Encyclopedia of

Information Communication
Technologies and Adult
Education Integration
Victor C. X. Wang
California State University, Long Beach, USA

Volume III

INFORMATION SCIENCE REFERENCE

Hershey • New York
Director of Editorial Content: Kristin Klinger
Director of Book Publications: Julia Mosemann
Acquisitions Editor: Lindsay Johnston
Production Editor: Jamie Snavely
Cover Design: Lisa Tosheff

Published in the United States of America by

Information Science Reference (an imprint of IGI Global)
701 E. Chocolate Avenue
Hershey PA 17033
Tel: 717-533-8845
Fax: 717-533-8661
E-mail: cust@igi-global.com
Web site: http://www.igi-global.com

Copyright © 2011 by IGI Global. All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored or distributed in
any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, without written permission from the publisher.
Product or company names used in this set are for identification purposes only. Inclusion of the names of the products or com-
panies does not indicate a claim of ownership by IGI Global of the trademark or registered trademark.

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data

Encyclopedia of information communication technologies and adult education integration / Victor C.X. Wang, editor. p. cm.
Includes bibliographical references and index. Summary: "The book provides comprehensive coverage and definitions of the
most important issues, concepts, trends and theories in adult education, adult ESL (English as a Second Language) and
information communication technologies, offering an in-depth description of key terms and theories/concepts related to
different areas, issues and trends in adult education worldwide"--Provided by publisher. ISBN 978-1-61692-906-0 (hardcover)
-- ISBN 978-1-61692-907-7 (ebook) 1. English language--Textbooks for foreign speakers. 2. English language--Study and
teaching--Foreign speakers. 3. Adult education. I. Wang, Victor C. X. PE1128.A2E458 2011
428.6'4--dc22

British Cataloguing in Publication Data

A Cataloguing in Publication record for this book is available from the British Library.

All work contributed to this book is new, previously-unpublished material. The views expressed in this book are those of the
authors, but not necessarily of the publisher.
List of Contributors

Ahedo, Manuel / University Rovira i Virgili, Spain......................................................................... 1085

Beck, Jules K. / University of Arkansas, Fayetteville, USA............................................................... 337
Bennett, Elisabeth E. / Tufts University and Baystate Health, USA.................................................. 838
Berger, Jim I. / Western Kentucky University, USA............................................................................ 810
Brewer, Ernest W. / University of Tennessee, Knoxville, USA........................................... 135, 396, 768
Carter, Carol A. / University of Tennessee, Knoxville, USA ............................................................. 753
Carter, Teresa J. / Virginia Commonwealth University, USA............................................................ 226
Ciceri, Emma / Postel, Italy............................................................................................................... 435
Closson, Rosemary B. / University of South Florida, USA................................................................ 971
Collins, Royce Ann / Kansas State University, USA.................................................................. 308, 824
Coughlin, Chris / Chico State University, USA.................................................................................. 643
Crim, Susan J. / University of Tennessee, USA.................................................................................. 656
D’Abundo, Michelle Lee / University of North Carolina, USA......................................................... 942
D’Andrea, Livia / University of Nevada, USA................................................................................... 911
Deggs, David / University of Arkansas, Fayetteville, USA................................................................. 154
Dickerson, Jeremy / East Carolina University, USA......................................................................... 539
English, Leona M. / St. Francis Xavier University, Canada.............................................................. 360
Farmer, Lesley S. J. / California State University, Long Beach, USA......................... 17, 184, 377, 687
Glazer, Hilda R. / Capella University, USA....................................................................................... 985
Golian-Lui, Linda Marie / University of Hawaii at Hilo, USA . ...................................................... 485
Golubski, Pamela M. / Carnegie Mellon University, USA.............................................................. 1013
Green, Wendy M. / University of Pennsylvania, USA........................................................................ 275
Grover, Kenda / University of Arkansas, Fayetteville, USA.............................................................. 154
Hai-Jew, Shalin / Kansas State University, USA................................................ 257, 415, 557, 876, 958
Han, Pi-Chi / University of Missouri-St. Louis, USA......................................................................... 293
Harris, Joy E. / University of Missouri - Kansas City, USA................................................................. 83
Headlee, Nancy / University of Tennessee, Knoxville, USA .............................................................. 135
Henschke, John A. / Lindenwood University, USA.......................................................................... 1031
Hernández-Gantes, Victor M. / University of South Florida, USA.................................................. 779
Hill, Lilian H. / University of Southern Mississippi, USA.................................................................. 102
Hoffman, Laura D. / Saddleback Valley Unified School District Adult Education, USA.................. 609
Hope, John K. / University of Auckland, New Zealand.................................................................... 1067
Irving, Catherine J. / St. Francis Xavier University, Canada........................................................... 360
Isaac, E. Paulette / University of Missouri-St. Louis, USA.............................................................. 1100
Kacirek, Kit / University of Arkansas, Fayetteville, USA......................................................... 154, 337
Kania-Gosche, Beth / Lindenwood University, USA........................................................................ 1113
Kayler, Mary / George Mason University, USA................................................................................. 795
King, Kathleen P. / University of South Florida, USA................................................................. 37, 595
Kisling, Eric / East Carolina University, USA.................................................................................... 539
Lang, Geraint / Anglia Ruskin University, UK................................................................................... 626
Liu, Leping / University of Nevada, USA........................................................................................... 911
Loboda, Iryna P. / University of Tennessee, Knoxville, USA............................................................. 578
Lynch, Doug / University of Pennsylvania, USA................................................................................ 275
Marchi, Simona / University of Rome, Italy............................................................................... 435, 723
Martin, James B. / Army’s Command and General Staff College at Ft. Leavenworth, USA..... 674, 824
Mayers, Gloysis / Zayed University, UAE.......................................................................................... 643
Mogren, Ragnhild / Stockholm University, Sweden.......................................................................... 927
Nugent, Jeffrey S. / Virginia Commonwealth University, USA ......................................................... 226
Parker, Judith / Columbia University, USA........................................................................................... 1
Petty, Gregory C. / University of Tennessee, Knoxville, USA............................................ 396, 578, 753
Plakhotnik, Maria S. / Florida International University, USA........................................................... 52
Poirier, Sandra / Middle Tennessee State University, USA................................................................ 643
Reio, Jr., Thomas G. / Florida International University, USA.......................................................... 656
Robinson-Neal, Andreé / USA Pacific University, USA..................................................................... 857
Rocco, Tonette S. / Florida International University, USA.................................................................. 52
Santhiveeran, Janaki / California State University, Long Beach, USA............................................. 896
Schmidt, Steven W. / East Carolina University, USA........................................................................ 539
Sidman, Cara Lynn / University of North Carolina, USA................................................................. 942
Skinner, Leane B. / Auburn University, USA..................................................................................... 451
Sonleitner, Nancy / University of Tennessee at Martin, USA............................................................. 643
Stein, David S. / The Ohio State University, USA....................................................................... 707, 985
Stockton, Stephen D. / University of Tennessee, Knoxville, USA...................................................... 768
Stokes, Carmeda / University of South Florida, USA........................................................................ 971
Strohschen, Gabriele / DePaul University, USA........................................................................ 118, 469
Stuck, M. F. / State University of New York, Suny Oswego, USA . .................................................... 999
Swanson, Karen Weller / Mercer University, USA.................................................................... 169, 795
Thomas, Chris Allen / University of Pennsylvania, USA................................................................... 275
Thunborg, Camilla / Stockholm University, Sweden......................................................................... 927
Torres-Coronas, Teresa / Universitat Rovira i Virgili, Spain............................................................ 204
Torrisi-Steele, Geraldine / Griffith University, Australia.................................................................. 521
Vidal-Blasco, María Arántzazu / Universitat Rovira i Virgili, Spain............................................... 204
Wang, Victor C. X. / California State University, Long Beach, USA........................ 68, 506, 740, 1050
Wanstreet, Constance E. / The Ohio State University, USA...................................................... 707, 985
Ware, Mary C. / State University of NY – Cortland, USA......................................................... 322, 999
Weinstein, Marc G. / Florida International University, USA.............................................................. 52
Westenkirchner, Suzy / Auburn University, USA....................................................................... 241, 485
Witte, James E. / Auburn University, USA......................................................................................... 241
Witte, Maria M. / Auburn University, USA........................................................................................ 241
Wooldridge, Deborah G. / Bowling Green State University, USA ................................................... 643
Wright, Melissa / University of Southern Mississippi, USA . ............................................................ 102
Table of Contents

Foreword............................................................................................................................................... xv

Preface.................................................................................................................................................xvii

Acknowledgment.................................................................................................................................. xx

Volume I

Chapter 1
The Role of Information Communication Technologies in Enriching Adult
Education Theory Building...................................................................................................................... 1
Judith Parker, Columbia University, USA

Chapter 2
How Adults Learn Through Information Technologies......................................................................... 17
Lesley S. J. Farmer, California State University, Long Beach, USA

Chapter 3
Comprehensive Distance Learning Design for Adult Education........................................................... 37
Kathleen P. King, University of South Florida, USA

Chapter 4
Web 2.0 and the Actualization of the Ideals of Adult Education........................................................... 52
Marc G. Weinstein, Florida International University, USA
Tonette S. Rocco, Florida International University, USA
Maria S. Plakhotnik, Florida International University, USA

Chapter 5
Conventional Online Teaching vs. Andragogical Online Teaching....................................................... 68
Victor C. X. Wang, California State University, Long Beach, USA
Chapter 6
Towards a Theory of Learned Technological Helplessness................................................................... 83
Joy E. Harris, University of Missouri - Kansas City, USA

Chapter 7
The Use of Web 2.0 Technologies in the ESL Classroom................................................................... 102
Melissa Wright, University of Southern Mississippi, USA
Lilian H. Hill, University of Southern Mississippi, USA

Chapter 8
Framing a Philosophy for 21st Century Global Recurrent Education:
Considerations on the Role of the Adult Educator............................................................................... 118
Gabriele Strohschen, DePaul University, USA

Chapter 9
Adapting Adult Learning Theories for Online Learning..................................................................... 135
Ernest W. Brewer, University of Tennessee, Knoxville, USA
Nancy Headlee, University of Tennessee, Knoxville, USA

Chapter 10
Impact of Virtual Learning Environments on the Future of Adult Education and Training................ 154
David Deggs, University of Arkansas, Fayetteville, USA
Kenda Grover, University of Arkansas, Fayetteville, USA
Kit Kacirek, University of Arkansas, Fayetteville, USA

Chapter 11
Delightfully, Difficult Work: Transformation through Teaching and Learning................................... 169
Karen Weller Swanson, Mercer University, USA

Chapter 12
Technology-Enhanced Information Literacy in Adult Education........................................................ 184
Lesley S. J. Farmer, California State University, Long Beach, USA

Chapter 13
Promoting Digital Competences through Social Software: A Case Study
at the Rovira i Virgili University.......................................................................................................... 204
Teresa Torres-Coronas, Universitat Rovira i Virgili, Spain
María Arántzazu Vidal-Blasco, Universitat Rovira i Virgili, Spain

Chapter 14
Personal Learning Networks: Implications for Self-Directed Learning in the Digital Age................ 226
Teresa J. Carter, Virginia Commonwealth University, USA
Jeffrey S. Nugent, Virginia Commonwealth University, USA
Chapter 15
Key Aspects of Teaching and Learning in the Online Environment.................................................... 241
Maria M. Witte, Auburn University, USA
James E. Witte, Auburn University, USA
Suzy Westenkirchner, Auburn University, USA

Chapter 16
Structuring and Facilitating Online Learning through Learning / Course Management Systems....... 257
Shalin Hai-Jew, Kansas State University, USA

Chapter 17
Online Learning: An Examination of Contexts in Corporate, Higher Education,
and K-12 Environments....................................................................................................................... 275
Chris Allen Thomas, University of Pennsylvania, USA
Wendy M. Green, University of Pennsylvania, USA
Doug Lynch, University of Pennsylvania, USA

Chapter 18
Cross-Cultural Learning and Intercultural Competence...................................................................... 293
Pi-Chi Han, University of Missouri-St. Louis, USA

Chapter 19
Applying Web 2.0 Technologies to Traditional Teaching.................................................................... 308
Royce Ann Collins, Kansas State University, USA

Chapter 20
Insuring Self-Direction and Flexibility in Distance Learning for Adults: Using Contracts................ 322
Mary C. Ware, State University of NY – Cortland, USA

Chapter 21
Using Qualitative Methods to Evaluate Distance Education: A Case Study....................................... 337
Jules K. Beck, University of Arkansas, Fayetteville, USA
Kit Kacirek, University of Arkansas, Fayetteville, USA

Chapter 22
Women, Information and Communication Technologies, and Lifelong Learning.............................. 360
Catherine J. Irving, St. Francis Xavier University, Canada
Leona M. English, St. Francis Xavier University, Canada
Volume II

Chapter 23
Gender Impact on Adult Education...................................................................................................... 377
Lesley S. J. Farmer, California State University, Long Beach, USA

Chapter 24
Comparing Lecturing and Small Group Discussions........................................................................... 396
Gregory C. Petty, University of Tennessee, Knoxville, USA
Ernest W. Brewer, University of Tennessee, Knoxville, USA

Chapter 25
Design Tools and Processes for Building E-Learning......................................................................... 415
Shalin Hai-Jew, Kansas State University, USA

Chapter 26
Participatory and Appreciative Adult Learning and Reflection in Virtual Environments:
Towards the Development of an Appreciative Stewardship................................................................ 435
Simona Marchi, University of Rome, Italy
Emma Ciceri, Postel, Italy

Chapter 27
Successful Strategies in the Online Learning Environment Based on Theories,
Styles, and Characteristics................................................................................................................... 451
Leane B. Skinner, Auburn University, USA

Chapter 28
Teaching Adults across Cultures, Distance, and Learning Preferences:
Universal Tools for the 21st Century.................................................................................................... 469
Gabriele Strohschen, DePaul University, USA

Chapter 29
Library Issues in Adult Online Education............................................................................................ 485
Linda Marie Golian-Lui, University of Hawaii at Hilo, USA
Suzy Westenkirchner, Auburn University, USA

Chapter 30
Online Adult Education: Policy, Access, Completion and Equity....................................................... 506
Victor C. X. Wang, California State University, Long Beach, USA

Chapter 31
Blended Learning Primer..................................................................................................................... 521
Geraldine Torrisi-Steele, Griffith University, Australia
Chapter 32
Using Technology in the Assessment of Adult Learners in Online Settings....................................... 539
Steven W. Schmidt, East Carolina University, USA
Jeremy Dickerson, East Carolina University, USA
Eric Kisling, East Carolina University, USA

Chapter 33
Self-Assessments in Contemporary Adult E-Learning........................................................................ 557
Shalin Hai-Jew, Kansas State University, USA

Chapter 34
Effects of Basic Computer Training on the Self-Efficacy of Adult Learner’s
Utilization of Online Learning............................................................................................................. 578
Gregory C. Petty, University of Tennessee, Knoxville, USA
Iryna P. Loboda, University of Tennessee, Knoxville, USA

Chapter 35
Digital Media: Opportunities for Voice and Empowerment in Adult Learning................................... 595
Kathleen P. King, University of South Florida, USA

Chapter 36
Integrating Digital Photography into Adult Education........................................................................ 609
Laura D. Hoffman, Saddleback Valley Unified School District Adult Education, USA

Chapter 37
Facilitation of Online Teaching and Learning..................................................................................... 626
Geraint Lang, Anglia Ruskin University, UK

Chapter 38
Community Service Learning: Preparing Female Students in the United Arab Emirates
for the Workplace................................................................................................................................. 643
Sandra Poirier, Middle Tennessee State University, USA
Deborah G. Wooldridge, Bowling Green State University, USA
Gloysis Mayers, Zayed University, UAE
Nancy Sonleitner, University of Tennessee at Martin, USA
Chris Coughlin, Chico State University, USA

Chapter 39
Social Presence in an Online Learning Environment.......................................................................... 656
Susan J. Crim, University of Tennessee, USA
Thomas G. Reio, Jr., Florida International University, USA
Chapter 40
Principles of Student Assessment in Adult Education......................................................................... 674
James B. Martin, Army’s Command and General Staff College at Ft. Leavenworth, USA

Chapter 41
Gaming in Adult Education................................................................................................................. 687
Lesley S. J. Farmer, California State University, Long Beach, USA

Chapter 42
Gender and Collaborative Knowledge Building in an Online Community of Inquiry........................ 707
Constance E. Wanstreet, The Ohio State University, USA
David S. Stein, The Ohio State University, USA

Chapter 43
Participatory and Appreciative Action and Reflection in Adult Learning:
Transformation as Appreciative Reflection.......................................................................................... 723
Simona Marchi, University of Rome, Italy

Chapter 44
Integrating Technology for Effective Adult Education........................................................................ 740
Victor C. X. Wang, California State University, Long Beach, USA

Volume III

Chapter 45
Self-Efficacy Beliefs of Adult Learners Utilizing Information Communication Technologies........... 753
Gregory C. Petty, University of Tennessee, Knoxville, USA
Carol A. Carter, University of Tennessee, Knoxville, USA

Chapter 46
Traditional Instructional Design for Online Learning vs. Unconventional Instructional Design........ 768
Ernest W. Brewer, University of Tennessee, Knoxville, USA
Stephen D. Stockton, University of Tennessee, Knoxville, USA

Chapter 47
Helping Faculty Design Online Courses in Higher Education............................................................ 779
Victor M. Hernández-Gantes, University of South Florida, USA

Chapter 48
Blended Learning: The Best of Both Worlds....................................................................................... 795
Karen Weller Swanson, Mercer University, USA
Mary Kayler, George Mason University, USA
Chapter 49
Perceived Neutrality of Technology and its Potential Impact: Recontextualizing Technology
into Adult Learning Settings using a Cultural Studies Approach........................................................ 810
Jim I. Berger, Western Kentucky University, USA

Chapter 50
Evaluating Teaching in Adult Education............................................................................................. 824
James B. Martin, Army’s Command and General Staff College at Ft. Leavenworth, USA
Royce Ann Collins, Kansas State University, USA

Chapter 51
Informal Adult Learning in Simulated and Virtual Environments....................................................... 838
Elisabeth E. Bennett, Tufts University and Baystate Health, USA

Chapter 52
Resourcing Equity for Online Learners: Supporting Students-with-Limitations................................ 857
Andreé Robinson-Neal, USA Pacific University, USA

Chapter 53
Virtual Collaboration........................................................................................................................... 876
Shalin Hai-Jew, Kansas State University, USA

Chapter 54
Blackboard Learning System on College Campuses........................................................................... 896
Janaki Santhiveeran, California State University, Long Beach, USA

Chapter 55
Initial Stages to Create Online Graduate Communities: Assessment and Development..................... 911
Leping Liu, University of Nevada, USA
Livia D’Andrea, University of Nevada, USA

Chapter 56
Boundaryless Work and the Role of Mobile ICT................................................................................. 927
Ragnhild Mogren, Stockholm University, Sweden
Camilla Thunborg, Stockholm University, Sweden

Chapter 57
Online Learning and Instruction in Health: Addressing the Demands for Education
and Training through Computer-Based Technologies......................................................................... 942
Michelle Lee D’Abundo, University of North Carolina, USA
Cara Lynn Sidman, University of North Carolina, USA
Chapter 58
Staying Legal and Ethical in Global E-Learning Course and Training Developments:
An Exploration..................................................................................................................................... 958
Shalin Hai-Jew, Kansas State University, USA

Chapter 59
Increasing Adult Learner Engagement in E-Learning Courses through Learner Case Writing.......... 971
Rosemary B. Closson, University of South Florida, USA
Carmeda Stokes, University of South Florida, USA

Chapter 60
Knowledge Building Online: The Promise and the Process................................................................ 985
David S. Stein, The Ohio State University, USA
Constance E. Wanstreet, The Ohio State University, USA
Hilda R. Glazer, Capella University, USA

Chapter 61
Age, Race and Gender Issues Related to On-Line Learning............................................................... 999
M. F. Stuck, State University of New York, Suny Oswego, USA
Mary. C. Ware, State University of NY – Cortland, USA

Chapter 62
Virtually Onboarding and Supporting Adult Students in College
Using Web 2.0 Technologies.............................................................................................................. 1013
Pamela M. Golubski, Carnegie Mellon University, USA

Chapter 63
Bringing Together Personal Learning, Higher Education Institutional Elements,
and Global Support for a Re-Orientation toward a Focus on Lifelong Learning and Education...... 1031
John A. Henschke, Lindenwood University, USA

Chapter 64
Program Development in Adult Education: An Example.................................................................. 1050
Victor C. X. Wang, California State University, Long Beach. USA

Chapter 65
Future Methods of Adult Education................................................................................................... 1067
John K. Hope, University of Auckland, New Zealand

Chapter 66
Adult Education and Globalization.................................................................................................... 1085
Manuel Ahedo, University Rovira i Virgili, Spain
Chapter 67
Barriers to Adult Education Participation, Distance Education, and Adult Learning........................ 1100
E. Paulette Isaac, University of Missouri-St. Louis, USA

Chapter 68
Using Principles of Andragogy to Teach Writing to Graduate Students Online................................ 1113
Beth Kania-Gosche, Lindenwood University, USA
 xv

Foreword

Historically, adult education was rooted in a variety of social movements. In the late nineteenth and
early twentieth centuries, the adult education movements responded to social and economic needs—
Mechanics Institutes in Australia, Women’s Institutes and the Antigonish movement in Canada, and the
Highlander Folk School in the United States, to name just a few. The goals of such movements were
to improve the conditions of manual laborers, oppressed groups, illiterate people, women, farmers and
others through informal education networks, study groups, and collective action. In other words, adult
education was about reaching out to those in need and those who would benefit from improved skills,
increased knowledge, and better conditions. What was then called “correspondence courses” (an early
form of distance education, in which people corresponded by mail with tutors) played a significant role
in adult education.
By the late 1960s and the 1970s, attention turned increasingly to individual learners, in part through
the work of Malcolm Knowles who introduced us to the concept of andragogy and, within that, self-
directed learning. It was also at this time that adult education began to move into the academic world
with the establishment of small programs and departments of adult education. Adult educators in aca-
demia drew on psychology (among other disciplines) to create a theoretical framework for their research
and practice, furthering the focus on individuals. This is not to say that the goal of social change faded;
adult educators drew on critical theory to support their work with issues related to gender, race, class,
and sexual orientation.
When the technology for hosting distance education in online and web-based courses and programs
arrived on the education scene, adult education embraced this opportunity. Having education accessible
to those in rural and remote areas already had a firm place in adult education, as did reaching out to those
who could not attend formal education programs during the hours when they were at work. Earlier on,
there was some tension in this regard, though, as those people who were most likely to be involved did
not necessarily have the means to own a computer or obtain internet connections, nor the skills needed
to use the technology. Today, this is still an issue in some rural areas and in developing countries, but
universal access (though perhaps not reliable access) seems to be becoming a reality.
In spite of the obviously happy and practical marriage between adult education and communication
technologies, writing and research that integrate the fields has not been brought together into one place
and made accessible to scholars and practitioners. The Encyclopedia of Information Communication
Technologies and Adult Education has done just that. It provides a comprehensive coverage of the issues,
concepts, and trends that integrate adult education and communication technologies. The chapters are
written by leading scholars in both fields, creating an in-depth compendium of terms and definitions,
and explanations of theories, concepts, and processes.
xvi

More than 60 chapters address a wide array of topics, some focusing more on adult education in
general, and others emphasizing the use of technology in the field, but all with an eye to integrating
work across the disciplines. Some of the chapters that especially drew my attention include the notion of
blended learning, where participants are online for a part of their work and together physically at other
times; interactive technologies and how they contribute to adult learning at a distance; virtual environ-
ments; how to establish community online; culturally responsive teaching online; age, race, and gender
issues; promoting transformative learning online; and the evaluation of learning online. I have been
facilitating online courses in adult education for close to ten years now, and I have generally followed
the practical literature for online teachers. Even so, I can see that there are many things for me to learn
and explore in this encyclopedia.

Patricia Cranton

Patricia Cranton, PhD, is currently Professor of Adult Education at Penn State University at Harrisburg. She has been Profes-
sor of Adult Education at St. Francis Xavier University, University of New Brunswick, and Brock University in Canada. Prior
to that, she was on faculty at McGill University from 1976 to 1986. Patricia Cranton’s books include Planning Instruction
for Adult Learners (1989) with a second edition in 2000, Working with Adult Learners (1992) also translated into Japanese
in 1999, Understanding and Promoting Transformative Learning (1994) also translated into Chinese in 1995, Professional
Development as Transformative Learning (1996) also translated into Japanese in 2000, No One Way: Teaching and Learning
in Higher Education (1998), Personal Empowerment through Type (1998), Becoming an Authentic Teacher (2001), Finding
our Way: A Guide for Adult Educators (2003). The second edition of Understanding and Promoting Transformative Learning
was published in 2006. Patricia has edited five New Directions volumes, Transformative Learning in Action (1997), Universal
Challenges in Faculty Work: Fresh Perspectives from around the World (1997), Fresh Approaches to the Evaluation of Teach-
ing (2001), Authenticity in Teaching (2006), and Reaching Out Across the Border: Canadian Perspectives in Adult Education
(with Leona English, 2009). She is currently working with Ed Taylor to prepare the Handbook of Transformative Learning.
 xvii

Preface

Technology has permeated society in general, and major government and economic stakeholders have
recognized the importance of incorporating technology throughout education in order to prepare a
competitive workforce in a global economy (Farmer, 2010, p. 276). Thanks to Malcolm Knowles who
made this predication about incorporating technology into education, especially the education of adult
learners in the 1970s. Indeed, education in the 21st century is being delivered electronically. Learners,
young and old, take advantage of acquiring knowledge through technology. Teachers of all ages try to
deliver their educational programs to students through WebCT, Blackboard programs or other cutting edge
programs simply because learning can be facilitated through the use of technology. While E-learning at
the K-12 educational settings has been conducted on a trial and error basis, it has become a major force
in adult education on any campuses in any countries including developing countries. Because working
adults cannot come to campuses for the face-to-face meetings, acquiring knowledge through technology,
especially Web 2.0’s interactivity, can occur anywhere, any time.
When Patricia Cranton (2010) addresses the three kinds of knowledge (instrumental knowledge,
practical knowledge and emancipatory knowledge) advanced by Habermas, she indicates that a changed
learner cannot occur without reflecting on the first two kinds of knowledge. Practical knowledge (com-
municative knowledge in Mezirow’s terms) is emphasized more in the Western educational arena among
the three kinds of knowledge. Indeed, it is through communication with others or discussion that we learn
to transform ourselves. When we think about how educators and learners acquire knowledge through
the lens as specified by Habermas, Cranton, Mezirow and others, we cannot underestimate the power
of information communication technologies. Although there is multiple access to knowledge, acquiring
knowledge through information communication technologies has proven to be the most convenient,
flexible means in the new century. By incorporating technology throughout education, both educators
and learners teach and learn by hearing, seeing and doing. And this concept confirms the Chinese saying,
“I hear, I forget; I see, I remember; I do, I understand.”
Mention Phoenix University and most people in other countries know that it is an online university
located in the United States. Yet, learners from around the world can take its courses anywhere, anytime.
The university has created classrooms without borders. As Bash (2003) noted, “in 2002, the University
of Phoenix, part of the Apollo Group, saw its enrollment surpass 100,000 students—making it the larg-
est institution of higher learning in the United States.” No need to say that this enrollment figure must
include students from overseas. Other universities do not want to lag behind in this regard. Increased
communication, interactivity among participants and incorporation of collaborative pedagogical models are
xviii

made possible by recent developments in technology. All the above mentioned opportunities cannot occur
without information communication technologies. Indeed, classes taught via information communication
technologies have many advantages over the classes taught via the traditional four walled-classrooms:

• instantaneous (synchronous) and delayed (asynchronous) communication modes,

• access to and from geographically isolated communities around the globe,
• multiple and collaborative among widely dispersed individuals,
• ultimate convenience, when and where you choose,
• interaction with and among individuals from diverse cultures, and
• ability to focus on participants’ ideas, without knowledge of age, race, gender, or background.
(Shrum, 2000)

Literature on adult education is readily available as AAACE (American Association for Adult and
Continuing Education) publishes its handbook of adult education every ten years. Since its inception in
1833 when the word “andragogy” was first coined by the German grammar school teacher Alexander
Kapp, principles of adult learning have been used one way or the other to guide adult education practice
in the field. The field of adult education was formally established in the 1920s in North America. Then,
Knowles popularized the concepts of andragogy in North America in the 1970s. Adult learning principles
have been critiqued, analyzed and refined. The next question that can be asked, “In what ways have
information communication technologies contributed to adult education? Or how has adult education
integrated information communication technologies?” The answer is we cannot find a comprehensive
encyclopedia that documents information communication technologies and adult education integration
in the literature. In developing this work as scholars, professors, practitioners and graduate students, we
have now filled this much needed void in the literature so that we can truly enhance andragogy, the art
and science of helping adults learn (as defined by the father of adult education, Malcolm Knowles), via
information communication technologies in the 21st century. Every time learners access this Encyclope-
dia of Information Communication Technologies and Adult Education Integration, hopefully they may
come to many “aha moments” in this information age.

Objective of the Encyclopedia

The Encyclopedia of Information Communication Technologies and Adult Education Integration is most
helpful as it provides comprehensive coverage and definitions of the most important issues, concepts,
trends and theories in adult education, adult ESL (English as a Second Language) and information com-
munication technologies. This important new publication is being distributed worldwide among aca-
demic and professional institutions, and is instrumental in providing researchers, scholars, students and
adult learning professionals with access to the latest knowledge related to information communication
technologies. Contributions to this important publication were made by scholars throughout the world
with notable research publications and expertise. The encyclopedia also features chapters authored by
leading experts offering an in-depth description of key terms and theories/concepts related to different
areas, issues and trends in adult education worldwide.
 xix

Adult education has matured as an academic domain, and is practiced globally in a conscious effort
to retool adults and provide lifelong learning opportunities for ever-changing societies. The timing is
ripe for an encyclopedia to cover the fundamentals and trends in this important field.

Victor C.X. Wang, EdD

California State University, Long Beach, USA
December 29, 2009

REFERENCES

Bash, L. (2003). Adult learners in the academy. Bolton, MA: Anker Publishing Company.
Cranton, P. (2010). Working towards self-evaluation. In V. C. X. Wang (Ed.), Assessing and evaluating
adult learning in career and technical education (pp. 2-11). Hangzhou, China; Hershey, USA: ZUP and
Information Science Reference.
Farmer, L. (2010). Career and technical education technology: Three decades in review and technologi-
cal trends in the future. In V. C. X. Wang (Ed.), Definitive readings in the history, philosophy, practice
and theories of career and technical education (pp. 259-277). Hangzhou, China; Hershey, USA: ZUP
and Information Science Reference.
Schrum, L. (2000). Online teaching and learning: Essential conditions for success! In L. Lau (Ed.), Dis-
tance Learning technologies: Issues, trends and opportunities (pp. 91-106). Hershey, PA: Idea Group
Publishing.
xx

Acknowledgment

I wish to thank all of the authors for their insights and excellent contributions to this encyclopedia. With-
out their dedicated work, this project could not have been satisfactorily completed. I wish to express my
heartfelt thanks to our reviewers. Some reviewers have even contributed chapters to this encyclopedia.
Their constructive, critical and comprehensive reviews have definitely helped with the quality of this
book. No need to say that their reviews set the benchmark. Although their names and affiliation have
appeared on the front page of the handbook, I wish to give them another round of applause here again
before our readers for their accurate and precise review work. Special thanks also go to the publishing
team at IGI Global, whose contributions throughout the whole process from inception of the initial idea
to final publication have been invaluable. In particular to Jan Travers and Kristin Klinger who accepted
my proposal to publish this groundbreaking encyclopedia in adult education and technology. I would
like to thank Dr. Patricia Cranton who wrote a foreword for this book. Dr. Cranton’s journal articles and
books are widely cited throughout the world and virtually every university library in North America
has catalogued her book(s) and her scholarly work can be found from many other countries. And last
but not least, my family, Katie Wang, Anni Wang and Anthony Wang, for their unfailing support and
encouragement during the many months it took to give birth to this book.
In summary, I wish to thank all of the people for their insights and excellent contributions to this
encyclopedia. I thank all of our readers who have become consumers of this excellent book. This book
will assist you in your educational and scholarly endeavors.

Reviewers for this Encyclopedia

Teresa Torres-Coronas, Universitat Rovira i Virgili, Spain
Leona English, St. Francis Xavier University, Canada
Lesley Farmer, California State University, Long Beach, USA
Pamela M. Golubski, Carnegie Mellon University, USA
Kerry Lee, University of Auckland, New Zealand
Catherine McLoughlin, Australian Catholic University, Australia
Judith Parker, Teachers College/Columbia University, USA
Gregory C. Petty, University of Tennessee, Knoxville, USA
Gabriele Strohschen, DePaul University, USA
Maria M. Witte, Auburn University, USA
 xxi

About the Editor

Victor C. X. Wang, EdD, an associate professor, joined the faculty at California State University,
Long Beach (CSULB) in 2002 and has been the credential coordinator of Career and Technical Education
and adult education since 2005. Dr. Wang’s research and writing activities have focused on workforce
education, the foundations of adult education, adult teaching and learning, training, transformative learn-
ing, cultural issues in vocational and adult education, distance education, human performance technol-
ogy and curriculum development. He has published well over 100 journal articles, book chapters and
books during his 8 years at CSULB and has been a reviewer for five national and international journals.
Currently he serves as the editor in chief of the International Journal of Adult Vocational Education and
Technology. He has won many academic achievement awards from universities in China and in the
United States, including the Distinguished Faculty Scholarly & Creative Achievement Award in 2009.
Dr. Wang taught extensively as a professor in Chinese universities prior to coming to study and work in
the United States in 1997. He has taught adult learners English as a second language, Chinese, computer
technology, vocational and adult education courses, research methods, administrative leadership, human
resource management and curriculum development for the past 21 years in university settings. Some of
the books he has written and edited have been adopted as required textbooks by major universities in the
United States, and in China. In addition, numerous universities worldwide including those Ivy League
universities in the United States have cataloged his books and journal articles.
 1

Chapter 1
The Role of Information
Communication Technologies
in Enriching Adult Education
Theory Building
Judith Parker
Columbia University, USA

ABSTRACT
Communication technology has influenced every aspect of our personal and professional lives. Yet, much
of the literature on this influence focuses on the impact it has had on our actions and on the practice
of teaching and learning. Little has addressed the impact of communication technology on the theory
building in the field of adult education. How has it influenced the movement forward of the field itself?
How has it changed the communication among professionals and between professionals and students? It
has been almost 100 years since Adult Education made its entry into the arena of professions and fields
of study. In recent decades, Malcolm Knowles is credited with popularizing adult learning theory, yet
Stephen Brookfield, Jack Mezirow, Maxine Greene and Knud Illeris are among those who have moved
the field forward. Along with this progression in theory, the utilization and sophistication of communi-
cation technology has escalated. This chapter will focus on the influence of communication technology
throughout this history of adult education, particularly its influence on communities of learning and
communities of practice for the experienced and the emerging adult educational professional and how
it might enrich the future of the profession.

INTRODUCTION tion of Adult Education in the early 20th century.

Adult education traces its history to philosophical
roots in ancient civilizations yet its emergence
as an academic field is considered to have begun
with the establishment of the American Associa-
DOI: 10.4018/978-1-61692-906-0.ch001
This chapter will begin by exploring the major
theories and theorists in the field of adult educa-
tion. While Malcolm Knowles is credited with
popularizing adult learning theory in the 1970’s,
Stephen Brookfield, Jack Mezirow, Victoria Mar-
sick and Knud Illeris are among those who have
moved the field forward over the recent decades.
 The Role of Information Communication Technologies in Enriching Adult Education Theory Building
Along with this progression in theory, the use
of technology has escalated in popularity creating
a need to frame its application in the foundational
principles of adult education; an “Andragogy
2.0” focus is required. Technology has played an
important part in the development and direction
of the field. The Gutenberg printing press is often
credited with being the beginning of the influence
of technology on education and communication,
however all early advances in transportation and
communication have had an influence on the field
of adult education. Any technology before and
since Gutenberg that has facilitated the coming
together of individuals and knowledge whether
by transporting the individuals to a common place
to share knowledge or by communicating the in-
formation to the individuals at remote locations
has influenced adult learning. Today, wiki’s and
blogs are the norm. Some universities offer space
behind password-protected firewalls, while others
advocate the use of public spaces for these online
collaborations. What impact does this have on
confidentiality and intellectual property issues? A
plethora of questions begin to emerge and answers
are only beginning to follow.
BACKGROUND
This chapter explores the role of information
communication technology in the development
of the field of adult education and suggests how
today’s Web 2.0 technology can enhance the field’s
future growth. To understand the background of
this influence, each of these two components will
be explored individually.
The Development of the
Field of Adult Education
It has been nearly a century since adult education
made its entry into the arena of professions and
fields of study. But the roots of the field extend
through millennia. Malcolm Knowles (1989)
2
describes himself as being “part of a long and
significant historical movement” (p. 72) and as-
signs the role of adult educators to great teachers
of ancient China, Rome and Greece. However,
he suggests that “ancient teachers were follow-
ing their intuitions rather than some prescribed
doctrine such as pedagogy” (p. 61). He continues
that because of their experience with adults, they
“perceived learning to be a process of active in-
quiry, not passive reception of transmitted content”
and therefore “invented techniques for engaging
learners in active inquiry” (p. 61). He credits the
Chinese sand Hebrews with methodologies such
as the “case method or critical incident”. Wang
and King (2010) note that one of the hallmarks of
adult learning, critical reflection, was advanced
by Confucius over 2,500 years ago. They add that
ancient cultures in India included the “develop-
ment of intuition, aesthetics, and a futuristic and
ecological perspective” (p. 14) in their view of
learning. The “Socratic dialogue” which Knowles
(1989) attributes to the Greeks consisted of posing
a dilemma to the group who would then pool their
knowledge and experience to develop a solution.
The Romans were credited with the methodology
that involved forcing the students to state positions
and to defend them.
While Knowles (1989) notes a gap in the
literature on adult education between the fall of
Rome and the Renaissance he also indicates that
the “institutionalization of education for children”
(p. 62) developed during that same period. The
Renaissance is also credited with an abundance of
new scientific discoveries and the development of
a new approach to scientific inquiry. Galileo first
pointed the newly invented telescope to the sky
in 1609 beginning the use of optical technology
in the investigation of our universe. During this
period, Francis Bacon formulated the scientific
method, a disciplined approach to searching for
new knowledge that has influenced the advance-
ment of every academic research project since and
therefore will be investigated further in the next
section of this chapter. As we consider the field of
The Role of Information Communication Technologies in Enriching Adult Education Theory Building
adult education moving forward, we will include
the impact of technology on the elements of this
new approach to acquiring and managing new
knowledge. Following the Renaissance, examples
of adult education institutions throughout Europe
can be seen in the folk high schools, the workers’
education movement and apprenticeships.
Elias and Merriam (2005) suggest that during
the colonial period the United States transplanted
a form of “elitist-classical education” from primar-
ily France and England to American educational
institutions, notably Harvard. Knowles (1989)
suggests that Benjamin Franklin might have been
the first American role model for adult learning.
Franklin’s “Junto, a discussion club …to explore
such intellectual challenges as morals, politics,
and natural philosophy” (p. 63) became a model
for other discussion groups and study circles.
Knowles (1989) continues to note the importance
of adult education throughout and on history citing
examples in the citizen involvement initiatives in
the American colonies and during the Civil War”
(p. 64). However, Knowles (1989) suggests that
the adult education movement during the early
1800’s “that had the greatest impact on the quality
of life in this country is agricultural education” and
cites local and regional agricultural societies and
fairs as locations for farmers to learn new prac-
tices to improve productivity on their farms. He
credits organizations such as the Grange, Farmers’
Union, and the American Farm Bureau Federation
in the last quarter of the 1800’s with educating
the farmers. The emergence of these formalized
groups will open the doors for a more structured
communication among group members and might
be considered examples of the communities of
learning and communities of practice that will be
explored in more detail in the next section of this
chapter. Additionally, the Land Grant Act of 1862
was significant in that it set aside land in every
state for a “land-grant college for research and
study in the agricultural and mechanical arts by
average students” (Knowles, 1989, p. 65). After
the Civil War, the new industrial society brought
a “compulsion for knowledge” (Knowles, 1989,
p. 64) and the secondary education curriculum
even expanded to include “life-related subjects”
(Elias & Merriam, 2005, p. 23).
At the beginning of the 1900’s, the progressive
education movement was prevalent and included
“vocational education, university extension and
cooperative extension, settlement houses for new
immigrants and Americanization education” (Elias
& Merriam, 2005, p. 58). The notable voice of
John Dewey was associated with these ideas of
pragmatism and progressive thought. Dewey’s
notion that practice is superior to theory was in
direct conflict with the earlier theories of Aristotle
and Plato who espoused the superiority of theory.
Dewey argued that “education appropriate for
American society must include both the liberal
and the practical, both education for work and
education for leisure” (Elias & Merriam, 2005,
p. 62). This was a digression from earlier thinkers
who suggested that primarily liberally educated
leaders were required for the growth of America.
This influenced education by implying that the
experiences of the learners were at the heart of
the educational process thus impacting the role
of the instructor in the classroom and that cur-
riculum should be expanded to include practical
knowledge. This period between the Civil War
and World War I is credited with the emergence
of numerous organizations focused on practical
adult education. The creation of the Cooperative
Extension Service and the passage of the Smith-
Hughes Vocational Education Act began the
formation of vocational schools open to adults
across the country (Knowles, 1989).
While James Watson is credited with found-
ing behaviorism in the 1920’s, (Elias & Merriam,
2005, p. 83), Edward Thorndike’s ideas are con-
nected with the behaviorist movement with a
focus on performance and an emphasis on the
scientific method and experimentation to arrive
at truth. Thorndike’s 1928 publication, Adult
Learning is considered the first major report of
research on learning with adults. He reported that
3
 The Role of Information Communication Technologies in Enriching Adult Education Theory Building
adults could be expected to learn at the same rate
as younger students and that the best time to learn
was just prior to using the knowledge (Elias &
Merriam, 2005).
The formalization of this body of knowledge
attributed to the field of adult education begins to
solidify when the American Association of Adult
Education, the forerunner of today’s Association of
Adult and Continuing Education, began to sponsor
studies in the field in the 1920’s. By 1934, this
Association published the first Handbook of Adult
and Continuing Education that “met the chief
function of the Association as a clearinghouse
for information about adult education” (Wilson &
Hayes, p. 7). Wilson and Hayes (2000) explain that
the “first attempts to define the field were to show
its institutional and programmatic manifestations
throughout society” and the “relation of knowl-
edge and practice” (p. 7). This 1934 handbook
and its next edition in 1936 were a directory of
both national organizations and local initiatives of
national significance in adult education including
descriptions of the activities of the organizations
such as “agricultural extension, workers education,
and Americanization programs” (Wilson & Hayes,
p. 7). The formalization of graduate programs in
adult education began to emerge in the late 1920’s
and by the early 1930’s the first doctorates were
awarded (Rowden, 1934).
The handbook continued as the defining body
of knowledge in the field of adult education and
reflected the field’s connection to societal events.
The next edition of the handbook in 1948 reflected
the influence of World War II, but continued the
tradition of informing the reader about how people
“in the conduct of their daily lives go about the
business of informing and educating themselves”
(Cartwright, p. xi). This edition also was the first to
link to academia. It was published by the Institute
of Adult Education at Teachers College, Colum-
bia University where the first graduate program
of adult education had been established. Wilson
and Hayes (2000) reflect that this handbook was
significant in demonstrating that “the field was
4
beginning to develop a sense of its professional
identity first through study of its practices and
now through developing a body of knowledge to
inform that practice” (p. 8).
The handbook continued to evolve and in
1960 when the next volume was edited by Mal-
colm Knowles, it included individual essays by
adult educators in order to “provide an overview
description of the current nature, characteristics,
and trends in the field of adult education” (p. xii).
Modern icons in the field of adult learning were
being to emerge and the story of their interactions
are a model for communication that moved the field
of adult education forward. In his autobiography,
Knowles (1989) credits a seminar led by Cyril
Houle at the University of Chicago with initiating
his own interests in the historical foundations of
adult education. In 1961, Cyril Houle’s classic
“The Inquiring Mind” laid the foundation for
Tough’s seminal publication “Learning Without
a Teacher” (1967) and “The Adult’s Learning
Projects” (1979). These introduced the concept
of self-directed learning and later influenced
Knowles. Tough’s (1979) research indicated that
adults were more successful learners if they were
aware of the benefits of their learning and the
negative consequences of not learning. This later
became one of Knowles’ (2005) six core andra-
gogical principles: “the learner’s need to know,
self-directed learning, prior experience of the
learner, readiness to learn, orientation to learning
and problem solving, and motivation to learn” (p.
183). He also introduced the term “andragogy”
in the United States. It was a term that he learned
from a European colleague who defined it as the
“art and science of helping adults learn” (Merriam,
Caffarella, & Baumgartner, 2007, p. 84). While a
great deal of discussion around these principles
continues in the field of adult education, they
provide a foundation for new theories and a guide
for practice. These principles will be examined
in the context of information technology later in
this chapter.
The Role of Information Communication Technologies in Enriching Adult Education Theory Building
Knowles continued to contribute to the 1970
handbook by summarizing the themes of the
earlier handbooks such as “educating the public,
collecting information, the elimination of ‘profit
makers’, the debate between cultural and voca-
tional adult education, and the tensions between
self-actualization and educating a democratic
citizenry” (Wilson & Hayes, p. 9). Wilson and
Hayes describe this focus of the 1970’s and the next
1980’s handbooks as reflecting the “dominance
of scientifically defined professional practice” (p.
12) of those decades.
Knowles’ ideas formed the foundation for adult
education but were also the subject of discussion by
other noted adult educators, among them Stephen
Brookfield. While Brookfield (1986) questioned
Knowles ideas of self-directedness, his assump-
tion of relating learning to particular social roles
and his focus on the need of adult’s for immediate
application, he was also developing his own ideas
on critical thinking and critical theory. Brookfield
defined critical thinking or critical reflection as
“reflecting on the assumptions underlying our
and others’ ideas and actions, and contemplating
alternative ways of thinking and living” (Brook-
field, 1986, p. x) and suggested that these were
distinctive characteristics of adult learning and
of adult education practice (2005).
Brookfield also offers a connection between
critical reflection and transformative learning.
Mezirow defines his own transformative learn-
ing theory as a process by which our taken-for-
granted frames of references are transformed by
making them more “inclusive, discriminating,
open, emotionally capable of change, and re-
flective” (Merriam, 2007, p. 255). Brookfield
explains that “although critical reflection is an
ineradicable element of transformative learning,
it is not a synonym for it. It is a necessary but not
sufficient condition of transformative learning…
.transformative learning cannot happen without
critical reflection but critical reflection can hap-
pen without an accompanying transformation in
perspective” (Brookfield as cited in Mezirow,
2000, p. 125). If one accepts the definition of
critical thinking above, then it becomes obvious
that critical reflection is not a process that is ac-
complished in a few minutes but might take hours
or days or weeks. This chapter will examine the
role of technology in facilitating critical reflection
over time. For example, a face-to-face discussion
relies on participants’ instant insights and reac-
tions. In contrast, an asynchronous discussion
online affords everyone the opportunity to read
others’ comments, reflect on them, then return
to the discussion at a later time with a thoughtful
comment as the result of critical reflection creating
a foundation for transformative learning.
Transformational learning has had a longstand-
ing impact on adult education. Wang and King
(2010) suggest that transformative learning has its
roots in ancient Chinese and Indian philosophies
and cite examples of writings by Confucian and
Buddhist scholars to support this claim. On a more
modern note, Sharan Merriam’s (2008) review of
the last three updates of her New Directions for
Adult and Continuing Education revealed that a
chapter on transformational learning was the only
constant across these volumes that span fifteen
years. Looking to the future, Kegan (2009) refers
to transformational learning as having “genuinely
landscape altering potential” (p. 41).
While Brookfield’s and Mezirow’s ideas on
critical reflection provided a foundation, Illeris
(2004) introduced a Danish perspective with his
own theory of the three dimensions of adult
learning: cognitive, emotional and social. His
model consisted of an inverted triangle with the
two psychological poles, Piaget’s cognition and
Freud’s emotion, at the two corners at the top and
society at the lower vertex. However, he stressed
that “all three dimensions are always integrated
parts of the learning process and in practice do not
exist as separate functions” (p. 20). Jarvis (2009)
continues with this theme by stating that “I was
clear in my own mind that learning always started
with experience and that experience is always
social…”(p. 24). This theme is evident in the 2000
5
 The Role of Information Communication Technologies in Enriching Adult Education Theory Building
edition of the Handbook of Adult and Continuing
Education in which Wilson and Hayes emphasized
“adult education as a social practice of practical
and prudent action, not just as an applied techni-
cal science” (p. 12). The emerging application of
social networks such as wiki’s and blogs will be
discussed in the next section and surely influence
these social aspects of learning.
Malcolm Knowles (2005) sees technology
as being in the “andragogical tradition” (p. 237)
and as consistent with the adult learning idea of
self-directedness. “The creation of a learning
community supports and encourages knowledge
acquisition. It creates a sense of excitement about
learning together and renews the passion involved
with exploring new realms in education” (Palloff
& Pratt, 1999, p. 163). As Kasworm and Londoner
(2000) advise, “the challenge for adult educa-
tion is to accept and embrace the possibilities of
technology (p. 225).
The Emergence of Information
Communication Technology
While today the term information communication
technology seems to be synonymous with com-
puters it is important to consider that technology
in many forms has impacted the academic field
of adult education for centuries. Lesgold (2000)
reminds us that “prior to the 15th century, codified
knowledge was extremely rare” and that “direct
discussion with a wise person was the primary way
of gaining knowledge” (p. 399). Books were not
easily replicated so where expensive and rare. Even
with the development of printing, only certain
key books were reproduced widely. However, by
the mid 1400’s Gutenberg’s invention of the first
printing press with movable type and usable ink
for the process would change the distribution of
knowledge dramatically. Hewitt (2005) suggests
that “the sixteenth and twenty-first centuries
share a dramatic element in common – the birth
of a revolution in communication technology”
(p. 47). He credits Gutenberg’s invention with
6
the emergence of the Renaissance and notes that
the “ability to publish books inexpensively de-
centralized the power of knowledge and forever
changed the structure of society” (p. 47). He calls
this “Gutenberg’s gift” and suggests that while it
was an “invitation to new understanding and hu-
man liberty” it also “bestowed upon its recipients
new responsibility for critical reflection” (p. 48).
This responsibility becomes even more important
in the twenty-first century as the dissemination
of knowledge becomes even more widespread
at an accelerating rate. Lesgold (2000) offers
another comparison between these two centuries
by suggesting that just as the book “removed
some of the need for memorization as a force for
knowledge distribution, so the computer removes
some of the need for over learning of routine in-
formation processing procedures, since these can
be accomplished by computers” (p. 401). While
numerous examples could be cited, we can agree
with Knowles (1989) as he credits Gutenberg’s
invention with having a great “impact on the
advancement of adult education” (p. 62).
But between the printing press of the mid
1400’s and today’s computers technological inno-
vations abound. Therefore it is useful to reflect on
their influences on adult education. In the courses
that the author teaches at Teachers College/Co-
lumbia University, she often divides the class into
groups and assigns each group a period in history.
She then presents the scenario that the students
are professionals in the field of adult education
and have just been invited to attend a workshop
on the latest technology in adult education. They
are asked to identify what technologies they will
expect to be presented at the workshop and how
those technologies likely impacted the field of
adult education at that time. Whether it was the
printing press, telephone, copying machine or
computer, new technologies have always presented
opportunities and challenges to adult education
professionals.
But following Hewitt’s earlier jump from the
fifteenth to the twenty-first century, we look to the
The Role of Information Communication Technologies in Enriching Adult Education Theory Building
emergence of this new revolution in information
communication technology. Shea-Schultz and
Fogarty (2002) suggest that this new era began
in the late 1960’s when the U.S. Department of
Defense initiated a project (Advanced Research
Projects Agency Network: ARPA-NET) to create a
nation-wide computer network using phone lines.
For over two decades, this network became the
“province of academic institutions, scientists, and
government employees engaged in research and
communications” (p. 7) allowing them to share
data between their remote computers. Initially, lack
of standards created communication difficulties.
It wasn’t until 1989 when “Tim Berners-Lee led
a team at Switzerland’s European Particle Phys-
ics Laboratory (CERN) in developing what he
dubbed World Wide Web standards” (p. 8). In the
following years, scientists at CERN conceptual-
ized the World Wide Web (WWW) with the sole
purpose of making research findings and scientific
materials available to the academic and scientific
community on a global network (Lau, 2000, p. i).
Shea-Schultz and Fogarty (2002) describe the
next “great innovation for the Web” as occurring
in 1992 when programmers at the University of
Illinois’ National Center for Supercomputing Ap-
plications (NCSA) developed the Mosaic browser
that enhanced text with embedded graphics (p. 8).
In the same year, the U.S. government made the
decision to free the web for commercial use (p. 9).
The expanded use of the Internet was fueled by a
parallel advancement in the “rise of increasingly
powerful, yet reasonably priced, personal comput-
ers fueled by silicon microchip processors” (p.
9). The next generation of the internet, Web 2.0,
surfaces and discussions of wiki’s and blogs and
Facebook and Myspace fuel the growing area of
online social networks. Kasworm and Londoner
(2000) offer useful advice in suggesting that it is
important “to accept and embrace the possibili-
ties of technology” (p. 225) and accept Knowles
(2005) acknowledgement of technology as being
in the “andragogical tradition” (p.237), consistent
with his adult learning idea of self-directedness.
While information communication technology
(ICT) has played an integral part in the develop-
ment of the theories of adult information, it will
more profoundly influence future development.
THE ROLE OF ICT ON THEORY
BUILDING IN ADULT EDUCATION
Adult education like many academic disciplines
advances through a series of steps involving new
discoveries being made as old hypotheses are
tested and confirmed or replaced by new ideas.
Peter Jarvis (2009) recounts the personal experi-
ence of developing his own theory of learning.
Beginning with input from workshop participants,
he “recognized that all the psychological models
of learning were flawed, including Kolb’s well-
known learning cycle, in as much as they omitted
the social and the interaction” (p. 23). He contin-
ued to develop models and refine them based on
analysis and new data.
Malcolm Knowles (2005), in his classic text
“The Adult Learner”, chronicles the historical
development of learning theories in a summary of
propounders and interpreters. His list includes 61
propounders and 33 interpreters who have influ-
enced the development of learning theories over
the past 130 years by their complimentary roles of
putting forward new ideas for consideration and
interpreting those ideas in light of practice. Not
only did they influence each other but in fact they
all developed as a result of societal influences and
in turn had an impact on that very society. It was
this interaction that moved adult education forward
as a field of study. This chapter explores the role
of technology in the development of the field of
adult education and suggests how today’s Web 2.0
technology can enhance the field’s future growth.
This exploration begins by revisiting the dis-
cussion of the Renaissance in the previous section
that chronicled the history of adult education.
During the Renaissance, the familiar work of
Galileo (1564-1642) and Newton (1642-1727)
7
 The Role of Information Communication Technologies in Enriching Adult Education Theory Building
built on the thinking of their contemporary Fran-
cis Bacon (1561-1626). Bacon is credited with
the development of a new approach to scientific
inquiry that has influenced the methodology by
which every academic field advances. This dis-
ciplined approach to acquiring and managing
new knowledge involves the following steps: an
observation of phenomena or the formulation of
a question; the development of a hypothesis and
making a prediction; testing the hypothesis by
experimentation; analyzing the data and drawing a
conclusion; communicating the results. A detailed
study of these steps reveals several threads that
are woven through them and which will form the
foundation of the discussion in this chapter. Those
common threads are access to data, analysis and
communication of results, and collaboration.
Access to Data
It is important to remember that the impact of
technologies on data gathering is not new. A
significant anniversary in 2009 commemorates
the fact that 400 years ago, Galileo turned the
newly invented telescope to the sky and began an
amazing expansion of new data acquisition with
this new optical technology. As the field of adult
education advances, the data in this field requires
access to previous research results and sources of
new data in publications and people in practice.
This data gathering stage can be a tedious and
time-consuming effort as the researcher visits
archives and libraries and locates experts and
practitioners. But information communication
technology has had a huge impact on this effort.
Michael Moe (2000), in a publication entitled
“The Knowledge Web” refers to the “richness”
and the “reach” of the Internet (p. 3). In academic
circles, this richness or depth of information be-
comes obvious in the plethora of digitized reports,
texts, and publications from government agencies,
academic institutions and private enterprises that
are available online. The reach or breadth of the
sources of information is obvious in the access
8
to digital libraries across the planet. Moe (2000)
also notes the importance of improved bandwidth
for speedy access and comments that “cable com-
panies, telco’s, satellite/wireless companies and
ISP’s are locked in an epic battle over standards,
protocols, open access and kilobits per second” (p.
63). This leads one to believe that this competition
will result in even increased downloading speeds.
If the researcher needs to locate subject matter
experts, increasingly sophisticated web browsers,
university websites and the social networking
sites of Web 2.0 facilitate this process. And once
located, communication can be facilitated by
phone, email, and web-conferencing to name just
a few possibilities.
ANALYSIS AND COMMUNICATION
OF RESULTS
Whether it is data gathering from online sources
or newly acquired data that needs to be analyzed,
technology again becomes instrumental in facili-
tating the task. Sorting through the references and
the data can be an overwhelming task. However,
software programs abound for the analysis of
both quantitative and qualitative data. Excel and
SPSS are only a sampling of those available for
quantitative data analysis. Atlas and NVivo are
just a few of those software programs available
for data mining and qualitative data analysis. Once
the data is grouped, analyzed, charted, graphed
and tabled, it needs to be interpreted in the light
of the research question and then the results com-
municated. Traditionally this communication took
the form of a paper presented at a professional
conference or publication in a scholarly journal.
Rhoades, Friedel and Morgan (2009) cite the lag
time from data analysis until the publication in a
journal as being eliminated by several open source
journals that allow researchers to share findings
quickly with mass audiences. They also mention
how the traditional workshops, seminars and
The Role of Information Communication Technologies in Enriching Adult Education Theory Building
conferences are being supplemented by online
communities of practice web sites.
The peer review process has always required
communication between colleagues. Today that
communication is facilitated by a number of new
developments in the area of information com-
munication technology. Global communication
is easy and free using Skype. Information can be
broadcast to groups in real time using podcasts
and asynchronously by a post on Youtube, wiki’s
or blogs. The emergence of computer mediated
communication (CMC) as a field of study sug-
gests the level of impact that technology has had
on communication. Just as the body of knowledge
surrounding adult education has developed over
almost a century to define that field, the literature
on CMC is beginning to define this new field.
The intersection of the field of CMC and adult
education might be the topic of future studies.
COLLABORATION
Rhoades, Friedel and Morgan (2009) define col-
laboration as “the process of shared creation: two
or more individuals with complementary skills
interacting to create a shared understanding that
none had previously possessed or could have come
to on their own (p. 24). The collaboration among
members of a discipline has always existed in the
form of face-to-face meetings and conferences or
written communication. But information com-
munication technology has added several new
dimensions to this process and in fact has changed
our social paradigm. Loader (1998) announces
that “the emergence of the new information and
communications technologies such as the Internet
are said to herald the coming of the “information
society”: a new social and economic paradigm
restructuring the traditional dimensions of time
and space within which we live, work, and in-
teract” (p. 3). This new social paradigm changes
our entire sense of space and time. Sitting with an
individual or group of colleagues in a room has
been replaced by typing on a computer keyboard
or on any of the numerous hand held internet
accessable devices, reading text on a screen, or
listening to voices on a phone. Instead of feeling
the presence of other collaborators, participants
are connected by voice or text and might be easily
distracted by daily tasks.
Several authors address this environment that
provides a new idea of space and society. Loader
(1998) reminds us that numerous social scientists
share the notion that “society is being transformed
by a revolution in information technology which
is creating an entirely new social structure” (p. 4).
Hakken (1999) suggests that the @ symbol used to
indicate an electronic domain in an email address,
is also an indication of the social space to which
one is connected. Web 2.0 technologies promise to
improve social networks. Hakken (1999) advises
that “we must come to terms…with an acceler-
ated decoupling of space from place (p. 215).
White and Bridwell (2004) concur by suggesting
that new technology is “significantly altering the
social role of learning” and that distance learning
is only an intermediate step toward a “telelearn-
ing environment” in which distance and location
become arbitrary (p. 287).
In this new societal paradigm, a new sense
of community emerges. The adult education
vocabulary around “learning communities” and
“communities of practice” has been around for a
few decades but their meaning has evolved with
the new sense of space provided by information
communication technology. Palloff and Pratt
(1999) remind us that the words “community and
communicate have the same root, communicare,
which means to share” (p. 25). Now that sharing
takes place outside of shared physical space. Daly,
Fisher and Martin (2000) note that community
can be defined as a “source of identity, of moral
and social stability, of shared meaning and mu-
tual cooperation” (p. 542) and also as a “group
of people who are socially interdependent, who
participate together in discussions and decision
making, and who share certain practices that both
9
 The Role of Information Communication Technologies in Enriching Adult Education Theory Building
define the community and are nurtured by it” (p.
542). All of these describe professionals in a field
such as adult education and none of them require
shared physical space.
On a more philosophical note, Maxine Greene
(1995) connects community to learning in her
chapter, “The Passion of Pluralism”. “We are
in search of what John Dewey called ‘the Great
Community” but at the same time, we are chal-
lenged as never before to confront plurality and
multiplicity” (p. 155). “To open up our experience
to existential possibilities of multiple kinds is to
extend and deepen what each of us thinks of when
he or she speaks of a community” (p. 161).
Palloff and Pratt (1999) remind us that “the
power of community is great. The power of a
learning community is even greater, as it sup-
ports the intellectual as well as personal growth
and development of its members” (p. 163). They
also credit a learning community with being able
to create “a sense of excitement about learning
together” and renewing “the passion involved with
exploring new realms in education” (p. 163). While
these communities were originally place bound,
today’s writings about communities involve the
discussion of the virtual community where physi-
cal distance and time difference are redefined.
The challenge can be how to foster a sense of
“community” among the participants without the
comfort of physical proximity. But increasingly,
the traditional whiteboard and flip charts are
replaced by fax machines, computer files, email,
telephones, and video and web conferencing.
The instantaneous feedback between colleagues
might be broken when using any asynchronous
communication medium that could create a chal-
lenge in being able to sustain the individuals’
participation and engagement. Another challenge
occurs if the sophistication of the communication
infrastructure differs from location to location so
that accommodation needs to be made for these
logistical constraints.
But aside from the challenges, participation
in an online learning community offers a number
10
of unique benefits. Students participating in such
online learning communities offered the following
reflections. One participant specifically mentioned
community in her reflection. “A community
emerged during the chat session as the group
members experienced a sense of personal related-
ness.” Another mentions the virtual space. “I was
enamored with the power of this medium. It gave
me a sense of jointly occupying a temporary space
(similar to a class room) and created the illusion
of physical proximity and group cohesion through
spontaneous conversation and sharing. At the same
time it eliminated space restrictions—all four of
us gathered from numerous locations, Carol from
as far as the UK, to meet and discuss the topic in
a real-time environment.” Yet, another elaborates
on this idea, including the flexibility of time in an
asynchronous online discussion. “The discussion
conducted here is very involving; everybody could
get a chance to express his own ideas. Moreover,
the discussion board online gives us a further
opportunity to share ideas with all of the class.
It has been developed into a real learning forum.
Everybody chose their favorite articles about
learning and training in their fields, and then
shared their own ideas on the “blackboard”, thus
evokes a real open discussion. This learning style
makes me feel that I can learn anytime anywhere
from so many people of diverse fields. By posting,
reading, and replying online, our learning location
has burst out of the limited classroom and lecture
time boundary, thus it has given us an authentic
flexibility and motivation to learn.” Community,
power, flexibility are strong descriptors for this
new social space and ones that could potentially
have a very positive impact on the field of adult
education.
It is important that these features of an online
collaboration can be viewed as positive for some
yet negative for others. While the lack of personal,
non-verbal clues is often cited as a negative feature
of one line learning communities, one student sees
it as a positive. She notes “It is a medium that
does promote engagement in discourse without
The Role of Information Communication Technologies in Enriching Adult Education Theory Building
the normal bias of face-to-face communication
(because our appearance is reduced to letters in
a computer screen). And although we have the
opportunity to influence and suggest tone, etc. by
the use of color, sizes, etc. the initial barriers to
traditional communication are somehow dimin-
ished. The use of discussion boards allows for a
lot of reflection prior to committing to opinions.
The student has the time and the resources to
build a message that will convey every idea that
s/he wants to communicate”. One saw a chat
room experience as more egalitarian. “The con-
versations were not superficial interactions but
purposeful, focused and useful. The instructions
preceding the chat in terms of reading position
papers, preparing questions followed by chat on
each paper allowed all group members an equal
opportunity to have their “voices” heard, making
the chat more effective. Setting up small groups
of 4 allowed each one the time and opportunity to
participate and understand each other’s situations
more closely and attentively. The archived feature
of the chat that automatically creates transcripts
of discussions make it useful for rereading and
future reference.” As more new participants
venture into this virtual space, they might agree
with the following comment. “The best part lies
in my realization toward the end of the chat that
a synchronous professional discussion isn’t too
difficult a thing for me. This is my first time to
do a real one with international professionals. As
a non-native speaker, I was very self-conscious
and afraid I’d loose face before this highly learned
group who seem to have a better and deeper un-
derstanding of all the theories we’re learning. But
the 2-hours went by fast and I felt more and more
comfortable, even not nervous when it’s my turn.”
As this new space and society become more
populated, the geographic distance encompassed
by learning communities will demand more use of
technology as the major vehicle for communica-
tion among professionals and between profession-
als and students. Technology will also increasingly
enhance traditional face-to-face meetings and
allow for the expansion of the dialogue before and
after the event. Yet, there is still a great deal to be
discovered as to the limitation, shortcomings and
optimal utility of technology-enhanced and tech-
nology delivered communication. Professional
adult educators and their colleagues in the emerg-
ing field of CMC mentioned earlier are poised at
the doorstep of an exciting new journey. But there
is a great need for researchers to delve into the
many questions surrounding this methodology.
The exploration of this new learning landscape
in the literature and online venues will likely con-
tinue moving the field of adult education and its
intersection with technology forward. Researchers
and practitioners alike have only scratched the
surface of possibilities. Maxine Greene (1995)
assures us that “Learning to look through multiple
perspectives, young people may be helped to build
bridges among themselves; attending to a range of
human stories, they may be provoked to heal and
to transform. Of course there will be difficulties
in at once affirming plurality and difference and
working to create community” (p. 167).
FUTURE DIRECTIONS
In his publication “The Knowledge Web”, Moe
(2000) recounts that historically, “nations have de-
veloped based on their access to physical resources
or their ability to surmount physical barriers” (p.
33). He mentions the ability of England and Spain
to cross oceans, Germany’s ability to turn coal and
iron resources into steel, and the United States’
utilization of agricultural and industrial resources.
This physically based economy depended on the
resources of coal, oil and steel. He then compares
this to today’s knowledge based economy in which
the use of the Internet and electronic delivery of
information relies on the “resources of brainpower
and the ability to acquire, deliver and process
information effectively” (p. 33). He suggests that
the “Internet is to the Knowledge Revolution what
the railroad was to the Industrial Revolution” (p.
11
 The Role of Information Communication Technologies in Enriching Adult Education Theory Building
14). He notes widespread optimism surrounding
the twenty-first century with “futurists predict-
ing a period of rapid growth at the magnitude of
the industrial revolution, if not greater, with the
advent of the knowledge-based economy” (p. 33).
Alheit (2009) suggests the “communication and
interaction networks of the IT age” will “create
the “future form of knowledge” which is “doing
knowledge, a kind of lifestyle that determines
the structures of society far beyond the purely
occupational domain” (p. 119).
As we look to the future we need to be prepared
for a mindset very different from today. Moe
(2000) sites an example that might give us an
insight into this new mindset. He cites an example
of a first grade teacher who collected well-known
proverbs. She gave each child in the class the first
half of the proverb and asked them to complete the
phrase. One example was “No news is…”. Some
students completed the phrase with “impossible”.
The twenty first century will have students who
expect information to be omni-present. Another
example was “If at first you don’t succeed…” The
student ending was “get new batteries” (p. 121).
The electronic age is an influence on how we think
and solve problems. How this new mindset will
influence the field of adult education is addressed
by several authors.
Merriam (2008) notes two shifts in the focus
of adult learning. One shift is from the individual
learner to the learner within the various contexts in
which learning takes place. This new perspective
considers “learning as part of the system’s cultural
and historical norms…(and) how physical space
and spatiality encourages or inhibits learning” (p.
94). The second shift is from learning as a purely
cognitive activity to one that is multidimensional
in nature. This might be considered to be a more
holistic approach in which “learning is construed
as a much broader activity involving the body, the
emotions, and the spirit as well as the mind” (p.
95). This appears to be an expansion of the previous
reference to Illeris’ three dimensions of learning
and Jarvis’ inclusion of social and interaction as
12
topics when developing a new model of adult edu-
cation. Mazarr (1999) notes that “knowledge-era
learning” must become more “holistic” and “high-
tech”; must “emphasize creativity and participa-
tion” and be “characterized by more choice and
competition” (p. 285). As technology has opened
up previous boundaries on our learning, the new
mindset seems to have opened the boundaries of
our concept of adult education.
Fenwick (2008) adds to the discussion of
the future by listing 4 emerging trends in adult
education: areas of definitions, an increased em-
phasis on practice-based learning, the importance
of identity and literacy and power and politics.
Fenwick (2008) suggests that “people’s sense of
their own knowledge in work and the knowledge
valued by the group to which they see themselves
belonging form a critical element of their sense
of identity” (p. 22) and there are “fundamental
tensions related to what knowledge counts most
and who says so” (p. 24). Finally, the traditional
organizational power and politics are taking new
forms in the virtual organizations and transna-
tional sites. The importance of these new forms
of power and politics is evident in Senge’s (2006)
concept of the learning organization that he pro-
posed in the early 1990’s and Wenger’s (1998)
communities of practice model that emerged in
the late 1990’s. The importance of their role will
continue in the future. Walther and Ramirez (2010)
recount the numerous social networking systems
such as Facebook and MySpace and their role
in establishing large social networks that “help
individuals maintain a larger number of ties than
people can typically maintain without such tech-
nology” but believe that “the greatest utility of
social networking systems has yet to be explored”
(pp. 278-79). Smith and Wilson (2010) note that
today, “interpersonal relationships can be initiated,
escalated, maintained, and dissolved either wholly,
or in part, through mediated technology” and they
predict that “as technology further evolves, the
study of the establishment and main tenance of
interpersonal relationships via Computer Medi-
The Role of Information Communication Technologies in Enriching Adult Education Theory Building
ated Communication is an area that will thrive”
(p. 14). Walther and Ramirez (2010) note that the
“use of synchronous, text-based IM technology
plays am important role in sustaining ongoing
associations, and the growth of text-messaging
via mobile phones also suggests that the central-
ity of text-only communication may not subside
anytime soon” (p. 272).
Further future predictions follow two themes.
The first cautions that emerging new technologies
will not replace the old. Valmont (2003) reminds us
that “oral storytelling did not die when Gutenberg
created the printing press” and “novels did not
go away when films became popular. Literacies
simply evolve” (p. 298). In his predictions for
the future, Mazarr (1999) delineates “three spe-
cific categories of technologies: biotechnology,
renewable energy, and information technology”
(p. 73). Under information technology he notes
the “Pervasive Knowledge Network” and “nano-
technology” (pp. 82-83).
This chapter has connected decades old learn-
ing theories to today’s technology rich environ-
ment. While the concept of the learning commu-
nity in the world of adult education is only a few
decades old, technology in the form of Web 2.0
is providing exciting options for enhancing and
expanding learning communities across space
and time. The ongoing collaboration within these
learning communities will fuel the advancement
of the field of adult education. The time has come
for adult education to meet Web 2.0 technology in
a world where Malcolm Knowles six principles
of andragogy exist in cyberspace. The author’s
predictions might be a future with even more
connections, more blurring of boundaries; a fu-
ture that values personal philosophies but shared
experiences and goals. Maxine Greene (2001)
challenges us to see the future as an opportunity
for “thinking of things as if they could be other-
wise” (Greene, 2001, p. 127).
CONCLUSION
Heaney (2000) reminds us that “individual practi-
tioners do not define the field of adult education,
nor do experts. A definition of a field of practice
is the social product of many individuals who
negotiate the values and meaning of work they
come to see as serving a common purpose over
time” (p. 561). The interactions between these
individuals that result in that social product have
been and will continue to be impacted by infor-
mation communication technology. This theme
is supported by Rhoades, Friedel, and Morgan
who define Web 2.0 as that second generation
of the World Wide Web that “aims to enhance
creativity, information sharing, collaboration and
functionality of the web” (p. 25) and by Farmer
(2010) who describes Web 2.0 technology as a
place where “knowledge is collaboratively built
and shared” (p. 272).
However, the development of this social prod-
uct is not without its negative aspects. Farmer
(2010) warns that “the issue of professional learn-
ing communities and advancement of knowledge
has clashed with traditional copyright issues. On
one hand, intellectual property and proprietary
information has become an industry nightmare as
employees shift from company to company, taking
their brain power and corporate knowledge with
them” (p. 274). Rhoades, Friedel, and Morgan
echo this concern asking “how can we share more,
do it more efficiently, and still get credit for the
work we do?” (p. 27). A related issue surfaces. Is
it collaboration or competition? A recent issue of
Science reports a recent discovery in astronomy
and “the ensuing race to publish observations” as
a “high-stakes pursuit in which communications
networks make possible worldwide, round-the-
clock collaborations, and pressures for cooperation
and competition often come into simultaneous
play. ‘This is extreme astronomy’” (Bhattacha-
rjee, 2009). Today’s technological advancement
is characterized by electronics and digitization,
by faster and farther. While the efficiency of
13
 The Role of Information Communication Technologies in Enriching Adult Education Theory Building
such a round the clock network is dramatically
increased, the issues of ownership and credit can
become more complicated. It seems that Web 2.0
with its podcasts, blogs, twitters, Youtube, virtual
realities and global, non-stop researching will be
a part of the future of adult education. Our great-
est challenge as professionals in the field may be
to ensure that the essential component of critical
reflection finds a place in this world of “extreme
adult education”.
REFERENCES
Adams, E., & Freeman, C. (2000). Commuting
the distance of distance learning: The Pepperdine
story. In Lau, L. (Ed.), Distance learning tech-
nologies: Issues, trends and opportunities (pp.
157–165). Hershey, PA: Idea Group Publishing.
Alheit, P. (2009). Biographical learning – within
the new lifelong learning. In Illeris, K. (Ed.),
Contemporary theories of learning: Learning
theorists…in their own words (pp. 116–128). New
York: Routledge.
Bhattacharjee, Y. (2009). Scrambling to read
the meaning of the sky’s most ancient flare.
Science, 325(5947), 1494–1495. doi:10.1126/
science.325_1494
Bray, J. (2009). Embrace the future now! Tech-
niques, 84(5), 6.
Brookfield, S. (1986). Understanding and facili-
tating adult learning. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Brookfield, S. (2005). The power of critical
theory: Liberating adult learning and teaching.
San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Cartwright, M. (1948). Preface. In Ely, M. (Ed.),
Handbook of adult education (pp. xi–xii). New
York: Institute of Adult Education, Teachers Col-
lege, Columbia University.
14
Cranton, P. (2006). Understanding and promot-
ing transformative learning. San Francisco: John
Wiley & Sons.
Daley, B. J., Fisher, J. C., & Martin, L. G. (2000).
Urban contexts for adult education practice. In
Wilson, A. L., & Hayes, A. R. (Eds.), Handbook
of adult and continuing education (pp. 539–555).
San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Edmondson, A., & Moingeon, B. (1998). From
organizational learning to the learning organi-
sation. Management Learning, 29(1), 5–20.
doi:10.1177/1350507698291001
Elias, J. L., & Merriam, S. B. (2005). Philosophi-
cal foundations of adult education. Malabar, FL:
Krieger Publishing Company.
Farmer, L. (2010). Career and technical education
technology: Three decades in review and tech-
nological trends in the future. In Wang, V. (Ed.),
Definitive readings in the history, philosophy,
practice and theories of career and technical
education (pp. 259–278).
Fenwick, T. (Fall 2008). Workplace learning:
Emerging trends and new perspectives in New
directions for adult and continuing education
no. 119 (pp.17-26) San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Greene, M. (1995). Releasing the imagination.
San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Greene, M. (2001). Variations on a blue guitar.
New York: Teachers College Press.
Hakken, D. (1999). Cyborgs@cyberspace. New.
York: Routledge.
Hangzhou, China; Hershey, PA: ZUP and Infor-
mation Science Reference.
Heaney, T. W. (2000). Adult education and society.
In Wilson, A. L., & Hayes, A. R. (Eds.), Handbook
of adult and continuing education (pp. 559–572).
San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
The Role of Information Communication Technologies in Enriching Adult Education Theory Building
Hewitt, H. (2005). Blog: Understanding the infor-
mation reformation that’s changing your world.
Nashville, TN: Thomas Nelson.
Houle, C. O. (1961). The inquiring mind. Madison,
WI: University of Wisconsin Press.
Illeris, K. (2004). The three dimensions of learn-
ing. Malabar, FL: Krieger.
Jarvis, P. (2009). Learning to be a person in
society: Learning to be me. In Illeris, K. (Ed.),
Contemporary theories of learning: learning
theorists…in their own words (pp. 21–34). New
York: Routledge.
Kasworm, C. D., & Londoner, C. A. (2000).
Adult learning and technology. In Wilson, A. L.,
& Hayes, E. (Eds.), Handbook of adult and con-
tinuing education (pp. 224–242). San Francisco,
CA: John Wiley & Sons.
Kegan, R. (2009). What ‘form’ transforms? A
constructive-developmental approach to transfor-
mative learning. In Illeris, K. (Ed.), Contemporary
theories of learning: Learning theorists…in their
own words (pp. 35–52). New York: Routledge.
Knowles, M. (1960). Handbook of adult education.
Chicago: Adult Education Association.
Knowles, M. (1989). The making of an adult
educator. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Knowles, M., Holton, E., & Swanson, R. (2005).
The adult learner. Burlington, MA: Elsevier.
Lau, L. (2000). Distance learning technologies:
Issues, trends and opportunities. Hershey, PA:
Idea Group Publishing.
Lesgold, A. (2000). What are the tools for? Revo-
lutionary change does not follow the usual norms.
In Lajoie, S. (Ed.), Computers as cognitive tools
(pp. 399–408). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum
Associates.
Loader, B. (1998). Cyberspace divide: Equality,
agency, and policy in the information society. New
York: Routledge. doi:10.4324/9780203169537
Mazarr, M. (1999). Global trends 2005: An
owner’s manual for the next decade. New York:
St. Martin’s Press.
Merriam, S., Caffarella, R., & Baumgartner, L.
(2007). Learning in adulthood: A comprehensive
guide. San Francisco: John Wiley & Sons.
Merriam, S. B. (Fall 2008). Adult learning theory
for the twenty-first century. In New directions
for adult and continuing education no. 119 (pp.
93–98). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Mezirow, J. (2000). Learning as transformation.
San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Moe, M. (2000). The knowledge web. Beverly
Hills, CA: Knowledge Enterprises Group.
Palloff, R., & Pratt, K. (1999). Building learn-
ing communities in cyberspace. San Francisco:
Jossey-Bass.
Rhoades, E., Friedel, C., & Morgan, A. (2009). Can
Web 2.0 improve our collaboration? Techniques,
83(9), 24–27.
Rowden, D. (Ed.). (1934). Handbook of adult
education. New York: American Association for
Adult Education.
Senge, P. M. (2006). The fifth discipline: The art
and practice of the learning organization. New
York: Doubleday Currency.
Shea-Schultz, H., & Fogarty, J. (2002). Online
learning today: Strategies that work. San Fran-
cisco: Berrett-Koehler Publishers.
Smith, S., & Wilson, S. (2010). New directions in
interpersonal communication research. Thousand
Oaks, CA: Sage.
Tough, A. (1967). Learning without a teacher.
Toronto: Institute for Studies in Education.
15
 The Role of Information Communication Technologies in Enriching Adult Education Theory Building
Tough, A. (1979). The adult’s learning project.
Toronto: Institute for Studies in Education.
Valmont, W. (2003). Technology for literacy teach-
ing and learning. New York: Houghton Mifflin.
Walther, J., & Ramirez, A. (2010). New tech-
nologies and new directions in online relating.
In Smith, S., & Wilson, S. (Eds.), New directions
in interpersonal communication research (pp.
264–284). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Wang, V., & King, K. (2010). Transformative
learning and ancient Asian educational perspec-
tives. In Wang, V. (Ed.), Assessing and evaluating
adult learning in career and technical education
(pp. 13–26). Hangzhou, China and Hershey, PA:
ZUP and Information Science Reference.
Wenger, E. (1998). Communities of practice:
Learning, meaning and identity. Cambridge, UK:
Cambridge University Press.
White, B. A., & Bridwell, C. (2004). Distance
learning techniques. In Galbraith, M. (Ed.), Adult
learning methods: A guide for effective instruction
(pp. 273–288). Malabar, FL: Krieger.
16
Wilson, A. L., & Hayes, A. R. (2000). Handbook
of adult and continuing education. San Francisco:
Jossey-Bass.
KEY TERMS AND DEFINITIONS
Adult Learning: The process of gaining
knowledge and expertise that is unique to adults
Communities of Practice: Learning com-
munities whose members share a common field
of practice or profession.
Critical Reflection: The process of analyzing
and questioning experiences and assumptions
Learning Community: A group of students
committed to learning collaboratively.
Social Networks: informal groups of learners
who interact regularly for the purpose of learning.
Transformative Learning: The process of
becoming critically aware of our assumptions
which may result in a change in perspective and
acting upon these new understandings
Web 2.0: The second generation of the inter-
net particicularly known for its enhanced social
networking features.
 17

Chapter 2
How Adults Learn Through
Information Technologies
Lesley S. J. Farmer
California State University, Long Beach, USA

ABSTRACT
To understand how learning is impacted by technology, an overview of learning processes, adult educa-
tion, and educational technology is needed. Adults learn contextually and through shared knowledge
construction. Technology plays an enormous role with respect to adult learning, particularly if multi-
generations learn together. Educators need to provide ways for adult learners to physically and intellec-
tually access technology. Several topics need to be addressed relative to technology-enhanced learning:
workplace issues, Digital Divide, and cultural concerns. Technology impacts learning communities in
several ways, particularly as interactive Web 2.0 tools are incorporated. Both educators and learners
need to collaboratively use technology for personal and professional growth.

INTRODUCTION been significantly impacted by technology. The

With the near ubiquity of technology, adult educa-
tion has been impacted. The nature of adult learn-
ing itself has morphed to some degree because
of technology. Technological factors influence
the conditions and processes of adult learning,
so adult educators must deal with those changes
effectively.
The world is changing faster than ever be-
cause of social and economic factors, which have
DOI: 10.4018/978-1-61692-906-0.ch002
world seems smaller as technology has connected
people globally; resultantly, economic entities are
increasingly interdependent, and cultures may
clash more often.
As individuals and entities try to manage
change from the outside, they need to retool
themselves. Adults can expect to change jobs
and even careers several times in their lifetimes.
Since their daily lives are also impacted by chang-
ing environments, adults will need to also adjust
personal behaviors as well. Formal and informal
education is needed now more than ever.
 How Adults Learn Through Information Technologies
Since 85 percent of twenty-first century jobs
will involve technology, it makes sense to incorpo-
rate technology in adult instruction. The intrinsic
properties of technology obviously impact learn-
ing with its potential combinations of text, image,
sound, and movement. These elements enable
learners with varying learning style preferences
to engage meaningfully with different aspects of
information. In addition, the hyperlink feature of
the web, electronic resources, and tools enable us-
ers to control their learning as they choose whether
to explore those links or to access information in
a nonlinear fashion. Indeed, technology-infused
instructional design fosters learner-centered ex-
periences; instructional designers basically create
the environment or structure for optimal learning.
BACKGROUND
To understand how learning is impacted by tech-
nology, an overview of learning processes, adult
education, and educational technology is needed.
How Adults Learn
Adults develop cognitively and psychologically
throughout their lives. The immediate issues of a
thirty-year old, for instance, usually differ from
the issues of a sixty-year old. This factor becomes
critical in adult education where a cross-section
of adults or professional group is participating.
The two fathers in adult development are Erik
Erikson and Daniel Levinson. Gail Sheehy has
popularized the concept of adult development in
her series of books on “passages.” Erikson ascer-
tained a unique set of issues that a person needs to
address at each point in life. Beyond adolescence,
he identified three stages:
• Young adulthood deals with love: intimacy
vs. isolation.
• Adulthood focuses on care: generativity
vs. stagnation.
18
• Old age deals with wisdom: integrity vs.
despair.
Psychologist Daniel Levinson (1978) studied
men’s interaction between their inner life and
external events, and identified their development
as “seasons in a man’s life.” Building on Erikson’s
stages, Levinson detailed three eras. Each stage
includes seasons of upheaval and change as well
as seasons of stability and synthesis.
• Early adult: 22-28 years old entering the
adult world, 28-33 transitioning between
old life structures and new life challenges,
33-40 settling down
• Middle adult: 40-45 mid-life transition, 45-
50 entering middle adulthood, 50-55 tran-
sitioning as in early adulthood, 55-60 cul-
mination and peaking of middle adulthood
• Late adult: 60-65 late adult transition, 65
onwards old age.
Gail Sheehy (1976) nicknamed the decades of
development as follows: tryout twenties, turbulent
thirties, flourishing forties, flaming fifties, serene
sixties, sage seventies, uninhibited eighties, noble
nineties. Sheehy also addressed the differences in
women’s development, and how those differences
impact heterosexual relationships. Probably the
greatest transition occurs in menopausal years
when women recreate themselves and men are
coming to terms with themselves; their social
roles seem to cross.
When one also considers the age of an indi-
vidual within the context of an era, such as reaching
adulthood in the 1940s as opposed to reaching it
in the 1970s or the 21st century, then the picture
becomes even more complex. Technology plays
an enormous role with respect to adult learning,
particularly if multi-generations learn together.
Nor do these developmental issues take into con-
sideration cultural differences. Each culture has
its own rites of passages and adult roles, which
may be determined by age, gender, and life situa-
How Adults Learn Through Information Technologies
tion. When ethnicities are set in different cultures,
such as a sixty-year old Chinese woman in a rural
village in Western China as opposed to another
sixty-year old Chinese woman in a Los Angeles
corporate office. Most basic of all, personality, can
vary wildly among most groups of individuals.
In any case, adult education should take ad-
vantage of these elements, and weave them into
learning activities. If dealing with a wide age
range, for instance, the instructor can make sure
to incorporate social opportunities to help younger
adult feel that they belong and can provide ex-
pertise, and to enable older learners to share their
knowledge. In that respect, technology “flips” the
traditional picture of wise elders teaching their
younger colleagues, a situation that is detailed later.
Adult Education
Earlier centuries considered children as miniature
adults, and taught them through example; children
mimicked adults. The idea of pedagogy marked a
consciousness about the unique aspects of children
and the way they learn. Ironically, andragogy, the
science of adult education, is a late 20th century
concept. In fact, many universities still refer to the
act of instruction in higher education as pedagogy,
which does not recognize the special attributes of
adult learners.
Malcolm Knowles is considered the father of
andragogy. Building on growing research about
lifelong human development, Knowles (1973)
leveraged the idea of adult self-concept and re-
sponsibility to explain the needs of adult learners.
Those factors need to be considered when design-
ing instruction for this population.
• Self-direction. Adults want to be treated as
responsible, self-directed learners. They
want to be in control of their learning.
Therefore, instructors should develop a
learning environment that provides adults
choices in how they learn, how they learn,
and how they demonstrate their learning.
• Experience. Adults have extensive and
diverse experiences, which help them to
construct meaning from learning activities.
Instructors should help adult learners iden-
tify what they already know, and then build
on that knowledge. Instructors should also
realize that adult learners may have experi-
enced negative learning situations, so they
have to overcome those negative connota-
tions. In addition, experienced adults build
up high expectations, so instructors should
be responsive to those demands.
• Motivation. Adults are motivated internal-
ly: by job needs, personal desire, and self-
esteem. Whenever possible, instruction
should be developed in response to adult
interests and needs, and should be offered
as an elective. In this scenario, the partici-
pants are willing, committed learners, thus
offering a positive atmosphere.
• Readiness. Adults learn when they see a
need to learn in order to cope with their
lives or improve them. As with motivation,
readiness should dictate the creation of
learning opportunities. Additionally, learn-
ing activities should be contextualized so
adults see how it fits into their daily expe-
rience. It should also be noted that instruc-
tors need to incorporate methods of dealing
with change since that aspect of learning
may be unexpected and uncomfortable.
• Need to know. Adults need to know what
they are going to learn and why they are
learning it before they commit to the learn-
ing. Therefore, instructors should address
the agenda –and the benefits of the learning
task when first announcing the opportunity
as well as at the beginning of the session.
• Timing. Adults have many demands for
their time, so need to fit learning within
the framework of the rest of their lives.
Instructors need to schedule learning activ-
ities to best fit existing schedule demands,
and they should offer options for self-pac-
19
 How Adults Learn Through Information Technologies
ing. Instructors may need to remind adult
learners about deadlines since other priori-
ties may overtake learners’ time.
• Practical. Adults appreciate immediate
and close transfer of learning and practi-
cal instruction. Hands-on, concrete learn-
ing activities that are domain-specific
work well with adults. Ideally, what teach-
ers learn Thursday afternoon they can use
Friday morning.
• Social. Adults want their social needs to
be met as well as their academic, intellec-
tual needs. Moreover, adults learn through
shared knowledge construction. Instructors
should provide opportunities for adult
learners to share their thoughts, and build
in networking time. By offering these out-
lets, instructors find that learners are more
satisfied with the session and learn more
as well. On the negative side, adults may
have trouble taking criticism, particularly
in public, so instructors need to be sensi-
tive to adult discomfort.
The Role of the Learner
The factor of self-identity and inner motivation im-
pacts adult education efforts in that adults usually
consider themselves as “free agent” learners; they
can choose to participate in a particular learning
venue and can also choose to leave it if dissatis-
fied. In those cases where adults are mandated to
attend some professional development session,
they may undermine or at least mentally reject and
ignore the instruction. Thus, hard sell approaches
usually do not work with adult learners. Rather,
the instructor needs to persuade the adult that the
instruction benefit them.
Even when institutions and agencies demand
continuing education or the demands of the job
may require skill “upgrading” adults search for
the most effective and efficient training available.
In the process, the learners place high demands
on their instructors, and when trained, those same
20
adults may well have higher expectations of their
employer. Additionally, adult learners may gain
sufficient expertise that they can command a
higher salary or better position – with the original
employer or with a more attractive offer. In brief,
adult learners constitute the locus of control.
With the advent of computer technology and
telecommunications, professional development
has embraced the digital world. As online courses
become more prevalent, adult learners are find-
ing it easier and more attractive to pursue these
venues. Now adults can choose their own mix
of courses or course modules from a variety of
higher education institutions, and construct their
own degree. With the push for outcomes-based
education and performance assessment, traditional
education is being severely tested. Again, these
free agent learners are driving up expectations
and forcing change.
The Role of the Instructor
With these premises, the role of the adult educator
becomes more the role of a facilitator or change
agent, guiding the process more than delivering
the content. These procedures cross delivery
methods, be they face-to-face role-plays to Web-
based tutorials. The instruction provides a safe and
positive learning climate, structures the setting
to facilitate joint planning, assesses the learners’
needs and interests in order to identify objectives
and craft learning activities, and then implements
and assesses the activities. Additionally, instruc-
tion and learning should be considered as a self-
reflective system. Both the instructor and learner
bring prior experience. They need to engage with
each other and the content at hand. The learner
must somehow change, hopefully in a manner
that the instructor (or change agent) can discern.
This series of thoughts and actions are assessed in
order to improve the system. Indeed, throughout
instruction, assessment needs to occur: of the
process, the product, and the people involved.
How Adults Learn Through Information Technologies
Contextualized Learning
Learning does not exist in a vacuum. It occurs
within the larger framework of the learner and
of the instructional sponsoring entity. In terms
of the learner, the instruction may constitute
part of a formal educational plan, a career-based
goal, or an informal self-improvement desire. If
learning is effective, then the learner changes
in some manner. When this change supports or
aligns with the learner’s environment, then that
change is usually welcomed and the learner is
positively reinforced. If, however, a misalignment
or conflict occurs between the changed learner
and the environment, then adjustment of one or
both entities will need to occur. For example, if a
teacher becomes enthralled with Web page design,
but the school does not allow for individuals to
put up separate Web pages, then the teacher may
have to find another Web host or limit Web page
design to non-school endeavors; alternately, the
school might change its policy or allow that one
expert teacher access to uploading functions.
Perhaps a female paraprofessional gains expertise
in desktop publishing and decides to pursue a
degree in communications. If the family cannot
afford for that person to go back to college, or if
her spouse is uncomfortable about her taking time
away from the family, then conflict may ensue.
While the instructor usually is not responsible
for the external changes that the learner may face,
being aware of the impact of change can help the
instructor when a learner seems stressed. Even if
change is positive and supported, learners may
need guidance as they start a professional devel-
opment endeavor. University re-entry learners
need to get re-acclimated to the rigors of graduate
work with its extensive reading, writing, study-
ing, and project development. Particularly if the
training involves technology, some learners may
need extra support as they learn to navigate web-
based instruction or other telecommunications
efforts. Some learners may not have access to
current equipment, and may get frustrated when
their system crashes under broadband demands.
If the instructor can help problem-solve with the
learner, the experience will be more satisfying
for both parties.
Lifelong Learning and the
Learning Society
The concept of lifelong learning seems self-
evident. As long as one is alive, one is likely to
encounter new situations that need to be resolved;
each of those encounters is a potential learning
moment. Nevertheless, because technology drives
change in so many aspects of life, lifelong learn-
ing takes on new and explicit meaning. People
consciously have to pay attention to the world
around themselves, and decide if they want to
change – and what they need to do in order to
accommodate those changes. In this respect, the
information society has sometimes been called
the learning society to emphasize the dynamic
nature of social change throughout people’s lives
(Field, 2006).
It must be first acknowledged that many adults
do not feel that the information society affects them
significantly. Nor do all adults think of themselves
as lifelong learners. To some adults, lifelong learn-
ing is equated with going back to school: book
learning. These individuals may well be learning
skills, such as dealing with water shortages or
adjusting to personal ailments or figuring out
how to work with a new boss, but they might not
label these adaptations as learning per se. Such
learning characterizes most people’s daily lives.
Adult educators must also acknowledge the valid-
ity of such learning approaches. Nevertheless, the
implications of a learning society lead to a more
systematic approach to adult education rather than
trial and error on a personal basis (Livingstone,
2001; Selwyn, Gorard, & Furlong, 2006).
The idea of a learning society that affects adult
education has a fairly short history. Global war
forced people to develop new skills and assume
new roles, which led to social changes such as
21
 How Adults Learn Through Information Technologies
women’s emancipation. World War II brought
with it technology advances that had far-ranging
implications. During and after both war times,
massive adult training quickly prepared people
for new and different jobs.
The digital society has led to ongoing change
rather than event-specific change so it might be
posited that widespread adult education would
result. Evidence supports that assumption; about
46 percent of the U. S. population participated
in adult education activities in 1999 (Westat
& Creighton, 2000). Although non-vocational
training dropped between 1997 and 2002 in
Great Britain, a rise in self-directed learning and
vocational training balanced the overall picture of
an increase of 60 percent since 1985 (Fitzgerald,
Taylor & La Valle, 2003). Nevertheless, a forced
government-based adult education initiative, such
as proposed in Great Britain (Istance, Schuetze,
& Schuller, 2002) would be likely to fail if for
no other reason than adult learners need to feel
control about their learning experience, choosing
if and how to participate. Rather, the conditions
for adult learning need to be provided widely and
systemically so that adults have opportunities for
meaningful learning.
Technology’s Impact on Adults
Technology has existed for thousands of years,
from the invention of the wheel onward. Tech-
nology under girded the Industrial Revolution.
Today’s technology is marked by its electronic,
digital nature. As such, digital technology per-
meates society at the daily level as well as on
the governmental level. Indeed, technology has
become so ubiquitous that it can be overlooked.
Even in developing countries where the main
issue is survival and life appears to be timeless,
technology can impact them: technology-based
research informs agricultural practices, local
products reach remote distances because of
technological logistics, and natural disasters are
addressed more quickly because of technology-
22
based communication and coordination. Global
issues have the potential to be heard immediately
because of telecommunications, and the financial
world would shut down if it were to be cut off from
technology for a week. Even if they are unaware
of technology, adults have to cope with its impact.
Both in terms of consumerism and production,
the economics of technology impact adult learners.
Products flow around the world via technology,
online shopping has become a huge market: brick-
and-mortar stores offer cyberspace “annexes,”
online stores enable adults with special needs to
shop privately without embarrassment.The con-
vergence of digital entertainment enables people
to choose the format, time, and physical space in
which to enjoy the arts conveniently. More than
ever before, physical and virtual products depend
on technology, and consumers’ access to them.
Globalization and post-industrialism has given
rise to the Knowledge Society where intellectual
capital has replaced material capital. Technology
and service jobs now dominate. “Knowledge
is innovation, innovation is quality, and qual-
ity is knowledge management” (Gilbert, 2007,
4). Medicine exemplifies this change as patient
diagnosis and treatment often depend on digital
data capture and analysis. The Human Genome
Project demonstrates how distributed knowledge
can lead to significant discoveries. Collaborative
technology plays a central role in many economic
realities, drawing upon a broad constituency’s
ability to connect. As a result, the need for more
technology specialists and engineers has gained
crisis status in the United States. At this point,
technology industries are resorting to outsourc-
ing of technology jobs to experts overseas and
lobbying for immigration requirement waivers
in order to recruit qualified employees. Even
beyond the technological industry, the message
is clear. American employers expect their work-
ers to use technology, to use information, and to
communicate effectively. As early as the 1991
SCANS (Secretary’s Commission on Achieving
Necessary Skills) Report, the need for employees
How Adults Learn Through Information Technologies
to use technology was mentioned. Even job notices
and applications require Internet connectivity
and the ability of the individual to handle digital
documents and applications. With the advent of
web 2.0, the importance of social networks of
consequence has grown. By using technology to
share and advance knowledge, companies stay
competitive (Nonaka & Takeuchi, 1995). As a
result, adults who are bypassed by technology are
likely to be marginalized in society as a whole;
certainly their options will be constrained.
A coalition of businesses and organizations,
the CEO Forum (2001) has produced a series of
reports on technology and learners, asserting that
technology can impact learner achievement and
prepare them for succeeding in the 21st century.
Likewise, the Partnership for 21st Century Skills
-- which is an advocacy organization of business,
educational and policy decision-makers – de-
veloped a framework for 21st century learning
(2004). In this framework, information, media
and technology skills constitute essential learner
learning outcomes.
In synthesizing research findings about the
benefit of learner technology, Lemke (2005)
identified three significant strands: as a driver for
change, as a support for academic achievement,
and as means for more informed decision making.
Volman and van Eck’s 2001 review of research
found that information and communication tech-
nology (ICT) contributes to learning by offering
environments that help learners solve real-life
problems, providing tools to manipulate infor-
mation, facilitating collaboration and feedback,
and connecting school with the outside world.
One measure of quality is in learners’ work being
valued in the marketplace and in their own lives.
Adult Learning in a Digital World
How do adults interact with technology? Some
adults may have little awareness of the extent that
technology touches them. Others are aware, but
may be uncomfortable or fearful about technol-
ogy (Petrina, Feng, & Kim, 2004). Others may
be intrigued or even obsessed with some form
of technology. In any case, technology impacts
learner’s attitudes and behaviors.
Field (2006) posits four types of learners in the
social space, which may be mapped onto technol-
ogy teaching and learning elements.
• Permanent learners seek opportunities
to learn, and can self-direct their learning.
They are likely to support new methods,
such as technology.
• Traditional learners are self-motivated,
and tend to favor academically-based edu-
cation. They prefer time-tested instruction-
al methods so may be wary of technology
unless the academic community promotes
it actively.
• Instrumental learners are typically other-
motivated (such as being mandated by an
employer); learning enables them to reach
a pre-determined goal. They prefer well-
tried methods so could respond better to
technology they already use rather than try
new technologies. Adult educators need to
show how technology will improve these
learners’ job status or other ultimate mo-
tive (e.g., save money on tax preparation).
• Non-learners do not identify with orga-
nized learning, and tend to resent all edu-
cation providers. They might not believe
in adult learning at all. They tend to avoid
technology, but if it is not associated with
learning, per se, technology may be ac-
cepted (e.g., digital cameras). Informal
adult educators might incorporate technol-
ogy as a recreational option, only later re-
vealing the learning aspects.
Regardless of the type of learner, though,
most adults like to maintain the status quo un-
less change is necessary. Therefore, couching
technology as a way to meet adults’ immediate
needs -- be it job security, keeping friendships,
23
 How Adults Learn Through Information Technologies
entertainment, or health -- can help adult learners
accept these new technology-enhanced learning
methods (Selwyn, 2005).
At first glance, technology would seem to
reinforce and enhance adult learning. Based on
Knowles’ 1973 work, the following elements pair
well with technology.
• Use of new materials: technology provides
access to timely information from around
the world.
• Self-directed and independent learning:
technology resources can be accessed
and used independently and usually at the
learner’s convenience.
• Control of learning: technology can pro-
vide a learning environment with tools and
resources that the learner can explore and
control.
• Immediate utility: technology-based re-
sources support just-in-time learning.
• Problem-orientation: technology tools fa-
cilitate problem-solving, and many digital
resources are comprised of how-to instruc-
tions, simulations, and models that aid in
finding solutions.
• Diverse, active learning: technology ex-
pands access to resources that address
needs of diverse populations, and Web 2.0
facilitates interactive and social learning.
One might equally assert that today’s technol-
ogy has substantially changed the face of adult
learning. First, technology significantly expands
and speeds up access to the world of information.
Telecommunications has collapsed time and space.
People potentially more access, more quickly, to
information around the world. Moreover, people
can respond to each other and share group infor-
mation much more easily than in the past. The
convergence of communication industries such
as telephony and television further expands the
dissemination of information.
24
The nature of the information itself has been
affected by digital technology. Besides the obvious
combination of text, image, and sound, technol-
ogy facilitates the repurposing and transformation
of information to address different objectives
or different audiences. More than ever, the user
needs to interpret the format of information as
well as its content, and their interdependence. The
interface between the information and the user
comprises another element that has not been as
crucial previously. That same interface also gives
rise to interactive and dynamic information. For
instance, hypertextuality enables the reader to go
to linked information that might be further linked
to other documentation; while footnotes and bib-
liographies serve this purpose hypothetically, they
generally do not provide instant connections to
the full texts/content. Furthermore, applications
such as Google docs and wikis enable participants
to literally change documents on the fly, thereby
chipping away at the idea of a permanent recorded
document.
Thirdly, technology impacts the nature of in-
struction, highlighting the issue of standardization
versus customization. On one hand, technology
enables instruction to be mass-produced and
standardized. Course design and resources can
be easily duplicated and disseminated. To a de-
gree, grading can be done automatically once a
quiz is set up. An online videoconference can be
scheduled for one time, with the understanding
that learners anywhere in the world can meet
simultaneously. On the other hand, with so many
more resources available because of telecommu-
nications and digitization, learners are more likely
to find information that fits their particular needs,
and educators can provide learners with more
choices in what resource they use or how they
can demonstrate knowledge. Technology-based
instruction can be structured so that learners can
self-pace their work. A couple of digital tools
support both standardized and customized adult
learning; instructors can develop automated needs
assessment tools that direct the learner to the most
How Adults Learn Through Information Technologies
appropriate resources and activities based on their
responses. Likewise, digital learning objects can
be stored and accessed for a variety of applications
across curricula, which can lead to a one-size-fits-
all mentality or can support a learner’s specific
needs, depending on how they are used.
Fourthly, technology can change the relation-
ship of teacher and learner – and the nature of
learning processes themselves. Because more
resources can be accessed independently, and
learners can access and manipulate those resources
at any time, adult learners have the opportunity
to be more independent. Because access and
communication can be asynchronous but still
timely (as opposed to traditional correspondence
courses), adults may be expected to accomplish
more because they have a more flexible window
of opportunity; they are not constrained by class
time. Indeed, the wall between class time and
daily life becomes more porous; conversations
can continue non-stop if one so wishes. Moreover,
the interactivity of the Internet, particularly Web
2.0 collaborative tools, enables adult learners to
relate to one another more fully. Group projects
become more feasible because students do not
have to meet at one place at one time; on the other
hand, when trying to assess learning progress,
adult educators have to take additional measures
to decipher how each person is contributing to the
end result. The adult educator’s status is likely to
shift from sage on the stage to guide on the side,
providing a learning environment in which adults
can explore.
In short, the incorporation of digital technology
fosters more independent, adult-centered learning.
Maier and Warren (2000) list several technology-
enhanced strategies that support such a model.
• flexible learning through ubiquitous access
to resources, including the instructor
• resource-centered learning provided within
a virtual environment, which enables learn-
ers to use tools to manipulate resources ac-
cording to individual needs and interests
• self-paced learning, unhampered by class
time or one-shot lectures
• collaborative learning using web-based
tools to compare learning and to generate
knowledge together
• distance learning because course materials
and structure can be accessed remotely.
ADULT EDUCATION RESPONSE
USING TECHNOLOGY
By its nature, adult education provides a broad
spectrum of curriculum and delivery models that
should respond to learners’ needs. In terms of
technology, adult learners may need to learn about
technology (such as computer operation) as well
as learn with technology (such as collaborating on
wikis). Not surprisingly, then, adult education’s
incorporation of educational technology can be
uneven, be it in terms of content, resources, in-
struction, learning activities, or assessment.
Access to Technology
To leverage technology in their learning, adults
need to be able to physically and intellectually
access it.
Physical Access
In terms of physical access, adult educators need
to consider several factors.
• Site access: is technology available to
classes and individuals throughout the day
and evening to accommodate adult work-
ing hours?
• Remote access: can learners get to tech-
nology resources from home or public
buildings?
• Equipment circulation: does the site lend
computers to learners or families? These
days, a variety of options are feasible:
25
 How Adults Learn Through Information Technologies
low-end word-processors and Internet de-
vices; mobile devices; older donated com-
puter systems that can be checked out for
the year in a fashion similar to textbook
circulation.
• Physical accommodations: does the site
have computers with larger monitors for
visually impaired users, trackballs for
physically limited motion, scanners to read
text, adjustable desks to accommodate
wheelchairs or other seating?
Physical access to technology remains uneven,
though discrepancies are now more nuanced than
before. The Digital Divide crisis rose largely from
socio-economic concerns. When money is scarce,
the choice between buying food and buying a com-
puter becomes almost insulting. When households
cannot afford a telephone, Internet issues become
mute. In transient conditions, issues of security
and theft often preclude owning valuables of any
sort. While the U. S. Department of Commerce
stated that in 1999 42% of U. S. households had
a personal computer and 26% had Internet access,
only 2% of low-income, rural households had
Internet access that same year. By 2007 the gap
had decreased. Even the majority of families with
less than a $20,000 household income owned a
computer, and 76 percent of the U. S. households
overall owned at least one computer (Pew Global,
2007). Instead, pockets of specific populations
still have little computer technology; for instance,
only 6.8 percent of individuals with disabilities
who live in rural areas have such access (Enders,
2007). Fortunately, a report by the Children’s
Partnership on online content for low-income and
underserved Americans (2000) found that low-
income populations use the Internet largely for
self-improvement: job searching, online training
and personal information. Technology need not
be a divider; rather it can bring information to
all learners. As organizations create technology
plans and policies, adult educators can make sure
that the digital divide becomes digital inclusion.
26
Digitally-based distance learning has increas-
ingly become commonplace as a way for adults
to gain access to education. Many adults con-
sider distance education efficient because of its
convenience, flexibility of time and space, and
need for few additional/outside resources. On
the other hand, distance education usually does
not have the same interactivity or social aspect as
face-to-face learning (although that disadvantage
is being addressed through Web 2.0 applications).
A hybrid combination of online and face-to-face
is preferred by most adult learners (Olafsen &
Cetindamar, 2005). Even if adult assert that they
like distance education, they might not learn ef-
fectively in that mode. In their study of online
learners, Makoe, Richardson and Price (2008)
discovered that adults come into distance educa-
tion situations with attitudes that depended on
culture and other contexts. If learners are older
than twenty-five years old, they are more likely
to drop, largely because of technology problems.
Researching one specific technology tool,
teacher-preparation faculty use of the university’s
online course management system, BeachBoard
(based on BlackBoard), Farmer (2003) noted the
following adult learning benefits:
• increased frequency and quality of out-
of-class, student-to-student dialogue (e.g.,
collaboration on assignments and projects;
peer review of work, etc.) via email, online
‘chat’ and discussion group facilities;
• increased opportunity for faculty-student
communication through individual and
group email;
• ability of instructors to evaluate efficiently
the quality of student work by means of
online quizzes and exams and to monitor
student effort and engagement in the sub-
ject matter on a more frequent and regu-
lar through the use of online discussion
groups;
• mutual reinforcement of out-of-class and
in-class student interaction;
How Adults Learn Through Information Technologies
• increased student confidence in their abil-
ity to use facilities such as email, chat
rooms, discussion boards.
Technical Access
Yet even if adults get their hands on the equipment,
they might not be able to take advantage of the
information resources themselves. Adult educators
need to make sure that adults have opportunities
to learn how to:
• operate computer and other technological
systems (i.e., open and close an applica-
tion, save a document, print, use a mouse,
use a menu and navigation bar, etc.)
• use productivity tools
• navigate the Internet (i.e., use browsers
and search engines, use email, etc.)
• evaluate information critically.
Still, equipment is not the end. Rather, hardware
is merely the mechanism for adult learners to ac-
cess and use information. What is the content? The
obvious answer is a rich collection of materials,
selected as carefully as traditional books. Even
with e-rates and “free” Internet documents and
applications, adult educators still need to purchase
costly electronic resources (such as DVDs) and
programs (such as subject-specific applications).
With multiple stations come issues of lab sets; with
networking comes issues of site licenses. Costly
or hard-to-find resources raise the issue of admin-
istrative support to ensure equitable programs.
As for technology skills, adult educators can-
not and should not have total responsibility for
teaching adults how to become technologically
competent. The entire enterprise needs to be
committed to digital inclusion through several
initiatives:
• computer systems with Internet access in
multiple work areas
• resources that make effective use of
technology
• technical support and adequate materials to
carry out institutional efforts.
Such commitment requires time, effort, money
– and planning. As adults support each other,
they can leverage their talents more effectively.
As administrators and manages support technol-
ogy use through training and access to resources,
home support for adult learning can increase. If
adult education occurs in public entities such as
community centers, partnerships with local busi-
nesses can result in obtaining needed materials
and expertise while providing the community
with well-prepared future employees and current
educational opportunities.
Intellectual Access
Throughout the instructional design process, in-
structors need to determine which technologies
will be used – and to what extent. Such decisions
need to be addressed in light of intellectual access
for adult learning. At the very minimum, instruc-
tors need to determine whether technology will be
used as a tool to deliver instruction, as a learning
aid, or as the outcome itself. Even the instructional
focus, whether to emphasize a technology tool or
educational task, requires careful consideration to
make sure that adult learners have the prerequi-
site skills and knowledge in order to learn with
technology. The decision-making process itself
may well involve technology, particularly when
gathering data (e.g., online surveys, PDA obser-
vation templates, web counters) and analyzing it
(e.g., spreadsheets, databases, content analysis
software). Technology-based choices apply at
each step in designing instruction, as shown here.
• Assess needs: online survey, video capture
of behavior, analysis of website “hits.”
• Identify learners: online solicitations, RSS
feed subscriptions, organizational lists.
27
 How Adults Learn Through Information Technologies
• Identify outcomes: technology standards,
online content standards, online education
syllabi.
• Identify indicators: technology rubrics,
technology products, electronic Delphi
method (i.e., getting experts to come to
consensus on key points).
• Identify prerequisite skills: web-based as-
sessment, performance observation, con-
tent analysis of sample work.
• Identify content: online training docu-
ments, electronic journal articles, virtual
chat.
• Identify the instructional format:
◦⊦ resources (Internet, DVDs, e-books)
◦⊦ instructor (technician, instruction de-
signer, remote-site expert)
◦⊦ methods (web tutorial, hands-on in-
struction, video presentation)
◦⊦ timeframe (self-paced, real-time,
just-in-time)
◦⊦ location (computer lab, classroom,
home)
◦⊦ grouping (individual, online group,
work unit)
◦⊦ individualization (programmed in-
struction, choice of technology,
coaching)
◦⊦ affective domain (wiki, threaded dis-
cussion, virtual chat).
• Contextualize instruction: web page within
work website, professional development
database, digital images of applications.
• Implement the plan: project planning soft-
ware program, web page development,
video conferencing.
• Assess the plan: PDA (personal digital as-
sistant) questionnaire, videotape, online
survey.
Each type of technology tool lends itself to spe-
cific learning approaches. Whenever possible, the
unique properties of each tool should be exploited
to optimize these experiences. An illustration of
28
how these choices impact instructional strategies
follows. A local Leche group meets monthly to
support pregnant mothers. The group’s facilitator
wants to make sure that the women maintain a
healthy lifestyle, so she shows them a free online
personalized health plan website that generates an
appropriate exercise regimen and nutritional guide
based on each woman’s situation. She prints out
the website front screen and URL, and reminds the
attendees that the local public library has Internet
computers that they can use in case they do not
have other access to the Internet. The facilitator
also volunteers to help individuals set up their
free account after class. A couple of women do
not speak English well, so the facilitator locates a
good website that includes information in Spanish.
The women have already paired for other Leche
activities, so the facilitator has them pair up for
this health plan project as well, making sure that
at least one person in each pairing is comfortable
with the Internet. In this way, the pairs can support
each other during the week.
WORKPLACE LEARNING
AND TECHNOLOGY
At first glance, incorporating technology into
workplace learning would appear to be a natural
fit. Especially for companies that have to respond
to a changing environment, technology plays an
increasingly important role. That employees would
learn technology skills on the job also makes sense
because changing technology usually precludes
formal academic training that would prepare
employees for these unforeseen changes.
On their part, employees learn about a tech-
nology that will improve their work quality and
job security. However, in truth, time used for
training takes away from the regular work time,
and improved technological skill may result in
more work but no additional pay. Instead, just
the workload and responsibility increase (Petrina,
Feng, & Kim, 2004).
How Adults Learn Through Information Technologies
Organizational Considerations
The instructional design process itself exists
within the context of the organizational entity that
is sponsoring the learning experience. Therefore,
for technology to be incorporated effectively into
adult education, organizational leadership needs
to have a shared vision for technology integra-
tion and the means to allocate resources (such as
material, facilities, infrastructure, and technical
support) to that end. Policies also need to be put
in place that support technology-enhanced adult
education; aspects might include acceptable use,
skills baselines, professional development and
incentives, hardware specifications and refresh
cycles, and equity issues. In short, the entire
enterprise needs to have the motivation and the
capacity to incorporate technology into its system
(Roblyer & Doering, 2009).
The organization also needs to be realize that
learning about technology differs from learning
with technology; the former views technology as
an end in itself while the latter views technology as
a means. With technology as an end, systems and
organizational goals are the central concern, and
advanced project management skills are needed;
the entire enterprise is changing. When technology
supports learning, job performance is the focus,
and the training department controls the process
to the large extent; the organization as a whole is
not in flux (Main, 2000).
Most adult education incorporates technol-
ogy for the latter reason. Nevertheless, too often
technology is added on top of existing instruction,
like icing on the cake, rather than transforming
instructional design. Some of the changed elements
include: the locus of control from teacher to learner,
just-in-time learning, emphasis on resource-rich
inquiry, and heightened interaction. In fact, one
of the first questions in the instructional design
process that needs to be answered is: “Should
technology be used?” The following lists contrasts
deciding factors.
Incorporating technology is appropriate when:
• accessing remote digital resources
• addressing sensory modes via simulations
and other knowledge representations
• building on or repurposing existing digital
resources or instruction
• encouraging repeated practice (e.g., drills
for rote learning)
• supporting anytime/anywhere learning
• recording and archiving communication
and effort.
Incorporating technology is not beneficial
when:
• focusing on in-house, non-technical
resources
• face-to-face personal contact is important
• providing one-time customized training
• other resources and means are more
effective.
A good rule of thumb is to employ the most
stable, low-tech format applicable to the concept
being taught. Once the decision to use technology
is made, regardless of the type of technology used,
instructional designers need to acknowledge and
take advantage of these media.
The Learning Organization
Although individual learning appears to be em-
phasized, the concept of the learning organization
deserves attention. Particularly as companies have
to respond quickly to an ever-changing environ-
ment, and employees increasingly switch jobs, the
notion of a learning organization that shares and
builds corporate knowledge has gained significant
ground. Human resource development trainers are
likely to incorporate technology as they facilitate
organizational change: through digital training
29
 How Adults Learn Through Information Technologies
modules, video or web-based conferencing, and
corporate information databases (Field, 2006).
Increasingly, the workplace is adopting the
concept of learning communities as a way to
cope with internal and external change. Basically,
a learning community is a group of individuals
who learn together over time, and act on their
learning to achieve common goals. Usually the
group includes both new and experienced mem-
bers, with the intent of acculturating everyone.
While individuals undoubtedly learn within the
group, the group as a whole functions to address
organizational issues so that team learning is
paramount. As Laiken (2001) noted in her study
of organizational learning models,
A focus on information organizational learn-
ing contributes to employees’ collective ability
to move beyond simply coping with stress to
engaging in creative action, for the benefit of both
the individual members and the organization as
a whole (p. 4).
Learning communities enjoy these benefits.
• New employees are trained more efficient-
ly because they can get help from mentors
and other experts.
• Institutional knowledge is shared so that
operations can function successfully if em-
ployees are absent or leave.
• Employees can keep current in their fields
by sharing their learning experiences, such
as conferences and professional reading.
• Individual learning and group learning in-
form each other.
• Camaraderie and interdependence are fa-
cilitated through joint, meaningful actions.
• Employees can analyze and reflect on their
practice with the aimof improving individ-
ual and organizational efforts.
On the other hand, learning communities may
face obstacles. Groups may favor harmony over
achievement, resulting in little learning or orga-
nizational improvement. Groups may push for
30
action, forgetting about the need for reflection.
Strong individuals may overpower the group,
minimizing independent thought. Individual
factors that contribute to the success of learning
communities include learner expertise, learning
history, attitude toward the learning activity, social
skills, and volition. Organizational factors that
foster learning community success include pre-
sentation (how the learning activity is introduced
and contextualized by management), security,
access, assistance, and incentives (Olafsen &
Cetindamar, 2005)
Technology impacts learning communities in
several ways.
• Communication and actions can be record-
ed more easily through emails, online cart,
and videoconferencing.
• Documents can be digitized for easier ac-
cess, storage, and retrieval.
• People can communicate anytime,
anywhere.
If the underlying message is “things change,”
then the inevitable question is: “What should
adult education look like in a digital world?” If
traditional adult education could be compared to
Theory X businesses where employees are told
what to do in a highly hierarchical bureaucracy,
then contemporary adult education could be com-
pared to Theory Y businesses where participatory
management is the name of the game. Learning
communities would compare to Theory Z orga-
nizations where highly – autonomous networks
of teams have replaced hierarchy. In any case,
adult education needs to address these changes
constructively.
DIGITAL DIVIDE OR
DIGITAL INCLUSION
At this point, the term Digital Divide usually refers
to the “haves” and “have nots” of technology. The
How Adults Learn Through Information Technologies
typical image includes powerful white males at
state-of-the-art computers doing advanced cal-
culations or sophisticated graphics while poor
homeless mothers stare at an isolated AppleII.
The actual picture is much more complicated,
and effective solutions involve much more than
plopping an eMachine inside every project com-
plex apartment.
Equity has been a long-standing issue in adult
education. If people are unaware of educational
opportunities or have limited access to such op-
portunities, then they cannot benefit from such
adult education. Now the stakes are higher in a
technology-rich society where timely and efficient
access to digital information can determine one’s
earning power as well as their physical health.
Probably the most exerted effort has been
made in providing equitable opportunities for
individuals with disabilities. The Americans with
Disabilities Act of 1990 mandated accommoda-
tions so that eligible individuals could access
information equitably. Closed-captioned televi-
sion and videos, accessible websites, universal
telephone service, and built-in adaptive features
in computers exemplify ways that technology can
help this population learn. Other assistive technol-
ogy includes modified input devices, specialized
software, and dedicated hardware. Adult educators
need to know what technological tools are avail-
able, and how to match them to the users’ needs.
This process is well-defined for youth, but less
clear for adult learners.
When technology first entered the adult educa-
tion “door,” a Digital Divide blocked that doorway.
As noted previously, lower-income adults could
not afford the technology, and non-English readers
had difficulty comprehending the largely textual
Internet. Now the prices for technology have
dropped, English now constitutes only a third
of text languages (and translation programs are
improving in quality), and web-based information
incorporates images and sound. Smart phones and
other mobile devices offer a comparably low-cost
mechanism potentially to enable people around
the world to access information to support adult
learning.
Nevertheless, access issues remain. The
principles of adult education that support self-
determined adult learning still threaten the social
norms of some cultures. Several governments
have tight controls on Internet access, and block
websites that might contradict or discount those
governmental values. Economic and political
instability and crisis also impact access to and
sustainability of adult education.
Additionally, the Digital Divide discrepancy
has a new wrinkle: age. Today’s millennial youth
have grown up in a digital world; at some point,
formal or information education usually provides
youth some technological access. They may be
called “digital immigrants.” In contrast, most
adults over the age of thirty tend to be “digital
immigrants”; electronic technology may be con-
sidered a second language or culture. In digital-rich
industries, youth may be advantaged because of
their technological skills; particularly if the cor-
porate culture advances expertise over seniority,
the gap between young and old may broaden,
sometimes to the disadvantage of seniors. Adults
who are used to being considered experts may feel
uncomfortable learning from youngsters; they
may well leave digital technology in the hands of
younger generations, which can seriously jeopar-
dize older adults’ own independence and lifelong
learning as well as their economic circumstances
(Istance, Schuetze, & Schuller, 2002).
Older adults (beyond 64 years old) are likely
to be fearful and threatened by digital technology
for several reasons: they are not used to it, they
associate technology with youth, they have less
dexterity to manipulate it, and their cognitive pro-
cesses are slower (Patrina, Feng, & Kim, 2008). On
the other hand, technology can help older adults
keep track of things better, help them communi-
cate more easily (particularly when handwriting
becomes burdensome), compensate for physical
constraints (e.g., enlarge text), and bring them
31
 How Adults Learn Through Information Technologies
convenient entertainment. These positive aspects
can motivate adults to learn with technology.
CULTURAL ISSUES
Increasingly, adults are seeking distance educa-
tion delivery options in order to get the training
needed from experts who may reside continents
away. Therefore, educators need to address and
accommodate cultural realities. Hofstede’s cur-
rent 2001 model of cultural dimensions provides
a framework for examining culturally-sensitive
online teaching and learning. As they work in
cross-cultural settings, or at the very least work
with learners from different cultures, educators
should strive for cultural competence. Specific
strategies are suggested to incorporate culturally-
sensitive learning/open educational resources
to address language barriers, student-teacher
relations, choosing resources, learning activities,
technical issues, and assessment.
Examination of the learner specifically leads
to several contributing cultural factors on an e-
learning environment; technology significantly
impacts student learning, and also is subject to
cultural influence. For instance, learners might
have different degrees of access due to cultural
attitudes about technology, socially-constructed
gender role expectations, and socio-economic
values. World experience and knowledge impacts
learners’ ability to locate and evaluate online in-
formation. Even social attitudes about language
acquisition and attitudes about English can impact
online use.
One flexible type of digital resource is open
educational resources – free learning objects –
which can be separated into three clusters.
• Learning content: courses, course materi-
als, content modules, learning objects, col-
lections, journals
• Tools: support OER creation, delivery, use
and improvement
32
• Implementation resources: intellectual
property licenses, design principles, --lo-
calization of content.
These learning objects can exist independently,
and can be integrated into a variety of courses
given the appropriate context.
While courses should have clear expectations
and specific deadlines, adult learners should be
given choices in the resources they use and the
ways that they demonstrate competence. Instruc-
tors should also provide opportunities for adults to
learn independently and in groups. These practices
enable adults to experience learning objects that
affirm their typical educational backgrounds and
introduces new strategies that help them build a
repertoire of learning tools. To further “push”
on cultural sensitivity, instructors can explicitly
address issues of culturally defined educational
practices.
FUTURE TRENDS
Technology has brought the world closer together,
at least in terms of interaction, if not agreement.
Globalization has required cross-cultural inter-
action and negotiation. Web 2.0 has facilitated
interactive communication and collaborative
knowledge building.
Globalization
While changing issues mark the digital society,
globalization’s potential impact on adult learning
leads to specific considerations about culturally-
sensitive information and information cross-
fertilization.
Culturally-Sensitive Information
Paradoxically to the trend of globalization, the
nature of information has become more culturally-
sensitive. Information by its nature gains meaning
How Adults Learn Through Information Technologies
through context; it does not exist separately from
its social environment. Historically, information
was transferred from one generation to another
in order to maintain and sustain society; learn-
ing was a matter of internalizing and duplicating
existing knowledge. When people encountered a
different culture, they had to learn that culture’s
information in order to survive (McElroy, 2002).
With the move to globalization in the work-
place, the cultural framework of information is the
organization itself. The organization’s employees
have to learn and internalize the corporate culture.
When the organizational culture contradicts the
daily societal culture, employees have to confront
those differences and decide how to resolve them:
accepting one culture and rejecting another, or rec-
onciling the differences. Additionally, in interna-
tional companies, their employees also encounter
the societal cultures of one another, which forces
still another round of negotiation of meaning and
possible consequences. As a survival technique,
some employees may compartmentalize their
private culture and their workplace culture, in-
teracting with their professional colleagues only
within the corporate culture. Unfortunately, that
approach leads to shallower relationships and less
authentic learning, which lessens the benefits of a
learning community (McMahon & Bruce, 2002).
As a result, adult education has to incorporate
cultural training in order to be aware of the cul-
tural connotations of information, understand and
respect those cultural differences, and leverage
those unique culturally-sensitive characteristics
of information to create deeper and more nuanced
knowledge.
Information Cross-Fertilization
Technology, transportation, and globalization
have also led to more cross-fertilization of adult
learning. International organizations have existed
for centuries as adults have reached out to other
like-minded individuals around the globe. Indeed,
institutions such as the Catholic Church influenced
governments significantly in the Middle Ages,
providing a consistent set of values and accepted
norms of behavior across ethnicities in the face
of political instability.
With the rapid pace of information and conse-
quential change, adults need to constantly learn in
order to maintain their professional “edge.” Those
individuals working in relative isolation, particu-
larly in highly-specialized professions, may have
difficulty keeping current. While journals publish
new research and practice, they may lag in timeli-
ness, and they provide only passive connectedness
for the reader. Fortunately, with today’s instant
telecommunications, international organizations
and other entities have risen in number, and can
significantly impact adult learning. Web-based
communities of practice can exist anywhere,
crossing national borders almost seamlessly.
A variety of communication methods facilitate
collaborative adult learning. Digitized documents
can be quickly created, stored, accessed and re-
trieved in remote servers. Adults can email, instant
message, and phone one another at any time via
the Internet. For group synchronous interaction,
adults can use chat rooms, webcasting, and video
conferencing. In short, a number of technology-
based tools enable adults to experience learning
communities and apply the latest research, even
if each person is the sole expert at his or her
workplace.
Adult educators should comprise part of those
borderless organizations to optimize learning.
They can design the conditions for learning by
helping those organizations conduct needs assess-
ments, define appropriate learning goals, locate
or develop relevant learning resources, design
activities that optimize learning and application,
and assess efforts. Adult educators also appreciate
the context of learning, and can help adults negoti-
ate change within their workplace and daily life.
33
 How Adults Learn Through Information Technologies
Web 2.0
Web 2.0 is the term given to express the idea of
interactivity that now marks some web-based
collaborative tools such as wikis and blogs.
Rather than one-way communication, Web 2.0
applications enable people to participate in two-
way active communication to create information.
The comparatively easy access of the Internet
further broadens the base of participation as well
as facilitates global dissemination of information
Just as Web 2.0 acknowledges and builds on
each person’s knowledge base, so too does adult
education. Examples of adult education 2.0 include
chat-based learning sessions, interactivity options
and social networking features, such as push tech-
nology RRS feeds, comment/messaging options,
incorporation of learning community repositories,
enterprise mash-ups, and user-customizable folk-
sonomy “shells.” Adult education could become a
participatory network, enabling learners to access
information and each other. Adult instructional de-
sign then would provide a coordinated framework
for participatory adult learning. Adult educators
could provide a personalized social network with
individual learning spaces. This learning network
would include structured information and instruc-
tion provider by educators and learners, as well as
permit social tagging for customizable access to
these resources and learning activities. Neverthe-
less, when working with adults, instructors may
find some learners flinching from group-directed
agendas or interactive role-plays, expecting the
traditional speech to be delivered — and regurgi-
tated by the adult student. When adults are given
opportunities to engage actively in their learning,
though, they can overcome their past preconcep-
tions about education, and take advantage of the
benefits of andragogy.
Indeed, the next iteration of learning through
technology is personalized learning plans. Increas-
ingly, learning has the potential to become more
customized. Already, software applications enable
learners to create personal learning spaces. Google
34
Reader represents a simple model: users identify
online social networks, be they dynamic websites
or blogs, that have RSS feeds. These “push”
technologies push information to the end user; the
consumer simply subscribes to the service. The
learner then links those services on their Reader
web page, which is refreshed every time a digital
message/feed is sent to it. Instead of getting email
announcements throughout the day, the learner
can go to the Reader at his convenience, picking
which sources to view; the learner controls which
information to access.
CONCLUSION
The advent of digital technology has changed as-
pects of adult learning because of the need to learn
how to use technology tools, the opportunity for
expanded access to resources, and the expanded
opportunities to engage with these resources and
with other learners. Previously, adult learner was
usually a local enterprise, either alone or with other
people at the workplace or in daily life. While
a case may be made that a learning society is
needed in order to keep up with technology and the
changes it fosters, it is equally true that technology
supports and facilitates a learning society, which
can help the world cope with accelerating change.
This societal context of adult learner helps blur
workplace and daily learning “boxes,” resulting
in more seamless transfer of learning.
In response, adult educators need to design
instruction, curriculum, and programs that offer
customizable learning and socially-rich learning
environments. Technology should be incorporated
in meaningful and effective ways that match
learning objectives and learner needs. Every effort
needs to be made to make sure that adults have the
opportunity to access and learn with technology,
and that adults can choose the type of learning
that best meets their needs. To that end, public
and private entities should insure that a robust and
equitable technology infrastructure is in place, and
How Adults Learn Through Information Technologies
that adult education be appropriated supported as
a right of every adult (Selwyn, 2005).
REFERENCES
CEO Forum on Education and Technology. (2001).
School technology and readiness report: Year 4
report. Washington, DC: CEO Forum on Educa-
tion and Technology.
Children’s Partnership. (2000). Online content for
low-income and underserved Americans. Santa
Monica, CA: Children’s Partnership.
Enders, A. (2007). Rates of computer and Internet
use: A comparison of urban and rural access by
people with disabilities. Rural Facts. Missoula,
MT: University of Montana.
Farmer, L. (2003). Facilitating faculty incor-
poration of information literacy skills into the
curriculum through the use of online instruction.
RSR. Reference Services Review, 31(4), 307–312.
doi:10.1108/00907320310515220
Field, J. (2006). Lifelong learning and the new
educational order (2nd. Rev. ed.). Sterling, VA:
Trentham Books.
Fitzgerald, R., Taylor, R., & La Valle, I. (2003).
National Adult Learning Survey (NALS) 2002.
Nottingham: Department for Education and Skills.
Gilbert, J. (2007, Winter). Catching the knowledge
wave. Education Canada, 4–8.
Hofstede, G. (2001). Culture’s consequences:
Comparing values, behaviors, institutions, and
organizations across nations. Thousand Oaks,
CA: Sage Publications.
Istance, D., Schuetze, H., & Schuller, T. (2002).
International perspectives on lifelong learning:
From recurrent education to the knowledge soci-
ety. New York: Open University Press.
Knowles, M. (1973). The adult learner: A ne-
glected species. Houston: Gulf Publishing.
Laiken, M. (2001). Models of organizational
learning: Paradoxes and best practices in the
post industrial workplace. Toronto: University
of Toronto.
Lemke, C. (2005, Winter). A range of use: Tech-
nology in learning. OnCue, 12, 21.
Levinson, D. (1978). The seasons of a man’s life.
New York: Knopf.
Livingstone, D. (2001). Adults’ information
learning: Definitions, findings, gaps and future
research. Toronto: University of Toronto Centre
for the Study of Education and Work.
Maier, P., & Warren, A. (2000). Integrating tech-
nology in learning and teaching. Sterling, VA:
Kogan Page.
Main, R. (2000). Leveraging technology for hu-
man performance improvement. In Piskurich, G.,
Becksi, P., & Hall, B. (Eds.), The ASTD handbook
of training design and delivery (pp. 453–472).
New York: McGraw-Hill.
McElroy, M. (2006). The new knowledge man-
agement: Complexity, learning and sustainable
innovation. Boston: Elsevier Science.
McMahon, C., & Bruce, C. (2002). Information
literacy needs of local staff in cross-cultural de-
velopment projects. Journal of International De-
velopment, 14(1), 113–137. doi:10.1002/jid.864
Nonaka, I., & Takeuchi, H. (1995). The knowledge-
creating company. New York: Oxford University
Press.
Olafsen, R., & Cetindamar, D. (2005). E-learning
in a competitive firm setting. Innovations in
Education and Teaching International, 42(4),
325–335. doi:10.1080/14703290500062581
35
 How Adults Learn Through Information Technologies
Partnership for 21st Century Skills. (2004).
Framework for 21st century learning. Tucson,
AZ: Partnership for 21st Century Skills.
Petrina, S., Feng, F., & Kim, J. (2004). Researching
cognition and technology: how we learn across
the lifespan. International Journal of Technology
and Design Education, 18, 375–396. doi:10.1007/
s10798-007-9033-5
Pew Global. (2007). Pew global attitudes project.
Washington, DC: Pew Project.
Roblyer, M., & Doering, A. (2009). Integrating
educational technology into teaching (5th ed.).
Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
Selwyn, N. (2005). Adult learning in the digital
age: Information technology and the learning
society. New York: Routledge.
Selwyn, N., Gorard, S., & Forlong, J. (2006). Adult
learning in the digital age: Information technology
and the learning society. New York: Routledge.
Sheehy, G. (1976). Passages: Predictable crises
in adult life. New York: Dutton.
U. S. Department of Labor. (1991). Secretary’s
Commission on Achieving Necessary Skills.
Washington, DC: Government Printing Office.
Volman, M., & van Eck, E. (2001). Gender equity
and information technology in education: The
second decade. Review of Educational Research,
7(4), 61–634.
36
Westat, K., & Creighton, S. (2000). Participation
in adult education in the United States: 1998-1999.
Washington, DC: U. S. Department of Education.
KEY TERMS AND DEFINITIONS
Andragogy: The art and science of helping
adults learn.
Collaboration: The process of sharing re-
sources and responsibilities to create shared
meaning and attain a common goal; interdependent
cooperation.
Digital Divide: The gap between “haves” and
“have-nots” relative to technology access.
Digital Natives: Individuals, usually born
since 1985, who have grown up in the digital world.
Globalization: The process of integrating
regions via communications and economics.
Instructional Design: A systematic analysis
of training needs and the development of aligned
instruction.
Learning Objects: A self-contained resource,
usually digital, that can be used and repurposed
in support of learning.
Technology Literacy: Ability for a person
to effectively and responsibly use technology to
access, manage, integrate, evaluate, create and
communicate information.
Web 2.0: Interactive Web; enables people to
collaborate and share online.
 37

Chapter 3
Comprehensive Distance
Learning Design for
Adult Education
Kathleen P. King
University of South Florida, USA

ABSTRACT
Understanding and successfully designing online learning courses are among the greatest needs of faculty
in adult and higher education today. An adult learning perspective emphasizes design which has rigor-
ous academic engagement, addresses current and prospective students’ needs, while being feasible to
develop (Simonson, Smaldino, Albright, & Zvacek, 2009; Palloff & Pratt, 2004). This chapter describes
rapid changes in society, technology and distance learning which influence both course design and
facilitation. Beginning with distance learning, the chapter illustrates the possibilities for teaching and
learning through several inexpensive and easy technologies, before progressing to planning, designing
and facilitating courses which incorporate them. Drawing upon 13+ years of distance learning research,
design and teaching, and extensive continued literature reviews, the chapter has a robust knowledge
base and model. The aim is to assist faculty in envisioning, planning, designing and facilitating online
classes which best address the many demands they have to satisfy.

INTRODUCTION also entertainment and socializing (Jones & Fox,

The convenience and flexibility of instruction may
compel people to pursue distance learning op-
portunities; however, there are other motivations
and incentives from an educational perspective
(Allen & Seaman, 2007). Today, adults 18-72 are
using the Internet not only for information, but
DOI: 10.4018/978-1-61692-906-0.ch003
2009). The multitude of people engaged in infor-
mal learning via Internet searches, audio books,
and podcasts highlights the fact that people of
all ages seek learning opportunities online when
they have a critical need to gain knowledge and
skills. (Berg, 2005; Christiansen, Johnson, & Horn,
2008; King & Sanquist, 2009; The Partnership for
21st Century Skills, 2004; Simonson et al., 2009).
Nonetheless, traditional educational institutions
 Comprehensive Distance Learning Design for Adult Education
tend to ignore this fact in the scope and design of
distance learning offerings.
Instead, informal distance learning opportu-
nities may be on-demand, highly dynamic, and
result in turning the tables on traditional formats.
Therefore, people arrive at traditional learning
spaces expecting more technology that they can
control. Control and flexibility have become major
characteristics of continuous information gather-
ing, daily learning and entertainment; therefore
they need to be included in distance learning.
Fueled by the technological delivery of global
information 24 hours day, seven days a week
(24/7), users expect to pursue academic studies
with the same tools, convenience, and global
reach as their work, entertainment, and social
engagement. (Allen & Seamen, 2007; Tapscott,
& Williams, 2006).
One of the greatest opportunities that arrives
with ubiquitous technology is to consider how it
may help reframe student-teacher relationships,
traditional program study restrictions, and student
responsibility, allowing for new models to emerge.
When we are able to embrace what technology
offers and learners seek, we become ready for an
educational revolution. Moreover, if institutions
are not able to embrace these opportunities, many
educational leaders expect that learners will go
outside traditional venues, and schools, colleges
and universities will struggle with enrollments
and income (Berg, 2002, 2005; Christensen et
al., 2008; Simonson et al., 2009).
This chapter’s model of designing distance
learning is built upon these critical premises. It
provides a valuable introduction to envisioning,
planning and designing distance learning courses
which will sustain and advance academic integrity.
Transforming learning with the ever-expanding
capabilities of technology provides a robust en-
vironment for academics and learners to grow
intellectually, creatively and responsibly.
38
BACKGROUND: FIRST
THINGS FIRST
Issues Related to
Institutional Support
This section addresses several institutional issues
of support which are not always reviewed, but in
fact are requisite for successful distance learning.
Evaluating an educational organization accord-
ing to the criteria provides a invaluable basis for
evaluating organizational readiness. If a college,
university or adult education program does not
already have the following services available to
them on a consistent basis, they need to develop
or outsource them in order to be successful in
distance learning.
Faculty Development Accessibility. The first
assumption is that programs which are developing
and supporting distance learning course need to
regularly provide faculty development on a con-
venient basis. Whether it is a faculty development
center which provides training individually in
regularly scheduled classes, or ongoing outsourced
professional development, faculty need to have
resources to learn how to expand their technol-
ogy and instructional skills (Brown, 2006). Some
people would argue to have outside agencies en-
tirely design the courses and think such support
would not be needed. However, faculty should
be involved in design, conversant in instructional
design and able to make valuable and necessary
changes as course and semesters progress. It is
unrealistic to try to offer courses on autopilot;
the best adult learning is customized to specific
learner needs and contexts; therefore at the very
least faculty need to be educated and prepared to be
able to make adaptations (Simonson et al., 2009).
Technical Support. The issue of technical
support may seem to be moot, but in fact, many
institutions who undertake distance learning do
not adequately provide the faculty and student
support which is needed. The recommended
guideline is 10 hrs a day live technical support
Comprehensive Distance Learning Design for Adult Education
and 24 hour turn around via email support (King
& Griggs, 2006). Learners and faculty alike can-
not be expected to adjust responsibilities to office
hour requirements. Learning happens at all hours,
time zones interfere as well as job responsibilities.
Responsiveness, supportive manner and value in
technical support are essential for distance learning
to succeed. Based on experience, whenever pos-
sible it is preferred that some form of live technical
support be accessible 24 hrs a day (perhaps chat,
voice, etc.).
Online Learning Management System Orga-
nizations need to decide what online management
system will be used. Examples of such platforms
include Blackboard, Moodle, Desire2Learn, An-
gel, and many more. Teachers and learners both
need to have a consistent online environment in
which they engage. By reviewing several of these
options, decisions can be made to determine which
system matches educational needs, technology re-
sources, financial resources ad technical expertise
of all who will use it. Without a dedicated and
consistent system, any effort in distance learning
becomes overly confusing, and time consuming
(Simonson et al., 2009).
Intellectual Property and Faculty Load. This
section covers probably one of the thorniest related
issues in the field of distance learning. Nonethe-
less, many educational groups attempt to launch
into this field without working through these
details first. In comparison, wiser educators and
administrators will identify policies, procedures
and basic agreements among regarding intellectual
property, compensation for course development,
teaching load, and course capacity (King & Griggs,
2006; Morrison, 2006; Simonson et al., 2009).
Anyone who thinks that matters of intellectual
property are nonessential has not been keeping
abreast of educational and public news; it is one
of the quickest growing and changing fields of
litigation today (Berg, 2002). The reason it is
prominent in the education field is that academics
were usually never considered as engaged in “work
for hire.” Specifically, academics traditionally
retained the rights to their writing and research. In
k-12 settings, the practice and culture is somewhat
different. However, in most instructional settings,
when one begins to be compensated for the desig-
nated and additional work of course design, then
some people may assume new rules can be applied!
(Berg, 2002) It is wise to be transparent about the
policy and provide settings for discussion about
needs, parameters and compensation. Similarly,
faculty need to determine if the organizational
policy meets their needs sufficiently and not expect
they will just “be taken care of.” As documented
in many articles and reports, policies and com-
pensation vary widely across organizations and
schools (Allen & Seaman, 2007; Simonson et al.,
2009). However, most authorities seem to agree
on this slice of advice: never make assumptions
in these areas.
With these fundamentals considered and in
place, faculty have strong institutional support
for their professional efforts. With the technology
platforms they have the tools needed to create
engaging and worthwhile classes. Finally, the
formal agreements institutionalize the distance
learning efforts in order that intellectual property
is not lost, or contested after the fact (King, 2008;
King & Griggs, 2006; Morrison, 2006; Simonson,
et al., 2009). This effort in defining the issues and
determining contextual applications provides a
framework for better understanding the history
of how distance learning developed.
Definitions and Critical Factors
Shaping the Historical Background
The history of distance learning spans hundreds
of years in our global world. This movement
is not a new wave of innovation and is a trend
which continues to march forward. Greece and
Africa delivered critical educational information
by human foot couriers. In the 19th century, mail
correspondence courses appeared, spanning the
continents. By the mid 20th century, educational
delivery options were extending along with the
39
 Comprehensive Distance Learning Design for Adult Education
scope of learning from vocational to liberal arts,
and religious education. Television introduced
technology into education in new dimensions in
the 1960s (Moore & Kearsley, 1996). Consider
the educational impact of such classics as Sesame
Street®, This Old House®, or GED on TV®; these
series can attest to the capacity of television and
the public’s acceptance of television to deliver
capable instruction. Recognizing distance learning
as a continuing development debunks the myth
of it being a passing fad and increases the need
for organizations and individuals alike to address
the opportunity.
Overcoming Barriers of Policy. People new to
this area may be surprised to learn that distance
learning programs and efforts serve a multitude
of contexts, content areas and age groups. And
yet this breadth of use did not happen overnight.
It took 40 years for online learning to mature
significantly in formal educational efforts (King
& Griggs, 2006). What type of issues and barriers
arise in attempts to introduce online learning to
specific settings?
Consider first that traditions run deep in aca-
demia. Therefore the adoption of videoconference,
teleconferencing, and eventually e-learning in
business and popular use from the 1970s through
the 2000s was not widely embraced in the United
States (US) education until 2005. Conversely,
UK and Australia academic institutions made
inroads more swiftly with these approaches for
several reasons. First of all, they had greater fa-
miliarity with adult learner needs. Second, they
actively incorporate the adult learning perspec-
tive in formal educational efforts (for example,
The Open University). Third, in Australia they
had extensive remote areas which they needed to
serve. (King & Wang, 2007; Moore & Kearsley,
1996). It was not until 2008/2009 that we reached
a widely significant marker in the USA timeline
of distance learning. It was then when the US
Department of Education (USDOE) qualified
postsecondary students enrolled in online courses
40
for federal financial aid (US Department of Edu-
cation, 2005-2006).
From Techie Only to Everyone. One of the
early problems faced by the distance learning
movement was that computer-based technology
and Internet applications were not always simple
to use. Today, many faculty may recall the signifi-
cant hardware and technical chain reaction which
happened during the late 1980s and 1990s. First
among these events was the release of the personal
computer (PC) in the late 1980s. It was the PC
which marked the remote beginning of today’s
accessible e-learning. Required expertise and
high costs of equipment had previously excluded
many people from the everyday use of e-learning
The second contributing factor was a sub-
stantial advancement: the standardization of
HyperText Markup Language (HTML) for the
World Wide Web in 1990 at the CERN Institute
(Simonson, et al., 2009). HTML enabled pages to
be linked together (hypertext) and be recognized
by several programs/browsers. Browsers were
quickly developed which allowed users to “point
and click” their way through Internet sites. Third,
the rollout of broadband Internet access at afford-
able prices across the world created the platform
of connectivity. A fourth major influence was
widespread social adoption of web based technol-
ogy innovations by the general public (Allen &
Seamen, 2007; Rogers, 1962). During these short
20 years, critical barriers of computing capability,
and affordability were eliminated. Most people
today expect that everyday information needs,
such as student homework assistance and answers,
travel plans, banking, shopping, etc. are instantly
and constantly accessible on Internet-connected
digital devices.
Dynamic and customizable social platforms
also drew mass numbers to them as the purchas-
ing power of the young users, aka Digital Natives
(Prensky, 2001; WGBH, 2008). Consider the vast
impact and popularity of YouTube.com, MySpace.
com, and iTunes. From cell phones to iPods, net
books to smart phones, the technology, and manu-
Comprehensive Distance Learning Design for Adult Education
facturing industries raced to develop the next great
application. The social trends and technological
developments of the past are inseparable from
today’s use of distance learning.
ADDRESSING THE CHALLENGES
OF DISTANCE LEARNING WITH
INSTRUCTIONAL DESIGN
Building upon the social adoption of technology
and the convenient, inexpensive availability of
such a wide variety of applications (video, audio,
virtual reality, etc), faculty have a robust set of
tools and a growing history of successful online
learning with which to begin. A few examples of
critical distance learning elements incorporated
easily and meaningfully include instructor interac-
tion, alternate media formats, online interactive
activities, and/or teacher-learner dialogue (Brown,
2006; Twigg, 2001).
In 2010 and beyond, some fields of distance
learning seem light-years further ahead of others
(Heron & Wright, 2006; King & Griggs, 2006).
Moreover, many progressive efforts harness
the captivating experiences of Second Life and
popularity of iTunes to teach Physics via virtual
roller coasters, or laboratory science via virtual
medical lab tests and surgeries (Todd & Himburg,
2007). Building upon best practices of face to
face classroom pedagogy and andragogy, distance
educators have a field rich with possibilities to
transform teaching and learning into new possibili-
ties. This section will focus on best practice for
distance learning, followed with a simple model
for beginning design.
Recommendations for Best
Practice in Online Learning
Instructional Design. US Department of Educa-
tion (2006) guidelines confirm that content ex-
perts need to be involved in the development of
distance learning courses. Instructional designers
specializing in supporting faculty in its develop-
ment can be immensely helpful in preparing and
creating online courses. At the least, the faculty
development center should provide support for
faculty in learning skills or techniques which
enable them to implement special capabilities in
their online courses.
Envision. Several progressive studies and
efforts confirm that designing distance learning
programs and courses beginning with the end
in mind, that is competency based design, has
many positive benefits (Brown, 2006; Wiggins
& McTighe, 1989). By training faculty in such
a model, they rethink their curriculum, content
assumptions, and instructional beliefs, and can
redesign courses to take greater advantage of the
technology. Additionally, because access can be as
convenient as their computer in the living room,
bedroom, or study, and time is not lost in travel to
and from campus, students have more available
time to work with the content. The greater amount
of time and ability to invest effort in projects or
assignments briefly several times during a week
afford new formats and opportunities for instruc-
tional design. Two brief examples are provided
here: (1) consider using ongoing simulations as
each member in a political science class assume
the role of a different member in the president’s
cabinet and has to handle a national emergency,
or (2) an in-depth scenario where class members
have to collaborate to arrive at a solution. The
logistics of such activities are cumbersome face
to face and might dominate a traditional class for
weeks, whereas online activities can be scheduled
more conveniently.
Using Technology in Meaningful Ways. Dis-
tance learning design should use technology in
ways which are meaningful, varied, and active.
Rather than students reading copious amounts of
text, effective courses delivered in distance educa-
tion include multiple modes of content delivery
(audio, video, text, presentations, etc.), learner
engagement in activities which demonstrate learn-
ing, peer dialogue, collaborative learning, and
41
 Comprehensive Distance Learning Design for Adult Education
problem based learning (Bersin, 2004; Stansbury,
2008). Presently, several books have been pub-
lished from a variety of educational perspectives
and across content and grade levels, which reveal
specific applications of these principles includ-
ing online course facilitation, blended learning,
wikis, blogs, podcasts, and Web 2.0 tools (See for
example, Bonk et al., 2005; King & Gura, 2009;
Palloff & Pratt, 2007).
Organization of Course. Online delivery also
afford the opportunity to redesign courses in or-
der to maximize the use of technology. Faculty
may reflect on ways in which they can bridge the
distance and use the online capabilities to explore
the content in more in-depth ways. Reconceptual-
izing the way the course is taught and delivered
(Caffarella, 2004; Simonson et al., 2009). In this
category of transformation, one would include
organizing the course around chronological,
thematic, dramatic reenactments, primary sources
or constructivist discovery as the delivery frame-
work. Faculty may envision this possibility and
be overwhelmed at reorganizing the entire course.
Instead, approach the task step by step and each
semester develop a different part of the course in
the new format. Online instructors can therefore to
entirely redesign a course across 4 - 5 semesters.
Dialogue /Reflection- If one wants to create
an online course which is an independent study
course, that is possible; however, more likely,
course design is for group instruction. What facili-
tative educators do “in the moment” and easily in
a face to face class by calling on different students,
recognizing those who are puzzled or have ques-
tions, and drawing in those who seem distracted, is
not as simple or causal in an online course. How-
ever, these same functions can be accomplished.
Consider that for many of our courses, dialogue
and reflection are a core element of how we want
students to not only learn facts, but also critically
examine them, ask questions and internalize the
principles. In an online environment, the ways we
might make that happen can be many.
42
Consider the possibilities of using, discussion
board questions, scenarios, and role playing which
probe controversial topics, differing opinions
about the subject, and explore alternate points of
views (Luppicini, 2007; Simonson et al., 2009).
Online classes might use the creation of a video,
audio reenactment, participant audio or video
interviews, student created debates, rich media
presentations, creative arts, and collaborative
blogs or wikis to express their findings and un-
derstanding. Some faculty do not realize how to
escalate the academic rigor of creative works by
requiring reference lists and citations to document
the sources and breadth of research.
Interaction is Critical. Another broader prin-
ciple which builds on reflection and dialogue is
that interaction is critical in an online course.
Consider the following systems for teacher-student
interaction as possibilities. Many online instructors
find that a policy of 24-48 hour email response
time provides reliability and reassurance to the
students. A discussion folder dedicated to assign-
ment questions can also be connected to send an
alert as email or text message so the teacher knows
critical information is needed. And holding virtual
office hours on a regular basis provides standard
communication systems of communication.
Of course the grading and feedback process
a major means of interaction with students and
there are simple and complex ways to provide such
input (Luppicini, 2007; Simonson et al., 2009). In
most cases the online grade book features have
advanced to allow input of comments directly, thus
streamlining the work and allowing more time to
be spent on quality feedback. At some point in the
semester faculty might provide recorded audio
comments to the individual students, rather like
a personal meeting, providing a critique of their
progress and their work. For those less comfort-
able with online tools, editing papers or work with
“track changes” or “comment” tools might be a
convenient means to provide in-text feedback for
students. The point is that there are many options
for providing guidance and evaluative comments,
Comprehensive Distance Learning Design for Adult Education
faculty can select what fits their work flow habits,
their content, the assignments or class load.
Instructional Strategies Which Work. Aside
from the more familiar online instructional strate-
gies, there are many more for faculty to consider
as they redesign their courses. Indeed, this is one
of the important areas, because for many faculty
until they realize what is possible, they do not see
what they can do immediately and in the future
(Conrad & Donaldson, 2004; Luppicini, 2007).
Faculty may consider how the platform can be
a much greater tool, even a virtual environment
and laboratory to
• Encourage student leadership of online
discussions
• Create and solve student created scenarios
• Experience short term and long term simu-
lation projects
• Have students contribute to a collaborative
Frequently Asked Question (FAQ) lists as
their explanation of content
• Develop group solutions to discussion
board answers after arriving at their solu-
tion collaboratively
• Incorporate extended ice breaker activities
• Create a career and future dream space
• Foster collaborative story telling, narrative
writing or problem solving
• Host jigsaw presentations (everyone pres-
ents part of the topic and it is assembled)
• And many more.
Many faculty also created designated discus-
sion boards folders for any or all of the following:
• Q&A Folder: Provides students the oppor-
tunity to ask assignment questions
• Cyber cafe: Provides social space in a des-
ignated area
• Student created special topic discussions
• Help Corner: Where instructor and stu-
dents contribute by assisting their learning
community with a defined scope of prob-
lems or issues.
The only limit to the possibilities is the imagi-
nation and great benefit. Consider asking students
what they would like added to the course and
evaluate the ideas based on the course objectives.
Moreover, great benefit can emerge from faculty
sharing their ideas with one another across depart-
ments or the institution.
Class Photograph or Student Web Pages.
Depending on the online platform used teachers
may want to have students create their own intro-
ductory webpage or blog (King & Gura, 2009).
Another simple and exciting strategy is to have
students submit a photo or image representing
themselves (avatar, flower, their dog or cat, etc.).
These are then assembled by the instructor or a
class representative as the class photo. This strat-
egy has recently become a favorite in classes for
community building and some people hang these
at their computers or use them as a wall paper
image to help them envision their classmates to
which they are posting responses.
Problem Solving and Problem Based Learning.
Building upon the opportunity for collaborative
learning is the technique of problem based learn-
ing, which may be deftly and effectively facilitated
in online environments. Problem based learning
in this context is closely linked to situated learn-
ing, long recognized as a powerful instructional
strategy (Lave & Wenger, 1991). There are an
increasing number of free resources, publisher
created resources and strategies for teachers
or students to design their own online problem
based learning projects. Including these activities
in online classes raises the level of the learning
experience several notches (Jonassen, 2007).
While face to face instructors have used prob-
lem based learning for ages, technology affords
the opportunity to profoundly expand, and scale
those efforts (Sundberg, et al., 2006). Johnny
Money ® is an example of a web-based simula-
tion game product which is available for free. This
43
 Comprehensive Distance Learning Design for Adult Education
game allows users to create their own business
and navigate the details and choices involved in
attempting to make it fiscally successful. The
game teaches entrepreneurship skills, but also in-
corporates many dimensions of personal financial
literacy (King & Gura, 2008). Instructors may also
use games not designed for education to develop
critical thinking, cultural values, media literacy,
and other skills in virtual environments (Prensky,
2008; Weir, 2008).
Virtual communities afford a different oppor-
tunity for formal and informal learning. In settings
such as Second Life ® and Club Penguin ® online
members meet other users, interact with them in
real-time, and may participate in learning or other
activities. Cultivating critical thinking, analysis,
decision-making, and problem solving skills are
required in most grades and level of study.
Assessment. While online grade books have
become increasingly sophisticated, from the list
of previous trends, we know much lies ahead;
online assessment is an exciting area (Heron &
Wright, 2006). Many online learning management
systems (e.g., Desire2Learn.com, Moodle.org etc.)
include capabilities to develop surveys, assess-
ments, testing, rubric capabilities, customizable
grade books, downloadable, and uploadable data
for grade books, consolidate student and class re-
ports, teacher and student comment features, and
adaptive releases. Online learning may be an op-
portunity to rethink the course within frameworks
of competency based learning, criterion based,
norm-based, or authentic assessment.
A fundamental strategy which is possible and
beneficial in online learning courses is the trans-
parency of assignment expectations, grading and
progress (Simonson et al., 2009). Faculty have to
continue to seek the ways which fit their content
area and their teaching style which will maximize
their interaction with the students in the most
meaningful ways because the impromptu after
class conversation of face to face classes is not
available. Regularly scheduled and transparent
assessment is a reliable way to provide this critical
44
interaction which fits teachers and learners needs.
Through integrated technology tools educators
may conduct more and different types of assess-
ments of student learning. Moreover, through
the greater transparency in the grading process,
greater learner responsibility and initiative can be
cultivated (King & Griggs, 2006).
The Formative Phase Design
Model of Distance Learning©
(Kathleen P. King, 2009)
Issues
Having established an understanding of how
distance learning has developed within our larger
society and best practices for instructional design,
this section addresses the often frustrating ques-
tion, Where Do I Begin to Design Online Learn-
ing? By approaching the planning and design of
online learning in sequence which can be added to
later, faculty do not have to experience the over-
whelming confusion which often destroys their
good intentions. In this section, the 10 stages of
The Formative Phase Design Model of Distance
Learning (King, 2009) are presented and explained
(see Figure 1).
The model’s key stages of design development
for distance learning courses reveal a unique way
to dynamically incorporate the needs of learners,
the dynamic capabilities of technology and the
power of instructional design in a formative design.
The focus is on ease of design, responsiveness to
change and needs among learner and faculty, and
exploration. This is a comprehensive model which
provides a phase perspective to instructional
design where the design and development of the
course will be returned to several times as each
part of the course might be developed or updated.
Moreover, the model is focused on recommenda-
tions and practice. Rather than a theoretical ap-
proach to design, this is one rooted in practice.
Step 1: Develop Your Phase Approach You
Can Live With. The model starts with the previ-
Comprehensive Distance Learning Design for Adult Education
Figure 1. The formative phase design model of
distance learning. © Kathleen P. King, 2009
ously mentioned principle: The Phase Approach.
This approach encourages faculty to recognize
that designing their online course is only Phase
One of their efforts. By thinking of their work as
eventually moving into, Phase Two, Phase Three,
etc, it frees instructors from the expectation that
everything has to be accomplished in their first
development effort. Especially when one does
not have the assistance of a full-time technical or
instructional design team, this space for progres-
sive development is liberating and reassuring.
Also, much like our traditional classrooms and
programs, when instructors may try new ap-
proaches or activities and see it does not work
as planned. This is not cause for panic, instead
if there seems redeeming merit to the effort, one
readjusts the delivery and tries again (Caffarella,
2000; Lawler & King, 2000). The same principle
applies to online learning design, if part of the
course is redesigned, either in content sections,
sequence or specific assignments; then they can
be adjusted until satisfactory, before having to
rush into designing another area.
Therefore in Step 1 of this model, determine
which aspect of the course to redesign first. Identify
if the final project, new assignments discussion,
assessment or other aspect will be addressed. Then
determine which is expected to be second, third,
etc. This approach becomes the preliminary plan
and can be changed as needs arise.
Step 2: Contemplate the Course Content.
Transforming a course to an online format might
afford the opportunity to include additional content
which was too difficult to include in a traditional
class (Conrad & Donaldson, 2004; Simonson et
al., 2009). Because of the extraordinary online
resources freely available, having students watch
a larger variety of primary source videos, listen to
audio and read additional material can be conve-
niently woven together into the online platform.
For instance, rather than solely reading about
Japanese internment camps in the World War II-
era USA, students can read primary documents,
see archive photographs, listen to interviews,
and more.
Additionally, faculty may develop or assemble
previously untapped resources enabling learners
to explore different areas of courses based on their
interests. As content experts, faculty are the best
able to select those online resources which are
valid and effective. This guidance provides learn-
ers with invaluable opportunities to discuss and
learn how to sift fallacy from fact in online media.
Step 3: Reframe and Redesign Activities.
Based on the examples provided in the sections
above, consider which course activities need to
be redesigned so that in-depth discussion and
dialogue can occur in an online environment.
Identify two or three activities which can be used
in the first round of your course redesign. Us-
ing a variety of activities is beneficial, but build
upon the instructor’s expertise and refrain from
overwhelming learners with too many different
types of assignments to master or too complex
technical requirements.
45
 Comprehensive Distance Learning Design for Adult Education
Step 4: Unleash the Crowd. Even if faculty
have never used small or large group assignments
in classes before, the online environment can pro-
vide a variety of benefits and means to facilitate
them. Group interaction in the online environment
provides another critical space for dialogue and
discussion of content (Luppicini, 2007; Palloff
& Pratt, 2005). In addition, groups incorporate
peer learning opportunities. By students having to
explain their understanding, choices and reasons
to their classmates, they will explore the content
more deeply and process it more fully.
Step 5: Use New Vehicles to Present Expert
Content. One of the greatest frustrations with
poorly designed online courses is that some do not
provide students with any teacher-created content.
Somehow, these faculty believe having students
read the text book and answer its questions will
suffice to adequately meet learning objectives.
Upon planning to design online courses, con-
sider how to use the online environment to share
your expertise. Again, dividing this large task is
a liberating strategy to cope with this volume of
the work.
First, decide the modes to use. For instance,
perhaps it will be audio lectures, PowerPoint®
or multimedia presentations, presentations ac-
companied by audio narration, video presenta-
tions of your lectures or discussions, or visual
representations of lectures notes. One of the most
powerful strategies is to incorporate a select few
of these approaches and vary them. Not only do
you maintain students’ interest more fully switch-
ing from video clips, to audio, and then text, but
you also appeal to different learning styles and
preferences (King & Gura, 2009; Simonson et
al., 2009). This experience is one which can be
quite enjoyable; instructors have the opportunity
to include and develop materials which would
have been impractical within traditional settings.
Step 6: Tap the Power of Peer Learning. Online
learning environments provide an unparalleled
opportunity to access the benefits of peer learn-
ing. As described, students can increase their
46
understanding by communicating and explor-
ing content with one another. However, another
powerful dimension of peer learning is including
students’ experiences to inform the dialogue and
course discussions (Conrad & Donaldson, 2004;
Luppicini, 2007; Palloff & Pratt, 2004). When
learners share their responses to content, ques-
tions, scenarios, or problems posed by the faculty,
it can be enriching and helpful for them to include
connections to their own perspectives and experi-
ence. Rather than a black and white world with
only faculty providing answers, instructors who
encourage peer learning can develop a critical
inquiry and learning community which respects
and values diverse views. Indeed one of the major
reasons that peer learning is so powerful is that
dialogue is the foundation of communicating
and building critical thinking and transformative
learning experiences (King, 2009).
Step 7: Strengthen Student Assessment. As
mentioned above, the frequency and depth of
student feedback is important in an online environ-
ment. There are many ways to include assessment
with student feedback in online classes (Simonson
et al., 2009). Consider first how to provide this
guidance on an ongoing basis so that students fre-
quently receive direction and support throughout
the course. This strategy may include providing
feedback on whatever is a frequent assignment,
their journals, or discussion boards, etc. Second,
provide extensive, swift written evaluations and
remarks on larger assignments in order for learners
to have ample detail and time to make improve-
ments before their next assignment is due. Online
classes can, as a group, surpass traditional courses
in providing transparency in grading and cultivat-
ing student responsibility for progress when these
recommendations are followed (Luppicini, 2007).
Over time, faculty develop greater skill in using
online technologies and strategies to customize
it for their preferred workflow.
Step 8: Intensify Interaction with Students.
Faculty design of online courses needs to provide
multiple means for student interaction with the
Comprehensive Distance Learning Design for Adult Education
instructor. From online office hours to responsive
email policies, assessment feedback structures to
advising appointments, there are many ways that
faculty can select formats which fit the needs of
the students, suit their professional and personal
needs as faculty, address the specific content, and
meet the learning needs of the students (Conrad &
Donaldson, 2004; Palloff & Pratt, 2004; Simonson
et al., 2007). For instance, live virtual office hours
with a shared screen might be an ideal way to help
students work through difficulties in solving math
problems, while a video camera conference may
be more effective for a literature class discussion
follow-up. Faculty can make initial selections,
determine if they work well, and add more strate-
gies over time.
Step 9: Escalate Online Course Evaluation.
As indicated in many course and program plan-
ning design books, it is most effective to design
programs with the evaluation in mind (Caffarella,
2002; Lawler & King, 2000). This maxim includes
faculty incorporating strategies and feedback
mechanisms for students/participants to share
needs, problems and suggestions during and after
a course delivery. Most faculty consider their
courses as works in progress. To support this
continuous design, online courses provide the
means to systematically collect and easily analyze
student feedback. It is interesting to note that as
technology users become more comfortable with
online technologies, they also expect more fea-
tures and services in their courses. At this point,
faculty can raise the ante of course expectations
and design developments.
Step 10: Deliver, Improve & Repeat! The final
step in the model ensures that faculty recognize
the continuing process. Instead of a linear se-
quence, this model poses an iterative, continu-
ous improvement cycle. Learners will provide
feedback, faculty will realize assignments and
strategies to add and modify and new develop-
ments will mean changes have to made. Most
online learning environments provide the ability
to copy an entire course into the new semester’s
space. This provides the starting point and faculty
prioritize the changes which are most urgent for
the next round.
Possible Limitations
Online learning has many possibilities for creating
interactive, anytime, anywhere learning experi-
ences, and yet it is wise to address some of the
limitations of which faculty need to be aware. In
this chapter the topics of building avenues for
interaction, feedback and dialogue have been
emphasized at length because these are primary
areas that can cause difficulty in online course if
omitted. Moreover, online discussions need to be
handled with care and of course differently than
face to face sessions. Students and teachers alike
lack visual cues, facial expression or tone of voice
to communicate affect, emphasis or meaning.
Therefore, laying ground rules or collectively
developing ground rules for online discussion is
a wise strategy for successful interpersonal com-
munication in online forums. Faculty should also
consider that although they might not intervene
directly into online discussions frequently, they
are responsible for the safety and welfare of the
participants in their course (Conrad & Donaldson,
2004; Palloff & Pratt, 2004). The unmonitored or
unwatched discussion forum can be a disaster in
the making.
Regarding security issues, of course wherever
student conversation is being conducted, these
should be secure and password protected. Students
need to understand privacy and online security
issues (Conrad & Donaldson, 2004; Luppicini,
2007; Palloff & Pratt, 2004). Examples of essential
policies include: protecting the privacy of their
classmates, not forwarding classroom materials
and having anti-virus and anti-spyware installed
on their computers to protect their classmates and
faculty from contaminated uploaded files. Uni-
versity policy on student information protection
needs to closely adhered to by faculty, staff and
students; the information technology department
47
 Comprehensive Distance Learning Design for Adult Education
and dean’s office should have detailed policies
will provide requirements.
Finally, plagiarism is an issue which has
highlighted discussions of online courses, but
is really no more prevalent than in traditional
classes today. A clear policy about the appropriate
and inappropriate citation of another’s work, the
means in which faculty might monitor its abuse
(perhaps Google checks or Online services such
as Turnitin.com), and the consequences of the
plagiarism must all be included in writing in the
syllabus and reviewed at the beginning of the
course (Luppicini, 2004; Simonson et al., 2007).
Rather than dissuading plagiarism solely by po-
licing it, faculty may emphasize the educational
opportunity and how this approach is safeguarding
their future (King & Gura, 2009). Many profes-
sionals have ruined their careers through misuse
of intellectual property.
Future Trends
While continuing the research on distance learning
for this chapter, it has become clearer that much
can be learned from the past. The same issues
which we have been coping with for 15 + years
need to be sorted out based on newer technologies,
different forms of media, and understandings of
copyright law (Allen & Seamen, 2007). Every six
months our global society seems to be experienc-
ing a major adoption for online activity (recently
video on demand (Youtube, Hulu, etc.), micro
blogging, or broadcast IMing (Twitter) which may
confound educators to some degree.
However, all of these emergent issues demon-
strate two of the previously mentioned principles:
flexibility and choices. With widespread technol-
ogy adoption for social, work and entertainment,
the move towards distance learning will continue
in forms yet unimagined. New requirements for
digital media copyrights, and new demands and
possibilities regarding intellectual property will
undoubtedly continue (Morrison, 2006). But the
call for training faculty in formative online learning
48
design will be paramount as students worldwide
increasingly demand innovative, informative,
rigorous academic content and requirements, and
engaging formats. Ongoing, readily accessible,
and relevant professional development support
becomes even more essential moving forward.
CONCLUSION
It is clear that distance learning will continue to
accelerate through organizational adoption and
learner demand (Allen & Seamen, 2007; Chris-
tensen et al., 2008). Moreover, the prominence of
informal learning through technology may force
formal educational efforts to rethink delivery
modes, accessibility and availability. This chapter
has provided background, discussion of issues,
framework and tenets for faculty to envision, plan
and design online learning courses.
Part of the exciting news for educators is
that we do not know the specific details of the
technology and instructional designs which will
emerge in the next 10-20 years. However, astute
educators and educational leaders can be vitally
involved in the adoption and transformation of
current forms of distance learning to chart a sound
pedagogical course.
REFERENCES
Allen, E., & Seaman, J. (2007). Online nation:
Five years of growth in online learning. Need-
ham, MA: Sloan-C. Retrieved August 10, 2009,
from http://www.aln.org/publications/survey/pdf/
online_nation.pdf
Berg, G. A. (2002). Why distance learning?New
York: Praeger.
Berg, G. A. (2005). Lessons from the edge. New
York: Praeger.
Comprehensive Distance Learning Design for Adult Education
Bersin, J. (2004). The blended learning book. San
Francisco: Pfeiffer.
Bonk, C. J., Graham, C. R., Cross, J., & Moore,
M. G. (2005). The handbook of blended learning.
San Francisco: Pfeiffer.
Brown, G. (2006). New perspectives on instruc-
tional effectiveness through distance education.
In King, K. P., & Griggs, J. K. (Eds.), Harnessing
innovative technology in higher education: Ac-
cess, equity, policy and instruction (pp. 97–110).
Madison, WI: Atwood.
Caffarella, R. S. (2002). Program planning for
adult learning (2nd ed.). San Francisco: Jossey-
Bass.
Christensen, C. M., Johnson, C. S., & Horn, M.
B. (2008). Disrupting class: How disruptive
innovation will change the way we learn. New
York: McGraw Hill.
Conrad, R., & Donaldson, J. (2004). Engaging
the online learner. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Heron, J., & Wright, V. (2006). Assessment in
online learning. In Wright, V., Sunal, C., & Wilson,
E. (Eds.), Research on enhancing the interactivity
of online learning (pp. 45–64). Charlotte, NH:
Information Age Publishing.
Jonassen, D. (2007). Engaging and supporting
problem solving in online learning. In R. Lup-
picini (Ed.). Online learning communities (pp.
109-128). Charlotte, NC: Information Age Pub-
lishing, Jones, S., & Fox, S. (2009). Generations
online in 2009. Pew Internet and American Life
Project. Retrieved August 16, 2009, from http://
pewresearch.org/pubs/1093/generations-online
King, K. P. (2008). Intellectual property. In Tomei,
L. (Ed.), Encyclopedia of information technology
curriculum integration I: A- interactive videocon-
ferencing (pp. 449–454). Hershey, PA: Information
Science Reference.
King, K. P. (2009). Foundations of e-learning
in career and technology education. In V. Wang
& K. King. Building workforce competencies in
career and technology education (pp. 191-212).
Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing.
King, K. P., & Griggs, J. K. (Eds.). (2006).
Harnessing innovative technologies in higher
education: Access, equity, policy and instruction.
Madison, WI: Atwood Publishing.
King, K. P., & Gura, M. (2008). Talking financial
literacy episode 11: SimBusiness. New York:
McGraw Hill. Retrieved August 3, 2009, from
http://www.talkingfinlit.org/2008/09/27/episode-
11-simbusiness-free-biz-sims-to-learn-financial-
literacy/
King, K. P., & Gura, M. (2009). Podcasting for
teachers: Using a new technology to revolutionize
teaching and learning (2nd ed.). Charlotte, NC:
Information Age Publishing, Inc.
King, K. P., & Sanquist, S. (2009). 21st century
learning and human performance. In Wang, V.,
& King, K. P. (Eds.), Fundamentals of human
performance and training (pp. 61–88). Charlotte,
NC: Information Age Publishing, Inc.
King, K. P., & Wang, V. (Eds.). (2007). Compara-
tive adult education around the globe. Hangzhou,
PR China: Zhejiang University Press.
Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Lawler, P. A., & King, K. P. (2000). Planning
for effective faculty development. Malabar, FL:
Krieger.
Luppicini, R. (Ed.). (2007). Online learning
communities. Charlotte, NC: Information Age
Publishing, Moore, M. G., & Kearsley, G. (1996).
Distance education: A systems view. Belmont,
CA: Wadsworth.
49
 Comprehensive Distance Learning Design for Adult Education
Morrison, J. (2006). Intellectual property, copy-
right and distance learning. Retrieved September
15, 2007, from http://horizon.unc.edu/projects/
resources/intellectual_property.asp
Palloff, R., & Pratt, K. (2005). Collaborating
online: Learning together in community. San
Francisco: Jossey Bass.
Prensky, M. (2001). Digital natives, digital immi-
grants. On The Horizon, 9(5), 1-6. Retrieved Sep-
tember 8, 2008, from http:// www.marcprensky.
com%2Fwriting%2FPrensky%2520-%2520Digi
tal%2520Natives%2C%2520Digital%2520Immi
grants%2520-%2520Part1.pdf
Prensky, M. (2008, June). Young minds, fast times:
The 21st century digital learner. Edutopia. Re-
trieved September 25, 2008, from http://www.edu-
topia.org/ikid-digital-learner-technology-2008
Rogers, E. M. (1962). Diffusion of innovation.
New York: Free Press.
Simonson, M., Smaldino, S. E., Albright, M.,
& Zvacek, S. (2009). Teaching and learning at
a distance (4th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ:
Prentice Hall.
Stansbury, M. (2008, March 26). Analysis: How
multimedia can improve learning. eSchool News.
Retrieved May 20, 2009, from http://www.es-
choolnews.com/news/top-news/?i=53243
Sundberg, C., Sunal, D., & Mays, A. (2006). Prob-
lem solving and coping strategies used in online
environments. In Wright, V., Sunal, C., & Wilson,
E. (Eds.), Research on enhancing the interactivity
of online learning (pp. 175–196). Charlotte, NC:
Information Age Publishing.
Tapscott, D., & Williams, A. D. (2006). Wikinom-
ics: How mass collaboration changes everything.
New York: Portfolio.
50
The Partnership for 21st Century Skills. (2004).
Framework for 21st Century learning. Tuc-
son, AZ: The Partnership for 21st Century
Skills. Retrieved August 12, 2009, from http://
www.21stcenturyskills.org/documents/frame-
workflyer_072307.pdf
Todd, J. J., & Himburg, E. (2007). Bringing ro-
botics to life. In Gura, M., & King, K. P. (Eds.),
Classroom robotics: Case stories of 21st Century
instruction for millennial students (pp. 115–132).
Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing, Inc.
Twigg, C. A. (2001). Innovations in online learn-
ing: Moving beyond no significant distance. The
Pew Learning and Technology Program: Retrieved
September 27, 2008, from http://www.center.rpi.
edu/PewSym/ mono4.html
US Department of Education. (2006). Evidence
of quality in distance education programs. Re-
trieved August 1, 2009, from http://www.ysu.edu/
accreditation/Resources/Accreditation-Evidence-
of-Quality-in-DE-Programs.pdf
U.S. Department of Education. (2005-2006). The
student guide: Financial aid from the US De-
partment of Education. Washington DC: Federal
Student Information Center. Retrieved November
1, 2008, from http://studentaid.ed.gov/students/
attachments/siteresources/Stud_guide.pdf
Weir, L. (2008, June). Wii love learning: Using
gaming technology to engage students. Eduto-
pia. Retrieved September 25, 2008, from http://
www.edutopia.org/ikid-wii-gaming-technology-
classroom
WGBH. (2008, Jan. 22). Growing up digital.
Frontline. Retrieved September 3, 2008, from
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/kid-
sonline/
Wiggins, G., & McTighe, J. (1998). Understand-
ing by design. Alexandria, VA: ASCD. (. ERIC
Reproduction No. ED, 424, 227.
Comprehensive Distance Learning Design for Adult Education
KEY TERMS AND DEFINITIONS
Asynchronous: Asynchronous learning stands
for non-simultaneous learning and affords the
convenience of learners and teachers being able
to log-in, read material, engage in discussions,
post assignments, etc, whenever is convenient
for their schedule, commitments and time zones.
Technology options can extend the possibilities in
many directions for both asynchronous learning
through for example online discussion boards,
video clips, audio clips, podcasts, and file sharing,
video conferencing, podcasting, etc.
Intellectual Property: The intangible property
right to protect the intellectual work of the person/s
who created it (includes patents, trademarks,
designs and copyright). A critical and extensive
area of institutional concern in distance learning
since 2000 (King, 2008; Morrison, 2006).
Podcast: Audio or video files hosted on the
web but served up via a special scripting language
(XML) which provides automated and usually free
subscription to users. Therefore users can elect to
“subscribe” to a podcast and every time they open
their program to listen to them (e.g., iTunes ®,
MusicMatch ®, Windows Media Player ®, etc.)
the latest episodes of the podcasts will download
for them without any action on their part. Podcasts
may be listed to on a computer or transferred to
a mobile listening device such as a MP3 player.
There are many educational podcasts available
(King & Gura, 2009).
Simulations (Technology Assisted): Exami-
nation of a problem or through online, computer
based, or another technology representation of the
experience and process. For example, pig dissec-
tion simulation, or financial planning simulation.
Virtual simulations closely resemble firsthand
experiences through interaction with many hu-
man senses.
Synchronous Learning: When teachers and
students are engaged in learning at the same
time- meeting face to face, online or any other
way simultaneously, this is termed synchronous
learning. Technology options can extend the
possibilities in many directions for synchronous
learning, through for example online discussion
boards, chat, video conferencing, podcasting, etc.
Video Conference: When people are connect-
ed via video and audio to communicate simultane-
ously. Connections which enable this connection
include ISDN lines, Internet, and dedicated IP
connections. Since 2006 inexpensive webcams
and free videoconferencing software have cre-
ated a surge of use of the high speed connection
Internet for this use. Such video conferencing
can be no-cost compared to the pricey per minute
costs of dedicated lines. This change affords the
ability to use videoconferencing for education,
entertainment and meetings and communication
among business colleagues and family.
Web 2.0: Development of the World Wide
Web to include more Web-based programs, oth-
erwise known as hosted services, collaborative
and easier content creation technologies (King,
2009; Simonson et al., 2008). Examples of Web
2.0 technologies include Google ® applications
which are run over the Internet rather than need-
ing to be downloaded; social networking sites,
such as Linked-In and MySpace; and content
creation technologies such as blogs, wikis and
podcasts. Controversy regarding the term exists
as the original vision and capabilities of the Web
included some of these abilities in fundamental
ways although they were not widely adopted at
the time.
51
52

Chapter 4
Web 2.0 and the Actualization
of the Ideals of Adult Education
Marc G. Weinstein
Florida International University, USA

Tonette S. Rocco
Florida International University, USA

Maria S. Plakhotnik
Florida International University, USA

ABSTRACT
This chapter explores how the emergent information ecosystem relates to assumptions about adult
learners articulated in andragogy (Knowles, 1970, 1984) and adult education concepts. The chapter
discusses the evolution of the information ecosystem and how its defining attributes relate to access,
voluntary participation, self-direction, and learning webs. The new opportunities offered by this infor-
mation ecosystem emerged in the same social and intellectual milieu as the foundational principles of
adult education. Current developments in adult education indicate that new innovations in the use of
interactive and communication technologies are emerging in a transformed information ecosystem.

INTRODUCTION formation ecosystem. The term ecosystem is used

Anyone with access to the World Wide Web now
has a portal to a vast amount of information. This
is a recent development as are the high rates
of Internet usage, easy access to user-created
content, and social computing. The explosion of
new content on the World Wide Web, the ability
of individuals to access and contribute to this
content, and new interactive and communication
technologies all constitute elements of a new in-
DOI: 10.4018/978-1-61692-906-0.ch004
to emphasize the importance of the multitude of
interactions between individuals and communities
in the information environment. In this chapter
we discuss how the emergent information ecosys-
tem relates to assumptions about adult learners
articulated in andragogy (Knowles, 1970, 1984)
and other adult education concepts. This chapter
begins with an overview of adult education and
core concepts as they relate to changes in the
information ecosystem. In part two, the early
era and subsequent evolution of the information
ecosystem are discussed as are their defining
Web 2.0 and the Actualization of the Ideals of Adult Education
attributes: access, voluntary participation, self-
direction, and learning webs. We note that the
new opportunities offered by this information
ecosystem are not accidental, but rather emerged
in the same social and intellectual milieu as the
foundational principles of adult education. In
the final part of the chapter, the current use of
new interactive communication technologies to
promote adult education are examined.
BACKGROUND
Technology has assisted adults to escape confor-
mity while providing tools to assist with learning
and knowledge creation. Technological tools have
included instruments to record information and
ideas such as pen and paper, printing presses,
computers, and Web 2.0. Knowles (1977) traces the
use of adult education to apprenticeship programs,
agricultural societies, and Benjamin Franklin’s
Junto. Apprenticeships were arrangements be-
tween a skilled craftsman and a novice where the
novice learned by doing. The master and apprentice
might be engaged with the latest technology in
the carpentry or silversmith trades. Agricultural
societies met to discuss innovations and techno-
logical advances in agriculture, while the Junto
members read printed material that they discussed
at meetings. Advances in technology around the
printing press improved access to materials such
as newspapers, pamphlets, and books. This techno-
logical advance increased communication and the
dissemination of knowledge, which aided colonists
when they declared and won independence and
nurtured a nascent economy (Knowles, 1977;
Isaacson, 2004). Technological advances foster
communication between people, dissemination
of ideas, and economic development.
Technology also assists adults seeking formal
(within educational institutions) or nonformal
education (external to the established institutions)
and informal learning (opportunistic, experi-
ential, incidental; Merriam & Brockett, 1997).
Informal learning occurs without sponsorship or
institutional control. Informal learning occurs in
every day contexts for problem solving (Merriam,
Caffarella, & Baumgartner, 2006; Merriam &
Brockett, 1997). “Most adult educators suspect
that the majority of adult learning is informal”
(Merriam et al., 2006, p. 60); adults have difficulty
in identifying and placing measurable parameters
around these learning episodes making it a difficult
area to study and to influence. Learning episodes
are more commonly known as self-directed learn-
ing projects.
Houle’s (1961) study of adult participation
produced a division of “purposes and values of
continuing education” (p. 15) that distinguishes
among goal, activity, and learning orientations.
In the 1970s Houle’s doctoral student, Tough,
investigated the learning orientation goal of adults
describing them as learning projects (Heimstra,
1994), initiated by learners who are motivated to
gain knowledge, skills, or produce change. The
assumption that adults are self-directed in their
learning was popularized by Knowles (1970) and
was based on learning orientation. Knowles (1970,
1975) further developed his basic assumptions
about the adult learner by setting a baseline for
self-directed learning. For Knowles self-directed
learning meant that adults have a universal need
and are intrinsically motivated to be self-directed
in their learning. The problems stem from experi-
ence and experience is used to solve the problems.
Knowles (1984) popularized other assump-
tions about the adult learner. He made the case
to distinguish between adults and children as
learners and developed the concept of andragogy,
a system of assumptions about the adult learner
(Merriam et al., 2006). Andragogy is “the art and
science of helping adults learn” (Knowles, 1970,
p. 38) and is counterpoised to pedagogy’s focus
on children. Adult educators accepted andragogy
because differentiating between the education
of children and adults was important to profes-
sionalizing the field. With these assumptions
“Knowles proposed a program planning model
53
 Web 2.0 and the Actualization of the Ideals of Adult Education
for designing, implementing, and evaluating
educational experiences with adults” (Merriam,
2001, p. 5). Andragogy and self-directed learning
are considered pillars in the knowledge base of
adult learning (Merriam, 2001).
Ohliger argued against the professionalization
of the field of adult education because he felt that
as the practice of adult education became the pro-
fession of adult education, less of the development
work would “advance equality and social justice
for independent learners” (Grace & Rocco, 2009,
p. 5) who value free access to media and materials.
Professionalization also carried with it education
as a solution to correct behavior, fill a void in
knowledge, or serve corporations. Education as a
solution diminished the importance of coming to
learning voluntarily, engaging with a community
of learners to solve a problem or pursue a cause,
and pursuing self-directed learning projects with-
out an instructor (Rocco, 2009).
An unarticulated assumption of the field is that
adults have unencumbered access to education
and learning opportunities. The assumption of
access has been criticized because the amount of
schooling, age, and socioeconomic status are pre-
dictors of access. Discussions of access, however,
must be focused on what can be measured. So in
1982 when Darkenwald and Merriam described
the typical adult education participant as “white,
and middle class, has completed high school, is
married” (p. 120), they refer to formal and non-
formal education.
The issue of access to education has been de-
bated most notably by Illich as a critique of the
institutionalization of schools, the commodifica-
tion of education, and the redundancy of experts
(Finger & Asun, 2001). The end result is “institu-
tions create the needs and control their satisfaction,
and by so doing, turn the human being and her or
his creativity into objects” (Finger & Asun, 2001, p.
10). Two concrete activities emerged from Illich’s
critique of institutionalization. He is known as the
founder of the home school movement (Illich,
1970) and the advocate of learning webs (Illich,
54
1973). Learning webs exist in a convivial society
that supports open access to learning tools and
building communities of learners (Finger & Asun,
2001). With computers costing less than televi-
sions and available in locations such as libraries
and homeless shelters, there are new possibilities
for “a radically new relationship between human
beings and their environment” (Illich, 1978, p. 80
quoted in Finger & Asun, 2001, p. 14) in terms of
access to learning tools, voluntary unencumbered
choice to solve problems, and the support of a
community of self-directed learners.
WEB 2.0 AND THE NEW
INFORMATION ECOSYSTEM
In 1990 Tim Berners-Lee and Robert Callias, his
assistant, a student and staff member of the Eu-
ropean Center for Nuclear Physics (CERN) were
the first to successfully communicate between at
HTTP client and server via the Internet (Gillies
& Calilliau, 2000). This innovation allowed a
connection from hypertext to the Transmission
Control Protocol and domain name systems in
what is now known as the “World Wide Web.”
After CERN created a website based on this in-
novation (see, http://info.cern.ch), the number of
websites grew exponentially. In its first decade,
the World Wide Web only offered limited user
interaction and has since been characterized as
Web 1.0 (DeNucci, 1999). In 2004 technology
blogger Tim O’Reilly popularized the term Web
2.0 in the first in a series of articles and blogposts
describing the technical and social attributes of
the Internet in its state of development at the start
of the 21st century (O’Reilly, 2005). While Web
2.0 offers a convenient shorthand to describe new
possibilities of collaboration and interaction on
the internet, the importance of Web 2.0 is better
understood in terms of how new ideas and social
relations emerge at a time when majority of the
adult population in industrialized countries and
nearly half the world’s population have access to
Web 2.0 and the Actualization of the Ideals of Adult Education
computational tools and vast amounts of content
in a new information ecosystem.
Intellectual Origins of Web 2.0
The emergence of Web 2.0 and the open source
movement have their origins in the democratic
ethos in the programmer communities around
Stanford University, Silicon Valley, the Mas-
sachusetts Institute of Technology (Massachu-
setts Institute of Technology OpenCourseWare,
n.d.), and Cambridge Massachusetts (Raymond,
2001). Established in 1975 in Silicon Valley, the
Homebrew Computer Club members helped each
other build personal computers, shared ideas, and
“shared” software. Sharing software prompted
Bill Gate’s Open Letter to Hobbyists, in which
he lamented that “As the majority of hobbyists
must be aware, most of you steal software” (Gates,
1976, para. 4).
A founding member of Homebrew Computer
Club Lee Feldenstein led a project called Com-
munity Memory, which allowed every day people
to link to a central computer from two terminals
set up in a popular record shop. The project’s
description was:
An actively open information system, enabling
direct communication among its users with no
centralized editing or control over the information
exchanged. Such a system represents a precise
antithesis to the dominant uses of electronic media
which broadcasts centrally-determined messages
to mass passive audiences (Leadbetter, 2008, p. 56)
Feldenstein saw the Community Memory proj-
ect and other efforts like it as fostering convivial
institutions like those discussed in Illich’s (1973)
Tools for Conviviality. Like John Ohliger and other
adult educators who challenged the conventions
of the time (Grace & Rocco, 2009), Feldenstein
was strongly influenced by Illich (1970) who
famously rallied against school that “discour-
ages and disables the poor from taking control of
their own learning” (p. 8). These optimistic and
democratic beginnings of the World Wide Web
ebbed in the era of the dot.com boom and bust
from approximately 1995-2001, but have begun
to re-emerge with the open-source movement and
social computing, which may lead to increased ac-
cess, voluntary participation, and self-directedness
(Raymond, 2001; Benkler, 2006).
This same ethos has guided a reconsideration
of traditional restrictive use of copyright. An
active computer hacker culture was emerging
around. At its center was Richard Stallman who
as an undergraduate student at Harvard became
a programmer at Artificial Intelligence Lab. He
continued to work there continued until 1983
when he launched the GNU operating system as
an alternative to the proprietary UNIX operating
system. (GNU is a recursive acronym for “GNU
is not Unix”.) In his continued efforts to develop
and promote GNU, Stallman issued the GNU
manifesto (Stallman, 1985) in which he outlined
the general principles of the free software move-
ment and General Purpose Licensing (GPL). This
was later developed in the concept of “copyleft.”
Copyright law grants an author the right to
prohibit others from reproducing, adapting, or
distributing copies of the authors’ work. In con-
trast, under the doctrine of copyleft, products
are allowed to be reproduced, adapted and redis-
tributed provided that the subsequent versions
of the product are also covered by the principles
of copyleft. The GNU GPL and copyleft were
developed further during the early years of Web
2.0 (Lessig, 2005). If copyright can be reduced
to “all rights reserved,” Creative Commons was
founded to formalize various ways creators of
intellectual property could codify “some rights
reserved” (Lessig, 2005).
In many ways, the restrictions of the use of
content are designed to protect the original authors
from false attribution of ideas as well as to protect
the intellectual property of the authors. The terms
of distribution for Online Courseware (OCW)
initiative provide a good example (Massachusetts
55
 Web 2.0 and the Actualization of the Ideals of Adult Education
Institute of Technology OpenCourseWare, n.d). In
the frequently asked questions section on OCW’s
website, clear and explicit references are made
to the concept of copyleft. Specifically, OCW
limits the use of the material to non-commercial
purposes. For-profit and non-profit entities may
use OCW material provided that a fee is not
charged to their clients. Massachusetts Institute
of Technology requires the distribution of OCW
and derivative works should attribute the initial
authorship of faculty. However, translations of
OCW materials must note that faculty have not
reviewed nor are responsible for the accuracy of
translations. Finally, in relating the principle of
copyleft requires that others who use the work must
“must offer the works freely and openly to others
under the same terms that OpenCourseWare first
made the works available to the user” (Massachu-
setts Institute of Technology OpenCourseWare,
n.d., para.8)
The impact of copyleft and Creative Commons
licensing on Web 2.0 and the current information
environment can be seen both in the development
of the technical infrastructure for collaboration
and access to the World Wide Web and in the
challenge to the notion that knowledge is owned
by individual or corporate producers of content.
In terms of infrastructure, Linux and the Open
Source software movement facilitate increased
access, reducing the transaction costs of mass col-
laboration (Raymond, 2001). In terms of content
creation, Creative Commons provide a means by
which content providers can share content with
varying levels of restrictions (Leadbetter, 2008).
Information Munificence
The technical infrastructure of the internet allows
individuals dispersed across time and space to gain
access and to develop new content. In less than the
span of a generation, the amount of information
has grown beyond what could be measured by the
estimated 135 million publicly accessible websites
(Wolfram Research, 2009). The munificence of
56
this new information environment is creating new
opportunities for explorations for learning in for-
mal, informal, and nonformal settings. The content
that defines this new information environment is
the result of a combination of for-profit initia-
tives, not-for-profit individual and institutional
initiatives, and social computing itself.
Among the most prolific for-profit enterprises
whose business model relies on aggregating
available content free of charge for end users is
Google. The impact of Google and its business
model on our information environment has been
so vast that a new verb “to Google” has been in
use since 2001 (“Google”, 2009). While Google’s
initial contribution was to demonstrate the power
of search technology, its more enduring legacy may
be as a driver of digitizing hitherto un-digitized
data sources such as books and an aggregator of
other digitization efforts.
Google has a variety of services in their beta
phase that makes information available at no
cost to end via links on website to Google Labs.
As products have moved out of the development
phase, Google’s current business model does
not rely on user fees. Among all of Google’s
information services, none is more expansive
or controversial than Google Book Search. An-
nounced in October 2004 as Google Print at the
Frankfurt Book Fair, the initial aim of this project
was to digitize all public domain printed works,
an endeavor made possible through Google’s
initial collaboration with Harvard University,
the University of Michigan, the New York Public
Library, the University of Oxford, and Stanford
University. These libraries were later joined by
at least 17 libraries including prestigious collec-
tions in Japan, Belgium, Germany, France, and
Switzerland. Google’s partnerships with these
not-for-profit and state institutions and advances
in scanning technology have enabled it to scan
seven million books in just its first 4 years of
work. One million of these titles are available in
full preview based on agreements with publishers
(Drummond, 2008).
Web 2.0 and the Actualization of the Ideals of Adult Education
Since Google launched its Book Search pro-
gram, numerous other initiatives that make content
available have been undertaken including one from
the French National Library. Additionally, nearly
all media outlets provide considerable amounts of
content free of charge to users, further enriching
our information environment.
Among the most impressive large-scale initia-
tives from not-for-profit institutions to date, is
Massachusetts Institute of Technology’s OCW
project, with over 1,800 courses in 33 disciplines
from all five schools. Free of charge to anyone
with access to the Internet, the OCW website is
designed to enhance access across the globe and
is functional at low-band width speeds with older
as well as newer versions of operating systems
and browsers. An impressive 75% of faculty have
made available at least one course through OCW,
and 49% have contributed two courses. In 2005 the
most recent year from which we have data, there
were 9.2 million page views – an increase of 56%
from the previous year (MIT OpenCourseWare,
2006). Additionally, more than 350 courses have
been translated into languages other than English.
Despite limitations such as lack of course packets
that contain copyrighted material, the absence of
solutions to some problem sets, and no direct ac-
cess to faculty, the OCW is a magnificent gift of
access that is providing to educators, institutions,
and individuals. Not surprisingly, Massachusetts
Institute of Technology’s lead in this field has
inspired other universities to make their courses
available on line.
As the amount of new content has increased
in recent years, new computational tools are be-
coming available to traditional and adult learners.
Among the most prominent is wolframalpha.com
launched in July 2009 by Wolfram Research, a
company associated with Mathematica. In addition
to allowing public access much of the computa-
tional algorithms available through its proprietary
Mathematica software, wolframalpha.com allows
users access to data series and computational
tools that hitherto had been simply unavailable to
average internet users (Wolfram Research, 2009).
User Created Content
A distinctive feature of Web 2.0 is the ability of
everyday users to create and contribute content
mediated through social network computing. The
highest profile, mass collaboration and content
creation effort is Wikipedia. In January 2001 fol-
lowing an inauspicious attempt to launch Nupedia,
an expert-driven encyclopedia, Jimmy Wales and
Larry Sanger founded Wikipedia initially con-
ceived as an information “feeder” to individuals
writing for Nupedia. Shortly after the launch of
Wikipedia, it became apparent that the wiki (the
Hawaiian word for “quick”) offered an efficient
medium for mass collaboration. A wiki is a web
site where users can make changes, contributions,
or corrections (“Wiki”, 2009). As the Wikipedia
project evolved, the mission became creating and
distributing “a free encyclopedia of the highest
possible quality to every single person on the planet
in their own language” (Wales, 2005, para. 1).
As of August 2009 Wikipedia has 13 million
articles in 262 language editions. Twenty-four of
these non-English language editions have over
100,000 entries each. The English edition with
three million entries receives slightly more than
half of Wikipedia’s cumulative traffic of between
25,000 and 60,000 page requests per second or
approximately between two and five million page
requests per day (“Wikipedia”, n.d).
While there is little doubt that Wikipedia has
been successful when measured by the volume of
traffic to its website, it has been roundly criticized
by those who lament that at its worst Wikipedia
is systematically biased and at its best is creating
a “generation of intellectual sluggards incapable
of moving beyond the Internet” (Fry, quoted in
Stothart, 2007 p. 2). Characterizing Wikipedia as
a “faith-based encyclopedia,” the former editor-in-
chief of the Encyclopedia Britannica lambasted the
open editing system of Wikipedia, commenting:
57
 Web 2.0 and the Actualization of the Ideals of Adult Education
The user who visits Wikipedia to learn about some
subject, to confirm some matter of fact, is rather
in the position of a visitor to a public restroom.
It may be obviously dirty, so that he knows to ex-
ercise great care, or it may seem fairly clean, so
that he may be lulled into a false sense of security.
What he certainly does not know is who has used
the facilities before him. (McHenry, 2004, p. 1)
No one can fault McHenry for his perspective;
however, does McHenry’s critique stand up to
empirical analysis? An “expert-led” investiga-
tion conducted by Nature magazine (Giles, 2005)
found numerous errors in both Wikipedia and the
Encyclopedia Britannica: an average of four errors
per Wikipedia article and three errors per Encyclo-
pedia Britannica entry. Despite the relative better
accuracy of the expert-led encyclopedia at the time
of the study, the main take-away for many is that
the self-correcting character of mass collabora-
tion on a wiki platform can lead to surprisingly
good results. After all, Encyclopedia Britannica
had over 100 years of experience in expert-led
content creation compared to Wikipedia’s four
years of experience.
Wikipedia is but one example of many en-
deavors in which users have contributed to the
social production of content. These include the
Spanish language Enciclopedia Libre, Susing.
nu, and numerous wikis in more narrow areas of
specialization. The content of these information
portals are user created and edited across time and
space by anonymous individuals. Whatever their
shortcomings might be in terms of accuracy, these
limitations would seem to be more than made up
for by breadth of reach. Unlike expert-led systems
that effectively have more limited-breadth due to
their subscription, fee-based business models, wi-
kis, and other collaborative content development
efforts are available to any self-directed literate
individuals with access to the World Wide Web.
Technology and an ethos that supports open access
have both been critical elements to the explosion
58
of knowledge content that is openly available in
our new information environment (Benkler, 2006).
WEB 2.0 AND COLLABORATION
AMONG ADULT EDUCATORS
Given the intellectual origins of Web 2.0, it is
not surprising that adult educators have been
among the first to use the tools for collaborative
endeavors. A new, uncoordinated movement is
emerging among adult educators collaborating in
the development of curriculum and dialogue on
issues of interest. Initiatives among professionals
are taking place alongside trends that place learn-
ing more under control of learners. How far this
latter development will go towards actualizing
the principles of access, voluntary participation,
and self-directedness will be determined by the
continuing success of the open source move-
ment. In this section of the chapter, we provide
examples how such Web 2.0 tools as blogs, wikis,
chat rooms, and social networking cites have been
used by adult educators.
Blogs
Blogs allow learners to share their experiences
by keeping an on-line diary or journal. Learners
post their entries to the blog in a reverse chrono-
logical order, and blog visitors can comment on
the entries, but they cannot delete or alter them.
Ninety percent of blog owners are between 13
and 29 years old; therefore, incorporating blogs in
adult education can facilitate student engagement
in the learning process, especially of adults under
30 (Rubio, Martin, & Moran, 2007). By using
blogs adult educators also show that they keep
up with emerging technologies and can “speak
the language” of their students and, hence, relate
to them.
Often adult educators use blogs to supple-
ment on-line, blended, or face-to-face classroom
instruction. These blogs help establish and sup-
Web 2.0 and the Actualization of the Ideals of Adult Education
port “a common online presence for unit related
information” (Duffy & Bruns, 2006, p. 33), such
as a course or project. In addition to calendars and
assignments, educators use blogs to post useful
tips for students and course updates or provide
lists of resources. Adult educators have also used
blogs to assess student learning needs and improve
classroom instruction. For example, Higdan and
Topaz (2009) in their mathematics classes require
university and college students to post a mes-
sage on a blog about the most challenging and
the most interesting parts of homework reading
materials the night before each class. Based on
the students’ responses, the instructors alter the
class instruction to address student difficulties and,
hence, facilitate their learning of the curriculum.
Blogs can also be used by adult learners to share
with peers their reflections on teaching methods
or professional challenges. Such blogs facilitate
learners’ understanding of their profession, criti-
cally reflect on their experiences, and document
their learning and professional growth (Kervin,
Mantei, & Herrington, 2009). For example,
University of Wollongong, Australia, created a
blog where pre-service teachers could share their
reflections of their first teaching experiences
with in-service teachers and university faculty.
These reflections helped the pre-service teach-
ers better understand their role and professional
identity as teachers. Well-organized blogs kept
over a period of time can also serve as electronic
portfolios (Weller, Pegler, & Mason, 2005) that
show adult learners’ analytical, storytelling, and
writing abilities. Blogs can also serve as a tool
to collect formative evaluation of the course or
learning activities (Madsen can’t use et al until
you define all authors once in text et al., 2008)
or feedback about university, program, or other
learner services.
Blogs can help adult learners to share and
to facilitate informal and non-formal learning
experiences. The University of Minnesota, for
example, encourages student participation in
civic engagement activities. Students’ reflections
on volunteering in the community, hospitals, or
homeless shelters posted as blogs represent “some
of the more thoughtful and compelling blogs”
among other blogs kept by the university students
(Nackerud & Scaletta, 2007, p. 82). Such blogs
have a potential to reach and inspire other students
about the importance of civic engagement. A lec-
turer in computer science Tim Roberts (2006), for
example, keeps a blog to inform researchers and
practitioners about online collaborative learning
and share relevant resources, such as articles,
books, journals, or glossary of terms. Farmers,
businessmen, activists, and educators in Indiana
use blogs to educate their local community how to
support the local food system (Glowacki-Dudka
& Isaacs, 2009). These blogs help engage the
community in planning of local food production,
solve problems, and research for grants and other
supports.
Many small and large businesses and corpora-
tions have realized the advantages that blogs can
bring to enhance communication, knowledge
sharing, and workplace learning. Blogs kept by
employees serve as a means to store and share
knowledge about any aspect of their jobs, such as
new ideas, trouble shooting, or information about
their competitors (Kapp, 2007). This knowledge is
accessible to everyone in the organization at any
geographic location. Not surprisingly, in a recent
survey (Bonk, Kim, Oh, Teng, & Son 2007), hu-
man resource development (HRD) practitioners
indicated that blogs, among other Web 2.0 tools,
would be used widely to facilitate blended learning
in corporate training in the near future.
Wikis
Wikis refer to types of websites that can be built
and edited by any user. Therefore, “if a blog is
a monologue, then wiki is a discussion” (Kapp,
2007, p. 29). Wikis are often used to store, cat-
egorize, and share materials related to a class or
project (Rubio et al., 2007). Due to their interac-
tive nature, wikis are also used for collaborative
59
 Web 2.0 and the Actualization of the Ideals of Adult Education
projects, such as class projects, research articles,
training manuals, or strategic plans (Cronin,
2009). For example, students in an undergradu-
ate marketing course collaborated on writing a
textbook via wiki (Cronin, 2009). Each student
was responsible for writing 12 pages of text and
editing 100 pages of other students’ text. Although
many students were not familiar with wikis, this
project helped students increase their collabora-
tion skills. Working collaboratively on a course
wiki has also been shown to increase student
learning of the course content (Matthew, Felvegi,
& Callaway, 2009). Matthew et al. required their
pre-service teachers in a language arts methods
course to work in groups on monitoring a page
on a class wiki. Each page was situated around a
course topic, and students were responsible for
adding and editing content to their page by post-
ing summaries of homework readings or essays
on how these readings were related to their prior
teaching or work experiences and other class as-
signments. This wiki assignment helped students
synthesize what they learned and connect what
they learned to their prior knowledge and expe-
rience. Wikis can help in evaluation of classes,
programs, or services. For example, at Brown
University students created a wiki to share their
experiences with instructors and courses in which
they were enrolled (Duffy & Bruns, 2006). Such
wikis provide students freedom and flexibility to
express their thoughts and review reflections of
other students.
Health education practitioners used wikis to
educate communities about diseases and share
practices. For example, the Flu Wiki (http://www.
fluwikie.com/) provides communities resources
to prevent influenza. The world largest non-profit
organization dedicated to blood cancer research
and education called Society uses wikis to share
best practices among members of its 66 chapters
(Kapp, 2007). SA Health Manager Wiki (http://
sa-health.wikidot.com/start) provides a space
for health care managers and leaders in South
Africa to share their knowledge to increase their
60
professional competencies. Some of the resources
include information related to personal develop-
ment, leadership and strategy, project and program
management, and organizational development.
For example, the “leadership and strategy” page
includes definitions, articles, and assessment tools
related to ethical leadership, providing feedback,
delegation of responsibilities, knowledge manage-
ment, problem solving, and many other topics.
Many adult education organizations, centers,
and groups have created wikis to share experiences
around common topics of interests. Adult Literacy
Education Wiki (http://wiki.literacytent.org/index.
php/Main_Page) has been created and used by
researchers, practitioners, and adult learners to
foster a virtual community of practice. Adult lit-
eracy educators are encouraged to contribute and
utilized this wiki to explore a variety of topics,
such as action research, corrections education,
and learning disabilities, among other concerns.
Adult Education Technology Wiki (http://adult-
edtech.pbworks.com/) was created “as a learning
space” (n.d., para. 2) for adult basic education
practitioners and volunteers to share ideas about
the implementation of new technologies. The
United Nations International Research and Train-
ing Institute for the Advancement of Women
(UN-INSTRAW), a global leader in research,
policy and practice to improve gender equality
and empower women, created its Gender Training
Wiki (http://un-instraw.org/wiki/training/index.
php/Main_Page). The wiki includes links to or-
ganizations that provide training related to gender
equality; conferences, workshops, and courses
related to gender issues; training resources; and
other useful links.
The Human Resource Development Working
Group (HRDWG) of the Asia-Pacific Economic
Cooperation (APEC) organization uses APEC
Human Resources Development wiki(http://hrd.
apec.org/index.php/Main_Page) to share and de-
velop knowledge about effective HRD practices
and policies and to facilitate networking among
the international HRD community. The “Projects”
Web 2.0 and the Actualization of the Ideals of Adult Education
page of this wiki provides links to the nearly 50
activities of HRDWG. For example, the page on
Vocational Education and Training for the Youth
Forum contains case-studies, papers, and reports
from the past three annual meetings of this forum.
Their Workshop on Embedding Entrepreneurship
in University Curriculum was a 2008 conference
that focused on the development of university
programs that promote entrepreneurship. The wiki
page of this conference contains recommenda-
tions of the conference report and power points
of the conference presentations. The “Events”
page of this wiki provides information on APEC
and non-APEC activities in the Asia-Pacific re-
gion that might be useful for HRD practitioners.
Another page of this wiki provides an overview
of the goals of several HRDWG networks (Ca-
pacity Building Network, Education Network,
and Labour and Social Protection Network) and
links to their pages.
Chat Rooms
Chat rooms provide opportunities for multiple
learners from multiple locations to interact at
the same time. Therefore, chat rooms represent
a great tool for adult educators for facilitating
interaction among students and between students
and faculty, especially in an on-line environment
where students to do not have opportunities to
meet with others face-to-face. Stein and Calvin
(2002) used chat rooms in their adult education
foundation course to facilitate the entire class and
small group discussions. When used to engage the
entire class, the instructor used chats to discuss
general course concerns and to set the tone for
small group discussions. Later, in small groups
students used chats to discuss weekly readings
and prepare responses to the instructors’ ques-
tions. Stein et al. need to list all the authors the
first time you reference before you can write et all
(2007) required students to use chat rooms when
working in groups to complete their coursework
for a blended adult education foundations class.
Through sharing their ideas, questioning responses
of their peers, and making connections students
transformed their individual understanding of the
course materials into a collective, shared under-
standing. Chat rooms can be used to incorporate
games into on-line adult education classroom.
Johnson and Aragon (2000) used chats to simulate
the popular “Who Wants to Be a Millionaire”
game in a graduate human resource development
course. The instructor posted multiple-choice
questions in the chat room and students posted the
letter corresponding to the correct answer in the
chat room. The next question went to the student
who was first to provide the correct answer. If a
student did not the answer, he/she could post “ask
the audience” message and then had to choose the
correct answer from suggestions posted by other
students. Chat rooms can also help the instructor
to send announcements or reminders, discuss and
establish rules for group work, or have virtual
office hours to communicate with students about
their academic progress or problems (Merrill,
DiSilvestro, & Johnson, 2008).
Chat rooms have several advantages over
traditional face-to-face classrooms for some
groups of adult learners, for example, for adults
learning a second language (Blake, 2009) or for
adults in continuing professional development
courses (Garrison, Schardt, & Kochi, 2000; Ryan
& Waterson, 2000). In traditional face-to-face
classrooms, adults learning a second language
usually take turns participating in a discussion or
answering questions (Blake, 2009). In chat rooms,
all students can contribute simultaneously and,
hence, use their second language more often. Chat
rooms also provide these learners some privacy and
lessen the degree of discomfort that many second
language learners have when speaking in front
of others in a traditional face-to-face classroom.
Also, while chatting students can see the words,
phrases, and sentences that they, their peers, or
instructors are typing, which provide visual clues
that facilitate their comprehension and learning.
Chat rooms have also been incorporated into dis-
61
 Web 2.0 and the Actualization of the Ideals of Adult Education
tance education courses in continuing professional
development, for example, for medical librarians
(Garrison et al., 2000) or practicing physicians
(Ryan & Waterson, 2000). Many professionals
have to or would like to participate in continuing
professional development; however, not all have
time or resources to enroll into traditional continu-
ing education courses or attend conferences and
workshops and opt for distance education courses.
In these courses, chat rooms provide opportunities
for adult learners to connect with others in their
profession, discuss their practice, and exchange
ideas to stay current with the knowledge in their
profession.
Many universities and colleges have added chat
rooms as a tool to provide some of their services
virtually. For example, University of Kansas Li-
braries uses chat rooms to promote research and
information literacy skills among their students,
faculty, and staff (Devin, Currie, & Stratton, 2008).
Like in the face-to-face environment, chat rooms
allow librarians to discuss with students or faculty
search words, develop search strategies, or explain
the difference between various types of sources.
Chat rooms provide other opportunities that a
face-to-face environment does not. For example,
librarians can suggest that students or faculty log
into the library website and walk them through the
database, step-by-step. When a student performs
a search task, librarians can use this time to as-
sist others and then check on the student again to
monitor his or her search progress.
Social Networking Sites
Social networking sites (e.g., Facebook, MySpace,
or LinkedIn) represent an on-line space for people
with common interests where they create their
profiles and share them with others. Educators
have started using these sites to create commu-
nities of practice (Wenger, 1998), or groups that
share ideas about something and learn from each
other through interaction. University of Brighton,
UK, integrated a social networking site Elgg to
62
build community among students, faculty, and
administrators across campus (Franklin & van
Harmelen, 2007). The site is used as both a plat-
form for on-line courses and a space for social
networking. Many faculty members moved their
on-line classes from the Blackboard platform to
Elgg because Elgg provides for more interaction.
Learners use this site for personal development
planning, developing e-portfolios, and providing
support for peers who struggle with their learning.
A non-profit organization, Principals for Change,
uses a social networking site, Green Spaces,
to share knowledge among school principals
and teachers about ways to save energy at their
schools and to integrate environmental awareness
into the school curriculum (“It’s Not Easy Being
Green—Or Is It?”, 2009).
Social networking sites have been used to
build professional networks for adult learners
and educators, free of charge and even without
leaving home. The University of Colorado has
integrated a social networking site TappedIn in a
broader teacher professional development initia-
tive (Sawchuk, 2008). The site allows almost 3,000
teachers locally and internationally to participate
in virtual classrooms and interest groups. Many
adult learners and educators engaged in academic
research have joined Academia.edu site (http://
www.academia.edu/about) to share their research
interests with others and find people with similar
research interests. Educators interested in the use
of Web 2.0 and collaborative technology in the
classroom have created the Classroom20 (http://
www.classroom20.com/). Classrom20 is a social
networking site where educators can exchange
ideas, find support and help, and participate in
virtual discussions around tools, for example, as
blogging, instant messaging, or podcasting, or
other issues around Web 2.0, such as cyberbull-
ing, internet safety, or professional development.
Social networking sites can also provide a sup-
port system for different groups of adult learners.
For example, Burgess (2009) suggests that incor-
poration of social networking sites into a course
Web 2.0 and the Actualization of the Ideals of Adult Education
curriculum benefits adult female learners’ aca-
demic experiences. Adult female learners succeed
better in learning environments that incorporate
connections and relationships among learners.
Therefore, inclusion of social networking sites
into a course fosters female learners’ social capital
by providing them access to networks of men and
women who can provide support with every day
activities as well as moral and professional support
(Burgess, 2009). Another good example comes
from Wisconsin, where immigrants from Brazil
have created their site to connect with each other,
build personal and professional relationships, and
maintain cultural identity (Conceição, Weber, &
Baldor, 2009).
CONCLUSION
The inclusion of Web 2.0 in adult education seems
appropriate in light of Lindeman’s (1989) view
of adult education as providing an environment
for new methods and incentives for informal self
directed learning. Certainly the new methods for
content creation such as blogs and wikis create
incentives for learning more about the actual
subject of the content, how to use the tools to
store the content, and how to collaborate with
others. Learners pursuing these activities embody
Knowles’ (1984) assumptions about the adult
learner as self directed, problem focused, building
on past experience, and a voluntary participant in
learning projects. The information ecosystem with
its multitude of interactions between individual
learners, collaborative communities of learn-
ers, and content within the information system
of Web 2.0 brings to life Illich’s (1973) vision
of learning webs. Learners pursuing solutions
to problems, creating knowledge, investigating
personal, professional, and spiritual questions
with the assistance and sometimes guidance of
others, freely given is exactly what Illich meant
by a learning web.
Many instructors are using Web 2.0 tools in
their teaching. These tools are incorporated into
blended or fully on-line courses facilitate learn-
ing, team building, and the co construction of
knowledge. Learners can continue using these
tools after they complete a course or a workshop,
so Web 2.0 provide methods and opportunities for
adult learners to “to see the activity of learning
as something that extends beyond the classroom”
(King, 1998, p. 31).
REFERENCES
Benkler, Y. (2006). The wealth of networks: How
social production transforms markets and free-
dom. New Haven: Yale University Press.
Blake, C. (2009). Potential of web-based Inter-
net chats for improving oral fluency in a second
language. Modern Language Journal, 93(2),
227–240. doi:10.1111/j.1540-4781.2009.00858.x
Bonk, C. J., Kim, K., Oh, E. J., Teng, Y., & Son, S.
J. (2007). The present and future state of blended
learning in workplace learning settings in the
United States. In F. M. Nafukho (Ed.), Proceedings
of the academy for human resource development
annual conference (pp. 86-93). Bowling Green,
OH: Academy for Human Resource Development.
Burgess, K. R. (2009). Social networking tech-
nologies as vehicles of support for women in learn-
ing communities. New Directions for Adult and
Continuing Education, 122, 63–71. doi:10.1002/
ace.335
Conceição, S. C. O., Weber, N., & Baldor, M. J.
(2009). Can web-based social networking envi-
ronments foster social and cultural identity? In D.
Truty (Eds.), Proceedings of the annual Midwest
research-to-practice conference in adult, continu-
ing, community and extension education (pp.
55-60). Chicago: Northeastern Illinois University.
63
 Web 2.0 and the Actualization of the Ideals of Adult Education
Cronin, J. J. (2009). Upgrading to web 2.0: An
experiential project to build a marketing wiki.
Journal of Marketing Education, 31(1), 66–75.
doi:10.1177/0273475308329250
Darkenwald, G. G., & Merriam, S. (1982). Adult
education foundations of practice. New York:
Harper Collins.
Devin, F., Currie, L., & Stratton, J. (2008).
Successful approaches to teaching through
chat. New Library World, 109(5/6), 223–234.
doi:10.1108/03074800810873579
DiNucci, D. (1999). Fragmented future. Print,
53(4), 32–222.
Drummond, D. (2008, October 28). New
chapter for Google Book Search. Retrieved
December 8, 2009, http://googleblog.blogspot.
com/2008_10_01_googleblog_archive.html
Duffy, P., & Bruns, A. (2006). The use of blogs,
wikis and RSS in education: A conversation of pos-
sibilities. In Proceedings of the Online Learning
and Teaching Conference (pp. 31-38). Retrieved
October 10, 2009, from http://eprints.qut.edu.
au/5398/1/5398.pdf
Finger, M., & Asun, J. M. (2001). Adult educa-
tion at the crossroads: Learning our way out.
Leicester, UK: NIACE.
Franklin, T., & van Harmelen, M. (2007). Web 2.0
for content for learning and teaching in higher
education. Retrieved November 12, 2009, from
http://staff.blog.ui.ac.id/harrybs/files/2008/10/
web-2-for-content-for-learning-and-teaching-in-
higher-education.pdf
Garrison, J. A., Schardt, C., & Kochi, J. (2000).
Web-based distance continuing education: A new
way of thinking for students and instructors. Bul-
letin of the Medical Library Association, 88(3),
211–217.
64
Gates, B. (1976, January 31). An open letter to
hobbyists. Homebrew Computer Club Newsletter,
2(1). Retrieved November 16, 2009, from http://
upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/1/14/
Bill_Gates_Letter_to_Hobbyists.jpg
Giles, J. (2005). Internet encyclopedias go
head to head. Nature, 485(15), 900–901.
doi:10.1038/438900a
Gillies, J., & Cailliau, R. (2000). How the web
was born: The story of the World Wide Web. New
York: Oxford University Press.
Glowacki-Dudka, M., & Isaacs, K. (2009). Ex-
amining social capital within East Central Indiana
local food systems. In D. Truty (Eds.), Proceed-
ings of the annual Midwest research-to-practice
conference in adult, continuing, community and
extension education (pp. 109-114). Chicago:
Northeastern Illinois University.
Google. (2009). In Merriam-Webster online dic-
tionary. Retrieved November 17, 2009, from http://
www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/google
Grace, A. P., & Rocco, T. S. (2009). John Funnell
Ohliger: A brief biography of his life and vocations.
In Grace, A. P., & Rocco, T. S. (Eds.), Challenging
the professionalization of adult education: John
Ohliger and contradictions in modern practice
(pp. 3–16). San Francisco: Jossey Bass.
Higdan, J., & Topaz, C. (2009). Blogs and wikis
as instructional tools: A social software adapta-
tion of just-in-time teaching. College Teaching,
57(2), 105–109. doi:10.3200/CTCH.57.2.105-110
Houle, C. O. (1961). The inquiring mind. Madison:
The University of Wisconsin Press.
Illich, I. (1970). Deschooling society. New York:
Harper & Row.
Illich, I. (1973). Tools for conviviality. London:
Marion Boyers.
Web 2.0 and the Actualization of the Ideals of Adult Education
Isaacson, W. (2004). Benjamin Franklin: An
American Life. New York: Simon and Schuster
Paperbacks.
It’s not easy being green—or is it? (2009). Educa-
tion Digest: Essential Readings Condensed for
Quick Review, 74(5), 19-21.
Johnson, S. D., & Aragon, S. R. (2000). An in-
structional strategy framework for online learning
environments. In T. M. Egan & S. A. Lynham
(Eds.), Proceedings of the academy for human
resource development annual conference (pp.
1022-1029). Bowling Green, OH: Academy for
Human Resource Development.
Kapp, K. M. (2007, July/August). Tools and tech-
niques for transferring know-how from boomers
to gamers. Global Business and Organizational
Excellence, 22-37.
Kervin, L., Mantei, J., & Herrington, A. (2009).
Blogs as a social networking tool to build commu-
nity. In Hatzipanagos, S., & Warburton, S. (Eds.),
Handbook of research on social software and
developing community ontologies (pp. 238–254).
Hershey, PA: Information Science Reference.
King, K. P. (1998). Course development on the
World Wide Web. New Directions for Adult and
Continuing Education, 78, 25–32. doi:10.1002/
ace.7803
Knowles, M. S. (1970). The modern practice of
adult education: Andragogy vs. pedagogy. New
York: Association Press.
Knowles, M. S. (1975). Self-directed learning:
A guide for learners and teachers. New York:
Cambridge Book.
Knowles, M. S. (1977). The adult education
movement in the U.S. Huntington, NY: Krieger.
Knowles, M. S. (1984). The adult learner: A
neglected species. Houston: Gulf.
Leadbetter, C. (2008). We think: Mass innovation,
not mass production. New York: Profile Books.
Lessig, L. (2005). Free culture: The nature and
future of creativity. New York: Penguin Books.
Lindeman, E. C. (1989). The meaning of adult
education. Norman, OK: Research Center for
Continuing Professional and Higher Education.
(Original work published 1926)
Madsen, S. R., Ruona, W. E. A., Callahan, J. L.,
Egan, T., Gibson, S. K., Levya-Gardner, B., et al.
(2008). Innovative teaching ideas for HRD educa-
tors (2008). In T. J. Chermack (Ed.), Proceedings
of the academy for human resource development
annual conference (pp. 1135-1139). Bowling
Green, OH: Academy for Human Resource De-
velopment.
Massachusetts Institute of Technology Open-
CourseWare. (n.d.). FAQ: Intellectual property.
Retrieved November 14, 2009, from http://ocw.
mit.edu/OcwWeb/web/help/faq3/index.htm
Matthew, K. I., Felvegi, E., & Callaway, R. A.
(2009). Wiki as a collaborative learning tool in a
language arts methods class. Journal of Research
on Technology in Education, 42(1), 55–72.
McHenry, R. (2004, November). The faith-
based encyclopedia. Retrieved November 18,
2009, from http://www.tcsdaily.com/Article.
aspx?id=111504A
Merriam, S. B. (2001). Andragogy and self-
directed learning: Pillars of adult learning theory.
New Directions for Continuing Education, 89,
3–13. doi:10.1002/ace.3
Merriam, S. B., & Brockett, R. (1997). The
profession and practice of adult education: An
introduction. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Merriam, S. B., Caffarella, R. S., & Baumgart-
ner, L. M. (2006). Learning in adulthood: A
comprehensive guide (3rd ed.). San Francisco:
Jossey-Bass.
65
 Web 2.0 and the Actualization of the Ideals of Adult Education
Merrill, H. S., DiSilvestro, F., & Johnson, J. (2008).
A capstone portfolio course as assessment in an
online masters degree: Reporting on four years
of experience. In M. L. Rowland (Ed.), Proceed-
ings of the annual Midwest research-to-practice
conference in adult, continuing, community and
extension education (pp. 135-140). Bowling
Green: University of Western Kentucky.
MIT OpenCourseWare. (2006). 2005 Program
evaluation findings report. Cambridge, MA.
Nackerud, S., & Scaletta, K. (2007). Blogging in
the academy. New Directions for Student Services,
124, 71–87.
O’Reilly, T. (2005, September 30). What is web
2.0: Design patterns and business models for the
next generation of software. O’Reilly Media.
Retrieved November 15, 2009, from http://oreilly.
com/web2/archive/what-is-web-20.html
Raymond, E. S. (2001). The cathedral & the
bazaar: Musings on Linux and open source by
an accidental revolutionary. Sebastopol, CA:
O’Reilly.
Roberts, T. (2006). Online collaborative learning
in higher education, blog. Bundaberg, Australia:
Central Queensland University. Retrieved Novem-
ber 12, 2009, from http://clp.cqu.edu.au/index.htm
Rocco, T. S. (2009). Informing learning for today’s
professionals: Lessons from the social critique of
mandatory continuing education. In Grace, A. P.,
& Rocco, T. S. (Eds.), Challenging the profes-
sionalization of adult education: John Ohliger and
contradictions in modern practice (pp. 165–182).
San Francisco: Jossey Bass.
Rubio, R., Martin, S., & Moran, S. (2007). Col-
laborative web learning tools: Wikis and blogs.
Computer Applications in Engineering Education.
published online April 13, 2009. doi:.doi:10.1002/
cae.20218
66
Ryan, D., & Waterson, R. (2000). Transforming
continuing education materials for on-line learn-
ing. Journal of Telemedicine and Telecare, 6,
64–66. doi:10.1258/1357633001935626
Sawchuk, S. (2008). Sites mimicking social net-
works set up for staff development. Education
Week, 28(1), 1.
Stallman, R. M. (1985). The GNU manifesto. Free
Software Foundation. Retrieved November 17,
2009, from http://www.gnu.org/gnu/manifesto.
html
Stein, D., & Calvin, J. (2002). The experience of
learning in a web-enhanced course. Proceedings
of the Annual Midwest Research-to-Practice
Conference in Adult, Continuing, Community and
Extension Education. Dekalb: Northern Illinois
University. Retrieved October 18, 2009, from
https://scholarworks.iupui.edu/handle/1805/391
Stein, D. S., Wanstreet, C. E., Glazer, H. R.,
Engle, C. L., Harris, R. A., & Johnston, S. M.
(2007). Creating shared understanding through
chats in a community of inquiry. The Internet and
Higher Education, 10, 103–115. doi:10.1016/j.
iheduc.2007.02.002
Stothart, C. (2007, June 22). Web threatens
learning ethos. The times higher education
supplement. Retrieved November 10, 2009, from
http://www.timeshighereducation.co.uk/story.
asp?storyCode=209408
Wales, J. (2005, March 8). [Wikipedia-l] Wikipe-
dia is an encyclopedia. Message posted to http://
lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikipedia-l/2005-
March/020469.html
Weller, M., Pegler, C., & Mason, R. (2005). Use of
innovative technologies on an e-learning course.
The Internet and Higher Education, 8(1), 61–71.
doi:10.1016/j.iheduc.2004.10.001
Web 2.0 and the Actualization of the Ideals of Adult Education
Wenger, E. (1998). Communities of practice:
Learning, meaning, and identity. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.
Wiki. (2009). In Merriam-Webster online diction-
ary. Retrieved November 17, 2009, from http://
www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/wiki
Wikipedia. (n.d.). Wikipedia. Retrieved Novem-
ber 19, 2009, from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/
Wikipedia
Wolfram Research. (2009). Query computed at
http://www.wolframalpha.com. Retrieved Octo-
ber, 10, 2009.
KEY TERMS AND DEFINITIONS
Blog: A web-based journal.
Creative Commons Licensing: Legal frame-
work to allow sharing of intellectual property.
Collaboration: Interaction of two or more
individual to generate new content, information
or product.
Information Ecosystem: Information envi-
ronment in which individuals and communities
interact in Internet.
Web 2.0: Software tools and information
infrastructure that allows individuals to interact
across time and space on the Internet.
Wiki: A web-based platform that facilitates
collaboration on the Internet.
World Wide Web: A system of interlinked
hypertext documents on the Internet
67
68

Chapter 5
Conventional Online
Teaching vs. Andragogical
Online Teaching
Victor C. X. Wang
California State University, Long Beach, USA

ABSTRACT
In an effort to promote the andragogical teaching model in helping adult learners learn online, the
author of this chapter has sought to compare and contrast this model with conventional online teaching
model. In doing so, the author argues while conventional online teaching is guided by behaviorism, in
order to help adults learn in the online environment, instructors must go beyond the conventional online
teaching model characterized by the use of Bloom’s Taxonomy of Educational Objectives and embrace
humanism from which andragogy flows. The two models addressed in this chapter were not developed
in a vacuum. Rather, they were derived from pedagogical and andragogical assumptions of learners.
According to the literature in adult education, pedagogical principles were developed as early as in
the 7th and 12th centuries whereas andragogical principles emerged in the early part of the 19th century
in Europe. Both pedagogical principles and andragogical principles have been used to guide online
adult teaching and learning since universities began to deliver courses in the virtual environments at
the beginning of the 21st century.

INTRODUCTION the 1970s, the father of adult education, Malcolm

As people walked into the 21st century, they real-
ized that teaching, especially teaching of adult
learners is completed not only in the traditional
classroom, but also in the electronic classroom or
what we call “virtual environments”. As early as
DOI: 10.4018/978-1-61692-906-0.ch005
Knowles predicted that teaching of adults in the
21st century, would be delivered electronically
(Knowles, 1975). We can all prove that his predi-
cation came true as more and more universities
have begun to deliver courses online to reach
learners far and wide. One logical inference as to
why Knowles made such a precise prediction is
the fact that mature learners cannot come to the
Conventional Online Teaching vs. Andragogical Online Teaching
traditional classroom to receive their education
and training because of their multiple work/family
responsibilities. Yet, they must retool their knowl-
edge and skills in order to survive and thrive under
any economical conditions in the 21st century. He
further predicted that the de-institutionalization of
education, in the form of open and independent
learning systems, would create a need for learn-
ers to develop appropriate self-directed learning
skills: Students entering into these programs
without having learned the skills of self-directed
inquiry will experience anxiety, frustration, and,
often failure, and so will their teachers (as cited in
Wang, 2005, p. 35). Self-directed learning skills
will definitely help mature learners learn in the
virtual environments where they have no face to
face meetings with their course instructors except
that some instructors may arrange some online
interaction with mature learners via technolo-
gies. The virtual environments provide not only
academic learning but also social networking.
King and Gura (2007) argue that learners young
and old in the information age, not only engage in
learning on the Internet, but also engage in online
social networking such as making virtual interna-
tional friends via their online journals, MySpace
and Facebook (Havenstein, 2007). In addition,
learners, especially those with better computer
skills, may engage in constant text messaging,
watching movies and “Googling” for all sorts of
their information needs directly from their cell
phones (King, 2009). The implication has been
people all live in such a digitally connected world
and the Internet has become a bone fide tool for
teachers to conduct teaching online and learners
to engage in learning online. If positively used,
the Internet can help maximize learning on the
part of learners. In other words, the Internet can
maximize learning anywhere, any time given the
asynchronous and synchronous nature of online
teaching/learning. If negatively used, the Internet
may frustrate our learners in the 21st century, leav-
ing our learners aimless “Googling” searching for
useless information they may not need to achieve
learning. As teachers and learners, we should be
aware of the dialectical relationships between the
above positive and negative usage of the Internet.
On the basis of the above analysis, it is vital
that teachers assume “appropriate” teaching meth-
ods on the Internet. Conventional online teaching
may work well with children or preadults as the
teaching methods were derived directly from the
traditional teaching methodologies. Traditional
teaching methodologies were directly derived
from B. F. Skinner’s behaviorism (1968). Behav-
iorism’s influence on instructional technology
“led to the design of piecemeal instruction with
immediate feedback and reinforcement, drill and
practice procedures, and self-paced programmed
instruction (as cited in Dewald, 2003, p. 48). As
Dewald (2003) further indicated, behaviorist
instructors make an effort to measure learning
outcomes. They also want students’ learning
outcomes to be observable in addition to being
measurable. Behaviorist instructors tend to have
the notion: If they fail to measure and observe
students’ learning outcomes, students fail to learn.
As a result of the influence of Skinner’s (1968)
behaviorism, instructors, including instructors of
adult learners, have been using heavily Bloom’s
(1956) Taxonomy of Educational Objectives to
outline their teaching objectives. While Bloom’s
Taxonomy of Educational Objectives proved to
be a powerful tool in instructional design and
in analyzing instructional outcomes, a critical
question to ask is does Bloom’s Taxonomy allow
instructors to involve learners in the instructional
design process? To date, no behaviorist instructors
have involved their learners in the instructional
design process unless they change their teaching
philosophy from behaviorism to humanism to
accommodate adult learning. The purpose of this
chapter is to compare and contrast conventional
online teaching and andragogical online teaching
so that both learners and instructors can determine
whether andragogical online teaching is superior to
conventional online teaching in the instruction of
today’s adult learners and vice versa. Without the
69
 Conventional Online Teaching vs. Andragogical Online Teaching
knowledge of conventional online teaching or that
of andragogical online teaching, instructors may
find it hard to “prescribe” the right instructional
design, let alone the right teaching methodologies
in the virtual environments. Although scholars/
researchers recognize the distinction between the
education of adults and the education of children,
step by step andragogical online teaching needs
to be provided. More importantly, practitioners
in the field should follow these steps in order
to achieve effective teaching of adults online. It
is okay for instructors to measure and observe
students’ learning outcomes in behaviorist terms.
However, andragogical online teaching may prove
to be a more powerful tool in helping adults learn
in the electronic classroom in the 21st century. The
sections that follow will address the fundamental
issue of conventional online teaching versus an-
dragogical online teaching.
BACKGROUND
Theoretical Framework
The education of children and adults centers on
pedagogy (the art and science of teaching chil-
dren) and andragogy (the art and science helping
adults learn). It boils down to the essential issue
of teacher-centered methods and learner-centered
education. As Knowles declared that adults have
andragogical learning characteristics whereas
children have pedagogical learning characteristics,
his comparison of two models generated much
controversy in the field. Basically, not every
adult learner will emerge as mature (self-directed)
learners. Therefore, teacher-centered method is
still useful especially when an adult is entering
into a totally new content area (Dewald, 2003, p.
49). However, no one is to doubt the benefits of
a learner-centered education when adult learn-
ers are self-directed and task-oriented towards
learning in either the traditional classrooms or
the electronic classrooms. When learners are
70
capable of teaching themselves in a particular
subject and when learners are responsible for their
own learning in an online learning environment,
instructors should follow Knowles’s andragogi-
cal model and denounce one’s behaviorism and
begin to embrace humanism etc. Only by doing
so can instructors help adult learners maximize
adult learning anywhere, any time in the online
teaching/learning environment. Only by doing so
can instructors make the switch from conventional
online teaching to andragogical online teaching.
Table 1 contains Knowles’s (1995) comparison
of two models that online instructors can apply
to practice accordingly.
Thus far, readers of this chapter may wonder
what behaviorism is all about and what humanism
is concerned with. Behaviorism was founded by
John Watson in the 1920s. Tyler, Thorndike,
Watson and Skinner were keen supporters of these
ideas. This philosophy emphasizes the importance
of the environment or external forces in shaping
desired behavior. Human behavior is believed to
be tied to prior conditioning. It is believed that
stimulus creates response. Teachers who believe
in behaviorism provide as many stimuli as pos-
sible in order to solicit more responses from
students. Once correct responses are obtained,
fair rewards are provided to students. By condi-
tioning, feedback and practice, basic skills and
life skills can be developed. To instructors who
are behaviorists, the aim of education is to de-
velop survival skills and change behavior (Lee,
2010, p. 33). It has contributed to the development
of systematic instructional design models and
emphasizes accountability. Competency based
teacher education, programmed instruction,
computer-assisted instruction, performance level
testing, behavior modification programs in various
teaching regimes were developed with this phi-
losophy as a basis. In the 1960s, the above men-
tioned modes of behaviorist education became
popular in North America. Even to this day, be-
haviorism has been widely used in K-12 education,
including higher education and adult education.
Conventional Online Teaching vs. Andragogical Online Teaching
Table 1. Knowles’ comparison of two models
Pedagogical Model
The learner is dependent on the teacher to decide what will be taught
and how it will be taught.
The learner has little experience to contribute to the learning effort,
so the goal is to transmit knowledge through lectures, assigned read-
ings, and presentations.
Learning is organized by the logic of the subject matter.
Learners are considered ready to learn when they attain prescribed ages.
Motivation is inspired by external rewards such as punishment, grades,
and pressure from teachers and parents.
The teacher is responsible for content design, determining coverage,
and efficient transmittal methods.
(Knowles, 1995, pp. 89-90)
Critics of this philosophy believe that learning is
too complex for behavior control. Hence, some
adult educators have turned to humanism.
The basis of humanism can be traced back to
classical China, Greece and Rome (Elias & Mer-
riam, 1995). It was not well known throughout
the Western world until the 1950s and 60s with
the work of Maslow and Rogers. Other key sup-
porters of this philosophy are Erasmus, Rousseau,
Knowles and Tough. The notion of self-directed
learning was derived from this philosophy. There-
fore, scholars argue that andragogy representing
adult education flows from humanism that drives
self-directed learning. This philosophy is based on
the assumption that human nature is essentially
positive and that each person possesses virtu-
ally unlimited potential and an innate goodness.
Actually, Confucius advanced humanism 2,500
years ago in China. Intellectualism is viewed as
what distinguishes humans from animals. While
humans are capable of intellectualism, animals
are not. Autonomy, dignity and freedom are seen
as sacred. It places emphasis on personal growth,
self-direction in the learning process, individual
potentiality and self actualization by using fa-
cilitation, self-direction and teamwork. One can
see that Maslow’s hierarchy of human needs was
Andragogical Model
The learner prefers to be self-directed, so the learner and teacher
should plan together what will be learned.
The learner brings a wealth of experience to the learning situation,
and therefore learning should include elements such as experiments,
discussion, case studies, and simulations.
Learning is organized around a task to be completed or problem to
be solved.
Learners are considered ready to learn when they have a need to
know something, and learners want to be able to apply what they
learn to their lives.
Motivation is inspired by internal incentives such as self-confidence,
better quality of life, and curiosity.
The teacher, as facilitator, is responsible for process design, creating
the climate for learning, and making resources available.
derived from humanism in that he did address self-
actualization. Instructors who believe in humanism
consider themselves as learning facilitators, or
consultants, linking students to learning resources.
Humanist Rogers believes that we cannot teach
another individual, we must facilitate his or her
learning. Individualized instructional process,
learning projects and sensitivity training are all
practices that use humanism as a basis. These
are some of the teaching methods humanistic
instructors may employ. Any curriculum is seen
as a vehicle for meeting needs. Critics of this
philosophy believe that important societal goals
may not be included within the learning (Lee,
2010, p. 34).
Now we can tell that behaviorism drives peda-
gogical assumptions of learning and humanism
drives andragogical assumptions of learning.
Teachers of all kinds should be well versed in
pedagogical and andragogical principles so that
they know exactly which philosophy to fall back
upon in terms of helping mature learners learn
in the traditional classroom or in virtual environ-
ments. Although humanism works well with adult
learners, this is not to say behaviorism has no place
in the education and training of mature learners.
The dialectical relationship addressed earlier in
71
 Conventional Online Teaching vs. Andragogical Online Teaching
this chapter is worth giving more thought to as
we are engaged in helping adult learners learn in
the 21st century.
Methods
Patton (2002) indicates that content analysis
requires considerably more than just reading to
see what’s there. Generating useful and credible
content analysis requires discipline, knowledge,
training, practice, creativity and hard work (p. 5).
Using pedagogy and andragogy as a critical theo-
retical framework, this chapter examined the exist-
ing literature related to traditional online teaching
and andragogical online teaching. Literature was
reviewed and analyzed for patterns and themes
that would contribute to either conventional online
teaching or andragogical online teaching. Accord-
ing to Miles and Huberman (1994), the intent of
the literature review was largely an investigative
process where the researcher gradually made sense
of a social phenomenon by contrasting, comparing,
replicating, cataloguing and classifying the object
of study. This is the very process the author of
this chapter has used for the purpose of this study.
In addition, the researcher of this chaper has a
master’s degree in online teaching and a doctorate
degree in adult education. He has been teaching
online courses at the university level for seven
years and he pays special attention to the differ-
ences and similarities of traditional online teaching
and andragogical online teaching. In addition,
he has been allowed to design his online classes,
using his pedagogical, andragogical knowledge
and skills. In some universities, instructors are not
allowed to design courses. They hire instructional
designers who are knowledgeable in pedagogical
and andragogical principles. It is these instruc-
tional designers who “put courses onto computer
screens” for course instructors. Course instructors
have to teach according to sequences/syllabi
prescribed by instructional designers. Using his
practical virtual classroom experience, pedagogi-
cal and andragogical assumptions of learning, and
72
content analysis (literature review), the author of
this chapter came up with the attractive chapter
in order to compare and contrast conventional
online teaching with andragogical online teach-
ing. The goal is to direct readers to adopt either
pedagogical principles of instructional design or
andragogical instructional design accordingly in
either the traditional classroom or virtual learning
environments.
CONVENTIONAL ONLINE
TEACHING VS. ANDRAGOGICAL
ONLINE TEACHING
Before the real issue of conventional online
teaching versus andragogical online teaching is
discussed, the word “conventional” must be de-
fined. According to Newbury House Dictionary
of American English, “conventional” is defined
as “based on or conforming to accepted ways of
doing things, (syn.) traditional.” One definition
provided by Merriam-Webster’s Online Diction-
ary indicates that “conventional” means lacking
originality or individuality. Compared with con-
ventional online teaching, andragogical online
teaching does offer a novel approach in the fol-
lowing ways in the field.
According to Knowles’ andragogical model,
Baumgartner (2008) advocated that,
In a truly andragogical setting, the learners would
plan their own curriculum. They would decide
the courses, their content, the organization and
sequence of content and they would evaluate
themselves on their learning. The facilitators
would provide learning contracts, help students
become more self-directed, utilize the learner’s
own experiences to help them plan their goals,
assess their needs, and plan a course of action.
What Baumgartner suggested runs contrary
to the conventional online teaching where the
teacher would do everything regarding the in-
Conventional Online Teaching vs. Andragogical Online Teaching
structional design process. While adults have a
deep psychological need to know what to learn,
why to learn, when to learn and if anything has
been learned, children may not have such a need
at all. Children simply learn when their teachers or
parents tell them to learn. To state this principle of
adult learning in Knowles’ original terms, adults
need to know why they need to learn something
before undertaking to learn it” (Knowles, 1989,
p. 83). To satisfy such a need in learning, not
only do instructors provide learning objectives,
more importantly they need to provide practical
relevance of the course material and objectives to
learners’ lives. For children, teachers do not have
to tell them how course materials are related to
their lives. Children may figure these out ten or
twenty years from now. Or some do not even care
about what they learn and whether it will apply
to practice in the future.
Since children have little experience, what is
important is teachers’ prior experience. Based
on teachers’ prior experience, teachers use their
own preferred behaviorist teaching methods such
as transmittal of knowledge through lectures, as-
signed readings and presentations. The teachers
may assume the role of a talking head. Translated
into online teaching, teachers rely heavily on as-
signed readings, PowerPoint presentations. Such
teaching methods reflect the so-called pedagogical
assumptions of learning. Now that adult learners
have valuable prior experience, andragogical
online instructors could draw on learners’ experi-
ences to draw out course relevance (Baumgartner,
2008). Knowles suggested that methods such
as helping learners tap into those experiences
such as “group discussion, simulation exercises,
problem-solving activities, case method, and
laboratory methods” work best (Knowles, 1989,
p. 84). These instructional methods are what we
call andragogical instructional methods.
The third principle of adult learning states that
adults have a self-concept of being responsible for
their own lives (the psychological definition of
adult).” (Knowles, 1989, p. 83). Therefore, it is
an adult educator’s responsibility to help adults
transition from dependent to self-directed learners.
In the online andragogical teaching environment,
instructors could organize learning around a task
to be completed or a problem to be solved. This
approach is more akin to constructivism, which
places its emphasis on the internal process of the
learner’s mind (Dewald, 2003, p. 53). Constructiv-
ist instructors have the notion that instructional
objectives are not to be imposed on the learner but
negotiated with the learner, and evaluation is “more
of a self-analysis tool.” (Jonassen, 1991, p. 12).
Learner’s self-concept does not deviate from
Rogers’ (1951) basic hypotheses, the last of which
was: Learning is a completely internal process
controlled by the learner and the learner engages
his [her] whole being in interaction with his en-
vironment as he perceives it (as cited in Knowles,
Holton, & Swanson, 2005, p. 50). While organiz-
ing learning by the logic of the subject matter is
logical to the education of children, this method
may frustrate online adult learners as this method
violates humanism from which andragogy directly
flows (Nuckles, 2000). According to Wang (2007,
p. 144), adult learners with humanistic orienta-
tion assume responsibility for learning and self-
development. Translated into andragogical online
teaching, instructors must establish a context for
learning and serve as a flexible resource for adult
learners (Elias & Merriam, 1995, 2005). Further,
humanistic online instructors see themselves as
facilitators, helpers, and partners in the learning
process. Even in virtual learning environments,
we can still see a relationship between instruc-
tors and learners, that is, a helping relationship
because instructors do assume a new role of being
facilitators, helpers or consultants. Humanistic
online instructors do not depend on lectures or
PowerPoint presentations. Rather, they link stu-
dents to learning resources, encourage learners to
be self-directed learners and enjoy being a guide
on the side.
Adults become ready to learn those things
they need to know or to be able to do in order to
73
 Conventional Online Teaching vs. Andragogical Online Teaching
cope effectively with their real-life situations. An
especially rich source of readiness to learn is the
developmental tasks associated with moving from
one developmental stage to the next (Knowles,
1989, p. 84). Learning objectives for children do
not have to be connected to their developmental
challenges as children are ready to learn when
they attain prescribed ages. For adult learners,
learning objectives must be connected to their
developmental challenges as they have a need
to know something, and they want to be able to
apply what they learn to their lives. In contrast to
children’s and youths’ subject-centered orienta-
tion to learning (at first in school), adults are life
centered (or task centered or problem centered)
in their orientation to learning (Knowles, 1989,
p. 84). Baumgartner suggested that course plan-
ners should recognize a balance between theory
and application. A fundamental question online
instructors should ask themselves is, are my prob-
lems/tasks for my online adult learners out of the
everyday context? If not, this very principle of
andragogical online teaching is violated and online
instructors of adults switch back to behaviorist
mode of teaching, which embraces the benefits
of pedagogical teaching.
While adults are responsible to some extrinsic
motivators (better jobs, promotions, salary in-
creases, and the like), the more potent motivators
are intrinsic motivators (the desire for increased
self esteem, quality of life, responsibility, job
satisfaction, and the like) (Knowles, 1989, p.
84). Since adults are internally motivated, does
this mean the teacher is not responsible for con-
tent design, determining coverage and efficient
transmittal methods? According to Baumgartner
(2008), the teacher still has a role to play, that is,
to intrinsically appeal to learners’ self-esteem or
have the potential to enhance a learner’s quality
of life. Teacher/facilitators could help learners
recognize this appeal by creating the climate for
learning and making resources available.
74
REFLECTIONS
Through the discussion of conventional online
teaching versus andragogical online teaching
shown in the above section, two models have
been developed: The Model of Conventional
Online Teaching and The Model of Andragogical
Online Teaching.
This model [Figure 1] illustrates the dynamic
interaction of variables that contribute to measur-
able/observable learning outcomes on the part of
learners. Instructors and practitioners have been
using this model in their traditional classrooms and
electronic classrooms since B. F. Skinner advanced
and popularized behaviorism. Since online teach-
ing occurred in the early 21st century, most uni-
versities and colleges including some businesses
and government agencies simply have moved
this model to computer screens. Since Bloom
(1956) developed his Taxonomy of Educational
Objectives, educators of all sorts have begun to
use Bloom’s Taxonomy to analyze instructional
outcomes. The goal of this model has been very
clear: Learning objectives for learners must lead
to measurable and observable learning outcomes.
Instructional methods focus on teacher-centered
methodologies. Teachers believe that it is their
responsibility to provide stimuli and that learners
are supposed to provide responses. If students pro-
vide correct answers, their behavior is rewarded.
Instructional methods reflect behaviorism, that
is, instructors must prescribe instructional design
and learners must assume a submissive role of
following their instructors (Knowles, Holton, &
Swanson, 1998, 2005). Further, instructors treat
learners as dependent learners (Grow, 1991; Wang,
2007). They believe in external rewards such as
punishment, grades, and pressure from teachers
and parents. Instructors believe that they are the
authority of knowledge. Therefore, they must
conduct instructional design according to their
own prior experience. Learners’ input is not taken
into consideration. Over the years, this model has
proved to be effective in the education and training
Conventional Online Teaching vs. Andragogical Online Teaching
Figure 1. The model of conventional online teaching
of children. For those adults who really embrace
behaviorist philosophy in learning, this model
can definitely work for them especially when
adult learners have straight deadlines to meet in a
short period of time. Other adults who enjoy this
model may have just entered a new subject area
in which they don’t have any prior knowledge.
This model works best especially in adult
basic education where mature learners may not
be self-directed in learning as they may not even
have entry level knowledge in terms of learning
a new subject. Although this model works best
with children, in some particular situations, it
works extremely well with adults. For example,
since the emphasis in vocational education is on
identifying the skills to perform in an occupation,
teaching those skills, and requiring a certain
standard of performance in those skills, this
model can prove to be effective. According to
Elias and Merriam (2005, p. 99), education in this
arena of practice is concerned with the outcomes
rather than the process of learning, on exit rather
than entrance requirements and on criterion-ref-
erenced evaluation rather than norm-referenced
evaluation. It must be pointed out that this mod-
el works well in certain cultures such as Confucius-
heritage societies where all learners are required
to pass standardized tests in order to be matricu-
lated into a certain school such as middle schools,
high schools or universities. They (2005) argue
that,
Criterion-referenced evaluation is an important
concept in behavioral psychology. In criterion-
referenced evaluation, the learner’s process
or accomplishments are compared to a fixed
standard or criterion of mastery rather than to
the performance of other students. It is based on
the assumption that learning objectives can be
predetermined, and that given sufficient time and
proper reinforcements nearly all students can meet
the objectives. (p. 99)
Learners’ learning outcomes (knowledge,
skills and attitudes and/or behaviors) have been
associated with competency-based education. In
competency-based education, instructors must set
criteria to be used in assessing student competency.
The assessment of a student’s competency used
performance as the primary source of evidence
(Elias & Merriam, 2005, p. 100). Elias and Mer-
riam further indicate that student progress is
determined by demonstrated competency rather
than in time periods or course completion.
Contrasted to the andragogical online teaching
in the 21st century, this conventional online teach-
ing model may prove to be effective when adults
are entering an unfamiliar subject area, or when
they are required to master certain skills in certain
areas in a short period of time. The danger in using
this conventional model in the instruction of adult
learners online is that it fails to recognize adult
learners as the center of the educational process,
which reflects democracy’s spirit of individualism
75
 Conventional Online Teaching vs. Andragogical Online Teaching
Figure 2. The model of andragogical online teaching
in Elias and Merriam’s terms (2005). The model
of Andragogical Online Teaching that is illustrated
in Figure 2 demonstrates a more powerful learning
process for adult learners in the online learning
environment.
Guided by humanism, this model promotes
cooperation and communication among indi-
viduals as a vehicle for interpersonal growth;
cooperation is a necessity for making democracy
work (Elias & Merriam, 2005, p. 144). The goal
of this model is all about self-actualization of
individual learners rather than measurable/observ-
able learning outcomes in behaviorist terms. In-
structors use this model to assist individuals to
grow and develop toward self-actualization and
toward becoming fully functioning persons
(Maslow, 1954; Elias & Merriam, 2005). Elias
and Merriam (2005) further address this model
by saying,
The notion of growth, development, and change is
integral to much of the psychological literature on
adult development. Adults are no longer viewed as
finished products at the age of sixteen, eighteen,
or twenty-one. Rather, adulthood is a period of
change, psychologically, socially and physiologi-
cally. Adult educators have begun to respond with
activities designed to take into account adult
development. One of the assumptions underlying
andragogy is related to meeting the needs of adults
76
and many of these needs are the direct outgrowth
of the developmental tasks salient to the various
changing stages of adulthood. (p. 144)
Instructors who have adopted this humanistic
approach tend to emphasize more on psychological
growth of learners than on programs. Many adult
educators who have adopted this approach value
the prior experience of adult learners, and are
committed to educating the whole person—these
are not readily measurable as in behaviorist terms
(Elias & Merriam, 2005). Since the advent of this
model in the early 1970s, adult education programs
have begun to center on the needs and interests
of the learners and this approach is dedicated to
the development of human beings. Since adults
are considered self-directed in learning, rigid
approaches such as immediate feedback, drill,
informational lectures are not suggested. Flexible
approaches such as instructors as facilitators and
consultants are encouraged in this model. Instruc-
tors are no longer considered “a sage on the stage,”
rather “a guide on the side” (Brown, 2006, p. 102).
Upon the basis of this model and Table 1, Knowles,
Holton and Swanson (1998, 2005) have specified
the following educational implications not only
for instructors in the traditional classrooms but
also in the electronic classrooms:
Conventional Online Teaching vs. Andragogical Online Teaching
1. Adults need information and involvement
before learning: the how, the what, and the
why of learning.
2. Although it can be argued that any learning
has the effect of building autonomy in a per-
son, there may be learning events in which
there is not a core aim to build autonomy in a
learner. However, when adults become self-
directed, both the learner and the instructor
should plan what will be learned together.
3. Learning is a continuous process grounded
in experience, which means that all learning
can be seen as relearning. This is particularly
true for adults who have such a large reservoir
of experience. Therefore, discussion, case
studies and simulations should be included
in the instruction of adults.
4. Learning is related to one’s developmental
tasks and life situations create a need to
know. Therefore, adult educators need to
anticipate and understand adults’ life situa-
tions and readiness for learning.
5. Adults learn best when information is
presented in real-life context. Experiential
learning approaches have the dual benefit of
appealing to the adult learner’s experience
base as well as increasing the likelihood of
performance change after training.
6. Adults are more motivated by internal moti-
vators than external motivators. Instructors
should help arrange learning that will help
adults with a problem or issue that is impor-
tant in their life. (pp. 183-203)
Obviously the andragogical online teaching
model goes beyond the conventional online teach-
ing model guided by behaviorism. Not only do
instructors assume different roles and responsibili-
ties, but also adult learners are heavily involved in
the planning process of learning. Learners are able
to negotiate with their instructors at the beginning
of each semester their course contents, course as-
signments and grading procedures etc. Learning is
geared to meeting the needs and interests of adult
learners. All instructional approaches are geared
to helping learners achieve self-actualization.
Novel instructional approaches such as assigning
students a learning contract is not only doable, but
also effective. The andragogical online teaching
model has not emerged in a vacuum. Rather, it
revolves around the andragogical model popular-
ized by Knowles in the early 1970s.
Depending on who to teach and what to teach
online, the conventional teaching model guided
by behaviorism can prove to be effective in many
ways. When it comes to helping adults learn online,
it is more advisable for instructors to utilize the
andragogical online teaching model because this
model is all about releasing the energy of adults
(Knowles, Holton, & Swanson, 1998, 2005) so
that they could achieve a full development of
their individual potentiality. Again, this is not
to say the andragogical model is superior to the
pedagogical model or the pedagogical model is
inferior to the andragogical model. Rather, use a
model in virtual learning environment that can
help maximize learning. The more differences we
know about these two models, the better decision
we can make in terms of which model to adopt
and adapt in either the traditional classroom or the
virtual learning environments. Both models have
been in existence for their own particular reasons
and they are both derived from both pedagogical
and andragogical assumptions of learning. The
dialectical relationship between the two models
does help educators of children and adults make
a sound decision as to which model to employ in
order to teach children or help adult learners learn
to maximize learning outcomes. The next section
of this chapter leads our readers to future trends
regarding this important topic on conventional
online teaching versus andragogical online teach-
ing in the 21st century as both methods are driven
two distinctively different philosophies.
77
 Conventional Online Teaching vs. Andragogical Online Teaching
FUTURE TRENDS
Scholarly endeavors of comparing and contrasting
behaviorism and humanism will continue far into
the 21st century simply because educators never
agree which philosophy works better with mature
learners. Up to this point, we do know for sure that
behaviorism drives conventional online teaching
whereas humanism drives andragogical online
teaching. Because of these two philosophies, in-
structors may design distinctively different online
courses. There are situations where humanism
takes absolute precedence over behaviorism in
terms of helpings adult learners learn. However,
behaviorism has contributed especially to “pro-
grammed instruction” in the virtual environments.
No one is to argue that the two pedagogical as-
sumptions and andragogical assumptions have
worked hand in hand to serve the learning needs
of both children and adult learners. Depending on
different learning situations, one may be superior
to the other and vice versa. This chapter is not to
present ideas and concepts that have contradicted
one another. Rather, it has presented a dialectical
relationship between pedagogical principles and
andragogical principles so that educators will de-
sign and deliver their online courses accordingly.
Another trend may be scholars will continue
to address why self-directed learning is derived
from humanism, not from behaviorism. Such an
endeavor will shed more light on the differences
between behaviorism and humanism.
Given the magnitude of online teaching and
learning and the wide use of pedagogical online
teaching and andragogical online teaching, it is
possible that we may produce some giant schol-
ars such as Knowles, Rogers and John Watson
and B. F. Skinner in the field of adult education
in the 21st century who may be able to generate
more applicable theories similar to behaviorism
and humanism.
It is assumed that university administrators may
engage in studying pedagogical and andragogicl
principles in the near future as so many wrong
78
decisions have been made regarding how to best
help learners learn via online environments. These
principles will equip these administrators with
necessary skills, knowledge and attitudes to make
sound decisions in order to deliver the best pos-
sible online courses to maximize learning on the
part of learners. Otherwise, faculty will complain
about poor leadership and students will complain
about not making their money’s worth.
CONCLUSION
Hase and Ellis (2001) indicated that learning how
to provide courses by distance education was
assisted by pioneers such as Knowles (1970).
Since then, instruction using study guides and
books of readings became the norm for distance
education learners. When online teaching/learning
occurred in the 21st century, this kind of instruction
was moved onto computer screens. Instructional
design for online teaching has been guided by
behaviorism, that is, instructors must prescribe
learning objectives, the whole teaching process
is characterized with teacher-centeredness and
students’ learning outcomes must be measurable
and observable. As leaders in adult education try
to popularize principles of andragogy (the art
and science of helping adults learn), especially
one of the principles such as self-directed learn-
ing, instructional design seemed to have made
the switch from behaviorism to humanism in
order to develop the potential for adult learning
(Hase & Ellis, 2001). More recently, new terms
have emerged in the field of distance education.
For example, learning/teaching anywhere, any-
time, flexible delivery, distributed learning have
become popular in the field. It is not surprising
that some online universities in the United States
are grounded in principles of adult learning. For
example, the mission statement and vision of this
university reflect principles of adult learning. Our
Mission: Northcentral University uses distance
learning methodologies to provide adult learn-
Conventional Online Teaching vs. Andragogical Online Teaching
ers throughout the world with opportunities to
earn bachelor’s, master’s and doctoral degrees in
recognized academic programs to enable them to
acquire the competencies and to apply the knowl-
edge and skills needed to participate and function
effectively in modern society. Vision: Northcentral
University is committed to being a premier higher
education distance learning institution. This end is
achieved through an uncompromising passion for
excellence in providing educational opportunities
for adult Learners that fosters integrity, critical
thinking, professional knowledge, a global view,
and leadership for a changing world.
Since adult learners are the center of this uni-
versity’s education, no traditional age students
are admitted into this university. To keep its
educational promises to adult learners, its online
instructional methods must reflect andragogical
assumptions of learning. Are their online courses
in Northcentral University that are driven by be-
haviorism or conventional online teaching? The
answer is a yes.
Although scholars and practitioners talk about
andragogical approaches to teaching online, it is
really hard to establish a learner-focused approach
to learning. In other words, most instructors still
cannot go beyond the conventional online teaching
model guided by behaviorism characterized with
measurable and observable learning outcomes.
Instructors depend heavily on Bloom’s Taxonomy
of Educational Objectives to delineate the learn-
ing process (Wang & Farmer, 2008). Researchers
found that most distance education programs were
highly teacher-directed, dominated by pedagogi-
cal rather than andragogical approaches (Hase &
Ellis, 2001, p. 28). Nowadays researchers seem
to emphasize the importance of using social
constructivism and interactive learning environ-
ments to increase the control of the learner over
learning. If researchers admit that learning is an
internal process and self-directed learning is the
goal of adult learning, then the development of
self-actualizing individuals cannot be measured
or observed. The ultimate goal in learning should
increase learners’ control over their own learning.
How can instructors do this since they are separated
from their learners in the online learning environ-
ment? Andragogical online teaching model offers
a viable option for today’s instructors.
For example, instructors can use this model
to increase learners’ internal motivation through
self-directedness. As Shuttler and Burdick (2006,
p. 173) indicated that learning is difficult to gauge
from the results of a rote quantitative examination:
this practice is seemly better suited to assessing
memorization. They advocated that course and
programmatic curriculum should include highly
participative and engaging activities and assess-
ments that assist the faculty member in facilitat-
ing active learning practices. In the conventional
online teaching model, an instructor assumes
the role of an unchallengeable figure. As online
education is evolving quickly in the 21st century,
the teacher moves from an acting authority figure
to become… the guide, the pointer-out, who also
participates in learning in proportion to the vitality
and relevance of his[or her] facts and experiences
(as cited in Mezirow, 1991).
This chapter has sought to compare and contrast
conventional online teaching and andragogical
online teaching. It is not the author’s intent to claim
that andragogical online teaching is superior to
conventional online teaching. Conventional online
teaching guided by behaviorism and Bloom’s
Taxonomy of Educational Objectives is still
useful in many online teaching situations. Since
much of online learning involves adult students,
many scholars and researchers suggested that
online teachers use a more asynchronous and self-
directed learning approach to meet adult students’
needs and interests (Berge, 2007). Naturally, the
andragogical online teaching model has emerged
as a more powerful tool in addressing the learning
needs of adults in the 21st century. This model
itself requires that online teachers go beyond
the conventional online teaching model which is
guided by behaviorist philosophy.
79
 Conventional Online Teaching vs. Andragogical Online Teaching
REFERENCES
Baumgartner, L. (2008). Andragogy: An intro-
duction and implications for curriculum and
instruction . In Wang, V. C. X. (Ed.), Strategic
approaches towards curriculum development
for adult learners in the global community (pp.
34–57). Malabar, FL: Krieger.
Berge, Z. L. (2007). Motivate and manage: Key
activities of online instructors . In Spector, J. M.
(Ed.), Finding your online voice: Stories told by
experienced online educators (pp. 73–77). Lon-
don: Routledge.
Bloom, B. S. (Ed.). (1956). Taxonomy of educa-
tional objectives. London: Longman.
Brown, G. (2006). New perspectives on instruc-
tional effectiveness through distance education .
In King, K. P., & Griggs, J. K. (Eds.), Harnessing
innovative technology in higher education: Ac-
cess, equity, policy, & instruction (pp. 97–109).
Madison, WI: Atwood.
Dewald, N. H. (2003). Pedagogy and andragogy
. In Dupuis, E. A. (Ed.), Developing web-based
instruction: Planning, designing, managing, and
evaluating for results (pp. 47–68). New York:
Neal-Schuman Publishers, Inc.
Elias, J. L., & Merriam, S. B. (1995). Philosophical
foundations of adult education. Malabar. Florida:
Krieger Publishing Company.
Elias, J. L., & Merriam, S. B. (2005). Philosophical
foundations of adult education (3rd ed.). Malabar.
Florida: Krieger Publishing Company.
Grow, G. O. (1991). Teaching learners to be
self-directed. Adult Education Quarterly, 41(3),
125–149. doi:10.1177/0001848191041003001
Hase, S., & Ellis, A. (2001). Problems with online
learning are systemic, not technical . In Stephen-
son, J. (Ed.), Teaching & learning online: New
pedagogies for new technologies (pp. 27–30).
London: Routledge.
80
Havenstein, H. (2007, July 9). Social networks
becoming ingrained in daily adult life. PC World.
Retrieved from http://www.pcworld.com/article/
id,134277/article.html?tk=nl_wbxnws
Jonassen, D. H. (1991). Objectivism versus
constructivism: Do we need a new philosophy
paradigm? Educational Technology Research
and Development, 39(3), 5–14. doi:10.1007/
BF02296434
King, K. P. (2009). Teachers of adults in the global
community . In Wang, V. C. X. (Ed.), Strategic
approaches towards curriculum development
for adult learners in the global community (pp.
91–119). Malabar, FL: Krieger.
King, K. P., & Gura, M. (2007). Podcasting for
Teachers: Using a new technology to revolutionize
teaching and learning. Charlotte, NC: Information
Age Publishing.
Knowles, M. S. (1975). Self-directed learning:
A guide for learners and teachers. New York:
Association Press.
Knowles, M. S. (1989). The making of an adult
educator. An autobiographical journey. San
Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Knowles, M. S. (1995). Designs for adult learning.
Alexandria, VA: American Society for Training
and Development.
Knowles, M. S., Holton, E., & Swanson, A. (1998).
The adult learner. Houston, TX: Gulf Publishing
Company.
Knowles, M. S., Holton, E., & Swanson, A. (2005).
The adult learner (6th ed.). Boston, MA: Elsevier
Butterworth Heinemann.
Lee, K. (2010). Philosopher or philistine? In
Wang, V. C. X. (Ed.), Assessing and evaluating
adult learning in career and technical education
(pp. 27–52). Hangzhou, China and Hershey, PA:
Zhejiang University Press & Information Science
Reference.
Conventional Online Teaching vs. Andragogical Online Teaching
Mezirow, J. (1991). Transformative dimensions
of adult learning. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualita-
tive data analysis: A sourcebook of new methods
(2nd ed.). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
Nuckles, C. R. (2000). Student-centered teach-
ing: Making it work. Adult Learning, 11(4), 5–6.
Patton, M. Q. (2002). Qualitative research &
evaluation methods (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks:
Sage Publications.
Rogers, C. R. (1951). Client-centered therapy.
Boston: Houghton-Mifflin.
Shuttler, R., & Burdick, J. (2006). Creating a
unified system of assessment . In Hricko, M.,
& Howell, S. L. (Eds.), Online assessment and
measurement: Foundations and challenges (pp.
165–173). PA: Idea Group Inc.
Skinner, B. F. (1968). The technology of teaching.
New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts.
Wang, V. (2005). Perceptions of Teaching Prefer-
ences of Online Instructors. Journal on Excellence
in College Teaching, 16(3), 33–54.
Wang, V. C. X. (2007). How contextually adapted
philosophies and the situational role of adult
educators affect learners’ transformation and
emancipation . In King, K. P., & Wang, V. C. X.
(Eds.), Comparative adult education around the
globe: International portraits and readings of
the history, practice philosophy, and theories of
adult learning (pp. 139–150). Hangzhou, China:
Zhejiang University Press.
Wang, V. C. X., & Farmer, L. (2008). Adult learning
methods in China and Bloom’s taxonomy. Inter-
national Journal for the Scholarship of Teaching
and Learning, 2(2), 1–15.
KEY TERMS AND DEFINITIONS
Adult Learning: It refers to the education
and training of mature learners. It focuses more
on the self-directed learning process. It is driven
by the concept of andragogy and humanism or
constructivism.
Andragogical: This term is the adjective form
of the noun andragogy.
Andragogy: A term first coined by Alexander
Kapp in 1833 in Germany and brought to North
America by a Yugoslavian scholar. In the 1970s,
the concept of andragogy was popularized by
the father of adult education, Malcolm Knowles.
The term is simply defined by Knowles as the
art and science of helping adults learn. Note here
Knowles emphasized strongly the word “help”
to indicate that educators can not teach adults
directly. Educators must facilitate adult learning.
In the 21st century, the concept of andragogy has
been applied to online teaching and learning and
some other fields of study as well.
Behaviorism: It stands for behaviorist teach-
ing philosophy. First invented by John Watson in
the 1920s and further advanced by B. F. Skinner
in the 1960s. Translated into online teaching and
learning, it represents “programmed instruction”
which was first introduced in the 1960s. In the 21st
century, programmed instruction is still useful for
the virtual learning environments, but it must be
supplemented and complemented by andragogical
teaching methods when it comes to helping adult
learners learn in the online learning environments.
Constructivism: It places its emphasis on the
internal process of the learner’s mind. Constructiv-
ist instructors have the notion that instructional
objectives are not to be imposed on the learner
but negotiated with the learner, and evaluation is
more of a self-analysis tool. This philosophy is
more akin to humanism.
81
 Conventional Online Teaching vs. Andragogical Online Teaching
Humanism: First advanced by educators and
philosophers such as Confucius 2,500 years ago
in China. Later, it was supported by giant scholars
such as Abraham Maslow who emphasized self-
actualization is the highest level of his hierarchy
of human needs. In adult education, it places
emphasis on personal growth, self-direction in the
learning process, individual potentiality and self
actualization by using facilitation, self-direction
and teamwork. When applied to the virtual learn-
ing environments, it is all about andragogical
teaching methods.
Instructional Design: It refers to the practice
of maximizing the effectiveness, efficiency and
82
appeal of instruction and other learning experi-
ences. The process consists broadly of determining
the current state and needs of the learner, defining
the end goal of instruction, and creating some
“intervention” to assist in the transition.
Pedagogical: This term is the adjective form
of the noun pedagogy.
Taxonomy: It refers to the science or tech-
nique of classification. In this chapter, it refers to
Bloom’s taxonomy which includes six levels: 1,
Knowledge; 2, Comprehension; 3, Application;
4, Analysis; 5, Synthesis; and 6, Evaluation.
 83

Chapter 6
Towards a Theory of Learned
Technological Helplessness
Joy E. Harris
University of Missouri - Kansas City, USA

ABSTRACT
This research attempts to lay the groundwork for the establishment of a proposed theory of Learned
Technological Helplessness (LTH) in female adult learners. The theory posits that females’ technologi-
cal ability and technological self-efficacy (TSE) are impacted by socialization into traditional gender
roles. Analysis of the intercorrelations between the individual’s gendered characteristics (as measured
by the Bem Sex Role Inventory or BSRI) and the participant’s computer self-efficacy (as measured by
the General Computer Self-Efficacy score) indicates that several masculine characteristics are statisti-
cally significant predictors of TSE. The qualitative results demonstrate that women consider men to be
more adept at using technology. This feminist emancipatory study provides useful information to adult
educators interested in how females perceive their technological ability and capacity to learn using
technology, and provides the groundwork for other researchers interested in exploring LTH.

INTRODUCTION complete certain science, technology, engineer-

It is well documented that the United States has
not been able to keep its technological edge by
relying on the products of its own educational
system (National Center for Education Statistics,
1997; National Science Foundation, 2006; Sci-
ence, Technology, and Global Competitiveness,
2005). The issue is compounded for females, who
DOI: 10.4018/978-1-61692-906-0.ch006
ing, and mathematics (STEM) degrees at rates
significantly lower than their male counterparts.
According to the National Science Foundation
(2008), although women earned more than half
of all science and engineering degrees in 2006,
they earned only 28% of the degrees in computer
science, and 26% of the degrees in engineering
and physics. One way that the U.S. could begin to
rectify this imbalance in specific STEM subject
areas is to start orienting females to embrace tech-
 Towards a Theory of Learned Technological Helplessness
nology from an early age and continue promoting
the value of embracing technology throughout
their entire formal educations.
Encouraging females to embrace technology
would not only help to reduce the deficit in the
U.S. technology sector, it would also be a start in
reducing the ongoing pay disparity between men
and women, as women moved into the relatively
high paying field of information technology (IT);
but perhaps even more important than relying
on American workers to fill American jobs and
creating pay equity for women, encouraging
women to embrace technology will improve their
success and productivity in virtually all areas of
their daily lives as it necessitates that they become
more autodidactic. In order to move more women
from a state of technological dependency to one
where they are self-taught, it is important to first
understand what factors impact women’s ability
to use technology as a tool for problem-solving
and personal productivity.
The primary problem facing female adult learn-
ers in the digital age is that current social structures
are maintaining the status quo of helping to keep
them ignorant of technology (Rosser, 2006). Some
feminist scholars believe that “technology and so-
ciety are bound together inextricably” (Wajcman,
2006, p. 83) and that it is almost “impossible to
imagine a woman-centered perspective in the ab-
sence of patriarchy” (Rosser, p. 31). Others claim
“women who enter and remain in IT do so under
extremely trying circumstances, which are almost
entirely cultural” (Ramsey & McCorduck, 2005,
p. 1). If these scholars are correct, then it could
help explain why many women are experiencing
learned helplessness (LH) when using technology.
Past studies on gender and technology have fo-
cused on workforce dynamics and not on women as
users of technology (Rosser, 2005). This research
helps fill this void in the literature, as it examines
the correlation between socialization and learned
helplessness in female adult learners as they inter-
act with technology. The purpose of the research
is to lay the groundwork for a proposed theory of
84
learned technological helplessness (LTH), which
posits that technological ability and technological
self-efficacy (TSE) are impacted by socialization
into traditional gender roles. The research find-
ings are presented and suggestions are made for
adult educators who wish to help female learners
become more self-actualized users of technology.
BACKGROUND
It is a widely held belief among 21stcentury edu-
cators that all persons above the age of three need
technology skills, as evidenced by the National
Educational Technology Standards. These national
standards outline what children should know and
be able to do with technology at all ages. Follow-
ing is a list of the technology standards for Pre-K
through 2nd grade:
1. Illustrate and communicate original ideas
and stories using digital tools and media-rich
resources
2. Identify, research, and collect data on an
environmental issue using digital resources
and propose a developmentally appropriate
solution
3. Engage in learning activities with learners
from multiple cultures through e-mail and
other electronic means
4. In a collaborative work group, use a variety
of technologies to produce a digital presenta-
tion or product in a curriculum area
5. Find and evaluate information related to a
current or historical person or event using
digital resources
6. Use simulations and graphical organizers to
explore and depict patterns of growth such
as the life cycles of plants and animals
7. Demonstrate safe and cooperative use of
technology
8. Independently apply digital tools and re-
sources to address a variety of tasks and
problems
Towards a Theory of Learned Technological Helplessness
9. Communicate about technology using
developmentally appropriate and accurate
terminology
10. Demonstrate the ability to navigate in virtual
environments such as electronic books, simu-
lation software, and Web sites (International
Society for Technology in Education, 2009,
p. 2)
Clearly, if culture has evolved to the point
where even four- to eight-year-old children need
technology skills of this caliber, then there is a
need to bring adults’ skills to a higher level, but
not simply for the sake of creating a society that
is infused with technology; rather, adults need
technology skills in order to function as part of
a society that can solve increasingly complex
problems through technological literacy (Eisen-
berg, 2005).
We live in a time where information genera-
tion and storage are expressed with increasingly
larger exponents. According to Educause (2007),
the amount of unique, new information generated
worldwide in 2007was more than in the previous
5000 years, and a projection from Swanson and
Gilder (2008) indicates that this trend of exponen-
tial information growth will continue:
From YouTube, IPTV, and high-definition
images, to ‘cloud computing’ and ubiquitous
mobile cameras—to 3D games, virtual worlds,
and photorealistic telepresence—the new wave
is swelling into an exaflood of Internet and IP
traffic. An exabyte is 10 to the 18th.We estimate
that by 2015, U.S. IP traffic could reach an annual
total of one zettabyte (1021 bytes), or one million
million billion bytes. (p. 1)
Because technology has moved into the fore
of daily life with computers, cell phones, GPS,
DVRs, MP3 players, and a multitude of other high
tech devices, those who do not have a high level
of technological literacy will suffer a competi-
tive disadvantage, as employers pass them over
for digital natives or other more technologically
competent workers. This is particularly true for
women who are still clustered into traditionally
female-dominated, low-tech positions, such as
clerks and entry level healthcare workers (Zorn,
2006), positions that are sometimes referred to as
the pink-collar ghetto (Ehrenreich, 2001).
According to Kaslow (1989), many females
have been socialized to be generally helpless.
Generations of separate spheres have not provided
many women with the skills they need to utilize
technology effectively, and socialization into tradi-
tional gender roles has encouraged a large number
of women to accept a lack of TSE as normal. A
low level of TSE can lead to a phenomenon that
I refer to as learned technological helplessness,
wherein an individual fails at using technology, and
then, based on these failures, comes to believe that
future attempts at using technology will also fail.
Learned Helplessness
In order to begin establishing a theory of Learned
Technological Helplessness as it relates to U.S.
female adult learners, this research builds off the
existing theory of learned helplessness, which in
its simplest terms is a “statement of the effects
of uncontrollability on behavior” (Garber &
Seligman, 1980, p. xv).The construct of learned
helplessness (LH) as it relates to control in humans
states, “When experiences with uncontrollable
events leads to the expectation that future events
will elude control, disruptions in motivations,
emotion, and learning may occur” (Peterson,
Maier, & Seligman, 1993, p. vii).
A major component of the LH theory is the
coping process. Mikulincer (1994) posits that
coping responses vary based on the amount of
failure; in small amounts, failure leads to improved
performance and in large amounts it leads to di-
minished performance. Similarly, LTH is thought
to be impacted by past failures using technology
and the larger the amount or severity of failure,
the more likely it is that LTH will occur.
While there has been some research conducted
on women who experience LH, the scope is rather
85
 Towards a Theory of Learned Technological Helplessness
limited. Psychologists who study LH in women
have primarily focused on LH as it pertains to
depression (Abramson, Edwards, Garber & Selig-
man, 1978; Garber & Seligman, 1980; Peterson,
Maier, & Seligman, 1993) or as it pertains to
spousal abuse (Walker, 1979; Wauchope, 1988).
Educational research has contributed to the exist-
ing body of knowledge by studying LH in academic
subjects, such as mathematics and physics, but
there is scant research on LH as it relates to task
completion. A logical extension of the existing
theory of LH is to explore the phenomenon as it
relates to completion of tasks that utilize technol-
ogy in an age where technology is ubiquitous.
TOWARDS A THEORY OF LEARNED
TECHNOLOGICAL HELPLESSNESS
Learned technological helplessness is built upon
the existing theory of learned helplessness. The
focus of LTH is on how women’s socialization
in a patriarchal society affects their abilities and
beliefs about their abilities to use technology ef-
fectively and how those beliefs ultimately affect
their learning as adults in a technology-driven
society.
Consistent with the stages identified in Peter-
son, Maier, and Seligman (1993), LTH manifests
itself as follows: (a) uncontrollable events when
using technology activate the coping process; (b)
the individual will evaluate appropriate coping
strategies; (c) if subsequent attempts at using
technology fail, the user will internalize the fail-
ure; and (d) future technology performance will
be negatively impacted. While LTH is consistent
with LH in the above aspects, there are two impor-
tant differences. First, LTH is based on perceived
control and is, therefore, about beliefs. Actions are
based on the learner’s beliefs and the anticipated
outcomes of actions taken. In contrast, according
to Peterson et al., ‘complete cases’ of LH must
contain three specific components: Contingency,
cognition, and behavior.
86
Contingency refers to the objective relationship
between the person’s actions and the outcomes
that he experiences. The most important contin-
gency here is uncontrollability: a random relation
between a person’s actions and the outcomes that
he experiences.
Cognition refers to the way in which the
person perceives, explains, and extrapolates the
contingency.
Behavior refers to the observable consequences
of (non)contingency and the person’s cognitions
about it. Most typically helpless studies measure
someone’s passivity versus activity in a situation
different from the one in which uncontrollability
was first encountered. (p. 8)
The first difference, then, between LH and LTH
is that in the former, contingency is controlled
and/or measured in some way, usually by the re-
searcher, while LTH does not require an objective
relationship between the person’s action and the
outcome; rather, it is sufficient that the individual
believes that the results are uncontrollable. If
the learner believes that she (Since this research
concerns itself exclusively with female learners,
the feminine pronoun is used throughout.) has
no control over an outcome, her actions and the
end result are the same as if no control existed.
The second difference is that LTH can mani-
fest itself as vicarious helplessness. According to
Brown and Inouye (1978), vicarious helplessness
“is most likely to occur when observers witness
a model whom they perceive to be of similar
competence consistently fail at a task despite high
expenditure of effort” (p. 900). American women
of previous generations were not socialized to be
good at technology; that was men’s work, so there
remains a severe lack of female technology role
models (Gallagher & Pearson, 2000). Cisco Sys-
tems, Inc., a multinational technology corporation,
views the lack of female role models in technol-
ogy as problematic and has created the Gender
Initiative project to address the disparity. “Women
are often excluded from the career opportunities
offered by IT. Without targeted recruitment and
Towards a Theory of Learned Technological Helplessness
training, women will continue to be left behind”
(Cisco Systems, 2009, para. 1). Cisco’s focus is
specifically on a lack of women in the IT field,
but there remains a lack of tech-savvy female role
models in American society in general. Current
technology innovators and role models include
Bill Gates(Microsoft), Steve Jobs(Apple), Larry
Page and Sergey Brin(Google). While many of
these male technology innovators are household
names, few Americans could cite even one woman
technology innovator.
The Problem
For the last 13 years, I have taught adults how to
use technology as a learning and productivity tool
in both the corporate and higher education sectors,
and I have observed a trend wherein otherwise
intelligent, competent women learners exhibit a
disbelief in their ability to attain proficiency in
using technology at an alarmingly high rate as
compared to their male peers. In working and
conversing with these women, I have come to
understand that for many of them, past failures
when using computers or other technology have
led them to believe that future attempts at using
technology will also fail; as a result, they simply
stop trying. This research study was undertaken
in an attempt to understand this phenomenon and
begin building a theory of learned technological
helplessness, using the existing theory of learned
helplessness as a foundation.
This research was conducted primarily through
quantitative methodologies but qualitative
strategies were also incorporated to further
examine the phenomenon. The goal was to employ
quantitative methodology to explore what correla-
tions, if any, existed between the variables; the
goals of the qualitative methods were to a) offer
women an opportunity to voice their experiences
with technology and b) explore the extent to which
the qualitative findings converged with or diverged
from the quantitative results.
Hypotheses
The hypotheses for the research were as follows:
1. There is a relationship between age and
women’s technological self-efficacy that is
completely mediated by socialization into
traditional female roles.
2. There is a relationship between teacher mod-
eling of technology usage and technological
self-efficacy that is partially mediated by
socialization into traditional female roles.
3. There is a correlation between women’s past
failures using technology and their beliefs
about technological self-efficacy.
Hypotheses one and two are shown as the
Model of Learned Technological Helplessness
(Figure 1).
Assumptions
There were several assumptions that I made as I
undertook this research:
1. The construct of LTH would be more
prevalent in women who are socialized into
traditionally female roles than in those who
are not.
2. The attitudes, beliefs, and choices surround-
ing technology exhibited by role models will
transfer, at least partially, to female learners’
attitudes, beliefs, and choices surrounding
technology.
3. Socialization varies by age, and older women
are more likely than younger women to ex-
hibit behaviors consistent with the construct
of LTH.
Methods
Quantitative data were used to measure the rela-
tionship between the variables. Concurrently, the
same constructs were explored using interviews
87
 Towards a Theory of Learned Technological Helplessness
Figure 1. The learned technological helplessness
model (Note: TSE = Technological self-efficacy)
with female college students at two campuses of
a Midwestern public university. The reason for
employing qualitative techniques along with col-
lecting quantitative data is to bring together the
strengths of both forms of research and integrate
the results from two different perspectives.
Sample Size. A path analysis was conducted
on the dependent variable of technological self-
efficacy (TSE) and the independent variables of
age, teacher modeling, and socialization. (Only
the correlation between TSE and socialization is
discussed at length, as no statistically significant
correlations between TSE and age or between
TSE and teacher modeling was found.) Based
on the recommendation by Kline (2004), it was
determined that 10-20 individuals would be needed
for each of the 8 free parameters or a minimum of
80-160 participants. The final sample size, after
eliminating those with missing data, was n=236.
Additionally, in-depth interviews were conducted
with three participants.
Sampling Technique. Participants (n=236)
were a convenience sample of women in the
education buildings of two separate campuses of
a public, Midwestern research institution, which
are geographically located several hours apart. The
research was an inquiry into (a) participants’ past
and current behaviors when utilizing technology
as a learning and productivity tool and beliefs
surrounding such usage, (b) participants’ affective
traits, and (c) teacher modeling of technology.
88
Demographics were collected to see if there
were any correlations between age and TSE. The
demographics of the participants are as follows:
172 (72.9%) Caucasian/White; 43 (18.2%) Afri-
can-American/Black; 5 (2.1%) Hispanic/Latino;
10 (4.2%) Asian/Pacific Islander; and Other 5
(2.1%); 1 Missing (0.4%). The distribution for
the total years of formal education is as follows:
55 (23.3%) High School/GED; 52 (22.0%) AA/
AS; 69 (29.2%) BA/BS; 43 (18.2%) MA/MS; 11
(4.7%) Professional Degree; and 6 (2.5%) Ph.D.
All participants in the quantitative portion of the
study were asked to complete an instrument that
allowed them to self-identify for possible partici-
pation in the qualitative portion of the study. The
instruments were administered over several days
between approximately 11:00 a.m. – 1:00 p.m. or
between 4:00 p.m. – 6:00 p.m. The reason for this
time of day was that the time slots are near meal
times and small edible incentives were offered,
such as chocolate, granola bars, chips, and fruit.
For the qualitative portion of the study, par-
ticipants (n=3) were purposefully selected from
those participants who asked to be included in
the pool and who reported beliefs that they have
low TSE. In order to be considered as having
low TSE, at least 4 of 7 of their answers on the
Beliefs and Self-Selection Instrument would have
to be answered in the affirmative. This method
was chosen because it would not benefit the re-
search to interview participants who reported high
levels of TSE when trying to determine possible
explanations for low TSE. Interview participants
were compensated twenty dollars ($20.00) for an
interview that lasted approximately 1 hour.
Instruments. Socialization into traditional gen-
der roles was measured using the Bem Sex Role
Inventory (BSRI). This BSRI has been used for
over 30 years as a standard for measuring femi-
ninity, masculinity, and undifferentiated sex roles
and is the best suited instrument for measuring
socialization of women into traditional gender
roles. The current marketers of the instrument
indicate that it “provides independent assessments
Towards a Theory of Learned Technological Helplessness
of masculinity and femininity in terms of the
respondent’s self-reported possession of socially
desirable, stereotypically masculine and feminine
personality characteristics” (Bem, 2009, para.
1).There is good evidence of test-retest reliability
with 28 males and 28 females over a four week
period with the following values: Masculinity r =
.90; Femininity r = .90; Androgyny r = .93 (Holt
& Ellis, 1998).
There has been much debate over the construct
validity of BEMS scores (Brems and Johnson,
1990; Choi& Fuqua 2003; Hegelson, 1994;
Street, Kimmel &Komrey, 1995), and it may be
time to measure the constructs of femininity and
masculinity in different ways. However, I am not
aware of any instrument with greater evidence of
the validity of its scores.
Technological self-efficacy (TSE) was mea-
sured using a General Computer Self-efficacy
(GCSE) instrument from Compeau and Higgins
(1995). Compeau and Higgins indicate that their
instrument has a high level of internal consistency;
the internal consistency coefficient (Cronbach’s
alpha) = .95. Evidence has been offered for cri-
terion validity, such as the instrument relating
negatively to users’ anxiety, positively to users
affect, and positively to outcome expectations
and performance.
Interviews. In order to add to the body of
knowledge in the adult education literature, it
is not sufficient simply to know the percentages
of adult female learners whose TSE is affected
by the independent variable of socialization
into traditional gender roles, it is also important
to know how and why TSE is affected. To that
end, three participants from a pool of those who
self-identified as having beliefs and exhibiting
behaviors consistent with the proposed construct
of LTH were interviewed. The researcher acknowl-
edges that this is a small n and does not suggest
that these results are generalizable, only that the
results are intriguing and warrant further research
into the proposed construct.
The interviews were semi-structured. Ex-
amples of questions that were asked include the
following:
• When you think of technology, what kinds
of things come to mind?
• How do you use technology?
• How do you think you compare to others in
terms of technological ability?
The purpose of these types of questions was
two-fold. First, the goal was to learn what women
believe about technology and their ability to use
technology as a learning tool and second, to deter-
mine to what extent the qualitative data converged
with (or diverged from) the quantitative data.
Analyses. The analyses of the study were con-
ducted in two phases. The first phase consisted
of a path analysis of the quantitative data. The
second phase of the analysis consisted of coding
transcribed interviews for emergent themes.
Path analysis allowed simultaneous calculation
and modeling of the relationships between the
constructs. Path analysis answered the following
questions: “How are the variables related to one
another?” “Does mediation occur?” “If mediation
occurs, are there significant indirect effects?”
The advantages of path analysis over multiple
regression are three-fold. First, path analysis al-
lows for simultaneous testing of the variables
rather than consecutive testing. Second, it is a
visual representation of the model. Third, it allows
for possible exploration of alternative models. The
disadvantages of path analysis are that it assumes
perfect validity of the measure, and the model fit
is only good for this particular sample so caution
must be exercised when generalizing.
The qualitative portion of the research relied
heavily on phenomenology, which concerns itself
with “studying everyday experience from the point
of view of the subject” (Schwandt, 2001, p. 192).
In order to analyze the interviews, they were tran-
scribed and coded, looking for emergent themes
using an a posteriori, inductive scheme, which is
89
 Towards a Theory of Learned Technological Helplessness

Table 1. Correlation of gendered traits to techno-

context specific. The data was coded inductively
logical self-efficacy
line-by-line, paying special attention to keywords
that express emotions about the use of the technol- Trait r Gender
ogy or the technology itself. A spreadsheet was Willing to Take Risks 0.274* M
created that listed each theme and the number of Define Own Beliefs 0.082 M
times that the themes occurred in each interview. Independent 0.193* M
After the interviews were coded, member-
Assertive 0.236* M
checking was employed. This is another form of
Strong Personality 0.190** M
triangulation that lends validity to the interview
Forceful 0.222** M
process and helps to ensure that interview bias is
Have Leadership Abilities 0.225** M
diminished to the extent possible.
Dominant 0.247** M
Willing to Take a Stand 0.177** M
Quantitative Results
Aggressive 0.246** M
Affectionate 0.117 F
The intercorrelations between the individual
BSRI characteristics and the participants’ GCSE Sympathetic 0.006 F

scores indicate that nine traits typically associ- Sensitive 0.070 F

ated with masculinity are statistically significant Understanding .166* F

indicators of TSE as shown in Table 1. Risk taking Compassionate 0.078 F

is a significant (alpha level = .05) predictor of
TSE at .274 and Dominant is significant at .247.
Seven other characteristics typically associated
with masculinity are also statistically significant
predictors of TSE: Aggressive, .246; Assertive,
.236; Have Leadership Abilities, .225; Forceful,
.222; Independent, .193; Strong Personality, .190;
Willing To Take A Stand, .177.Only one feminine
trait, Warm, was a statistically significant predictor
of TSE at .198. It is important to remember that
while the strengths are medium to small, this is
not synonymous with ‘bad’ or insignificant.
These results suggest that that while having
feminine traits is not a deficit to TSE, having
masculine traits is an asset to TSE. In other words,
women socialized to be more feminine are not
necessarily worse at using technology but wom-
en socialized to have traits historically considered
more masculine are better at using technology.
These are important findings not only for adult
educators but also for educators and parents of
children because socialization is a lifelong process.
The model that was used predicted that (a)
there is a relationship between teacher modeling
of technology usage and TSE that is partially
Eager to Soothe Hurt Feelings .021 F
Warm .198** F
Tender .100 F
Love Children -.040 F
Gentle .113 F
Note: M = masculine characteristic, F = feminine characteristic.
* p<.05. ** p<.01.
mediated by socialization into traditional female
roles and (b) there is a relationship between age
and TSE that is fully mediated by socialization
into traditional female roles. None of the direct
or indirect paths tested in the model were found
to be significant. In addition, the model explains
approximately one percent of the variance in TSE.
The model fit indices suggested that the model
was a good fit for the data
(X2(2) = 508, p = .776, NFI = .937, RMSEA
90% confidence interval ranges from low = .000
to high = .085). The model supports the theory
that feminine characteristics (as measured by the
BSRI) do not predict TSE; this is consistent with
the proposed theory that males, or those socialized
to have more characteristics historically associ-

90
Towards a Theory of Learned Technological Helplessness
ated with males, will have higher TSE. Because
only feminine characteristics were used to define
socialization in the initial study, and that variable
was found to have only a negligible impact on
TSE, masculine characteristics should be added
to the construct of socialization for future studies.
Statistical significance is not enough for re-
search findings to be important. There must also
be practical significance and this is where the
qualitative results come into play. As detailed in
the following section, four key themes emerged
that support the practical significance of the
quantitative results listed above.
Qualitative Results
Three females over age 18 participated in the
interviews. The interview participants each have
different ethnicities, SES, and educations. At the
time of the interviews in 2008, Simone was a
23-year-old Caucasian from a blue-collar family.
She attended private school most of her life and
was a junior in college. Ann was a 24-year-old
Hispanic, from a white-collar family. She at-
tended public school all of her life and completed
an Associate’s degree. Desta was a 19-year-old
Ethiopian immigrant, from a wealthy family. She
attended public school all of her life and was a
university sophomore. (Real names are not used.)
Four key patterns emerged from the interviews
that are consistent with the proposed theory of
LTH:
1. All three interview participants reported
that they believed, based on their own ob-
servations and early personal experiences,
males and females are socialized to interact
differently with technology.
2. All participants reported that as adult females
they do interact with technology differently
than the men in their lives.
3. All three participants indicated a belief that
women, in general, are less confident than
men when using technology.
4. All three participants believed that the way
others teach—words, tone, body language,
and patience—impacts students’ feelings
about their self-efficacy.
Pattern 1—Women’s Socialization and its
Intersection with Technology Usage. A count of
socialization differences revealed that Simone
mentioned disparate treatment 23 times, while Ann
and Desta mentioned it 11 and 8 times, respectively.
Of her experiences with differentiated socializa-
tion, Simone says, “My dad showered my brother
with all types of technological games and systems
when he was growing up, and I didn’t really get
to touch any of that . . . and then his interest grew
with age.” Desta concurs. In talking about the
roles males and females play in her family, she
says, “For example, like mowing the grass, like
girls, they don’t do it, so I expect certain things
out of guys supposed to be doing1, so if I have a
computer problem, I expect them to help me out.”
Ann’s experiences were a little different than
that of the first two participants, as she has only
sisters and no first-hand experiences of disparate
treatment between the sexes at home, but Ann be-
lieves that in society at large there are differences
between the sexes, which manifest themselves in
older adults.
Ann: I think older men are better with technology
than older women.
Joy: Why do you think that is?
Ann: I really don’t know. I just think that; I don’t
know why I think that. I think that men just know
how to use technology better than older women.
Pattern2—Women’s Beliefs About how They
Compare to Others. Beliefs are central to the
proposed theory of LTH because beliefs are
often self-fulfilling. Each of the three interview
participants compared herself negatively to others
in terms of her ability to use technology effec-
91
 Towards a Theory of Learned Technological Helplessness
tively. One participant commented negatively on
her abilities 14 times, while another commented
negatively 9 times, and the third commented
negatively 2 times. What each participant had
in common was the belief that her ability to use
technology was inferior to that of her immediate
male family members. Interestingly, even when
the technological issues were in the traditional
female domain, males still took care of them.
Consider Ann’s remarks:
Joy: A lot of appliances, now days have remote
controls, washers and dryers that talk to each
other with USB interfaces, microwaves that are
programmable, anything that you might use on
a daily basis, cordless phones—
Ann: I can use those things, basically, but if there’s
anything that needs to be programmed, I leave
that up to my husband.
Desta also relied on male family members to
fix the technology for her:
I don’t know. I just feel like a guy might know
better in like technology. I don’t know, I always
think about that. They know more.
Simone had similar feelings about her inabil-
ity to correct problems that she might encounter,
whereas, her brother, she believed, would have
no such issues.
Simone: My brother is going to school for computer
engineering kind of stuff; he does it by himself.
He reads MIT archives for fun, physics books for
fun. Like he’s a nerd, and compared to him, I feel
like an ant in the world of technology.
Pattern 3—Women’s Confidence in Interacting
With Technology. Over the last 13 years, I have
noticed that many females make self-deprecating
remarks about their ability to use technology ef-
fectively, where as males rarely make these kinds
92
of comments. A count of the patterns showed that
two of the three participants rated their interactions
with technology negatively a total of nine times
each while the third participant rated her interac-
tions with technology negatively five times. The
participants considered their abilities inferior both
to males and other females. Consider Simone’s
remarks when asked about her internet connection:
Joy: Do you have DSL? How do you connect to
the Internet?
Simone: Umm, yea, DSL, my brother does all that.
He’s actually is kind of a Nazi about it; you can’t
eat by the keyboard. You have to have headphones
on at all times. We had a router, but we had a big
thunderstorm over the summer, and, I don’t know.
See, this is why I rated myself low. I don’t know
any technical terms.
Simone also said, “All my other girlfriends
always call their boyfriends for help.”
Ann also relied on others because she believed
that her skills were inferior, but in her case, the
others were all females:
Joy: Now you mentioned that classmates would
help you when you were in school. Were there
laboratories or other centers were you could go
and ask first?
Ann: Yes, there were.
Joy: Did you ever go to those?
Ann: No, I didn’t. If I had questions I had, I have
three sisters, two older and one younger, and all
of them know more about computers than me. So
if I ever had a question I could just ask any one of
them. So, I generally wouldn’t stay after school. I
would just have them help me at home or a friend
or something like that.
Towards a Theory of Learned Technological Helplessness
When asked why she thought her sisters were
both competent and confident in using technology
while she was not, Ann responded, “I slacked off
during the important years or um a couple, a couple
of the years where I was really should have been
learning how to use computers.”
Desta saw a clear delineation between the
sexes in terms of technology usage:
Joy: When you think about the other female mem-
bers of your family or your classmates, do you
see any difference between men and women’s use
of technology, generally speaking?
Desta: I see, yes, yes, the female, well I don’t
know about most of my friends, but like the female
members of my family, they have no clue about
computers or other technology like, or my mom,
like if she needed help how to figure things out on
the computer, you know, like she’d ask for help,
yea. But some of my friends know, they only use
computers for certain things or phones just call, so
like they don’t spend that much time actually, you
know, trying to figure out this technology thing.
Pattern4—Teaching with Technology. The
quantitative portion of the study found no cor-
relation between teacher modeling and females’
learned technological helplessness, but the women
who were interviewed offered some interesting
insights into how formal and informal teachers
appeared when using technology as a teaching
tool. Participants reported that teachers in formal
classrooms either (a) did not use technology at
all or (b) relied so heavily on it that they could
barely teach without it. Neither of these scenarios
indicates positive teacher modeling of technology.
Simone: Yes, I saw my first impressionable
PowerPoint my freshman year here, ‘cause I’m
a transfer student, and someone did one with
sounds and links to YouTube and I was like “I
didn’t even know you could do that.” I thought
that was pretty cool. I was like “Wow! I’m gonna
play around with that and see how that works.”
Desta, on the other hand, reported that her
teachers rely so heavily on PowerPoint that class
can barely go on in a coherent manner if the tech-
nology is not working correctly.
Desta: Yea, like my teachers, I don’t think they
could do lecture without a computer. Whenever
one time, here in this building, I had psychology
and the computer shut down on her and she had
to lecture by hand and she was not comfortable.
Ann rated her teachers as average, did not re-
ally speak to their modeling of technology, and
believed that because she “only took general
courses” that there “wouldn’t be much technology
in those courses anyway.”
In terms of informal learning, two of the
participants talked about their interactions with
informal teachers. Participants discussed how
teachers’ behaviors in informal settings affected
them. Non-classroom issues that participants
mentioned included being talked down to, body
language that indicated impatience, and others
doing for them rather than teaching them how to
do for themselves. Simone had this to say about
her brother, who has taught her much about
technology:
Simone: And he’ll call me an idiot and tell me
that I’m disrespecting technology because I don’t
understand how it works. But then he’ll begrudg-
ingly explain to me, in big long words, what’s
going on and how I can fix it.
Ann had this to say about the body language
of those in computer labs:
Ann: . . . if they’re like sighing or they seem like
they’re getting frustrated or their body language,
then I wouldn’t feel comfortable to keep asking
questions.
93
 Towards a Theory of Learned Technological Helplessness
Joy: So, you mentioned some specific things. Body
language would be a cue to you that someone
might not be patient. What kinds of things would
they have to do with their body to make you feel
comfortable?
Ann: Um, maybe instead of just coming over and
standing over me and looking down, like if they
would sit down with me, and I would feel like they
were taking the time out to sit with me and really
talk to me. . . . I just feel like I would have to have
a lot of one on one time to really feel comfortable.
Finally, on learning to be helpless, Ann has
this to say:
Ann: If I ever had a problem or a question with
something about technology, I would, I would ask
somebody and they would do it for me. I would just
let them do it for me, instead of actually learning
it myself, and when people continued to do that
over and over again over months and years, then
eventually I just started to depend on people doing
it for me instead of myself.
DISCUSSION OF RESULTS
The experiences of the interview subjects were
unique to their individual family structure and
SES but the trend was that the interviewed women
considered men, in general, more adept at using
technology. In particular, they all agreed that the
men in their lives were better at interacting with
technology than they were. The stories from two
of the three female participants indicate their belief
that males and females are socialized to interact
differently with technology. The third interview
participant stated that while growing up, her
sisters were better at using technology than she
was; now that that she is married, however, she
relies on her husband’s technological expertise
even when it comes to the household appliances
that she uses more than him. This third interview
94
participant has learned to be technologically help-
less but perhaps for reasons other than disparate
socialization.
The quantitative results in this initial study
demonstrate that having traditionally masculine
traits can predict higher technological self-
efficacy, which was expected in a society where
maleness has always been the norm and where
female traits have historically been considered
defective or incomplete. Conversely, having more
traditionally feminine traits is not a predictor of
less efficacious technology interaction. What these
correlations show is that those who take more risks,
are leaders, and are more assertive or aggressive
will be more likely to have higher TSE and more
actual success in using technology to learn and
solve problems. Since the aforementioned traits are
all typically associated with males, the hypothesis
that females’ technological ability and technologi-
cal self-efficacy are impacted by socialization into
traditional gender roles is strengthened.
In a world where “both children’s and parents’
intelligence estimates are biased in a gender-
stereotypical manner favoring boys’ (Steinmayr &
Spinath, 2009, pp. 743-44), the findings that those
with more masculine traits have higher technologi-
cal self-efficacy is not surprising, but it should be
duly noted and addressed by educators. For adult
educators, the first important step is talk with
students about how culture socializes males and
females differently and how these differences have
been shown empirically to impact self-efficacy
in multiple domains. Helping students to adopt
a you’ll-see-it-when-you-believe-it philosophy
takes the power of self-fulfilling prophecy and
turns it into a positive re-imaging process, wherein
students learn that if they first believe that certain
behaviors lead to success, then they will actually
see success in their endeavors.
This study is the first to investigate the phe-
nomenon of learned technological helplessness
and was limited to studying how it manifests itself
in women. Future studies will need to expand
Towards a Theory of Learned Technological Helplessness
this construct by adding males to the study for
comparative purposes.
PRESENT PERSPECTIVES
If women are ever to achieve technological parity
with men, fundamental changes need to take place
not only in our patriarchal institutions but also in
the ideologies and technologies that originated
from those institutions; only then will women
finally be in a position to make their experiences,
lives and needs the primary focus of daily life
in all environments (Rosser, 2005). Some states
have created task forces specifically designed to
address the disparity between men and women in
technology. New Jersey, for instance, created the
New Jersey Council on Gender Parity in Labor
and Education, which sponsored two reports that
focused on creating gender parity in technological
fields: Bridging the Gap: Gender Equity in Sci-
ence, Engineering and Technology and Women and
Work: Prospects for Parity in the New Economy.
Similar efforts to increase women’s roles in the
use and development of technology can be seen
around the world.
The Global Gender Parity group, comprised
of 50 women and 50 men, all influential in their
fields, came together in January 2009 to discuss
how society would benefit from increasing the
number of women who enter and stay in IT fields.
While the state and global efforts are extremely
important, it will likely take years or even decades
for the changes that these groups propose to take
effect. In the interim, adult educators have an ob-
ligation to work at the local level to help women
achieve higher levels of self-efficacy when using
technology and reduce learned technological
helplessness.
It may be tempting to think that humans are
born helpless and that individuals either chose
to stay helpless or not, but Seligman and Maier
(1967), Hiroto (1974), and Mikulincer (1994)
all demonstrated empirically that both animals
and humans can learn to be helpless, even when
they have the ability to control situations. In hu-
mans, learned helplessness is a function of the
individual’s beliefs and, therefore, is related to
self-efficacy.
Self-efficacy involves an individual’s beliefs
about her abilities to judge, organize and perform
specific actions, but there is more to self-efficacy
than the actions themselves.
Actions have consequences:
People’s beliefs in their efficacy have diverse
effects. Such beliefs influence the course of events
that people choose to pursue, how much effort
they put forth in given endeavors, how long they
will persevere in the face of obstacles and fail-
ures, their resilience to adversity, whether their
thought patterns are self-hindering or self-aiding,
how much stress and depression they experience
in coping with taxing environmental demands,
and the level of accomplishments they realize.
(Bandura, 1997, p. 3)
Consider the following example of how beliefs
can affect a learner’s ability to interact effectively
with computers:
1. A user takes a basic computer class.
2. A couple weeks after the class ends, when the
user has some free time, she tries to send a
batch of photos to a friend, but the individual
files are too large and require compression,
a process with which she is unfamiliar. She
decides she needs more training.
3. The user takes another basic computer class.
4. A couple of weeks after the class ends, when
the user has some free time, she tries to order
a birthday present for a friend off Amazon.
com. This requires browsing for the book
she wants to order, setting up an account,
deciding on whether she wants the book
gift-wrapped, and choosing the shipping
method. Finally, after more than an hour,
she has made her choices and completed the
required tasks, but then she is prompted for
the payment method. Her choices are credit
95
 Towards a Theory of Learned Technological Helplessness
card or PayPal. She has heard it’s not safe to
enter credit card information on the Internet,
so she chooses PayPal, which prompts her
to set up another account. She thinks, “Oh,
forget it,” and signs off her computer, having
decided that she will never be any good at
this type of thing and wonders what all the
hype is about. For her, driving to the store
would have been just as quick and not nearly
as frustrating.
The user in the all too real scenario above has
learned that she does not like computers or that
computers do not like her. She is learning to be
helpless and is well down the path to never being
able to solve her own problems using technol-
ogy. That is the bad news. The good news is that
changing learners’ beliefs does not appear to be
a complicated process.
FUTURE TRENDS AND
RECOMMENDATIONS FOR
ADULT EDUCATORS
Previous studies in literacy and mathematics have
demonstrated that predictions are self-fulfilling
and often can be overcome simply by helping
the student mentally predict success rather than
failure (Oldfather, 1996; Wieschenberg, 1994).
Oldfather states, “the subjective reality (i.e., the
perception of the student) is central to the nature
of his/her response to particular situations” (p.
3). This re-visioning approach, which has been
shown to be effective in other contexts, should be
incorporated into adult learning situations where
the student appears to exhibit traits consistent with
LTH. This approach may be particularly useful to
those who exhibit fewer masculine characteristics
such as risk-taking, and aggressiveness, which
are both essential elements in learning to use any
new technology.
While teaching the importance of metacogni-
tion, educators should also encourage adult learn-
96
ers to think about how they will teach themselves
how to use technology. For some reason, many
adults seem to think that with so many other things
on their plates—work, family life, classes, and
community activities—they do not have the time
to learn technology. To help students in my classes
realize that they do indeed have the time and that
it is just a matter of priorities, I ask the students,
by a show of hands, how many of them carry cell
phones. Virtually every hand in the room goes
up. Then I ask how many of them took a class to
learn to place a call, send a text message, or send
picture mail. Of course, no hands go up. I remind
the students that they took the time to learn these
things because they had a need or desire. I have
yet to meet a single person, even those well into
their retirement years, who after owning a cell
phone for a few months was willing to give it
up because of the convenience that it offers. Just
like washing machines and microwaves before,
very few adults choose to live without such tech-
nological conveniences once they learn to use
them; computers and other currently ubiquitous
technologies are no different.
Consistent with andragogy, if an adult has an
immediate need to know; is ready, oriented and
motivated to learn; and has a wealth of experience
from which to draw, then the adult educator merely
needs to facilitate using her content knowledge
for learning to take place. Problems may arise,
however, when the experiences from which the
learner draws have been wrought with failures.
Fortunately, adult educators are poised to help
change future experiences.
The things that seem complicated, alien, and
not worth the trouble today, will be the things
that we take for granted tomorrow. The sooner
adult educators encourage their students to em-
brace new technologies as the time-savers and
problem-solvers that they are, the sooner we will
have a society filled with lifelong learners eager
to interact with technologies of all types without
fear that they will break something. Just as it is all
but impossible to permanently break a microwave
Towards a Theory of Learned Technological Helplessness
Figure 2. Computer problem-solving flowchart. Used with permission from, http://xkcd.com
or washing machine simply by choosing a wrong
combination of buttons, it is virtually impossible
to permanently break a computerized device by
making wrong selections from the menus. Typi-
cally, the worst that happens is that the device
simply does not do what the user wants it to.
Adult educators need to remind students of this
fact frequently and encourage them to keep trying
different things with the technologies that they use
until the desired results are achieved.
Encouraging learners to be autodidactic does
not imply that adult learners should never seek
help, only that they become accustomed to trying
to solve their own problems when using technology
before asking someone else for assistance. The
XKCD comic shown in Figure 2 offers a humorous
but very real problem-solving flowchart, which
illustrates that there is no magic in becoming
tech savvy; one only needs to understand that
risk-taking is essential in the learning process.
The assumptions of andragogy posit, among
other things, that adults are primarily intrinsi-
cally motivated and have a life-centered or
problem-centered orientation to learning
(Knowles, Holton, & Swanson, 2005). It is not
unreasonable to assume, then, that women who
struggle with the problem of using technology for
learning and personal productivity will begin
seeking out adult education programs as a means
of rectifying the problems that a lack of techno-
logical proficiency can cause. Forward-thinking
adult educators can assist this segment of learners
by identifying and understanding the phenomenon
of LTH in women and promoting the skills neces-
sary for utilizing technology as a life-long learn-
ing and productivity tool.
Adult educators also need to constantly remind
themselves that their words, tone, body language,
and patience level may have a real impact on
students’ feelings about their self-efficacy. As
Bandura’s (1977, 1986) social learning theory
posits, learning takes place through modeling.
Henschke (1998) not only agrees that teacher
modeling is important in adult education, he be-
97
 Towards a Theory of Learned Technological Helplessness
lieves that it is the single most important factor
in facilitating adult learning. “I have observed,
in almost a quarter century of preparing adult
educators to help adults learn, that the validity of
teaching ultimately derives from a single element:
modeling” (p. 11). Henschke reminds us of two
things. First, many great teachers modeled the
attributes that they were trying to teach—Moses,
Confucius, Abraham, Socrates, Jesus, and Cicero,
who modeled, respectively, the law, thinking,
faith, questioning, love, and oration. Second,
Henschke reminds fellow adult educators that,
“We are models. Students learn more from our
actions than from our words. They want to see if
our actions match our words” (p. 12).
Keeping in mind the verbal cues of words and
tone along with the nonverbal cues from body
language that affect students’ general attitudes
about learning is not sufficient in the information
age. Twenty-first century adult educators also need
to remain cognizant of how their own modeling
of technology may impact students’ choices sur-
rounding use of technology as a tool for problem
solving and personal productivity.
CONCLUSION
The ubiquitous availability of the Internet has
forever changed the face of adult education, as
new distance learning options are emerging ev-
eryday. Computers equipped with webcams and
tools integrated into learning management sys-
tems (LMS) allow for group video conferencing.
Asynchronous communications can be archived
in the LMS for others not in attendance at the
virtual meeting. Open source applications such as
Google Docs allow users to create, collaborate, and
share documents on the web and the new Google
Wave provides an even richer experience, as us-
ers create, edit, and collaborate with multimedia
elements in real time. Add to these, countless
web 2.0 applications and cloud computing. The
list of emerging technologies literally grows by
98
the hour. Educators are preparing their students
for a world that is changing so quickly that much
of what a college freshman learns is obsolete by
the time she graduates.
In light of the exponential rate of technological
change, today’s adult educators need to focus less
on teaching specific skills and more on teaching
students how to use technology to answer their own
questions, solve their own problems, and above all
to embrace technological change. Understanding
the phenomenon of learned technological help-
lessness, its root causes, and ways to counteract it
will help adult educators create revised teaching
paradigms that will lead to a reduction in learned
technological helplessness in women and promote
a more socially just society.
REFERENCES
Abramson, L. Y., Garber, J., Edwards, N. B., &
Seligman, M. E. (1978). Expectancy changes in de-
pression and schizophrenia. Journal of Abnormal
Psychology, 87(1), 102–109. doi:10.1037/0021-
843X.87.1.102
Bandura, A. (1977). Social learning theory.
Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought
and action: A social cognitive theory. Englewood
Cliffs: Prentice Hall.
Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise
of control. New York: W.H. Freeman.
Bem, S. C. (2009).Bem sex role inventory: A
measure of androgyny and gender role. Retrieved
August 3, 2009, from http://www.mindgarden.
com/products/ bemss.htm
Brems, C., & Johnson, M. E. (1990). Reex-
amination of the Bem sex-role inventory: The
interpersonal BSRI. Journal of Personality
Assessment, 55(3&4), 484–498. doi:10.1207/
s15327752jpa5503&4_8
Towards a Theory of Learned Technological Helplessness
Brown, I. Jr, & Inouye, D. K. (1978). Learned
helplessness through modeling: The role of per-
ceived similarity in competence. Journal of Per-
sonality and Social Psychology, 36(8), 900–908.
doi:10.1037/0022-3514.36.8.900
Choi, N., & Fuqua, D. R. (2003). The structure
of the Bem sex role inventory: A summary re-
port of 23 validation studies. Educational and
Psychological Measurement, 63(5), 872–887.
doi:10.1177/0013164403258235
Cisco Systems. (2009). Gender Initiative. Re-
trieved August 3, 2009, from http://www.cisco.
com/ web/about/ac227/ac333/cisco-and-society/
transforming-communities/gender-initiative.html
Compeau, D. R., & Higgins, C. A. (1995). Com-
puter self-efficacy: Development of a measure
and initial test. Management Information Systems
Quarterly, 19(2), 189–211. doi:10.2307/249688
Educause. (2007). Connecting and reflecting:
Preparing learners for life 2.0. Retrieved August
3, 2009, from http://net.educause.edu/eli081
Ehreneich, B. (2001). Nickel and dimed: On (not)
getting by in America. New York: Henry Holt.
Eisenberg, M. B. (2005). Teaching information
problem solving. In Robinson, L. I., & Eisenberg,
M. B. (Eds.), The big6 collection: The best of the
big6 enewsletter (Vol. 2, pp. 256–266). Columbus,
Ohio: Linworth.
Gallaher, J., & Pearson, F. (2000). Women’s per-
ceptions of the climate in engineering technology
programs. Journal of Engineering Education,
89(3), 309–314.
Garber, J., & Seligman, M. E. P. (1980). Human
helplessness. New York: Academic Press.
Helgeson, V. S. (1994). Prototypes and dimen-
sions of masculinity and femininity. Sex Roles,
31, 653–682. doi:10.1007/BF01544286
Henschke, J. A. (1998). Modeling the preparation
of adult educators. Adult Learning, 9(3), 11–13.
Hiroto, D. S. (1974). Locus of control and learned
helplessness. Journal of Experimental Psychol-
ogy, 102, 187–193. doi:10.1037/h0035910
Holt, C. L., & Ellis, J. B. (1998). Assess-
ing the current validity of the Bem Sex-
Role Inventory. Sex Roles, 39, 929–941.
doi:10.1023/A:1018836923919
International Society For Technology In Educa-
tion. (2009). NETS for students 2007 profiles.
Retrieved September 8, 2009, from http://
www.iste.org/Content/NavigationMenu/ NETS/
ForStudents/2007Standards/NETS-S_2007_Stu-
dent_Profiles.pdf
Kaslow, F. (1989). Sexuality in May-December
marriages. In Kantor, D., & Okun, B. F. (Eds.),
Intimate environments: Sex, intimacy, and gender
in families (pp. 321–345). New York: Guilford
Press.
Kline, R. B. (2004). Principles and practice
of structural equations modeling. New York:
Guilford.
Knowles, M. S., Holton, E. F., & Swanson, R. A.
(2005). The adult learner (6th ed.). Burlington,
MA: Elsevier.
Mikulincer, M. (1994). Human learned helpless-
ness: A coping perspective. New York: Plenum
Press.
National Center for Education Statistics. (1997).
Education and the economy: An indicators report.
U.S. Department of Education, Office of Educa-
tional Research and Improvement.
National Science Foundation. (2006). Strategic
plan 2006-2011. Retrieved September 8, 2009,
from http://www.nsf.gov/pubs/2006/nsf0648/
NSF-06-48.pdf
99
 Towards a Theory of Learned Technological Helplessness
National Science Foundation, Division of Science
Resources Statistics. (2008). Retrieved August
3, 2009, from http://www.nsf.gov/statistics/
nsf08321/content.cfm?pub_id=3785&id=2
Oldfather, P. (1996). Reduce student anxiety and
helplessness; increase motivation. Journal of
Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 40(3), 229.
Peterson, C., Maier, S. F., & Seligman, M. E.
P. (1993). Learned helplessness: A theory for
the age of personal control. New York: Oxford
University Press.
Ramsey, N., & McCorduck, P. (2005). Where are
the women in information technology?Palo Alto:
Anita Borg Institute.
Rosser, S.V. (2005). Through the lenses of femi-
nist theories: Focus on women and information
technologies. Frontiers: A Journal of Women
Studies, 26(10), 1-23.
Rosser, S. V. (2006). Using lenses of feminist
theories. In Fox, M. F., Johnson, D. G., & Rosser,
S. V. (Eds.), Women, gender and technology (pp.
13–46). Urbana: University of Illinois Press.
Schwandt, T. A. (2001). Dictionary of qualitative
inquiry. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Science, technology, and global competitiveness:
Hearing before the Committee on Science, 109th
Congr., 1st Sess. (2005). Retrieved August 3, 2009,
from http://commdocs. house.gov/committees/
science/hsy24132.000/hsy24132_0.HTM#0
Seligman, M. E. P., & Maier, S. F. (1967). Failure
to escape traumatic shock. Journal of Experimen-
tal Psychology, 74, 1–9. doi:10.1037/h0024514
Steinmayr, R., & Spinath, B. (2009). What explains
boys’ stronger confidence in their intelligence?
Sex Roles, 61(9-10), 736–749. doi:10.1007/
s11199-009-9675-8
100
Street, S., Kimmel, E. B., & Kromrey, J. D.
(1995). Revisiting university student gender role
perceptions. Sex Roles, 33, 183–201. doi:10.1007/
BF01544610
Swanson, B., & Gilder, G. (2008). Estimating the
exaflood: The impact of video and rich media on
the Internet – a ‘zettayte’ by 2015. Seattle: Dis-
covery Institute. Retrieved August 3, 2009, from
http://www.discovery.org/a/4428
Wajcam, J. (2006). New connections: Social stud-
ies of science and technology and studies of work.
Work, Employment and Society, 20, 773–786.
doi:10.1177/0950017006069814
Walker, L. E. (1979). The battered woman. New
York: Harper & Row.
Wauchope, B. A. (1988). Help-seeking decisions
of battered women: A test of learned helplessness
and two stress theories. Paper presented at the
Eastern Sociological Society (58th annual meet-
ing). Philadelphia, PA.
Wieschenberg, A. A. (1994). Overcoming con-
ditioned helplessness in mathematics. College
Teaching, 42(2), 51.
Zorn, J. (2006). It’s women’s work. Presidential
address delivered to the Association of Pacific
Coast Geographers, 69th annual meeting.
KEY TERMS AND DEFINITIONS
A Posteriori: Knowledge that depends on
evidence or experience.
Autodidactic: Self-taught.
Informal Teacher: An adult who teaches an-
other adult in a setting other than an educational
institution.
Learned Technological Helplessness: A state
of learned helplessness that applies specifically
to technology usage.
Towards a Theory of Learned Technological Helplessness
Member-Checking: A qualitative research
technique wherein the researcher compares her
understanding of what an interview participant
said or meant with the participant to ensure that
the researcher’s interpretation is accurate.
Phenomenology: A qualitative research
technique that examines phenomena from the
perspective of the person experiencing it.
Semi-Structured Interviews: An interview
technique that allows for a natural conversational
tone while asking the same questions of each
participant.
Technological Self-Efficacy: One’s belief
about one’s ability to succeed at a specific task
that involves the use of technological tools.
Technology: Electronic machines, compo-
nents, and wireless devices used for personal,
educational, and professional productivity, as
well as those used for entertainment and the in-
frastructures behind such devices.
Vicarious Helplessness: A type of helpless-
ness that is learned by observing the failure of
others rather than through personal experience.
ENDNOTE
1
Desta is not a native English speaker. Inter-
views were transcribed verbatim.
101
102

Chapter 7
The Use of Web 2.0
Technologies in the
ESL Classroom
Melissa Wright
University of Southern Mississippi, USA

Lilian H. Hill
University of Southern Mississippi, USA

ABSTRACT
This chapter includes a brief history of the Internet, definitions of Web 2.0 and characterization of its social
nature, identification and descriptions of the various Web 2.0 technologies, applications of sociocultural
perspectives to language learning, the benefits of using Web 2.0 in the English as a Second Language
(ESL) classroom, ways in which Web 2.0 has been used successfully in various academic settings, and
specific activities for using Web 2.0 in ESL instruction. It is imperative that ESL instructors become
familiar with internet technologies and ways they can be used to enhance the educational experiences
of their students. The more familiar students are with Web 2.0 technologies, the better prepared they
will be for their future educational and occupational endeavors.

INTRODUCTION that can be done using Web 2.0 technologies can

Computer users are now able to produce websites,
comment or edit the work of others online, and
post videos and audio recordings with relative ease
through Web 2.0 technologies such as blogs, wikis,
and Facebook. These technologies are beginning
to be incorporated more and more often into the
learning environment because they allow learners
to interact with each other and work collabora-
tively. The interactivity and collaborative work
DOI: 10.4018/978-1-61692-906-0.ch007
be especially beneficial for English as a second
(or other) language learners because they will be
required to use their English in natural settings
with both native and non-native speakers. This
chapter includes a brief history of the Internet,
definitions of Web 2.0 and characterization of
its social nature, identification and descriptions
of the various Web 2.0 technologies, applications
of sociocultural perspectives to language learn-
ing, the benefits of using Web 2.0 in the English
as a Second Language (ESL) classroom, ways
in which Web 2.0 has been used successfully in
The Use of Web 2.0 Technologies in the ESL Classroom
various academic settings, and specific activities
for using Web 2.0 in ESL instruction.
BACKGROUND
After World War II, the climate in the United States
was one of fear that the country would be attacked
by Russia. During the Cold War era, the fear of
being attacked became even more prevalent. As
a result, the Advanced Research Projects Agency
(ARPA) of the Pentagon began to develop a way
for different computers within the government
to communicate with each other if the country
was attacked and/or if one of the computers was
destroyed due to an attack. The result was the
ARPAnet, which became available in 1969 and
was the precursor of the modern day Internet.
There were four computer sites: University of
California Las Angeles, University of California,
University of Utah, and Stanford University. By
1972, there were 37 sites or nodes in the ARPAnet,
which consisted predominantly of universities and
government research facilities. The first public
demonstration of e-mail took place on ARPAnet in
1972. To have access to the ARPAnet, institutions
had to be involved in a Department of Defense-
related research project. However, by the 1980s,
many other organizations wanted to have access
to the ARPAnet. Therefore, in 1986, the National
Science Foundation developed a high-speed suc-
cessor to the ARPAnet, the NSFnet (Welsh, 2007a).
The NSFnet opened up access to its five re-
gional supercomputing centers and usage became
more and more widespread. While the ARPAnet
was originally one network, Vinton Cerf, known
as the father of the Internet, began to create a
network of networks, which he referred to as the
“inter-netting project.” The system of networks
which emerged from his research became known as
the Internet. The original ARPAnet was shut down
in 1990, while the National Science Foundation
began to sell pieces of the original NSFnet to major
telecommunications companies between 1990 and
1994. This allowed the Internet to become acces-
sible to anyone with a computer (Welsh, 2007a).
Two of the earliest Internet applications, e-
mail and telnetting, did not allow graphics and
multimedia. However, in 1990, Tim Berners-Lee,
who worked at CERN in Geneva, Switzerland,
developed the World Wide Web part of the Internet,
which allowed for the use of graphics, multimedia,
and hypertext, or interactive links, on the Internet.
He and his associates at CERN developed both
hypertext markup language (html), the language
which could create webpages with graphics and
multimedia, and browsers (Internet Explorer or
Netscape), which allowed graphics and hypertext
to be displayed on a computer screen meant for
text-only (Welsh, 2007b).
The first generation of the World Wide Web and
the Internet may be referred to as Web 1.0. Web
1.0 was known as “static,” meaning that there was
little opportunity for user interaction. Generally,
users could not edit or add to content on websites.
It is commonly called the “read-only” version of
the Internet. The term “Web 2.0” was first used in
2004 by Dale Dougherty of O’Reilly Media, Inc.,
a company which produces books and other me-
dia related to technology (Bonk, 2009; O’Reilly,
2005). Web 2.0 refers to the use of technologies
which facilitate user-centered works, interaction,
and collaboration between different people or
groups of people. Common Web 2.0 technologies
include the following: web-logs (blogs); wikis;
podcasts; (Anderson, 2007); Twitter; and social
networking sites such as Facebook and My Space.
WEB 2.0 TECHNOLOGIES
AND PEDAGOGY
Internet technologies classified under the umbrella
Web 2.0 have been described as profoundly social
(Anderson, 2007), and are known for their con-
nectivity, openness to modification by multiple
users, collaboration, social networking, and the
use of microcontent that can be manipulated in
103
 The Use of Web 2.0 Technologies in the ESL Classroom
various ways and moved around in contrast to
static webpages. Anderson (2006) identifies key
ideas of Web 2.0: (1) “individual production
and user generated content, (2) harness[ing] the
power of the crowd, (3) data on an epic scale, (4)
architecture of participation, (5) network effects,
and (6) openness” (p. 14). The democratic and
do it yourself nature of Web 2.0 technologies led
Hemmi, Bayne, and Land (2008) to suggest the
terms social technology or social media. They
suggest that the social aspects of Web 2.0 are of
the most interest in higher education settings.
Web 2.0 technologies are ushering in an era where
“knowledge sharing is the norm” (Bonk, 2009, p.
49). “With opportunities to make personal deci-
sions related to explorations and potential online
discoveries, learners develop a sense of ownership
and self-directedness” (p. 49).
Bonk (2009) labels Web 2.0 a “transformative
pedagogical device” (p. 346). A networked infor-
mation economy includes a multitude of voices
and viewpoints. Individuals can find meaningful
information in openly accessible communities
created by their peers. “Individuals can contrib-
ute to the knowledge building process instead of
passively consuming prepackaged knowledge and
information (p. 328). Learners are able to not only
participate but also to make choices regarding what
content sources they will use and create. Learners
express themselves in the process of contribut-
ing knowledge sources to the Web. This change
in what is considered meaningful information
alters concepts of what it is to learn, be a learner
in a community of learners, and what constitutes
valid information.
Interactive approaches to language learning in
Web 2.0 take advantage of social networking tech-
niques. For example, LiveMocha is a free service
that links people interested in learning with a tutor
in the language of their choice. Many tutors are
native speakers of their language. Learners can
converse in writing with their tutors by email or in
conversation with the use of headsets. Additional
features allow users to connect with others using
104
the system through a live chat feature, track their
progress, get personalized feedback, use a flash
card feature, download podcasts, and receive ad-
ditional grammar content. The community-based
approach of LiveMocha offers a combination of
education and social interaction that fosters lan-
guage learning in ways that texts and audiotapes do
not. From its inception the success of LiveMocha
can be gauged by its popularity with more than
two million people having joined in two years
(Bonk, 2009; McClure, 2009).
Social Interaction and
Language Learning
Social interaction is crucial to language learning
(Schwarzer, 2009), with the goal of being able
to communicate with people who speak the lan-
guage. Adult language learning and teaching is
most effective when it occurs within community
(Larrota & Brooks, 2009). Sociocultural concep-
tions of learning view learning and cognition
as culturally mediated and socially structured.
Learning and cognition are not isolated, internal
psychological events, but instead involve complex
social practices (Niewolny & Wilson, 2009).
Sociocultural perspectives on language learning
perceive language as a “social tool that shapes
the processes of the mind rather than a series of
symbols that is separate from its users” (p. 3).
Teachers influenced by this perspective bring
the social world into their classrooms and teach
language use within authentic human interac-
tions. Language is a part of identity and learning
a new language may cause people to change their
perceptions and themselves.
Many researchers have come to believe that
language learning is a process of socialization and
have turned away from a focus on individual efforts
(Martinsen, 2009). ESL classrooms can be creative
spaces in which “social sharing, new knowledge
creation, and language learning” take place (Lar-
rotta & Brooks, 2009, p. 3). Language learners
are not simply passive users of a new language
The Use of Web 2.0 Technologies in the ESL Classroom
but also create language within human dialogue,
thereby contributing to the ongoing process of
language evolution. This gives them new power
to share resources they have as people from other
countries and cultures with diverse experiences
and viewpoints. ESL learners’ contributions of
new vocabulary and cultural experiences enrich
their culture in which they are now living.
Second language learners may have differing
experiences and skills with web-based technol-
ogy. Age and previous experience are influential;
however, using web-based technologies requires
navigation knowledge and content knowledge
(Murray & McPherson, 2006). Adult language
learners, especially those having limited experi-
ence require support and “explicit, scaffolded
instruction in order to read the Web” (p. 131).
Second language learners tend to interpret what
they read through a sociocultural lens based on
their life experiences (Murray & McPherson,
2006). Texts they are expected to read are “em-
bedded in sociocultural contexts, are created for
social purposes, and reflect ideologies of writers
and their context (p. 133). Digital texts differ from
print in that they can be structured in dissimilar
ways. Research regarding the experiences of
second language learners while reading the Web
has been limited. What research exists suggests
that navigational and content vocabulary tend to
be challenging and that learners tend to get lost as
they attempt to refine search terms. Instructors can
alleviate their frustration by “explicit instruction
in the vocabulary, elements and structures of web
pages” (p. 133) and careful instruction regarding
how to select search terms.
Some second language instruction employs
text-based online chat. Advantages of synchronous
computer-mediated chat are that online chatting
combines features of speech and writing, and learn-
ers are both writers and readers, interact with each
other socially, send messages more frequently,
produce more complex messages, and are less
anxious. This form of mediated chat promotes
attention to the forms of the second language
and subsequent language learning. Computer
mediated communication has been found to be an
“effective medium for facilitating the acquisition
of discourse patterns and speech acts” (Shekary
& Tahririan, 2006, p. 558). In a comparison of
text and voice chat, Satar and Özdener (2008)
found that speaking proficiency was fostered for
both experimental groups. However, text-based
chat may be suitable for less advanced language
learners in that it is more tolerant of pauses and
silences, whereas voice chat may be suitable for
intermediate and advanced learners in that it can
facilitate development of increased fluency and
use of active vocabulary.
Schwarzer (2009) recommends a whole
language approach to teaching ESL. Authentic
activities in ESL incorporate experiences and
print sources from the learners’ daily lives in the
community and view ESL learners as also being
family members, workers or business owners, and
community members. Using a holistic perspective
denotes studying the language in realistic ways
that include context rather than as isolated words,
word endings, sentences, and paragraphs. ESL
learners are asked to express what they wish to
learn and participate in decisions regarding cur-
riculum. Fostering the development of inquiry
skills, asking their own questions of what they hear
and read, can render learning more meaningful.
Language learning is a developmental process
and learners need support as they make mistakes
and take risks. This is easier in a community of
learners where learners feel welcome and experi-
ence a sense of belonging.
Benefits of Using Web 2.0
Technologies in the ESL Classroom
The benefits of using Web 2.0 technologies in the
ESL classroom are many. One of the most benefi-
cial aspects, however, is that it allows learners to
practice and develop their written language skills
in a way that is modern, interesting, and requires
social collaboration with other learners. Often
105
 The Use of Web 2.0 Technologies in the ESL Classroom
learners are reticent to speak or use their English
with native speakers or even with other ESL learn-
ers. Thus, while using Web 2.0 allows learners to
develop their writing and speaking skills, it also
requires them to interact with others using tech-
nologies that they will most likely continue to use
outside of their educational environments. Carrió
Pastor (2007) comments that “technology is part
of our lives and teachers should use all the tools
in order to motivate students to learn” (p. 599).
When teachers include Web 2.0 technologies in
their teaching, students pay more attention. Taking
static text and putting it on the Web, augmented by
hyperlinks to text, maps, pictures, relevant music,
discussion forums, and other media, can make text
more accessible and render it as a powerful vehicle
for enriched learning. Innovative pedagogy in Web
2.0 platforms creates learning that is engaging,
creates cognitively-rich information, and fosters
networking among learners. Employing Web 2.0
technologies promotes self-directed learning and
“can foster reflection, perspective taking, . . . higher
order thinking,” and collaboration (Bonk, 2009,
p. 331). Participating in social networking can
also encourage a sense of belonging or identity.
Research is burgeoning in using technology
(specifically Web 2.0) in the learning environment,
and technology use has garnered predominantly
positive feedback from learners and instructors.
Not a great amount of research has involved the
use of Web 2.0 technologies in the ESL classroom,
but that in other academic areas bodes well for
applying Web 2.0 technologies to ESL instruction.
Hemmi, Bayne, and Land (2008) used Web 2.0
technologies in three higher education courses at
two universities in Scotland. The courses included
undergraduate and graduate courses in divinity
and religion, with each course employing blogs,
wikis, and course discussion boards. Blogs were
used in two ways: (1) students collaborated and
communicated with their peers on assignments,
and (2) they completed assignments on their blogs
and received feedback only from their instructors.
106
Several themes emerged in interviews with tutors
and students. First, many commented on the col-
laborative aspect of the blogs and how it helped
students learn to work with others and to “negoti-
ate their voice” (p. 23). Second, many tutors and
students commented on the “honesty” aspect of
being able to communicate with their tutor one-
on-one in a blog. They felt that they could engage
in an honest dialogue with their instructor with
little or no barriers. Third, the instructors saw their
role as being a facilitator of learning rather than
acting as an “authority” on their subject.
Students’ language learning is assisted by the
ability to reflect in the target language on their
learning process. Externalizing this reflection in
learner interactions can be beneficial and is facili-
tated by web-based conferencing. In their study
regarding how online tutors can serve to encourage
students to integrate linguistic tasks with reflec-
tion, Lamy & Goodfellow (1999) recommend
tutors use a blend between a cognitive style of
facilitation which focuses on linguistic tasks and
produces more subject knowledge, and a social
style with an emphasis on interactions between
language learners and satisfies the socio-affective
needs of students.
Recommendations for Using
Web 2.0 Technologies in the
Learning Environment
Instructors in programs using Web 2.0 technolo-
gies must learn to become social facilitators and
be able to relate to students on a more personal
basis to form collegial rather than authoritarian
relationships (Lamy and Goodfellow, 1999).
Students in these programs may be taking more
charge of their learning processes and may deviate
from a set schedule according to personal learning
needs. Nevertheless, when students become more
independent in learning, teachers may struggle
with the role changes required and need significant
The Use of Web 2.0 Technologies in the ESL Classroom
professional development time to adjust success-
fully (Reynard, 2003).
Many instructors approach technology with
trepidation. In response, Wetzel (2009) offers
seven tips for incorporating technology in the
classroom or learning environment. First, instruc-
tors should embrace new technology. They should
learn about the new technologies and create ways
to use them in the classroom. Second, learners are
most invested in their learning when they are able
to use tools such as blogs and wikis that they may
also use in their personal lives. In addition, they
are able to maintain their learning projects after
a course is over and to share them with friends
and relatives. Third, using Web 2.0 technologies
allows for learners to create a social network.
Since the best language learning occurs by using
the language actively rather than in isolation,
creating a social network among learners can al-
low for facilitation of language learning. Fourth,
technology should enhance the content of what is
being taught. Technology is a tool which can be
used to stimulate interest and facilitate learning in
what, to younger learners, is their natural environ-
ment. Fifth, instructors who are not as comfortable
with the emerging technologies should start small
and then expand their use of technology as their
comfort and skill level grows. For example, an
instructor could start with a class blog and then
expand to wikis and/or podcasts. Sixth, instructors
should always prepare a back-up plan. Technology
and computers can fail and fail often. Seventh,
instructors should not be afraid to enlist the help
of their students. Often the younger students have
more experience with technology and Web 2.0
software than their instructors. Instructors can gain
from their students’ knowledge to become more
technologically proficient. In the English language
learning environment, an additional bonus is that
learners will have to use their English to explain
the technology to their instructors.
Web 2.0 Technologies Used to
Facilitate Language Learning
Web 2.0 technologies employed in the ESL class-
room include blogs, wikis, podcasting, twitters,
and social networking. The term blog, or web-log,
was first used by Jorn Barger in 1997. A webpage
that does not require a user to know any type of
programming code to create, blogs may be created
by users who create an account on a number of
free websites such as http://www.blogspot.com
or http://wordpress.org/. Blogs generally consist
of short paragraphs in which users offer their
opinions and personal thoughts about a variety of
topics. They may be much like an online version
of a diary or journal where users can post not
only their thoughts and beliefs, but also pictures,
videos, or links to other websites. Entries or posts
are generally arranged in reverse chronological
order. Blogs may be set to private (meaning that
only the user can view his/her entries), or others
(selected others or anyone) may be allowed to
view and comment on entries (Anderson, 2007).
Wiki comes from the Hawaiian word “wiki-
wiki,” which means “quick” or “in a hurry.” It is
a webpage in which anyone who has access may
edit the content. One of the most famous wikis
is Wikipedia, which is an online encyclopedia in
which anyone may edit, delete, or contribute to
the entries. Unlike blogs, most wikis have a his-
tory function which allows users to view previous
versions to see what has been changed or deleted.
In addition, many wikis have a rollback function
which allows previous versions to be restored
(Anderson, 2007). Wikis have two writing modes:
the document mode and the thread mode. The
document mode allows for multiple authors to
submit entries and to edit or change their entries or
those of others, while the thread mode allows for
contributors to hold discussions by posting signed
messages, allowing for a threaded discussion to
emerge. There are two reading modes: read and
edit. The read mode is the default and the content
is displayed just as it is in any website. For a wiki
107
 The Use of Web 2.0 Technologies in the ESL Classroom
to be edited, the contributor must click on the edit
button (Augar & Zhou, 2004). A good free wiki
software is Wikispaces (http://www.wikispaces.
com/).
The term podcasting is a combination of the
words IPod, a portable media player created by
Apple, and broadcasting (Pedersen, 2005.) Pod-
casts are audio recordings which can be made of
lectures, songs, dramatic readings, or personal
journal entries. The most common way to save
these files is in MP3 format, which allows them
to be played either on a computer or on an MP3
player. All that is needed to make a podcast is
access to a free podcasting software site such as
Audacity and a microphone, which, if not built in
to the computer, may be purchased inexpensively
at most stores selling computer equipment.
Twitter was created by Jack Dorsey in March
of 2006 and made available to the public in Au-
gust of 2006. It stemmed from Dorsey’s idea of
always wanting to know what his friends were
doing (Twitter, 2009, para. 3). Each update is
limited to 140 characters. Twitter may be used
for providing instant updates of one’s status, for
social or instant messaging, and to receive instant
news reports. The most common use of Twitter
is to provide short updates of what is going on
in one’s life, with each of these updates called a
tweet. People use Twitter to keep abreast of their
friends and family and to express opinions on
posted topics (Nations, n.d.).
Social networking may be defined as the online
opportunity to meet friends or people with com-
mon interests and to create communities. Two of
the best known sites for social networking are
Facebook and My Space. Originally created as
a network for students at Harvard University,
Facebook was developed by Mark Zuckerberg
and became public in 2004 with the mission of
giving “people the power to share and make the
world more open and connected” (Facebook,
2009). It is open to anyone with a valid e-mail
address. Users may post daily entries about what
is going on in their lives, pictures, biographies,
108
and blogs. Each user on Facebook has a “wall”
where he/she may post daily entries or links to
photographs and videos. A user’s friends may
also post on his/her wall. Additionally, users may
connect with friends, classmates, and family all
over the world. Privacy may be protected by only
allowing certain people who become “friends” to
have access to what is on one’s account.
Sample Activities Using
Web 2.0 Technologies
The previous section offered descriptions of
several Web 2.0 technologies. The purpose of
this section is to outline and describe activities
that incorporate them. Most learner activities are
designed to promote collaborative learning.
Blogs
de Almedia Soares (2008) has identified three
types of blogs which would be useful in language
learning: the tutor blog, the learner blog and the
collaborative blog.
Tutor Blogs
The “tutor blog” is created by the instructor and
may serve three major purposes. First, the blog
can serve as a place where students can locate
course information such as the syllabus, class
assignments or projects, due dates, or changes
to the course schedule. Second, tutor blogs can
serve as a link to information for websites, jour-
nal articles, and other readings that the instructor
feels are important for students to read. Finally,
tutor blogs can serve as an outlet for instructors
to talk about their teaching experiences—what
went well in a lesson, what did not go well, and
teaching activities. It can also be used to ask for
advice on teaching practices or developing activi-
ties for the classroom.
The following activities for using tutor blogs
in the ESL classroom can include:
The Use of Web 2.0 Technologies in the ESL Classroom
1. Website of the day blog—Instructors will
post a summary and evaluation of a different
website each day. The websites may relate
to language learning and/or other course
content. He/she will also provide two to three
questions which may be answered using that
site. Students will find the answers to the
questions and post them to the blog.
2. Grammar blurbs blog—Instructors may
post short descriptions of different English
grammar points such as using the past pro-
gressive. For example, an entry may be: The
past progressive is typically used when there
are at least two events which took place in
the past and one event interrupts or interacts
with the other. The event which began first
is usually in the past progressive, while the
second event is in the simple past tense.
For example, “Young-Jin was driving down
Elm Street when Susie crashed into him.”
Young-Jin was driving his car (1st event) and
Susie crashed into him (2nd event). Sample
sentences using the past progressive both
correctly and incorrectly could then be
posted and the students could state on the
blogs whether they think each sentence is
correct or incorrect and explain why.
3. Class content blog—Instructors may use
this kind of blog to post course syllabi, class
assignments, assignment deadlines, grading
rubrics, and online lectures here.
4. ESL Activities blog—Instructors may post
class activities here and solicit feedback
from other ESL instructors.
Learner Blogs
The second type of blog is the learner blog. This
is one where the learner is almost solely respon-
sible for the content. It is a place where he/she
can express his/her thoughts about a variety of
subjects. It is also a place where the learner can
ask for advice on language learning, provide
advice to others, and seek out a community of
fellow language learners.
1. Students may be directed to keep a daily
blog on one of the following topics:
◦⊦ Their lives and experiences in the
country in which they are studying
English
◦⊦ Their experiences learning English
(new words or ideas they encounter;
new grammatical concepts; problems
they encounter with the language;
how they feel about their progress in
learning English)
◦⊦ A comparison of their culture and the
culture of the country in which they
are studying English
◦⊦ Current events (a different current
event for each day of the week)
◦⊦ Favorite movies or television shows
Students should be expected write in their blog
at least five times per week with each entry between
500 and 750 words. Students can write a minimum
of three comments per week on other students’
blog entries, with each comment expected to be
between 100 and 200 words.
2. Students can be directed to keep a weekly
blog about their course readings. They may
provide at least 3 weekly summaries of
readings from at least one of their courses.
In addition, they should post two to three
questions they have about the readings.
Students can be assigned a partner and each
week they will answer their partner’s ques-
tions about the readings.
3. Students can choose an online source each
week and provide an evaluation and sum-
mary of this site. Their weekly site may be
those related to language learning or to any
of their course content.
109
 The Use of Web 2.0 Technologies in the ESL Classroom
Collaborative Blogs
The third type of blog is a collaborative blog,
which is shared between all class members and
the instructor. Collaborative assignments such as
story-writing, grammar exercises, or discussions
can be held among class members.
Specific activities using collaborative blogs
could include:
1. Discussion board blog--The instructor may
post a discussion question or topic every day
to which students are required to respond.
The discussion question may be related to
current events, language learning, different
cultures, or college life.
2. Grammar or word games blog—The instruc-
tor may post different grammar games such
as cloze passages, a piece of text in which
words are omitted throughout, where the
students post their ideas of what words
should be inserted in blanks.
Wikis
Wikis could be used by an entire group or sub-
groups of learners to improve writing fluency and
reading comprehension. For example, one learner
could begin a story, with the other learners adding
to the story until they deem it to be complete. In
order to contribute to the story, learners must read
and comprehend the parts already written by their
classmates or group members. In addition, learn-
ers could revise and edit stories together before
submitting them to their instructor.
Because wikis can be easily edited by anyone
with access to the site, they can be a primary
collaborative tool in ESL learning. Achterman
(2006) lists five features of wikis that make them
especially good for collaborative learning: 1) They
are easy to use, 2) Learners may create projects
as a class or as a small group within a class, 3)
Learners may create documents with a nonlinear
structure by using hyperlinks, 4) Learners have the
110
ability to edit, delete, or return to previous versions
of a document, and 5) because there are features
for discussion and comment, there is ample op-
portunity for critical reflection on what has been
written. Learners may be asked to explain and
discuss why they made certain edits or why they
think their way of structuring a passage is the best;
and 6) Instructors are able to track individual or
group participation and progress on an assignment
(Rosen & Nelson, 2008). The following activities
may be used in an ESL classroom to promote
collaborative learning.
1. Word of the Day Wiki—Each day the in-
structor or one of the students could post a
new English word to a wiki. Other students
would provide definitions of the word and
use it in a sentence. Learners may use the
discussion feature to comment on previous
definitions or sentences written.
2. Storytelling Wiki—Each week the instruc-
tor could begin a story. Each student would
add to the story until it is deemed complete.
Each student could be required to write a
certain amount of words and/or paragraphs.
A sample beginning could be: Once upon a
time there were three boys named José, Matt,
and Adam. Each day, while walking home
from school, they passed by an old aban-
doned house that was said to be haunted.
José and Matt would always dare Adam to
open the door and go in. One day, Adam
couldn’t resist. He went to the door, turned
the door knob, and, to his amazement, the
door slowly opened. He crept inside, took
one look, and screamed. . . .
3. Research Wiki--A group or class project
where learners could take one topic (e.g.,
music, food, sports) and conduct research.
Each learner in the group would be respon-
sible for researching a different aspect of
the topic. For example, if the topic was 20th
century music, various sub-topics could
include different genres such as blues, rock,
The Use of Web 2.0 Technologies in the ESL Classroom
or country, the role of music as political
commentary (e.g., the protest music of the
1960s), major composers, and/or the role of
music in different cultures or in everyday
lives. Each group or class member could
post their individual research to the wikis.
The group or class could then work together
to revise, edit, and produce the completed
research paper or project.
4. Wikiary—Learners could be asked to post to
the class wiki three new English words per
week that they have encountered either in
their classes, on television, or in interactions
with other people. In addition to the word,
learners can provide the following: part of
speech, definition, and origin. At the end of
the term, the learners will arrange the words
in alphabetical order and create an English
dictionary.
5. Storytelling with Photographs—Each week,
the instructor will post a photograph or print.
Each student will write a minimum of 150
words in which they tell the “story” of what
is happening in the photograph. In addition,
learners may also add to and comment on
the stories of others in the classroom.
Podcasts
Podcasts can be a very effective way to practice
listening and speaking skills in English. There are
many free podcasts available from sources such as
National Public Radio (NPR). In addition, there
are other sites which provide podcasts geared
especially toward ESL students such as ELT
podcasts (http://esl.about.com/gi/o.htm?zi=1/XJ/
Ya&zTi=1&sdn=esl&cdn=education&tm=16&g
ps=42_314_1259_571&f=20&tt=14&bt=0&bts=
0&zu=http%3A//www.eltpodcast.com/archive/
bc). In addition, the Internet TESL Journal (http://
iteslj.org/links/ESL/Listening/Podcasts/) provides
a list of sites with free ESL podcasts. Learners
may download the podcasts to an MP3 player or
computer and listen to them anytime. Instructors
can listen to podcasts and create learning guides
with vocabulary, comprehension questions, and
other activities. Pedersen (2005) lists the following
benefits of podcasting in the learning environ-
ment: 1) Learners can listen to a lecture multiple
times; 2) If a learner has to miss a class, he/she
may listen to a podcast of the lecture at any time;
3) The instructor may supplement in-class lecture
with additional materials that may be listened to
at any time; and 4) They are excellent educational
tools for auditory learners and for those learners
with visual impairments or learning disabilities
such as dyslexia. Below are sample podcasting
activities which may be incorporated into the ESL
learning environment.
1. Weekly top-ten podcasts—Learners will take
a different aspect of the English language
(grammar, vocabulary, pronunciation, listen-
ing skills, essay writing, idioms) and create
a podcast which offers the “top ten” tips
for mastering this aspect of the language.
Podcasts may be created in groups of 3-4
students or as an entire class. Another idea
is to create a weekly top ten list of likes or
dislikes about various aspects of the culture
in which they are living (e.g, the food, the
lifestyle).
2. Reader’s Theatre—Groups of 4-6 learners
will choose a passage from a novel or a play
and create a dramatic reading. Each reading
will be from 5-8 minutes. After listening to
the podcasts, learners can critique their own
or other class members’ pronunciations,
pacing, and expressive speech and make
suggestions for improvement.
3. Research podcast—Groups of 3-4 learners
can choose a different topic each week to
research and create a podcast on an aspect
of this topic. Sample topics may be world
history (history of any country or culture),
the new culture in which they are living,
music, theatre, or cinema.
111
 The Use of Web 2.0 Technologies in the ESL Classroom
4. Current Events Podcast—Groups of 3-4
learners could produce a five-minute podcast
of a current event each week.
5. Listening Skills—Learners can listen to
podcasts produced by NPR and answer
comprehension questions on the content. In
addition, groups of 3-4 students may work
together to produce a written or oral sum-
mary of the content.
6. Cloze Passage Podcast—The instructor will
record a passage in which a part of speech
(verb, adverb, noun) is left out in each sen-
tence. Learners will listen to the passage and
fill in an appropriate word.
Twitter
Since each “tweet” or update on Twitter is limited
to 140 characters, Twitter is an excellent way to
supplement teaching summarizing and synthesiz-
ing skills for written material. Two primary reasons
to use Twitter in the learning environment are that
first, Twitter is something that many students will
already be familiar with and use in their personal
lives and second, it easily lends itself to collabora-
tive work. In addition, use of Twitter (http://www.
twitter.com) is free. The benefits of using Twitter
include: 1) The instructor has a written record of
the “tweets” and the ideas being discussed by
learners; 2) Conversations between learners can
be viewed as they happen; 3) Instructors are able
to look at each individual learner’s contributions
to the discussion, and 4) It forces learners to hone
their summarizing skills and to write concisely,
(Twitter in the Classroom, 2009). The following
are specific activities which incorporate Twitter
into the ESL learning environment.
1. Weekly updates—Learners may post weekly
tweets about how they are doing and/or how
they feel about living in a new country. This
allows them to keep up with their friends
and family at home, too.
112
2. Commercial Reviews—A television com-
mercial will be played several times.
Learners will be divided into groups of 3-4
and will create a review of the commercial.
The following information will be provided
in the reviews: 1) a brief description of the
product being marketed; 2) the techniques
used to market the product—jingles or
music, humor, repetition; 3) how effective
they think the commercial was; and 4) any
suggestions for improvement to the commer-
cial. After the review is written, each group
will edit it down to 140 characters and post
it to Twitter. Each group will comment on
at least two other groups’ reviews (Twitter
in the Classroom, 2009).
3. What Have I Learned Weekly Tweet—
Learners can provide a weekly tweet on what
they have learned in their English classes.
They may post about social skills needed in
the new culture, grammar, new vocabulary,
or reading content.
4. Commercial Blurb Tweet—Groups of 3-4
learners can work to create a blurb for a
new product that they create. The product
may be any household, language learning, or
personal product. They can tweet their blurbs
to the rest of the class and each group can
review and comment on at least two other
groups’ products.
5. Pen-Pal Tweets—Each learner can be as-
signed a pen-pal who is a native English
speaker. The pen-pals can tweet each other
daily updates of their days and tweet at least
three replies where they discuss each other’s
initial tweet.
6. Trick or Tweet—Learners can post three
things about themselves in which two are
true and one is false. For example, I was
born in June, I once met David Beckham,
and I learned to drive when I was 12 years
old. Other learners and the instructor can
tweet their guesses as to which is not true
The Use of Web 2.0 Technologies in the ESL Classroom
of their classmates. Each learner can post the
correct answer at the end of the day.
7. Current Event Tweets—Groups of learners
can research a weekly current event and to-
gether will create a 140-character summary
of that event to post on Twitter.
8. Slang and Net Speak Tweets—The instructor
will tweet an example of English slang (This
dish rocks.), (Laura was over the moon when
she heard the news.), or net speak (LOL, FYI,
IMO). Each learner will tweet their guess as
to the meaning of the expression. Answers
will be provided at the end of the day if no
learner correctly guesses the answer.
9. English Question of the Day Tweet—Each
learner can tweet a question he/she has about
the English language to the instructor and the
rest of the class. Questions may be related to
grammatical tips, vocabulary, or clarifica-
tion of a class reading. The other students
will attempt to answer the question. If no
other student can answer the question, the
instruction will provide the correct answer.
Facebook
Facebook is now being used in many educational
settings at universities around the country such
as Stanford and Berkeley. It is a beneficial tool
for ESL learning environments for the following
reasons: (1) Many learners are already familiar
with social networking sites; (2) It lends itself to
many collaborative projects; (3) Instructors can
put course content such as lectures or assignments
on Facebook; (4) It can be used as a tool to teach
appropriate “netiquette” or Internet behavior and
safety guidelines; (5) Blogs can be imported to
learners’Facebook pages; (6) Learners can connect
with other ESL students from different programs;
and (7) Instructors can find a network of profes-
sional colleagues from different programs with
whom they can exchange ideas, discover new
teaching strategies, and discuss issues that arise in
their classrooms (100 Ways You Should Be Using
Facebook in Your Classroom, 2009). The follow-
ing activities offer suggestions for incorporating
Facebook into the ESL learning environment.
1. Farmville (or other interactive games)—
After creating their Facebook accounts,
learners may sign up to play Farmville,
where they can plant and harvest crops,
buy livestock, trees, or seeds, and visit
their neighbors. Learners can add each of
their classmates as their neighbor and have
a weekly “visit” with at least two of their
classmates. During their visit, they can
perform chores for their neighbors or bring
things to them that they have bought. Before
their visit, learners may ask their neighbors
on Facebook what they will need them to do
and if they need them to bring or buy them
anything. After their visit, they can post to
Facebook what they did or brought for their
neighbor, what they did on their own farm,
and any medals they won.
2. Daily Discussion—Each day the instructor
may post a discussion question (questions
may be about current events, music, movies,
or content from their lessons) to Facebook.
Learners post their opinions and respond to
at least three other learners’ responses.
3. Flashcards—Groups of 3-4 students can
prepare flashcards of English vocabulary
words that they have encountered or that they
will be quizzed on in class. On one side of
the flashcard, they can post the vocabulary
word, while on the other, they can place the
definition and the part(s) of speech. Each
group will be allowed to use the others’
flashcards to study new vocabulary.
FUTURE TRENDS
Over the past twenty years, the lines between
computers, telecommunications, televisions, and
photography and/or videography have blurred
113
 The Use of Web 2.0 Technologies in the ESL Classroom
tremendously. Individuals can now place phone
calls, watch movies, and edit and distribute film
or videos on a single computer (Molebash, 1999).
Web 2.0 has allowed users to publish their work,
to learn collaboratively by working with their
classmates and potentially with other people all
over the world. This has allowed language learn-
ing to become an active, learner-centered process
where students experience a vast array of natural
language in authentic settings. These capabilities
will only increase, allowing computers to become
more and more a part of language learning.
The current generation of college students is
the first to grow up immersed in technology and
the Internet. They are often referred to as “Web 2.0
students, the Net Generation, or Digital Natives”
(Rosen & Nelson, 2008, p. 220). By the age of 21,
the average person of this generation “will have
spent 10,000 hours playing video games, 20,000
watching television, 10,000 hours on his/her cell
phone, and [sent and received] 200,000 e-mails”
(Bonamici, Hutto, Smith, & Ward, as cited in
Rosen & Nelson, 2008, p. 220). In the last decade,
we have seen a move from Web 1.0, which is
known as the “read-only” web and used HTML
(hypertext markup language) protocols to create
webpages, to Web 2.0, which is more interactive
and known as the “wildly read-write web” (Web
3.0 Concepts Explained in Plain English, 2009).
To create the interactive capability of Web 2.0, the
more easily mastered XML (extensible markup
language) protocols are used to create webpages.
The future is Web 3.0, which has been labeled “the
portable personal web.” It will be more focused
on the individual and will be the “semantic web,”
in which the concentration is on the meaning of
data. The protocols to be used will focus on user
behavior, or “me-omony.” With Web 3.0, then,
learners should be able to personalize their on-
line searches more and make their learning more
their own. The following future trends may be
identified:
114
• Computer technology will allow learners to
personalize their language learning, mak-
ing classroom assignments more reflective
of their own learning and/or learning style.
• Language learners and instructors will be
able to more easily create and modify their
web or database searches, allowing for
more concise and precise results.
• With the use of Web 3.0, learners will be
able to decrease the amount of time it takes
to locate information on the Web.
• Language instructors will have greater ca-
pability to create more interactive online
class exercises.
• There will be an increase in the develop-
ment of international online communities
of language learners from different pro-
grams all over the world.
• There will be greater collaboration among
language instructors from all over the
world.
• The technology will allow learners greater
capability to self-edit and improve their lis-
tening, grammar, and pronunciation skills.
CONCLUSION
In conclusion, Web 2.0 technologies are becom-
ing more prevalent in our society. They are being
used not only in people’s personal lives, but also
in their educational and occupational settings.
Learners are able to work on virtually all aspects
of their language learning, from grammar and
punctuation to speaking and listening skills via
Web 2.0 technologies. Additionally, Web 2.0 has
allowed language to be taken out of the classroom
and into the “real world,” permitting learners the
opportunities to learn collaboratively and use their
new language more and more in its natural settings.
Therefore, it is very important that ESL instruc-
tors become familiar with these technologies and
how they can be used to enhance the educational
experiences of their students. The more familiar
The Use of Web 2.0 Technologies in the ESL Classroom
students are with Web 2.0 technologies, the greater
opportunity they have to improve their language
skills and the better prepared they will be for their
future educational and occupational endeavors.
REFERENCES
Achterman, D. (2006). Beyond Wikipedia. Teacher
Librarian, 34(2), 19–22.
Anderson, P. (2007). What is Web 2.0? Ideas,
technologies, and implications for education. Joint
Information Systems Committee (JISC) Report.
Retrieved December 5, 2009 from http://www.jisc.
ac.uk/media/documents/techwatch/tsw0701b.pdf
Augar, R. R., Raitman, R., & Zhou, W. (2004).
Teaching and learning online with wikis. Con-
ference proceedings, ASCILITE. Retrieved De-
cember 5, 2009 from http://www.ascilite.org.au/
conferences/perth04/procs/augar.html
Bonamici, A., Hutto, D., Smith, D., & Ward, J.
(2005). The “Net Generation”: Implications for
libraries and higher education. Presentation at the
Orbis Cascade Alliance Council Meeting, Bell-
ingham, WA. Retrieved December 5, 2009 from
www.orbiscascade.org/council/c0510/Frye.ppt
Bonk, C. J. (2009). The world is open: How web
technology is revolutionizing education. San
Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Carrió Pastor, M. L. (2007). The internet as a
tool to learning a second language in a technical
environment. European Journal of Engineering
Education, 32(5), 599–612.
de Almeida Soares, D. (2008). Understanding
class blogs as a tool for language development.
Language Teaching Research, 12, 517–533.
doi:10.1177/1362168808097165
Facebook. (2009). Company overview. Retrieved
December 5, 2009, from http://www.facebook.
com/facebook?ref=pf#/facebook?v=info&ref=pf
Hemmi, A., Bayne, S., & Land, R. (2008). The
appropriation and repurposing of social technolo-
gies in higher education. Journal of Computer As-
sisted Learning, 25(1), 19–30. doi:10.1111/j.1365-
2729.2008.00306.x
Lamy, M. N., & Goodfellow, R. (1999). Supporting
language students’ interactions in web-based con-
ferencing. Computer Assisted Language Learning,
12(5), 457–477. doi:10.1076/call.12.5.457.5696
Larrotta, C., & Brooks, A. K. (2009). Editors’
notes. In C. Larrotta, & A. K. Brooks (Eds.),
Bringing community to the adult ESL classroom
(pp. 1-4). New Directions for Adult and Continuing
Education, No. 121. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Martinsen, R. A. (2009). Community in a hurry:
Social contracts and social covenants in short-
term ESL courses. In C. Larrotta, & A. K. Brooks
(Eds.), Bringing community to the adult ESL
classroom (pp. 55-64). New Directions for Adult
and Continuing Education, No. 121. San Fran-
cisco: Jossey-Bass.
McClure, M. (2009). Livemocha creates an online
language learning platform. Information Today,
26(8), 10. doi:AN 44158113.
Molebash, P. (1999). Technology and education:
Current and future trends. IT Journal. Retrieved
December 4, 2009, from http://etext.virginia.edu/
journals/itjournal/1999/molebash.html.
Murray, D. E., & McPherson, P. (2006). Scaf-
folding instruction for reading the Web. Lan-
guage Teaching Research, 10(2), 131–156.
doi:10.1191/1362168806lr189oa
Nations, D. (n.d.). What is Twitter? Twitter ex-
plained. Retrieved December 5, 2009, from http://
webtrends.about.com/od/socialnetworking/a/
what-is-twitter.htm
115
 The Use of Web 2.0 Technologies in the ESL Classroom
Niewolny, K. L., & Wilson, A. L. (2009).
What happened to the promise? A critical (re)
orientation of two sociocultural learning tradi-
tions. Adult Education Quarterly, 60(1), 26–45.
doi:10.1177/0741713609333086
O’Reilly, T. (2005). What is Web 2.0: Design pat-
terns and business models for the next generation
of software. Retrieved December 5, 2009, from
http://www.oreillynet.com/lpt/a/6228
Pedersen, C. M. (2005). Podcasting in education.
Encyclopedia of Educational Technology. Re-
trieved December 5, 2009, from http://coe.sdsu.
edu/eet/articles/podcasting/index.htm
Reynard, R. (2003). Internet-based ESL for
distance adult students—a framework for dy-
namic language learning. Canadian Modern
Language Review, 60(2), 123–142. doi:10.3138/
cmlr.60.2.123
Rosen, D., & Nelson, C. (2008). Web 2.0:
A new generation of learners and education.
Computers in the Schools, 25(3-4), 211–225.
doi:10.1080/07380560802370997
Satar, H. M., & Özdener, N. (2008). The effects of
synchronous CMC on speaking proficiency and
anxiety: Text versus voice chat. Modern Language
Journal, 92(iv), 595–613. doi:10.1111/j.1540-
4781.2008.00789.x
Schwarzer, D. (2009). Best practices for teaching
the “whole” adult ESL learner. In C. Larrotta, &
A. K. Brooks (Eds.), Bringing community to the
adult ESL classroom (pp. 25–33). New Directions
for Adult and Continuing Education, No. 121. San
Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Shekary, M., & Tahririan, M. H. (2006). Negotia-
tion of meaning and noticing in text-based online
chat. Modern Language Journal, 90(iv), 557–573.
doi:10.1111/j.1540-4781.2006.00504.x
116
Twitter. (2009). Where did the idea of Twitter
come from? Retrieved December 5, 2009, from
http://twitter.com/about#about
Twitter in the classroom. (2009). Retrieved
December 5, 2009, from http://blog.classroom-
teacher.ca/338/twitter-in-the-classroom/
100ways you should be using Facebook in
your classroom. (2009). Retrieved Decem-
ber 5, 2009, from http://www.onlinecollege.
org/2009/10/20/100-ways-you-should-be-using-
facebook-in-your-classroom/
Web 3.0 concepts explained in plain English.
(2009). Retrieved December 5, 2009, from
http://www.labnol.org/internet/web-3-concepts-
explained/8908
Welsh, T. (2007a). The Cold War & ARPANet.
Library and Information Science 201 class lecture.
Hattiesburg, MS: The University of Southern
Mississippi.
Welsh, T. (2007b). The Internet. Library and In-
formation Science 201 class lecture. Hattiesburg,
MS: The University of Southern Mississippi.
Wetzel, D. R. (2009). 7 technology tips for the
classroom: Strategies and techniques for integrat-
ing Web 2.0 tools. Retrieved December 5, 2009,
from http://teachingtechnology.suite101.com/ar-
ticle.cfm/7_technology_tips_for_the_classroom
KEY TERMS AND DEFINITIONS
Digital Natives: The generation that has grown
up with computer and internet technologies as an
integral part of their lives.
English as a Second Language (ESL): Pro-
cess of learning English in a country in which it
is a native language.
Internet Technologies: A group of web-based
technologies that facilitate communication.
The Use of Web 2.0 Technologies in the ESL Classroom
Second Language Acquisition: Process and
study of developing the ability to use a second
language.
Social Networking: Group of people who
are drawn together due to common interests or
backgrounds and use internet technologies to
communicate.
Sociocultural Perspectives on Learning: A
group of learning theories in which the context,
social structures, and cultures in which people live
play an active role in shaping learning.
Web 2.0: Interactive technologies such as
podcasts, blogs, wikis, Twitter, and Facebook)
in which users can collaborate and interact with
each other.
117
118

Chapter 8
Framing a Philosophy
for 21st Century Global
Recurrent Education:
Considerations on the Role
of the Adult Educator
Gabriele Strohschen
DePaul University, USA

ABSTRACT
This chapter delineates the origins of Western values that underlie prevailing adult education practices,
calling for a critical analysis of assumptions that undergird our philosophy of adult education. It moves
to provide an overview of an alternative, emerging blended shore theory/philosophy of adult education,
which guides practitioners in exploring their praxis and creating a credo for it.

INTRODUCTION and delivery models to serve adult learners; and to

In our age of rapidly changing technology, we
all too often get drawn into using a latest tool-
du-jour or program innovation in our teaching
practice without adequate analysis of the needs
of learners, or of the appropriateness or useful-
ness of such a tool or program in the facilitation
of the learning process. As practitioners in the
dynamic field of adult education, we ought to be
at the decision-making table of program design
DOI: 10.4018/978-1-61692-906-0.ch008
make appropriate decisions with the utmost profes-
sionalism, we ought to have a clear philosophical
grounding for our praxis. To be so effective, we
must have examined our values and assumptions
and built our practice on a thoughtfully constructed
credo. Perhaps, most importantly, awareness of
deeply embedded assumptions ought to be a
precursor for discerning what constitutes a good
practice. Honoring many traditions of educational
philosophy does not preclude the existence of
intersections that constitute common ground
where disparate stakeholders in adult education
Framing a Philosophy for 21st Century Global Recurrent Education
may meet and collaborate toward the construc-
tion of a peaceful, sustainable, global society by
means of a blended shore (Strohschen, 2009) adult
education philosophy.
The last century took us from covered wagons
on the prairie to rocket ships on the moon. Our
world is one in a state of flux and educators are
called to address the swiftly changing needs of
adults in training, education, and development
programs (i.e., adult education). One key lesson
we have learned during the last century, when
Einstein introduced his theory of relativity in
1905, was that nothing is immune to change. We
claim that training, education, and development
activities that constitute the field of adult education
address the needs of adult learners and aid them
in adapting to change. We need to recognize that
change has many contexts and meanings. We may
refer to change in community contexts or in our
respective work environments to which one needs
to adapt. In the latter, today’s adult learners need
to re-engineer skills as career changes occur over
their lifetime more so than in the past. In succes-
sion training in today’s workforce, for example,
learning needs emerge and we are tasked with
preparing employees, basing this on analyses of
educational needs and appropriate design of cur-
ricula. We may refer to a new mind-set, sets of
skills, or attitudes for living in a globally connected
community as being change. Gardner, for example,
framed his take on such change as “five minds for
the future” which are pivotal “if we are to thrive
in the world during the eras to come” (2006, p.
1). He highlights knowledge of traditional liberal
arts disciplines; the ability to synthesize informa-
tion and experiences; venturing into creating new
questions and solutions; extending respect beyond
tolerance of differences; and ethically engaging in
good citizenship. In considering changing needs of
and demands on adult learners, the adult educator
is called upon to ground her practice in a clearly
identified credo, because the goals of such adult
education activities in a multi-layered context of
change reach beyond skill training, knowledge
dissemination, or development of particular
mind-sets. The development of a credo begins
with critically reconsidering our philosophical
framework for adult education.
Critical reflection upon assumptions (Brook-
field, 1995) alone is a fundamental step in gain-
ing a deeper grasp of self-awareness. Once such
awareness has become constituted, engaging self
and others in the “eductive” process of teaching
(Stanage, 1987), begs for clarity of a succinctly
developed credo; our professional platform, if you
will. And a credo rests on thoughtfully examined
principles, beliefs, values, doctrines, and think-
ing. Brookfield (1995) also tells us that becoming
aware of the implicit assumptions that frame how
we think and act is one of the most puzzling intel-
lectual challenges we face in our lives. Brookfield
orders assumptions into three kinds: paradigmatic
assumptions, which are deeply internalized per-
spectives of reality we deem objective and may
not even recognize as assumptions; prescriptive
assumptions, which are rooted in our beliefs and
perspectives and lead us to choose our actions or
frame our expectations of others and of situations;
and causal assumptions, which lead us to deter-
mine how things work and how we can change
them. Assumptions are so deeply embedded that
uncovering them, rigorously examining them, and
critically reflecting upon them with the aim of
deepening personal and professional growth is not
an easy undertaking. Moreover, it is one that is not
necessarily encouraged and rewarded, particularly
in hierarchal structures that value the status quo,
really; or, at minimum, merely prescribe the way
toward an already accepted kind of change. Be
it at the university, the community organization,
or the corporation, a maverick seldom stays long
with the pack. The pack typically tries to ostracize
her because being critically reflective, even after
becoming so, challenges the comfort most of us
find in the presumed predictability and orderliness
of our adult education world. Yet, it is precisely
119
 Framing a Philosophy for 21st Century Global Recurrent Education
this difficult self-work that must be completed
by each adult education practitioner before she
ought to move toward facilitating learning and
development among others.
Correspondingly, educational institutions in
currently emerging economies as much as in so-
termed developed countries wish to concretize the
success of their offerings. Such success is defined
by their contributions toward increasing competi-
tiveness of a workforce and improved quality of
life, for instance. This is gauged with criteria found
in the prevailing work-and entrepreneurial skills
and knowledge bases and standards, which have
been primarily established by entities in our so-
called First World countries. Given such alleged
agreement, solutions to “gocal” adult education
systems are being created swiftly these days. Yet,
these, too, ought to be built upon reflection of
assumptions and analysis of indigenous wisdoms
and established, good practices that are culturally
grounded in order to work effectively. (It is im-
portant to point out here that with “indigenous”
I refer to the “local;” and do not intend it to be
a euphemism for non-Western culture.) Ours is
a multi-faceted situation that has yet to be fully
problematized before sound decision-making for
the design and delivery of adult education can
lead us to the solutions of how best to construct
peaceful and sustainable life options by, with,
and for people.
The adult education professionals are poised
to contribute to the development of appropriate
practices; however, we must be grounded in an
examined philosophy of education from which to
practice our craft; and we also must be thoroughly
versed in the nuts-n-bolts of teaching. Ours is not
an either-or situation; adult education is deeply
entrenched in the world’s relationships—human
and otherwise—and our actions spiral interde-
pendently through theories, philosophies, and
practices.
The mission of this chapter, therefore, is to
provide an undergirding sketch for developing
an education philosophy for contemporary, re-
120
current education for adults. The blended shore
concept (Strohschen, 2009) of adult education is
introduced for that purpose. With such a founda-
tion, educators of adults can be prepared to make
appropriate selections from among the vast ar-
ray of often vendor-driven choices for learning
management systems and multimedia tools in our
intercultural, diverse, adult education settings and
facilitate the learning process within a recursive,
reciprocal, and interdependent manner. A brief
introduction to metagogy (Strohschen & Elazier,
2005; Strohschen & Elazier, 2007; Strohschen &
Elazier, 2009; Strohschen, 2009) addresses how
to apply the theoretical/philosophical principles
of the blended shore concept.
CONCERNS AND
CORRESPONDING CONTENT
Adult educators are tasked to educate, train,
and develop learners of all ages with the goal of
maximizing everyone’s capacities for sustainable
and meaningful participation in today’s world
community, with the generally shared anticipation
that economic viability will contribute to peace
and prosperity for all. In such adult education
endeavors, technology is playing a more and more
prominent role in our efforts to reach learners
through time and space. Technology alone can-
not serve the contextual needs of today’s adult
learner, who returns to a learning setting in order
to bridge a performance gap; or of the student who
seeks to participate in the workforce or engage
in entrepreneurial pursuits; or the adult who is
in search of finding meaning in her work, com-
munity, or family activities. There are, needless
to say, as many individual goals driving the need
for training, education, and development activi-
ties as there are individuals, context, and systems.
There still is a commonality across those goals
that spirals back to the intent of adult education,
namely the growth of self, skills, or knowledge
Framing a Philosophy for 21st Century Global Recurrent Education
for the betterment or better making of one’s or an
organization’s or a community’s circumstance.
The adult education practitioner, correspond-
ingly, plays varying roles in facilitating the learning
process. The appropriate approach to facilitate
learning needed or desired by the adult, in turn,
varies with the goals of the learner in urgency, rel-
evance, and applicability. Hence, the facilitator of
the learning process, irrespective of the educational
setting (e.g., formal, informal, or non-formal)
must be knowledgeable in the key elements of
instructional practice, the aforementioned nuts-n-
bolts. These elements pivot on (a) learning needs
assessment and analysis; (b) design of learning
events; and (c) and delivery of learning activities
that result in outcomes that can be evaluated for
competence. The practitioner must also understand
the context within which preparatory or recurrent
training or education occurs along with grasping
the reality of the students’ experiences and needs.
Understanding of diversity or cross-cultural as-
pects, I contend, comes with critical reflection
on one’s own assumptions and values and with a
serious effort at reaching self-awareness to clarify
identity; it does not come from pandering to those
other from self by gleaning a few facts about their
ways or their culture and weaving that into one’s
speech or curriculum.
Now, it is beyond the intent and scope of this
chapter to delineate and analyze the global eco-
nomic and political structures, market systems, and
monetary frameworks, their respective underlying
values and beliefs, and the implications of it all
on the everyday existence of adults - anywhere.
Yet, as educators, it behooves us to investigate the
context of our respective institutions or settings
within which we practice our craft, and within
which we support—or perhaps not support—the
development and refinement of human perfor-
mance goals or learning outcomes or community/
social change. We ought to acknowledge the reality
of our interdependent world economy and the role
of adult education in it, no matter our particular
political or theoretical or philosophical lenses
through which we analyze this reality. And we
ought to respect the reality of “our” students after
making earnest efforts to comprehend it.
For instance, the Department of Labor reported
nine million working poor with 60 percent of them
women (Herman, 1999) and made the argument
that “skills are the ticket” in the “information-
based, skills-intensive economy of the twenty-first
century” (p. viii). With growing investment in
education, young women enroll in college at higher
rates (70%) than young men (64%) (Herman, 1999,
p. xvii); and the World Bank (2000) concurs that,
worldwide, education is the ticket to change the
inequities in workers’ ability to make living wages,
“wage differentials – which provide an incentive
to invest in skills - are widening in the knowledge
economy” (p. 75) with a anticipated high price
tag projected at 1.66 trillion USD, to narrow that
differential. Private funding for post-secondary,
non-university level education is reported at
high rates in countries with emerging economies
(e.g., Thailand 37.3%) and significantly lower for
countries who have not managed to engage so-
termed First World countries and private investors
in the strengthening of their infrastructures (e.g.,
Hungary 8%) (World Bank, 2000).
The analysis of such facts may bring to light
the values upon which they rest. Whose facts and
whose realities might this speak to and for whose
benefit do we create educational structures? Re-
search into the problems with, and solutions for,
sustainable development by means of education
remains a challenge; perhaps it is our challenge to
take up as adult education practitioner-scholars.
Perhaps, it is not. Be that as it may, I suggest
that, at minimum, as educators, we must develop
a keen awareness of the existence of disparate
realities and needs of the varying stakeholders
in adult education if we are to professionally and
ethically perform our craft to benefit the students.
121
 Framing a Philosophy for 21st Century Global Recurrent Education
TOWARD A CREDO: EXAMINING
THE ORIGINS OF VALUES AND
BELIEFS IN ADULT EDUCATION
Practicing our craft across cultures in a global
context, it is imperative that we ground ourselves
in the sort of philosophy of education, and a corre-
sponding professional practice, that acknowledges
and values local wisdom and interdependence as
central to creating a sustainable life world. A credo
for our education practice ought to guide us to
thoughtfully discern the socio- and geo-political
contexts in which our adult education programs
exist. Although we may not be able to immediately
have an impact on change for the benefit of adults
on a global or even local, institutional scale or on
the prevailing mind-sets and attitudes of decision-
makers, we ought to practice our education craft
within high standards of the profession as knowl-
edgeable, qualified instructors, who are grounded
in a clear philosophy. In that we must take care
not to allow vendors to drive our profession lest
education become more and more commodified
(Jarvis, 2001).
Values and beliefs of the Western mind-set are
at the heart of educational practices, anywhere,
really; and we wittingly or unwittingly continue
to exploit human and material resources around
the globe rather than innovating, in interdependent
ways, solutions that embrace a both-and rather
than an either-or mind-set and lead us toward that
sustainability by means of education.
Let us turn to this original Western mind-set.
This basically unilateral (i.e., Western) mind-set
with its origins in the Enlightenment has long
contributed to depleting our earth’s riches, both the
material and human kind. This mind-set continues
to threaten the development of peaceful, sustain-
able life environments in our 21st Century; it does
so with its imposed and exported values, content,
and delivery models of education programs. In
our post post-modern era, or what Friedman
(2000) has called the era of globalization, our
122
lauded technology is quite capable of solving
social, economic, and ecological problems in the
hands of wise decision-makers, one can argue. It
is technology that is hailed as the way to expand
education for all throughout those regions of the
world where it had been the very Western mind-
set driven actions that have created much, if not
most, if not all of the wretchedness, which our
world’s poor are enduring. ICT is to bring the
means for development. Development is a priori
deemed good whether or not it has been thoroughly
defined in its application and implications. And
education can become a tool for oppression of the
mind, which is a colonization more powerful than
territorial colonization of the preceding centuries
(Strohschen, 2009). Education can also be a tool
for emancipation and liberation from problems.
The goal of examining one’s values and beliefs,
therefore, is to prompt discourse and critical
reflection on assumptions such as development
and values such as good. Rigorous examination
of our values and assumptions and beliefs is also a
call to action for each of us to arrive at a platform
from which we can collectively and individually,
and with appropriate use of the tools of the 21st
Century, improve the quality of life of the adult
learners/workers by means of education.
OF MICE AND MEN: WHERE DO
OUR SO-TERMED WESTERN
VALUES ORIGINATE?
Today’s scientific breakthroughs (look at the
developing nanotechnology, for instance) and
prolific contemporary philosophers (see Ken-
neth Wilbur, for example) offer glimpses into a
Utopia that far surpasses the envisioning of the
early Utopians of the 19th and the 20th Century
(see St. Simon, for example). Technology of the
21st Century holds possibilities and promises that
can take us to expand our inquiry and investiga-
tion into creating a better life for all beyond our
Framing a Philosophy for 21st Century Global Recurrent Education
current myopic view of improving existing condi-
tions; which, most often, only happens for those
who already have the means for improving or the
means to gather the resources from others needed
to improve their own conditions. It is a matter of
moving from a mind-set of substitution to one of
innovation; from exploitation of existing resources
to generation of new scenarios. Maybe we need
not develop a better mousetrap; maybe we need
to find ways to co-exist peacefully with mice?
Long-held values, beliefs, and theories can be
usurped swiftly; yet, are fundamental assumptions
inherent in culture, any culture, changeable? The
either-or dichotomous thinking of Judeo-Christian
culture-based societies is deeply engrained in
the psyche of its people. So are the notions of
individualism and dominion. We have success-
fully exported such thinking, and continue to do
so with our international/intercultural education
programs. A rather condensed review of the origins
and meanderings of the Western mind-set evolu-
tion can give us a moment of hesitation; perhaps
long enough to trigger critical reflection on its
paradigmatic assumptions.
The era of social Darwinism validated the de-
velopment of an attitude of survival of the fittest,
a phrase first coined by Herbert Spencer in the
mid-1800s (Spencer, 1864). Historians tell us that
the misuse of scientific theory from one context to
another was used to justify and institutionalize that
Western European, post-Enlightenment attitude
of the law of the jungle. This attitude, grounded
in deep assumptions, and one sees it today still,
increasingly had industrialists wield control over
industrial expansion and replace the values of
mercantilism with those of economic liberalism,
Greer very succinctly tells us (1974). And it was
Adam Smith’s laissez faire approach to the natural
economy that was crafted into a rationale, which
supported tycoons in negotiating and controlling
state regulations, and in gaining and maintaining
economic advantage.
The emergence of the modern day large cor-
poration, of course also due to the inventions
and increasing uses of machines and automation,
had an incredible impact on communities and
community life, locally and globally defined.
Controlled by a small group of business leaders,
and one sees it today still, these corporations
determined investment choices, R&D decisions,
and the development of the workforce in all of
its ramifications. Industrial capitalism became an
international phenomenon as large corporations
led and shaped the development of our values,
beliefs, and needs. Their investments and power
ushered in the international nature of industrializa-
tion in the 19th and 20th centuries (Greer, 1974). It
was European capital that built railways in Africa
to transport raw materials that were processed in
Europe and sold around the globe, for example. It
was within the values of the post Enlightenment
era, Western conquerors’ mind-set that the modern
and post-modern-day economic structures were
built. Bankers and business owners shaped a mass
culture and created demands for the goods they
produced, eagerly feeding our growing hunger
for material things. We changed.
We changed, and in the process, workers “like
the machine and its parts, became standardized,
replaceable cogs in a production line that turned
out standardized, replaceable things” (Greer,
1974, p. 439). The history of the development
of capitalism and its proponents and opponents
is sprinkled with the confetti crafted from the
remains of manifestos and treatises that emerged
during the 19th and 20th Century, pro and con to
this dualistic, either-or posture of our leadership.
As Marx noted, “social revolutions occur when
a new mode of production bursts the fetters of
established laws and relationship” (as cited in
Greer, 1974, p. 443).
Eventually, computers replaced the new modes
of production and this new machine and its use
has affected our way of life and our way of think-
ing. Nonetheless, not unlike the automaton of the
123
 Framing a Philosophy for 21st Century Global Recurrent Education
preceding centuries tethered us to predetermined
ways, the machines of the 21st Century, the com-
puters, constitute electronic leashes; although
the factory whistles do not blow anymore, the
new tool ties us to the wizardry of marketers and
the 24/7 workplace accessibility that is said to
afford us participation in the prosperity dream.
So we changed, and we didn’t. Revolutions have
occurred since the dawn of the computer and the
WWW. And the wizards of business, the tycoons,
and the mavericks of technology are merely per-
petuating our dichotomous attitude; one wherein
a few control the many; where the fittest survive;
where interdependence and collaboration are not
valued as approaches to creating a sustainable
lifeworld for all. Corporations are increasing their
spending on training to remain competitive in a
global economy at 28 billions USD in 2002, for
example (World Bank, 2000, p. xix), a fact that
reiterates that the transition from the industrial to
the knowledge-based economies “fuels demand
for a well-educated workforce” (Karoly & Panis,
p. xviii) but not necessarily the desire to create a
better life for all by means of education.
In short, the very values that emerged during
the Enlightenment period of our so-termed West-
ern civilization and that shaped the systems and
structures of our economic, political, and social
communities prevail, albeit moved no longer by
the plow or by the machine but by the computer.
Steve Casey, President of America Online, said,
“an interactive communications medium is
emerging, and it will change the way we inform,
educate, work, and play. AOL is at the forefront
of this exciting revolution,” (Lichty, 1997, p. viii)
and then called on us to join “as we work together
to shape this new medium.” In the years since he
wrote those words, consider for a moment, how
have we shaped this medium; how has it shaped us?
Education and training within the context of
improving worker performance is largely based
on what Ozman & Craver (2003, p. 67) have de-
scribed as an educational philosophy that “tends
to assert itself most in times of turmoil”, that is,
124
realism. Secular realism emphasizes the teaching
of basic facts that are needed for survival and
“advancement of technology and science” (Ozman
& Craver, 2003, p. 67). Opponents of progressive
education and other educational philosophies
claim that because realism-based education is not
valued and implemented, students do not emerge
educated with “those character traits and basic
values necessary for ethical conduct and leader-
ship” (Ozman & Craver, 2003, p. 68).
As adult educators, we are tasked with edu-
cating adults, within training or academic set-
tings and many other contexts, but nonetheless
tasked with the goal of leading adults toward the
achievement of their goals and supporting, with
our instruction, the improvement of the quality of
their lives. Such has been our mandate. Such we
believe in no matter our educational philosophy,
do we not? We must understand the origins of the
various philosophical frameworks of education,
and particularly the purpose and role of adult
education as it is practiced now, if we are to work
in good faith as educators of adults. Understand-
ing our role and knowing upon what values and
principles we base our practice are key aspects of
professionalism in our profession. Not unlike the
message in Steinbeck’s Of Mice and Men, then,
we are assisting others to identify and take a place
in the world and make meaning of their lives.
And not unlike the themes in that novel, we have
to deal with the dreams, power issues, survival
needs, and uncertainty of the future faced by adult
learners. We can do so only when we are aware of
the prevailing mind-sets, values, and realities of
the stakeholders in adult education, after we have
critically examined our assumptions and values
as much as theirs to arrive at clarity of our role
as 21st Century adult educators. Then, we create
pathways to possibilities.
Framing a Philosophy for 21st Century Global Recurrent Education
FUTURE TRENDS
The Subject and Object of
Adult Education: Adults
The broad field of education for adults claims to
have a closer connection to and a deeper under-
standing of adults and their lifelong learning en-
deavors than have traditional education structures
like colleges and universities1. “[…] our concern
has been with the difference, a major one, between
how faculty and students view and understand the
learning/teaching process,” claimed Dai Hounsell
back in 1987 (Smith et al., p. 113) about the field
of adult education. By the 1980s, adult education
had been firmly established as a field in the USA,
albeit one without a unified voice as to its purpose
and goals. And yet, the common denominator of
adult education endeavors, whether formal, in-
formal, or non-formal, has always been the adult.
Irrespective of the various aims and objec-
tives claimed by the workers in this field fro a
long time (Darkenwald & Merriam, 1982), adult
educators seemed to agree with what Knowles
had already predicted in 1964; namely, that this
movement called adult education might be the
educational frontier of the 20th Century and be-
yond. Andragogues, to use the terminology for
adult educators introduced to the USA by Linde-
man and popularized by Knowles (Davenport &
Davenport, 1985), distinguished themselves from
pedagogues in their approaches to facilitating
learning. Sets of principles, values, and beliefs
about how adults learn originated within the
emergent range of adult education frameworks,
spanning from the behaviorist to the humanist to
the critical/radical education models. Interest in
defining and, consequently, developing techniques
for facilitating adults’ learning grew profusely
from that era on.2 What should distinguish adult
education practitioners’ ways of educating is our
commitment to facilitating the learning process,
or, as Stanage (1998) put it, the “leading forth” of
adults according to their expressed goals, instead
of adding to a grab bag approach to adult educa-
tion by expanding repertoires of techniques and
strategies, and adding tools and toys, to teach
content only.
THE ADULT EDUCATOR: NOT
A NEGLIGENT SPECIES
The literature on the notion of a paradigm shift
to a knowledge economy and the changes in the
purpose of adult education offers a plethora of
possibilities on how education institutions may
embrace changes in their structures and attitudes.
It is the adult educator, however, who can become
a pivotal force during this time of transition. It is
the adult educator who has the experience of being
on the margins of resources, status, and clarity of
purpose and role in a knowledge society. Adult
education workers have long come from many
philosophical orientations; utilized many teach-
ing approaches; and toiled in the field of adult
education in many a non-conventional manner.
Therefore, adult educators ought to be able to
create ways of becoming partners with the adult
learners that help adults become “[…] perceptive,
flexible, creative, adaptable and, most of all, able
to solve problems and make decisions in a multi-
plicity of personal and professional situations as
yet unimagined” (Ryan, 1994). The 21st Century
educator will need to be a strategic partner, a
knowledgeable coach, a process manager, an
adaptive leader, and a self-aware human. In that,
these kind of adult educators take on the high-risk
task of becoming transformational leaders.
BLENDED SHORE EDUCATION:
TOWARD A THEORY AND
PHILOSOPHY FOR 21ST
CENTURY ADULT EDUCATION
The blended shore concept (Strohschen, 2009)
was created within an action research project in
125
 Framing a Philosophy for 21st Century Global Recurrent Education
a two-fold way. Individual educators examined
their practice and contributed their findings as
much as their musings in the form of 21 chapters.
Examining my twenty plus years of program and
staff development and community organizing
experiences in primarily urban community-based
organizations in Chicago crystallized essential
elements with which to build the conceptual
framework for the analysis of these chapters. The
blended shore concept then emerged from the
analysis of the contributing authors’ description
of their respective experiences, when examined
through a lens of critical reflection (Brookfield,
1995), informed by constructionist ideas (Gergen,
2001), and considered with interdependence as
a shared value, pivotal for the analysis. This ap-
proach within such a conceptual framework itself
is the essence of a blended shore approach to
learning with one another for a mindful (Mezirow
& Associates, 2000), inter-and cross-cultural
praxis of adult education in international and
transnational contexts.
The blended shore education is scaffolded
by two dimensions and four pillars. The two
dimensions are: one, the spectrum of roles of the
teacher and student in the learning process or the
delivery of training, education, and development
programs (Strohschen & Elazier, 2005, see Fig. 2
below); and, two, the design decision processes
for the development of training, education, and
development programs. These two dimensions
are supported by four pillar themes, within which
to explore and analyze delivery and development
practices for the purpose of creating contextu-
ally appropriate adult education programs and
corresponding delivery modes that facilitate the
learning process, that is, what we generally call
instruction.
These themes were chosen because they are
controversial in the adult education discourse,
particularly in our environment of globalization
and commodification of education (Jarvis, 2001),
by any definition. These four pillars, explored by
126
Brookfield (2009, pp. 27-43), Daun (2009, pp.
45-61), Lynch (2009, pp. 63-70), and Sambuli-
Mosha (2009, pp. 71-83), are representative of
what contemporary adult education literature
examines with respect to development, lifelong
education/learning, standards, and spirituality. In
the process of critically re-considering research
and philosophical considerations on this cluster
of disparate concepts in these themes, the adult
educator is implored to examine her paradigmatic
assumptions (Brookfield, 1995).
The blended shore concept essentially:
• values social interdependence
• espouses interdependence as the guiding
value in any collaboration
• respects indigenous wisdoms and sees
“indigenous” as any one groups’ ways of
knowing and ways of doing
• blends such indigenous wisdoms and local
knowledge with established global stan-
dards and good practices, if and when ap-
propriate, to synthesize varied approaches
• co-constructs educational programs based
on critical reflection to make socially re-
sponsible choices
• embraces universal standards and com-
petencies in the professional practice of
educating adults as deemed appropriate by
stakeholders
• acknowledges the spiritual domain of
learning and incorporates delivery strate-
gies into those geared to address tradition-
al cognitive, affective, and psychomotor
domains.
Evident from this sketch of blended shore
education, the concept provides a framework for
critical reflection strategies and benchmarks, if
you will, as a starting point for de-constructing
assumptions about education program design
and delivery. In its both-and stance toward the
design and delivery of instruction we find key
Framing a Philosophy for 21st Century Global Recurrent Education
Figure. 1. Four Pillars
philosophical consideration that lead us toward
creating the kind of credo described above. In turn,
a credo guides us toward organic and adaptive ap-
proaches of program development and delivery,
which provide fungible, proactive, and immediate
responses to the ever-changing demands on and
of today’s adult students and educators
A SKETCH OF THE KEY ASPECTS
OF THE LEARNING RELATIONSHIP:
APPLYING PHILOSOPHICAL
CONSIDERATIONS TO PRACTICE
The above sketches key aspects of the adult edu-
cator’s roles, characteristics, and the scope of the
learning process for both teacher and learner,
which illustrates our concept of metagogy. It is
built on the following values and assumptions:
• The teacher-student relationship has a pro-
cess-driven focus. With this, both acknowl-
edge that there is no one best approach but
rather that the teaching approach must fit
the learning task at hand.
• Since student and teacher are seen in part-
nership/relationship, which exists regard-
less of where on the spectrum the learner
stands at any point in time with respect to
a learning task, both select the most appro-
priate approach. Collaboration is a value
intrinsic to any approach.
• The movement across and between depen-
dence and interdependence is reflexive, de-
pending on the learning task, and is select-
ed based on the readiness of the student.
Readiness is defined as that combination
of knowledge, skill, attitude, and reflected
upon experience that a student brings to the
task.
• Teacher-student roles are viewed as inter-
changeable and there is an acceptance of
valuing the 21st Century educator as a trans-
formational leader between paradigms.
The pedagogical approach, at the point of a
directive stance of the teacher, works in learning
situations where the student lacks the readiness
to engage in the learning task at hand that leads
to learning goals. Adult students returning to
school, for example, may find themselves ill
equipped to cope with required academic skills.
Here, expecting self-directedness at the point when
a student ventures into unknown learning tasks
would be equivalent to giving a person a sailboat,
an instructional manual, and a nautical map and
asking her to start sailing across Lake Michigan.
Once a certain level of readiness prevails, the
andragogical approach calls on the teacher to
engage the student in the decision-making pro-
cess. Students can now determine how and when
to learn certain tasks and collaboratively move
through the learning process with the teacher. In
the sailing scenario, this may play out after basic
sail setting techniques have been mastered and
students can choose what navigational skills to
work on. The student can take more responsibil-
ity and learn independently, using manuals and
127
 Framing a Philosophy for 21st Century Global Recurrent Education
Figure 2. The learner-teacher spectrum
maps in preparation of further instruction. In this
example, the movement from pedagogical/direc-
tive to andragogical/self-directed approaches is
iterative and the teacher has assumed more of a
consultative role. Learning becomes validated by
mastery of the tasks.
In the approach where the teachers become
coaches, they guide students based on significant
knowledge and expertise. Whatever learning
task is at hand, the aim is to benefit the students
by sharing knowledge and expertise freely. The
adult educators in the role of coaches ensure that
the student has hired them before offering their
expertise. Then they make sure students perceive
a problem, opportunity or unmet need before
offering their expertise. At the same time, they
make sure that they, too, understand the problem
or unmet need.
Once this has been accomplished, the student
remains in charge of the decision-making pro-
cess, self-directedly choosing learning goals and
short-term or mid-range tasks. The coach listens
to and acknowledges the student’s resistance to
128
change, should that be the case. Together they
make sure they have adequate facts or know how
to address the task at hand. Finally, coaches leave
the responsibility with the student for rejecting
or accepting their guidance. Coaches know their
role is more than merely providing subject-matter
content. Many times they must provide knowledge
and experience in other areas that support the use
of the newly acquired knowledge. Coaches ana-
lyze situations, consider options and alternatives,
make recommendations, and motivate students
to action by providing value. Like a doctor who
recommends surgery without a thorough analysis
of the patient’s condition, an adult educator recom-
mending an educational intervention without un-
derstanding the student’s situation would be guilty
of malpractice. Successful adult educators in this
paradigm see the importance of the periodically
needed role of coach. They understand that their
success depends upon their ability to share their
expertise in a responsible manner that contributes
first to their students’ success.
Framing a Philosophy for 21st Century Global Recurrent Education
As learning tasks are more complex and require
greater knowledge and skills that the student needs
to bring to the learning situation, the teaching ap-
proach exists in a more interdependent context;
one wherein the teacher must partner strategically
with the student to get the task done. Teacher
content area expertise, more than in previous
learning situations, now becomes less important
as the process managing of the learning situation
is the main expertise needed from the teacher.
This strategic partner, or what is termed here the
adaptive leader, also becomes an assembler of
resources, utilizing the knowledge base of adult
education to assess and address the learning needs
of the student collaboratively with the student.
This interdependency creates moments of critical
self-reflection for the teacher, allowing for growth
and learning for the teacher as well. Partnership
means a commitment to ongoing communication
and transparency. Therefore, the possibility of
continuous growth and improvement is reinforced
for both student and teacher.
The partnership or relationship now becomes
the basis for constantly looking for new ways
to improve the educational experience and the
learning for both. Teachers have now moved more
into responsibilities of transactional and trans-
formational leadership. This form of educational
partnership is foundational for the education of
adults within a blended shore concept. Partnership
evolves when the commitment to the partner is
focused on getting mutual needs met. Providing
for, servicing, and contributing to the other per-
son’s goal achievement is something both partners
enjoy doing. Partnership means being committed
to something larger than the individual. These edu-
cational partnerships have a future beyond a single
course or a one-time, educational event. They
constitute a mutual commitment to one another
as much as to the learning and teaching processes.
The student is asked to take a quantum leap and
trust the teacher. While they leap together, the roles
of teacher and student become interchangeable.
The partnership exists with shared goals, ethics,
attitudes, and orientations. There is a common vi-
sion that connects teacher and student as both are
engaged in transformation as they move about the
Teacher-Learner Spectrum. We have termed this
approach to adult education the “new metagogy”
(Strohschen & Elazier, 2009).
ROLES AND CHARACTERISTICS
OF THE 21ST CENTURY
ADULT EDUCATOR
Adult educators in a blended shore paradigm of
adult education establishes an atmosphere con-
ducive to collaborative, interdependent decision-
making that supports this transformational lead-
ership needed to cope with and to direct change.
Mezirow (2000) reminds us that almost any change
in life creates feelings of uncertainty and doubt.
Educators must establish a relationship with
learners, in which these feelings can be discussed,
i.e., an atmosphere conducive to change. Lewin
(1951), in his research on how people change,
has determined that before a change is accepted,
there must occur an unfreezing of the person’s
present belief system. This unfreezing will be
facilitated when the person has the opportunity to
openly express loyalty and allegiance to the old
beliefs and the fear and doubt of changing them.
As already discussed, Brookfield (1995) tells us
that becoming aware of the implicit assumptions
that frame how we think and act is one of the
most puzzling intellectual challenges we face
in our lives. Those paradigmatic assumptions
are deeply internalized perspectives of reality,
which we deem objective, and we may not even
recognize them as assumptions. Becoming aware
of them and examining them can be painful and
seemingly disempowering at first. It is a sort of
transformation, however, that educators must
embrace much as caterpillars must cocoon them-
selves before emerging a butterfly. Moreover, it
is a task that is not necessarily encouraged and
129
 Framing a Philosophy for 21st Century Global Recurrent Education
rewarded, particularly in hierarchal structures that
value the status quo.
Yet, change entails both: allegiance to the old
way and fear and doubt about the new one. Adult
learners need an opportunity to talk openly about
their concerns. As a result, the adult educator must
be skilled in authentic, non-judgmental listening.
Only then will the adult learners feel comfortable
and safe about raising questions. In the traditional
model, these questions are considered objections
to overcome. This conveys to the learner the mes-
sage either that their feelings about change are
wrong or that the teacher has all the answers. It
stifles the flow of open, honest communication
necessary for building committed partnerships.
In our traditional orientation toward education,
educators lecture, showcase their knowledge,
and are ultimately expected to drive the educa-
tion/learning processes. Even when we claim
constructivist approaches wherein the learner
co-authors curricula or co-constructs knowledge,
we have maintained the power relationships if
by nothing else than with the existence of insti-
tutionalized schooling and delivery of programs;
with titles for teachers and grades for students,
for example. Educators have been programmed
to believe that they have the main responsibility
to provide answers, in the long run. Given this
positionality (Taylor & Tisdell. 1999) as much as
institutional expectations, it is difficult for teachers
to understand the importance of just listening to
the concerns of students, or observing stages of
development, and not taking action immediately.
At the same time, those teachers, who engage in
interdependent relationships with students and let
learning solutions emerge if and when appropriate
for the learning process, are often also chastised
by students for not teaching them in the moment;
when, quite to the contrary, the teaching occurred
in the adaptive leading in the moment and will,
consequently, happen during the debriefing after
the event. When concerns by both teacher and
student are not allowed to surface, or when they
are brought up and denied, they have the power
130
to sabotage the relationship. Of course, a trusting
relationship is key to this approach to be valid
in the first place. Once doubt is brought to the
surface and treated as valid, its power to impede
the change process goes away. It is a climate of
utter openness and freedom from pre-assigned
teaching roles and responsibilities that can pave
the way for this new teaching and learning.
CONCLUSION
This chapter seeks to provide a foundation for an
education philosophy that supports educators in
the contemporary field of recurrent adult educa-
tion. The intent is not to describe nor prescribe a
particular philosophy of adult education; rather,
the considerations presented are intended to guide
adult education practitioners toward creating their
own credo for their own praxis.
There are fundamental and essential elements,
I suggest, that ought to guide such development of
a credo. These are tethered to a new mind-set that
veers from prevailing values and beliefs ushered in
during the Western Enlightenment era. Although
this foundation is not to be prescriptive, we run
into the paradox of paradigm because I, clearly,
suggest values and beliefs, no matter that they
are new or different from ones. The saving grace
in this dilemma, I offer, lays in the acceptance of
interdependence as the pivotal value; the call for
a both-and attitude; and my insistence on rigorous
critical examination of, basically, everything I or
anyone else says. Before such statement gets at-
tacked for its seeming post-modern flavor, I wish
to point out the phenomenological nature of this
approach to building one’s credo and philosophical
perspective on adult education. This means that,
on the slippery slope of interpersonal relation-
ships, such as exist between student and teacher,
collaborative deconstructing and co-constructing
of what is a good practice is essential, contextual,
and recursive.
Framing a Philosophy for 21st Century Global Recurrent Education
Now, at the same time, this chapter seeks to
delineate that there are, nonetheless, commonali-
ties for building a philosophy of adult education
in our 21st Century, which are found at several
intersections of our practices. These were de-
scribed within the concept of the blended shore
approach to design and delivery of adult educa-
tion programs. The common ground of four pil-
lar themes (i.e., development, lifelong learning/
education, standardization, and spirituality) means
that those themes need to be critically examined
within each instant and context of program design
and delivery considerations. This does not mean
that blended shore education ascribes to any one
take on development, lifelong learning/education,
standardization, or spirituality. It does mean that
the blended shore education theory compels adult
education practitioners to critically and collabora-
tively investigate values and practices along those
thematic strands in order to arrive at a mutually
beneficial (interdependent) solution.
In short, an awareness of the political reali-
ties and experiences of students is fundamental
to developing our approach to instruction in re-
current, intercultural adult education. Without a
clearly crafted credo for a practice that is based
upon carefully examined assumptions, values, and
beliefs of prevailing educational institutions, we
may wittingly or unwittingly fall prey to malprac-
ticing in our profession. An authentic apprecia-
tion of the disparate values and perspectives of
stakeholders who are part of the decision-making
processes or who are at the receiving end of the
implemented decision is key. Examination and
awareness building ought to take place within
the context of rigorous, critical self-reflection
and it should apply principles of critical theory
and constructionism. A good dose of adherence
to interdependent thinking will go a long way in
fashioning a both-and attitude that values local
wisdoms and tacit knowledge of the givers and
partakers of adult education programs.
The blended shore concept then morphs into a
suggested new pedagogy for adults, called the new
metagogy. This currently ongoing action research
is sketched in this chapter, espousing roles and
relationships among the students and teachers.
The Teacher-Learner Spectrum shows a way to
review and examine the learning and transforma-
tion processes in our adult education practice.
As we jointly explore the new frontiers of adult
education in this knowledge-based society, and
as we seek to serve today’s and tomorrow’s adult
student, we should build on what we know about
good practices in the education of adults. Simply
put, in our increasingly global knowledge-based
society and interconnected, intercultural work-
force and economy of the 21st Century we ought
to move toward lived interdependence in learning
and teaching based on a rigorously, mindfully, and
carefully examined credo that guides our practice.
REFERENCES
Brookfield, S. D. (1995). Becoming a critically
reflective teacher. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Chen, Y. C. (2003). New principalship for global-
ization, localization and individualization: Para-
digm shift. Keynote address at the International
Conference on Principalship and School Man-
agement Practices in the Era of Globalization:
Issues and Challenge. University of Malaya City
Campus, Kuala Lumpur.
Darkenwald, G. G., & Merriam, S. B. (1982).
Adult education: Foundations of practice. New
York: Harper & Row.
Davenport, J., & Davenport, J. A. (1985, Novem-
ber). Knowles or Lindeman: Would the real father
of American andragogy please stand up. Lifelong
Learning, 9(3), 4–5.
Freire, P. (1970). Pedagogy of the oppressed. New
York: Herder and Herder.
131
 Framing a Philosophy for 21st Century Global Recurrent Education

Friedman, T. L. (2000). The Lexus and the olive Knowles, M. S., Holton, E. F., & Swanson, R. A.
tree: Understanding globalization. New York: (1998). The adult learner: The definitive classic of
Anchor Books. adult education and human resource development
(5th ed.). Woburn, MA: Butterworth-Heinemann.
Gage, N. L. (1972). Teacher effectiveness and
teacher education. Palo Alto, CA: Pacific Books. Lewin, K. (1951). Field theory in social science:
Selected theoretical papers (Cartwright, D., Ed.).
Gardner, H. (2006). Five minds for the future.
New York: Harper & Row.
Boston: Harvard Business School Press.
Lichty, T. (1997). The official America online for
Gergen, K. J. (2001). Social construction in
MacIntosh tour guide (3rd ed.). Research Triangle
context. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Park, N.C.: Ventana Communication Group.
Greer, T. H. (1977). A brief history of Western man
Marsick, V. J. (1998). Transformative learning
(3rd ed.). New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich.
from experience in the knowledge era. Daedalus,
Hayes, D., & Wynyard, R. (Eds.). (2002). The 127(4), 119.
McDonaldization of higher education. Westport,
Mezirow, J. (2000). Learning as transformation:
Ct: Bergin & Garvey.
Critical perspectives on a theory in progress. San
Herman, A. (Ed.). (1999). Futurework: Trends Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
and challenges for work in the 21st century. A
Ryan, P. Faculty of Education. Arts smart. Re-
report of the United States Department of Labor.
trieved from http://www.mun.ca/educ/faculty/
Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Labor.
mwatch/vol2/pryan.html
Jarvis, P. A. (2000). Universities and corporate
Smith, R. (1987). (Ed.). Learning how to learn.
universities. London: Kogan Page.
DeKalb, IL: Northern Illinois University.
Jarvis, P. A. (2001). Universities and corporate
Spencer, H. (1864). The principles of biology.
universities: The higher learning industry in global
London, Edinburgh: Williams and Norgate.
society. London: Kogan Page.
Stanage, S. M. (1987). Adult education and
Karoly, L. A., & Panis, C. W. A. (2004). The 21st
phenomenological research: New directions for
century at work: Forces shaping the future work-
theory, practice, and research. Malabar, Florida:
force and workplace in the United States. Santa
Robert E. Krieger Publishing.
Monica, CA: Rand Corporation.
Stanage, S. M. (1998). Lifelong learning: A phe-
Knowles, M. S. (1964). The field of operations
nomenology of meaning and value transformation
in adult education . In Jenson, G., Liveright,
in postmodern adult education. Malabar, Florida:
A., & Hallenbeck, W. (Eds.), Adult education:
Robert E. Krieger Publishing.
Outlines of an emerging field of university study
(pp. 41–68). Washington, D.C.: Adult Education Strohschen, G. (Ed.). (2009). Handbook of
Association of the U.S.A. blended shore education: Adult program design
and delivery. New York: Springer International.
Knowles, M. S. (1990). The adult learner: A
doi:10.1007/978-0-387-09443-4
neglected species (Rev. ed.). Houston, TX: Gulf
Publishing Company.

132
Framing a Philosophy for 21st Century Global Recurrent Education
Strohschen, G., & Elazier, K. (2005). The 21st Cen-
tury educator. Invited Lead Paper Presentation.
Quality Educational Leadership: A partnership
of East and WEST Assumption University and
Wollongong University (pp. 25–26). Australia:
Assumption University, Bang Na Campus, Thai-
land. November.
Strohschen, G., & Elazier, K. (2007). The 21st
century adult educator: Strategic and consulta-
tive partner. Assumption University Journal,
1(1), 42–53.
Strohschen, G., & Elazier, K. (2009). The blended
shore concept of international/intercultural adult
education program development and delivery: A
discourse in progress. In Proceedings of the Adult
Higher Education Alliance 2009 Annual Confer-
ence, The Spirit of AHEA: Engaging Communities
and Enlivening Practice (pp. 23-29). Chicago:
National-Louis University.
Taylor, E. W., & Tisdell, E. J. (1999). Adult
education philosophy informs practice. Adult
Learning, 11(2), 6.
UNESCO. (2005). Toward knowledge societies.
Paris: UNESCO Publishing.
Willis, J. W. (2008). Qualitative research methods
in education and educational technology. Char-
lotte, NC: Information Age Publishing.
World Bank. (2000). Higher education in devel-
oping countries: Peril and promise. Washington,
D.C.: The International Bank for Reconstruction
and Development / The World Bank.
KEY TERMS AND DEFINITIONS
Adult Education: The concept of adult educa-
tion in the context of this discussion means those
actions and activities in which educators and
students engage within formal, informal, and
non-formal settings or programs of education,
training, and development.
Andragogy: The practice of education for
adults as introduced to the USA by Malcolm
Knowles.
Blended Shore Education: A concept devel-
oped by Gabriele Strohschen and Kenneth Elazier
in The handbook of blended shore education: Adult
program development and delivery. It provides a
conceptual framework for developing education.
Training, and development programs in intercul-
tural/international contexts (2009).
Metagogy: The term given by Strohschen and
Elazier to the inclusive approach to instruction by,
with, and for student and teacher that iteratively
moves on a spectrum of dependent/more direc-
tive to interdependent/less directive instructional
approaches and relationships (2009).
Paradigmatic Assumption: Brookfield’s
concept of deeply internalized perspectives of
reality adults deem objective and may not even
recognize as assumptions. (1995)
Learning How to Learn: The study and resul-
tant principles of applied andragogy as developed
originally by Robert Smith of Northern Illinois
University (1987).
Eduction: The term given the process of fa-
cilitating learning within a conceptual framework
of constitutive phenomenology as described by
Sherman Stanage (1987).
ENDNOTES
1
This statement rests on the premise that we
agree that adult education has a particular
knowledge base, with an identifiable history
and a distinguishing philosophical frame-
work, all of which has traditionally differed
from institutions and structures that also
educate adults (e.g. colleges, trade schools,
corporate training departments).
2
The scope of this chapter is too narrow to
do even a smidgen of justice to the rich
133
 Framing a Philosophy for 21st Century Global Recurrent Education

histories – both written and unwritten- of
adult education. The reader is encouraged
to consider the point illustrated with this
brief statement; i.e., that adult education,
in its myriad manifestations, established
sets of principles particular to this field. At
the time, these principles of adult learning
and corresponding techniques of facilitat-
ing learning were cutting edge and unique.
Today, much of this knowledge base has
become mainstream education/training fare,
even when its originators are not credited.

134
 135

Chapter 9
Adapting Adult Learning
Theories for Online Learning
Ernest W. Brewer
University of Tennessee, Knoxville, USA

Nancy S. Headlee
University of Tennessee, Knoxville, USA

ABSTRACT
This chapter explores prominent adult learning theories and their contributions to the understanding
and the delivery of adult education. Such theories define and identify characteristics commonly found
among adult learners and provide insight regarding factors that can enhance the integration of adult
education and information communication technologies. These theories in adult education emanate
from educational leaders representing varied perspectives based upon a broad range of activities and
interests. However, the commonality among them is to support the unique needs of the adult learner and
to contribute to the continual growth and development of the field toward the inevitable incorporation
of information communication technologies.

INTRODUCTION 1967; U.S. Office of Education, 1935). Current

The economic climate within the United States
has a direct influence on the development of jobs
and job training, resulting in parallel programmatic
strategies. During the period from 1933 to 1942,
difficult economic times and high unemployment
rates resulted in the formation of the Civilian
Conservation Corps, part of a legislative package
that prompted vocational training and a wealth of
new jobs (Hill, 1935; Howell, 1976; Salmond,
DOI: 10.4018/978-1-61692-906-0.ch009
economic factors continue to produce a sharply
increased focus on the need for adults to pursue
training in order to remain viable within an ever-
changing world of work.
The American Recovery and Reinvestment
Act of 2009 (known as the Recovery Act) is spe-
cifically intended to create and support ongoing
training mechanisms that will serve to maintain
and create jobs in the United States. Two of the
guiding principles inherent within the legisla-
tion are to “increase workforce system capacity
and service levels” along with “using data and
 Adapting Adult Learning Theories for Online Learning
workforce information to guide strategic plan-
ning and service delivery” (U. S. Department of
Labor, 2009, p. 5).
In preparation for the anticipated new legisla-
tion, the U. S. Department of Labor’s Employment
and Training Administration (ETA) conducted
assessments throughout the spring of 2009 in
order to ascertain the specific readiness levels
of state and local workforce systems and to in-
form ETA’s strategic technical assistance plans.
Consultations with all 53 states and territories
and 156 local areas throughout the United States
produced information that was categorized in
two broad areas: Administrative Capacity which
included financial management, reporting, and
communication and partnership; and Program
Capacity which included adult services through
established federal mechanisms such as One-Stop
Career Centers, Workforce Investment Act (WIA)
programs addressing reemployment, unemploy-
ment, integration with trade and industry, and
youth services. Included within this assessment
was the organizational capacity for e-learning,
defined as the delivery of instructional content
or completion of learning experiences through
use of electronic technology.
As a result of this consultation process, ETA
determined that 87% of the states have need of
assistance in utilizing electronic labor market tools
and more that half require some level of technical
assistance in communication and coordination of
activities with other agencies. Given the time and
distance from state to state and agency to agency,
electronic learning methods provide a timely and
cost-effective means of fulfilling those educational
and training needs.
This monumental assessment and consultation
effort by the U.S. Department of Labor ETA and
the passage of such an unprecedented legislative
mandate dramatically emphasizes the importance
of continual training for working adults and for
those who are seeking to re-establish themselves
in new pathways of employment. The current sys-
tem of work requires training on the part of both
136
trainers and workers to cope with reforms that are
necessary due to advancing technology. This sys-
tem of work as we know it must undergo changes
if the United States is to remain competitive in
the world marketplace. Therefore, sustainability
of our work system is of vital importance. As
Fullan (2005) has defined it, “sustainability is the
capacity of a system to engage in the complexities
of continuous improvement consistent with deep
values of human purpose” (p. ix). America’s work
system faces extraordinary challenges if it is to
retool the skills of its stakeholders and maintain
viable career pathways for continual economic
growth and development.
Lifelong learning is an important vehicle that
contributes toward changes in the skills and knowl-
edge of adult workers, regardless of their area of
interest. Jobs in all levels of the work hierarchy
from retail clerks, secretaries, and electrical line-
men to medical workers, bankers, and teachers
require that professional skills be updated so as to
incorporate new technologies. For example, elec-
trical linemen are faced with learning new ways
to build and maintain alternative power sources
such as solar and wind powered devices. Retail
clerks have gone from the by-gone era of simple
cash registers to complex computer programs that
track not only sales, but also monitor inventory
and total store transactions. Trends toward data-
driven decision making have also contributed to
an emphasis on developing skills that will assess
performance, record data, and produce the most
current information through the use of commu-
nication technologies.
One of the main objectives of this chapter is
to examine the characteristics of adult learners
and the factors within adult learning theories that
can contribute toward the successful transition
from traditional classroom techniques to online
learning methods. Specifically examined will be
aspects of adult learning theories of Malcolm
Knowles, Jack Mezirow, Stephen Covey, and
Hanna Fingeret. Contributions of Myles Horton
and Paulo Freire laid the groundwork that changed
Adapting Adult Learning Theories for Online Learning
approaches to informal adult learning, resulting
in a significant impact on adult participation in
learning and their work will also be reviewed in
this chapter. Though varied in their approaches
and fields of interest, each of these educational
leaders has made significant contributions toward
our understanding of adult learner characteristics
and their acquisition of knowledge. Their work
continues to pave the way for new interpretations
and applications to enhance adult learning.
BACKGROUND
Adult Learning Theories
A basic premise common among early adult learn-
ing theories is that the basis of educational and
social changes comes through adult literacy. In
the past, literacy focused on reading and writing
for acquisition of information. The 21st century
has ushered in new meanings for literacy that
include the use of information communication
technologies. The rapid rate of changing informa-
tion that circulates around the world in lightning
speed requires adult literacy to include software
and hardware applications that may seem to some
adults to mirror the science fiction gadgets of the
comic strip era.
Reforms that embrace new technology bring
into play strategies that are complex and include
many unknowns. Therefore, transitioning into
such reforms requires that the adult learner rec-
oncile differences and approach learning with an
open attitude that invites inquiry and exploration
of new ways of gaining information. The result-
ing paradigm shift has the power to unlock the
adult learner’s established cognitive framework
and support a quest for sustainable transformative
learning experiences that are both complex and
evolutionary. Weil and McGill (1989) observed
that in the information age, the challenge for
training and educational programs is to assist
in developing competent individuals “who have
initiative, sensitivity to others and awareness of
practical realities, along with sufficient confi-
dence, insight, skill and flexibility to act effectively
in a changing world” (p. 36).
When discussing cellular phones, computers,
and electronic entertainment equipment, one
frequently hears adults declare that they “don’t
know how to use that thing” and that they must
rely on teens in their lives to set up and program
such devices. Adapting to the use of current
devices seems, in many ways, to be less chal-
lenging to those who have grown up in this age
of rapid technological change versus those who
have previously relied on less complex means
of information communication. Integrating the
previous knowledge and practice with current
knowledge and practice requires a connective
transfer of learning that spans between the old and
new. The challenge for educators in the field of
adult learning is to find strategies that will assist
in building the knowledge bridge.
Sfard (1998) asserted that, “learning transfer
means carrying knowledge across contextual
boundaries” (p. 9). An inherent goal of each adult
learner is to complete a self-selected training
program with the knowledge and confidence to
use the acquired skills in their daily professional
or personal activities. But how can that best be
accomplished?
FOUNDATIONAL PRINCIPLES
AND PRACTICES
The majority of adults choose to be active partici-
pants in the learning process rather than simply
passive recipients who merely receive knowledge
(Caffarella, 1992; Knowles, 1980; Silberman,
1990). Hence, the role of instructor includes not
only the task of providing information, but also
includes serving as a facilitator and resource ad-
visor of learning (Brookfield, 1986; Hiemstra &
Sisco; 1990). Research and understanding of the
most effective practices in teaching adults have
137
 Adapting Adult Learning Theories for Online Learning
led to the establishment of a body of instructional
strategies and techniques that target such students.
Educational leaders with expertise in this area
provide multiple perspectives that combine to
create the field of adult education.
Malcolm Knowles: Key Assumptions
About Adult Learning
The development of learning strategies that focus
on the specific needs of adult learners became
formalized in the work of Malcolm Knowles,
who adopted the use of the term andragogy as
a collective term for such strategies (Knowles,
1975, 1984a, 1984b). The principles inherent
within the andragogical approach to adult learning
emphasize the self-directed nature that propels
adults to enter and persist in educational training
programs. Knowles (1984a, 1984b) established
six key assumptions that contribute to successful
adult learning:
1. Adults need to see the relevance between
things that are being taught and how they
are applicable in real life (Why do I need to
know this?).
2. Adults have a wealth of accumulated a
wealth of experiential knowledge and that
serves as the foundation for new learning
activities (How does this relate to what I
already know?).
3. Adults are self-reliant and self-directed,
therefore, they must be engaged in the
decision-making processes for acquiring
new knowledge (What are my preferred
methods of achieving this task/goal?).
4. Adults are goal-oriented and need to clearly
see the immediate relevance in each step of
their educational program so as to confirm
that it is applicable toward ultimate goal
achievement (Will this help me attain my
goal?).
5. Adults are practical and require problem-
centered learning tasks rather than content-
138
oriented tasks (How is this applicable in my
life/work?).
6. Adults respond positively to a collaborative
consensus approach in which all learners are
respected for their knowledge and experi-
ence (Are my thoughts and ideas respected
in this learning experience?).
The characteristics of adult learners as defined
by Knowles translate into practices that are valid
guides for adult education programs as they tran-
sition into online and distance learning instruc-
tion. First, organizations and training programs
would be wise to assess both the technological
and informational skills levels of adults prior to
entry into a program of training. Formal written
assessments and thorough intake interviews will
provide a departure point for entry that will lessen
frustrations and heighten success. Clear short-term
steps to achieve long-term goals can be designed
with input from the adult learner as a parallel to
certification or licensure requirements. Inclusion
of the learner as decision-maker produces commit-
ment and motivation that will serve as a support
system when inevitable obstacles emerge. This
process is particularly strengthened when program
recruitment and enrollment personnel are trained
and committed to understanding the issues and
problems inherent in the lives’ of adult learners.
Secondly, the principles of Knowles’ adult
learning theory would dictate that online and dis-
tance education programs design a high-interest
curriculum that is flexible enough to meet the needs
of individuals learners, but is structured enough
to provide clear direction on the path leading to
goal achievement. Tasks and projects within each
level of the curriculum should contain elements of
choice that allow the adult learner to tailor such
learning experiences so as to be relevant and ap-
plicable to their specific needs. For example, an
accounting class in an online course would, of
course, contain specific core elements of instruc-
tion, but could also include an opportunity to ap-
Adapting Adult Learning Theories for Online Learning
ply such elements in a personalized project that
would have meaning and relevance to the learner.
Lieb (1991) concludes that these assumptions
identified in Knowles’ theory of adult learning
form the basis of another vital factor for engaging
adult learners: motivation. Lieb notes five factors
that serve as major motivators for adult learners:
1. Social interactions that contribute to the
formation of work associations and personal
friendships.
2. External requirements and expectations such
as mandated or voluntary training to retain or
upgrade employment status as recommended
by supervisors.
3. Internal or personal expectations resulting
from a desire to rise in rank and achievement
in a job or to compete for advancement with
peers or competitors.
4. Social responsibility derived from a desire
to serve in a community for the common
good or for the betterment of mankind.
5. Self-challenge born from a desire to seek
knowledge simply for its own sake or to
decrease boredom and provide contrast in
daily life.
A contributing construct to the subtheme of
motivation is found in relation to expectancy-
value theory as derived from Murray’s concept of
need for achievement (Pintrich & Schunk, 2002).
Perry, Turner, and Meyer (2006) proposed that
expectancy-value theory explains motivation “in
terms of individuals’ expectations that an outcome
is likely in a given situation, and the extent to which
they value that outcome” (p. 329). As affirmed in
Knowles’ assumptions, adult learners who desire
and value training are more likely to successfully
engage in and complete training programs.
Sansone and Harackiewicz (2000) found that
intrinsic motivation serves to push an individual
toward earning a reward or, in the case of adult
learners, satisfying a need to acquire new or up-
dated knowledge. Perry, Turner, and Meyer (2006)
concluded that “cognitive theories of motivation
privilege intrinsic sources of motivation (e.g.,
interest, increased knowledge and skill) more than
extrinsic rewards, assuming individuals are natu-
rally motivated to develop intellectual and other
potentials and take pride in their accomplishments”
(p. 329). Lieb (1991) asserts that enhancing an
adult learner’s reasons for enrolling and decreasing
barriers to training serve to substantially heighten
the level of motivation for adult learners.
Knowles’ ideas of adragogy or adult-centered
principles of learning helped to form the theoretical
basis for the practice of adult learning strategies.
Tried and true, their validity extends into online and
distance learning developments that can transition
adults from pencil and paper traditional learners
into 21st century learners who are comfortable with
current information communication technologies.
Jack Mezirow:
Transformational Theory
Each individual brings their own knowledge,
experience, and perspective to every learning
situation. Utilizing that unique foundation requires
the learner to reflectively connect past knowledge
with current knowledge. Jack Mezirow (1990) set
forth the theory that critical reflection around the
assumptions, beliefs, and values that one holds
can produce insights that assist in making mean-
ing out of common, everyday experiences. This
intellectual activity can lead one to change his/
her perspective and that is the key to transforma-
tive learning.
Mezirow’s (1991) overview of transforma-
tional theory asserts that failure to acknowledge
the key role of an individual’s personal frame of
reference limits the lens through which meaning
is construed and learning occurs. Transformation
begins when the individual examines the juxtapo-
sition of communicated ideas with prior learning
and the biases that may accompany such learning.
Assumptions, beliefs, social norms and ideologies,
cultural codes (both spoken and unspoken), and
139
 Adapting Adult Learning Theories for Online Learning
behaviors are evoked and brought to the forefront
when adults are confronted with unfamiliar ideas.
Inherent within transformation theory are 12
“key propositions” as summarized by Mezirow
(1996):
1. Transformation theory is a model grounded
in the process of finding consensus in the
interpretations and beliefs that are central
to human discourse and learning.
2. Learning is a process whereby one seeks to
integrate prior interpretation and current or
new interpretation of an experience for the
purpose of guiding future action.
3. Past images and symbolic models from
prior learning are projected into current
experiences to form analogies that help us
to interpret new experiences.
4. Interpretation of meaning is derived in mul-
tiple ways including intentional, incidental,
or presentational (as through kinesthetic
experiences, intuition, or feelings).
5. Sense making utilizes filters put into place
by the individual’s frame of reference, which
shapes perception, cognition and feelings.
6. There are two dimensions within a frame of
reference—that of meaning perspective that
incorporate generalized predispositions and
meaning scheme which incorporates specific
clusters of beliefs and feelings.
7. Actions are guided by beliefs and, as such,
result in the belief being tested. If found
to be impractical or problematic through
a change in circumstance, an individual’s
frame of reference may be transformed if
examined through internal critical reflec-
tion. This is a vital component in the adult
learning process.
8. Transformation involves both objective
reframing (as in redefining a task-oriented
problem) and subjective reframing (recog-
nizing the inaccuracies within a frame of
reference and analyzing the foundational
underlying assumptions). Critical reflection
140
of one’s self has the potential to produce
powerful transformations.
9. Within the learning process are two separate
and distinctive domains, each with a differ-
ent purpose: instrumental learning, used in
controlling or manipulating others or the
surrounding environment; and communica-
tive learning, involving understanding of
meanings as communicated by others.
10. Communicative learning utilizes rational,
thoughtful, objective, and informed dis-
course that enables participants to arrive at
consensual conclusions that may potentially
be reframed through review of a broader
group of participants.
11. Reflective insights can guide action that
is predicated upon an informed decision,
causing action to be immediate or delayed,
and resulting in a transformational learning
experience.
12. Transformation through the learning process
involves participation in problem-solving
and task-oriented performance skills that
may involve self-reflection (instrumental
competence) as well as the ability to express
one’s own ideas and values independently
from the thoughts and ideas of others.
In summary, Mezirow’s transformative learn-
ing theory brought an internal reflective focus to
the adult learning process, thereby giving validity
and acknowledgement to the importance that each
individual’s worldview brings to any learning
experience and elevating the personalized aspects
that contribute to adult learning. It provides a dy-
namic model that includes constructs, language,
and categories that facilitate understanding of the
adult learning process as found in myriad cultural
settings. The contributions of prior learning and
experience are given value and credibility.
Ebert (2000) surmised that “the essence of
transformational learning theory to the field of
adult education was that it promoted a deeper
understanding of change—change in the ways
Adapting Adult Learning Theories for Online Learning
learners perceived themselves and their world” (p.
97). Smith and Reio (2006) contended that “trans-
formative learning is rooted in life experience and
the fundamental human need to make sense of our
lives” (p. 127). This intellectual activity can lead
one to change his perspective and that is the key
to transformative learning, removing the finite
barriers of one’s perceptions and leading to new
insights and personal meanings, which lead to
new roles and behaviors.
Stephen Covey: Self Empowerment
In 1989, a phenomenon entitled Seven Habits of
Highly Effective People swept the United States,
leaving behind a model for success in business
and in life that became the ideal for thousands of
people. The author, Stephen Covey, believed that,
“our society and our educational system need a
common vision, a vision in which people become
empowered by developing proper habits of living.
Once empowered, people become increasingly
more responsible for their own learning process”
(Fenwick & Parsons, 1995, p. 3).
Covey (1989) delineated seven habits that
were grouped to lead individuals from a state of
dependence to one of proactive independence
that allowed one to experience synergistic inter-
dependence. The first three habits honed internal
attitudes and self-reflection: Be proactive; Begin
With the End in Mind; and Put First Things First.
The subsequent three habits focused on expanding
outward toward interdependence: Think Win/Win;
Seek First to Understand...Then to be Understood;
and Synergize. The final habit, Sharpen the Saw, af-
firmed the need for continual renewal of physical,
spiritual, mental, and social/emotional wellbeing
if one is to live a productive and balanced life that
is congruent with personal values.
Illustrative examples throughout Covey’s land-
mark book enabled its readers to instantaneously
identify with ideas, situations, and actions that they
encountered on a daily basis. The seven habits
were, in actuality, not new, but were presented as
interrelated human strengths that could provide a
potential pathway that would allow adults to as-
similate new experiences into their personal frame
of reference. They made a way for change, the
inevitable force that manipulates individual reali-
ties and brings about new ways of being through
paradigm shifts that “move us from one way of
seeing the world to another...Our paradigms, cor-
rect or incorrect, are the sources of our attitudes
and behaviors, and ultimately our relationships
with others” (p. 30).
Covey’s principles were embraced by individu-
als and large corporations alike. Entities such as
Proctor and Gamble, Blue Cross & Blue Shield,
Federal Express, and Shell Oil aligned and in-
fused their employee development programs with
Covey-defined principles. Evidence of the high
level of interest in the book was reflected in its
sales of over two million copies in 20 languages
(Fenwick & Parsons, 1995, p. 4). Covey continued
to inspire readers toward principle-centered ways
of being through additional writings that addressed
change factors and personal development in mul-
tiple settings such as business and education. His
contribution to the field of adult education lies in
his demonstrated success in developing programs
that produce growth and positive change for those
who engage in them.
Hanna Fingeret: Qualitative
Research in Adult Learning
Understanding the effectiveness of adult education
programs requires that practitioners engage in
research. It is in this capacity that Hanna Fingeret
is best known. Fingeret’s qualitative research stud-
ies (Fingeret, 1982, 1983) have examined both
the programs and the participants in programs of
Adult Basic Education. Her insightful research in
the field of adult education, specifically in adult
literacy, has revealed a deeply authentic interest
in adults who have limited literacy skills and the
resulting impact that the deficit brings in their
everyday lives, in their learning and survival strate-
141
 Adapting Adult Learning Theories for Online Learning
gies, and in their educational activities (Newman
& Beverstock, 1990). Her work has enlightened
the field regarding the methods employed by il-
literate adults who must develop strategies to cope
with the demands of a literacy-dominant society.
Fingeret has been a proponent of qualitative
ethnographic and participatory action research
methods because, unlike quantitative methods,
they lend themselves to delving deeper into the
multiple aspects that shape the lives of adult learn-
ers. “We can best understand the lives of adults
who are different from ourselves by asking them to
teach us, to show us, to explain to us, to allow us
to participate in their lives” (Fingeret, 1982, p. 9).
Fingeret’s belief that research can involve
both the practitioner and the participant has been
echoed by others who seek to examine issues from
a holistic perspective. Carr and Kemmis (1986)
defined action research as “research into practice
by practitioners” (p. 199). It involves cycles of in-
quiry, action and reflection that address a particular
issue or subject and allows for all participants to
reflect on the previous action in order to plan the
next one (Dick, 1993). Action research embraces
the belief that “all people—professional action
researchers included—accumulate, organize, and
use complex knowledge continuously in every-
day life” (Greenwood & Levin, 2007, p. 4). The
individuals engaged in the research derive from
this process new skills and insights.
The action research methodology departs from
other research traditions in that it
is an iterative process that involves distinctive
steps that are normally linked to planning, acting,
observing, and evaluating (McTaggart, 1991). The
number of steps and the identified name of each
step varies from author to author, but the reflec-
tion stage in all of the schemes signals for a new
plan of action to be formulated, thus beginning
a new cycle (Dick, 1993; Jarvis, 1998; McNiff,
1988; Peters, 1994; Ziegler, 2001).
Greenwood and Levin (2007) observed that
action research differs from other research tradi-
tions that focus mainly on theoretical work in
142
that it seeks to “create a research situation where
active manipulation of the material and social
world defines the inquiry process” (p. 107). In
this way, new knowledge gained through action
research is created through active experimentation,
tested in real life, and validated through work-
ability. Fingeret’s work to develop more effective
adult literacy programs incorporated such active
experimentation and, as such, resulted in new
strategies that enhanced the field.
Specifically, Kemmis and McTaggart (2005)
delineated action research as having a “spiral of
self-reflective cycles” (p. 563). The elements
within the cyclical spiral are planning, acting
and observing, reflecting, and replanning. These
cycles are continually repeated and, through this
process, individuals engaged in action research
derive new skills and insights. As opposed to
other research traditions, it is a dynamic rather
than linear process, allowing for adaptations and
interventions along the way that can serve to
tailor aspects within the research as brought to
light through the reflecting cycle. The dynamic
nature of Fingeret’s qualitative research into adult
literacy took advantage of this cyclical spiral and
produced new understandings and approaches to
the emerging issues surrounding adult learning.
Reason and Bradbury (2001) stated that there
is no brief, succinct definition for action research,
but conclude that a basic, working definition can
be established as a departure point for understand-
ing the methodology. To that end, they describe
action research as:
...a participatory, democratic process concerned
with developing practical knowing in the pursuit
of worthwhile human purposes, grounded in a
participatory worldview which we believe is
emerging at this historical moment. It seeks to
bring together action and reflection, theory and
practice, in participation with others. (p. 1)
Reason and Bradbury’s stance on action re-
search acknowledges that action research serves
Adapting Adult Learning Theories for Online Learning
to enable participants to work toward practical
outcomes and new forms of understanding since
“action without reflection and understanding is
blind just as theory without action is meaning-
less” (p. 2).
The framework for action research rests upon
the participatory knowledge approach which ad-
vocates “inquiry completed ‘with’ others rather
than ‘on’ or ‘to’ others” and, as such, engages the
participants as active collaborators (Creswell,
2003, p. 11). As the researcher, Fingeret has
studied the practices of adult literacy programs
and the development of literacy education in
the United States. Her multiple research studies
(Fingeret, 1994; Fingeret & Danin, 1991; Pates
& Fingeret, 1994) have examined the activities,
the participants, and the processes of evaluation
from the perspectives of the learners, teachers,
and project staff. Her findings have served as a
baseline for reflection, analysis, and change in
the field and have resulted in the acceptance and
use of nontraditional methods for personalized
instruction and assessment.
Formal, Nonformal, and
Informal Learning
The National Center for Educational Statistics
(NCES) in the U.S. Department of Education
has monitored adult participation in education
through a series of surveys since 1969. Initially,
adult education was equated with organized
or formal instruction and included any full or
part-time course or educational activity taken by
adult education respondents who were seventeen
years old and over. Such courses were sponsored
through established educational institutions or
employers and were, therefore, considered to be
formal instruction. However, the monitoring of
participation in informal education activities was
not included until their 2001 survey. Collins, Brick,
and Kim (1997) caution that changes in NCES’s
research design over the years prevent making
direct comparisons among the survey results.
Merriam, Caffarella, and Baumgartner (2007)
investigated who and why adults participate in
educational activities. In reviewing the continuing
spectrum of data found in NCES surveys, they
found that participation percentages of adults rose
dramatically when both formal and nonformal
education programs were examined. Inclusion
of nonformal or informal education programs
broadened the programmatic scope to incorporate
a variety of activities. “Work-related informal
learning activities included supervised training
or mentoring, self-paced study using books or
videotapes, self-paced study using computers,
attending ‘brown-bag’ or informal presentations,
attending conferences or conventions, and reading
professional journals or magazines” (Kim, Col-
lins Hagedorn, Williamson, & Chapman, 2004).
Acknowledgement of the importance of adult
participation in informal learning settings brings
us to the examination of popular education.
Freire and Horton
“Knowledge is power” is an oft-quoted phrase
attributed to Sir Francis Bacon, noted English
author and philosopher (1561-1626). Observations
throughout history can be found to illustrate and
affirm that, indeed, knowledge has frequently
been used as a divisive tool in societies to separate
people, elevating some and repressing others.
Paulo Freire examined the discordant use of
education to oppress specific classes of people and
sought to transform the use of knowledge from
a tool for further oppression to an instrument for
changing existing social structure. Freire (1970)
viewed educational processes at the time as resting
on “banking” principles wherein knowledge was
“deposited” by those who possess it into those
who have none. In such practice, the learner is
projected as being abjectly ignorant while the
teacher is projected as all-knowing, a parallel char-
acteristic in the ideology of oppression, thereby
negating any processes of inquiry. It was Freire’s
assertion that, “The capability of banking educa-
143
 Adapting Adult Learning Theories for Online Learning
tion to minimize or annul the students’ creative
power and to stimulate their credulity serves the
interests of the oppressors, who care neither to
have the world revealed nor to see it transformed”
(p. 73). Freire sought to disarm those in power by
bringing the opportunity for literacy to all, thus
giving voice to the oppressed.
Transforming educational practices from
“banking” into processes of inquiry and dialogue
gives learners power to act and has the potential
to change societal practices and structures built
on oppression and exploitation. Teaching literacy
begins a continuum that empowers learners to
participate as equals with teachers in the learning
process. Freire’s ideas have profoundly impacted
theory and practice of adult education around the
world by shedding light on the power relationships
in society and teaching learners “how to participate
in and change those power structures” (Newman
& Beverstock, 1990, p. 105).
Similarly, Myles Horton significantly impacted
adult education through his work to empower
those who are oppressed. His method was to bring
people together in an environment that valued
the knowledge and experience of each individual
and where all could use such knowledge to fully
participate in learning that would be mutually
beneficial for everyone. Horton was an organizer
and the founder of the Highlander Folk School
that has been a major catalyst for social change
in the United States since its inception in 1932
(Horton, Kohl, & Kohl, 1998). “Seeking to develop
a form of education to change society rather than
maintain the status quo, Myles Horton created a
pedagogy which leads people to challenge the
system, to take risks” (p. xix).
Both Horton and Freire acknowledged their
similar philosophies regarding the power of educa-
tion to transform individuals and change societal
norms (Horton & Freire, 1990). Ebert (2000) and
Conti (1977) noted that similarities between the
Horton and Freire include beliefs that:
144
1. Processes of reflection and action are inher-
ent in learning;
2. Traditional education and such practices
associated with it are maintained by those
in power;
3. Empowerment of the oppressed requires that
they value and acknowledge their dignity and
become full participants in the educational
process; and
4. Social actions require cooperation and com-
munication on the part of all participants if
success is to be achieved.
Freire and Horton established foundational
principles and philosophies that continue to be
currently operative in the field of adult education
in both formal and informal educational settings.
Group experiences that empower learners to in-
quire, question, and seek additional knowledge
are enacted in organized educational settings on
a routine basis, along with opportunities for in-
formal learning that abound in myriad situations.
Concluding Thoughts about
Learning Theories
The contributions of each of these educational
leaders have expanded adult learning theories
while adding depth and varied perspective to the
understanding and delivery of adult education.
The characteristics and needs of adult learners
have been reviewed congruent to these established
theories. The integration of adult education and
information communication technologies sug-
gests that delivery of knowledge must be adapted
to accommodate the dynamic needs of the adult
learner while infusing new practices to address
technological advances.
FUTURE TRENDS
According the U. S. Department of Education
National Center for Educational Statistics (NCES),
Adapting Adult Learning Theories for Online Learning
the number of adult students entering or returning
to college has steadily increased over the past two
decades and will continue to increase incremen-
tally for the future decade (NCES, 2004). It is
estimated that in 2001, 92 million (46%) of adults
in the United States participated in some kind of
formal adult education in order to keep their skills
current, accommodate new job requirements, earn
an advanced degree, or to satisfy the desire for
additional knowledge (Allen & Seaman, 2005).
The projected increase in adult participa-
tion in both formal and informal educational
opportunities paired with the rapid economic
and technological changes in our information
and communication-based world have elevated
lifelong learning from a casual pursuit to one of
necessity. The confluence of time, demographics,
finances, and personal/professional responsi-
bilities make distance learning or e-learning an
efficient and effective method of reaching the
adult learner (Rasheed, 2007). E-learning offers
opportunities for flexible learning schedules,
varied options for learning pace, and practical
applications of instructional content delivered in
means that may be replicated in actual job situa-
tions (ASTD/NGA, 2001).
The evolving vision for future training incor-
porates appropriate levels of e-learning that would
allow adult learners to engage in a continuous
updating of information so as to keep pace with
the lightening speed of changes in business and
industry. However, as with any changing process,
the blending of adult education and information
communication technologies requires adaptation
and accommodation on the part of the learner and
the teacher.
New Paradigms for Adult Learning
Organizations, educational institutions, and enti-
ties in business and industry create the learning
delivery procedures to be utilized within their
specific educational and training programs. In cre-
ating such procedures, an important consideration
is the role of the adult educator in transitioning
adult learning to include new technologies. A para-
digm shift on the part of the instructor is required
to adapt basic curriculum and updated informa-
tion to new strategies congruent with e-learning.
Rather than serving in the traditionally defined
role of teacher, the instructional role becomes, in
large part, one of facilitator. Adult educators will
certainly design curriculum content appropriate
for the specific course, but the actual delivery of
instruction utilizing information communication
technology requires a more active interplay with
the learner who must assume more responsibility
for choosing delivery methods related to time,
individual versus group work, and ways of com-
pleting and presenting assignments.
Considering the previously discussed needs of
adult learners, establishing a positive environment
that will support the learning style of the student
depends on the facilitator’s skill in creating a
safe, nurturing, and accepting atmosphere. Why
is safety so important? The answer lies in the
hierarchy of human needs as set forth by Maslow
(1954) which placed survival and safety as the
initial foci for individuals, but identifies the goal
of self-actualization as an innermost striving for
human beings. As the basic need for humans, it
is essential that a participant in an adult learning
group feel safe both in the actual physical sense
and in the psychological sense in order to reach
self-actualization, which represents the highest
level of psychological health, and also the full
utilization of talents and capacities.
It is incumbent on the adult educator as the
facilitator to help the group establish an environ-
ment wherein all members feel safe enough to
explore beyond their perceived level of familiar-
ity and comfort. Inherent within competence and
control beliefs is the construct of self-concept that
“reflects one’s collective self-perceptions formed
through experiences with the environment and
interpretations of those experiences and influenced
by interactions with significant other persons”
145
 Adapting Adult Learning Theories for Online Learning
(Shavelson & Bolus, 1982, as cited in Schunk &
Zimmerman, 2006, p. 352).
Another characteristic inherent in the role of the
facilitator is found in Vygotsky’s (1978) zone of
proximal development, a theory that suggests that
a level of competent performance can be achieved
by an individual when supported or mediated by
a more competent other. In discussing this theory,
O’Donnell (2006) concluded that
...the zone of proximal development is jointly
constructed by the interacting participants...and
is best accomplished when one partner is aware
of the current level of functioning of the other
and is able to prompt, hint, or otherwise scaffold
the developing competence of the other. (p. 787)
Scaffolding is an instructional technique that
incorporates the teacher as a model for introducing
a desired learning strategy or task. The respon-
sibility for replicating the task is then gradually
shifted to the students. The term scaffolding derives
from the works of Wood, Bruner, and Ross (1976)
and was developed as a metaphor to illustrate the
assistance that a teacher may provide in order to
help a student accomplish a task or understand a
concept that was initially beyond that student’s
capability.
The scaffolding of tasks and responsibilities of
the adult learner add yet another characteristic to
the adult educator who is in the role of learning
facilitator. A shift in levels of responsibilities of
the adult learner results in a shift in the role of the
facilitator. O’Donnell (2006) discussed the role
of the teacher in varying theoretical perspectives
on peer learning. She identifies the role of the
facilitator to be present in multiple perspectives,
including social cohesion, sociocultural, elabo-
ration. She also identified the role of facilitator
as being essential and noted that in Vygotskyian
terms the role of facilitator is identified as model/
guide. Within these varying perspectives, the fa-
cilitator works to ensure teambuilding, directing
146
instruction in help-giving, modeling, valuing of
contributions, and building a sense of community.
Lyman and Foyle (1990) noted that leadership
of a group is accomplished by modeling skills
and behaviors that support group development,
embedding principles and practices within the
process that will move the group toward self-
facilitation. As the facilitator, the adult educator
will be challenged to build such a shifting of
responsibilities into the progression of learning
tasks so as to keep adult learners engaged in the
learning process. O’Donnell (2006) suggested that
in a reciprocal peer tutoring situation, the role of
the teacher as the initial model is essential for a
complex cognitive activity. To that end, a skilled
teacher “is capable of making her or his thinking
visible, allowing students to gradually practice
increasingly complex skills, and eventually fad-
ing the support needed by the students” (p. 797).
Another description that applies to individual
learning spaces or “zones” is classified within an
experiential learning model (Schoel & Maizell,
2002). When one is functioning within the realm
of the familiar, one is in the comfort zone. Little
challenge is found here—status quo is maintained.
Beyond that is a realm of risk-taking known as
the stretch zone wherein optimal growth may oc-
cur. The learner is challenged in new ways that
produce growth and understanding, paving the
way for expanded abilities and knowledge that
are just beyond their comfort zone. When the
level of challenge pushes the learner into feelings
of uncertainty, doubt, and fear, the panic zone is
reached and survival becomes the main focus.
Growth is replaced with a “shutting down” or
retreat so as to distance one from the situation
and affect a return to a safer environment. This
process relates to collaborative learning in the
need to establish a “space” where collaborative
learning is fostered and can potentially grow.
Adult learners engaged in the continual pro-
cesses of inquiry and acquisition of new informa-
tion may find themselves confronted with multiple
methods of instruction that are unfamiliar and may,
Adapting Adult Learning Theories for Online Learning
as a result, produce uncomfortable challenges to
learning. Computerized assessment and evalu-
ation techniques, televised interactive lectures,
videoconferencing, podcasts, webinars, blogs,
professional networking sites, and electronic
portfolios are just some of the instructional tools
utilized in e-learning that have the potential to
produce frustration and reduction in motivation
to learn. It is in this context that the role of the
instructor becomes essential in establishing a
safe and encouraging learning environment for
adult learners.
Interactive Elements to
Promote Learning
The potential for adult learners to participate in
training and educational programs based upon their
own selection and schedule requires an increase
in each learner’s level of personal responsibility
for his or her own learning. Dependent upon the
structure of the educational task, each individual
learner must engage in finding, analyzing, assimi-
lating, retrieving and storing pertinent information.
However, each learner can still benefit from ap-
propriate assistance from outside sources.
O’Donnell (2006) used the term peer learning
to describe various forms of learning in which peers
help one another. She includes cooperative and
collaborative learning, peer tutoring, and cross-age
tutoring among the many forms in which peers
interact to learn from each other. Johnson and
Johnson (1991) suggested five basic elements that
assist in promoting learning together: (a) positive
interdependence; (b) face-to-face promotive inter-
action; (c) individual accountability and personal
responsibility; (d) interpersonal and small group
skills; and (e) group processing. In the world of
e-learning, such strategies are still applicable in
the form of online learning communities, instant
messaging, chat rooms, and other electronic
methods for interaction.
Another perspective for formulating instruc-
tional strategies that promote positive interac-
tion for adult learners involves reciprocity and
mutuality. Greenberg (2000), defined reciprocity
as the “positive connection of acceptance, trust,
and understanding” that is derived from being
in relationship with another (p. 212). Mutuality
is defined by Greenberg and Williams (2002)
as being “dependent upon openness, flexibility,
spontaneity, and a willingness to be changed by
the relationship” (p. 100). From their observations,
they asserted that:
Reciprocity …provides a dynamic connection
between people that sets up a propensity for
change; a propensity for movement that might
not occur without the interaction. The intent of
each participant, the meaning they bring to the
experience and share together, and any insight
they gain at a level that goes beyond the specific
learning experience is determined in many ways
by the degree to which they establish effective
reciprocity, both in being with and doing for oth-
ers in the learning experience. (p. 96)
Once fully established within the group en-
vironment, either face-to-face or in an online
learning situation, reciprocity and mutuality as de-
scribed above becomes an integral part in helping
to bring about both individual and group change.
Additional Factors to Ensure Success
Once the decision is made by an organization
or group to transition to e-learning through the
use of information communication technolo-
gies, the question arises as to where to begin.
Assessing the level of readiness for e-learning is
an efficient way to set appropriate expectations,
prevent false starts, and avoid costly mistakes.
Claire Schooley of Forrester Research cautions
that distance learning programs fail to reach their
full potential if organizational goals are not aligned
with actual employee tasks. Support from upper
level management and executives can also ensure
e-learning success by encouraging development
of appropriate distance learning strategies, and by
promoting e-learning usage throughout an organi-
147
 Adapting Adult Learning Theories for Online Learning
zation. Factors such as access, time, convenience,
and motivation also impact the potential success
of e-learning.
Money earmarked for training is decreasing
as the need for training increases. E-learning
and e-conferences take the place of face-to-face
training and conferencing as time and money are
dwindling. Microtization is a term that describes
the trend of computers and other technology de-
vices to shrink in size while expanding in capacity.
However, it is also applicable to the specialized
tasks that fuel the drive to learn. The information
needed to complete specific, work-related tasks
requires continual updating if the skills of the
worker are to remain fresh and viable.
Micro-virtual conferences, new methods of
assessment and delivery of information, and
certifications that focus on single skill sets are
necessary to support broad skill sets. Developing
strategies that incorporate the best of traditional
adult learning theories along with effective new
strategies will establish e-learning options that
will provide the needed answers.
FUTURE TRENDS
The future trend toward increased usage of e-
learning will inevitably continue at a rapid rate
as business, industry, and education strive to keep
pace with technological advances. Maintaining
status quo in knowledge and technological prac-
tices is no longer adequate is such a fast-paced
environment. “Keeping up” in the 21st century
digital economy has established expectations for
learning to be continuously ongoing in every field.
E-learning provides the fastest, most conve-
nient methods for accomplishing this task. As
explored in this chapter, successful transitioning
to e-learning requires creating a favorable climate
that promotes:
1. Reinforced expectations that continuous
learning is necessary for continued employ-
ment and economic survival;
148
2. Greater access to computers and other forms
of technology so that barriers to e-learning
are diminished;
3. Development of curriculum that incorporates
flexibility for individualized learning needs
and multiple delivery methods;
4. Restructuring the role of the instructor from
that of traditional teacher to one of learning
facilitator;
5. Transforming best practices of adult educa-
tion to be congruent with online learning;
and, most importantly,
6. Empowering adult learners to assume in-
creased responsibility for their own learn-
ing.Attention to these factors will help fuel
increased levels of training and contribute
toward a better, more efficient workforce
that will meet the needs of the future.
CONCLUSION
The integration between adult learning and in-
formation communication technologies is fast
becoming the inevitable method of choice for
teaching and training adult learners. In sum-
mary, e-learning brings higher, more up-to-date
education and training that can be acquired with
fewer barriers and the greatest deference to each
learner’s individual learning style. As early as a
decade ago, Sfard (1998) asserted that,
Our ability to prepare ourselves today to deal with
new situations we are going to encounter tomor-
row is the very essence of learning. Competence
means being able to repeat what can be repeated
while changing what needs to be changed. (p. 9)
More recently, the National Governors Asso-
ciation (ASTD & NGA, 2001) predicted that the
utilization of e-learning has the potential to bring
multiple benefits to the United States through:
1. Development of a higher level of quality in
education and training programs;
Adapting Adult Learning Theories for Online Learning
2. Greater access to training leading to greater
employment opportunities;
3. Higher levels of efficiency and performance
in business and industry;
4. A workforce that is competitive in the world
marketplace; and
5. Strengthening of both families and commu-
nities through higher levels of employment
and productivity.
Additionally, the incorporation of e-learning
into the world of adult learning could possibly
influence the development of models for changes
in future learning that may be applied at all edu-
cational levels from kindergarten to college.
The challenge for organizations, from universi-
ties to businesses, is to acknowledge and utilize
the full potential of e-learning. Productivity and
performance gains may be achieved in all aspects
requiring updated information and communica-
tion. Governmental policies, as reflected in the
American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of
2009 and other legislative mandates, provide a
nurturing environment for e-learning. Barriers
to e-learning can be removed through the col-
laborative efforts of government, industry, and
educational institutions. Embracing e-learning
in personal and professional capacities paves the
way to a new era of unprecedented growth and
opportunity for the United States and a brighter
future for all of its citizens.
REFERENCES
Allen, E. I., & Seaman, J. (2005). Entering the
mainstream, The quality and extent of online
education in the United States, 2003 and 2004.
Retrieved October 22, 2009, from http://www.
elearners.com/guide-to-online-education/online-
education-research.asp
American Society of Training Directors & Na-
tional Governors Association. (2001). A vision
of e-learning for America’s workforce: Report of
the commission on technology and adult learning.
Alexandria, VA: ASTD.
Brookfield, S. (1986). Understanding and facili-
tating adult learning: A comprehensive analysis of
principles and effective practice. San Francisco:
Jossey-Bass.
Caffarella, R. S. (1992). Cognitive development in
adulthood. Paper presented at the annual confer-
ence of the Project for Study of Adult Learning,
Chicago, IL.
Carr, W., & Kemmis, S. (1986). Becoming criti-
cal: Education, knowledge and action research.
London: Falmer Press.
Collins, M. S., Brick, J. M., & Kim, K. (1997). The
measurement of participation in adult education.
In R. Nolan & H. Chelesvig (Eds.), Proceedings
of the 38th Annual Adult Education Research
Conference (pp. 61-66). Stillwater: Oklahoma
State University.
Conti, G. (1977). Rebels with a cause: Myles Hor-
ton and Paulo Freire. Community College Review,
5(1), 36–43. doi:10.1177/009155217700500107
Covey, S. R. (1989). The seven habits of highly
effective people: Restoring the character ethic.
New York: Simon & Schuster.
Creswell, J. W. (2003). Research design: Qualita-
tive, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches
(2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Dick, B. (1993). You want to do an action research
thesis? How to conduct and report action research.
Action Research Theses and Dissertations. Re-
trieved September 5, 2009, from http://www.scu.
edu.au/schools/gcm/ar/art/arthesis.html.
Ebert, O. (2000). Six leaders in the adult educa-
tion field. Journal of Educational Opportunity,
18(3), 91–103.
149
 Adapting Adult Learning Theories for Online Learning
Fenwick, T., & Parsons, J. (1995). Who is Stephen
Covey, and what can we learn from critically
analyzing his work? (ERIC Reproduction Service
No. ED382 913.)
Fingeret, A. H. (1982). The illiterate underclass:
Demythologizing an American stigma. Un-
published doctoral dissertation, Syracuse State
University.
Fingeret, A. H. (1983). Oral subculture member-
ship: A nondeficit approach to illiterate adults.
Lifelong Learning Conference Proceedings. Col-
lege Park, MD: University of Maryland. ERIC
Reproduction Service No. ED226228).
Fingeret, A. H., & Danin, S. (1991). They really
put a hurtin’ on my brain. Learning in Literacy
Volunteers of New York City. Durham, NC: Lit-
eracy South.
Fingeret, H. A. (1994). Lives of change: An eth-
nographic evaluation of two learner-centered
literacy programs. Vancouver, Canada: University
of British Columbia.
Freire, P. (1970). Pedagogy of the oppressed. New
York: Continuum.
Fullan, M. (2005). Leadership and sustainability:
System thinkers in action. Thousand Oaks, CA:
Corwin Press.
Greenberg, K. H. (2000). Cognitive enrichment
advantage teacher handbook. Chicago: Skylight
Professional Development.
Greenberg, K. H., & Williams, L. (2002). Reci-
procity and mutuality in dynamic assessment:
Asking uncomfortable questions. In Resing, W.,
Ruijssenaars, W., & van der Aalsvort, D. (Eds.),
Learning Potential Assessment and Cognitive
Training: Actual Research and Perspectives in
Theory Building and Methodology (pp. 91–110).
England: JAI Press/Elsivier.
150
Greenwood, D. J., & Levin, M. (2007). Intro-
duction to action research: Social research for
social change (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA:
Sage Publications.
Hiemstra, R., & Sisco, B. (1990). Individualizing
instruction: Making learning personal, empower-
ing, and successful. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Hill, F. E. (1935). The school in the camps: The
educational program of the civilian conservation
corps. New York: American Association for Adult
Education.
Horton, M., & Freire, P. (1990). We make the road
by walking: Conversations on education and social
change. Philadelphia: Temple University Press.
Horton, M., Kohl, J., & Kohl, H. (1998). The long
haul: An autobiography. New York: Teachers
College Press.
Howell, G. (1976). C.C.C. Boys remember: A
pictorial history of the civilian conservation corps.
Medford, OR: Klocker Printery.
Jarvis, P. (1998). The practitioner-researcher:
Developing theory from practice. San Francisco:
Jossey-Bass.
Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, R. T. (1991). Learn-
ing together and alone: Cooperative, competitive,
and individualistic learning. Englewood Cliffs,
NJ: Prentice Hall.
Kemmis, S., & McTaggart, R. (2005). Participa-
tory action research: Communicative action and
the public sphere. In Denzin, N. K., & Lincoln,
Y. S. (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research
(3rd ed., pp. 559–603). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage
Publications.
Kim, K., Collins Hagedorn, M., Williamson, J.,
& Chapman, C. (2004). Participation in adult
education and lifelong learning: 2000-01 (NCES
20004-050). U. S. Department of Education, Na-
tional Center for Education Staistics. Washington,
DC: U. S. Government Printing Office.
Adapting Adult Learning Theories for Online Learning
Knowles, M. (1975). Self-directed learning.
Chicago: Follet.
Knowles, M. (1984a). The adult learner: A
neglected species (3rd ed.). Houston, TX: Gulf
Publishing.
Knowles, M. (1984b). Andragogy in action. San
Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Knowles, M., Holton, E. III, & Swanson, R. (2005).
The adult learner: The definitive classic in adult
education and human resource development (6th
ed.). Burlington, MA: Elsevier.
Knowles, M. S. (1980). The modern practice of
adult education: From pedagogy to androgogy
(2nd ed.). New York: Cambridge.
Lieb, S. (1991). Principles of adult learning.
Retrieved August 31, 2009 from http://honolulu.
hawaii.edu/intranet/committees/FacDevCom/
guidebk/teachtip/adults-2.htm
Lyman, L., & Foyle, H. C. (1990). Cooperative
grouping for interactive learning: Students, teach-
ers, and administrators. NEA School Restructur-
ing Series. Washington, DC: National Education
Association.
Maslow, A. (1954). Motivation and personality.
New York: Harper & Row.
McNiff, J. (1988). Action research: Prin-
ciples and practice. London: Routledge.
doi:10.4324/9780203305676
McTaggert, R. (1991). Principles for participatory
action research. Adult Education Quarterly, 41(3),
168–187. doi:10.1177/0001848191041003003
Merriam, S., Caffarella, R., & Baumgartner, L.
(2007). Learning in adulthood: A comprehensive
guide. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Mezirow, J. (1990). Fostering critical reflection in
adulthood: A guide to transformative and emanci-
patory learning. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Mezirow, J. (1991). Transformative dimensions of
adult learning. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Mezirow, J. (1996). Contemporary paradigms
of learning. Adult Education Quarterly, 46(3),
158–173. doi:10.1177/074171369604600303
Newman, A., & Beverstock, C. (1990). Adult
literacy: Contexts and challenges. Newark, DE:
International Reading Association, Inc.
O’Donnell, A. M. (2006). The role of peers and
group learning. In Alexander, P., & Winne, P.
(Eds.), Handbook of educational psychology
(2nd ed., pp. 781–802). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence
Erlbaum Associates.
Pates, A., & Fingeret, H. A. (1994). Innovative
training practices: Practitioner research as staff
development. Durham, NC: Literacy South.
Perry, N. E., Turner, J. C., & Meyer, D. K. (2006).
Classrooms as contexts for motivating learning.
In Alexander, P., & Winne, P. (Eds.), Handbook
of educational psychology (2nd ed., pp. 781–802).
Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Peters, J. M. (1994, April). Instructors-as-re-
searchers-and-theorists: Faculty development in
a community college. Paper presented at Oxford
University.
Pintrich, P. R., & Schunk, D. H. (2002). Motiva-
tion in education: Theory, research, and applica-
tions (2nd ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Merrill
Prentice Hall.
Rasheed, F. (2007). Factors impeding implementa-
tion of web-based distance learning. Association
for the Advancement of Computing in Education
(AACE) [Chesapeake, VA: AACE.]. Journal,
15(3), 315–338.
Reason, P., & Bradbury, H. (Eds.). (2001). Hand-
book of action research: Participative inquiry and
practice. London: Sage Publications.
151
 Adapting Adult Learning Theories for Online Learning
Salmond, J. A. (1967). The civilian conservation
corps, 1933-1942: A new deal case study. Durham,
NC: Duke University Press.
Sansone, C., & Harackiewicz, J. M. (2000). In-
trinsic and extrinsic motivation: The search for
optimal motivation and performance. San Diego,
CA: Academic Press.
Schoel, J., & Maizell, R. S. (2002). Exploring
islands of healing: New perspectives on adven-
ture based counseling. Beverly, MA: Project
Adventure.
Schunk, D. H., & Zimmerman, B. J. (2006).
Competence and control beliefs: Distinguishing
the means and ends. In Alexander, P., & Winne,
P. (Eds.), Handbook of educational psychology
(2nd ed., pp. 349–367). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence
Erlbaum Associates.
Sfard, A. (1998). On two metaphors for learning
and the dangers of choosing just one. Educational
Researcher, 27(2), 4–13.
Shavelson, R. J., & Bolus, R. (1982). Self-
concept. The interplay of theory and methods.
Journal of Educational Psychology, 74, 3–17.
doi:10.1037/0022-0663.74.1.3
Silberman, M. (1990). Active training. San Diego:
University Associates.
Smith, C. M., & Reio, T. G. (2006). Adult devel-
opment, schooling, and the transition to work. In
Alexander, P., & Winne, P. (Eds.), Handbook of
educational psychology (2nd ed., pp. 349–367).
Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
United States Department of Education, National
Center for Educational Statistics. (2004). 2004
Digest of Education Statistics. Washington, DC:
U. S. Government Printing Office.
United States Department of Labor Employment
& Training Administration. (2009). National
workforce system readiness level and technical
assistance needs. Washington, DC: U.S. Govern-
ment Printing Office.
152
United States Office of Education. (1935). Civilian
conservation corps. Vocational series. Washing-
ton, DC: U. S. Government Printing Office.
Vygotsky, L. (1978). Mind and society: The devel-
opment of higher mental processes. Cambridge,
MA: Harvard University Press.
Weil, S. W., & McGill, I. (1989). Making sense
of experiential learning: Diversity in theory and
practice. Philadelphia: Open University Press.
Wood, D., Bruner, J. S., & Ross, G. (1976). The
role of tutoring in problem solving. Journal of
Psychology and Psychiatry, 17(3), 28–31.
Ziegler, M. (2001). Improving practice through
action research. Adult Learning, 12(1), 3–4.
KEY TERMS AND DEFINITIONS
American Recovery and Reinvestment Act
(ARRA) of 2009: The ARRA is also known as
the Recovery Act. It was specifically intended to
create and support ongoing training mechanisms
that will serve to maintain and create jobs in the
United States.
Andragogical Approach: The principles in-
herent within the andragogical approach to adult
learning emphasize the self-directed nature that
propels adults to enter and persist in educational
training programs.
E-Learning: This term is defined as the de-
livery of instructional content or completion of
learning experiences through use of electronic
technology.
Expectancy-Value Theory: This theory ex-
plains motivation in terms of individuals’ expecta-
tions that an outcome is likely in a given situation,
and the extent to which they value that outcome.
Individual Learning Spaces or Zones: When
one is functioning within the realm of the familiar,
one is in the comfort zone. Little challenge is found
here—status quo is maintained. Beyond that is a
realm of risk-taking known as the stretch zone
Adapting Adult Learning Theories for Online Learning
wherein optimal growth may occur. The learner
is challenged in new ways that produce growth
and understanding, paving the way for expanded
abilities and knowledge that are just beyond their
comfort zone. When the level of challenge pushes
the learner into feelings of uncertainty, doubt,
and fear, the panic zone is reached and survival
becomes the main focus.
Learning Transfer: When we talk about
learning transfer, we mean carrying knowledge
across contextual boundaries.
Microtization: This a term that describes the
trend of computers and other technology devices
to shrink in size while expanding in capacity.
However, it is also applicable to the specialized
tasks that fuel the drive to learn.
Self Empowerment: Once empowered, people
become increasingly more responsible for their
own learning process.
Transformational Theory: This theory as-
serts that failure to acknowledge the key role of
an individual’s personal frame of reference limits
the lens through which meaning is construed and
learning occurs.
153
154

Chapter 10
Impact of Virtual Learning
Environments on the Future of
Adult Education and Training
David Deggs
University of Arkansas, Fayetteville, USA

Kenda Grover
University of Arkansas, Fayetteville, USA

Kit Kacirek
University of Arkansas, Fayetteville, USA

ABSTRACT
The use of distance education technologies has become more common in adult education and training
programs over the past few decades as educators and trainers have made great strides to utilize these
technologies to meet the increasingly demanding needs of adult learners. Meanwhile virtual learning
has become a popular form of distance education, although it has only been implemented to a limited
scope within adult education and training compared to other areas of education. This chapter explores
the advances that have occurred with distance education technologies including standardized course
management systems, investments in technology systems, and refinement of instructional delivery methods.
The chapter also explores future trends that are likely to emerge regarding the use of virtual learning
for adult education and training and also provide guidance to adult educators and trainers who plan
to utilize virtual learning.

INTRODUCTION which have utilized web-based technologies have

Distance education has increasingly become a
more common instructional method for delivering
programs to meet the education and training needs
of adult learners. Distance education programs
DOI: 10.4018/978-1-61692-906-0.ch010
grown tremendously over the past few decades
among both adult education and training pro-
grams, including enrollment in degree programs
offered by colleges and universities. This growth
has been cited in the literature and acknowledged
by national education organizations (Moosavar-
Impact of Virtual Learning Environments on the Future of Adult Education and Training
Rahmani & Larson-Daugherty, 2007; Ellis, Ginns,
& Piggott, 2009)
There are many challenges facing distance
education today including increased enroll-
ments, changing faculty roles, training needs for
faculty, and securing financial support (Howell,
Williams, & Lindsay, 2003). Increased popular-
ity of web-based instruction has caused many of
these challenges (Bullen, 1999) and as a result
the Internet has emerged as the dominant form of
distance-education media. The end result has been
identified need for “learning and teaching strate-
gies that exploit the capabilities of technology”
(Howell, Williams, & Lindsay, 2003, pp. 11-12).
Programs must respond to these challenges, meet
learner demand, and properly utilize the technol-
ogy or chance loosing students to other institutions
(Kroder, Suess, & Sachs, 1998).
Meanwhile virtual learning environments
(VLEs) have become more popular in other areas
of education and are also becoming somewhat
more common for use in meeting training needs.
Vander Valk (2008) stated that virtual environ-
ments hold great promise for educational institu-
tions. Virtual environments provide opportunities
for collaborative learning, development of learn-
ing communities, and virtual training, as well as
“exciting possibilities in the areas of experiential
learning and prior learning assessment” (p. 210).
However, virtual reality (VR) is somewhat novel
to the fields of adult education and training, as
evidenced by its limited use to date, the possibility
of using computers to create virtual worlds and
simulations was acknowledged two decades ago
by Bricken (1990):
Computers are not only symbol processors, they
are reality generators. Until recently, computers
have generated only one dimensional symbolic
strings. Text and numbers. Text is a code which,
when read, generates images of reality in our
minds. (Introduction section, para. 3)
Bricken stated that virtual reality was in the
“unique position of being commercially avail-
able before being academically understood”
(Introduction section, para. one). Adult education
and training programs are likened to other fields
of education where virtual education has yet to
be implemented to its fullest potential. Today,
many adult educators and trainers are striving to
implement existing distance education and other
technologies into teaching and learning processes.
Thus there is limited time to explore the use of
virtual reality, despite the opportunities and ben-
efits it can provide. Furthermore, it is likely that
misunderstandings about the proper use of virtual
learning environments could likely account for
the lack of utilization of the technology into adult
education and training programs.
WHAT WILL BECOME OF
DISTANCE EDUCATION?
Approximately one decade ago Eastmond (1998)
stated that the challenge for adult learning via
internet-based distance education was to move
adult students, faculty, advisers and courses to
higher technologies. At that time “higher tech-
nologies” consisted of e-mail and web-based
applications. Eastmond cautioned that these
“high-tech environments are less familiar to most
adults, requiring some skill with computers, and
challenge educators to rethink their instructional
approaches” (p. 34). Although advances have been
made and institutions and organizations have made
investments in distance education technologies,
the development and implementation of distance
education programs for adult learners has not
reached an optimal level. Harroff and Valentine
(2006) stated that web-based adult education may
have yet to gain adequate support among some
institutions in order to ensure that the quality of
instruction remains effective. Harroff and Val-
entine also stated that demand and competition
could prompt organizations to invest in resources
155
 Impact of Virtual Learning Environments on the Future of Adult Education and Training
to improve and expand web-based instructional
offerings. (p. 16)
Despite some of the aforementioned chal-
lenges, there has been growth in the use and
popularity of distance education technologies
over the past couple of decades in adult educa-
tion and training programs. Distance education
technologies have been promoted as the means
to provide educational opportunity so that learn-
ers could learn anytime or anywhere. However,
distance education programs are not universal
and have not resolved all issues associated with
access and opportunity as many educators and
administrators had hoped or dreamed. As West-
brook (2006), stated “online learning is not the
global solution that it pretends to be in terms of
bridging geographical, and cultural, distances”
(p. 472) which is due to the disparities between
information rich and information poor.
The use of distance education technologies
has grown at a staggering pace in higher educa-
tion after the technologies emerged in the 1990s.
The use of distance education technologies grew
out of pressures to provide a highly educated
workforce amidst budget challenges for colleges
and universities. Although it was thought to be
the “next big thing,” online education has been
met by “considerable political contention in the
university” (Hamilton & Feenberg, 2005, p. 97).
Perhaps political contention regarding online
learning in higher education has been warranted
in some cases. For example, research about the
use of distance education in higher education has
found that students drop out of online courses due
to issues related to personal resilience, personal
identity issues, lack of support, or poorly designed
or supported courses (Hughes, 2007). Likewise,
it has been found that adults who participated in
distance education programs for the first time often
experienced cognitive overload which resulted in
early withdrawals and in some cases dropping out
of an online degree program (Tyler-Smith, 2006).
Much of the debate about distance education
technologies centers on issues related to compe-
156
tition with traditional face-to-face instructional
methods. Some educators have feared that distance
education programs would replace traditional
face-to-face instructional methods. However,
some critics have purported that distance educa-
tion technologies are merely an alternative to
reach larger numbers of non-traditional students
(Ndahi, 2006). Others see the Internet and distance
education technologies as an alternate conduit for
delivering instruction and categorize the Internet
as simply another educational tool that can be used
to create educational communities with boundar-
ies (Duin, 1998).
Success of distance education programs hinges
on many elements including adequate training
and support as well as the level of involvement
of faculty and students. Adequate training must
be provided to faculty who choose to teach via
distance and technical support structures must exist
for students and faculty alike (Westbrook, 2006;
Harroff & Valentine, 2006). Adequate training
must be coupled with a thorough understanding
of the technologies that are being utilized (Mer-
rill, 2004). Online courses must be carefully con-
structed by faculty and instructional designers and
likewise must include the elements of faculty pres-
ence and student immediacy (Vesely, Bloom, &
Sherlock, 2007). The design of distance education
programs for adults must be student-centered with
the activities and assignments aligned to course
objectives and learning outcomes (Merrill, 2004).
Finally, well-constructed online courses for adult
learners have included the elements of assessment,
guidance, community building, communication,
humanizing and evaluation (DuCharme-Hansen
& Dupin-Bryant, 2004).
Enrollment in distance education programs has
grown as adult learners sought new opportuni-
ties to participate in adult education and training
programs. Adult learners have sought learning
opportunities that are convenient and which will
also meet their learning needs when considering
education and training programs. Many adult
learners have found that distance education
Impact of Virtual Learning Environments on the Future of Adult Education and Training
programs are the solution to their learning and
personal needs. Thus the future growth of adult
education and training programs offered via dis-
tance education technologies will more than likely
be contingent upon demand by adult learners for
programs offered in a convenient and accessible
format. It is conceivable that the adult learner,
through expression of their learning and personal
needs, could in fact be the catalyst for continued
refinement and enhancement of existing online
learning environments and development of new
and more engaging distance learning environments
(Grover, Deggs & Kacirek, 2009).
Developing New Technologies
for Distance Education
Adult educators and trainers should carefully
consider how distance education technologies
will permeate the landscape of education and
training in the near future. The emergence of
new and improved technologies has promoted
the evolution of distance education programs
that has previously been discussed as well as the
challenges that face distance education programs
The evolution of distance education has also led to
changes in policy and practice regarding education
and training for adults. Hamilton and Feenberg
(2005) offered the following question about the
future of distance education and how it will be
affected by selection of an intended function:
The essential question to ask in a revised politics
of online education is whether the technology
will work to facilitate the transmission of static
information, fostering standardised modes of
interaction between human users, machines and
commodified knowledge, or whether the technolo-
gies and online programmes can be rooted in an
essentially social ideal of education, extending
and enabling new forms of mediated interaction.
Technology could potentially support either one
of these programmes. But, as outcomes, they are
in no sense given prior to specific appropriations
within particular social settings. (p. 116)
Saba (2008) discussed the development of an
educational management system (EMS) of the
future and offered a conceptualization of how such
systems will meet the needs of higher education
constituents. The components of Saba’s EMS for
the future included elements of autonomy and cre-
ativity. Saba advocated for an educational manage-
ment system that will “offer relevant environments
for learner(s) to develop new ideas, experiment
with such ideas and transfer them to novel situa-
tions” (p. 166). Saba spoke of the emergence of
this new EMS during the post-industrial era where
“the university has become the primary engine of
the knowledge economy” (p. 158). As evidenced
by the statements from Hamilton and Feenberg
(2005) as well as Saba, the development of new
distance education technologies could likely be
contingent upon responsiveness to societal needs
such as social interaction and preparation of a
workforce for a new highly competitive economy.
Both approaches could simultaneously add to the
value that adult learners, educators, trainers, and
other stakeholders contribute to the information
society.
Blended Models which include both face to
face and distance education components are often
referred to as hybrid models which are character-
ized as having at least half the learning activities
conducted via an online format (Mossaver-Rah-
mani & Larson-Daugherty, 2007).
Skill and Young (2002) provided an explana-
tion of what a hybrid model might include in their
description of an integrated learning environment.
Their integrated learning environment included
a combination of in-class and electronically
mediated experiences for learners. Their hybrid
model blended face-to-face experiences with an
interactive electronic learning experience in order
to facilitate virtual teamwork among learners. Skill
and Young’s model focused on learning outcomes
157
 Impact of Virtual Learning Environments on the Future of Adult Education and Training
and time on task as a method of assessment and
promotes learner empowerment and responsibility.
Finally, the use of hybrid models has been
supported by Hughes (2007) who stated that a
blended course, which includes an online virtual
learning component, can improve retention of
at-risk learners. For some adult educators and
trainers, the hybrid model may be a formidable
method for balancing the benefits of both distance
education and face-to-face instructional methods.
Is There an Inevitable Migration
Toward Virtual Learning?
As previously stated, adult learners seek educa-
tion and training programs due to learning needs.
Growth of the information society has fueled this
need for adult learners. As early as 1990 Bricken
saw the connection between the growth of the
information society and the need for learners
to interact with information in a virtual world.
Bricken (1990) further described the possible uses
of virtual reality (VR) in education which could
lead to a more comprehensive and responsive
environment:
VR provides an exciting educational medium for
exploring worlds and for exploring ourselves. It
provides a training environment that is rich, repli-
cable, and responsive. It permits direct evaluation
of educational theory. The central educational
issue for VR is one of transfer of experience.
(Education Approaches section)
There has been an increased interest in virtual
collaboration and development of knowledge net-
works as a result of the digital revolution (Yoon
& Johnson, 2008). The result has been increased
efforts to develop more virtual learning environ-
ments. McGill and Hobbs (2007) defined a VLE as
“an information system that facilitates e-learning”
and which is able to “process, store and disseminate
educational material and support communication
associated with teaching and learning” (p. 191).
158
Virtual learning environments (VLEs) will en-
able adult educators and trainers to expand upon
the use of distance education technologies that
have already been put to use in adult education
and training programs. VLEs hold great promise
for the further refinement and enhancement of
distance education as it is currently known. The
promise of VLEs is the key component which
Bricken (1990) identified as an environment that
surrounds the learner. The use of a dimensional
environment which surrounds the learner would
move beyond the well known textual environ-
ment of current distance education technologies
and would also allow adult educators and trainers
to differentiate instructional methods in order
to enhance learning experiences. The end result
will be the expanded ability to meet adult learner
needs in a more comprehensive and responsive
environment.
Virtual reality has become more common
in training settings than in educational settings.
Thus far, virtual reality has been used to train
professionals such as aircraft pilots, air-traffic
controllers, military ground troops, and surgeons.
The emphasis of such training has been on the
development of critical thinking skills (Tichon,
2007). Interaction with information, transfer of
experience, and development of critical think-
ing skills are equally important to other areas
of adult education and training. The promise of
learning through virtual learning environments
and simulations could assist adult educators and
trainers in meeting some of the learning needs of
adult learners who are actively participating in the
myriad of educational and training programs that
exist in today’s information society.
There have been many documented benefits of
using virtual reality for learning purposes. Some
of the benefits related to educational and train-
ing purposes have included group work, social
consensus, and the construction of functional,
multi-participant environments. Furthermore,
virtual reality has provided opportunities for
customization of learning based upon individual
Impact of Virtual Learning Environments on the Future of Adult Education and Training
learner needs. Much of this customization may oc-
cur during the learning process as educators would
be able to “respond to the participant-learner, in
terms of both needs and preferences” thus making
a predesigned model not always appropriate as “the
teacher and student will modify the environment
in support of student behavior,” (Bricken, 1990,
Education Approaches section, para. 4). Such
approaches would support andragogical theories
which promote student-centered instruction based
upon student needs and prior learning experiences.
Virtual learning environments offer advantages
over physical learning environments. Reduced
costs, ability to utilize real tools for development
and design, improved safety and less likelihood
for injury, and ability to control the situation are
among the documented advantages to simulations
or virtual learning spaces (LaPorte, 2001; Tichon,
2007). Other examples of the promise of virtual
learning environments has included the ability
to create collaborative learning opportunities,
opportunity to develop learning communities,
ability to utilize experiential learning activities,
and ability to facilitate prior learning assessment
activities. Likewise, virtual learning environments
have been found to provide both neutrality and a
new mode that enables self-invention by learners
(Vander Valk, 2008).
Second Life, which is one of the most popular
virtual environments, has been adapted for educa-
tional use by the creation of experiential learning
activities. Students who have participated in learn-
ing environments created in Second Life are able
to role play, collaborate, and complete experiments
with other students and faculty. These learning
experiences which have been created in Second
Life may not be available or possible through
the face-to-face classrooms or typical distance
education programs (Skiba, 2009). Another virtual
or simulated environment, which has shared the
functionality for educational purposes like Second
Life, is massive multiplayer online role-playing
games (MMORPGs). MMORPGs have provided
additional potential for training and learning by
large groups by connected multiple remote users.
Efforts have been made toward using MMORPGs
for military training and “edu-gaming.” Although
there has been some success with MMORPGs,
the simulation-based learning approaches that
they employ merit further research (de Freitas &
Griffiths, 2007). Both Second Life and MMOR-
PGs were not initially developed for education
and training purposes; however, both have been
adapted to provide unique and enriching education
and training experiences for learners. These two
forms of virtual reality and simulations are prime
examples of virtual technologies that were made
available for commercial use prior to academic
use that Bricken (1990) described.
Reconciling Student and
Faculty Needs in Virtual
Learning Environments
Research by McGill and Hobbs (2007) found
that instructors perceived that they had a high
level of support for using VLEs. However, the
use of such virtual reality technology has not
been found to support the teaching activities and
practices of instructors. On the other hand, it has
been found that students believe that the use of
VLEs has supported their learning needs (McGill
& Hobbs, 2007). Thus, it has been suggested that
there is incongruence between faculty teaching
preferences and students’ learning preferences.
This has raised questions as to how VLEs can be
adjusted to meet the needs of both educators and
learners alike. Just as with ordinary distance edu-
cation programs, students require support and, as
with some cases in traditional distance education
programs, faculty do not always have the techni-
cal literacy required to lend students the support
that they need in VLEs (Kemp, Livingstone &
Bloomfield, 2009). It is essential that organiza-
tions and institutions provide adequate training to
adult educators and trainers so that they develop
the technical literacy skills required to develop
159
 Impact of Virtual Learning Environments on the Future of Adult Education and Training
virtual learning environments and interact with
learners in a meaningful way.
Desharnais and Limson (2007) offered design
principles from the Virtual Courseware project
which began in 1998. These principles can guide
educators and trainers in developing their techni-
cal literacy skills. The Virtual Coursework project
was focused on the development of simulations for
earth, environmental, or life science curricula and
was also used to supplement laboratory and field
work. Although these principles were developed
for the sciences, Desharnais and Limson assert
that these design principles can be used by all
fields. Their principles included:
1. Align to learning standards or objectives,
2. Make the software web-based and easily
accessible,
3. Design with the three “i’s” in mind: interac-
tive, intuitive, and inquiry-based,
4. Reinforce scientific methodology and critical
thinking skills,
5. Create open-ended simulations with linear
demonstration tours,
6. Use randomization algorithms that simulate
experimental error,
7. Provide mechanisms that allow students to
record and save experimental results,
8. Incorporate assessment tools,
9. Allow customization by instructors, and
10. Provide online help for students and sup-
porting documentation for instructors.
Merging Traditional Distance
Education with Virtual Learning
Blending of an existing course management sys-
tem for distance education with a virtual learning
environment has been found to further develop and
enhance distance education programs by allow-
ing for verifiable identity management, integrat-
ing support for assessment, and offering proven
structures for student collaboration and reflection
(Kemp, Livingstone & Bloomfield, 2009). For
160
example, the Simulation Linked Object Oriented
Dynamic Learning Environment (SLOODLE)
has allowed for the integration of the environ-
ments of Second Life with Moodle which is an
online course management system. The features
of SLOODLE included web-intercom, registra-
tion booth for identity management, quiz tool
and 3-D drop box, and choice tool which allowed
students to “vote” and see results in both Second
Life and Moodle. The multi-function SLOODLE
toolbar has been designed to allow students to use
classroom gestures which emulate a face-to-face
learning environment. Students and faculty may
also deliver notes to a student’s Moodle blog
while logged into the system through Second
Life. Finally, the presenter function in SLOODLE
has allowed learners and educators to present in-
formation in Moodle that was created in Second
Life (About Simulation Linked Object Oriented
Dynamic Learning Environment, n.d.). As virtual
education continues to become more widespread,
software applications such as SLOODLE which
act as a bridge between online course manage-
ment systems and virtual learning environments
will become more relevant when attempting to
provide education and training opportunities to
adult learners. Models such as this one which
connect the two environments are essential in
today’s information society where learners may
be accustomed to one system, but required to
participate in a program that operates in another.
Software such as SLOODLE has provided great
promise for enabling learners to explore new
learning systems, either traditional online course
management system or virtual worlds, through the
comfort of a system to which they are accustomed.
Virtual Teams to Promote
Interaction in Distance Education
The requirement for students to collaborate in
teams, either face-to-face or online, presents “a
complex psycho-social phenomenon” which is
abound with issues related to classroom manage-
Impact of Virtual Learning Environments on the Future of Adult Education and Training
ment (Westbrook, 2006, p. 475). Perhaps some of
the issues related to collaboration and team work
can be alleviated through virtual learning and the
development of virtual teams. Virtual teams are
similar to traditional teams as the members have
common goals and have to work collaboratively
on projects. As virtual teams have become more
popular in education and business settings, Yoon
and Johnson (2008) identified seven phases of
development for virtual teams including orienta-
tion, scheduling, exploration, work and decision,
progress check and evaluation, refinement or
putting together, and termination (Yoon & John-
son, 2008). Many adult educators and trainers
value the use of teamwork but also struggle to
reconcile the benefits with student complaints.
It is plausible to expect that virtual teams could
alleviate some of the issues which are faced by
adult educators and trainers who choose to utilize
teams for class work and projects while removing
some of the ambiguity and frustration that adult
learners experience.
Rice, Davidson, Dannenhoffer, and Gay (2007)
argue that the effectiveness of virtual teams can
be improved through adopting formal procedures
and structures. Tasks such as brainstorming,
consensus-building, and group meetings for dis-
seminating information and describing ideas can
be accomplished through computer mediated
collaborations provided that training is made
available to team members. Training should focus
on the use of technology, methodologies for team
functioning, and computer mediated collaboration
protocols (Rice, Davidson, Dannenhoffer, & Gay,
2007). Nunamaker, Reinig, and Briggs (2009) offer
the following principles for developing effective
virtual teams:
1. Realign reward structures for virtual teams.
2. Find new ways to focus attention on task.
3. Design activities that cause people to get to
know each other.
4. Build a virtual presence.
5. Agree on standards and terminology.
6. Leverage anonymity when appropriate.
7. Be more explicit.
8. Train teams to self-facilitate.
9. Embed collaboration technology into every-
day work.
FUTURE TRENDS FOR DISTANCE
EDUCATION AS A RESULT
OF VIRTUAL LEARNING
There is ample evidence to suggest that virtual
learning environments will become a more com-
mon and widely accepted method of instruction to
meet the education and training needs of adults in
the near future. Based upon the evidence that has
been cited in this chapter, the authors provide the
following trends that may emerge in the next few
years as adult education and training programs
begin to incorporate or migrate to the use of virtual
learning environments.
1. The terminology used to describe distance
education technologies will likely be ex-
panded to include references to the use of
virtual learning environments for instruc-
tional delivery.
The term distance education has almost become
exclusively synonymous with online education
although other forms of distance education have
existed for centuries. When distance education
was first introduced to higher education, it also
referred to courses offered via compressed in-
teractive video, paper-based independent study,
television, or satellite downlink. It is probable that
in the near further the term distance education will
also infer the use of virtual learning technologies
as an instructional delivery method. Although
researchers and some educators and trainers will
more than likely view it as a distinct area of dis-
tance education, it is more than likely that adult
learners, the consumers who participate in adult
education and training programs, will view virtual
161
 Impact of Virtual Learning Environments on the Future of Adult Education and Training
learning as the standard for course and program
delivery in distance education.
2. Course management systems used to deliver
education and training programs via distance
will continue to undergo extensive redesign
and modification to accommodate virtual
learning applications.
Course management systems which are used
to provide current distance education courses and
programs have undergone extensive revisions
since their inception. Online course manage-
ment systems are consistently upgraded in order
to improve the instructional design process for
educators and trainers and enhance the experience
for learners. Advances have been made in the
software used to create learning modules, facilitate
class discussions, and provide student feedback.
As previously discussed, there have already been
efforts to bridge course management systems with
virtual reality systems through software programs
such as SLOODLE. Likewise, there are presently
efforts underway to improve the experiences as-
sociated with the use of synchronous learning
applications within current course management
systems. The next logical step will be the incor-
poration of virtual learning applications for use in
online course management systems. Rather than a
software program that acts as a bridge, it is more
than likely that the incorporation of such virtual
learning applications will be a component that is
developed for and which is available through the
online course management system.
3. There will be increased competition among
public and private adult education and train-
ing providers to deliver courses and programs
through virtual learning technologies.
Current distance education technologies have
created a separation between providers of adult
education and training programs. Providers now
proudly advertise their ability to provide programs
162
via distance education in order to attract learners.
In some cases providers have reluctantly decided
to deliver programs via distance in order to remain
solvent and competitive with peers or competitors.
As previously stated, adult learners often choose
education and training programs based upon both
convenience and learning needs. It is plausible
that the use of virtual learning technologies and
knowledge of the advantages and benefits will be
the next criteria for classifying adult education and
training programs by consumer-minded learners.
Learners could possibly inquire about the use of
virtual learning technologies in a program and
eliminate a program from consideration because
it fails to use such technologies. This will more
than likely fuel the continued competition between
public and private providers of adult education
and training programs.
4. Greater emphasis will be placed on technical
literacy requirements for learners, educators
and trainers as a prerequisite to utilizing
virtual learning technologies.
In most cases until now learners, educators,
and trainers have been allowed to develop and
master essential technical skills as they become
acclimated to the distance learning environment.
Most orientation and training programs have only
recommended that users possess a certain skill
level and in some cases that level of skill ambigu-
ously defined. It is probable that as virtual learning
becomes more prevalent that learners, educators
and trainers will have to demonstrate competency
related to technical literacy before being permitted
to enroll or teach in an adult education or training
program that utilizes virtual learning technologies.
These prerequisite skills will be essential as learn-
ing would occur primarily through synchronous
methods and the learning environment will be a
consistent and active state of change. The option
of becoming acclimated to the technology used
to instructional delivery purposes while actively
Impact of Virtual Learning Environments on the Future of Adult Education and Training
participating these types of learning environments
will not be possible.
5. Hybrid models will become more popular
as an intermediary between face-to-face and
distance education environments.
More hybrid courses and programs which offer
a balance of face-to-face and distance education
learning environments are likely to emerge as
organizations work to resolve the aforementioned
political contention regarding the option of com-
pleting a course or program via distance education.
The advantages of virtual learning over current
distance education technologies could make it a
preferred alternative to educators and trainers who
have been reluctant or resistant to offer a course or
program via a distance education platform which
is primarily textual in nature. Since virtual learning
enables the use of other senses, some educators
and trainers might be more amenable to its use
because they may feel that it provides a greater
level of connectedness with learners who are at
a distance. However, some critics will likely see
this as another fad or lesser alterative to face-to-
face learning just as some view current distance
education technologies.
6. New measures of assessment and evaluation
will be developed to determine the value and
worth of virtual learning technologies.
Current distance education technologies have
necessitated the development of refined measures
to determine the value and worth of courses and
programs. Assessment and evaluation of distance
education technologies have affected the meth-
ods used by students to evaluate their learning
experiences, methods used by administrators and
managers to evaluate educators and trainers, and
the methods used by accreditation agencies to de-
termine quality and credential programs. Although
the adoption of virtual learning environments may
not result in entirely new measures of assessment
and evaluation, it will necessitate extensive revi-
sion to the measures that are currently in place
for distance education technologies.
Although the adoption of virtual learning tech-
nologies will result in new trends for the field of
distance education, it not reasonable to anticipate
that virtual learning technologies will bring about
resolution to some of the long-standing issues
that have permeated the debate about the value
of distance education in adult education or train-
ing. Without question the debates about the use of
distance education as an alternative to face-to-face
instructional methods will likely continue with
the political contention with which it has been
wrought. Adoption of virtual learning technolo-
gies will likely heighten and in some cases renew
these on-going debates which have been focused
on issues such as quality of instruction, learner
outcomes, cost issues, and support for distance
education programs. Although this will present
a new set of challenges for adult educators and
trainers who opt to use virtual learning technolo-
gies as an instructional delivery method, it will
also provide a more interactive and comprehen-
sive learning environment for adults who decide
to enroll in these programs. Again, this type of
learning environment will be more conducive to
meeting the needs of adult learners who partici-
pate in education and training programs. Some
references to support this section would be helpful
RECOMMENDATIONS FOR
TRANSITIONING TO VIRTUAL
LEARNING ENVIRONMENTS
Providers of adult education and training programs
that decide to adopt the use of virtual learning
environments will need to carefully develop and
adopt long range plans in order to do so. Incorpora-
tion of virtual learning technologies into existing
programs must be carefully planned and executed
processes. The following recommendations are
offered by the authors for programs that wish to
163
 Impact of Virtual Learning Environments on the Future of Adult Education and Training
consider adoption of virtual learning technolo-
gies. These recommendations reflect several in-
terconnected issues which are contingent upon
many factors related to the administration and
delivery of adult education and training programs
offered via distance education. Programs which
are considering the adoption of virtual learning
technologies are advised to consider the issues
not as mutually exclusive concepts, but rather
as integrated indicators of program quality and
instructional effectiveness.
Plans to adopt the use of virtual learning en-
vironments should begin with an environmental
scan followed by input from stakeholders of the
education or training program. An environmental
scan of programs currently offered via distance
education should including elements:
1. Review enrollment patterns including learner
application and acceptance rates, enroll-
ment status such as part-time and fulltime
(as applicable) or intensity and duration of
enrollment, and course or program comple-
tion rates.
2. Evaluate the effectiveness of the instructional
methods used to teach or train via the distance
education technologies which are currently
in use.
3. Revisit learning objectives for the course or
program currently offered via distance and
measure the degree to which those objectives
have been met.
4. Review learner placement after program
completion and if possible the return on
investment for the learner as a result of
completion of the educational or training
program.
5. Assess the current level of technical literacy
skills for learners, educators, and trainers
related to their use of the distance learning
technologies currently in use.
The environmental scan should be followed by
gathering input from multiple stakeholders about
164
the idea of adopting virtual learning technologies
or migrating to virtual learning environments.
Stakeholders should include past, current, and
potentially future learners; educators and train-
ers; information technology support staff of
the organization; and employers or supervisors
of learners who have completed education and
training programs. Input from these stakeholders
should be focused on the impact to the program.
The impact of adopting or migrating to virtual
learning technologies would have to be consid-
ered in terms of costs to both the organization
and learners, instructional design considerations,
value associated with adopting virtual learning
technologies, and access for adult learners. The
following recommendations are designed to assist
organizations in determining such impact.
1. Calculate the anticipated costs associated
with migration to virtual learning environ-
ments for the organization. Costs to the
organization that should be reviewed include
costs for personnel to design and support
courses, necessary upgrades to equipment
to host virtual learning technologies, mainte-
nance expenses, and operating expenditures
such as connectivity to the Internet.
2. Calculate the anticipated costs associated
with migration to virtual learning environ-
ments for learners. Determine if adoption of
virtual learning technologies would result
in an increase to tuition, fees, or other costs
associated with enrollment in the program
for learners. Programs should also consider
whether or not learners would have to obtain
new equipment for home or work in order
to be full participants in virtual learning
environments.
3. Identify any changes to instructional design
models that migration to virtual learning
environments would necessitate. Consider
how changes to instructional design would
necessitate different methods to organize
content and assess learning. Also consider
Impact of Virtual Learning Environments on the Future of Adult Education and Training
how interaction in the learning environment
would be affected.
4. Specify how virtual learning environments
would affect universal design principles.
Plans must be developed to address how
barrier-free environments which accommo-
date learners with disabilities would be con-
structed, made accessible, and maintained.
5. Consider the value that virtual learning tech-
nologies would add to program offerings.
This would entail investigation of whether
or not the change from a primarily textual
based environment to a virtual environment
that employs the use of more senses would
actually improve learning experiences.
6. Determine if adoption of virtual learning
technologies might eliminate access to
programs for some adult learners. Options
to ensure that programs remain accessible
should be considered when making the
decision to adopt virtual learning technolo-
gies as to not further the divide between the
information rich and information poor.
If the decision is made to migrate to virtual
learning environments, organizations will need to
develop long-term plans to guide the implementa-
tion and migration processes. Technology planning
has become essential in the fields of education
and training over the past couple of decades. The
decision to incorporate virtual learning technolo-
gies will likely entail similar processes to those
already used in technology planning especially for
distance education. Plans to adopt virtual learning
technologies will need to include a timeline that
includes major steps along with responsibilities
of the different parties of the organization. The
timeline should include ample time for planning,
testing, training of educators and trainers, orienta-
tion for learners, initial assessment of outcomes,
and ongoing refinement of the plan. The plan
should include an explanation of outcomes and
indicators that outcomes have been met. Finally,
the plan should include a detailed list of project
costs to the organization and a determination of
the means for financing such costs. References
would be helpful here. You introduce some very
good points but should be supported by literature.
CONCLUSION
Virtual learning environments (VLEs) hold great
promise for the refinement and enhancement of
adult education and training programs in the future.
As adult educators and trainers strive to imple-
ment methods to actively engage adult learners
who choose to enroll in programs via distance, it
will be essential to examine and determine how
VLEs might better meet adult learner needs than
the distance education technologies that are cur-
rently in use. It will take time for institutions and
organizations to build capacity for the full imple-
mentation of virtual learning. Adequate training
and technical support must be provided for adult
educators and trainers as well as for adult learners
who choose to participate in VLEs.
The use of virtual learning environments in
adult education and training programs will likely
lead to further refinement and enhancement of
instructional design models as well as the estab-
lishment of new instructional design models. The
benefits of virtual learning environments such as
the ability to incorporate group and team work
activities as well as customize individual educa-
tion and training needs are actually more closely
aligned with adult education and training theories
and principles as compared to the current forms
of distance education technologies. Closer align-
ment with adult education and training theories
and principles can only serve to optimize learn-
ing environments in adult education and training
programs and contribute to improved learning
outcomes by ensuring that knowledge transfer
has occurred.
Institutions and organizations which are
providers of adult education and training pro-
grams will at some time be required to make
165
 Impact of Virtual Learning Environments on the Future of Adult Education and Training
some investment in virtual learning systems in
order to meet adult learner demand and in order
to remain competitive. Again, this demand will
more than likely be fueled by adult learners who
seek education and training programs based upon
their personal and learning needs. Adult educators
and trainers will have more control regarding the
design of learning environments and would be
able to make modifications to such environments
more quickly in order to differentiate instructional
practices to benefit adult learners. The result will
be a learning space that will be in a constant state
of change based upon learner input and educator
or trainer response to that input. The use of virtual
learning environments will also require proficient
technical literacy for adult learners as well as adult
educators and trainers. Adequate preparation on
how to access the virtual learning environment,
how to interact with peers and educators or train-
ers, and how to meaningfully contribute to the
knowledge being created will need to be addressed
in programs to orient learners to virtual learning
environments.
Virtual learning environments provide great
promise for creating a profound impact on the
field of adult education and training. Its use will
only serve to advance the field by prompting prac-
titioners and researchers to consistently consider
the needs of adult learners and by creating more
responsive learning spaces. In time virtual learn-
ing environments will become an acknowledged
instructional delivery method for adult education
and training programs.
REFERENCES
About Simulation Linked Object Oriented Dy-
namic Learning Environment (SLOODLE). (n.d.).
Retrieved September 30, 2009, from http://www.
sloodle.org/blog/?page_id=2
166
Bricken, W. (1990). Virtual reality: Directions of
growth (Notes from the SIGGRAPH 1990 panel).
Retrieved October 1, 2009, from http://www.hitl.
washington.edu/publications/r-90-1/
Bullen, M. (1999). What’s the difference: A review
of contemporary research on the effectiveness of
distance learning in higher education. Journal of
Distance Education, 14(1), 102–114.
de Freitas, S., & Griffiths, M. (2007). Online gam-
ing as an educational tool in learning and training.
British Journal of Educational Technology, 38(3),
535–537. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8535.2007.00720.x
Deggs, D., Grover, K., & Kacirek, K. (2009). Ex-
pectations of students in an online graduate degree
program. Manuscript submitted for publication.
Desharnais, R. A., & Limson, M. (2007). Design-
ing and implementing virtual courseware to pro-
mote inquiry-based learning. MERLOT Journal
of Online Learning and Teaching, 3(1), 30-39.
Retrieved September 28, 2009, from http://jolt.
merlot.org/vol3no1/desharnais.htm
DuCharme-Hansen, B. A., & Dupin-Bryant, P. A.
(2004). Distance education plans: Course plan-
ning for online adult learners. TechTrends, 49(2),
31–39. doi:10.1007/BF02773969
Duin, A. H. (1998). The culture of distance educa-
tion: Implementing an online graduate level course
in audience analysis. Technical Communication
Quarterly, 7(4), 365–388.
Eastmond, D. V. (1998). Adult learners and
internet-based distance education. New Directions
for Adult and Continuing Education, 78, 33–41.
doi:10.1002/ace.7804
Ellis, R. A., Ginns, P., & Piggott, L. (2009). E-
learning in higher education: Some key aspects and
their relationship to approaches to study. Higher
Education Research & Development, 28(3),
303–318. doi:10.1080/07294360902839909
Impact of Virtual Learning Environments on the Future of Adult Education and Training
Hamilton, E., & Feenberg, A. (2005). The techni-
cal codes of online education. Techné: Research
in Philosophy and Technology, 9(1), 97-123. Re-
trieved September 28, 2009, from http://scholar.
lib.vt.edu/ejournals/SPT/v9n1/hamilton.html
Harroff, P. A., & Valentine, T. (2006). Dimensions
of program quality in web-based adult education.
American Journal of Distance Education, 20(1),
7–22. doi:10.1207/s15389286ajde2001_2
Howell, S. L., Williams, P. B., & Lindsay, N.
K. (2003). Thirty-two trends affecting distance
education: An informed foundation for strategic
planning. Online Journal of Distance Learning
Administration, 6(3). Retrieved December 19,
2009, from http://www.westga.edu/~distance/
ojdla/fall63/howell63.pdf
Hughes, G. (2007). Using blended learning to
increase learner support and improve retention.
Teaching in Higher Education, 12(3), 349–363.
doi:10.1080/13562510701278690
Kemp, J. W., Livingstone, D., & Bloomfield, P.
R. (2009). SLOODLE: Connecting VLE tools
with emergency teaching practice in second life.
British Journal of Educational Technology, 40(3),
551–555. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8535.2009.00938.x
Kroder, S., Suess, J., & Sachs, D. (1998). Lessons
in launching web-based graduate courses. THE
Journal, 25(10). Retrieved September 20, 2009,
from Academic Search Premier database.
LaPorte, J. (2001). Applied Latin and a caveat on
virtual problem solving. Journal of Technology
Education, 13(1), 2-4. Retrieved September 28,
2009, from http://scholar.lib.vt.edu/ejournals/JTE/
v13n1/editor.html
McGill, T. J., & Hobbs, V. J. (2007). How students
and instructors using a virtual learning environ-
ment perceive the fit between technology and
task. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 24,
191–202. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2729.2007.00253.x
Merrill, H. S. (2004). Best practices for online
facilitation. Adult Learning, 14(2), 13–16.
Moosavar-Rahmani, F., & Larson-Daugherty, C.
(2007). Supporting the hybrid learning model:
A new proposition. MERLOT Journal of Online
Learning and Teaching, 3(1), 67-78. Retrieved
September 28, 2009, from http://jolt.merlot.org/
vol3no1/larson-daugherty.htm
Ndahi, H. (2006). The use of innovative methods
to deliver technology education laboratory courses
via distance learning: A strategy to increase enroll-
ment. Journal of Technology Education, 27(2),
33–42.
Nunamaker, J. F., Reinig, B. A., & Briggs, R. O.
(2009). Principles for effective virtual teamwork.
Communications of the ACM, 52(4), 113–117.
doi:10.1145/1498765.1498797
Rice, D. J., Davidson, B. D., Dannenhoffer, J. F.,
& Gay, G. K. (2007). Improving the effectiveness
of virtual teams by adapting team processes. Com-
puter Supported Cooperative Work, 16, 567–594.
doi:10.1007/s10606-007-9070-3
Saba, F. (2008). Learning management systems
of the future: A theoretical framework and design.
MERLOT Journal of Online Learning and Teach-
ing, 4(2), 158–168.
Skiba, D. J. (2009). Nursing education 2.0: A
second look at second life. Nursing Education
Perspectives, 30(2), 129–131.
Skill, T. D., & Young, B. A. (2002). Embracing
the hybrid model: Working at the intersections
of virtual and physical learning spaces. New Di-
rections for Teaching and Learning, 92, 23–32.
doi:10.1002/tl.76
Skopek, T. A., & Schuhmann, R. A. (2008). Tra-
ditional and non-traditional students in the same
classroom? Additional challenges of the distance
education environment. Online Journal of Dis-
tance Learning Administration, 11(1). Retrieved
December 19, 2009, from http://www.westga.
edu/~distance/ojdla/spring111/skopek111.pdf
167
 Impact of Virtual Learning Environments on the Future of Adult Education and Training
Tichon, J. (2007). Training cognitive skills in
virtual reality: Measuring performance. Cyberpsy-
chology & Behavior, 10(2), 286–289. doi:10.1089/
cpb.2006.9957
Tyler-Smith, K. (2006). Early attrition among first
time eLearners: A review of factors that contrib-
ute to drop-out, withdrawal and non-completion
rates of adult learners undertaking eLearn-
ing programmes. MERLOT Journal of Online
Learning and Teaching, 2(2), 73-85. Retrieved
September 28, 2009, from http://jolt.merlot.org/
Vol2_No2_TylerSmith.htm
Vander Valk, F. (2008). Identity, power, and rep-
resentation in virtual environments. MERLOT
Journal of Online Learning and Teaching, 4(2),
205-211. Retrieved September 28, 2009, from
http://jolt.merlot.org/vol4no2/vandervalk0608.
htm
Vesely, P., Bloom, L., & Sherlock, J. (2007). Key
elements of building online community: Compar-
ing faculty and student perceptions. MERLOT
Journal of Online Learning and Teaching, 3(3),
234-246. Retrieved September 28, 2009, from
http://jolt.merlot.org/vol3no3/vesely.htm
Westbrook, V. (2006). The virtual learning future.
Teaching in Higher Education, 11(4), 471–482.
doi:10.1080/13562510600874276
168
Yoon, S. W., & Johnson, S. D. (2008). Phases and
patterns of group development in virtual learning
teams. Educational Technology Research and
Development, 56, 595–618. doi:10.1007/s11423-
007-9078-x
KEY TERMS AND DEFINITIONS
Distance Education: Courses and programs
in which learners are separated from educators,
trainers or facilitators via distance. Common
forms of distance education include courses
and programs offered via the Internet or World
Wide Web, compressed interactive video, paper-
based independent study, television, or satellite
downlink.
Virtual Learning Environments: Learning
environment that is provided through a course
management system or software program which
utilizes virtual reality technologies to facilitate
learning or training.
Virtual Reality: A simulated synchronous
environment created through a computer system
which allows for the utilization of multiple senses.
Virtual reality environments are designed to al-
low educators, trainers, facilitators and learners
to interact within a common space.
 169

Chapter 11
Delightfully, Difficult Work:
Transformation through
Teaching and Learning
Karen Weller Swanson
Mercer University, USA

ABSTRACT
Many times students enroll in courses with the sole intention of learning new content or skills. While this
is a reasonable goal, a longer term vision for students towards one of a transformed individual educates
the whole person. Transformation through education has been studied for years (Kegan, 1994; Baxter-
Magolda & King, 2004; and Belenky et al., 1986). This chapter is designed to examine the framework that
explains the process of the transformational growth of students in becoming self-authoring. This chapter
will also discuss the scholarly role that transformation plays for instructors through the Scholarship of
Teaching and Learning (SoTL). Both theories have similar requirements for reflection, dialogue with
peers and continuous growth. The need to design experiences that explicitly support students to reflect on
their assumptions, consider alternative perspectives, develop a content language, and make connections
between theory and practice will be discussed. The impact of explicitly making these ideas transpar-
ent to students illustrates the importance of modeling and valuing reflective feedback by instructors to
enhance the learning process. Ideally, well-designed course dynamically shapes instructors’ thinking
about their teaching and students’ ways of thinking about their learning.

INTRODUCTION students to become more aware of their cognitive

Reflection and transformation, in educational
circles today, are quickly becoming the latest buzz
words. Current conversations include portfolios,
journaling and online discussions as ways for
DOI: 10.4018/978-1-61692-906-0.ch011
learning patterns. The intention of this chapter is
weave together the theories of critical reflection
(Bolton, 2005), self-authorship (Baxter Magolda,
2004) and a feedback cycle (Brookfield, 2000)
to better impact learning; also to introduce the
Scholarship of Teaching and Learning for in-
structors as a systematic way to reflect on their

teaching. These four theories intertwine the reflec-
tive feedback cycle into a teaching and learning
design to be mutually beneficial. The outcome of
incorporating a feedback cycle is to illustrate the
different developmental levels, teaching and learn-
ing preferences and ways to construct knowledge
between instructors and students.
BACKGROUND
Theoretical Framework
Transformative Teaching
Transformative learning must begin with instruc-
tors who are themselves transformed. Instructors at
times see teaching and learning as separate entities.
Instructors conceptualize a scope and sequence
of content and incorporate a pedagogical method
for delivery. It may be lecture, debate, cooperative
learning or other methods. However, the impetus
of learning falls solely on the shoulders of the stu-
dent. In fact, many times instructors are frustrated
that students aren’t “getting it” or view students
as lazy. It is in this moment that the essence of
transformative teaching is embraced or resisted.
Whose responsibility is it to learn? Instructor or
student? The goal of the Scholarship of Teach-
ing and Learning (SoTL) is to mediate the why
and how of self-assessing one’s teaching and the
promotion of learning. Baxter Magolda (1999)
puts it simply, “Educational reformers tell us that
our traditional style of teaching – giving students
information –does not yield that [transformative]
outcome. Yet when many of us genuinely try to
engage students differently, we become the source
of their dissatisfaction” (p. 5). Those traditional
ways include the sole use of direct instruction
such as lecture, summative assessment and teacher
directed discussion with predetermined outcomes.
While students say they want to be engaged,
engagement requires risk, preparation and the
possibility of being challenged by one’s peers.
170
Delightfully, Difficult Work
Scholarship of Teaching and Learning
A change in pedagogy is necessary to transform
student learning, the systematic assessment of an
individual’s teaching and the effect on student
outcomes is called the Scholarship of Teach-
ing and Learning (SoTL). SoTL is defined by
the Carnegie Foundation (Cambridge, 2001) as
“problem posing about an issue to teaching or
learning, study of the problem through methods
appropriate to the disciplinary epistemologies,
applications of results to practice, communica-
tion of results self-reflection and peer review”
(p. 1). The SoTL framework establishes that each
discipline has signature pedagogy such as inquiry
for science and narrative for English. Medical and
law schools also incorporate signature pedagogies
supported by a set of rules of engagement such as
problem-based learning and debate, respectively.
SoTL is inter-disciplinary and an application used
primarily in content disciplines. It is only recently
that interdisciplinary work is inclusive of those
with an education focus. It is the explicit review
and investigation of those signature pedagogies
that supports the work of academia and the trans-
formation of students.
The emergence of the SoTL(namely in the last
twenty years) framework moves reflective practice
for instructors past the concern of having to cre-
ate a less rigorous curriculum toward systematic
scholarly teaching. Boyer (1990) began the process
of reconceptualizing the way instructors think
about their teaching by proposing four areas of
scholarship: discovery, integration, application
and teaching. His goal was to promote academic
teaching as having a civic impact. Boyer states
“Teaching is also a dynamic endeavor involving
all the analogies, metaphors, and images that build
bridges between the teacher’s understanding and
the student’s learning…. When defined as scholar-
ship, however, teaching both educates and entices
future scholars” (p. 23). The goal Boyer expresses
is that teachers are also learners when interaction
Delightfully, Difficult Work
in the classroom around readings, questions move
all involved into new and creative spaces.
Systematic reflection is the beginning of a
transformed instructor. Cottrell and Jones (2003)
suggest designing courses which are transparent in
their pedagogical purposes of transferring learn-
ing expectations to students. Weimer (2002) also
begins instructional transformation with transpar-
ency. Scholarly teaching is defined by McKinney
(2004) as “involving a scholarly approach to teach-
ing just as we would take a scholarly approach
to other areas of knowledge and practice” (p. 1).
She states that scholarly teachers reflect on their
teaching, use the results of assessment to inform
instruction, discuss teaching with peers, read
current literature in their area, and in the end try
something new. SoTL adds another component
in that the reflection and redesign of instruction
is done systematically. Scholarly teaching is not
an end of course institutionally designed evalua-
tion but a weekly process of considering both the
teaching and learning in the classroom. Shulman
(2001) states that the scholarship of teaching and
learning comprise of three components to be
determined scholarly and those are:
1. Findings or understanding are to be made
public through conference presentations for
example,
2. Can be critically reviewed by peers in the
appropriate community and
3. Can be built upon by others to advance the
field.
Cottrell and Jones (2003) expand Shulman’s
three criteria into an instruction application using
five elements to support transformational teaching.
1. Vision which is the conceptual framework
of the course.
2. Design is the course activities and plan.
3. Interactions are the reflective practices which
join instructors and students to reach the
vision.
4. Outcomes are the assessment used to measure
the learning outcomes.
5. Analysis is reflection on the outcomes for
changes and improvement in the future.
The goal of the Scholarship of Teaching and
Learning is focused on the experience and process-
ing of the instructors regarding their classroom
experiences. They evaluate their curriculum
choices, pedagogical selections, instructional de-
sign, assessment choices and student outcomes in
all four areas. SoTL is the combination of personal
reflection and scholarship applied to teaching.
What then is the connection between trans-
formative teaching and transformative learning?
While instructors plan and students experience
similar classroom events the internalization for the
individual is very personal. “Pedagogy that fails to
take students’ current epistemic assumptions into
account often fails to engage them meaningfully”
(Baxter Magolda, 1999, p. 7). She goes on to add
“constructive-developmental pedagogy… is more
than letting students talk and generate their own
ideas. It is a matter of creating the developmental
conditions that allow them to generate their own
ideas effectively, in essence to develop their minds,
their voices, and themselves” (p. 9).
Essentially dialogue between instructors and
students regarding what they are experiencing
during coursework is essential for transparency
and reflection is necessary. With SoTL in mind
to support instructional transformation, how
does an instructor help students move towards
transformation?
Transformative Learning
Three interrelated topics will be discussed to create
a framework in which to support a feedback cycle
for development which leads to transformation.
The first is Brookfield’s (1995) model of critical
reflection; the second is Bolton’s (2005) model
of reflective practice and lastly is the underlying
theory of self-authorship (Baxter Magolda, 2004).
171

It is the process of incorporating these three theo-
ries that this author has developed a model that
impacts the goal of transformation. Each theory
contains elements that require individuals to con-
sider and challenge their personal belief systems.
All three require these beliefs and knowledge to
be placed into and molded through dialogue with
others. Lastly, there is a requisite for theory of
content related material to aid in the formation
of new epistemic understandings. Kegan (1994)
states the process of self-authorship as does not
replace our previously constructed organization of
experiences but creates a more complex system of
thinking. However the purposes differ among the
three. The goal of critical reflection (Brookfield) is
the acknowledgment of hegemony or power, while
reflective practice is the movement from reflec-
tive to reflexive practice (Bolton) and the learning
outcomes through self-authorship model employs
each of the two towards individual growth.
Brookfield’s (1995) critical reflection model
addresses assumptions “in regards to hegemony
through the lenses of autobiography as students
and learners, our students, our colleagues and
theoretical literature” (p. 29). The application of
this theory is valued in self-authorship because
it provides the four lenses in which to evaluate
how students interpret their experiences in the
classroom. The first is an autobiographic lens. This
lens may have a greater impact on teaching and
learning than any other lens. Brookfield states that
personal experience frames learning preferences.
For example, if students have a history of poor
math instruction they may have internalized that
they are poor at math. It is the examination of this
assumption that leads the learning in a new context
to reassemble their beliefs about math and create
a new reality. The risk with autobiography is that
it can go unexamined and create uninformed or
distorted perceptions.
From an instructional perspective, the trans-
forming experience for students may be argued to
begin the student’s perspective which may provide
the greatest surprise element. Student feedback
172
Delightfully, Difficult Work
regarding class experiences and understandings
can either confirm or challenge instructors in-
tended learning outcomes. Because students bring
the previously discussed autobiography to their
learning it is expected that their interpretation of
the teaching would differ as well. Due to issues of
authority it may be difficult to elicit honest student
response for feedback. However, feedback can be
anonymous until a trusting environment has been
established. The value in the student feedback
piece is that results should impact teaching and
assumptions about student understanding. There
begins to be an explicit cycle of student/teacher
dialogue developing which impacts both the
teaching and learning.
In as much as dialogue influences teaching and
learning, it is not a singular criteria on which to
base transformative growth. Theoretical literature
or content knowledge also provides new insights
and challenges to student and instructional think-
ing. It helps put a name to what students may have
intuitively previously known to be true. It places
their experience into a broad spectrum in which
their assumptions are confirmed or challenged.
Brookfield states that literature can provide an
explanation when personal failures may be rooted
in political constraints outside the one’s control.
For example, student resistance may have less to
do with how dynamic the teaching is and more to
do with issues of social justice. Once the feedback
cycle begins and it is informed by content or
theory the third aspect towards transformation is
reflection (Swanson & Kayler, 2008).
Dewey (1933) defines reflection as “an active,
persistent and careful consideration of any belief
or supposed form of knowledge” (p. 9). Reflective
practice can be as simple as reviewing the day’s
events or as complex as dissecting those events
to gain new insights into one’s self and practice.
If the goal of reflection is problem-solving then
reflexivity is characterized as “coming as close as
possible to an awareness of the way I am experi-
enced and perceived by others. It is being able to
stay with personal uncertainty, critically informed
Delightfully, Difficult Work
curiosity as to how others perceive things as well
as how I do, and flexibility to consider changing
deeply held ways of being” (Bolton, 2005, p. 10).
Thus the process of reflection takes the next step
from the critical reflection model of examining
assumptions with regard to hegemony toward
reflexivity for the purpose of ending up with more
questions than one began.
Bolton (2005) has adapted Rowland’s (2000)
model of learning resources. She states that there
are three domains: public area of knowledge,
personal area of knowledge and shared area of
knowledge. She states the public area of knowl-
edge includes text and theory in which outside
sources hold authority. The purpose of public
domains in reflection is that it keeps the reflection
from being a personal confession. The personal
area of knowledge includes personal thoughts and
knowledge of situations. This is where the bulk
of reflection is held, it is whether that personal
knowledge is open to other for questioning or
even personal investigation of assumptions. The
reflective layer of shared knowledge is most often
the forgotten step in moving public and personal
knowledge toward integration; for the purpose
of this paper shared knowledge is considered
part of the feedback cycle and later referred to
as dialogue with others.
We are all familiar with reflecting on the car
ride home after an intense conversation or ex-
perience. However, the process of writing one’s
thoughts and questions captures those moments
of clarity in a more sustainable method. Reflec-
tive practice focuses specifically on the process
of reflection through writing to collect, evaluate
and transform one’s thoughts. Writing provides
a venue to paint a scenario through multiple
lenses and to post questions which may have no
answers. Bolton (2005) suggests those writings
and questions go public for the purpose to gain
perspective, possibility and placement among the
experience of others. Writing about experiences
and thoughts develops a meaning and language.
Reflective writing builds confidence because the
author develops a voice. She states that “expres-
sive and explorative writing develops confidence,
co-operation and collaboration, encourages skills
sharing, the development of team-building and
enhances ability to deal with conflict in an artistic,
aesthetic process” (Bolton, 2005, p. 64). The role
of reflective writing in student development is key
to refocus from reporting toward question genera-
tion which is advancement toward self-authorship.
Similar to children going through developmen-
tal stages adults do as well. The process of growing
towards the ability to see multiple perspectives is
gradual and marked by distinct stages. The con-
structivist theory of self-authorship is based in the
work of Kegan (1994), Belenky et al. (1986) and
Baxter Magolda and King (2004). The outcome as
defined by Kegan is self-authorship, the develop-
ment of a cohesive internal set of beliefs, values
and interpersonal loyalties rather than depending
on someone else’s. Learning partnerships layers
on three assumptions about learning: learning
is social, personal identity molds construction
of knowledge, and knowledge is co-constructed
through the negotiation of expertise and authority
(Baxter Magolda, 2004, p. xix). The three guiding
principles are to validate learners as constructors
of knowledge, place learning within the learners
experience (outside of the experts realm otherwise
they cannot join in the process), and define learn-
ing as a mutual task.
Further description of the developmental
foundations of learning outcomes includes three
foundations: intrapersonal, interpersonal and
epistemological. Epistemological knowing is
defined as “how people use assumptions about
the nature, limits and certainty of knowledge to
make knowledge claims” (Baxter Magolda, 2004,
p. 9). The perception of knowledge is constructed
in the context of available evidence. It requires
the knower to evaluate and analyze evidence in
order to continuously construct an epistemological
framework. The cognitive outcomes associated
with increased epistemological include skills
173

such as reflective judgment and problem-solving
(Mezirow, 2000).
While epistemological knowing defines how
knowers construct knowledge, intrapersonal
knowing is how knowers construct a view of them-
selves. Baxter Magolda and King (2004) state that
reflection; exploration and a value system are all
part of creating an identity that is self-determined
rather than one which is adopted from an external
source. Bolton (2005) defines reflective practice
as “learning and developing through examining
what we think happened on any occasion, and
how we think others perceived the event and us,
opening our practice to scrutiny by others, and
studying texts from the wide sphere”(p. 12). Thus
intrapersonal knowing is limited in similar fashion
to autobiography. It is the addition interpersonal
element that situates knowing into a social context.
A constructive-developmental view of learning
incorporates two major concepts:
1. that students construct knowledge by orga-
nizing and making meaning of their experi-
ences, and
2. that this construction takes place in the
context of their evolving assumptions about
knowledge itself and students’ role in creat-
ing it (Baxter Magolda, 1999, p. 6).
The definition of interpersonal knowing is
“how people view themselves in relation to oth-
ers and how they construct relationships” (Baxter
Magolda, 2004, p. 9). That is relationships are
a creation of effective collaboration toward ne-
gotiating multiple perspectives and needs. The
goal is towards a productive interdependence in
which the knower retains their personal identity
while in conversation with others. Kegan (1994)
defines self-authoring as when one “can coordi-
nate, integrate, act upon, or invent values, beliefs,
convictions, generalizations, ideals, abstractions,
interpersonal loyalties, and intrapersonal states. It
is no longer authored by them; authors them and
thereby achieves a personal authority” (p. 185).
174
Delightfully, Difficult Work
It is the responsibility of the instructors to attach
value to learner’s experiences (prior knowledge
for example) and situate them as co-creators of
meaning. Secondly, it is equally important to
build partnerships between students as well (the
feedback cycle).
Another theoretical framework which sup-
ports the need for social interaction in learning
is Vygotsky’s social development theory of how
students are learning both individually and so-
cially. One aspect of Vygotsky’s (1978) social
development theory is based on the idea that
social interaction is vital to cognitive develop-
ment. A second aspect is related to the idea that
the potential for cognitive development depends
on the zone of proximal development (ZPD):
a level of development attained when learners
engage in social behaviors with others slightly
ahead of them developmentally. The range of
skills that can be developed with guidance or peer
collaboration exceeds what can be attained alone
(Kayler & Weller, 2004). Barr and Tagg (1995)
also suggest that a shift in the classroom focus
from one of teaching to one of learning. Their
research values the process of how to learn as
much as what to learn. They argue for instructors
to create learning climates or communities, to use
learner-centered pedagogy and to value individual
learner’s personal experiences. Their underlying
position is for instructors to create stimulating
and multifaceted learning experiences (Swanson
& Kayler, 2009).
In conclusion each of these three theories: the
critical reflection model, reflective practice and
self-authorship provide a tripod-like foundation
in meaningful learning. The theories overlap in
the essential areas of relationships, reflection and
examining assumptions. The following sections
discuss the practical application of these theories
in which curriculum was constructed to engage
students in transformative experiences toward
self-authorship.
Delightfully, Difficult Work
Transforming Students Through
Pedeagogy Rather Than Content
It would be wonderful to wave a magic wand
over students to produce a love of learning and
expanded levels of comprehension. However,
transformation does not happen magically, but
through intentional instructional processes. The
intersection of critical pedagogy and learning
outcomes is the focus on learning rather than on
delivery of content. What makes this discussion
important is that little research has been done on
how students make sense of what they learn. Thus
it is not only what courses add to knowledge but
how students situate that learning both individually
and socially. The negotiation of meaning then cre-
ates a transformation. The pedagogical concepts
which promote transformation include the inte-
gration of critical pedagogy and learner-centered
theory. Each provides a schaffolding which could
be transparently modeled in the classroom. The
purpose is to provide a language and recognition
of hegemony regarding issues of power, voice,
responsibility, marginalizing and mattering in
both teaching and learning. These two concepts
incorporated the intrapersonal, interpersonal and
epistemological aspects of the reflective practice.
The foundational premise of critical pedagogy
is to help students articulate their assumptions
regarding teaching and learning. Critical peda-
gogy provides a common vocabulary to talk about
fundamental questions about knowledge, justice
and equity in the classroom, school, family and
community (Wink, 2005). Critical pedagogy is a
way of thinking about, negotiating, and transform-
ing the relationship among classroom teaching,
the production of knowledge, the institutional
structures of the school, and the social and mate-
rial relationships of the wide community, society
and nation state (McLaren, 1998).
Learner-centered teaching shares the con-
structivist orientation toward knowledge and
self-authorship. This transparency impacts stu-
dents’ perceptions of instructors and their own
teaching experiences. Weimer (2002) states that
being transparent in curriculum design and choices
develop autonomous learners and challenge the
traditional work of instructors. Learner-centered
teaching is not new in the k-12 arena; conversely
it is only beginning to emerge in the university
setting. It requires students playing a meaningful
role in the teaching and learning. The role of power,
decision-making and resistance are all aspects
which must be openly addressed in a learner-
centered classroom. This is where the feedback
cycle of using Brookfield’s (1995) critical incident
questions informs the instruction.
• When in class were you most engaged?
• When in class were you least engaged?
• When did the actions of a instructors or
student make you feel affirmed?
• When did the actions of a instructors or
student make you puzzled?
• When were you most surprised?
A cycle suggests a non-linear flow; instructors
provide responses back to the class as a whole.
The purpose of creating a cycle is that most stu-
dents believe that their classroom experience is
everyone’s classroom experience. In providing
an opportunity for everyone’s voice to be heard,
creates a rich community. This is consistent with
the need for interpersonal awareness of how one’s
values and perceptions fit into the larger whole.
For example, if a student loves journal they may
be surprise to find that others struggle or even
hate writing for reflection. Feedback not only
informs regarding student understandings but the
ways they are interpreting their understandings
which generates more informed decision-making.
Wiemer (2002) also discusses the role of resistance
by students. While an instructor’s goal is towards
helping students transform and become more self-
authoring many would prefer to be hand-fed and
passive receivers in the classroom.
175

Modes of Reflective Practice
The students expect a syllabus, schedule and
set of rules of engagement. In other words, they
know how to play the game of school. Students
view instructors as the expert and themselves as
receive of that expertise. Generally, there is little
attention paid to issues of power and expertise in
either the classroom. Copeland et al (1993) state
that students reflect at differing depths based on
their years of practice.
Reflection is designed to occur in many forms
in the program and intentionally incorporates
all three aspects of intrapersonal, interpersonal
and epistemological knowing. Referring back
to Brookfield’s (1995) four lenses to explore
assumptions, students are in dialogue with self
through journaling, dialogue with others in on-line
discussions which require a self-assessment com-
ponent, dialogue with theory through structured
discussions using pedagogical formats such as
World Café and fishbowl, dialogue with instructors
through interim feedback and mentoring.
Journaling is not a new construct. However,
when students are placed in reflexive communities
with their peers, the groups ask critical questions
to press each other to ask deeper questions to
get at their assumptions learning. Incorporating
reflection into a public forum breaths air into an
otherwise static perspective, for example, Tammi
taught one section of high school biology to Eng-
lish as a Language class. Her initial question was
how to design learning so students could pass the
state exam. In the process of her questioning she
found that some students were not the least bit
interested in the state examine but in language
acquisition, social networks and working. Her
reflexive group pressed her to consider that her
personal definition of success, graduating from
high school, was not a universal goal for all of her
students. This realization dramatically changed
how she structured learning to create mattering
while balancing the authority of the state.
176
Delightfully, Difficult Work
Therefore creating opportunities in and outside
of the university setting for students to exchange
ideas is essential to employing a constructivist
stance in teaching. Classes may be constructed
to provide students opportunity to participate in
an online discussion group outside of class. The
purpose of the group is two-fold: to discuss the
theory as it pertains to students as adult learners
and the second is how that theory manifests itself
in their lives or practice. Discussion groups that
incorporate a feedback loop in which participates
evaluate themselves and the group dynamic pro-
vides a second level of reflection of learning. The
assessment is a reflection on their contributions,
understandings and degree to which they chal-
lenged the thinking of their peers.
Students find a critical pedagogical and learner-
centered model of instruction disconcerting
because the process of learning is more highly
negotiated. The focus on critical epistemologi-
cal issues in combination with a developmental
approach creates a learning environment that
transforms. Mezirow (2000) defines transforma-
tive learning as,
the process by which we transform our taken-for-
granted frames of reference(meaning perspectives,
habits of mind, mind-sets) to make them more in-
clusive, discriminating, open emotionally capable
of change and reflective so that they may generate
beliefs and opinions that will prove more true or
justified to guide action. Transformative learning
involves participation in constructive discourse
to use the experience of others to assess reasons
justifying these assumptions, and making an ac-
tion decision based on the resulting insight. (p. 8)
In terms of the impact of transformation on
teaching critical pedagogy is defined as looking
below the surface of issues to think and analyze
them (Wink, 2005). The existence of visible
and invisible interactions between instructors
and students significantly impacts learning. The
change begins with student feedback transpar-
Delightfully, Difficult Work
ently influencing the curriculum and culture of
the class. As students begin creating a feedback
cycle in their discussion they beginning to hear
the voices and expert knowledge their peers bring
into the classroom.
Much of what has been stated about learning
partnerships is grounded theory in the education
of children such as the use and exploration of prior
knowledge and cooperative learning. However,
what makes the application to adult development
unique is cultivating shared expertise and authority
in the classroom and the subsequent application of
shared expertise. The two underlying components
which inform instruction are that students create
meaning based on their lived experiences and the
construction of knowledge is fluid based on their
views of learning and their role in the process. For
the purpose of this chapter, it is believed that teach-
ing without regards for a student’s epistemological
foundation in mind results in less than desired
outcome. For example, curricular decisions move
past class discussions to further develop student
voice and intrapersonal understandings of them-
selves. As a result, instructors are required to hold
two complementary mindsets simultaneously; one
as a instructors member and another as a learner.
Instructors must balance the specific language of
each mindset to best help students gain access to
the specialized knowledge of critical pedagogy
and learner centered theory while they reformulate
new understandings for themselves.
Issues, Controversies, Problems
By definition transformation is a complex and
complicated business. “ It is simultaneously an
ability to construct knowledge in a contextual
world, an ability to construct an internal identity
separate from external influences, and an ability
to engage in relationship without losing one’s
internal identity” (Baxter Magolda, 1999, p.
12). The emerging controversy includes student
resistance and classroom conflict. Both which
would be naturally avoided by instructors but
when embraced from a developmental perspective
grow all involved. The problems of course time
constraints and curricular rigor also confound the
motivation toward constructing and implementing
a transformative learning environment.
Resistance and Conflict
A strong student reaction to learner-centered
teaching in higher education is common in higher
education. Students are used to ‘playing the game
of school’ and being successful to receiving
and duplicating the information given to them.
A learner-centered classroom requires critical
dialogue, negotiated meaning and ambiguity.
Students want to know what to do, when to do it
and how to do it. However under such circum-
stance students comment that their classes are
irrelevant or unresponsive to their learning needs.
Conversely instructors comment that students do
not bring a love of learning or preparedness to
the classroom setting. The disconnect between
students and instructors can be mediated through
transparency of the course content and planning,
as well as guiding students to articulate their
learning contextually. The result however often
looks and feels like conflict.
Conflict in the classroom can sound like a low
murmur or feel like a current that is slowly dragging
the learning downward. While it may seem easier
to ignore than investigate, in a learner-centered
classroom ignorance is not an option. The ways to
handle conflict can be as creative as those involved.
The first is to determine the source of the conflict.
It could be the course content or learning experi-
ences. Another source of conflict can be among
or between students themselves. Consider any
classroom is made up of students at each stage of
self-authorship. Those who are more mature may
be frustrated with those who have yet advanced
toward becoming self-authoring. Many times it is
students with less authorship who voice frustra-
tion with learner-centered pedagogy, they would
prefer stronger, directed guidance. The third may
177

be the convergence of a students’ prior knowledge
and the introduction of alternative perspectives
creates an internal conflict that can be reconciled
when placed in dialogue with others. It may be
useful to begin content and discussion which elicit
multiple perspective with a text from an external
author. Student will find it easier to argue with
an author who is not present and instructor may
find the conversation easier to facilitate. Norms
for participating in a critical conversation can
be established and practiced. The role of the in-
structor is then to create a safe environment and
explicate the norms of dialogue as it advances
toward understanding. Over the semester as stu-
dents produce work that is brought to the class,
established norms reinforce a safe environment
and the role of communities of practice.
The instructor’s role in regards to resistance
and conflict is to challenge their own level of
transformation. Allowing students to verbalize
both conflict and resistance allows for creative
techniques to co-create a classroom environment
in which everyone comes out ahead in the ability
to self-author.
Time and Rigor
A semester does not seem to allow enough time
to involve the learner in the process of reflective
practice; it may appear to be someone else’s job.
The time spent upfront in giving students choice
in readings and/or assignments, creating grading
criteria and integrating student feedback into sev-
eral class days can seem expensive. The process
encompasses creating a learning environment in
which students make choices to develop a voice
in their learning; and blending new experience
with prior knowledge to enhance understanding
of content and themselves.
In terms of rigor, the presence a transforma-
tion lens in the classroom does not create a false
dichotomy. An instructor is not in a situation where
they can have content or pedagogy. Deciding to
use a constructivist-developmental approach re-
178
Delightfully, Difficult Work
quires the instructor to set the content and adjust
the pedagogy to provide choice where possible,
discussion with regard to required course out-
comes and added responsibility on the learner’s
part to come to class ready to contribute in a way
that is meaning to them. For example, rather than
lecturing in class and then assigning students to
participate in online discussions after the fact,
the reverse is a way to increase several positive
learning outcomes. By using online discussions
as a community of practice prior to instruction,
instructors can assign readings, ask students to
grapple with the content amongst themselves.
This increases accountability and peer-pressure for
students to actually do their reading and reflect on
it. Class time then takes on a additive dimension
from that already covered in reading. Instructors
can access discussion groups to monitor how
conversations are progressing. It is recommended
however that instructors not participate in online
discussions for two reasons: students are less likely
to have honest conversations when instructors
voice is present; and instructors have a difficult
time not redirecting student conversation.
The goal of transformed students has benefit
for all involved. Instructors have a tendency to
get frustrated with students who appear immature
in their thinking. Many times it is no immaturity
but a lack of the three aspects of self-authorship.
The process of walking students through their
prior experiences, their content understanding and
involving the company of their peers to inform
their learning truly creates a complex tapestry
of comprehension beyond simple hearing and
memorization.
Finally the understanding that instructors are
all on a journey of transforming as well, hooks
(1994) states that empowering students to author
their knowledge also requires teachers committed
to their own self-actualization, ones willing to
take risks, express vulnerability; and share their
own experience in learning settings.
It is in the reflection of our own practice that
leads to why we teach the way we do and value the
Delightfully, Difficult Work
learning outcomes we’ve designed. It is through
these self-examinations (intrapersonal) that de-
ciding to give students those same opportunities
toward transformation in the classroom appears.
However, this is not an exercise for sissies, it
requires finding a peer to have dialogue with
to move your thinking forward (interpersonal)
and reading professional journals to learn new
ideas in the content area and regard pedagogy
(epistemological).
Solutions, Recommendations
and Future Trends
Transparency and Choice
The solution toward transformative learning is
in negotiating the role of truth in the classroom.
Palmer (1998) states,
if we regard truth as something handed down
from authorities on high, the classroom will look
like a dictatorship. If we regard truth as a fiction
determined by personal whim, the classroom will
look like anarchy. If we regard truth as emerg-
ing from a complex process of mutual inquiry,
the classroom will look like a resourceful and
interdependent community (p. 51).
Palmer’s perspective presses for an elucidation
of pedagogy and stance. The use of systematic
feedback to enhance dialogue from the trivial to
the profound is one such possibility.
As the author of this chapter and a university
professor I am all too aware of how short a semester
is to address all learning needs of my students.
However, it is a reasonable goal in provide four
feedback opportunities in which student com-
ments are collected at critical decision points. This
information is then used to form the next several
weeks of class. For example, in a hybrid course
on research methods only the first online date is
designed ahead of student input. As the semester
unfolds, student feedback informs the content and
outcomes for the following online components
of the course. Weimer (2002) suggests offering
students choice among quizzes, written papers and
projects. She argues that all students do not have
to complete the same activities to demonstrate
learning the required course content.
Belenky et al (1986) observe that instructors
usually plan the class conversation and exercises
in private and go to class prepared to speak from
this viewpoint. This only allows students to see
the product and not the process of decision-
making that went into determining the content
and pedagogy used. They found that instructors
who admitted that they did have all the answers
were considered to be more open-minded, which
brings full circle the challenge of who holds truth
and what substantiates truth in the classroom.
Plan with Development in Mind:
Bridges Leading to Complexity
Building bridges is a metaphor used in many text
on transformation. Building bridges is exhausting
work and requires a blueprint. To aid students in
moving toward self-authorship instructors must
first determine the beginning point for each stu-
dent and more importantly make that position
cognizant for the learner. The task for instructors
is then to meet students where they are and help
them build their own bridge in understanding
how to construct their understandings. Managing
multiple techniques to produce such learning is
likened to the tools necessary to bridge building.
Some jobs require the tap of a hammer while
others may need a bull-dozer. Baxter Magolda
(1999) makes three suggestions toward helping
link student development and pedagogy.
1. Instructors must be able to connect to stu-
dents’ current meaning-making structures in
order to determine the kind of experiences
that might call those structures into question.
2. connecting to students’ stylistic preferences
within structures also heightens the prob-
179

ability of their meaningful engagement in
reorganizing their ways of making meaning
(p. 58)
It is important to make explicit that students
can only practice multifarious ways of thinking
if instructors require and support interactions
that incorporate modeling. The modeling must
incorporate students prior links to content and
meaning-making structures.
Learning Communities
If a solution toward the transformation of students
is the interpersonal component of self-authorship
and the use of dialogue to create new epistemo-
logical understandings the use of communities
of practice is key. Vygotsky’s theoretical work
integrated how students are learning both indi-
vidually and socially environments. Vygotsky’s
(1978) social development theory is based on the
idea that social interaction is vital to cognitive
development. He promotes that the potential for
cognitive development depends on the “zone of
proximal development” (ZPD): a level of devel-
opment attained when learners engage in social
behaviors with others slightly more developed.
The argument is that the range of skills that can
be developed with guidance or peer collaboration
exceeds what can be attained alone (Kayler &
Weller, 2004).
Communities of practice (CoP) are specialized
learning communities defined by the knowledge,
not the task. The definition of CoPs is a shared
purpose and the value to members. Members
determine what is worth sharing, how to present
their ideas and which activities to pursue, and can
include complex and long-standing issues that re-
quire sustained learning (Wenger, McDermott, &
Snyder, 2002). Two examples of CoPs are student
lead study groups or a book club. The crux is that
CoPs hold information that can best be ascertained
through association. These communities hold spe-
cial knowledge for example if you want to learn
more about wine you might join a wine tasting
180
Delightfully, Difficult Work
club. They have a defined vocabulary, ways of
being together and an internalized motivation to
participate. Classrooms can be configured with a
similar essence and goal. The content provides the
vocabulary challenge, the instructor and students
create a way of being and it is the internal motiva-
tion to participate that requires both instructor and
students to view education in a new way.
Communities of Practice can be designed in
online formats or face to face formats. It is impor-
tant to allow for student choice in topic because if
the content is one they are not interested in a CoP
becomes an assignment. It is also important that
students choice the group they want to participate
in for the conversation. It is a challenge to allow
students the time and space to tackle curriculum
without instructional assistance. However, de-
signed well, the outcomes can be far richer than
those constrained by faculty influence.
Wenger (1998) suggests that communities of
practice fulfill a number of functions in the cre-
ation, accumulation and diffusion of knowledge
and the exchange of interpretation of informa-
tion. Students work together and independently
to create knowledge within an environment that
fostered mutual respect and trust. Self-assessment
contributes to the knowledge base by illustrating
how students work to transform their practice by
participating in an online community of practice.
The goal of a CoP is to evolve over time, it
is within that context that students transform
(Wenger 1998). Students share challenges, inter-
act regularly and learn from each other. Students
developing language enhanced their ability to
articulate and address challenges as they wrestled
with theory and content knowledge (Swanson &
Kayler, 2009).Therefore the role of community
is a highly valuable part of learning.
CONCLUSION
To create and sustain a transformative learning
environment the rigid lines between who is teach-
ing and who is learning in the classroom must
Delightfully, Difficult Work
be reexamined. Baxter Magolda (1999) paints
a model,
Teachers are members of a knowledge commu-
nity that students want to join, but students need
to become fluent in the knowledge community’s
language to do so. The teacher, in order to help
them make this transition, needs not only to be
knowledgeable in her or his community, but also
to be able to converse in the students’ community.
The skill to converse in both communities helps
the teacher facilitate that students’increasing flu-
ency in the new knowledge community. Students’
experiences is the source of the teacher learning to
converse in their community. As students become
members of the new knowledge community, their
participation in “talking together and reading
agreement” implies the need for self-authorship –
constructing their own perspectives in the context
of the knowledge community.” (p. 16)
This can feel like a daunting task and requires
a measure of risk-taking and patience for all in-
volved. Talking from experience, it is also easier
said than done. The place to begin is from one
of sincerity, a refinement of why instructors love
their content area and how to bridge that passion
in a way that students are willing to join in the
community of practice if only for a semester. It
is key to remember that the take-away for the
student may not be a love for the discipline but a
new way of understanding their individual learning
process and how to transfer that understanding to
other courses. In other words, becoming a more
transformative teacher or learner while in the
company of others is delightfully, difficult work.
While this chapter outlined the students’ pro-
cess of moving forward become self-authoring, the
instructors’ systematic process of the scholarship
of teaching learning are parallel in approach and
outcome. Interestingly, each is also an individual
journey. Self-authorship requires dialogue with
other students to help them reframe their prior
knowledge with new content while SOTL requires
a public dialogue as instructors reframe their
pedagogy. To use a metaphor, transformation is a
dance between student and instructor. As students
change classes from semester to semester they
are in constant growth toward authoring their
own ideas and being able to incorporate multiple
perspectives into their repertoire. Similarly as
instructors change students each semester, what
worked for one set may not work for another. It is
an attitude toward continuous improvement. Ferry
and Ross-Gordon (1998) confirm that reflective
practitioners are active in their decision-making
and view the process as a cycle of learning based
on experience.
Instructors develop the ability to value students’
critical insights, experiences and perceptions in a
deeper way. The dynamics of teaching and learning
in a community empowered both instructors and
students. Another outcome of instructor empower-
ment and application of theory was listening to
student voices which resulted in a redistribution of
power. Transformation cannot happen in isolation.
It takes introspection, dialogue and new ideas to
promote permanent change.
REFERENCES
Barr, R. B., & Tagg, J. (1995). From teaching to
learning – A new paradigm for undergraduate
education. Change, 27(6), 12–25.
Baxter, M. M. (2004). Self-authorship as a the
common goal of 21st-0centtury education . In
Baxter, M. M., & King, K. P. (Eds.), Learning
partnerships: Theory and models of practice to
educate for self-authorship (pp. 1–36). Sterling,
VA: Stylus.
Baxter Magolda, M. (1999). Creating context
for learning and self- authorship. Nashville, TN:
Vanderbilt University Press.
Belenky, M., Clinchy, B. M., Goldbeger, N., &
Tarule, J. (1986). Women’s ways of knowing: The
development of self, voice, and mind. New York:
Basic Books.
181

Bolton, G. (2005). Reflective practice. Writing
and professional development (2nd ed.). Thousand
Oaks, CA: Sage.
Boyer, E. L. (1990). Scholarship reconsidered:
Priorities of the professoriate. The Carnegie
Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching.
New York: John Wiley and Sons.
Brookfield, S. (1995). Becoming a critically re-
flective teacher. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Brookfield, S. (2000). Transformative learning as
ideology critique . In Mezirow, J. (Ed.), Learn-
ing as transformation: Critical perspectives on a
theory in progress (pp. 125–150). San Francisco:
Jossey-Bass.
Cambridge, B. (2001). Fostering the scholarship
of teaching and learning: Communities of practice
. In Lieberman, D., & Wehlburg, C. (Eds.), To
improve the Academy (pp. 3–16). Bolton, MA:
Anker.
Copeland, W. D., Birmingham, C., LaCruz, E.,
& Lewin, B. (1993). The reflective practitioner
in teaching: toward a research agenda. Teach-
ing and Teacher Education, 9(4), 347–359.
doi:10.1016/0742-051X(93)90002-X
Cottrell, S. A., & Jones, E. A. (2003). Research-
ing the scholarship of teaching and learning:
an analysis of current curriculum practices.
Innovative Higher Education, 27(3), 169–181.
doi:10.1023/A:1022303210086
Dewey, J. (1933). How we think. Boston: D.C.
Heath.
Ferry, N. M., & Ross-Gordon, N. (1998). An
enquiry into Schon’s epistemology of practice:
exploring links between experience and reflec-
tive practice. Adult Education Quarterly, 48(2),
98–112. doi:10.1177/074171369804800205
182
Delightfully, Difficult Work
Hooks, B. (1994). Teaching to transgress. NY:
Routledge.
Kayler, M., & Weller, K. (2004, July). Building
dynamic learning communities through the use of
Web-based communication. Learning Technology
Newsletter, 6(3), 18–19.
Kegan, R. (1994). In over our heads: The mental
demands of modern life. Cambridge, MA: Harvard
University Press.
McKinney, K. (2004). The scholarship of teach-
ing and learning: Past lessons, current chal-
lenges, and future visions . In Welburg, C. M.,
& Chadwich-Blossey, S. (Eds.), To improve the
academy: Resources for instructors, instructional,
and organizational development, 22 (pp. 3–19).
Bolton, MA: Anker.
McLaren, P. (Ed.). (1998). Life in schools: An
introduction to critical pedagogy in the founda-
tions of education (3rd ed.). New York: Longman.
Mezirow, J. (2000). Learning as transformation.
Critical perspectives on a theory in progress. San
Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Palmer, P. (1998). The courage to teach: Explor-
ing the inner landscape of a teacher’s life. San
Francisco: Jossey Bass.
Rowland, S. (2000). The enquiring university
lecturer. Buckingham: Society for Research into
Higher Education and Open University Press.
Shulman, L. E. (2001). Remarks at the teaching
symposium for the cross endowed chair for the
scholarship of Teaching and Learning, Illinois
State University, November.
Swanson, K. W., & Kayler, M. (2008). Co-
constructing a learner-centered curriculum in
teacher professional development. Journal for the
Practical Application of Constructivist Theory in
Education, 3(1), 1–26.
Delightfully, Difficult Work
Swanson, K. W., & Kayler, M. (2009). The role
of self-assessment in e-learning communities . In
Wang, V. C. X. (Ed.), Handbook of research on
E-learning applications for career and technical
education: Technologies for vocational training
(pp. 431–443). Hershey, PA: IGI Publishing.
Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society. Cam-
bridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Weimer, M. (2002). Learner-centered teaching:
Five key changes to practice. San Francisco:
Jossey-Bass.
Wenger, E. (1998). Comunities of practice. Learn-
ing, meaning and identity. New York: Cambridge
Press.
Wenger, E., McDermott, R., & Snyder, W. C.
(2002). Cultivating communities of practice: A
guide to managing knowledge. Cambridge, MA:
Harvard Business School Press.
Wink, J. (2005). Critical pedagogy: Notes from
the year world. New York: Addison-Wesley
Longman, Inc.
KEY TERMS AND DEFINITIONS
Adult Development: The process of indi-
vidualizing one’s own thoughts in opinions.
Development is promoted in the context of others
such as parents, teachers and friends. One moves
from a state of internalizing the beliefs held by
others to a more sophisticated state of creating
individualized views which incorporate parts and
pieces from others.
Community Of Practice: A group of individu-
als who meet around a common topic which hold
specialized vocabulary and ways of knowing. It
is within this group that one learns the intricacies
of the topic and also helps to build knowledge in
other participants.
Constructive-Developmental Pedagogy:
More than letting students talk and generate their
own ideas, it is a matter of creating the develop-
mental conditions that allow them to generate their
own ideas effectively, in essence to develop their
minds, their voices, and themselves.
Learner-Centered Pedagogy: This refers
to the process of teaching and learning in which
students are at the heart of curriculum design,
classroom interaction and evaluation techniques.
For example, students are provided choice of read-
ings, assignments and assessment tools in a class.
Feedback Cycle: It is a method of collecting
information from students regarding their thoughts
on a class, assignment or the community. Students
are asked question which elicit specific responses
which then the instructor reads and places in an
organized format that represents the range of
answers to a question. The student’s views are
then presented at the next class and discussed.
The information gathered over the course is used
by the instructor to make adjustments to the cur-
riculum, assignment and community interactions.
Resistance: It is the process of passive or
aggressive responses by students to instruction
or assignments.
Scholarship of Teaching and Learning: This
is the systematic practice by instructors and in-
structors to use classroom data to inform curricular
decisions. It requires that these understandings are
made public, are part of a critical conversation
with academic peers and can advance the field.
183
184

Chapter 12
Technology-Enhanced
Information Literacy
in Adult Education
Lesley S. J. Farmer
California State University, Long Beach, USA

ABSTRACT
Economic and social activities rely on information and communication technologies. Information literacy
forms the basis for lifelong learning. Particularly with the advent of electronic information, adult learn-
ers need to manage technologies knowledgeably. Information Literacy Learning Models show learners’
interaction with information, and inform instructional design. Technology can inform and enrich this
process, including supporting anytime/anywhere learning. Technology-enhanced adult education that
addresses information literacy has to deal with several issues: e-resources, instructor acceptance and
knowledge of technology, collaboration, and interactivity. Future trends are also mentioned.

INTRODUCTION information at the right time to do things right and

The need for critical use of information is more
important than ever. The 1991 SCANS report notes
information location and manipulation as vital
skills for today’s employees. In a digital world
where the amount of information doubles every
two years, adults need to evaluate resources care-
fully and determine how to use relevant informa-
tion to solve problems and make wise decisions.
Furthermore, it is no longer principally an
issue of getting information: it’s getting the right
DOI: 10.4018/978-1-61692-906-0.ch012
to do the right things. Economic and social activi-
ties rely on information and communication tech-
nologies. Knowledge is ever-flowing, and social
interactions seem web-like (Pink, 2006). As the
world seems to grow smaller, due to increased com-
munication and population transience, the global
scene reflects a more interactive mode relative to
information. Even when a nation appears to act
alone to seem isolationist, it cannot survive in that
manner because the world is so interdependent.
This changing informational environment affects
adult education, and also emphasizes the need for
Technology-Enhanced Information Literacy in Adult Education
lifelong education to prepare today’s workforce
to deal with an uncertain tomorrow.
BACKGROUND
To understand how adult education can improve
learning through technology-enhanced infor-
mation literacy, underlying definitions of the
contributing factors need to be explained. These
factors result in an interdependent approach to
adult learning that recognizes today’s technologi-
cal society.
Defining Information Literacy
One of the goals of education is to help individu-
als become functionally literate, which involves a
continuum of skills that enables students to be able
to do something: procedural knowledge. Students
need to access, comprehend, and respond to infor-
mation. In the United States, reading and writing
ability are core competencies in that process.
However, other skills such as numeracy and visual
acuity are also implicated because knowledge
can be represented in so many forms. Increas-
ingly, other countries combine information and
communication literacies under the heading ICT
(Information and Communication Technology).
Information literacy, as defined by the Associa-
tion of College and Research Libraries (ACRL),
includes a set of abilities “requiring individuals to
recognize when information is needed and have
the ability to locate, evaluate, and use effectively
the needed information. Information literacy also
is increasingly important in the contemporary
environment of rapid technological change and
proliferating information resources.” (ACRL,
2000, p. 2) ACRL continues: “Information literacy
forms the basis for lifelong learning. It is common
to all disciplines, to all learning environments,
and to all levels of education. It enables learners
to master content and extend their investigations,
become more self-directed, and assume greater
control over their own learning.” (p. 3)
At one time, these competencies were typi-
cally labeled “library skills” or “research process
skills” but they now encompass much more than a
physical library, incorporate many more formats of
information, and address the issues of generating
new knowledge as much as verifying and applying
existing knowledge. Particularly with the advent
of electronic information, information literacy
also deals with social learning and responsibility.
In this light, information literacy facilitates a
major facet of adult education: providing students
the means to become critical lifelong learners. In-
deed, as students develop and practice these skills,
their learning increases across subject domains.
Testing a hypothesis can transfer to justifying a
thesis statement, for instance. Additionally, infor-
mation literacy competency standards provide a
framework for assessing student achievement.
Information Literacy
Learning Models
Knowing how adults learn affects the kind of in-
structional model that instructors use to optimize
the experience. Fortunately, information processes
tend to reflect the same values as adult learning:
engaged learning, opportunities for choice, per-
sonal construction of meaning, sharing of findings,
and building knowledge.
It should be noted that information literacy
and the processes for locating, assessing, and
using information should not be confused with
information processing theory. The latter deals
with mental operations, focusing on physiological
phenomena: sensory reception of stimuli, coding,
and memory. Typically, information processing
theory is associated with cognitive learning theory.
The models that best fits within the construct of
adult learning is situated cognition flexibility in
which one begins on the periphery and observes
critically; knowledge is constructed socially.
185
 Technology-Enhanced Information Literacy in Adult Education
Two other main perspectives are behavioral
learning and constructivism. The former places
learners in a receptive position where external
stimuli shape the learner’s response. The latter,
constructivism, posits individual construction of
meaning through active interaction with the envi-
ronment or stimuli. Constructivism acknowledges
multiple perspectives and contextualized knowl-
edge, and places the learner center in the process
with the teacher as coach. Most adult education
models align themselves with constructivist theory
since they acknowledge the rich background of
the learners and their ability to shape their learn-
ing experience. For example, cognitive flexibil-
ity theory differentiates between beginning and
advanced learning, and links abstract concepts
to case studies.
In their description of information-processing
constructivist theory, which bridges cognitive and
constructivist learning theory, Jonassen, Peck and
Wilson (1999) asserted that technologies “should
engage students in meaningful learning, where
they are intentionally and actively processing in-
formation while pursuing authentic tasks together
in order to construct personal and socially shared
meaning for the phenomena they are exploring
and manipulating” (p. 218).
Table 1 provides a conceptual model to visu-
alize how adults interact with information, and
show how adult educators can facilitate learning
in an information society.
Technology Literacy
Technology literacy refers to a person’s ability to
access and use technology responsibly and effec-
tively. The International Society for Technology in
Education (ISTE) developed technology literacy
standards that apply to young students (2007) as
well as to experienced teachers (2008). Their six
areas of competency include:
1. creativity and innovation
2. communication and collaboration
186
3. research and information fluency
4. critical thinking, problem solving, and deci-
sion making
5. digital citizenship
6. technology operations and concepts.
The International Technology Education As-
sociation (2000) has also developed technology
literacy standards for students, but these focus
more on learning about and for technology rather
than using technology as an intellectual tool. Their
foci include:
1. the nature of technology
2. technology and society
3. design (specifically, engineering design for
problem-solving)
4. abilities for a technological world (creating
technological products)
5. the designed world (i.e., agriculture, energy,
medicine, transportation, manufacturing
construction, communication).
In other areas of the world, technology literacy
is frequently reconfigured as Information and
Communications Technology or as Information
and Technology Literacy, which recognizes the
overlapping concepts. The ISTE standards, while
rather tool-based, offer the most delineated and
most easily applicable set that can be expected
for U. S. education.
Information literacy is linked to information
technology, but has a broader base and implication.
Information technology skills enable an individual
to use computers, software applications, databases,
and other technologies to achieve a wide variety
of academic, work-related, and personal goals”
(ACRL, 2000, p. 3) Technology also makes
information literacy more complex so that adult
education needs to consider information literacy as
an underlying principle of lifelong learning. While
information transcends technology, as evidenced
when individuals interview experts, technology
certainly impacts information literacy. Thus,
Technology-Enhanced Information Literacy in Adult Education

Table 1.

ELEMENT ADULT LEARNER INFORMATION ADULT EDUCATOR

Pre-engagement: Background, knowledge, capabili-
ties, situation
Origin of Need: Personal, professional
Task determinator: Self-determined or other-determined
(e.g., employer)
First contact: Attention (may choose to ignore it)
Comprehension/ Intel- Decoding (e.g., visuals, sound, lin-
lectual Access: guistics, language); Understanding
content (e.g., vocabulary, semiotics,
concepts, context)
Evaluation: Agreement/ rejection/ incorporation
of ideas (based on cognitive, affec-
tive, behavioral); Determination of
use; Task or need change
Manipulation of Infor- Interpretation; Organization; Syn-
mation: thesis; Re-Formatting; Changing;
Relating or Combining with other
information
Application/ Use: Problem-solving; Learning; Self/
group change; Adding to knowl-
edge base
(Adapted from Farmer, Librarians, Literacy and the Promotion of Gender Equity. McFarland, 2005, p. 166)
What are its characteristics? What are
the characteristics of the environment
in general and at that moment?
Producer wants to influence or gain
power
Format parameters
Physical access issues (equipment,
availability)
Layout, cues to understanding, glos-
sary, dual coding
Comparative information; peer review
Characteristics of information and its
representation; malleability
Generation of new information;
Change in environment; Change in
power
FACILITATION
Knowledge, role, situation
Standards, Needs assessment
Instructional design
Introduction
Language instruction; oral reading;
simplification; deconstruction;
contextualization
Criteria lists, rubrics; critical think-
ing / information literacy skills
instruction
Analytical and manipulation skills
instruction; Provision of tools
Assessment; Providing venue
for implementation; Knowledge
management

technology is used as a learning and productivity
tool while information literacy is, in effect, an
intellectual framework.
Information Literacy and
Technology Literacy within
the Information Society
Information has always been needed. As early as
the 1991 SCANS (Secretary’s Commission on
Achieving Necessary Skills) report, governmental
agencies have noted the need for employees who
can: locate, interpret and organize information;
communicate information; create documents;
solve problems; work with a variety of technol-
ogy; and know how to acquire new knowledge.
However, what particularizes the recent notion of
an information (or knowledge) society is the vastly
increased speed, access, and interconnectedness
of information worldwide. Simultaneously, infor-
mation and communication have converged, such
as telecommunications and broadcasting, giving
rise to informational industries. At this point in
history, telecommunications and media constitute
one-sixth of the U. S. economy, and thirty percent
of all economic growth between 1996 and 2000
was attributed to enhanced productivity based
on information technology (Wilhelm, 2004). The
cost of technology has dropped precipitously so
that the majority of people can access it, thereby
reinforcing mass media and other information
entities. As a result, new forms of organization and
social interaction have emerged (Webster, 2002).
This information society impacts existing cul-
tures and institutions, including adult education.
The speed and globalization of information leads

187
 Technology-Enhanced Information Literacy in Adult Education
to constant change, which can be hard to digest
and manage. The majority of jobs now involve
technology and other related new skills, so that
the idea of a “terminal” degree or a static skill set
is becoming an outdated paradigm. Rather, adults
often need to “retool” themselves throughout their
work lives. Particularly for adults who are largely
digital immigrants, this new world of information,
especially in electronic form, can be puzzling and
overwhelming. Without effective technology-
enhanced adult education, these workers might
not have enough background information to
understand and use the new information.
International stakeholders at the World Sum-
mit on the Information Society stated their shared
values of information literacy:
Information Literacy lies at the core of lifelong
learning. It empowers people in all walks of life
to seek, evaluate, use and create information
effectively to achieve their personal, social, oc-
cupational and educational goals. It is a basic
human right in a digital world and promotes
social inclusion of all nations (Garner, 2005, p. 3).
Summit world leaders “made a strong commit-
ment towards building a people-centred, inclusive
and development-oriented Information Society for
all, where everyone can access, utilise and share
information and knowledge” (United Nations,
2006, p. 6). Fundamentally, an information soci-
ety is one in which information replaces material
goods as the chief driver of socio-economics. Hu-
man intellectual capital has higher currency than
material capital, or at least intellect is needed to
optimize the use of material resources.
In a landmark study of CEOs from 28 coun-
tries, Rosen et al. (2000). documented four global
literacies need in today’s business world: personal
literacy (self-knowledge and self-esteem), social
literacy, business literacy, and cultural literacy. As
businesses increasingly realize the importance of
intellectual capital, knowledge management has
become a key ingredient for success. In 1995,
188
G-7 leadership agreed that a global information
society needed to be built, providing infrastruc-
ture and applications as they impact societies
and cultures. Particularly since one of the main
reasons for education is to prepare its students to
contribute to society’s economic well-being, it
makes sense to incorporate information literacy
into the curriculum.
UNESCO Bangkok has identified communi-
cation and information as a major program, with
information literacy constituting a major thread
within that initiative. This international organiza-
tion asserts:
Information literacy enhances the pursuit of
knowledge by equipping individuals with the skills
and abilities for critical reception, assessment
and use of information in their professional and
personal lives. For the society to have informa-
tion literate adults, information literacy education
needs to start as early as possible (¶ 1).
UNESCO as a whole has embraced information
and communication technology, and is facilitating
global discussion and efforts.
Everyone should be offered the opportunity to
acquire the necessary skills in order to understand,
participate actively in, and benefit fully from, the
Information Society and the knowledge economy.
Given the wide range of ICT [information and
communication technology] specialists required
at all levels, building the institutional capacities
to collect, organize, store and share information
and knowledge deserves special attention. Gov-
ernments should develop comprehensive and
forward-looking strategies to respond to the new
human capacity needs, including the creation of
an environment that supports information literacy,
ICT literacy and life-long learning for the general
public (p. 6)
Even beyond economics, information literacy
is needed in order to fully realize one’s self-
potential and to be a responsible and participatory
Technology-Enhanced Information Literacy in Adult Education
citizen. On a more profound level, information lit-
eracy is imperative for a democratic, open society.
The intersection of technology and globaliza-
tion has led to more intense and pluralistic inter-
actions across societies. Because information’s
meaning and impact is contextualized, shared
knowledge and understanding can be harder to
achieve. In a world scarred with political turmoil
and terrorism, information literacy has never been
so important. Adult educators, in collaboration
with information professionals, should be discuss-
ing strategies to promote the value of information
literacy – and ways to optimize its attainment by
global citizens -- through initiatives facilitated
via private and public entities.
Factors Driving Adult Education
What is driving change in adult education? Most
of the factors are external to the educational
environment. Changing demographics probably
tops the list. Particularly with NAFTA (North
American Free Trade Agreement), business has
become increasingly international. Information,
materials and labor cross national borders con-
stantly. Downturns in economies and worldwide
political upheaval have resulted in growing migra-
tion. Outsourcing offered a means to get low-cost
labor, although recent economic downturns have
lessened that practice as domestic unemployment
demands that in-country personnel be used first.
However, such domestic employees oftentimes
have to be retooled to gain the knowledge base
and accompanying skills to be productive in a
new career. Increasingly, their ability to learn how
to learn, to integrate and apply new information
appropriately, is their key to financial survival. In
any case, the message is clear that adult education
functions within and as a part of global economic
realities (Friedman, 2006).
Another major factor facilitating – or forcing
– change in the information world is technology.
More households have televisions than bathrooms.
Digital storage and data manipulation has trans-
formed business practices, aiding collaboration
and streamlining supply and demand processes.
Technology has the potential to collapse space and
time, disseminating information and documenta-
tion at an incredible speed. It has also democra-
tized communication to some degree, bypassing
traditional selection and filtering processes to
share all kinds of information and misinformation.
Technology can also “flatten” communication if it
relies only on text; people do not have sound and
visual cues to contextualize a message. Therefore,
one needs to communicate more clearly and un-
ambiguously. Technology also introduces another
dimension in group learning: the need to know
the technical aspects of communicating. Thus,
contributions may be a factor more of software and
hardware availability and protocol than of subject
expertise. However, these same advances have also
given rise to the Digital Divide; a direct positive
correlation exists between household income and
household computer ownership.
More recently, the Digital Divide has been ap-
plied to age differentials, where millennial youth
outperform older adults in their use of informa-
tion technology. Interactive Web 2.0 furthers
distinguishes adults and youth. Over two-thirds
of adults use email while minors are more likely
to text message. A little more than a third of
adults constitute ‘power’ online users in contrast
to almost two-thirds for youth. In addition, youth
are generally twice as likely to use Web 2.0 tools
and mobile technology than adults (Drago, 2009;
Li, 2007). Adults are learning from youngsters
rather than the other way around, which upsets
the ‘natural’ order of education whereby adults
transfer knowledge to younger ones.
TECHNOLOGY-ENHANCED
INFORMATION LITERACY IN ADULT
EDUCATION INSTRUCTIONAL DESIGN
Lifelong learning often implies that the learner
knows how to learn as well as identifies what to
189
 Technology-Enhanced Information Literacy in Adult Education
learn. In optimizing technology integration into
adult learning, educators need to incorporate
information literacy and social learning.
To jumpstart adult learner knowledge building,
adult educators should investigate their current
instructional design efforts to identify possible
examples of information literacy, which they
might not have formally “named” accordingly.
By linking learning goals to information literacy
standards, adult educators can then identify those
skills and resources they need to incorporate into
instruction. By blending information literacy into
instructional design, adult educators can optimize
professional development sessions because adults
are not only gaining subject-specific knowledge
but they are also gaining lifelong learning skills.
A core learning competence is, in effect, updated
and expanded into the realm of a community of
practice.
Adult education that addresses information
literacy tends to focus on assessment, instructional
design, and management. Technology can inform
this process. Representative activities follow.
1. Assess learner needs and choose appropriate
resources to meet those needs.
◦⊦ Use software and online diagnostic
tests.
◦⊦ Videotape learner performances and
analyze them.
◦⊦ Use a spreadsheet to record and ana-
lyze learner performance.
◦⊦ Read reviews of resources.
◦⊦ Locate and develop rubrics.
2. Develop and implement learning activities
that meet learner needs.
◦⊦ Locate and develop self-paced
tutorials.
◦⊦ Locate and develop documents and
directions.
◦⊦ Develop presentation templates.
◦⊦ Schedule an educational
videoconference.
◦⊦ Plan a field trip.
190
3. Manage the learning environment.
◦⊦ Include social breaks for learners to
process new information.
◦⊦ Use network supervision software to
monitor learner use of computers.
◦⊦ Create learning stations.
◦⊦ Produce a class Web site that in-
cludes assignments, exemplars, and
resources.
◦⊦ Create a wiki for learners to share
information.
Specifically during the delivery of adult edu-
cational learning opportunities, several activities
can be incorporated to foster understanding and
practice of information literacy:
• Highlight information literacy standards
that are explicitly addressed in learner
projects.
• Have adults generate concept maps (either
manually or with graphic organizer ap-
plications) about information literacy be-
fore and after a professional development
session.
• Starting with learner outcomes, identify
associated literacies.
• Trace the instructional design process
and incorporate information literacy
accordingly.
• Pair adults in two different disciplines to
compare information literacy overlap and
transference.
• Lead a discussion with administrators or
supervisors about the impact of informa-
tion literacy on workplace mission, pro-
duction outcomes, and employee evalu-
ation. The 1991 SCANS report could be
referenced.
Even with these suggestions, technology is
sometimes added on top of existing instruction,
like icing on the cake, rather than transforming
instructional design. Some of the changed elements
Technology-Enhanced Information Literacy in Adult Education
include: the locus of control from teacher to learner,
just-in-time learning, emphasis on resource-rich
inquiry, and heightened interaction. In fact, one
of the first questions in the instructional design
process that needs to be answered is: “Should
technology be used?” The following lists contrasts
deciding factors.
Incorporating technology is appropriate when:
• accessing remote digital resources
• addressing sensory modes via simulations
and other knowledge representations
• building on or repurposing existing digital
resources or instruction
• encouraging repeated practice (e.g., drills
for rote learning)
• supporting anytime/anywhere learning
• recording and archiving communication
and effort.
Incorporating technology is not beneficial
when:
• focusing on in-house, non-technical
resources
• face-to-face personal contact is important
• providing one-time customized training
• other resources and means are more
effective.
A good rule of thumb is to employ the most
stable, low-tech format applicable to the concept
being taught. Once the decision to use technology
is made, regardless of the type of technology used,
instructional designers need to acknowledge and
take advantage of these media.
It should be noted that the choice and imple-
mentation of instructional strategies need to
be addressed in light of the entire instructional
design process. Throughout the instructional
design process, instructors need to determine
which technologies will be used – and to what
extent. In fact, technology-infused instructional
design often requires the use of several technolo-
gies. At the very minimum, instructors need to
determine whether technology will be used as a
tool to deliver instruction, as a learning aid, or as
the outcome itself. Even the instructional focus,
whether to emphasize a technology tool or edu-
cational task, requires careful consideration. The
decision-making process itself may well involve
technology, particularly when gathering data (e.g.,
online surveys, PDA observation templates, web
counters) and analyzing it (e.g., spreadsheets,
databases, content analysis software). Technology-
based choices apply at each step in designing
instruction, as shown here.
• Assess needs: online survey, video capture
of behavior, analysis of website “hits”
• Identify learners: online solicitations, RSS
feed subscriptions, organizational lists
• Identify outcomes: technology standards,
online content standards, online education
syllabi
• Identify indicators: technology rubrics,
technology products, electronic Delphi
method (i.e., getting experts to come to
consensus on key points)
• Identify prerequisite skills: web-based as-
sessment, performance observation, con-
tent analysis of sample work
• Identify content: online training docu-
ments, electronic journal articles, virtual
chat
• Identify the instructional format:
◦⊦ resources (Internet, DVDs, e-books)
◦⊦ instructor (technician, instruction de-
signer, remote-site expert)
◦⊦ methods (web tutorial, hands-on in-
struction, video presentation)
◦⊦ timeframe (self-paced, real-time,
just-in-time)
◦⊦ location (computer lab, classroom,
home)
◦⊦ grouping (individual, online group,
work unit)
191
 Technology-Enhanced Information Literacy in Adult Education
◦⊦ individualization (programmed in-
struction, choice of technology,
coaching)
◦⊦ affective domain (wiki, threaded dis-
cussion, virtual chat)
• Contextualize instruction: web page within
work website, professional development
database, digital images of applications
• Implement the plan: project planning soft-
ware program, web page development,
video conferencing
• Assess the plan: PDA (personal digital as-
sistant) questionnaire, videotape, online
survey.
Each type of technology tool lends itself to spe-
cific learning approaches. Whenever possible, the
unique properties of each tool should be exploited
to optimize these experiences. An illustration of
how these choices impact instructional strategies
follows. A local agency supports single fathers.
The group meets monthly to discuss parenting
issues. The group’s facilitator works with the
fathers to identify personally meaningful goals:
keeping children safe and healthy, and maintain-
ing a personally healthy lifestyle. The facilitator
provides a booklet that contains a checklist of
developmental benchmarks and a time table for
“well baby” medical visits. He also cites an ac-
companying website that gives more details, and
provides the same information in Spanish. To help
anxious fathers, the facilitator shows streaming
video clips about basic child care procedures, such
as bathing. The facilitator encourages the fathers
to buddy up so that they can phone or text each
other for support. The facilitator also reminds the
fathers that the public library has free Internet ac-
cess in case computer access is a problem.
E-RESOURCES
All of these instruction strategy decision points
include selecting appropriate resources to incor-
192
porate. Two major categories are content-centric
resources and production-centric resources. While
applications are emphasized here, it should be
mentioned that digital resources need equipment
in order to use them, so instructors need to check
their availability and ease of operability before
choosing dependent digital resources. In terms
of physical access to technology, adult educators
need to consider several factors.
• Site access: is technology available to
classes and individuals throughout the day
and evening to accommodate adult work-
ing hours?
• Remote access: can learners get to tech-
nology resources from home or public
buildings?
• Equipment circulation: does the site lend
computers to learners or families? These
days, a variety of options are feasible:
low-end word-processors and Internet de-
vices; mobile devices; older donated com-
puter systems that can be checked out for
the year in a fashion similar to textbook
circulation.
• Physical accommodations: does the site
have computers with larger monitors for
visually impaired users, trackballs for
physically limited motion, scanners to read
text, adjustable desks to accommodate
wheelchairs or other seating?
Nevertheless, equipment is not the end. Rather,
hardware is merely the mechanism for adult learn-
ers to access and use information. What content-
rich resources drive instruction?
Content-Centric Resources
Content-rich resources include subject-specific
software, DVDs, audiotapes, podcasts, and In-
ternet files, particularly online databases. Digital
access tools include library catalogs, indices, tele-
communications, Internet directories, and search
Technology-Enhanced Information Literacy in Adult Education
engines. The advantages of these technology tools
include: combination of media, currency, multiple
access points, user control, and capability to be
repurposed. These features are particularly useful
to meet the needs of learners with different learning
styles and English language barriers. Additionally,
when instructors transmit their information via
content-rich tools, they facilitate learning anytime
and anywhere in a standardized way, which can
provide large-scale instruction.
Learners can access these resources inde-
pendently or as part of face-to-face classroom
course delivery. In the latter situation, technol-
ogy resources provide immediate exploration of
relevant information. For instance, the instructor
might talk about copyright and then have learners
take an online copyright test; afterwards, the class
can discuss the answers and implications. A class
may talk about finding real world connections
to geometry; they can use cell phones to capture
those images.
Discrete portions of resources may be selected
and edited to demonstrate one specific concept
or insight. That individual learning object may
be used for another course for another purpose.
For example, a video clip of a lung surgery detail
may be used in an anatomy class as well as in a
drug-prevention course. When well indexed and
incorporated into a database for easy access and
retrieval, these learning modules provide an ef-
fective way to optimize electronic resources. They
can be easily inserted into multimedia and online
presentations to offer a quick, clear explanation
or to serve as an open-ended, generative learning
prompt.
Whatever technology resources are used,
instructors need to make sure that learners do
something with them; the learning needs to
be interactive rather than passive. To facilitate
critical viewing, the instructor should provide
guiding questions. Having an activity based on
the resources helps reinforce and build on learn-
ing, so providing information about that project
before viewing the resource optimizes transfer
of learning.
Probably the most interactive web-based
instruction format is a WebQuest. In this model,
a meaningful task is presented. The WebQuest
creator provides the learner with links to appropri-
ate web-based documents in order to complete the
task. Often collaborative roles are incorporated
into the WebQuest to promote human interaction
as well as interaction with resources. WebQuests
blend information access, manipulation, and
presentation.
Production-Centric Resources
Other digital resources facilitate content manipu-
lation and presentation, which are detailed here.
Application suites such as MicroSoft Office and
Google Docs enable individuals to transform digi-
tal information from one format to another easily.
• Word processing/desktop publishing: easy
to use and repurpose, and other applica-
tions can often be inserted. Instructors can
create learning guide sheets, and learners
can present and share their findings.
• Spreadsheet: helps organize data and fa-
cilitates numerical analysis. Instructors can
locate data sets for analysis; learners can
test hypotheses about data.
• Database: helps sort and links data sets. A
newer form of databases is social network-
ing websites, as exemplified by delicious,
Flickr, and Facebook. Instructors can lo-
cate data sets for analysis; learners can test
hypotheses about existing data and collab-
oratively create their own social sharing
database.
• Authoring/presentation: combines me-
dia to present content sequentially or in
other structured order locally and online.
Instructors and learners can present con-
tent, and reorder or combine presentations.
193
 Technology-Enhanced Information Literacy in Adult Education
• Audio files/podcasting: presents aural
information such as voice and music.
Instructors and learners can record and
archive explanations and sound clips for
later use.
• Graphic programs: represents knowledge
visually; some programs require hours of
training. Instructors can diagnose learner
knowledge as they create content concept
maps; instructors and learners can explain
concepts with images.
• Video editing: realistic, multimedia format
for presenting concepts, particularly pro-
cesses and persuading audiences; requires
some training and equipment. Instructors
and learners can demonstrate how the se-
lection and sequencing of video informa-
tion can impact perception.
For most content areas, a variety of tech-
nologies may be incorporated for successful
instructional strategies. By examining all of the
instructional design factors, optimum technologies
can be chosen with confidence.
Task-Specific Resources
To demonstrate how the choice of resource impacts
instructional strategies, the following outline of
content matter to teach information literacy in-
corporates technology at each step.
1. Identify the need for information.
a. Video: Learners brainstorm informa-
tion needs for a Middle East peace
summit simulation.
b. Web activity: Concept mapping and
other educational techniques to help
learners identify information needs.
2. Access information effectively.
a. Video: Learners identify various search
strategies to locate information, such as
generating key words and using library
catalogs and indexes.
194
b. Web activity: Tutorial on use of online
databases and university catalog; use of
bibliographies, etc.; locate educational
research and lesson plans.
3. Evaluate and select information.
a. Video: Learners use web evaluation
criteria.
b. Web activity: WebQuest that explains
use of rubrics and other tools to evalu-
ate materials; evaluate educational
research and learning activities.
4. Manipulate information to accomplish a
specific purpose.
a. Video: Learners create spreadsheets
and timelines to organize information.
b. Web activity: Instructional design
process.
5. Communicate product or performance.
a. Video: Learners create a PowerPoint
presentation.
b. Web activity: Tutorial on presentation
software.
6. Evaluate process and product.
a. Video: Learners use rubrics to evaluate
their learning experience.
b. Web activity: Locate and evaluate
assessment and standards websites;
WebQuest on copyright and other legal
issues.
AFFECTIVE SIDE OF TECHNOLOGY
INCORPORATION
In the final analysis, the incorporation of infor-
mation technology depends on people and orga-
nizational behavior, not machines. For teaching
faculty to incorporate information technology, they
have to accept it, that is, they need to be willing
to use it for a designated task (Davis, 1993). Such
willingness is a conscious choice that involves the
affective domain. As Goleman (1995) asserted,
people “who are anxious, angry, or depressed to
not learn; people who are caught in these stated
Technology-Enhanced Information Literacy in Adult Education
do not take in information efficiently or deal with
it well” (p. 47). Woodrow (1992) specified the
necessity of teachers having a positive attitude
for information technology to be incorporated
effectively. In fact, Liu, MacMillan and Timmons
(1998) found that negative attitudes of teachers
about technology can impede student learning.
Nahl (2005) investigated the influence of affective
variables in using the Internet. She found that high
self-efficacy and optimism counteracted feelings
of frustration and irritation in challenging Internet
tasks; additionally, high affective coping skills
led to lower uncertainty and greater acceptance
of technology systems (2003).
Several models trace the acceptance of tech-
nology and innovation, recognizing the affective
domain. Rogers’ seminal research on the diffusion
of innovation (1962) focused on the individual
within the organization. The four factors involved
in diffusion included the innovation (new idea,
practice, or object), communication channel, time
(both decision-making and adoption processes),
and the social system. Individuals bring their
personality and social characteristics, as well as
their perceived need for the innovation as they
learn about the innovation, couched within social
system norms. As individuals decide whether to
accept or reject the innovation; they perceive the
innovation’s characteristics, including its
• relative advantage over other available
tools
• compatibility with social practice
• complexity or ease to learn
• triability before having to commit to it
• observability of its benefits.
One of the most widely known and researched
theoretical bases, David’s 1993 Technology Ac-
ceptance Model (TAM) identified four affective
factors that predict intent to use technology: per-
ceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, attitude
toward using technology, and subjective norm. The
latter factor indicates the degree to which peers
and other people around the individual encourage
technology acceptance. In that respect, Davis’s
work recognizes that other people’s beliefs impacts
one’s own attitude and willingness to accept new
technologies, even if personally uncomfortable
with change in general.
Hall and Loucks’ related concerns based adop-
tion model (1979) posited that people progressed
from self concern (awareness, informational, per-
sonal) to task concerns (management) to impact
concerns (consequence, collaboration, renewal).
Nevertheless, the affective domain is an active
element throughout the stages since teachers’
attitudes about impact colors their management
style and collaborative efforts.
Karahanna, Straub and Chervany (1999) found
an interesting connection between individuals and
groups relative to pre-and post-adoption attitudes
about information technology. Potential technol-
ogy adoption intent was based on normative pres-
sures while technology user intent was based their
personal attitude. Likewise, pre-adoption attitude
drew on a wider spectrum of innovative charac-
teristics (Rogers, 1962) than continuing users,
who focused on perceived technology usefulness
and on personal improved status; pre-users have
less experience and more uncertainty. Kasworn
(1997) found similar results: the seeds for innova-
tion sometimes comes from group synergy, but
learning was based on individual’s ego, needs,
and interests.
Ajzen and Fishbein (1980) also investigated
the affective domain relative to technology ac-
ceptance, noting both personal belief systems
and response to subjective norms. Their theory of
reasoned action asserted that individual’s attitudes
about the consequences of behaviors (the extent
of success and the value of the outcome) and the
influence of others (both in terms of their belief
about the outcome and the motivation to comply
to other’s expectations) led to intent of behavior,
such as the use of technology.
195
 Technology-Enhanced Information Literacy in Adult Education
COLLABORATION
Sometimes librarians consider information lit-
eracy as “their” curriculum. These set of processes,
though, are more accurately considered as vital
learning tools across curricula. Thus, adult edu-
cators should think of information literacy as an
educational lingua franca that helps the learning
community communicate and learn together. In
this spirit, information literacy should be taught
within the context of subject matter: true infor-
mational needs.
For this reason, beside the fact that good teach-
ing often arises out of a community of practice,
adult educators and librarians should collabora-
tively design learning activities that foster both
subject matter competency as well as literacies.
Many content frameworks include information
literacy components, but they are not always ex-
plicitly labeled as such. Therefore, librarians and
adult educators should look at content standards
and information literacy standards simultaneously
together, taking into consideration the adult learn-
ers’ prerequisite information literacy skills and
available resources.
Differing degrees of collaboration exist in
every adult education program depending upon
status of the stakeholders and faculty culture.
Two pre-conditions must exist before informa-
tion literacy based collaboration can exist: adult
educators have to understand and value informa-
tion literacy – and the librarian’s role in curricular
deployment. Technology adds another dimension
in that it demands a change in the educational
culture as well as in best practice. Counter-intu-
itively, change that involves technology requires
significant psychological support and increased
collaboration.
Providing resources in support of course cur-
riculum is the most basic of services provided by
librarians. Research guides, in class assignments,
and print handouts are established methods of as-
sistance. Technology gives opportunity to expand
the role of librarians as a partner in the educational
196
process. Consultation has been expanding from the
role of a resource consultant to that of a joint cre-
ator of course content and delivery. Collaboration
can range in breadth from one concept explained
during a single class session to a programmatic
approach to information literacy. Likewise, col-
laboration can range in depth from a single en-
counter to an ongoing professional relationship.
As for technology incorporation, both librar-
ians and technology specialists can provide valu-
able guidance. While librarians focus on technol-
ogy literacy and supporting resources to a large
extent, the technology specialists can help adult
educators select, install, and maintain hardware
and software. The technology specialist may also
know some advanced features for software that
educators use – or programs that help students
learn. In addition, the technology specialist can
facilitate the smooth operations of electronic re-
sources; that kind of support enables adult educa-
tors to focus on other professional functions such
as instructional design, delivery, and collaboration.
Ideally, technology facilitates collaboration as
telecommunications can facilitate asynchronous
planning and documentation. However, when
instructors are less comfortable with technology,
the librarian or technology specialist may get the
entire responsibility for teaching technical skills
without any input from the instructor of record.
Nevertheless, the extent of collaboration is usu-
ally less dependent on each party’s technological
expertise than it is on interpersonal trust.
On a more systemic level, entire adult programs
can examine information literacy standards along-
side subject matter standards in an effort to develop
an interdependent matrix of learning activities
that can insure student information competence.
In this model, developing a hypothesis or a thesis
statement both exemplify the process of identify-
ing a task. If the nursing instructor introduces this
concept prior to the technical writing instructor,
then the latter can build upon the students’ recent
learning, thus deepening understanding and of-
fering more opportunities to practice that skill
Technology-Enhanced Information Literacy in Adult Education
in other contexts. Similarly, just as each training
builds on prior knowledge sets, so to can infor-
mation and technology literacy skills build upon
prior experience that is contextualized to optimize
meaningful engagement.
The instructional design process itself exists
within the context of the organizational entity that
is sponsoring the learning experience. Therefore,
for technology to be incorporated effectively into
adult education, organizational leadership needs
to have a shared vision for technology integra-
tion and the means to allocate resources (such as
material, facilities, infrastructure, and technical
support) to that end. Policies also need to be put
in place that support technology-enhanced adult
education; aspects might include acceptable use,
skills baselines, professional development and
incentives, hardware specifications and refresh
cycles, and equity issues. In short, the entire
enterprise needs to have the motivation and the
capacity to incorporate technology into its system
(Roblyer & Doering, 2009).
The organization also needs to be realize that
learning about technology differs from learning
with technology; the former views technology as
an end in itself while the latter views technology
as a means. With technology as an end, systems
and organizational goals are the central concern,
and advanced project management skills are
needed; the entire enterprise is changing. When
technology supports learning, job performance is
the focus, and the training department controls the
process to the large extent; the organization as a
whole is not in flux.
Getting the buy-in of all the stakeholders for
technology efforts, and involving them throughout
the planning process, become critical tasks (Legge
& Mumford, 1978). Bjørn-Andersen, Eason, and
Robey (1986) further asserted that technology
acceptance depended on the affective aspects of
control and enhancement, whereby a feeling of less
personal control increased resistance while a sense
of self-improvement and contributing facilitated
adoption. This issue of control within an organi-
zation was addressed in Gould and Lewis’s 1985
principles for user-centered instructional systems
design; they asserted that early focus be given to
users and actual tasks, and that design should be
a participatory set of activities incorporating user
testing and feedback.
INTERACTIVE TECHNOLOGY
AND INFORMATION LITERACY
Today’s technology-rich environments have in-
creased the potential repertoire of instructional
strategies, including interactive learning. Prob-
ably the most influential change in teaching with
technology within adult education currently has
been the introduction and increasing acceptance of
interactive Web 2.0. Knowledge is collaboratively
built and shared. Whereas earlier decades focused
more on instructor-produced content, which could
involve high-level technical expertise, Web 2.0
tools are often easy to use so that content can
regain intellectual focus. Adding this broad-based
authoring set of tools to the educational concept
of constructivism results in practical applications
of information literacy and student-centered cur-
riculum. Johnson (2009) suggests several Web 2.0
tools that work well for adult education across
the curriculum.
1. Audio files. Audacity (http://audacity.
sourceforge.net) is an open source appli-
cation for recording and editing sound.
Instructors can record lectures and shorter
tutorials, and learners can listen to the audio
files at their convenience for as many times
as they wish.
2. Blogs. 21classes (http://www.21classes.
com) enables instructors to develop a class
blog portal. For a fee, access can be restricted,
and each student can upload up to 25 MB of
content. This software also supports subject
“tagging” and full-text searching. Class
Blogmeister (http://classblogmeister.com)
197
 Technology-Enhanced Information Literacy in Adult Education
is a free product that enables instructors to
set up and monitor student blog accounts.
3. Graphic organizers. Bubbl.us (http://bubbl.
us) is a visual brainstorming and concept
mapping tool. Conceptshare (http://www.
conceptshare.com) is an online design col-
laboration tool that allows comments. Gliffy
(http://www.gliffy.com) provides a variety
of diagrams and other graphic organizer
templates.
4. Image sharing. Bubbleshare (http://www.
bubbleshare.com) permits individuals to
upload photos and other images with unlim-
ited storage. Audio and video captions can
be added to “albums.” Flickr (http://www.
flickr.com) is a free photograph management
system that operates on several digital plat-
forms, including mobile devices. Individuals
can also “push” photos through feeds and
other alert systems.
5. Multimedia. Voicethread (http://www.
voicethread.com) is a free (or low-cost) pro-
gram that enables users to develop and share
online “albums” of mixed media; viewers
can comment in several ways. Zoho (http://
zoho.com) is a free online collaborative
environment that supports group projects
in a variety of formats.
6. Networking. Ning (http://www.ning.com) is
a free online social networking environment
that supports links, groups, and sharing of
documents such as videos. LinkedIn (http://
www.linkedin.com) facilitates business and
professional connections, so lends itself to
mentoring opportunities.
7. Presentations. Slideshare (http://www.
slideshare.net) is a free site that allows users
to upload and share PowerPoint/OpenOffice/
pdf presentations and documents. Audio can
also be incorporated. Spresent (http://www.
spresent.com) is a free web-based application
that enables users to create and disseminate
Flash presentations.
198
8. Video. Viddler (http://www.viddler.com)
supports uploading and share of video within
a browser. Vimeo (http://www.vimeo.com)
provides 500 MG of video storage and shar-
ing capacity. YouTube (http://www.youtube.
com) is a free online video streaming service
that allows users to upload and share videos.
9. Virtual environments. Second Life (http://
www.secondlife.com) is an object-oriented
online environment in which to interact
with artifacts and avatars (personalities).
University of Illinois at Chicago’s School of
Public Health is using this environment to
prepare students for health-related response
planning. Microsoft and VMware have
introduced virtual “machine” software that
creates a “sandbox” for technical students to
explore hardware without harming it. ALIVE
(Advanced Learning and Immersive Virtual
Environment) laboratory in Queensland is
developing simple tools to enable educators
to teach with ready-made or customized
embedded three-dimensional applications
(de Byl, 2009).
10. Wikis. PB Wiki (http://www.pbwiki.com)
is a free webpage creator application that
can be used collaboratively. Alternatively,
individuals can make comments on peer
pages. Wiki creators, such as instructors,
can customize access options. WikiSpaces
(http://www.wikispaces.com) is another site
that can be secured; K-12 educators can
establish a free account.
11. Group writing. Google Docs (http://docs.
google.com) allows learners to share and edit
documents using a suite of productivity tools.
Google Notebook (http://www.google.com/
notebook) organizes text, images and links
that can be sharing, even from cell phones.
Whiteboard (http://www.whiteboard.com)
facilitates collaborative writing, and saves
earlier versions.
Technology-Enhanced Information Literacy in Adult Education
Instructor computers and hands-on active
learning have been further enhanced by other
hardware such as tablets, interactive white boards
and Personal Response Systems (PRS). These
tools make it possible for learners to contribute
and control information, thereby improving their
information and technology literacy while focus-
ing on the subject matter at hand.
• Computer tablets are typically laptops with
a touch screen. The laptop can be held in
clipboard fashion with the user being able
to “write” on the screen. If the tablet is
electronically connected to a data projec-
tor, the instructor can circulate the tablet
among the class so that each learner can
input on the tablet as they are ready to con-
tribute information.
• Interactive white boards use a surface that
is linked electronically to the computer;
the image projection is calibrated so that
the user can move images on the board as
if it were a touch screen and “write” on it
as if it were a computer tablet. In effect,
the person at the board “controls” the com-
puter, and can add information to the board
and open computer application.
• PRSs (personal response systems) use in-
frared technology so that when student
click on the handheld device, their inputs
are collected statistically and can be shared
via the instructor’s computer, and projected
for the class to see. This system is particu-
larly effective in large classes because it
facilitates instant checks for understanding
so that the instructor can clarify confusing
information – or speed ahead because the
students already know the information to
be discussed.
FUTURE TRENDS
Self-managed learning tools and planning rein-
force adult learner control. Knowledge manage-
ment systems enable learning communities to pool
their knowledge and generate new ideas for the
improvement of the entire enterprise.
Self-Paced Learning Tools
In the digital age, adult educators should seek
alternative means to teach students informa-
tion literacy skills. Increasingly, librarians have
developed instructional web tutorials or, at the
least, create web portals that link to such learn-
ing aids. A good list of peer-reviewed online
library tutorials, which may be applicable to high
school settings, is found at http://www.ala.org/ala/
rusa/rusaourassoc/rusasections/mars/marspubs/
marsinnovativerefgeneral.htm. Other starting
points follow.
1. ICT Literacy (http://www.ictliteracy.info)
2. Skovde University Library (Sweden):
Information Literacy (http://www.his.se/
bib/enginfolit.shtml)
3. Directory of Online Resources for Information
Literacy (http://www.lib.usf.edu/ref/doril/)
4. Information Literacy for K-16 Settings
(http://www.csulb.edu/~lfarmer/infolitweb-
style.htm)
5. Educator’s Reference Desk: Information
Literacy (http://www.eduref.org/cgi-bin/
print.cgi/Resources/Subjects/Information_
Literacy/Information_Literacy.html)
6. Information Skills Modules (http://ism-1.
lib.vt.edu)
7. Library Research Guides (http://www.lib.
berkeley.edu/TeachingLib/Guides)
8. OASIS: Online Advancement of Student
Information Skills (http://oasis.sfsu.edu/)
199
 Technology-Enhanced Information Literacy in Adult Education
Adult educators and librarians can use these
resources in guided practice with an entire class,
incorporate single sections of these materials into
a learning activity, or encourage students to use
them independently individually and in small
groups. Providing a choice of venues allows
student choice and recognizes different learning
preferences.
Learning objects constitute another set of self-
regulated learning tools. These digital documents
serve as learning activity blocks for instruction
design. They can consist of presentations, simu-
lations, tutorials, assessments, or even readings.
Each learning object can be embedded into an
existing instructional session or learning activity
to provide a variety of ways to experience a con-
cept or deepen understanding. Learning objects
are usually fund in federative repositories that
index them and facilitate their retrieval. A model
representative adult education repository is the
international MERLOT (http://www.merlot.org):
Multimedia Educational Resource for Learning
and Online Teaching. At the other end of the
spectrum, collections of learning objects may be
held by an individual instructor.
Self-Managed Learning
Environments
Adults tend to seek control of their learning.
Such self-regulation reflects metacognition (that
is, thinking about thinking), which is a valid
indicator of a high level of information literacy.
With the advent of technology tools, adults can
manage their learning more effectively. One of
the recent applications is readers, such as Google
Reader, which collects current information. The
creator of the reader page identifies electronic
news services that he wants to keep current on;
he subscribes to the service through RSS (Really
Simple Syndication), and creates a link to his
reader. On the reader, the user can also add his
own original content. The user can also customize
the reader’s appearance to reflect personal style.
200
This kind of aggregated information builds on the
user’s interests, and provides an efficient way to
manage lifelong learning.
Knowledge Management
As a vehicle for documenting information,
knowledge management has gained attention in
adult learning communities as an effective way
to gather, organize, and store information in order
to optimize its retrieval and use. Traditionally,
librarians have served as information managers.
In general, librarians have gathered information
from outside an organization in order to inform the
organization and support organizational learning
and operations, although they might well archive
internal documents. Knowledge management
tends to focus on the information generated within
the organization, which can run the gamut from
policies and manuals to informal memos and per-
sonal guide sheets, from architectural blueprints
to party snapshots, from Dictaphone tapes to pod-
casts, from code books to spreadsheet templates.
Additionally, knowledge management is likely
to use a decentralized model where information
could be stored in several physical and virtual
spaces. Centralization occurs in the identification,
description and classification of the information; a
portal is usually developed as a means to link and
relate the various informational sources (McElroy,
2006). Librarians can still serve as knowledge
managers, although some companies label such
experts as chief information officers.
Adult educators are most likely to keep
documentation about their own operations and
instructional design and training resources. They
would benefit from working with librarians to
standardize their own documentation practices as
well as identify information that could be collected
in order to facilitate learning within the organiza-
tion. Adult educators can also inform librarians
about appropriate ways to categorize information
to better reflect the organization’s operations. By
having more effective access to an organization’s
Technology-Enhanced Information Literacy in Adult Education
knowledge base, adult educators can design more
accurate and encompassing instruction that will
benefit all of the organization’s members.
CONCLUSION
The information society is only as strong as the
information generated within it – and the extent
to which that information is used to contribute
to society. As change permeates society, adult
learners constantly encounter new information
occur throughout their public and private lives.
Each time they have to decide how to handle this
information, which can be stressful and complex.
Adult learning must also change with the
times, leveraging technology and social trends
to provide meaningful learning opportunities that
address global, cultural, and individual informa-
tion needs. Information literacy offers one way
to provide a series of processes that can help deal
with information and facilitate lifelong learning.
At the very least, adult education needs to lever-
age its principles of participatory learning to
include effective ways that learners can generate
information.
Adult educators have more physical and intel-
lectual tools than ever to insure that all adults have
equitable access to quality adult education so that
each person can choose what to learn, when to
learn, and how to learn. Both individualized and
collaborative learning is possible more than ever,
and systematic approaches to adult learning can
optimize impact. Together, adult learners can con-
tribute to and take advantage of the digital society.
REFERENCES
Ajzen, I., & Fishbein, M. (1980). Understanding
attitudes and predicting social behavior. Engle-
wood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Association of College and Research Libraries.
(2000). Information literacy competency stan-
dards for higher education. Chicago: American
Library Association.
Bangkok, U. N. E. S. C. O. Information Literacy.
Communication and information. Retrieved No-
vember 15, 2009, from http://www.unescobkk.
org/index.php?id=1897.
Bjørn-Andersen, N., Eason, K., & Robey, D.
(Eds.). (1986). Managing computer impact: An
international study of management and organiza-
tions. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
Davis, F. D. (1993). User acceptance of infor-
mation technology: system characteristics, user
perceptions and behavioral impacts. International
Journal of Man-Machine Studies, 38(3), 475–487.
doi:10.1006/imms.1993.1022
Drago, V. (2009). How generations view the
mobile Internet. Boston: Forrester Research.
Retrieved November 15, 2009, from http://
www.forrester.com/Research/Document/Ex-
cerpt/0,7211,47296,00.html
Farmer, L. (2005). Librarians, literacy and the
promotion of gender equity. Jefferson, NC: Mc-
Farland.
Friedman, T. (2006). The world is flat (updated and
expanded). New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux.
Garner, S. (2005). High-level colloquium on
information literacy and lifelong learning. Al-
exandria, Egypt: International Federal of Library
Associations.
Goleman, E. (1995). Emotional intelligence. New
York: Bantam.
Gould, J., & Lewis, C. (1985). Designing for us-
ability: Key principles and what designers think.
Communications of the ACM, 29(3), 300–311.
doi:10.1145/3166.3170
201
 Technology-Enhanced Information Literacy in Adult Education
Hall, G., & Loucks, S. (1979). Implementing in-
novations in schools: A concerns-based approach.
Austin, TX: Research and Development Center
for Teacher Education, University of Texas.
International Society for Technology in Educa-
tion. (2007). National educational technology
standards for students. Eugene, OR: International
Society for Technology in Education.
International Society for Technology in Educa-
tion. (2008). National educational technology
standards for teachers. Eugene, OR: International
Society for Technology in Education.
International Technology Education Association.
(2000). Standards for technological literacy.
Reston, VA: International Technology Education
Association.
Johnson, M. (2009). Primary source teaching the
Web 2.0 way, K12. Worthington, OH: Linworth.
Jonassen, J., Peck, K., & Wilson, W. (1999). Learn-
ing with technology: A constructivist perspective.
Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Karahanna, E., Straub, D., & Chervany, N. (1999).
Information technology adoption across time:
A cross-sectional comparison of pre-adoption
and post-adoption beliefs. Management Infor-
mation Systems Quarterly, 23(2), 183–213.
doi:10.2307/249751
Kasworn, C. (1997, Nov.). The agony and the
ecstasy of adult learning: Faculty learning com-
puter technology. Paper presented at the Annual
Meeting of the American Association for Adult
and Continuing Education, Cincinnati, OH.
Legge, K., & Mumford, E. (Eds.). (1978). Design-
ing organizations for satisfaction and efficiency.
Westport, CT: Gower Press.
Li, C. (2007). How consumers use social networks.
Boston: Forrester Research.
202
Liu, X., MacMillan, R., & Timmons, V. (1996).
Integration of computers into the curriculum: How
teachers may hinder students’ use of computers.
McGill Journal of Education, 33(1), 51–69.
McElroy, M. (2006). The new knowledge man-
agement: Complexity, learning and sustainable
innovation. Boston: Elsevier Science.
Nahl, D. (2005). Affective and cognitive infor-
mation behavior: interaction effects in internet
use. In A. Grove (Ed.), Proceedings 68th Annual
Meeting of the American Society for Information
Science and Technology (ASIST) 42 (pp. 39-43).
Charlotte, NC.
Pink, D. (2006). A whole new mind. New York:
Riverhead.
Roblyer, M., & Doering, A. (2009). Integrating
educational technology into teaching (5th ed.).
Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
Rogers, E. (1962). Diffusion of innovations. New
York: Free Press.
Rosen, R. (2000). Global literacies. New York:
Simon and Schuster.
United Nations. (2006). World information society
report. Paris: United Nations.
United States Department of Labor. (1991).
Secretary’s Commission on Achieving Necessary
Skills (SCANS). Washington, DC: Government
Printing Office.
Webster, F. (2002). Theories of the information
society (2nd ed.). London: Routledge.
Wilhelm, A. (2004). Digital nation: Toward an
inclusive information society. Cambridge, MA:
MIT Press.
Woodrow, J. (1990). Locus of control and stu-
dent teacher computer attitudes. Computers &
Education, 14(5), 421–432. doi:10.1016/0360-
1315(90)90036-7
Technology-Enhanced Information Literacy in Adult Education
KEY TERMS AND DEFINITIONS
Affective Domain: emotional aspect.
Behavioral Learning: A model of learning
that places learners in a receptive position. where
external stimuli shape the learner’s response.
Collaboration: The process of sharing re-
sources and responsibilities to create shared
meaning and attain a common goal; interdependent
cooperation.
Constructivism: A learning theory that posits
individual construction of meaning through ac-
tive interaction with the environment or stimuli.
Constructivism acknowledges multiple perspec-
tives and contextualized knowledge, and places
the learner center in the process with the teacher
as coach.
Information Literacy: The ability to access,
evaluate, use, manage, communicate and gener-
ate information.
Information Processing Theory: The theory
explaining the mental operations and physiologi-
cal phenomena (e.g., sensory reception of stimuli,
coding, and memory) involved in processing
information.
Metacognition: thinking about thinking.
Situated Cognition Flexibility: The ability
to begin on the periphery and observes critically;
knowledge is constructed socially.
Technology Literacy: A person’s ability to
access and use technology responsibly and ef-
fectively.
Web 2.0: Interactive Web; enables people to
collaborate and share online.
203
204

Chapter 13
Promoting Digital Competences
through Social Software:
A Case Study at the Rovira
i Virgili University
Teresa Torres-Coronas
Universitat Rovira i Virgili, Spain

María Arántzazu Vidal-Blasco

Universitat Rovira i Virgili, Spain

ABSTRACT
In the present landscape of technological change there is increasing awareness of the need to support the
acquisition of digital competences. In this chapter, we address how digital competences can be developed
through formal learning. We show how to design a web 2.0 learning experience that was undertaken at
Universitat Rovira i Virgili1 and which developed both digital competences and management knowledge.
In particular, the case presented focuses on the field of gender equality within the framework of labor
relations in a non-real company created for this purpose, “Quadratonics SA”. Through Quadratonics’,
web 2.0 tools and social software students improve their digital competences and, at the same time, are
exposed to the most up-to-date innovations in ICT. Our final reflection is that higher education academics
should continue to expand their awareness of web 2.0 applications and the role they can play in opti-
mizing learning and knowledge creation among students, who will be the digital workers of the future.

INTRODUCTION entire classes can have discussions via chat soft-

Information and communication technologies
(ICT) are currently playing a key role in the educa-
tion arena, from primary school to higher educa-
tion and adult learning. Nowadays, campuses are
networked, faculty post their notes on web pages,
students access the library from their rooms, and
DOI: 10.4018/978-1-61692-906-0.ch013
ware (Rice-Lively, 2000). This development was
labelled under the now commonly accepted term
e-learning, which is evolving to new models such
as mobile learning.
The European e-Learning Action Plan 2001
(European Commission, 2001) defines e-learning
as the use of new multimedia technologies and
the Internet to improve the quality of learning by
Promoting Digital Competences through Social Software
facilitating access to resources and services as
well as remote exchanges and collaboration. This
requires new e-interaction and e-communication
competences and a reorganization of e-learning
structures. The components of these structures
include content delivery in multiple formats,
learning management, and a networked commu-
nity of learners (Gunasekaran, McNeil, & Shaul,
2002). Internet/World Wide Web have meant that
opportunities have been identified for developing
distance learning activity into a more advanced
online environment known as Virtual Learning
Environment (VLE). Higher education institutions
devote substantial resources to providing students
with access to internet-based information, VLEs
and other forms of e-learning. These efforts are
predicated upon the assumption that “university
students are inherently inclined towards using
the internet as a source of information within
their day-to-day lives and, it follows, disposed
towards academic use of the internet” (Selwyn,
2008, p. 12).
In a fast moving technological environment,
the traditional approach to e-learning is currently
changing from the use of VLE to learning 2.0, an
approach that combines complementary tools and
web services—such as blogs, wikis, podcasting,
videoblogs, and social networking tools—to sup-
port the creation of ad-hoc learning communities.
In this context most of the current research tends to
be concerned with the potential of the worldwide
web and other internet applications to accelerate
university students’ learning and knowledge-
building, and support interactivity, interaction
and collaboration (Selwyn, 2008).
This chapter aims to provide an introduction
to the application of web 2.0 tools and social
software on the learning process. Social software
has emerged as a major component of the web 2.0
technology movement. But, how can social soft-
ware play a role in higher education? To answer
this question, this proposal focuses on the role of
web 2.0 technologies in promoting learning and
the development of digital competences among
students. A pedagogical application at the Rovira
i Virgili University (URV) which stems from the
provision of collaborative knowledge discovery, is
discussed in depth. At the same time, the chapter
explores the concept of digital competence from
the perspective of the competence needs of the
labour market and, the role that social software
plays in the learning process. Finally, some sug-
gestions are made for future research in this field.
BAKGROUND
Social Software, ICT
and Learning 2.0
The term social software includes a large number
of web 2.0 tools used for online communication:
for example, instant messaging, text chat, internet
forum, weblogs (or blogs for short), wikis, social
network services, social guides, social bookmark-
ing, social citations, social libraries and virtual
worlds. O’Reilly (2003) describes web 2.0 as an
“architecture of participation’’ in which collective
intelligence generates a ‘‘network effect’’ leading
to websites that become more valuable as more
people participate. For McGee and Begg (2008),
web 2.0 “represents a group of web technologies
with a user-centric focus that actively change and
evolve with user participation.” (p. 164). Accord-
ing to De Pablos (2007), social software refers to
the “use of computer-mediated communication
for forming communities: a web-based applica-
tion is made available to a multitude of users
contributing and sharing information.” (p. 22).
From these definitions, two basic characteristics
of social software can be derived:
1. They provide support for communicative
interaction, either in real time (e.g. chats)
or delayed time (e.g. email).
2. They provide support for social network-
ing, so that knowledge can be shared and
constructed collectively.
205
 Promoting Digital Competences through Social Software
The educational potential of these changes
require a “thorough rethink of both the individual
and collective dimension of the teaching-learning
processes, rhythms of learning, new ways of
structuring information for the construction of
knowledge, and the tasks and competences of
teachers and students ” (De Pablos, 2007, p. 21),
and the development of on-line learning activities
based on collaborative work (Landeta, 2007). In
higher education, social software is now seen
as a tool that offers learners access to learning
experiences which are based on active participa-
tion rather than passive reception and new forms
of knowledge creation. The use of Web 2.0 tools
and social software at the University is a strategy
for a change towards the continuous improvement
of education (Guzman, 2008) and a new culture
sustained on the connectivism developed by Sie-
mens (2004), in which knowledge is generated by
means of a participatory culture or 2.0 learning.
2.0 learning involves using the web 2.0 and a
variety of technological tools, mainly located on
the web, for teaching and learning (Comba & To-
ledo, 2009). According to Cuesta Morales (2008)
it is a type of learning that: (1) is not based on
objects and content that is filed away; rather it is
a stream that flows, which we can join whenever
we want; (2) focuses on the user; (3) is carried out
by immersion (learning by doing); and (4) is con-
nected, based on conversations and interactions,
that take place through social networks or virtual
communities. For Haro (2009) the added value of
such networks in the learning process resides in
the effect of social attraction for the student—it
brings informal learning closer to formal learning
and private life closer to teaching life—and the
simplicity of a communication model that allows
for “unlimited interaction and multidirectional
communication processes” (Cabero & Llorente,
2007, p. 112).
2.0 learning takes place within a sociocultural
system in which people use technology to interact
and learn collectively bargaining, thus encourag-
ing lifelong learning. Some examples of how
206
social software can help to encourage learning
are (McLoughlin & Lee, 2007):
• Connectivity: Social networks like
MySpace, Facebook and Friendster facili-
tate the connection between people by cre-
ating spaces of affinity in which people can
acquire social and communication skills.
These networks are places of informal
learning that contribute to digital literacy.
• Finding and sharing information in a col-
laborative fashion. There are a wide range
of new possibilities for sharing informa-
tion. Social bookmarking services such
as del.icio.us or Digg make it possible to
create, classify and organize collections
of web resources. Thus, users with similar
interests can learn from one other and con-
tribute to the growth of web-based content
and knowledge.
• Creating content: The Web 2.0 stresses
creating content above and beyond mere
consumption. Anyone can create, organize
and share content. Wikis allow individuals
to work together to generate new knowl-
edge by openly publishing documents.
• Aggregating information and knowledge,
and changing content. The Really Simple
Syndication (RSS) systems and related
technologies such as podcasting and vod-
casting (which involve syndicating and ag-
gregating audio and video content, respec-
tively) are an indicator of how material can
be collected from different sources and
then put to personal use. The content can
be easily reformulated (mashup).
In short, as Maenza and Ponce point out
(2008, pp. 4-5) these new environments are con-
tributing to an educational transformation which
implements, with no major problems, Piaget’s
concepts of constructivism and Vigostsky’s social
interaction: permanent, collaborative and active
learning, in which learners are responsible for
Promoting Digital Competences through Social Software
their own learning. At the same time, however,
information technologies are an instrument of
support and reinforcement in teaching innovation
(Salinas, 2004). The new technologies make a
new university model possible which promotes
2.0 learning. According to Thompson (2007),
students who have grown up with the Web 2.0
(the so-called digital natives or “Web Genera-
tion Students”) will eventually reform the higher
education institutions.
Esteve (2009) expressed himself in similar
terms and pointed out that the Spanish university,
in the middle of the process of adapting to the
EHEA, should continue to renew its educational
methodologies and, ultimately, continue the pro-
cess of change of the educational paradigm. The
driving force of the ICT and the revolution of the
social tools are somehow reshaping the personal
learning environments of the students and gener-
ating new horizons for the development of new
competences of future graduates.
As is well known, the EHEA places the student
at the centre of teaching-learning process. This
shift in the educational paradigm is related to a
methodological change that stresses the student’s
active role, initiative and critical thinking. In this
new context, which focuses on the student and the
attainment of competences, as we have already
pointed out, the information technologies play a
key role, providing new contexts and possibili-
ties for the development of these skills. In this
chapter we shall explain how to carry out these
processes of educational innovation and develop
digital competences.
Exploring the Concept of
Digital Competence
All the changes involved in the information society
make new demands of individuals, because they
need to acquire competences that are qualitatively
different from those required just one decade ago.
The information society requires new knowledge,
new skills and, above all, new attitudes, which
can be grouped under the term digital compe-
tence, and it also requires individuals to be able
to use technology interactively. As stated by the
OECD’s Definition and Selection of Competences
(DeSeCo) Project (http://www.oecd.org/edu/sta-
tistics/deseco) the interactive use of technology
requires an awareness of new ways in which in-
dividuals can use technologies in their daily lives.
ICT can transform the way people work together
(by reducing the importance of location), access
information (by making vast amounts of informa-
tion sources instantly available) and interact with
others (by facilitating relationships and networks
of people from around the world on a regular basis).
To harness such potential, individuals will need
to go beyond the basic technical skills needed to
simply use the Internet, send e-mails and so on.
The twenty-first century must prepare graduates
for the technology-enabled communication that
has transformed the world into a global commu-
nity, with business colleagues and competitors as
likely to live in India as Indianapolis (Partnership
for 21st Century Skills, 2003).
The “Key Competences for Lifelong Learn-
ing European Reference Framework” (European
Parliament and Council, 2005) defines a digital
competence as the “the confident and critical use
of Information Society Technology (IST) for work,
leisure and communication. It is underpinned by
basic skills in ICT: the use of computers to retrieve,
assess, store, produce, present and exchange in-
formation, and to communicate and participate in
collaborative networks via the Internet.” (p. 7).
Digital competence requires a critical and reflec-
tive attitude towards the information available
and responsible use of the interactive media. An
interest in engaging in communities and networks
for cultural, social and/or professional purposes
also supports this competence. Higher education
institutions and academics are responsible for
fostering this interest among students.
This definition is important in that it lists five
critical components of ICT literacy: access (know-
ing how to collect and/or retrieve information),
207
 Promoting Digital Competences through Social Software
Management (applying an existing organizational
or classification scheme), integration (interpreting
and representing information, including summa-
rizing, comparing and contrasting), evaluation
(making judgments about the quality, relevance,
usefulness, or efficiency of information), and
creation (generating information by adapting,
applying, designing, inventing, or authoring in-
formation). However, apart from the ICT literacy
needed to manage information, learners need
additional competences to react to the challenges
of a digital society. Siemens (2006, p. 113) lists
the following:
• Anchoring: Staying focused on impor-
tant tasks while undergoing a deluge of
distractions;
• Filtering: Managing knowledge flow and
extracting important elements;
• Connecting with each other: Building net-
works in order to continue to stay current
and informed;
• Being human together: Interacting at a hu-
man, not only utilitarian, level to form so-
cial spaces.
• Creating and deriving meaning:
Understanding implications, comprehend-
ing meaning and impact;
• Evaluation and authentication:
Determining the value of knowledge and
ensuring authenticity;
• Altered processes of validation: Validating
people and ideas within an appropriate
context;
• Critical and creative thinking: Questioning
and dreaming;
• Pattern recognition: Recognizing patterns
and trends;
• Navigation of the knowledge landscape:
Navigating between repositories, people,
technology, and ideas while achieving the
intended purposes;
• Acceptance of uncertainty: Balancing what
is known with the unknown to see how ex-
208
isting knowledge relates to what we do not
know;
• Contextualizing: Understanding the prom-
inence of context, seeing continuums, en-
suring that key contextual issues are not
overlooked in context-games.
All these digital skills go beyond obtain-
ing, evaluating and using information. They are
the basis for students to demonstrate creative
thinking, construct knowledge and develop in-
novative products and processes. They are the
competences that allow students to use digital
media and environments to communicate, and
work and learn collaboratively. They enable stu-
dents to use the skills of critical thinking to plan
and manage projects, solve problems and make
informed decisions with the appropriate digital
tools and resources. In short, digital competence
is the ability to understand and express by mak-
ing analytical, productive and creative use of the
information technologies and social software to
transform information into knowledge.
Working in the Digital Era: New
Competence Requirements
In a society of increasing individualism, social
networks are providing a communication fabric
that allows people to interact with great intensity
within their organizations. In a survey conducted
by the Economist Intelligence Unit and sponsored
by KPMG International, executives from different
sectors agreed that the adaptation of Web 2.0 tools
could offer benefits in key areas (Matuazak, 2007):
• Greater collaboration. Most Web 2.0
technologies connect people and facilitate
cooperative work, thus encouraging the
exchange of knowledge and information.
This sort of collaboration may help us to
improve decision taking and solve prob-
lems more effectively.
Promoting Digital Competences through Social Software
• Innovation. The Web 2.0 tools can make it
possible for a wider range of collaborators
to take part in research and development
(R+D) activities. Thanks to these tools,
R+D may become more inclusive.
• Improved productivity. The Web 2.0 tools
have the potential to create a network ef-
fect that will improve the quantity and the
quality of work.
Undoubtedly, Web 2.0 tools and social software
can increase the commitment of the members of an
organization (Dawson, 2009). The improvement
in internal communication systems helps infor-
mation to be sent more efficiently and improves
communicative skills. The main reasons are that
the Web 2.0 tools encourage basic collaborative
behaviour in knowledge-based work environ-
ments and that learning and development are
more effective with 2.0 tools that provide easier
access to new knowledge because they encourage
learning processes based on connectivism as it is
understood by Siemens (2006).
Working in the digital age means that, more
than ever before, it is necessary to understand
how organizations make use of 2.0 tools and
social software in the various areas of their activ-
ity. In 2007, the survey Enterprise 2.0 of KPMG
International revealed that sales and marketing,
information and research, information technol-
ogy, customer service, and strategy and business
development are the areas that make most use of
Web 2.0 tools. Companies can go to a specific
blog and see whether their products are being
questioned or praised. Present-day companies,
then, cannot ask themselves if this is a fashion that
will last or not: they simply have to be aware that
the Internet can destroy a brand, so they have to
be a part of it to defend their products. And they
can be a part of it by participating in the Web 2.0.
There are more and more 2.0 companies every
day. Procter & Gamble, for example, use RSS
systems to give news and information about the
company, they publish wikis to encourage co-
operation and blogs to communicate and share.
Procter & Gamble also created a social network
that enables its staff to find experts in specific
knowledge areas (Hoover, 2007a). For its part,
Motorola uses more than 4000 blogs and wikis,
and nearly 3000 people are actively involved in
creating content by means of social bookmarking
(Hoover, 2007b). The blog McDonald’s “Open for
Discussion” blog brings together all those inter-
ested in corporate social responsibility. Customers,
suppliers and employees all make contributions
(Scott, 2007).
All these initiatives depend on the profession-
als who work in companies and this is where the
importance of being a 2.0 professional lies. Profes-
sionals in the age of knowledge and connectivity:
• Understand the dynamics of the Enterprise
2.0 model and of a network economy in
which interactive dialogue with clients has
become the key to keeping clients faithful.
• Have the skills to work in the knowledge
economy, master the language of the infor-
mation and communication technologies,
and know how to use them to discover op-
portunities within their organizations.
• Can cope with the challenge of hypercon-
nectivity in network economy communica-
tions with the purpose of making collabo-
ration an efficient work tool that enables
the power of collective intelligence to be
exploited.
• Are constantly aware that business deci-
sions must take into account the needs
of society and sustainable economic
development.
These new demands of the labour market mean
that the processes for evaluating the competences
of higher education institutions need to be adapted
to include digital competences in a framework of
general competences and independently of the
particular qualification. It is on the basis of these
209
 Promoting Digital Competences through Social Software
ideas that the teaching innovation experience
summarized below was planned.
A CASE STUDY AT THE ROVIRA
I VIRGILI UNIVERSITY
Rovira i Virgili University
Competence Framework
Organizations are using competence models to
“clarify organization-specific competences to im-
prove human performance and unify individual ca-
pabilities with organizational core competences”
(Rothwell & Lindholm, 1999, p. 104). Competence
models can be used as a recruitment and selection
tool, as an assessment tool, as a tool to develop
curricula and training material, as a coaching,
counselling and mentoring tool, as a career de-
velopment tool, and as a behavioural requirement
benchmarking tool (Yeung, Woolcock & Sullivan,
1996). The European Higher Education Area is
an education model with a competence-based ap-
proach, which aims to ensure that the competences
taught are those that are required in the workplace.
Thus, the goal of any competence-based educa-
tion is to ensure that learning is transferred to
the workplace. It involves an extensive process
of identifying relevant competences, after which
learning activities need to be developed. In this
context, the ability to choose and use appropriate
ICT and social media is becoming a necessary
competence for academics.
A deep understanding of what is required by the
labour market needs to be matched by a common
understanding of the learning outcomes achieved
in different courses and degrees. Synthesising the
available literature, Andrews and Higson (2008)
have identified the following key ‘transferable’
competences that are integral to graduate employ-
ability: professionalism; reliability; the ability to
cope with uncertainty; the ability to work under
pressure; the ability to plan and think strategically;
the capability to communicate and interact with
210
others, either in teams or through networking;
good written and verbal communication skills;
information and communication technology skills;
creativity and self-confidence; good self-manage-
ment and time-management skills; a willingness
to learn and accept responsibility. In turn these are
attested to by different qualifications. The URV
competence framework is a key step towards in-
creased transparency in the competence market.
Competences, which enable student to succeed
and to have a university degree, will also enable
them to prosper throughout their professional
careers. The development of competences must
be maintained and reinforced by higher education
institutions.
The Rovira i Virgili University competence
framework was first implemented in the academic
year 2003/04 to adapt its curricula to the European
Higher Education Area. The proposed competence
framework divides student’s competences into
three different types: specific (A), transverse (B)
and nuclear (C) (see Table 1 for a definition).
Within each competence, various levels of mastery
can be formulated. These levels express the degree
of achievement of a competence throughout a
degree, a course or a planned activity.
The development of competences has a com-
plex structure. As an initial working proposal, the
URV has established the competences displayed
in table 2 for a variety of disciplines, as is described
in the document “Guías para trabajar y evaluar
las competencias transversales/nucleares en las
titulaciones de Grado” (“Guide for developing
and evaluating the transferable/core competences
in bachelor degree qualifications”) (Rovira i
Virgili University, 2009).
Once the competences to be developed in the
academic curricula of the various degrees have
been agreed on, learning outcomes must be de-
termined as an explicit statement of what students
must have achieved by the end of the teaching-
learning process. Students will be evaluated on
the basis of these competence-based learning
outcomes. If the outcomes are well defined, stu-
Promoting Digital Competences through Social Software

Table 1.Definition of competences

COMPETENCE DEFINITION
Specific Set of competences related to the knowledge (knowing and understanding) and skills (knowing how to act) of
each degree. They are not transferable to other professional fields not connected to the knowledge area.
Transferable Set of competences related to attitudes and values (knowing how to be) and, procedures (know how). They can
be transferred from one specific professional field to another.
Core Set of basic competences required by all URV students, which may be knowledge, attitudes and procedures

dents will be made aware of what they need to
learn, and teachers will be able to reflect on which
knowledge, procedures and attitudes need to be
taught and assessed. These procedures, attitudes
and knowledge are defined by the demands of the
labour market and the new competences required
of the workers of the digital age.
Adapting the URV Competence
Framework for Digital
Competence Assessment
have been chosen because of their relation to the
development of skills for the use of social software.
In this regard, it is important for students to have
an advanced user knowledge of ICT, to know
how to adapt their communication style to the
new technological environment and, at the same
time, be able to work collaboratively in virtual
teams. The EHEA prioritizes collaborative work
as a transferable competence in order to promote
independent, committed learning that is in tune
with the changing needs of businesses today.

The experience described here has focused on
developing the digital competencies related to
competences C2, C4 and B5 in Table 2. Tables
3 to 7 present the definition and the descriptors
for the skills that we have evaluated, and which
The Added Value of “Quadratanics,
SA” as a 2.0 Learning Experience
Using the competence framework described,
we analyze how digital skills can be developed

Table 2. Core and transferable competences at the Rovira i Virgili University

CORE COMPETENCES TRANSFERABLE COMPETENCES

C1 Intermediate knowledge of a foreign language, preferably B1 Learning to learn
English.
C2 Advanced user knowledge of the information and commu- B2 Ability to effectively solve complex problems.
nication technologies.
C3 Ability to manage information and knowledge. B3 Ability to apply critical, logical and creative thinking and to
show innovative capacity.
C4 Ability to write and speak correctly one of the two official B4 Ability to work autonomously with responsibility and
languages of the URV. initiative.
C5 Ethical and socially responsible behaviour as a citizen and B5 Ability to work cooperatively as part of a team and sharing
a professional. the responsibility.
C6 Ability to define and undertake the academic and professional B6 Ability to communicate information, ideas, problems and
project proposed by the University. solutions clearly and effectively in public or in specific
technical fields.
B7 Sensitivity to environmental issues.
B8 Ability to manage technical or professional projects.

211
 Promoting Digital Competences through Social Software

Table 3. C2 Competence: Definition and learning levels

C2. ADVANCED USER KNOWLEDGE OF THE INFORMATION AND COMMUNICATION TECHNOLOGIES

The URV has divided this competence into three areas: computer hardware, the operating system and specific software, focusing on the use
of the computer as a communication tool. This third area can also be divided into two: software for off-line communication and software
for on-line communication.
LEARNING OUTCOMES (2) DESCRIPTORS (1)
1 2 3
Can use software for off-line Is aware of the existence of text Uses basic tools for editing Adapts software to personal
communication. editors, spreadsheets and digital texts, spreadsheets and digital needs
presentations presentations.
Can use software for on-line Is aware of the existence of Internet Uses ICT for work purposes. Habitually uses ICT and adapts
communication: interactive tools and the basic tools: web navigator them to personal needs.
(web, Moodle, blogs, etc.), e-mail, and e-mail.
forums, chats, videoconferences,
collaborative work tools, etc.
(1) Descriptors are used to assess student work which cannot be evaluated with complete objectivity. Scores are always given on a scale of 1 to 3.
(2) The learning level displayed in the table refers exclusively to the third area of the competence, which is the area that has been used to evaluate
the development of digital competences. In our case the evaluation has focused exclusively on the use of software for on-line communication.

Table 4. C4 Competence: Definition and learning levels.

C4. ABILITY TO WRITE AND SPEAK CORRECTLY ONE OF THE TWO OFFICIAL LANGUAGES OF THE URV
General URV definition: competence related to the ability to produce oral and written texts with the characteristics of grammatical accuracy,
textual cohesion and communicative appropriateness
LEARNING LEVEL DESCRIPTORS (1)
1 2 3
Can produce a written text that is The type of language used is The type of language used has The type of language used is ap-
appropriate to the communicative deficient in regard to the degree some deficiencies in regard to propriate to the degree of formal-
situation (1) of formality and the channel. the degree of formality or the ity required by the channel and it
The text does not respond to what channel, some information may is maintained throughout the text.
was asked. not be entirely relevant or some The information is appropriate
essential information may be and relevant to what was asked.
missing.
(1) Because it is an on-line course, it was decided to choose a single learning level related to the need to adapt the written text to the commu-
nicative situation. In this case it is on-line communication using the web as a channel, which requires a different communicative written style.

through formal learning. In particular, we present
a Web 2.0 learning experience carried out at the
Rovira i Virgili University. The course, entitled
“The Development of Professional Competences
for Professionals of the Digital Age: Use of
Social Software and 2.0 Web Tools” was taught
completely in digital format. The students who
participated in the experiment had specific learning
targets about the world of management and they
used ICTs and social software as support tools to
create knowledge.
This experiment in teaching innovation, aimed
at exploring the power of 2.0 learning, arose out
of the idea that this teaching methodology solves
two basic problems: firstly, it helps students to
learn about the world of management and, sec-
ondly, it enables them to develop the skills they
need to work in the digital age. The result of this
process is that students create social capital and
become digitally literate in Web 2.0 tools and
social software. The case that was studied in the
summer course, from the point of view of manage-

212
Promoting Digital Competences through Social Software

Table 5. B5 Competence: Levels of Mastery

B.5. ABILITY TO WORK COOPERATIVELY AS PART OF A TEAM AND TO SHARE THE RESPONSIBILITY
URV general definition: Ability to work as part of a (interdisciplinary) team, as a member or supervisor with the purpose of undertaking
projects with pragmatism and responsibility, accepting commitments and respecting the resources available.
LEVEL OF MASTERY DESCRIPTION
First level Ability to participate and collaborate actively in the tasks of the team and to promote confidence, cor-
diality and focus on the joint task.
Second level Ability to contribute to the consolidation and development of the team, by encouraging communication,
the balanced distribution of tasks, internal climate and cohesion.
Third level Ability to direct work groups, ensuring that members integrate and perform to a high standard.

ment, was equal opportunities in labour relations
at a fictitious company created for this purpose,
Quadratonics SA.
Forty students were enrolled in the online
course. They worked in virtual teams. The contexts
for learning in this course were interactive, col-
laborative, multi-disciplinary and student-centred.
Students were required to solve a multimedia case,
entitled “Quadratonics SA” (available at http://
quadratonics.awardspace.com/.). Quadratonics
SA uses a connectivist learning approach, provides
an interactive learning experience, supports the
development of 2.0 competences, encourages
student creativity, relates academic and workplace
competences, promotes the use of ICT and social
software, encourages on-line collaboration and
fosters changes in the learning process.
The course was held online in July 2009).
Moodle2 served as the online learning environ-
ment. The course was divided into three learn-
ing modules (Learning about web 2.0 and social
software, Enterprise 2.0 and, Labour relations
2.0). All the theoretical and conceptual aspects
presented and the instructions about the work that
had to be done were posted on Moodle at the very
beginning of the course.
The general purpose of the course was to
provide students with an overview of the Web 2.0

Table 6. B5 Competence: Levels of mastery and learning outcomes

LEVELS OF MASTERY LEARNING OUTCOMES

First level Students:
Identify the collective objectives of the group with their own
Collaborate in defining, organizing and distributing the tasks of the group
Actively take part and share information, knowledge and experience
Make their individual contribution before established deadlines and with the resources available.
Bear in mind the points of view of others and give constructive feedback
Second level Students:
Accept and respect the rules of the group
Contribute to establishing and applying the team’s work processes
Act constructively to solve conflicts
Contribute to the cohesion of the group with their way of communicating with and relating to others
Are interested in the importance of the group’s activity
Third level Students:
Take an active part in planning teamwork, distributing tasks and setting deadlines
Lead meetings efficiently
Propose ambitious and clearly defined objectives
Facilitate the positive management of the differences, disagreements and conflicts that emerge in the
group
Encourage all members to commit themselves to managing and running the team.

213
 Promoting Digital Competences through Social Software

Table 7. B5 Competence: Definition and learning levels for the third level of mastery

B.5. ABILITY TO WORK COOPERATIVELY AS PART OF A TEAM AND TO SHARE THE RESPONSIBILITY (THIRD LEVEL
OF MASTERY)
LEARNING LEVEL (1) DESCRIPTORS
1 2 3
Ability to take an active part in Improvises the planning and the Correctly plans the distribution Encourages other members to
planning teamwork, distributing deadlines are not realistic of tasks and sets reasonable participate by coordinating their
tasks and setting deadlines deadlines contributions
Directs meetings effectively Coordinates meetings inefficient- Coordinates meetings appro- Coordinates meetings effectively
ly (time, commitments, results) priately and achieves the objectives and
the commitment of the group
members
Facilitates the positive manage- Cannot redress the differences Copes with conflicts by dealing Copes with conflicts by explain-
ment of the differences, disagree- expressed with the contributions of the ing that differences are enriching
ments and conflicts that emerge various team members and the and gets all team members to
in the group differences between them reach agreements
(1) In the particular case of competence B5, the three learning levels in the table have been chosen. Working with 2.0 tools and social soft-
ware requires developing digital competencies related too n-line teamwork, which affects everything from the way in which the work must
be planned to conflict management.

world by working with technology 2.0 and social
software. Because they worked with these tools,
students were expected to develop competences
2.0 and understand how to apply this technology to
solve business problems. Rubrics related to com-
petence development were designed for student
assignments (see Table 9), which made student
grading fairer. The students worked in teams and
had not met each other before the course. The
members of the team of instructors all had differ-
ent backgrounds to maximize the mutual learning
experience. The final project report required teams
to present their results using a blog.
The methodology used to achieve the overall
aim of the project was based on social interaction,
and in particular collaborative learning. At the
same time, knowledge was constructed using the
constructivist approach. Among the basic tools
provided by Moodle, e-mail (the internal messag-
ing service) and forums (for interactive discussions

Table 8. Pedagogical criteria for Quadratonics course design

CRITERIA DESCRIPTION
Use of technology Interactive content to increase student motivation and the development of digital competences.
Versatile use The case of Quadratonics SA can be easily adapted to different degrees or curriculums.
Flexibility Quadratonics SA is a general experience in which digital competences can be applied. It provides the op-
portunity for students to develop.
Interdisciplinarity The content of Quadratonics SA is interdisciplinary: for example, business management, human relations,
accountancy and ergonomics. It can be used by both social science and engineering students.
Social connectivity/e-collab- Quadratonics SA focuses on e-collaborative interactions between students. Students learn from each other
oration in learner-to-learner interactions.
Real-world application Quadratonics SA highlights real-world applications of Web 2.0 technology and social software.
Personal identification Quadratonics SA enables digital native students to apply social software in ways that relate to their own
interests.
Learning model Social constructivism and connectivism.

214
Promoting Digital Competences through Social Software

Table 9. Digital competence assessment

CORE COMPETENCES
USE OF ICT
e-COMMUNICATION
TRANSFERABLE COMPETENCES
e-COLLABORATIVE WORK
(virtual team environment)
Use of interactive tools and not only asynchronous email to communicate
Use of specific online tools and software to support virtual team collaboration.
Ability to produce a written text appropriate to the communicative situation (web environment)
Design, development, publishing, and presentation of project results (e.g., web pages, blogs) using
technological resources that demonstrate and communicate curriculum concepts.
Active collaboration in planning teamwork, distributing tasks and setting deadlines
Active collaboration with peers using telecommunications and collaborative tools to plan team work,
distribute tasks among team members and fix deadlines.
Ability to lead virtual meetings efficiently.
Positive management of differences, disagreements and conflicts that arise in the team (in a virtual
environment)

and conversations) were used for the purpose of
constructing and transferring knowledge.
Alongside these objectives, this course was
used as a base for developing a new learning re-
source (Quadratonics SA). Developing learning
resources for web environments requires “prepar-
ing materials, reconfiguring existing materials, and
drawing on a new pedagogical approach suitable
for the online environment” (Samarawickrema
& Stacey, 2007, p. 322). Table 8 summarizes
pedagogical criteria for evaluating Quadratonics,
SA as a social networking environment. They are
based upon the previous work of (Bower, 2008;
Hart, 2008; Storey, Phillips, Maczewski, & Wang,
2002). Most of these approaches analyse context
and goals, and involve examining technology,
pedagogy, learners, and resources for student
development and support.
According to the constructivist perspective,
knowledge is produced by the learner rather than
processed from information received. It places
students in a context, requires them to solve re-
alistic problems, and makes learners acquire
knowledge through interaction and collaboration.
Quadratonics SA is about forming collaborative
teams. Team members work together to present
their findings using 2.0 tools such as blogs. If we
want students to develop their digital compe-
tences, then a connectivist approach should also
be used. At the same time, developing digital
competences through higher education must be
understood as a substitutive product of profes-
sional practice. As a result, each learning process
or learning activity should take into account that
it must be designed to be open to the profes-
sional world and to the development of critical
thinking.
Broadly speaking, the added value of Quadra-
tonics SA can be seen in Figure 1, which displays
the key elements of the learning environment:
This added value can be synthesized in the
following way:
1. As well as the typical objective of resolving
a case (developing skills for resolving cases
and taking decisions) there are two further
objectives that are necessary to work in the
digital age: the ability to use web 2.0 tools
/ social software and the ability to work in
virtual teams.
2. The case makes it possible to apply the
six classical stages of the case method but
working online.
3. The teams and their design can be applied
to different learning environments and edu-
cational levels.

215
 Promoting Digital Competences through Social Software
Figure 1. The learning environment of Quadratonics SA
4. Web 2.0 tools are extremely versatile and
can be used by virtual teams and selected
by teachers as a function of the number of
students and their experience in using Web
2.0 tools.
5. Content is flexible and can be adapted to
different subjects, university programmes
and other educational contexts.
Quadratonics SA is a model to help us learn in
a collaborative fashion using Web 2.0 tools and
social software. The technologies exist to facilitate
social networking for learning and social capital.
Now we just have to learn how to use these tech-
nologies to continue learning and become true
professionals in the digital age.
“Quadratonics SA” Learning Outputs
The work that students had to do to be awarded the
certificate for having satisfactorily completed the
summer course consisted of two parts. In the first
part, students were expected to be able to handle
Web 2.0 tools and learn to work cooperatively,
216
especially with the group to which they had been
assigned to carry out the task. In the second part,
students were asked to analyze the situation of
equality in the company to be studied, Quadraton-
ics SA, following the instructions provided. To
solve the equality problems found, students had
to use Web 2.0 tools provided by the Quadraton-
ics SA website.
The students’ final assignments were evaluated
using the method of heteroevaluation, under-
stood as the “evaluation that one person makes
of another’s work, actions or performance” and
which, in our context, is the teacher’s evaluation
of the students.
Using the descriptors displayed in Tables 2 to 7,
the learning outcomes related to the development
of digital competences and the corresponding de-
scriptors have been adapted to the world of social
software, as can be seen in Table 9. The results
were evaluated by a total of 7 teachers who took
part in the evaluation project.
Figure 2 summarizes the learning outcomes
achieved by students for each of the competences
studied, which enables us to evaluate the students’
Promoting Digital Competences through Social Software
Figure 2. Average score for digital competence among URV students
learning. In turn, the figure reveals the extent to
which competences have been acquired by means
of a score that evaluates the level of mastery on
a scale from 1 to 3.
In particular, we note that the core competence
e-communication (C4) has the lowest mean score
(1.73). Accordingly, on average, students have
most difficulties in achieving the learning out-
come: “producing a written text appropriate to
the communicative situation”. That is to say, they
find it difficult to produce a blog with a written
text on the issue to be analysed (equal employment
opportunities in Quadratonics SA).
We should also point out the results obtained
in the transferable competence of e-collaborative
work (virtual team environment, B5), and with
regard to the third level of mastery analyzed: Abil-
ity to work cooperatively as part of a team and
to share the responsibility. In this case, students
fail to acquire a satisfactory level of mastery for
“Facilitates the positive management of the dif-
ferences, disagreements and conflicts that emerge
in the virtual group (score: 1.78). The results of
the other two levels of learning are satisfactory, as
are those for the core competence “Advanced user
knowledge of the information and communication
technologies” (C2). The area of competence C2
that deals with the use of “online communication
software: interactive tools”, was divided into two
parts to differentiate between those students who
use interactive tools other than e-mail, and those
who use online collaborative work tools.
Table 10 summarizes the use that students have
made of Web 2.0 tools throughout the summer
course. Since the work was done in teams of five,
the table shows, for each one of the eight groups,
what the various Web 2.0 tools have been used
for. We should point out that, in general, students
have used g-mail for e-communication. Likewise,
we should also mention that Google Docs was
largely used as an online office tool, and that the
Moodle forums were used by students to com-
municate with one another.
Finally, Table 11 shows the students’ percep-
tion of the use of Web 2.0 tools in Quadratonics
SA. The first column shows the opinion of the
expert, and the others the opinion of the eight
student groups mentioned above. This enables the
expert opinion to be compared with the students’
opinions and shows that the difference between
them is not excessive. The conclusion is that the
competences that were being evaluated have been
satisfactorily acquired and that the students have
217
 Table 10. Use of Web 2.0 tools in the collaborative work of the summer course

218
COLLABORATIVE WORK 2.0
Team 1 Team 2 Team 3 Team 4 Team 5 Team 6 Team 7 Team 8
e-Communica- Communication Communication G-mail Facebook chat E-mails to distrib- Messenger to Communication Communication
tion and organization chat ute work Exchange ideas via e-mail via e-mail
of work and distribute
work

Two-to-two
conversations

Project manage-
ment (virtual
teams)

To sched- To schedule virtual To schedule virtual

ule virtual meetings via chat meetings via chat
meetings
via chat
Project manage-
ment

Ofimàtica (eines Collaborative work Collaborative work Collaborative work Collaborative Collaborative work Collaborative work
ofimàtiques en work
línia))
Blogs (shared in- Communication Communication
telligence (1) and collaborative
work

Online presenta-
tions
Virtual learning Forum for prelimi- Forum for prelimi- Forum for prelimi-
environment nary contacts nary contacts nary contacts

Google sites

(1) Only those who used the blog for virtual work
Promoting Digital Competences through Social Software
 Table 11. Students’ perceptions: Solving problems in Quadratonics SA with web 2.0 technologies

TECHNOLOGY 2.0 AND ENTERPRISE 2.0

THE EXPERT VOICE ROVIRA I VIRGILI UNIVERSITY STUDENTS
(DAWSON, 2009)
Team 1 Team 2 Team 3 Team 4 Team 5 Team 6 Team 7 Team 8
SOCIAL NETWORKING
To m a k e p e o p l e a n d t h e i r e x - Linked to re- Facebook: for con- Building an In- Facebook: for Developing Facebook: Facebook: for
pertise visible across the firm. cruiting staff. necting workers tranet to promote encouraging a an Intranet for for commu- debates and
To facilitate social interaction and trust- Facebook: for and giving new collaboration. sense of royalty higher work- nity building collecting
building. constructing employees access and establishing related interac- Developing an workers’ sug-
communities of to retired employ- liasons between tion. Intranet gestions and
workers. ees’ expertise. workers. opnions
Facebook as a tool
for knowledge
management.
INSTANT MESSAGING
To reduce phone To facilitate To facilitate
call expenses communication work-related
among workers interaction
MICROBLOGGING
Promoting Digital Competences through Social Software

Short updates that people can subscribe Using Twitter as Using Twitter
and respond to, building broad-based con- a communication as a communi-
versations. tool. cation tool.
VIDEO SHARING
Used for internal communication, content Youtube to ad-
updates, learning programs, and sharing of vertise the com-
social activities. pany
PODCASTS
Used to provide learning content and inter- Can be used to
nal communications in a format that can be produce educa-
listened to by workers at their convenience. tional material on
equality issues
BLOGS
Used as internal communication and project Company blog Can be used to Can be used to Can be used to
management tool. They can also be used as with question- provide informa- publish news inform
an informal external communication channel naires to ask for tion and make sug- and communi-
to stakeholders. information and gestions cations
participation

219
continued on the following page
 Table 11. continued

220
TECHNOLOGY 2.0 AND ENTERPRISE 2.0
THE EXPERT VOICE ROVIRA I VIRGILI UNIVERSITY STUDENTS
(DAWSON, 2009)
Team 1 Team 2 Team 3 Team 4 Team 5 Team 6 Team 7 Team 8
WIKIS
Used for collaborative document creation
and project management.
E-COLLABORATIVE WORK TOOLS
Google Docs Google Docs for Google Docs
for virtual team promoting tele- to facilitate
work working real -time col-
laboration and
document shar-
ing
VIRTUAL LEARNING ENVIRONMENTS
To i m p r o v e To improve knowl- To i m p r o v e To e n a b l e
learning edge sharing knowledge workers to
sharing learn wher-
ever they are.
To reach a
large number
of workers
Promoting Digital Competences through Social Software
Promoting Digital Competences through Social Software
sufficient knowledge to use Web 2.0 tools in a
work environment.
Students have chosen chats as an e-meeting
tool. Social bonding is enhanced by using instant
messenger technology and helps to bring about a
more friendly communication atmosphere. The
use of IM stimulates active learning.
FUTURE TRENDS
A range of subjects need to be explored in detail
to step up research —educational, socio-economic
and technological — in the field of learning 2.0
and in the use of web 2.0 tools and social learning
in higher education.
• Special attention needs to be paid to using
emerging technologies for the develop-
ment of innovative applications in educa-
tion and training. In this new technological
environment, the question of how to moti-
vate and socialize students as active learn-
ers also needs to be raised. As Hvid and
Godsk (2006) state “e-learning platforms
need an aesthetic perspective instead of
mainly addressing usability and function”
(p. 210).
• In the near future, portable and personal
technologies will provide new opportuni-
ties for connecting people and creating
new e-learning 2.0 environments. We are
only just beginning to understand the op-
portunities that mobile technologies and
social software provide for learning.
• Better digital competence rubrics and in-
dicators need to be developed to monitor
progress in the use of Web 2.0 in formal
education for digital competence develop-
ment. This step is needed to certify the de-
gree of student competence.
• Another key issue for future research is to
explore what forms of knowledge students
obtain from social software and, most im-
portantly, how students use such knowl-
edge. In-depth qualitative research should
be carried out to understand how it is con-
structed by Web 2.0 technologies. In this
context, the Open University of Catalonia
is studying how social networks such as
Facebook can be used for course delivery.
• The concept of virtual networks for col-
laboration needs to be revisited. We need
to understand how these communities are
formed and the ways in which they can fa-
cilitate the contribution of cybersocial net-
working to the learning and engagement of
students and teachers.
• E-learning Web 2.0 may be able to reach
learners who are disadvantaged by the dig-
ital divide. It is also important to define a
research agenda which takes into account
individual differences in learning, and spe-
cial needs education so that the potential
of web 2.0 technology can be exploited to
provide remedial measures in the case of
disability, exclusion or difficulty in gaining
access to learning, or where conventional
education does not work.
Bearing in mind all these agendas, e-learning
2.0 is likely to be a fertile research field and an
appealing teaching and learning environment.
CONCLUSION
The new student generation has grown up in an
environment where ICT has opened up opportuni-
ties of social interaction. The emergence of web
2.0 technologies and social software has enabled
students to connect, collaborate and create new
knowledge through computer-mediated commu-
nication and online communities. The influence of
constructivist ideas on learning (Vygotsky, 1978)
has led educators to implement more motivating
221
 Promoting Digital Competences through Social Software
environments, in which learning takes place in
settings closer to real-life scenarios, such as the
one we have described in this chapter. Web 2.0
fits not only into a constructivist model of learn-
ing but into a connectivist model such as the one
postulated by Siemens (2006). From Siemens’
point of view:
• learning and knowledge resides in the di-
versity of individual perspectives;
• learning is a process of connecting infor-
mation sources;
• learning may reside in non-human appli-
ances (e.g. a database, but also a commu-
nity, a network, etc);
• the capacity to know more is more critical
than what is currently known: Learning is
a knowledge creation process;
• the ability to see connections between
fields, ideas, and concepts is a core skill,
since the individual is participating, as a
node, in a network that learns;
• accurate and up-to-date knowledge is the
aim of all connectivist learning activities;
• connections need to be maintained and en-
hanced to facilitate continual learning.
The Quadratonics’ learning experience is
much more than simply adding technology to the
learning process. Quadratonics SA is a learning
experience for the connected society. The learn-
ing dynamics and knowledge creation that take
place in virtual communities like Quadratonics
SA have clear similarities to the dynamics and
knowledge creation in a learning society. Finally
it is important to remember that “when staff move
their on-campus teaching to more off-campus and
blended environments, professional development
is invaluable.” (Samarawickrema & Stacey, 2007,
p. 329). Teaching experiences, such as Quadra-
tonics SA can encourage academics to adopt ICT
thus increasing the human capital value of higher
education institutions.
222
REFERENCES
Andrews, J., & Higson, H. (2008). Gradu-
ate employability, ‘soft skills’ versus ‘hard’
business knowledge: A European Study.
Higher Education in Europe, 33(4), 411–422.
doi:10.1080/03797720802522627
Bower, M. (2008). Affordance analysis - match-
ing learning tasks with learning technologies.
Educational Media International, 45(1), 3–15.
doi:10.1080/09523980701847115
Cabero, J., & Llorente, M. (2007). La interacción
en el aprendizaje en red: Uso de herramientas,
elementos de análisis y posibilidades educativas.
Revista Iberoamericana de Educación a Distan-
cia, 10(2), 97–123.
Comba, S., & Toledo, E. (2009). La comunicación
digital: nuevos ambientes de interacción en la
formación universitaria. Revista Razón y Palabra.
Mexico. Julio. Retreived July 22, 2009, from http://
www.razonypalabra.org.mx/n63/scomba.html
Cuesta Morales, P. (2008). Aplicaciones educati-
vas de la web 2.0 en la universidad. Retrieved July
22, 2009, from http://webs.uvigo.es/portalvicfie/
arquivos/xor_03_elearning20.pdf
Dawson, R. (2009). Implementing Enterprise
2.0. Advanced Human Technologies. Capítol 2.
Retrieved March 15, 2009, from http://imple-
mentingenterprise2.com/
De Pablos, J. (2007). El cambio metodológico en
el Espacio Europeo de Educación Superior. Re-
vista Iberoamericana de Educación a Distancia,
10(2), 15–44.
Esteve, F. (2009). Bolonia y las TIC: De la
docencia 1.0 al aprendizaje 2.0. La Cuestión
Universitaria, 5, 59-68. Retrieved September 1,
2009, from www.lacuestionuniversitaria.upm.es/
web/.../articulos/.../LCU5-6.pdf
Promoting Digital Competences through Social Software
European Commission. (2001). The e-learning
action plan. Designing tomorrow’s education.
Retrieved September 15, 2008, from http://
eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.
do?uri=COM:2001:0172:FIN:EN:PDF
European Parliament and Council. (2005). Rec-
ommendation on key competences for lifelong
learning. Retrieved, September 16, 2009 from
http://ec.europa.eu/education/policies/2010/doc/
keyrec_en.pdf
Gunasekaran, A., McNeil, R. D., & Shaul, D.
(2002). E-learning: Research and applications. In-
dustrial and Commercial Training, 34(2), 44–53.
doi:10.1108/00197850210417528
Guzmán, T. (2008). Las tecnologías de la in-
vormación y la comunicación en la Universidad
Autónoma de Querétaro: Propuesta estratégica
para su integración. Doctoral Dissertation. De-
partament of Pedagogy, Rovira i Virgili Univer-
sity. Retrieved July 22, 2009, from http://www.
tesisenxarxa.net/TESIS_URV/AVAILABLE/
TDX-0123109-121321//TESIS_TGF.pdf
Haro, J. (2009, March). Las redes sociales aplica-
das a la práctica docente. Didáctica, Innovación y
Multimedia. 13. Retrieved August 31, 2009, http://
www.pangea.org/dim/revistaDIM13/Articulos/
juanjosedeharo.doc
Hart, J. (2008). A guide to social learning: How to
use social media for formal and informal learning.
Retrieved September 1, 2009, from http://c4lpt.
co.uk/handbook/index.html
Hoover, J. N. (2007a, June 25). Beyond e-mail.
Information Week.
Hoover, J. N. (2007b, June 18). Fire enterprise 2.0
start ups worth a second look. Information week.
Hvid, M., & Godsk, M. (2006, June). The plea-
sure of e-learning - Towards aesthetic e-learning
platforms. In Proceedings of the 12th International
Conference of European University Information
Systems (pp. 210-212). University of Tartu &
EUNIS, Tartu, Estonia.
Landeta, A. (Coord.) (2007). E-learning 2.0.
Buenas prácticas de e-learning (Chapter 9).
Retrieved September 20, 2009, from http://www.
buenaspracticas-elearning.com/capitulo-9-e-
learning-2-0.html
Maenza, R., & Ponce, S. (2008). Transforma-
ciones en ámbitos educativos propiciadas por la
web 2.0. III Encuentro Internacional. Educación,
Formación, Nuevas Tecnologías. BTM 2008.
Uruguay. Retrieved, July 31, 2009, from http://
www.utemvirtual.cl/encuentrobtm/wp.../07/
maenza_ponce.pdf
Matuazak, G. (2007). Enterprise 2.0. The benefits
and challenges of adoption. KPMG International.
Retrieved September 15, 2008, from http://
www.kpmg.com/Global/IssuesAndInsights/
ArticlesAndPublications/Pages/Enterprise-20-
The-benefits-and-challenges-of-adoption.aspx
McGee, J. B., & Begg, M. (2008). What
medical educators need to know about “Web
2.0”. Medical Teacher, 30(2), 164–169.
doi:10.1080/01421590701881673
McLoughlin, C., & Lee, M. J. W. (2007, Decem-
ber). Social software and participatory learning:
extending pedagogical choices with technology
affordances in the Web 2.0 era. In R. Atkinson &
C. McBeath (Eds.), ICT: Providing choices for
learners and learning. Proceedings of the 24th
ASCILITE Conference (pp. 664-675). Singapore.
O’Reilly, T. (2003). Architecture of Participation.
Retrieved September 15, 2008, from http://www.
oreillynet.com/pub/wlg/3017
Partnership for 21st Century Skills. (2003). Learn-
ing for the 21st Century: A report and mile guide for
21st Century skills, partnership for 21st Century
skills. Washington, D.C. Retrieved November
21, 2009, from www.21stcenturyskills.org/index.
php?option ¼ com_content&task ¼ view&id ¼
29&Itemid ¼ 42
223
 Promoting Digital Competences through Social Software
Queiruga, A., Del Hoyo, C., & Queiruga, D.
(2008). Nuevas herramientas online frente a
los cambios en la metodología de enseñanza-
aprendizaje. Retrieved September 1, 2009, from
http://www.uem.es/.../Araceli%20Queiruga%20
y%20col.%20(salamanca).pdf
Rice-Lively, M. L. (2000). Bordeless education
at UT-Austin GSLIS. Texas Library Journal,
76(2), 58–60.
Rothwell, W. J., & Lindholm, J. E. (1999). Com-
petency identification, modeling and assessment
in the USA. International Journal of Training and
Development, 3(2), 90–105. doi:10.1111/1468-
2419.00069
Rovira i Virgili University (2009): Competèn-
cies del Currículum Nuclear de la URV. Guia per
treballar i avaluar les competéncies nuclears a les
titulacions de Grau. Grupo de Competències de
la URV. Versión 1.0 Maig.
Rovira i Virgili University (2009): Competèn-
cies transversals. Guia per treballar i avaluar les
competències transversals a les titulacions de
Grau. Grupo de Competències de la URV. Versión
1.0 Juny.
Salinas, J. (2004, November). Innovación docente
y uso de las TIC en la enseñanza universitaria.
Revista de Universidad y Sociedad del Cono-
cimiento, 1(1), noviembre. Retrieved September
2, 2009, from http://rusc.uoc.edu/ojs/index.php/
rusc/article/viewArticle/228
Samarawickrema, G., & Stacey, E. (2007). Adopt-
ing web-based learning and teaching: A case study
in higher education. Distance Education, 28(3),
313–333. doi:10.1080/01587910701611344
Scott, D. M. (2007). The new rules of marketing
and PR. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley & Sons.
Selwyn, N. (2008). An investigation of differences
in undergraduates’ academic use of Internet. Ac-
tive Learning in Higher Education, 9(1), 11–22.
doi:10.1177/1469787407086744
224
Siemens, G. (2004). Connectivism: A learning
theory for the digital age. Retrieved September
15, 2009, from http://www.elearnspace.org/
Articles/connectivism.htm
Siemens, G. (2006). Knowing Knowledge. Re-
trieved September 1, 2009, from http://www.
knowingknowledge.com
Storey, M. A., Phillips, B., Maczewski, M., &
Wang, M. (2002). Evaluating the usability of Web-
based learning tools. Educational Technology &
Society, 5(3). Retrieved September 1, 2009, from
http://www.ifets.info/journals/5_3/storey.html
Thompson, J. (2007). Web 2.0 acepta escuelas y
universidades: el surgimiento de educación 2.0.
Retrieved September 1, 2009, from http://www.
masternewmedia.org/es/2007/05/01/web_20_
acepta_escuelas_y.htm
Vygotsky, L. (1978). La mente en la sociedad: el
desarrollo de las funciones psicológicas superi-
ores. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Yeung, A., Woolcock, P., & Sullivan, J. (1996).
Identifying and developing HR competencies for
the future: keys to sustaining the transformation
of HR functions’. Human Resource Planning,
19(4), 48–58.
KEY TERMS AND DEFINITIONS
Collaborative Learning: An educational
approach based the idea that learning is a natu-
rally social act. The learner actively constructs
knowledge by formulating ideas into words, and
these ideas are built upon through reactions and
responses of others. In other words, collaborative
learning is not only active but also interactive. It
is a student-centered approach in which social
software tools are currently used for building and
sharing knowledge.
Connectivism: A learning theory for the digital
era. It is based upon the idea that knowledge is
Promoting Digital Competences through Social Software
networked and so the act of learning takes place
inside virtual networks and communities through
social interaction. It is a networked model of
learning.
Digital Competence: The use of computers
to retrieve, assess, store, produce, present and
exchange information, and to communicate and
participate in collaborative virtual networks. It
requires a critical and reflective attitude towards
the information available and responsible use of
the interactive media.
Learning Process: Activities carried out to
achieve educational objectives. They are car-
ried out individually, although this takes place
in a cultural and social context, in which people
combine their new knowledge with their previous
cognitive structures.
Social Capital: A cross-disciplinary concept
referring to the benefits of social networks and
connections. Social capital is constructed and
maintained in the interaction between individuals
or groups. Social networks promote different types
of social capital: bonding –referring to horizontal
ties between individuals-, bridging – referring
to ties that cut across different communities- or
linking –referring to vertical ties.
Social Software: Software that allows the
creation of communities and resources in which
individuals come together to learn, collaborate
and build knowledge. It is also known as Web 2.0
and it supports social interaction and collaborative
learning. Current typical examples include Flickr®
and YouTube™ –as audiovisual social software.
Virtual Education: It includes aspects of
both online and e-learning but goes somewhat
further. While it is largely web-centric it does
not necessarily limit itself to learners outside a
conventional classroom. It uses multimedia and,
besides delivering content, also enables a high
level of interaction among learners, content, teach-
ers, peers and administration both synchronously
and asynchronously.
ENDNOTES
1
The URV was created in 1991 by the Parlia-
ment of Catalonia, thus restoring the Tarra-
gona University of the 16th century. From the
very first day its aim has been very clear: to
place knowledge at the service of society so
as to contribute to the social and economic
development of its environment. The URV
trains professionals under the precepts of
European harmonization. It provides 52
programmes of study in a wide variety of
knowledge areas for over 12,000 students.
The data show that the URV is not only one
of the leading universities in Catalonia but
also one of the leading universities in the
European area for the quality of its teaching,
its commitment to continuous training and
the excellence of its research, development
and innovation. Further information at http://
www.urv.cat/
2
According to Queiruga, Del Hoyo and Quei-
ruga (2008), Moodle, an e-learning platform,
facilitates autonomous learning and makes it
possible to have access to teaching resources
at all times, thus providing a delocalized
education system. The pedagogical model on
which Moodle is based is so-called “social
constructivism”: that is to say, knowledge
is generated to the extent that the various
communities that form around it contribute
or carry out activities, debates or forums. The
educational activities that Moodle provides
enable collaborative learning. Moodle is a
tool that is based on free software which is
available together with manuals, help, instal-
lation software and various useful links at
http://moodle.org.
225
226

Chapter 14
Personal Learning Networks:
Implications for Self-Directed
Learning in the Digital Age
Teresa J. Carter
Virginia Commonwealth University, USA

Jeffrey S. Nugent
Virginia Commonwealth University, USA

ABSTRACT
Twenty-first century information communication technologies are enabling learners to create personal
learning networks (PLNs) tailored to individual learning goals, needs, and interests, with implications
for self-directed learning in the digital age. New, readily available digital media tools, open courseware,
and other Web 2.0 technologies are changing how learners interact online, creating a participatory
culture of knowledge sharing and content creation that is very different from early uses of the Web for
accessing content. As learners participate in the multiple virtual communities of practice that comprise
a PLN, they require new skills that merit reconsideration of the role of the educator in helping learners
to become self-directed in both formal and informal learning contexts.

INTRODUCTION to address the question of how information com-

Learning from experience has a distinctive place
within the literature on adult education ever since
Dewey (1938/1963) first made us aware of the
importance of using everyday life experiences as
the basis for learning. Scholars have explored the
role of informal and incidental learning and the
role of the adult educator in supporting learners
in their quests for knowledge in both formal and
informal learning contexts. This chapter attempts
DOI: 10.4018/978-1-61692-906-0.ch014
munication technologies are contributing to adult
education by exploring the concept of a personal
learning network (PLN) and its implications for
self-directed learning (SDL).
Personal learning networks are based on the
premise that learning occurs through interaction
with multiple people and in multiple contexts
through virtual communities. Informal member-
ship in each Web-based community is initiated
by the individual learner, who interacts through
a variety of communication technologies and
digital media. By engaging with others who share
Personal Learning Networks
similar interests and motivations for learning,
the learner develops a network of contacts and
resources to solve problems and access learning
when and where needed. The PLN functions as
a self-designed, self-initiated system for lifelong
learning.
It is the changing nature of the World Wide
Web itself that has brought the PLN into existence
and given it its distinctive form. As the Web has
evolved from a place where learners go to access
information and acquire knowledge to become a
place of participatory culture in which ordinary
individuals can construct knowledge (Jenkins,
2006), the PLN has evolved as a 21st century so-
cial network focused on learning rather than other
types of social exchange. This participatory culture
has arisen with the advent of Web 2.0, defined
by a host of new open source technologies that
have appeared in the last few years: blogs, wikis,
social bookmarking services, and social software
for communicating, writing, and interacting on
the Web. By implication, Web 2.0 also refers to
the practices that are shaped by the use of these
technologies. These practices allow anyone to
collaborate, create, and share information online,
resulting in a flexible and dynamic environment
with the potential to link people to resources in
ways only recently possible (O’Reilly, 2005).
A PLN is created through the learner’s par-
ticipation in multiple communities of practice
(Lave & Wenger, 1991; Wenger, 1998; Wenger,
McDermott, & Snyder, 2002) to access learning
resources when needed. Within each commu-
nity that a learner participates, newcomers are
socialized into the practices of the community
by adopting its norms, culture, and distinctive
meanings for language use. Initially, participa-
tion is “legitimately peripheral” (Lave & Wenger,
1991), but as individuals become contributing
members, sharing ideas as well as resources,
they gain increased access and status as members
of an informally organized network of learners.
The tools associated with participation include
many different types of digital media, as well as
a vast and growing array of open source tutori-
als, podcasts, and video resources. Many of these
are available through iTunes University (http://
www.apple.com/education/mobile-learning/),
the OpenCourseWare Consortium (http://www.
ocwconsortium.org/), the Massachusetts Institute
of Technology (MIT) OpenCourseWare Project
(http://ocw.mit.edu/OcwWeb/web/home/home/
index.htm), and other sites of freely available
resources that can be accessed anytime, anywhere.
The very nature of such ubiquitous access changes
how adult educators should think about learning
in the digital age, with implications for their roles
as facilitators of SDL.
The scholarly roots of a PLN are multi-disci-
plinary, grounded in traditional concepts of adult
education and sociology. Adult learning concepts
that describe the nature of formal, informal, and
incidental learning, as well as the substantial lit-
erature on self-directed learning, are at the core
of a PLN. The definition and function of a PLN
derive from social network theory (Freeman, 2004;
Granovetter, 1983). The literature on communi-
ties of practice (Lave & Wenger, 1991; Wenger,
1998; Wenger et al., 2002), which views learning
as informal, socially situated, and sustained by a
body of common practices, describes how adult
learners create, maintain, and grow a network of
relationships to nurture self-initiated learning.
In this chapter, we begin by locating SDL within
the broader field of adult education, describing the
nature of formal, informal, and incidental learning
and exploring the role of the adult educator as
first articulated by Knowles (1975). We will then
illustrate how a PLN works in practice through
a vignette typical of a 21st century learner who
has developed the skills to maximize learning in
the digital age. Next, we will describe the theo-
retical underpinnings of a PLN and the rise of a
participatory culture on the Web, exploring what
a PLN looks like in practice through the use of
social media, digital tools, and open source learn-
ing resources. Finally, we will present a rationale
for the adult educator to model development of
227

a PLN and adopt pedagogical practices that will
scaffold learners into the skills and knowledge
necessary to make the most of information com-
munication technologies now and in the future.
LEARNING IN MULTIPLE
CONTEXTS: FORMAL,
INFORMAL, AND INCIDENTAL
One of the most abstract concepts in the adult
educator’s lexicon is that of learning. Depend-
ing on the theoretical lens adopted, learning can
be conceived of through behavioral, cognitive,
humanist, social cognitive, or constructivist per-
spectives (Merriam, Caffarella, & Baumgartner,
2007). Educators can also focus on the various
arenas of adult life in which learning occurs and
frame their understanding by categorizing learn-
ing as formal (classroom-based or institutional),
informal (through life experiences), or incidental,
produced as the unintentional byproduct of some
other activity (Marsick & Watkins, 1990, 2001).
Marsick and Watkins (1990, 2001) define
informal learning as either planned or unplanned,
but state that learners are consciously aware of
their learning when it occurs, even when out-
side of a classroom or structured environment
designed for that purpose. When learners have
deliberately undertaken the learning activity, they
often describe informal learning in such terms as
self-directed, networking, coaching, mentoring (or
being mentored), and the learning from experience
that is commonly expressed as “trial and error”
through experimentation.
Adult educators cannot afford to ignore the sig-
nificance of learning that is self-initiated and self-
directed, especially since much of it contributes to
what is learned through formally designed learning
experiences. Studies of informal learning among
managers in the workplace have long indicated
the relative prevalence of informal learning over
formal classroom or organizationally-designed
learning experiences (Davies & Easterby-Smith,
228
Personal Learning Networks
1984; McCall, Lombardo, & Morrison, 1988),
with informal learning accounting for as much
as 70% of all managerial learning (Leslie, Aring,
& Brand, 1997). Because of its prevalence, adult
educators are taking note, not only of how such
learning occurs, but also of how formal learning
environments can embrace methods that include
informal learning strategies in support of learn-
ers’ goals.
When informal learning is unplanned, learn-
ers are often caught by surprise at the nature of
the unexpected or through the realization of a
problem that demands immediate resolution.
They engage in what Schön (1987) described as
a “stop and think,” an opportunity when reflection
during the course of action can actually change
the outcome of the situation as the learner ad-
dresses the unexpected by experimenting with a
new approach. When the learner revisits what has
happened and ponders “why,” informal learning
occurs as retrospective sensemaking, what Schön
called reflection-on-action.
Another form of informal learning from experi-
ence is what is described as incidental learning in
the literature (Marsick & Watkins, 1990, 2001).
Marsick and Watkins claim that incidental learning
is always an unintended by-product of some other
(non-learning) activity. Because it is unexpected,
they believe it usually remains unexamined for its
learning potential unless brought into conscious
awareness.
Reischmann (1986) referred to incidental learn-
ing as learning “en passant.” He viewed learning
en passant as unpredictable and highly individu-
alized, since people often learn different things
from the same experience. Reischmann suggested
that learning unexpectedly while navigating usual
life situations builds on what individuals already
know, and also has the potential to become either
the basis for future learning or the starting point
for intentional learning efforts. Incidental learning
depends upon a wide variety of supports (people,
media, resources, and institutions) to develop into
intentional learning (Marsick & Watkins, 1990,
Personal Learning Networks
2001; Reischmann, 1986). These scholars believe
that while incidental learning cannot be predicted,
it is nonetheless useful since it emerges out of the
day-to-day activities of life.
While learning within a PLN is self-directed
and initiated by the learner, it presents many
unique opportunities for incidental learning. These
occur almost serendipitously through the connec-
tions that a learner makes within the network and
through the resources that are part of an interlinked
and interconnected Web. This potential for a PLN
to yield unexpected insights and spontaneous
discoveries can be a delightful surprise for the
learner. It is as if there are two interwoven layers
to the self-directed learning that occurs through a
PLN. The core activity is one initiated and directed
by the learner in deliberately reaching out to con-
nect with the communities, resources, and people
of the network. The second layer of potential
learning is that which is magnified by the social
nature of the Web. It results in many unexpected
discoveries, making the PLN a powerful enabler
of self-directed learning.
Scholars have noted that informal and inci-
dental learning are on the rise in the digital age
(Marsick, Watkins, Callahan, & Volpe, 2006;
Siemens, 2005), providing us with unanticipated
possibilities for information access and knowledge
creation. Wesch (2009) suggests that “at the base
of this ‘information revolution’ are new ways of
relating to one another, new forms of discourse,
new ways of interacting, new kinds of groups,
and new ways of sharing, trading, and collabo-
rating” (para. 2). Learning in the digital age is
initiated and sustained by the learners’ curiosity
and fostered by the ease with which anyone with
a computer connection can reach out to others,
creating a virtual community with those who share
common interests and motivations. In a world in
which the vast storehouse of human knowledge
is at our fingertips (Nugent, 2009), self-directed
learning takes center stage.
Knowles (1975) was among the first to articu-
late a definition of SDL that describes self-initiated
learning and the educators’ role in fostering it,
whether learning occurs as a part of a formal
learning situation or through the informal activi-
ties of daily life:
In its broadest meaning, “self-directed learning”
describes a process in which individuals take
the initiative, with or without the help of others,
in diagnosing their learning needs, formulating
learning goals, identifying human and material
resources for learning, choosing and implementing
appropriate learning strategies, and evaluating
learning outcomes. (p. 18)
We use this definition of SDL to describe
learning in which learners initiate and sustain the
network of connections that comprise a PLN. The
advent of information communication technolo-
gies has the power to blur the distinctions between
formal, informal, and incidental learning in many
virtual environments that are now embedded in
everyday life at home, in school, or during work-
related activities.
THEORETICAL CONCEPTS IN SELF-
DIRECTED LEARNING TO SUPPORT
PERSONAL LEARNING NETWORKS
Within the broader field of adult education, SDL
has developed over more than four decades through
scholarly research and activities (Guglielmino,
Long, & Hiemstra, 2004). SDL has been explored
as a personal attribute of the learner, expressed as
learner autonomy; a process in which individuals
plan and manage their own learning; and as a way
of organizing instruction in the classroom to per-
mit maximum learner control (Caffarella, 1993).
While all three foci have relevance for learning
in the digital age to support formal and informal
learning, it is the process by which learners plan
and manage their own learning that is most per-
tinent to the development of a PLN.
229

Early writings on SDL focused on the self-
planned learning projects undertaken by adults
in a wide variety of settings, including some that
would traditionally be classified as institutions
of formal instruction, such as the church (Tough,
1971). Tough operationalized the term “learning
project” to mean a total investment of at least seven
hours (approximately a day’s work) focused on a
single effort to improve skills and knowledge in a
particular area of interest. Tough’s initial research
on more than 66 individuals found that adults were
deeply engaged in self-planned learning, investing
an average of 700 to 800 hours per year in projects
related to accomplishing personal goals, improv-
ing job-related skills, or adopting new recreational
activities and interests (Guglielmino et al., 2004).
Today, learners have access to an unprecedent-
ed amount of content on the Web that, ironically, is
becoming more organized through the mediating
functions of social media. Individuals, groups, and
collectives of all kinds are self-organizing in social
networks such as Facebook, MySpace, LinkedIn,
and Ning sites. As myriad communities of practice
have sprung into being around blogs, wikis, and
other social software, learners are discovering the
ability to locate, store, and tag (label) worthwhile
content such as photos, music, video, and text, not
only for themselves, but also for others to access.
Users of social media are creating an organizing
structure through a host of new digital media tools
for information exchange and dissemination to
obtain frequently updated, streamed, or interac-
tive content. They have discovered that they can
mix, share, and adapt others’ work to create new
knowledge forms through collaborative efforts
(Wesch, 2009). The PLN functions as a highly
individualized mechanism for harnessing the vast
resources accessible on the Web, enhancing the
possibilities for SDL in ways not imagined in the
20th century (Nugent, 2009). With the introduc-
tion of aggregators and feed readers (Real Simple
Syndication or RSS), digital tools that permit
frequently updated content to reach the user in
230
Personal Learning Networks
a single Web-based location, SDL has been dra-
matically enhanced by the Internet (Rager, 2006).
The Organizing Circumstance
in Self-Directed Learning
One concept, in particular, within the early schol-
arship on SDL merits renewed attention for its
description of how learners go about learning on
their own, that of the “organizing circumstance,”
first described in 1984 by George Spear and
Gerald Mocker as they were building on Tough’s
(1971) initial work. In a secondary analysis of data
from a study of self-initiated learning projects of
78 adults in formal as well as informal settings,
Spear and Mocker (1984) discovered that the
linear sequence of planning steps delineated by
Tough did not appear to hold true for a group of
adults who had less than a high school education.
Instead, Spear and Mocker (1984) observed
that the gathering and selecting of resources,
including accessing other people as resources for
learning, while deliberate, was certainly not linear,
and, instead, appeared to be directed largely by
what was available to the learner in the immediate
environment. A chance encounter, a flyer or leaflet
that appeared in the mail, a workplace conversa-
tion—these were the sparks that led learners to
initiate learning efforts in pursuit of personal
goals (p. 3). The resources most accessible to the
learner tended to guide the learning process along
a certain trajectory so that the course of learning
was shaped by what was most easily available
(Spear & Mocker, 1984; West, 1992). Further
study led Spear and Mocker (1984) to postulate
that there was an organizing circumstance at work:
The environment itself provided the impetus for
learning and the connections with people and
resources that determined the path along which
learning proceeded (p. 9).
The novelty of this idea intrigued many at
the time for its insights into the serendipitous
nature of much self-initiated learning, while a
few scholars were quick to criticize Spear and
Personal Learning Networks
Mocker, believing that they were harkening back
to an era of behaviorist determination in human
actions (West, 1992). However, Spear and Mocker
(1984) were clear that they did not intend to imply
a lack of free will or autonomy in learning, but,
rather, that learning occurred within an existing
context that exerted an organizing function on
what was learned, as well as how (p. 9). Since
1984, subsequent studies with adults of various
ages and socioeconomic levels have found sup-
port for the idea that SDL is often opportunistic
in nature (Berger, 1990; Danis & Tremblay, 1985;
Rager, 2004), guided by resources that are most
accessible to the learner.
In contrast to an immediate environment that
delimits the opportunities for access to resources,
today’s Web environment provides a complex
array of unlimited choices (Rager, 2006). The hy-
perlinks that connect both resources and people in
a virtual learning space also help define a learning
trajectory that is shaped by the PLN of an individual
learner, providing an organizing structure among
all possible Web-based resources. While the nature
of the organizing circumstance has evolved in its
complexity for 21st century learners, the concept
nonetheless appears relevant as individuals create
unique learning paths based on the circumstances
of their Web-based community memberships.
New Skills for an
Interconnected World
Many learners are unsure how to go about as-
sessing the quality of content that awaits them on
the Web (Rager, 2006). The task for the digital
age learner has become one of evaluating the ap-
propriateness, authenticity, and quality of what is
available (Wesch, 2009). Most learners will require
knowledge of how to create a network of connec-
tions to both human and non-human resources
before they can fully embrace the participatory
culture of what the Web has to offer (Downes,
2007; Siemens, 2005; Wesch, 2009). Today’s
learners require technological savvy, knowledge of
information communication technologies, and the
willingness to extend themselves into a world-wide
community that crosses national boundaries and
includes multiple cultures and diverse perspectives
in their quest for knowledge. Development of a
PLN can provide the connections that function
as multiple-trajectories for building knowledge
in an era in which learners are content creators
as well as collaborators with others.
This vignette describes a few hours during a
typical day of a self-directed learner, illustrating
the concept of a PLN and the role of information
communication technologies that are readily avail-
able to support adult learning. It is a thoroughly
contemporary portrait of a woman who has learned
how to build and create a network of people and
resources accessible through digital media tools
to enable her to accomplish self-initiated learning
tasks as well as classroom-based assignments.
She is an example of a learner in the digital age.
Suzanne and her two daughters, one in college and
the other a senior in high school, are waiting in
an airport WiFi-enabled café for their connecting
flight to Washington, DC. It is Mom’s 25th college
reunion weekend, and she is excited to think about
seeing friends from her college days. Suzanne is
a human resources consultant now in graduate
school taking an online course.
While daughters Emily and Christine linger over
a concoction of ice cream and chocolate, Suzanne
uses her smartphone to access the Internet and
the class wiki to check on this week’s reading
assignment. She and another student, Jake, are
preparing a virtual presentation and will lead
the class discussion in two weeks. While on the
wiki, she sees that Jake has uploaded a draft of
the presentation content. She notices a couple of
minor typos and one serious (she thinks) factual
error—she makes edits online in this collabora-
tive writing space and then does a search of the
research article in question to verify her inter-
231

pretation of the questionable content, updating
the wiki afterwards.
Next, she sends a quick tweet via Twitter to let Jake
know to check the site for her edits. Meanwhile,
Suzanne checks tagged content on her Delicious
site, a social bookmarking service on the Web,
for additional articles and relevant information
shared by others in her personal learning network.
Ultimately, Suzanne’s efforts will yield several
articles, two blog posts with worthwhile content,
links to other references, and people with expertise
in the content area of their presentation.
Suzanne and her daughters still have an hour
before the airplane leaves. She grabs her headset
and uses her smartphone to access iTunes Uni-
versity and a video podcast pre-recorded by the
professor for next week’s online discussion. After
watching it, she’ll post her own reaction to it on
her blog established as a reflective journal for her
class. Then she’ll read the posts of three of her
classmates, her blog buddies, and send comments
to them of her reaction to their posts on the topic.
While on her blog, she approves a comment from
a woman in Great Britain who found her site a
few weeks ago. They have been regularly reading
each other’s blogs and sharing insights on the
differences in human resources practice in the
UK and the US through comments to posts each
has made. Through this woman’s blog, she has
located a great social networking site of human
resource professionals from around the world, and
she has begun to participate in the site activities:
webcasts, chat sessions, and more.
Suzanne’s network of colleagues who share her
professional interests is growing exponentially.
She sees herself as a newcomer to most of these
communities of practice, but one who is gaining in
confidence with what she has begun to contribute
to the conversation. She uses an RSS feed reader
to aggregate content from blogs and the social
232
Personal Learning Networks
networking site so that she can keep up with
contacts who live in several different countries.
Daughter Christine is asking where they will
eat for dinner. Suzanne has her smartphone out
and opens up a food and restaurant application.
“Here … Look... I’ve found a little bistro that’s
just across the street from the place where the
President likes to eat chili! Let’s go there.” They
pass the phone around and each take a look at
the menu posted online: “How far is it from the
hotel?” asks one of her daughters.“Can we get
there by metro?” Another quick search and she
has the answer. “Just a block from the U Street
Station on the Green Line. We can get there in
10 minutes.”
Suzanne finds her mind wandering back to the
dilemma in her own living room at home. The
new puppy, at home with Dad this weekend, ate
a good chunk of a living room sofa cushion last
Tuesday. Puppy survived, but she’s not sure the
family budget will. She’s considering learning how
to re-upholster the piece herself and wonders,
“How do I get started with this project?” She
opens up her smartphone and accesses the Internet
again. Her personal learning network includes
classmates, colleagues from work, church, and
professional organizations in and around her lo-
cal community. She sends a tweet via Twitter to
several of these groups and asks, “Who knows
how to upholster a sofa, or has a contact person
who might be willing to teach me?” She knows
from past experience that she is likely to turn up
more than one valuable lead.
Meanwhile, daughter Emily is asking her mom
for help with a homework assignment on the
Galapagos Islands. “Tonight, before I leave for
the school reunion, we’ll go online and see what
kind of great photos we can find on Flickr that
you can use for your poster.” Suzanne knows
that this social media site is a great source of
photography resources shared by people around
Personal Learning Networks
the world. Photos accessed through the Creative
Commons digital copyright can be remixed and
used if credited. Next, Suzanne connects to a social
networking site, Facebook, and sends a message
to her friends and contacts: “Has anybody ever
been to the Galapagos Islands, and can you tell
me about your experience?” By the time the girls
are settling into the hotel after dinner, Suzanne has
three contacts with insights on the island wildlife,
and email, Twitter, and site links to dozens more
resources and contacts provided by them to help
her daughter. She’s also located a lecture via the
MIT Open Courseware Project on the Galapagos
which she thinks her daughter will be able to use
to learn what she needs for the school project.
Suddenly, they hear the airline boarding an-
nouncement. “At last!,” she comments. Now, if
she could only quit worrying about how to train
the puppy, she would feel that things are under
control—at least for today.
More than any other personal characteristic,
self-directed learners exercise autonomy (Caf-
farella, 1993). Learner control is the hallmark of
their experience and also why it is so personally
rewarding. Not only is the learner in charge of
when learning takes place, the learner sets its
direction, occasionally under the guidelines of
an assignment or instructor, but always with the
opportunity to explore, experiment, and engage
with multiple others who have become part of a
virtual community (Downes, 2007). The learner
defines the extent and limits of participation,
building a network composed of professional
as well as personal contacts. The tools used to
do this, however, are not necessarily intuitive to
most adult learners, who need to be introduced
to the concept of a PLN as well as the practical
strategies for accessing and creating content on
blogs, wikis, podcasts, and other social media.
Here is an important role for the adult educator
who has adopted Web 2.0 technologies for edu-
cational purposes to model the practices inherent
in a participatory culture. Yet, while the Web has
radically altered the possibilities for learning in
a networked world, our institutions of higher
education and the pedagogical practices that exist
within them are struggling to keep up with changes
in what it means to be literate in the digital age.
DEVELOPING NEW
MEDIA LITERACY IN A
PARTICIPATORY CULTURE
Learning in a digital, networked world is often in
sharp contrast to many of the pedagogical tradi-
tions still deeply embedded within our institutions
of higher education (Davidson & Goldberg, 2009).
Wesch (2008) contrasts the messages presented by
many existing physical structures and assumptions
about teaching and learning with the opportunities
presented by a social Web:
While most of our classrooms were built under
the assumption that information is scarce and
hard to find, nearly the entire body of human
knowledge now flows through and around these
rooms in one form or another, ready to be accessed
by laptops, cellphones, and iPods. Classrooms
built to re-enforce the top-down authoritative
knowledge of the teacher are now enveloped by
a cloud of ubiquitous digital information where
knowledge is made, not found, and authority is
continuously negotiated through discussion and
participation. (para. 16)
Since the current generation of college students
has scant memory of days before the Internet,
Davidson and Goldberg (2009) suggest that a
participatory culture is no longer exotic or new to
today’s undergraduates, but a commonplace way
of socializing and learning (p. 13). Participatory
learning, however, is not simply about interaction
as a consequence of ubiquitous access but, rather,
about learning from others who may be strang-
ers, who may choose to remain anonymous, and
whose institutional status and credentials may be
233

unknown (p. 16). Many of our traditional ways of
thinking about what counts as knowledge and who
generates it are altered in a participatory culture:
“In the current academy, virtually everything in
a scholar’s life is based on peer review and in-
stitutionally ordained authority. Who counts as a
‘peer’ is carefully defined ….With participatory
learning these conventional modes of authority
break down” (p. 17).
What, then, does it mean to share and build
resources, to become literate in the use of new
media in a culture of learning through participation
rather than mere access? Jenkins (2006) defines
a participatory culture as follows:
A culture with relatively low barriers to artistic
expression and civic engagement, strong support
for creating and sharing one’s creations, and
some type of informal mentorship whereby what
is known by the most experienced is passed along
to novices. A participatory culture is also one in
which members believe their contributions matter,
and feel some degree of social connection with
one another. (p. 3)
To become competent in this participatory
culture is a new form of literacy, one which builds
on traditional literacy skills of written expression,
research ability, general computer skills, and criti-
cal thinking (Jenkins, 2006). Jenkins asserts that
a participatory culture marks a shift in focus from
individual expression to community involvement
as learners acquire social skills of networking and
collaboration (p. 4). The learner’s response to
this emergent and participatory Web is the PLN,
customized and self-organized to meet the unique
learning needs and interests of an individual at any
given time. Creating a PLN, however, requires a
special set of skills as learners learn to negotiate
meaning, engage with diverse others, and col-
laborate in new ways.
The skills that are needed in a participatory
culture include many of the mainstays of adult
education practice re-formed in the environment
234
Personal Learning Networks
of a social Web. Others that are newly valued
in today’s work environment that are described
by Jenkins (2006) include skills such as (a)
simulation, the ability to interpret and construct
dynamic models of real-world processes; (b)
distributed cognition, defined as the ability to
interact meaningfully with tools that expand our
mental capacities; (c) collective intelligence, the
ability to pool knowledge and compare notes with
others toward a common goal; (d) judgment, the
ability to evaluate the reliability and credibility of
different information sources; (e) networking, the
ability to search for, synthesize, and disseminate
information; (f) negotiation, the ability to travel
across diverse communities, respecting multiple
perspectives, grasping and following alternative
norms; (g) appropriation, the ability to meaning-
fully sample and remix media content; (h) mul-
titasking, the ability to scan one’s environment
and shift focus as needed to salient details; and
(i) transmedia navigation, the ability to follow the
flow of stories and information across multiple
modalities (p. 4). To this impressive list of the de-
mands placed upon a 21st century learner, Jenkins
adds the ability for play through experimentation
and performance as a form of improvisation (p.
4). Learning through participation not only in-
volves use of these skills, but such learning has
the capacity to enlarge a learner’s worldview as
a consequence of using them.
Learning within a Network
Comprised of Communities
of Practice
Learning in a participatory culture takes the form
of communities of co-learners organized within
a virtual network, drawing its explanatory power
from social network theory with its concepts of
nodes and ties (Freeman, 2004; Granovetter,
1983). Social network theory views individuals
(as nodes) tied to others in connecting links that
vary in strength and centrality within the social
structure. Many different types of ties can exist
Personal Learning Networks
between individual nodes in a social network
(often displayed in a diagram much like a concept
map) to explain the different relationships among
people. Social network analysis allows researchers
to examine a complex set of relationships between
members of a social system (Freeman, 2004).
Small, tight networks are often less valuable than
large, open networks with many loose connec-
tions (weak ties), since the more open and diffuse
networks are likely to result in more new ideas
and diversity of perspectives (Granovetter, 1983).
This analogy is an apt descriptor for individuals
connected within a PLN. The greater the number
of loose connections, or weak ties, the more wide-
ranging are the possibilities for diverse viewpoints,
different sources of knowledge, and enhanced
learning as a result. Creating a network of many
different connections that vary in the strength and
intensity of relationships within them becomes a
central feature of a PLN. Learners build relation-
ships within many different virtual communities
as part of their personal networks.
Weinberger (2002) suggests that the Web
has transformed our notions of time, space, self,
knowledge, and even reality itself as we learn in
the digital age. Many of our time-honored assump-
tions have been turned upside down. An individual
can create and manage an online persona that
may differ dramatically from the person known
to his or her neighbors. As members of a PLN,
we have the ability to explore alternative ways of
relating through simulations, crossing time zones
and cultural borders with the click of a hyperlink
to transport ourselves into new worlds. Opportu-
nities exist to create a social network composed
of multiple sources of knowledge, becoming a
member of many different virtual communities
by sharing in their practices as we learn what
interests us. Our network is enabled by many
small pieces, the social media of the Web, loosely
joining us to potential colleagues, collaborators,
co-creators, and knowledge-sharing individuals,
resources, and tools (p. 25).
Among the possible communities within a
PLN that Warlick (2009) describes are those with
professional colleagues, associations, people
within one’s extended family, local community
groups, or those known through casual relation-
ships. These are usually personally created through
synchronous communications, connected in “real
time.” Other communities within a PLN exist as
either personally or socially maintained semi-
synchronous connections of mobile telephones,
Twitter, blogs, wikis, and social networks such
as Facebook or LinkedIn. The learner also has
the ability to receive content and information
resources through many dynamically maintained
asynchronous connections enabled by an RSS
content feed reader, such as Google’s Reader or
Bloglines, so that resources are available when the
learner has time to access them. Blog content and
content tagged through social bookmarking sites
can be collected and aggregated in this manner.
To enable adult learners to succeed as ac-
tive, engaged members in this participatory Web
culture rather than as onlookers, they need role
models, mentors, and instruction in how to use
digital media tools. The practices made possible
by these tools are neither intuitive or self-evident
to most learners (Nugent, 2009). Much more is
being asked of learners than Spear and Mocker
(1984) observed 30 years ago when they first
conceived of the immediate environment as an
organizing circumstance for learning. Because
the environment has changed so dramatically,
learners will need to extend their capacity to learn
within communities made possible by Web 2.0.
This requires a new knowledge base of possible
resources and the skills to learn how to use them.
Helping Adults Learn How to
Learn in a Participatory Culture
Much of the language surrounding SDL empha-
sizes learner control of the process as well as
the content of learning; indeed, the concept of
learner autonomy has become a major research
235

stream within the literature on SDL (Caffarella,
1993; Guglielmino et al., 2004). This focus on
the autonomous individual has resulted in many
misconceptions that SDL is largely a solitary
activity. To the contrary, numerous scholars have
explicated the relational nature of SDL (Brook-
field, 1985; Candy, 1991; Peters & Gray, 2005)
by describing the need for instructors, mentors,
and other helpers to guide the learner along a
process that scaffolds them into the level of skill
and knowledge required as they move from a state
of dependency to independency (Grow, 1991).
Innovative educators who are leading the way
by adopting PLNs for their own personal and
professional development have offered several
strategies to help others learn how to introduce
social media into the classroom experience. If
educators want to help learners learn how to learn,
they will need to experience the navigational skills
needed in the participatory culture of the Web
for themselves so that they can then model these
practices. Nielsen (2008) has suggested several
steps that an educator can take to begin build-
ing a PLN to illustrate the practice for learners.
The first of these is to join a professional social
network. Examples of social networking sites for
educators include Classroom 2.0 (http://www.
classroom20.com/), EduBlogger World (http://
edubloggerworld.ning.com/), and Flat Classrooms
(http://flatclassrooms.ning.com/), among others.
Each of these exists as a virtual support commu-
nity for educators interested in adopting Web 2.0
tools and strategies for learning in the classroom
setting. In these networks, adult educators, as well
as educators from the K-12 world, share their ideas,
practices, and tips on what makes for successful
learning by using digital media. An educator can
glean many insights from the experiences of oth-
ers simply by joining one of these social networks
and listening to the ongoing conversation that
takes place through blogs, comments, and online
forums. As an educator who is new to social media
begins to learn the unique language, norms, and
conventions of one of these virtual communities,
236
Personal Learning Networks
he or she is likely to experiment with new ideas,
and eventually becomes comfortable enough to
contribute to the ongoing virtual dialogue. This
is an important first step in making the transition
to learning through a PLN.
Nielsen (2008) recommends that educators
then choose five blogs of interest and begin to
follow them, setting up an RSS feed reader for
subscribing to their content. Educator blogs can be
found via a blog search engine or through many
of the blog hosting services that cater specifically
to educators. Walsh (2009) has provided blogging
resources for educators, including an extensive
list found at SupportBlogging.com (http://sup-
portblogging.com/Links+to+School+Bloggers),
as has Warlick (2009) in his blog, Warlick’s Co-
Learners (http://davidwarlick.com/wiki/pmwiki.
php?n=Main.EducatorsGuideToBlogging). As
adult educators become familiar with reading
the blogs of their PLN, they are in a position to
transition from reader to writer by leaving com-
ments on the blog sites they follow.
Nielsen’s (2008) final recommendation for
immersion into the practices of a PLN includes
joining the microblogging community by follow-
ing well-known educational bloggers on Twit-
ter (http://www.twitter.com). Twitter has been
described as “an online application that is part
blog, part social networking site, part cell phone/
IM tool, designed to let users answer the ques-
tion ‘What are you doing?’” (Educause Learning
Initiative, 2007, p. 1.). However, many users have
adopted the available 140 character writing space
to post “tweets” that contain online resources or
ask questions of the contacts they follow in these
communities (p. 1). Launched in 2006, Twitter
has become a popular Web 2.0 application since
it can also be accessed through mobile telephones.
Many educational blogs provide links to blog
authors’ Twitter sites.
Each of these small forays into the world of
Web 2.0 technologies moves the PLN creator
down a path of engagement into multiple virtual
communities of practice. From these small begin-
Personal Learning Networks
nings, a network begins to take shape in a unique
configuration that reflects the personal interests
and goals of the adult educator who hopes to model
the practices involved in a participatory culture in
order to teach them to others. Once the educator
has experienced the benefits of SDL through digital
media, it then becomes possible to guide learners
through a similar process. Assignments can be
created to engage learners in seeking resources
and creating new media content by accessing their
emerging PLNs. Novice learners need multiple
opportunities, tutelage, and feedback as they be-
gin to adopt the 21st century skills as outlined by
Jenkins (2006). Many traditional practices in adult
learning, particularly those intended to engage
learners in reflective practice, can be enhanced
through PLN participation.
IMPLICATIONS OF THE
PLN FOR SELF-DIRECTED
LEARNING IN THE FUTURE
Within this chapter, we have suggested that the
growth and evolution of the World Wide Web
as an environment for accessing, creating, and
sharing information has generated new and un-
precedented opportunities for SDL. In continuing
to look toward the horizon, one thing is becoming
increasingly clear: Educators will need to rethink
teaching and learning based on a model of infor-
mation and resource abundance. Adult learners in
this new digital age will have access to unlimited
knowledge resources with the capacity to con-
nect to virtual communities that share interests
on any topic imaginable. More learning will be
self-directed as these opportunities for informal
learning become blended with and complement
formal learning contexts where learners interact
as content creators and collaborators. Within this
learning ecology, the ability and skills to create
PLNs will likely be an imperative.
Insightful adult educators will recognize both
the amazing potential as well as the significant
challenges brought about by these new opportu-
nities. However, the skills and abilities to create
and engage in PLNs will neither be obvious
nor the inherited trait of a particular generation.
Learners will need guidance and mentoring from
skilled practitioners who can serve as role mod-
els for learning in these new contexts. This may
necessarily cause us develop new understandings
of the roles of teachers and learners, as well as
the nature of authority and expertise. Within the
concept of a PLN, we are witnessing a flattening
of traditional roles and hierarchies with expertise
linked to collaboration as well as the creation and
sharing of quality content. The value of SDL will
be enhanced by the capacity to connect with and
participate in a community of co-learners.
Ultimately, while PLNs represent a new era of
digital innovation in SDL, they are also signaling
the human capacity to educate further than we have
ever been able to before. Knowledge has been set
free, and in the process has empowered all of us to
learn through connection and discovery in ways
that are necessary for adapting to a continuously
changing world. The emergent potential of the
PLN for enhancing SDL is limited only by our
imagination, interests, and personal desires, both
as educators and as learners.
REFERENCES
Berger, N. O. (1990). A qualitative study of the
process of self-directed learning. Doctoral dis-
sertation, Virginia Commonwealth University.
Dissertation Abstracts International Section B,
51(10), 3301. (AAT9107153)
Brookfield, S. (1985, March). Self-directed learn-
ing: A critical review of the research. In Brookfield,
S. (Ed.), New directions for continuing education:
No. 25. Self-directed learning: From theory to
practice (pp. 5–16). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
237

Caffarella, R. S. (1993, Spring). Self-directed
learning. In Merriam, S. B. (Ed.), New directions
for adult and continuing education: No. 57. An
update on adult learning theory (pp. 25–35). San
Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Candy, P. C. (1991). Self-direction for lifelong
learning: A comprehensive guide to theory and
practice. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Danis, C., & Tremblay, N. A. (1985). Critical
analysis of adult learning principles from a self-
directed learner’s perspective. In Proceedings of
the Twenty-Sixth Annual Adult Education Research
Conference, USA (pp. 138-143).
Davidson, C. N., & Goldberg, D. T. (2009). The
future of learning institutions in the digital age.
Retrieved from The John D. and Catherine T.
MacArthur Foundation on Digital Media and
Learning, http://mitpress.mit.edu/books/chapters/
Future_of_Learning.pdf
Davies, J., & Easterby-Smith, M. (1984, April).
Learning and development from managerial
experiences. Journal of Management Studies,
21(2), 169–183. doi:10.1111/j.1467-6486.1984.
tb00230.x
Dewey, J. (1963). Experience and education. New
York: Collier. (Original work published 1938)
Downes, S. (2007). Learning networks in prac-
tice. Emerging Technologies for Learning (Vol
2, pp. 19-27). Coventry, UK: Becta. Retrieved
from http://partners.becta.org.uk/upload-dir/
downloads/page_documents/research/emerg-
ing_technologies07.pdf
Educause Learning Initiative. (2007, July 18). 7
things you should know about Twitter. (ELI Report
No. 7027). Retrieved from Educause Learning
Initiative website: http://www.educause.edu/EL
I/7ThingsYouShouldKnowAboutTwitt/161801
238
Personal Learning Networks
Freeman, L. C. (2004). The development of social
network analysis: A study in the sociology of sci-
ence. Vancouver: Empirical Press.
Granovetter, M. S. (1983). The strength of weak
ties: A network theory revisited. Sociological
Theory, 1, 201–233. Retrieved from http://www.
jstor.org/stable/202051. doi:10.2307/202051
Grow, G. O. (1991). Teaching learners to be
self-directed. Adult Education Quarterly, 41(3),
125–149..doi:10.1177/0001848191041003001
Guglielmino, L. M., Long, H. B., & Hiemstra, R.
(2004, Spring). Self-direction in learning in the
United States. International Journal of Self-Di-
rected Learning, 1(1), 1–17. Retrieved from http://
www.sdlglobal.com/IJSDL/IJSDL1.1-2004.pdf.
Jenkins, H. (2006). Confronting the challenges
of participatory culture: Media education for the
21st century. Boston: MIT Press and The John D.
& Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation Reports
on Digital Media. Retrieved from http://digital-
learning.macfound.org/atf/cf/%7B7E45C7E0-
A3E0-4B89-AC9C-E807E1B0AE4E%7D/
JENKINS_WHITE_PAPER.PDF
Knowles, M. S. (1975). Self-directed learning:
A guide for teachers and learners. New York:
Cambridge Adult Education Company.
Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning:
Legitimate peripheral participation. New York:
Cambridge University Press.
Leslie, B., Aring, M. K., & Brand, B. (1997).
Informal learning: The new frontier of employee
& organizational development. Economic Devel-
opment Review (Schiller Park, Ill.), 15(4), 12–18.
Marsick, V. J., & Watkins, K. E. (1990). Informal
and incidental learning in the workplace. New
York: Routledge.
Personal Learning Networks
Marsick, V. J., & Watkins, K. E. (2001, Spring).
Informal and incidental learning. [San Francisco:
Jossey-Bass.]. New Directions for Adult and Con-
tinuing Education, (89): 25–34. doi:10.1002/ace.5
Marsick, V. J., Watkins, K. E., Callahan, M. W.,
& Volpe, M. (2006, February). Reviewing theory
and research on informal and incidental learning.
In Proceedings of the 2006 International Academy
of Human Resource Development Conference,
USA (pp. 794-800).
McCall, M. W., Lombardo, M. M., & Morrison,
A. M. (1988). The lessons of experience: How
successful executives develop on the job. New
York: Lexington Books.
Merriam, S. B., Caffarella, R. S., & Baumgart-
ner, L. M. (2007). Learning in adulthood: A
comprehensive guide (3rd ed.). San Francisco:
Jossey-Bass.
Nielsen, L. (2008, October 12). Five things you
can do to begin developing your personal learning
network. Retrieved from http://theinnovativeedu-
cator.blogspot.com/2008/04/5-things-you-can-
do-to-begin-developing.html
Nugent, J. S. (2009, November). Open, connected,
and social: Envisioning adult literacy in the digital
age. Paper presented at Virginia Commonwealth
University Summit on the Future of Adult Educa-
tion in the New Digital World, Richmond, VA.
Retrieved from http://newdigitalworld.pbworks.
Nugent.pdf
O’Reilly, T. (2005). What is Web 2.0? Retrieved
from http://oreilly.com/web2/archive/what-is-
web-20.html
Peters, J., & Gray, A. (2005). A solitary act one
cannot do alone: The self-directed, collaborative
learner. International Journal of Self-directed
learning, 2(2), 12-23.
Rager, K. B. (2004, January-February). A the-
matic analysis of the self-directed learning experi-
ences of 13 breast cancer patients. International
Journal of Lifelong Education, 23(1), 95–109.
doi:10.1080/0260137032000172088
Rager, K. B. (2006, Spring). The organizing
circumstance revisited: Opportunities and chal-
lenges posed by the influence of the Internet.
International Journal of Self-Directed Learning,
3(1), 52–60.
Reischmann, J. (1986, October). Learning “en
passant”: The forgotten dimension. Paper pre-
sented at the American Association for Adult and
Continuing Education, Hollywood, FL. Retrieved
from ERIC database. (ED274782)
Schön, D. A. (1987). Educating the reflective
practitioner. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Siemens, G. (2005). Connectivism: A learning
theory for the digital age. International Journal
of Instructional Technology & Distance Learning,
2(1). Retrieved from http://www.itdl.org/Journal/
Jan_05/article01.htm.
Spear, G. E., & Mocker, D. W. (1984). The organiz-
ing circumstance: Environmental determinants in
self-directed learning. Adult Education Quarterly,
35(1), 1-10. doi:10/1177/0001848184035001001
Tough, A. M. (1971). The adult’s learning projects:
A fresh approach to theory and practice in adult
learning. Toronto, Ontario, CA: Ontario Institute
for Studies in Education.
Walsh, K. (2009, June 1). Blogs and blogging
resources for educators. Retrieved from http://
www.educause.edu/blog/kwalsh1/Blogsandblog-
gingresourcesforEd/172966
Warlick, D. (2009, March-April). Grow your
personal learning network. Leading and Learning
with Technology, 36(6), 12–16.
Weinberger, J. (2002). Small pieces loosely
joined: A unified theory of the web. New York:
Basic Books.
239

Wenger, E. (1998). Communities of practice:
Learning, meaning, and identity. New York:
Cambridge University Press.
Wenger, E., McDermott, R. A., & Snyder, W.
(2002). Communities of practice: A guide to
managing knowledge. Boston: Harvard Business
School Press.
Wesch, M. (2008, October 21). A vision of students
today (and what teachers must do). Encyclopedia
Britannica blog. Retrieved from http://www.bri-
tannica.com/blogs/2008/10/a-vision-of-students-
today-what-teachers-must-do/
Wesch, M. (2009, January 7). From knowledgable
to knowledge-able: Learning in the new media
environments. Filtered: The Academic Commons
Magazine. Retrieved from http://www.academic-
commons.org/commons/essay/knowledgable-
knowledge-able.
West, R. F. (1992). The organizing circumstance:
Environmental determinants in self-directed learn-
ing (George E. Spear and Donald Mocker). In G. J.
Confessore & S. J. Confessore (Eds.), Guideposts
to self-directed learning: Expert commentary on
essential concepts (pp. 85-98). King of Prussia,
PA: Organization Design and Development, Inc.
KEY TERMS AND DEFINITIONS
Community of Practice: A naturally-
occurring group of practitioners in a particular
knowledge domain who develop shared language,
norms, and negotiated meanings in a socially
situated context.
240
Personal Learning Networks
Distributed Cognition: The ability to interact
meaningfully with tools that expand one’s mental
capacity.
Incidental Learning: Learning that occurs
as a byproduct or unintended consequence of
another activity.
Informal Learning: Learning through life
experiences.
Formal Learning: Learning that takes place
in a classroom or institutional setting.
Participatory Culture: Collaboration with
others and sharing of Web-based resources to
create new content and construct knowledge.
Personal Learning Network (PLN): Social
ties with multiple people and resources through
virtual communities of practice that contribute to
individual learning.
Self-Directed Learning (SDL): Learning
that is initiated and controlled through a learner’s
actions and initiative.
Situated Learning: Learning that takes place
in the same context in which it is applied.
Social Network: A social structure composed
of individuals, organizations, or groups who are
connected through their relationships in an inter-
dependent manner.
Web 2.0: Digital media tools as well as the
practices involved in using them for engaging,
collaborating, and sharing information and content
on the World Wide Web.
 241

Chapter 15
Key Aspects of Teaching
and Learning in the
Online Environment
Maria M. Witte
Auburn University, USA

James E. Witte
Auburn University, USA

Suzy Westenkirchner
Auburn University, USA

ABSTRACT
Online education provides increased accessibility and possibilities for learners in various locations and
situations. Once learners decide to participate in online education, there are key aspects to consider in
the teaching and learning environment to ensure the experience is effective. The purpose of this chapter
is to identify characteristics of adults as learners and the role of learners and instructors in this set-
ting. In addition, fostering competent online learners requires a dedicated support system and effective
feedback processes. Future trends consist of an increase in informal learning and a decrease in formal
training and workshops. Informal learning tools are being used to change the culture and learning curve
within educational and organizational communities. This trend will also impact the form and function
of learning assessments within the teaching and learning online environments.

INTRODUCTION which was a 12 percent increase from the previ-

Allen and Seaman (2008) reported that online
enrollments are increasing yearly at a rate higher
than post secondary education institution enroll-
ments. There were over 3.9 million students who
took at least one online course during Fall 2007
DOI: 10.4018/978-1-61692-906-0.ch015
ous year. The majority of online learners in the
United States are adults between 25 and 50 years
of age. Moore and Kearsley (2005) revealed that
as a result of this finding it would be valuable to
understand the nature of adult learning to best ap-
preciate the online learner. Based on the Knowles’
(1990) concept of adult education, adults prefer
to have some control over the learning situation
 Key Aspects of Teaching and Learning in the Online Environment
and be able to exercise personal responsibility.
They also prefer to define their learning tasks and
make decisions about how to learn, what, when
and where to learn that fits their needs best. Adults
appreciate serving as a learning resource because
they bring considerable experiences and back-
ground to the teaching and learning environment.
Most adults want to acquire knowledge that can
be used to solve today’s problems and this type
of motivation encourages them on an intrinsic
level. Adult learners may be anxious about the
online format, requirements, new institution, new
technologies, and about whether or not they can
actually complete the course.
Moore and Kearsley (2005) revealed that the
source of anxiety is usually the learner’s concern
about being able to meet institutional and indi-
vidual expectations, which is natural fear of failure.
The instructor’s role would be to assure the learner
and ensure they are familiar with administrative
procedures, course requirements, and accessibility
with the online tools and system.
The decision to pursue online education goals
will require more than just financial obligations.
Additional responsibilities come from family,
work, and social arenas and this extra time and
effort are extracted from current time allowances.
Therefore, adults will typically be highly moti-
vated and task oriented with specific goals and
reasons to begin an educational program. The
adult learner usually has more experience work-
ing with others in classroom situations and with
administrators in organizational systems.
To the adult student, teachers gain authority from
what they know and the way they deal with their
students, not from any external symbols or titles.
Physical distance tends to further reduce the
dominant psychological position of the teacher
(probably one reason some classroom teachers
do not enjoy being at a distance). (Moore & Ke-
arsley, 2005, p. 162)
242
Resources are available to guide and harness
the use of the internet and World Wide Web and to
“…change traditional teaching and the way people
work and learn in schools” (Provenzo, 2005, p.
v). The teaching and learning environments are
constantly changing and new programs, software,
and resources are redefining how we live and
learn. This chapter will provide an overview of
adults as learners and primary motivations and
learning principles that shape their experiences.
The number of online learners is increasing as
opposed to classroom-based programs and the
following section provides a general profile of
the online learner. To support the needs of online
learners it also requires an adoption of efficient
online service from staff and administrators as
well as productive and effective instructor interac-
tion and feedback. These key aspects of teaching
and learning in an online environment will also
include future trends related to an increased use of
informal learning and corresponding assessments.
BACKGROUND
Adults as Learners
Adults will participate in teaching and educational
settings for a variety of reasons. Adults may want
to learn new skills, knowledge, or attitudes about
specific topics but their decision to participate
may be enhanced or hindered by the available
options. Prior educational experiences may also
filter an adult’s decision to return to a learning
environment, whether it is in a face-to-face or
online format. Building an awareness of why
individuals may or may not want to participate is
a key aspect in understanding adults as learners.
Knowles’ (1980) core set of adult learning
principles, known as andragogy, are based on a
unique characteristics of adults as learners and
consider the learner’s need to know; self-concept
of the learner; prior experience of the learner;
readiness to learn; orientation to learning; and,
Key Aspects of Teaching and Learning in the Online Environment
their motivation to learn. Adults typically have
a desire to understand why they need to learn
something before they will undertake learning
projects or activities. Even if previous experiences
were not positive, instructors can guide learners
so that they can advance and work towards their
own goals. Self-concept refers to the learner be-
ing responsible for their own decisions and not
feeling coerced into and ultimately resenting a
prescribed learning activity.
Learner’s experiences will vary in both quantity
and quality and those experiences will account
for a wide range of differences in background,
motivation, needs, interests and goals. Since adults
have numerous experiences they will arrive at the
teaching and learning environment with precon-
ceived notions and assumptions. Some of these
assumptions may hinder goal attainment. For these
reasons, instructors should individualize teaching
and learning strategies for their adult learners and
assist them in examining their paradigms and to
be open to different ideas (Knowles, Holton, &
Swanson, 1998). The readiness to learn principle
refers to the willingness of the learner to study
specific topics due to relevancy or that it would
serve as a basis for future knowledge. Knowles,
Holton, and Swanson (1998) indicated that the
instructor’s role would be to encourage these
students or to use career counseling, role play, or
other simulation exercises to stimulate readiness.
The next core adult learning principle is orien-
tation to learning. Adults generally prefer perfor-
mance- instead of subject-centered learning focus.
Performance centeredness improves their abilities
to solve current problems and deal with real-life
issues. The remaining principle is motivation
and that may refer to either internal motivation,
such as wanting to improve job conditions, better
living conditions and quality of life, or improved
self-confidence levels; or external motivation,
such as pursuing an increase in salary, promotion,
or being in a position to be more competitive for
better jobs. “If one looks at social structure rather
than individual needs and interests, one discovers
some very different explanations why adults do
or do not participate in adult learning activities.
These competing perspectives imply different
strategies for increasing participation” (Merriam
& Caffarella, 1991, p. 94).
Online Adult Learner Characteristics
The Distance Education and Training Council
surveyed member institutions in 1998 and 2007
(Distance Education and Training Council, 2007;
Moore & Kearsley, 2005) and found the following
results shown in Table 1.
Over a span of ten years the average age of
online education students has increased six years
and the percentage of males attending online
courses and programs has also risen. There was
a one percentage point decrease in the non-start
rate which is a positive indication of learners
beginning and continuing with online courses.
Course completion and graduation rates increased
dramatically within this time span and this finding
reflects committed and highly motivated learners.
The National Online Learners Priorities (2009)
study confirmed in their study that the majority
of online learners were female, Caucasian, and
were enrolled full-time in online courses. The
majority of learners were at the undergraduate
level and were full-time employed at the time
they were working on their degree.
Table 1.
€€€€€Item 1998 2007
• Average age of students 31 37
• Percent of students that were male 48% 55%
• Percent of students employed at time of 90% 90%
enrollment
• Percent of student that had their tuition 31% 36%
paid by their employers
• Average non-start rate (percentage) 16% 15%
• Average rate for completing a course 57% 85%
(percentage)
• Average graduate rate (percentage) 38% 66%
243
 Key Aspects of Teaching and Learning in the Online Environment
Chu (2009) examined adult learner’s prefer-
ences for internet-based learning environments
and although adult learners preferred content that
had relevance to life and reflective thinking, they
scored lower on ease of technology use. Under-
standably, as time progressed using the internet
and technological tools, it also increased and
strengthened the adult learner’s internet-based
learning environment experiences.
Acknowledging adult learners and their over-
all tendencies and motivators will also assist in
identifying the learner and instructor’s roles in the
online environment. “In the 21st century, online
learning will constitute 50% of all learning and
education. The rapid rise of learning on the internet
is occurring not because it is more convenient,
cheaper, or faster, but because cognitive learning
on the internet is better than learning in-person”
(Draves, 2002, p. 5). Support services are criti-
cal to maintain the online learner’s interest and
retention. Services include guidance, counseling,
administrative, and an orientation to the online
environment and campus. Online learners have
expectations about feedback and want their work
treated with respect and want to receive a clear
indication of how they can improve (Moore &
Kearsley, 2005). Feedback is a critical component
of the online experience and should be structured
for a learner’s success. Since online learning is
becoming more prevalent, it follows to recognize
that informal learning may soon have a major im-
pact upon formal learning processes. The internet
has opened doors to topics and subjects and to
the prospect of gaining knowledge from learners
around the world or from across the hall. Groups
form naturally and learning expands through
these virtual communities. These platforms will
create a need for different and evolving informal
learning assessments as they become part of the
formalized learning and training in the classroom
or workplace.
244
TEACHING AND LEARNING ISSUES
Learner’s Role
Once an individual has decided to undertake a
learning task, the question then becomes how
one learns to learn and to do so effectively. The
ability to learn varies from individual to individual
and will be evidenced through numerous outlets.
These outlets might be scholarship, mastering
physical challenges, artistic endeavors, teaching
others, or learning new skills or information.
Candy (1990) indicated that individuals will
learn about the learning process through their
own aptitude and personal experiences. As an
instructor, increasing the depth of learning may be
through developing the learner’s understanding or
through strengthening the understanding of what
the knowledge is and how it is formed. “Over-
all, proponents contend that the development of
more competent, sophisticated, flexible, and self
responsible learners is a complex and demanding
enterprise, which affects all facets and all stages
of education—formal and informal—and which
has important and inescapable ramifications for
teaching and learning” (p. 32).
Learning to learn is a developmental process in
which awareness promotes further understanding
and capacity. It is a lifelong process and assists
learners in coping with personal and professional
changes in their lives. Candy (1991) identified
features that are related to the learning to learn
concept. These features regard learning to learn
as a lifelong process; a developmental process
that stimulates an individual’s perceptions and
conceptions; acquiring an assortment of attitudes,
understandings, skills that eventually allow more
effectiveness and flexibility in the learner; and
searching for deeper meaning of the material,
assumptions, rules, and expectations.
Characteristics inherent in the learning to
learn concept include the terms metacognition
and self-direction. Metacognition refers to an
individual’s awareness of what they know and
Key Aspects of Teaching and Learning in the Online Environment
their ability to identify and describe thoughts
and thought processes (Kuhn, 1999). Driscoll
(2000) identified metacognition as the aware-
ness of thinking and the self-regulatory behavior
that accompanies this awareness. Metacognitive
abilities will depend on the individual, task, and
strategy variables and how they all interrelate.
Older learners were considered to have a better
understanding of specific memory abilities and
limitations than younger learners. Even though all
students were capable of using memory strategies,
Driscoll (2000) found that older learners were
more organized and purposeful in their learning
steps. The task variables related to instructional
content differences. When the content is new,
the learner may use general learning strategies
to understand and use the content; however, as
familiarity with the subject matter increases, the
learner may use more specific strategies. The
instructor’s role would be to identify the level of
content knowledge so that appropriate strategies
are used by the learners.
Driscoll (2000) revealed that strategy variables
are the actual metacognitive strategies and the
process learners use to encode, store, and retrieve
information. As an instructor, learners can be told
what to do if it is a simple task or if the task is
complex, it can be broken into smaller segments.
The self-regulatory skills allow learners to regu-
late their activities to be successful in teaching
and learning environments. Instructors can teach
learners to take a proactive role in their learning
and this can be accomplished through the use of
study or critical thinking skill development.
Osborne, Kriese, Tobey, and Johnson (2009)
developed a scholarship of teaching and learning
(SoTL) model that was used to measure levels
of critical thinking in an online course. Critical
thinking theories are readily available; however,
there are relatively few that document how critical
thinking can be incorporated into the classroom
setting. The SoTL model was based on Kuhn’s
(1999) work beginning with the cognitive com-
petencies, or meta-knowing. These competen-
cies refer to the awareness of how individuals
and others actually know the content. The three
meta-knowing categories consist of metastrategic,
metacognitive, and epistemological. Metastrategic
competencies involve the ability to select and
monitor the actual thinking strategies an individual
uses. In the classroom setting, learners are asked
what they know and to consider how they know
it. Metacognitive knowing refers to declarative
knowledge which is information learners declare
that they know and have formed opinions about
on the topic. Learners could be asked to describe
their own thoughts and thought processes about
the topic without truly understanding the reper-
cussions of that specific knowledge.
A critical element of this step is to acknowledge
what aspect(s) of what is being stated are factual
(declarative) and what is based on opinion. It is
not assumed that students will know to separate
facts from opinions in their own thinking without
being told to do so, shown how to do so, and being
held accountable for doing so. (Osborne, Kriese,
Tobey, & Johnson, 2009, p. 46)
The remaining meta-knowing category is
epistemological knowing which refers to under-
standing how a learner’s knowledge aligns with
what other learners know about the topic. This
category is developmental in nature and trans-
lates to an interactive process where a learner’s
experience will determine the extent to which a
learner moves from metastrategic to metacognitive
and then to epistemological knowing. Osborne,
Kriese, Tobey, and Johnson (2009) used these
categories and incorporated individual and group
assignments in their online course that required
students to practice critical thinking. The critical
thinking elements were to integrate the learner’s
thoughts, feeling and desires into course assign-
ments and reveals levels of recitation, exploration,
understanding, and appreciation. To facilitate
critical thinking in an online course, they used
MacKnight’s (2000) guidelines for students (e.g.,
245
 Key Aspects of Teaching and Learning in the Online Environment
asking the right questions, listening to each other,
helping each other learn, respecting other ideas,
thinking in new ways) and faculty (e.g., maintain-
ing focused discussions, asking probing questions
that hold students accountable, and encouraging
full participation).
Osborne, Kriese, Tobey, and Johnson (2009)
found that interpersonal skills were an important
element of critical thinking and these types of
skills could be taught and identified in an online
course. Students who rated highly on critical
thinking skills also possessed strong interpersonal
skills. Instructors can provide opportunities to
create assignments and discussions to cultivate
and improve a learner’s critical thinking process
in an online environment even better than in a
face-to-face class.
Effective learning also requires a self-directed
learner and possibly an instructor to guide the
learner in the process. Self-direction and self-
regulation are being used interchangeably as
they both relate to motivation and goal-directed
behavior. Motivation can be driven by the learner’s
awareness about the task, the consequences of
completing or not completing the task, and their
own ability to do so (Driscoll, 2000). Developing
self-regulatory skills so that learners arrange their
own goals and manage their own learning and
performance is the key to designing self-directed
learning projects. “The ability to undertake all or
most of the design of one’s own learning, to evalu-
ate one’s performance, and to make adjustments
accordingly are the attributes of a self-directed
learner” (Moore & Kearsley, 2005, p. 120). The
self-directed learner can design their own objec-
tives, identify resources, chose learning methods,
test, and evaluate their performance; however,
not all learners are self-directed initially. Online
education is well suited for the self-directed learner
who is not as dependent on direct instruction and
continual feedback from the instructor. Online
instructors will want to anticipate the needs of
students and whether or not they would be able
to work independently. It will also require an es-
246
timation of the frequency of interaction between
the student, instructor, and institution.
Instructor’s Role
Moore and Kearsley (2005) stipulated that ef-
fective online teaching will require a thorough
understanding of the nature of interaction and how
to facilitate that process. There are three types of
interaction and they are interaction of the learner
with the content, interaction with instructor, and
interaction with other learners. The learner-content
interaction consists of planned learning of specific
content that is facilitated by an instructor. From
that point, the learner then constructs their own
knowledge by assimilating information through
their own cognitive processes. This interaction will
most likely change a learner’s understanding and
perspective. The instructor would facilitate this
process by supporting and assisting the learner
as they interact with the content and make it
meaningful within their own context. The next
type of interaction is learner-instructor and occurs
after the content has been presented. Some of the
ways in which this interaction occurs is through
modeling or demonstration and stimulating the
learner’s interest in the topic. Application and
practice follow next as well as information and
formal evaluation steps to ensure the learner is
progressing. The instructor continues to serve as
support and encouragement, whether it is through
face-to-face, telephone, email, or through discus-
sion postings and e-conversations. The last type
of interaction is learner-learner. For the online
instructor, this form of interaction can take place
within groups or between groups. Groups can
serve as content focal points and conduits to assist
learners in thinking through and finding relevance
within the content.
Wlodkowski (1993) identified four motivating
instructor characteristics and they were expertise,
empathy, enthusiasm and clarity. Expertise is de-
rived from knowing something, at a deeper level,
that is beneficial and can be shared with others in
Key Aspects of Teaching and Learning in the Online Environment
an instructional setting. Empathy is demonstrated
through understanding and considering the needs
to the adult learner. “Adult needs and expectations
for what they are taught will powerfully influence
how they motivationally respond to what they
are taught” (p. 23). Learners may participate in
an educational activity because they desire the
social interaction, want to learn new skills, or are
interested in pursuing some form of certification.
However, if the content or the instructional process
does not meet their needs, they will discontinue it
or will find little value in the activity. Enthusiasm
is the ability to sincerely convey commitment and
animation. The instructor cares about and values
the content and teaches it with interest and pas-
sion and in doing so encourages similar feelings
in the learner. Clarity is demonstrated when the
instructor can teach a topic in a way that is easy
to understand and logically organized from the
learner’s perspective. To assist in clarification,
instructors may need to reiterate specific points or
provide opportunities for a question and answer
session.
Moore and Kearsley (2005) provided instructor
tips for teaching online and these included bringing
a human element into the teaching environment at
the beginning of the class by inviting each learner
to provide a brief biography. Knowles (1990) had
suggested this technique for establishing a climate
for learning. Small groups should be formed to
share what they are (in relation to their present
work roles and past experiences), who they are,
one thing that will enable others to see them as
unique human beings, any special resources they
would bring to the group, and any questions or
concerns they have about the uniqueness of adults
as learners and for taking responsibility for their
own learning. Due to early experiences and con-
ditioning of competition within the classroom for
grades or a teacher’s favor, adult learners may
continue this perspective and display degrees of
rivalry toward fellow learners. The climate setting
exercise counters this situation and allows mutual
trust to develop. In addition to the opening activ-
ity, Knowles presented himself as a human being
and included family background, special interests,
and hobbies, instead of just expert credentials.
He would also encourage learners to call him by
his first name as it creates a warmer and closer
relationship between the instructor and learner.
Miner (2009) provided ways to facilitate and
engage learners in an online synchronous class.
One way is to keep the learners so involved in the
learning process that they do not have time to let
their attention wander or to multi-task. “The best
virtual classroom learning experiences put the
dialogue and the learning process firmly in the
hands of the participants” (p. 31). Instead of bring-
ing the learners together to view a presentation,
pre-record it and allow them to view it sometime
before the class. Make class time as meaningful,
interactive, and engaging as possible. Other ways
include using learner’s names and being direct.
In an online class, nonverbal communication is
limited since the instructor is not usually able to
view body language or use eye contact with the
learners. In a face-to-face classroom, instructors
may use a learner’s name several times in conver-
sation and propose a question based on confused
looks or lack of learner engagement. In an online
classroom, adjustments are needed and instead
of asking the whole class a question, direct it to
a specific learner. “You’ll also find that you call
on people randomly, usually based on whether
you’ve heard from them recently or not, much
more so than you would in the classroom” (p.
32). Asking open-ended questions in an online
classroom is confusing and delays interaction.
Use direct language and ask a specific learner to
comment or provide their reaction to the reading
or case study.
Another way to improve online classroom fa-
cilitation is to write down instructions. “The least
preferred way for Americans to absorb knowledge
is in an auditory manner; yet, the virtual classroom
forces [a large percent] of our communication to
be entirely auditory. This heightens the possibility
that participants will get confused, especially when
247
 Key Aspects of Teaching and Learning in the Online Environment
they are asked to complete some type of activity”
(Miner, 2009, p. 33). Provide written instructions
for activities either through the assignments area of
learning systems, such as Blackboard, or through
a power point presentation slide. The final way
that can be used to improve online facilitation
is to maintain a high energy level. Learners will
usually be isolated and will not be able to ben-
efit from energy levels of their colleagues. Use
a presenter’s voice, natural body language, and
mannerisms and if possible, stand up and move
around as if standing in front of the class.
Instructors should become more familiar with
e-moderating which is a key aspect of online
teaching and learning. E-moderating is a process
of facilitating the development of small and large
groups through conferences and includes summa-
rizing and connecting discussion points from the
learners. “The role of e-moderator is particularly
important in helping learners to reflect about the
issues under discussion. E-moderation of online
discussions has been shown to be beneficial for
promoting group work and collaborative learning
and it is considered to be an effective method to
achieve structured group interaction” (Ellis, Ginns,
& Piggott, 2009, p. 306).
Moore and Kearsley (2005) also suggested
specific tactics regarding electronic messages.
One was to control the number and length of mes-
sages that are posted weekly. Identify a set number
of postings per week so the students can adjust
accordingly. Not only is the student submitting
comments; however, the instructor would need to
read and respond to them as well. Summaries could
also be used and sent out to the entire class which
would reinforce content or redirect discussions.
After assignments have been completed, provide
an overall review of the strengths and weaknesses
of the conversations. Use the online learning tools
such as discussion or groups to organize teams
and to structure smaller conversation posts. It
was suggested that personal or private emails be
sent through other methods and not through class
postings. Discussion board procedures should be
248
identified, outlined, and available for revising
as needed by all of the learners. Use this same
forum to provide announcements, changes to the
schedule, or to announce special activities.
Instructors would need to model good manners
and expect the same behavior from all learners. In
online environments there are social aspects and
protocol that have evolved, especially for effective
collaboration and virtual group activities. Build-
ing online communities requires specific etiquette
and can be built through in three stages--comfort,
conferment, and camaraderie (Moore & Kearsley,
2005). Developing online communities are similar
to face-to-face classes except additional planning
and organization are required to foster collabora-
tion among the class members.
Reducing stress and anxiety for adult learn-
ers would also be beneficial for all those in the
teaching and learning environment. It is usually
not the content that is of concern to the adult
learner; it is their inexperience of using an online
format that may cause anxiousness, especially at
the beginning of the class. Ensure that contact is
made, either telephonically or through email, to
welcome each member to the class and to orient
them to the class format, tools, processes, and
resources. Orientation modules can be prepared
to provide basic information to guide the learner
in learning to learn in the online format. The
learner can repeat these modules to clarify or build
confidence in using the tools and to reinforce the
next steps. Moore and Kearsley (2005) suggested
that the first assignment is extremely critical and
is a pivotal point since the fear of the unknown
may become so intense that the anxious learner
may drop the class. However, once the fear has
been reduced through positive instructor feedback
and familiarity with the online format, the learner
will experience increased confidence and course
satisfaction levels.
Key Aspects of Teaching and Learning in the Online Environment
Learner Support
To assist the learner in overcoming the fear of the
unknown, some form of student support is needed
at the institutional level. On-campus learners
have easier access to counseling, career services,
study partners programs, and financial aid offices
whereas the online learners have what is available
telephonically or electronically via the web. Moore
and Kearsley (2005) emphasized the importance
of student support services when they stated, “It
is an area that deserves more attention since there
is a direct relationship between students’ failure
and dropping out of a program and failure of the
student support system” (p. 179).
The need for support will vary in intensity
and degree for each learner throughout the online
experience. Outlining degree options and provid-
ing guidance based on the learner’s needs during
initial meetings will curtail future concerns or
delays in the academic process. In addition to
these initial meetings, some form of learner orien-
tations would be extremely beneficial to identify
learner, instructor and institutional expectations;
properly access online courses and resources;
successfully navigate the administrative system
(e.g., registration, billing); and effectively answer
frequently asked questions. Moore and Kearsley
(2005) stressed the importance of informing
learners about balancing requirements and time
management that will be needed to be academi-
cally successful. Increased demands challenge
time allotted for other roles and responsibilities
and learners need to be aware of how the online
course demands will affect their lives. Some of
the items that could be included in an orientation
were a description of online education and how it
works, available degree programs, how to study
and learn, self-assessment instruments to identify
if distance education is appropriate for the learner,
sample course materials, and on-campus details.
Online resources can guide the development of
online student services and serve as an excellent
resource for administrators, course designers, in-
structors, and student support staff (Durrett, 2006).
Institutions should recognize instructor’s ef-
forts to teach online and reward these endeavors
as part of the scholarship, tenure, and promotion
process within an academic setting (Williams
& Pennington, 2010). Simonson, Smaldino, Al-
bright, and Zvacek (2009) stressed that faculty is-
sues should be resolved initially to avoid problems
later in the process. “Integrating distance education
faculty policy with traditional labor-management
policy seems most often to be the best strategy”
(p. 195). Maintaining and increasing motivation
levels for both instructors and learners is vital to
continue building online practices and infrastruc-
ture. Institutions may have full-time or part-time
staff to assist learners telephonically or online.
Web-based support is advantageous to both on-
campus and online learners since there is 24-hour
access to needed information and services. The
majority of learners look forward to maintaining
contact and interacting with instructors and class
learners. This connection provides support at the
institutional, instructional, and personal level
which reinforces relationships and accountability.
Developing a sense of belonging can be accom-
plished through social networking venues such as
course chat rooms, blogs, or Twitter.
Learner Feedback
Even though there is an abundance of technol-
ogy to assist instructors in providing timely
feedback on learners’ work, the challenge is to
identify technologies that will be most helpful
and effective in the process. The National Online
Learners Priorities Report (2009) provided higher
educational institution data from 68,000 students
at 87 institutions about student satisfaction, fac-
ulty availability, and timely feedback. Learners,
whether they are face-to-face or online, usually
want immediate feedback and access to faculty.
Learners are seeking reassurance that what they are
doing is in keeping with instructor expectations.
249
 Key Aspects of Teaching and Learning in the Online Environment
Further, in comparing the classroom learner and
the online learner, the online learner’s expecta-
tions for feedback were higher; however, they
were also relatively satisfied with their academic
experiences.
Draves (2002) indicated that instructors re-
ally do not know how to talk online since it is
a new experience for most of them. When stu-
dents post a comment during an online course,
good feedback will start with good netiquette.
“Netiquette is etiquette (good manners, accept-
able behavior) for the Internet. In order to have
a good discussion online, we have to have some
guidelines, some boundaries, for conducting that
discussion in order for the online conversation to
be successful” (p. 135). Good netiquette includes
remaining unemotional; avoiding self-centered
comments; avoiding negativity; using upper and
lower caps when typing since all caps indicates
anger or yelling; using comments that are polite,
understated, and stated in positive language; dis-
agreeing politely; and not disrupting a dialogue
or ongoing conversation.
Feedback can be delivered effectively online
through comments on assignments or through
online discussions and is an indication that a
learner’s work is of value. Most online classes
are not as teacher-centered as face-to-face classes.
Classes that are learner-centered and focused more
on the experiences and opinions of the students
will enhance the online content (Barrett, Poe, &
Spagnola-Doyle, 2009). Feedback was typically
provided during an instructor’s office hours so
the question would be, how would that practice
translate to an online environment? Lei and Pitts
(2009) researched the use of virtual office hours
for both traditional and non-traditional students
and found that students’ use of virtual office hours
were not significantly different than traditional
office hours. However, it was noted that learners
in classes with virtual office hours reported higher
levels of satisfaction with office hours. “Having
professors who are perceived as accessible and
willing to help beyond the requirements of the
250
course may increase students’ overall level of
satisfaction with the course and learning environ-
ment” (p. 181).
Spencer (2004) revealed that the shift from on-
campus to online course delivery is enhanced since
institutions, educators, and trainers understand the
importance of developing an infrastructure that
will provide online course services such as tutors,
library, counseling services, course materials, and
computer network support.
FUTURE TRENDS
Nancherla (2009) stated “Pervading many work-
place in various guises and fast becoming a staple
of today’s employee diet, the tools of informal
learning are being harnessed both inside and
outside the training function, infiltrating all parts
of the organization” (p. 55). Emerging trends in
the teaching and learning environment include ac-
knowledging and using informal learning methods,
along with corresponding authentic assessments,
to develop the knowledge and skills of learners.
Informal Learning
Informal learning consists of distinct learning
activities that do not conform to a formal learning
method and usually occur in the absence of an
instructor or classroom setting. Informal learning
is occurring at high levels within organizations
and is expected to increase in proportion in all
organizational learning venues. “Informal learning
is becoming more prevalent because of an evolving
workplace environment that needs its speed and
wide span of effectiveness” (Nancherla, 2009, p.
56). Knowles (1962) had predicted that the role
of the teacher would be redefined from one who
primarily transmits knowledge to one who primar-
ily helps students to inquire. If the learner’s needs
are not being met in the traditional classroom, then
non-traditional methods and approaches will be
used thus the case for informal learning.
Key Aspects of Teaching and Learning in the Online Environment
Nancherla (2009) indicated there was a large
gap between the degree in which newer and
seasoned employees are sharing information as
seasoned employees share information at lesser
rates than the others. To close this gap would
require an organization to build an environment
of open communication with technological tools
provided by the employer and then encouraging
employees to use the tools. If tools are not pro-
vided, employees will often maneuver around to
use newer methods of communication. Informal
learning can have considerable influence on or-
ganizations and provides a high impact, low cost
alternative. Other cost effective methods of infor-
mation sharing and learning include wikis, blogs,
and other open source methods to fill this need.
Chen and Wang (2009) researched online
discussion forums that used computer supported
collaborative learning (CSCL) processes. Com-
puter supported collaborative learning refers to
advancing learning through productive discourse
and social conversations. “It seems that both effec-
tive discussions and social interaction contribute
to learning in a virtual community. However,
much less attention has been given to the relation-
ship between them” (p. 588). The social aspect
has been found as a way to integrate individuals
with diverse backgrounds into being a productive
group member (Tempelaar, Van den Bossche,
Gijselaers, & Segers, 2009). Social talk can be an
on-task activity and can be purposive, strategic,
and goal-oriented. “If we are to understand better
how effective learning occurs, we cannot exclude
these social conversations and discard them as
irrelevant to effective learning” (Chen & Wang,
2009, p. 608).
Social conversations are part of an informal
learning process. There were three areas that re-
inforce the need to adopt new informal learning
practices which were information overload in the
workplace, how quickly information is needed,
and the work style of the millennial generation
(Nancherla, 2009). Informal learning is becom-
ing more prevalent because it is user-initiated,
self-directed, and provides just-in-time learning.
“Informal learning fits the context of today’s
knowledge-on-the-go world, where information
is best processed in small information bites” (p.
57). Tang and Austin (2009) examined student
perceptions about teaching technologies and found
that younger students preferred video and older
students preferred lecture methods. This finding
reinforces the need to vary methods used in the
teaching and learning environment, especially
since there might be differences between younger
and older adults.
There is also value in connecting informal
learning with educational or organizational goals.
For example, Sun Microsystems, a network
services solution provider, initiated an open
learning exchange to provide company leaders
an alternative to formalized learning, tap into
employee expertise, and cultivate and generate
ideas. Informal learning takes place through
this exchange as employees contribute to online
discussions and learn in smaller chunks through
podcasts and videos, delivered through ITunes,
or links to PDFs, books, news, or other media.
According to Nancherla (2009), setbacks to
informal learning may be due to a lack of skills
in an institution’s training department, a lack of
technologies within the organization, or an un-
derdeveloped learning culture at the institutional
level. It was suggested to prepare solutions before
implementing an informal learning structure. For
example, if there is a lack of collaboration among
learners, then it will be an ineffective use of re-
sources and technology to implement informal
learning methods. Instructors or leaders should
spend part of their work day creating informal
knowledge and documenting it for use in the
near future. This would include patterns of com-
munication, where individuals go for information,
and where should they be going for information.
In the future, the word “training” will be most
likely replaced with “learning” as it captures the
essence of inside knowledge being shared and
251
 Key Aspects of Teaching and Learning in the Online Environment
retained through colleagues and social networking
platforms instead of in a classroom.
Assessment of Learners
Assessing learners in an online environment has
reinforced the need for instructors to be creative
and engaging in the teaching and learning setting.
West (1997) revealed that the current educational
system focuses on the remediation of certain dis-
abilities; however, it needs to encompass a broader
range of skills levels that address an individual’s
unusual abilities and special difficulties. Assess-
ment techniques and practices have become more
comprehensive and can concentrate on a learner’s
areas of unusual strengths instead of pointing out
weaknesses and areas that are difficult. As an
example, West indicated that the visual-spatial
modes of thought should be used in all levels of
the educational process. The visual-spatial learner
thinks primarily in pictures, has visual strengths,
and usually sees the whole picture but misses
the details.
While visual approaches have received greater
attention at lower grade levels for some time,
higher education is slow to change and still relies
heavily on traditional academic methods—books
and lectures. Systematic experimentation with a
range of emerging, visually oriented tools and
processes might prove to be especially fruitful
for many different kinds of students with different
talents and different brains. (p. 42)
Determining what knowledge or skill will be
assessed in an online environment is an impor-
tant instructional issue. Oosterhof, Conrad, and
Ely (2008) indicated that it depends on whether
learning a particular skill is training or education.
“With training, the goal is for learners to be able to
perform a particular task, often with a high degree
of proficiency and consistency. With education,
the goal is to provide learners with a framework
for further learning from which unanticipated
252
problems can be solved” (p. 56). In the educational
environment, instruction and assessment are often
goal driven and goals are usually broad statements
of target outcomes. Since online courses cover a
wide extent of topics, corresponding assessments
will comprise only a sample selection from within
the content. Oosterhof, Conrad, and Ely (2008)
identified a three-step process to select content
to be assessed when the purpose is educational
and not training related. The first step is to select
a focus within the goal. For example, if the goal
was student work and instructor feedback will
be sent electronically then it involves too many
skills and content to serve as an appropriate focus.
A more selective focus would be for students to
submit assignments by attaching word documents
to emails. The instructor would then provide
feedback on those documents and return them
to the student via email. “The specific focus that
the instructor selects will be influenced by what
foundation of knowledge will be most beneficial
to students and what resources the instructor and
student have access to during the learning process”
(Oosterhof, Conrad, and Ely, 2008, p. 61).
The second step in the process is to select
specific content to assess. Since it will cover only
a small percentage of the content, it would not be
as discriminating to include skills that all students
have mastered or skills that all students would
not be capable of demonstrating. There are also
different types of performance assessments that
measure declarative knowledge or information
level, procedural knowledge regarding concepts
and rules, or basic problem solving skills. Using
the focus of students submitting assignments
by attaching word documents to emails, the
specific content that could be assessed would be
to ask the learners to describe how they would
access the assignments from the online system
(e.g., Blackboard). This would be an example
of declarative knowledge assessment. The third
step in the process is to determine the number
of observations to be used in the assessments.
The number of observations correlates with the
Key Aspects of Teaching and Learning in the Online Environment
number of test items and tasks that learners will
be asked to perform. Essential skills should be
stressed; however, not at the expense of limiting
what should be assessed.
Acquiring more confidence in the test items
will require increasing the number of skill obser-
vations; however, it also diminishes the number
of skills to be sampled. Online assessments do
not have the same face-to-face classroom time
constraints which can be an advantage. The num-
ber of observations that will adequately assess a
specific skill will require the instructor’s judgment.
Oosterhof, Conrad, and Ely (2008) provided an
assessment example of the learner being able to use
Blackboard’s grade book features to access Word
documents uploaded by students. Using this exam-
ple, the instructor could have the learners complete
a performance assessment using Blackboard’s
online gradebook to access uploaded assignments.
This three step process to select the assessment
content provides a foundation and is a key aspect
in the teaching and learning environment. Most
learning systems, such as Blackboard, Learning-
Space, Virtual-U or WebCT have the capability
of integrating tools such as quizzes, tests with
options of true-false, multiple-choice, matching,
ordering or fill-in-the-blank assessments (Dab-
bagh & Bannan-Ritland, 2005). Other examples
of effective learning evaluation techniques are
portfolios, performance evaluations, interviews,
journals, reflective papers, web site development,
peer assessment, and learner self-assessment
(Hanna, Glowacki-Dudka, & Conceicao-Runlee,
2000). Assessments will continue to evolve as
technology advances and changes.
Computer-based graphics and simulators
are used widely to test scientific, mathematical,
relational, medical, navigational, and aviation
skills and knowledge. West (1997) reflected that
since our society has such a diverse and special-
ized population that there should be a numerous
opportunities to find the best use of their talents.
Opportunities are growing exponentially as tech-
nology now offers learners more accessibility, ac-
commodation, and affordability. Friedman (2006)
revealed that these options have globalized and
flattened the world in terms of technological in-
frastructure. For example, the internet was created
and allowed individuals and companies to open
online stores, banks, schools, and bookshops for
local and global suppliers and customers. Through
the use of the internet, work can be pieced out to
allow jobs to be disaggregated and sourced to a
company located in another country around the
world. These outsourced tasks can be performed
efficiently at lower costs with no overhead. In-
creased international and local competition will
force educational institutions and organizations
to respond differently to compete for students and
work-based talents. Technological devices will and
have become smaller, less expensive, and more
personal, digital, virtual, and mobile. Advances
in technology will continue to allow for a variety
of assessment methods to engage the learner in
the teaching and learning environment.
CONCLUSION
There are a variety of factors that affect a learner’s
success in the online environment. These factors
include the learner’s needs, educational experi-
ences, personal preferences, familiarity with
technology and computer processing, knowing
how and where to access student support services,
previous experience in online courses, and feeling
socially supported and encouraged. The provi-
sion of student support services is critical to the
success of learner’s and online programs. These
specific service areas include orientation, admis-
sions, study and learning skill development, and
providing social interaction options.
Key aspects of teaching and learning in the
online environment include improving the quality
of the learner’s experience and addressing their
perceptions about the online components and
how they can be used in the learning process.
Ellis, Ginns, and Piggott (2009) reinforced the
253
 Key Aspects of Teaching and Learning in the Online Environment
importance of building awareness about the nature
and purpose of learner assignment submissions
and online instructor feedback. “How students
perceive and use the activities and materials rep-
resent one of the keys to unlocking the full value
of e-learning in the student learning experience
at university” (p. 316).
Informal learning methods have not been as
fully recognized for their value and importance;
however, the trend is that informal methods will
replace formalized learning processes. Open
communication is viable and doable with the cur-
rent technology and capitalizing on this vehicle
provides results that are high impact with low
costs. Online discussion forums, also referred
to as computer supported collaborative learning,
encourages socialization and crystallization of
content. Informal learning is more self-directed
and provides learning when needed. As informal
learning becomes more of the norm, it will require
assessment techniques and practices that use and
enhance the collaborative and visually-oriented
tools in use today.
REFERENCES
Allen, I. E., & Seaman, J. (2008). Staying the
course: Online education in the United States,
2008. Babson Survey Research Group. Retrieved
October 17, 2009, from http://www.sloan-c.org/
publications/survey/pdf/staying_the_course.pdf
Barrett, S., Poe, C., & Spagnola-Doyle, C. (2009).
Power up: A practical student’s guide to online
learning. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Pren-
tice Hall.
Candy, P. (1990). How people learn to learn. In
Smith, R. (Eds.), Learning to learn across the
lifespan (pp. 30–63). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Candy, P. (1991). Self-direction for lifelong learn-
ing: A comprehensive guide to theory and practice.
San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
254
Chen, F., & Wang, T. (2009). Social conversa-
tion and effective discussion in online group
learning. Educational Technology Research and
Development, 57, 587–612. doi:10.1007/s11423-
009-9121-1
Chu, R. (2009). Self-directed learning readiness,
internet self-efficacy and preferences towards
constructivist internet-based learning environ-
ments among higher-aged adults. Journal of
Computer Assisted Learning, 25(5), 489–501.
doi:10.1111/j.1365-2729.2009.00324.x
Dabbagh, N., & Bannan-Ritland, B. (2005). Online
learning: Concepts, strategies, and application.
Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Merrill Prentice
Hall.
Distance Education and Training Council (DETC).
(2007). 2007 distance education survey: A report
on course structure and educational services in
distance education and training council member
institutions. Washington D.C.: Author. Retrieved
October 10, 2009, from http://www.detc.org/
downloads/2007DESurvey.pdf
Draves, W. (2002). Teaching online (2nd ed.).
River Falls, Wisconsin: Learning Resources
Network.
Driscoll, M. (2000). Psychology of learning for
instruction (2nd ed.). Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
Durrett, D. (2006). Online student support ser-
vices: A best practices monograph. Creating an
effective orientation for online students. Retrieved
October 16, 2009, from http://www.onlinestudent-
support.org/Monograph/online_orient.php
Ellis, R., Ginns, P., & Piggott, L. (2009). E-learning
in higher education: Some key aspects and their
relationship to approaches to study. Higher Educa-
tion Research & Development, 28(3), 303–318.
doi:10.1080/07294360902839909
Key Aspects of Teaching and Learning in the Online Environment

Friedman, T. (2006). The world is flat: A brief
history of the twenty-first century. New York:
Farrar, Straus and Giroux.
Hanna, D., Glowacki-Dudka, M., & Conceicao-
Runlee, S. (2000). 147 practical tips for teaching
online groups: Essentials of web-based education.
Madison, Wisconsin: Atwood Publishing.
Knowles, M. (1962). The adult education move-
ment in the United States. New York: Holt, Rine-
hart and Winston.
Knowles, M. (1980). The modern practice of
adult education: From pedagogy to andragogy.
Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall Regents.
Knowles, M. (1990). Fostering competence in self-
directed learning. In Smith, R. (Eds.), Learning
to learn across the lifespan (pp. 123–136). San
Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Knowles, M., Holton, E., & Swanson, R. (1998).
The adult learner: The definitive classic in adult
education and human resource development (5th
ed.). Woburn, MA: Butterworth-Heinemann.
Kuhn, D. (1999). A development model of critical
thinking. Educational Researcher, 28(2), 16–26.
Lei, L., & Pitts, J. (2009). Does it really matter?
Using virtual office hours to enhance student-
faculty interaction. Journal of Information Systems
Education, 20(2), 175–185.
MacKnight, C. B. (2000). Teaching critical think-
ing through online discussions. EDUCAUSE
Quarterly, 23(4), 38–41.
Merriam, S., & Caffarella, R. (1991). Learning in
adulthood: A comprehensive guide. San Francisco:
Jossey-Bass.
Miner, N. (2009). The non-drowsy virtual class-
room. Training & Development, 63(7), 31–33.
Moore, M., & Kearsley, G. (2005). Distance edu-
cation: A systems view. Belmont, CA: Thomson
Wadsworth.
Nancherla, A. (2009). Knowledge delivered in
any other form is…perhaps sweeter: Informal
learning is becoming a standardized part of a
complete, balanced workplace regimen. Training
& Development, 63(5), 54–60.
National OnLine Learners Priorities Report.
(2009). Research Report, Noel-Levitz. Retrieved
October 17, 2009, from https://www.noellevitz.
com/NR/rdonlyres/1CB71B9D-5E9A-42CB-
A757-AB6DFA69889F/0/NatSatisfactionRepor-
tOnlineLearners09.pdf
Oosterhof, A., Conrad, R., & Ely, D. (2008). As-
sessing learners online. Upper Saddle River, NJ:
Pearson Merrill Prentice Hall.
Osborne, R., Kriese, P., Tobey, H., & Johnson,
E. (2009). Putting it all together: Incorporating
“SoTL Practices” for teaching interpersonal and
critical thinking skills in an online course. InSight:
A Journal of Scholarly Teaching, 4, 45-55.
Provenzo, E. (2005). The internet and online
research for teachers (3rd ed.). Boston: Pearson
Education.
Simonson, M., Smaldino, S., Albright, M., &
Zvacek, S. (2009). Teaching and learning at a
distance: Foundations of distance education (4th
ed.). Boston: Pearson Education.
Spencer, B. (2004). On-line adult learning. In
Foley, G. (Ed.), Dimensions of learning: Adult
education and training in a global era (pp.
189–200). Berkshire, England: Open University
Press, McGraw-Hill Education.
Tang, T., & Austin, J. (2009). Students’ perceptions
of teaching technologies, application of technolo-
gies, and academic performance. Computers &
Education, 53(4), 1241–1255. doi:10.1016/j.
compedu.2009.06.007

255
 Key Aspects of Teaching and Learning in the Online Environment
Tempelaar, D., Van den Bossche, P., Gijselaers,
W., & Segers, M. (2009). The role of academic
motivation in computer-supported collaborative
learning. Computers in Human Behavior, 25(6),
1195–1206. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2009.05.012
West, T. (1997). In the mind’s eye: Visual thinkers,
gifted people with dyslexia and other learning
difficulties, computer images and the ironies of
creativity. Amherst, NY: Prometheus Books.
Williams, M., & Pennington, K. (2010). Institu-
tional efforts to support faculty in online teaching.
Innovative Higher Education, 34(4), 257–268.
Wlodkowski, R. (1993). Enhancing adult motiva-
tion to learn: A guide to improving instruction and
increasing learner achievement. San Francisco:
Jossey-Bass.
KEY TERMS AND DEFINITIONS
Adult Learner: An adult, considered mature
in status and experience, that is in a formal or
informal learning process.
Blackboard: A teaching and learning system
that is used to deliver online resources and learning
activities. Other learning systems include Learning
Space, Virtual-U and WebCT.
Blogs: A contraction of the term weblog which
is a type of website that is usually maintained
by an individual and contains regular entries of
256
reactions, descriptions, and could contain graph-
ics, links or video.
Informal Learning: Also referred to as social
learning and serves as a way of sharing informa-
tion informally within and between groups of
individuals.
Metacognition: Awareness of one’s own cog-
nitive processes and about their own self-regula-
tion, also considered “knowing about knowing.”
Millennial Generation: Individuals born
between the years of 1977 and 1998. Computers,
cell phones, PDAs, and other mobile technology
have been a natural part of their lives and they
are considered technologically literate.
Self-Directed Learner: A learner that is self-
motivated and shows initiative and responsibility
by setting their own goals, selecting resources, and
identifying priorities for learning tasks or topics.
Twitter: A free social networking and micro-
blogging service that allows users to post messages
known as tweets. Tweets are text-based posts 140
characters or less that are posted on the subscriber’s
page and then distributed to all those following
the subscriber.
Wiki: A website that allows creating and
editing a number of interlinked web pages that
are intended for note taking or to serve as col-
laborative websites.
 257

Chapter 16
Structuring and Facilitating
Online Learning through
Learning / Course
Management Systems
Shalin Hai-Jew
Kansas State University, USA

ABSTRACT
Online learning—whether it is human-facilitated or automated, hybrid / blended, asynchronopus or syn-
chronous or mixed--often relies on learning / course management systems (L/CMSes). These systems have
evolved in the past decade-and-a-half of popular use to integrate powerful tools, third-party software,
Web 2.0 functionalities (blogs, wikis, virtual worlds, and tag clouds), and a growing set of capabilities
(eportfolios, data management, back-end data mining, information assurance, and other elements). This
chapter highlights learning / course management systems, their functionalities and structures (including
some integrated technologies), their applied uses in adult e-learning, and extra-curricular applications.
A concluding section explores future L/CMSes based on current trends.

INTRODUCTION devices (Zanev & Clark, 2005) for ubiquitous,

Electronic learning, whether in higher education,
industry, or the public sector, requires an elec-
tronic platform. For the widest access possible,
these platforms tend to be Web-based, browser-
readable, and operating-system or platform- ag-
nostic. The learning may be location-independent
(“anywhere”), or it may be location-based, with
location-aware devices, and digitally augmented.
E-learning is often deliverable on wireless mobile
DOI: 10.4018/978-1-61692-906-0.ch016
anytime-anywhere access. This type of learning
is multimedia-based and full-sensory. It may
involve asynchronous and synchronous interac-
tivity. It may involve wide learner tracking, with
full reports of what an authenticated learner has
accessed, posted, and expressed.
Most universities and colleges have one official
learning system, and some have multiple learning /
course management systems (L/CMSes) to address
“the diverse needs of faculty who teach different
disciplines, for which there exist particular specific
instructional technology requirements that are not
 Structuring and Facilitating Online Learning through Learning / Course Management Systems
necessarily met by a single system” (Raeburn,
Kashy, Gift, Brown, & Kortemeyer, 2006, p.
T1F-32). The selection of such technologies is
challenging because of the high learning curve
to using the technologies (Hill, 2008), the high
adoption costs, and the technology integration
into a learning circumstance (Ullery, 2002). Often,
these require the support of so-called on-campus
“evangelists” (Wainwright, Osterman, Finnerman,
& Hill, 2007) to encourage administrator, faculty,
and staff buy-in.
Technological system choices are important
ones because faculty will build contents to these
structures, and porting them off to another system
will often be time-consuming and morale-deflat-
ing. These technologies have enabled cooperative
environments for multi-institutional consortial
offering of joint degrees (Ribón, de Miguel, &
Ortiz, 2009). Such systems offer unified ways to
communicate with learners, deploy policies, and
train a workforce in terms of compliance with
various policies.
L/CMSes are not learning platforms that
were designed to deliver a specific, defined
curriculum. These are not the systems created
for closed computer laboratories or dedicated,
stand-alone simulations. Such systems do not
offer pervasive 3D immersive spaces. Simply,
L/CMSes are technological systems created to
enhance mediated education by offering basic
“classroom” and learning functionalities. For the
greatest flexibility, L/CMSes are designed to be
“generics” that work on all operating systems and
mainstream browser platforms. They are known
as system- and browser-agnostic.
This chapter will highlight the different func-
tionalities of L/CMSes, their applied uses in adult
e-learning, their extracurricular applications, and
some future uses. These technologies will need to
add value: “In order to have an effective Learning
Management System (LMS), it should enhance
the advantages and at the same time alleviate the
issues that exist in traditional learning environ-
ments” (Darbhamulla & Lawhead, 2004, p. 110).
258
BACKGROUND
The Evolution of Learning /
Course Management Systems
While a number of electronic platforms are
deployed for e-learning, a cluster of integrated
tools known as learning / course management
systems (L/CMSes) has evolved and matured
with the popularization of e-learning. L/CMSes
have evolved from barebones functionalities to
complex systems capable of offering a broad
range of utilities.
Early generation L/CMSes focused on the
delivery of simple digital contents. Many focused
on a straight classroom simulation (Chen &
Shih, 2000) or of the “near-classroom” experi-
ence (Leonard, Riley, & Staman, 2003). Some
offered rudimentary grade recording and some
basic asynchronous interactivity, often through
message boards and email.
Later generation learning platforms offer
broader social networking connectivity. They
offer a wider archival of learner works and in
more varied digital forms. Others offer a greater
range of assessments, such as alternate assess-
ments through electronic portfolios. Given that
eportfolios are not usually stand-alone as an as-
sessment tool but usually used in a context (Zhang,
Olfman, Ractham, & Firpo, 2009), these are often
deployed as parts of group projects and are pub-
licized through external blog sites which allow
users to “record and share learning experiences
and reflections that are relevant to a portfolio’s
contents (Zhang, Olfman, Ractham, & Firpo, 2009,
p. 14). The use of e-portfolio shows an expansion
of conceptualization of learning beyond tradition-
alist, “instructivist,” and information-delivery
approaches to teaching and learning to the wider
acceptance of social cognition and constructivist
concepts and practices. Even more, current L/
CMSes integrate social networking sites or have
their own built-in student profile tools and learner
Structuring and Facilitating Online Learning through Learning / Course Management Systems
“lounges” for casual interactivity, socializing, and
mutual support.
Some L/CMSes are proprietary and for-profit
(BlackBoard™, ANGEL Learning™, WebCT™,
Axio Learning™, ECollege™), and others are
open-source and free (Sakai™, Moodle™). For
some institutions of higher education, the built-in
limits to modifications (of commercial systems)
are seen as a weakness, which adds to the total
cost of ownership (Masuda, Murata, Yasutome,
Shibuya, & Nakanishi, 2008). As researchers
note, tertiary institutions must contain “the rising
costs of the e-learning infrastructure” (Marshall
& Mitchell, 2004, p. 185). If selected well, L/
CMSes are said to magnify the capabilities of a
limited staff (Olsen, 2006).
While all go through upgrading cycles and
patches, many are fixed-form and controlled by
administrators; some are malleable, with open
code and adaptability by developers. Some of these
systems are based on defined learning theories;
others claim to be pedagogically “agnostic.” These
systems may have loose coupling of tools that
may be toggled on or off based on user needs and
computer competencies (Meiselwitz & Trajkovski,
2006). In one case, a workshop tool in a learning
management system was used to support student
“peer assessments of student written journal
article reviews” (Dooley, 2009, p. 344). Another
endeavor offered learner experiences with online
laboratories (Brown & Lahoud, 2005).
Many tap into third-party software tools and
Web 2.0 open-source products for more learner
sociability, cross-disciplinary collaborations, and
harnessing of collective intelligence (known col-
loquially as “crowd sourcing”) in the electronic
learning. The “perpetual beta” of Web 2.0 tech-
nologies means that these constant releases occur
without a clear update schedule (Ullrich, Borau,
Luo, Tan, Shen, & Shen, 2008, p. 709), so the
technological systems that would benefit from
their existence will require easy ways to integrate
these. These systems are moving towards “robust
interconnectivity” (Schakelman, 2001, p. 262).
However, it should be noted that proprietary L/
CMSes have not been studied in depth because of
the limited access (Quarless, 2007) to protected in-
formation and source codes. (Note: The companies
that create proprietary L/CMSes have invited this
author to join in on design sessions but with the
signing of a non-disclosure agreement or NDA.
The author declined because of potential conflicts
of interest with her work in an office that builds
a competing proprietary L/CMS.)
Serving a wider range of learner needs. As
e-learning has matured, the L/CMSes that have
survived the mass convergence have evolved along
with more sophisticated learner and organizational
needs. These technological tools have become
more flexible in adjusting to a wider range of
learners with diverse learning styles. Educational
technologies must meet the needs of particular
educational cultures to be successful (Hulme &
Locasto, 2003). They accommodate more long-
term uses than typical learning terms (quarters
or semesters). They allow for self-registration
and automated non-human facilitated learning,
with tools that support adult learner self-efficacy
and self-determination (Radenski, 2009). They
incorporate intelligent agents that may support
customized learning and decision support. They
enable the collection and distribution of learning
contents to-and-from mobile devices. They also
integrate wide research on learner motivations in
online collaborative spaces (Clear & Kassabova,
2005) and their reactions to the socio-technical
design.
Content provision. Prevalent L/CMSes have
also made inroads with content providers—digital
library repositories (Oldnettel, Malachinski, &
Reil, 2003), book publishers, and educational
content creators—to offer electronic access to rich
storehouses of texts; e-books and hypertextbooks
(Röβling, et al., 2006), and e-publications, study
or course packs; imagery; sound files; video; test
banks; digital learning objects, and other learning
contents. Digital libraries, for their part, have be-
come more accessible to faculty and learners with
259
 Structuring and Facilitating Online Learning through Learning / Course Management Systems
the building of syllabi to package the contents for
various learning endeavors (Pérez-Quiñones, Fox,
Cassel, & Fan, 2006). Open courseware—which
is provided free for download and use—offers
whole university-level courses for use, even
though such contents are not frequently updated
for freshness (Yue, Yang, Ding, & Chen, 2004).
Course and module cartridges may be uploaded
into these L/CMSes, often on a subscription basis.
Commercially produced courses may be adapted
for the university context for efficiencies (Bradford
& Brown, 2006).
Going mobile and location-sensitive. L/
CMSes now may deliver some multimedia con-
tents to mobile devices that play within the visual
limitations of the small-screen devices. There are
more technological linkages supporting situated
learning in real spaces, and employing multi-
modal interaction, location-aware devices, and
augmented devices (Li, Lau, Shih, & Li, 2008).
Sound and video captures captured through mo-
bile devices for information sharing and social
interactions (Zhu, Li, Lv, Shang, & Dick, 2009)
may be integrated into L/CMSes.
Adhering to changing standards. Technologi-
cal and accessibility standards affect L/CMSes.
These must adhere to technological standards of
interactivity, in order to promote the “reusability,”
portability, and interchangeablity of digital learn-
ing objects. These learning systems must also
support federal accessibility standards, to accom-
modate those who may have disabilities, such as
visual acuity, deafness, symbolic and cognitive
processing, and mobility issues. For example, one
provides non-visual access to the entire learning
system (Enagandula, Juthani, Ramakrishnan,
Rawal, & Vidyasagar, 2005). L/CMSes enable
users to define their preferred formats (Leung &
Chan, 2007). Security standards, as defined by
both the federal and state governments, are also
a critical aspect. These e-learning systems must
uphold organizational and administrative needs
to protect the assurance of information. Federal
laws also require privacy protections for learners,
260
so these systems provide privacy for its users, the
authentication of users, and forensic trackability
(known as an “electronic audit trail”) of all ac-
tions within the system (Suleman, 2008, p. 229).
L/CMSes may be seen as componentized
systems that draw inspiration and direction from
numerous sources. Their development evolves
based on feedback from user design assessments,
helpdesk services, and other information streams.
They are domain or field-independent; however,
they can also be built to support context-dependent,
situated learning—through the offering of artifacts
that create a particular learning environment. L/
CMSes also integrate rich functionalities and
resources from third-party and open-source soft-
ware inventions whether these are intergrated into
the system or used alongside third-party systems
(often through hyper-linking). These resources
may include wikis, blogs, e-portfolios, and other
digital tools.
COMMON FUNCTIONALITIES
AND STRUCTURES
The growing complexity of learning / course
management systems (L/CMSes) has led to a
greater need for intensive training of system
administrators, faculty, staff, and learners. While
all stakeholders to L/CMSes have had growing
access and capabilities in these systems, many
other options have been encapsulated (or hid-
den) for more manageable interfaces. Table 1:
“Learning / Course Management System (L/CMS)
Functionalities and Structures” summarizes the
main affordances for learning: Collection and
Distribution of Digital Contents; Asynchronous
Communications; Synchronous Communications;
Telepresence and Social Presence; Digital Content
Authoring; Distributed Collaboration; Archival
Functions; Designed Spaces; Information Collec-
tion and Analysis; User Support; Assessments and
Grading; Legalities, and Administration.
Structuring and Facilitating Online Learning through Learning / Course Management Systems

All socio-technical systems involve affor-
dances and constraints; “affordances” are enable-
ments that allow for various functions. “Con-
straints” involve limitations to what people can
do through the system. Different instances of a
particular L/CMS may feature highly different
functionalities depending on the needs of the
organization, its administrators, faculty, and learn-
ers. There is a value for deeper analysis about the

Table 1. Learning / Course Management System (L/CMS) Functionalities and Structures

Collection and Distribution of Digital Contents: Early-style L/CMSes offered one-way distribution of digital contents, often from the
instructor to a group of learners. This function has since evolved to multi-way exchanges of digital contents and now involve a range of
multimedia: text files, slideshows, animated tutorials, audio, video, and archived webcasts.
Many e-learning systems offer announcement tools to regulate the distribution of timely information. Many have embedded Really
Simple Syndication (RSS) feeds for podcasts and vodcasts (video podcasts) delivery to mobile devices.
To organize digital contents, most offer a folder structure which offers a way of modularizing the contents as well as annotating the files
and labeling the various layers of the course or e-learning.
These systems have integrated learning object repositories (Prakash, Saini, & Kutti, 2009), which allow for the uploading of learning
contents and their sharing among faculty and defined learners.
The resources of highly-indexed digital libraries are made available to many through L/CMSes for information-centered learning; these
may involve the uses of concept mapping to support constructivist creation of knowledge (Marshall, Chen, Shen, & Fox, 2006).
Learner eportfolios and galleries are integrated with L/CMSes to showcase work by experts as well as by learners. These promote learn-
ing, peer critique, and self-assessments.
Asynchronous Communications: Given the importance of interactivity in e-learning, these e-learning systems offer ways for learners
to interact with each other through message / discussion boards, audio messages, private messages, and shared files. Some systems even
support the sharing of pre-recorded audio for asynchronous communications. Some have internal email systems that do not connect with
outside emails; others have a through-put system that connects people using their own registered emails. Still others allow for broadcast
and microcast electronic mailing lists. L/CMSes have been credited with lowering language barriers as an affordance (Xu, 2008).
Synchronous Communications: Real-time communications may involve text, audio, visuals, and live webcams—singularly or in
various combinations. Webcasts may capture all the above in a smooth multi-channel way, involving live chat, online response (voting)
systems, slideshows, live webcams, live sharing of websites, live audio, and even remote sharing of participant desktops (with each
respective learner’s permission). This is achieved through web conferencing or “webinar” (Web + seminar) tools like Adobe Connect™,
Wimba™, WebEx™, and others.
Telepresence and Social Presence: Many L/CMSes offer ways for individuals to build their online identities and profiles by sharing
photos and information about themselves. There are indicators to show the presence of each learner in a live interactive setting, and
there are “social presence” tools to show multiple individuals’ presences in a synchronous interaction. For example, web conferencing
may show the names of the participants and their contributions in a live situation and more closely emulate face-to-face communication
(Sabin & Higgs, 2007); 3D immersive virtual worlds may show multiple avatars in a shared common space.
Digital Content Authoring: L/CMSes may offer the ability to author contents—such as web pages, audio files, video files, screen cap-
tures, screen recordings (Smith & Smith, 2007),
and assessments. Others may be more complex and have built-in templates for modules, slideshows, and branched learning. L/CMSes are
designed to accept authored contents from dozens of external and independent software programs. Many are incorporating the authoring
capability for some types of digital contents.
Distributed Collaboration: The importance of virtual teaming around shared projects has affected the design of L/CMSes—because
of the need to train learners in virtual teaming and because of organizational needs for faculty and staff to collaborate around hiring
committees, decision-making, and projects. Collaborative tools involve a selective mix of the communications and web conferencing
tools as well as the archival and showcasing functions. Collaboration may also be done around the group tools that protect the privacy
and communications of the work teams. Tools that offer file version control—for co-creation, co-editing and co-revision—also enhance
the shared work. A major goal of such collaborative spaces is to enhance distributed group and individual creativity (Farooq, Carroll, &
Ganoe, 2005).
Archival Functions: Digital contents used in e-learning may be archived in L/CMSes. The most common unit of archival is at the course
level, with courses that may be archived off-server and reconstituted (often with the version of the L/CMS that was used to create the
course originally). Contents as atomistically granular as digital learning objects and digital artifacts (such as images) may be archived for
later access and uses, even on mobile devices (Yordanova, 2007). The integration of digital repositories into some L/CMSes has meant an
extension of the archival function and the sharing of digital artifacts.

continued on the following page

261
 Structuring and Facilitating Online Learning through Learning / Course Management Systems

Table 1. continued

Designed Spaces: An important affordance of L/CMSes is the integration of various tools into a coherent space—for context-setting.
Each interface has been designed for navigation, functionality, usability, interactivity, and information exchange. The user interfaces
provide conceptual models and metaphors for how the online system is to be used; these bridge user mental models with the conceptual
ones that more accurately represent the technological tool.
An L/CMS must offer a clear sense of context and orientation, intuitive usage, and seamlessness to new learners at the moment of
log-in. Here, learners who are focused around a particular learning domain may experience images, text, and immersive learning within
that targeted space. Degree programs, course series, and short courses may be branded with logos, a particular look-and-feel, and other
customizing elements. Learners in courses may have the e-learning paths or trajectories defined through the curriculum; they may even
experience branched learning (based on their own performances and choices), sequencing, and pacing, depending on the sophistication of
the L/CMS. This sense of design may enhance experiential learning, such as with the integration of Flash simulations and virtual worlds.
Learners may also connect with remote laboratories (Leitner & Cane, 2005), where they may affect settings on equipment and access
lab-based devices (Chin, Myers, & Holt, 2002), web cameras, and digital information. Remote laboratories that are Web-enabled allow
learners to log in from anywhere in the world and allows them to see, hear, and participate in the experiments going on in a live labora-
tory—where some processes may be started, maintained, or influenced from a distance.
Linked spaces to L/CMSes also often need design, such as the integration of 3D virtual worlds with in-world navigation and interactiv-
ity concerns (Leidl & Röβling, 2007). Collaborative endeavors in virtual worlds involve convergent avatars to a common location, for
example, which may require collaborative navigation (Yang & Olson, 2002).
Information Collection and Analysis: Survey systems to assess the instruction, bolster educational research, and enhance the learning
strengthen L/CMS capabilities for discovery and new information capture. These systems offer both open systems with a public uniform
resource locator (URL) where respondents may go to post their responses, or closed systems with a verified and closed email list of
respondents.
Much information may be depicted using informational graphics like charts and tables. Back-end functionalities for datamining and
database queries extend this ability even further, with the ability to surface hidden information in “cryptic” data sets (McGrath, 2008). In
cases of misuse of system resources, LCMSes may also show individual actions that meet legal requirements of evidentiary proof. Some
systems have developed information visualizations to help faculty be more aware of what is occurring in their online learning courses
(Mazza & Dimitrova, 2004). Some tools track real-time visualizations of learner interactions in an asynchronous conference to support
the design of interactivity and communications (Jyothi, McAvinia, & Keating, 2007).
Another valuable aspect for information collection involves the labeling of digital objects, which may include structured data about data
or “metadata.” Proper labeling of uploaded resources enhances their “management, discovery and retrieval” (Al-Khalifa & Davis, 2006,
p. 69) as well as their interchangeability and uses in other learning contexts. Metadata in e-learning offers “searchable properties” (Tor-
tora, Sebillo, Vitiello, & D’Ambrosio, 2002, p. 542).
Front-end information and knowledge collection—such as through wikis (Guth, 2007) and blogs—elicit other types of information and
responses.
User Support: Users of socio-technical systems assume that the systems will be self-explanatory—through the user interfaces (with
consistent semantics and layout), context-sensitive help (with step-by-step directions), embedded animated tutorials, and directional an-
notations.
Most institutions offer 24/7/365 live helpdesk support (Davenport, 2005) and remote troubleshooting for users of L/CMSes. How an L/
CMS functions depends on numerous factors: the fitness of the learner’s computer, the updatedness of browsers, the robustness of securi-
ty systems on desktop or laptop computers, the busyness of the engaged servers, the security management of the technological infrastruc-
tures, the speed of connectivity to the Internet, the correctness of the code and testing, and the scripting of the various digital objects that
comprise that particular portion of an online learning experience. This technology system involves numerous dependencies, and there are
many challenges to troubleshooting a system that goes dark or has long latency periods (Fitch & Marceau, 2007). E-learning requires a
solid technology infrastructure (Vrasidas, 2004).
This offers developers of the L/CMS to collect qualitative and quantitative information about the efficacy of the system; it also allows for
the escalation of complaint tickets to the level of the system developers to address system-level problems.
Tutors, computer lab assistants, media development centers, and peer assistants often support students with their uses of L/CMSes. Fac-
ulty and staff are supported by various information technology staff and administrators—who must develop a robust policy for the uses
of such technologies, which may include acceptable use, privacy, terms of use, and others.
Various tools support user self-management, such as calendars that record due dates and deadlines. Automated system reminders may
help users follow through with their commitments. Some systems offer task managers that offer learners a “self-service and self-admin-
istrative mechanism that enables the learner to plan his study, create learning maps, manage and track learning processes, update records,
register for courses and events, and schedule activities” (Li, 2001, p. 434). Others still will analyze a respective learner’s calendar and
infer scheduling preferences (Weber & Pollack, 2005).
These systems often involve embedded “wizards” that support the import and export of courses and digital contents; sequenced course
setups; sequenced assessment and survey creation, and other complex work.

continued on the following page

262
Structuring and Facilitating Online Learning through Learning / Course Management Systems

Table 1. continued

Assessments and Grading: The types of assessments that may be deployed have become more complex and integrate more artificial
intelligence. Besides the usual true-false, multiple-choice, mix-and-match, sequencing, and such, L/CMSes now have short answer (with
automated text analysis), essay exams, the uses of sound / digital imagery / video, and other assessment types. Other functionalities in
the works allow for more complex question creation based on accumulated learner responses to other assessment questions (Sokolova &
Tolkov, 2007). Manual assessments have been integrated to allow for off-line fieldwork consideration for grading. Learners may engage
in “repeated self-checking of their skills” during off hours (Sugi, Kita, Yasunami, & Nakano, 2006, n.p.).
Tools to detect plagiarism and academic dishonesty may also be integrated with L/CMSes. Others allow for proctoring of exams at the
various localized home bases of learners, to enhance the validity of the test-taking.
Grading systems have become more nuanced, with a greater range of assessment types and grading structures that have been enabled.
Many grading systems in L/CMSes link directly to the student records. Some systems have “attendance” features to show learner partici-
pations in particular events as well as their participation in the course.
Legalities: L/CMSes must offer a solid environment for the protection of critical information, user privacy, intellectual property (through
digital rights management), and computer forensics that will hold up in the legal system. “Staying legal” is a responsibility for all users
of the shared technology.
Administration: Although much of the focus on these systems is to support instruction (Yueh & Hsu, 2008), administrators will find
many supportive tools in L/CMSes.
A critical part of housekeeping for online learning involves authentication of learners. The system, in combination with proper policies
and procedures, must be able to verify that the learners going through the learning are actually who they claim to be (Bailie & Jortberg,
2009), even including the use of biometrics (Bedford, Gregg, & Clinton, 2009).
Another aspect of access relates to disparate role definitions. Common roles of system users include students, instructors, guests, teach-
ing assistants, and administrators, and each of these categories involves a different level of access to the affordances and resources of an
L/CMS; differing roles add complexity (Helmick, 2007).
Centralized controls enable administrators to enforce intellectual property policies of the institution, such as disallowing users from post-
ing copyrighted materials onto a course site.
These systems must offer roster management—from enrollment to account maintenance to final record-keeping. Some learning involves
open-entry open-exit learning, which means learners may start the learning at any time and may leave upon completion of the requisite
work. This would suggest a need for a system of self-enrollment. There may be closed-entry, open-exit learning; open-entry, closed-exit
learning, and the most common type: closed-entry, closed exit (with defined start-and-end dates). Some e-learning may involve continu-
ous learning with on-going need for access. The ability to manage the start and end dates of the learning terms is critical.
Unique challenges also occur with courses that have a non-conforming size—such as those with very high or very low enrollments.
Automated learning may involve the need for automated assessment of learners’ progress and branching logic to define their learning.
Behind all the types of learning needs to be rigorous data management.
The record-keeping function may well enhance the collecting of data for the accreditation review process (Wulf, 2004). L/CMSes offer
tools for other types of management, such as lab administration (Pribbenow & Nguyen, 2002).

implications of various socio-technical systems While the above offers a more mechanistic
(Beck, 2005). view of the design of elements for L/CMSes, it
is helpful to consider the pedagogical theories
The Development Cycle of L/CMSes underlying the various tools.

Different organizations have varied approaches Pedagogical Theories

to designing and developing their L/CMSes.
A general development cycle—in an abstract
depiction—involves the collection of relevant
information, strategic planning, the definition of
design standards, development, extensive testing,
and then a return to patching cycles until the next
development push (which is often done on an an-
nualized schedule). Figure 1 “The Development
Cycle of L/CMSes” provides an overview.
The popularization of e-learning through L/
CMSes is seen as a move from instructivism (via
computer based trainings) to constructivism (via
experiential learning, situated cognition, and social
interactions). Communities are a crucial setting for
learning (Hoadley & Kilner, 2005), with human
interactions enhancing cognition and higher-order
thinking (Jyothi, McAvinia, & Keating, 2007). The

263
 Structuring and Facilitating Online Learning through Learning / Course Management Systems
Figure 1. The Development Cycle of L/CMSes
online spaces lessen faculty control and enhance
learner control over their own learning (Li, 2001).
Online socializing may lead to a healthy, “positive
interdependence” between people (Pumipuntu
& Phromchanthuek, 2008, p. 7). The concepts
of lifelong learning suggest that learning occurs
not only in formal settings but informal ones, and
these latter ones are often individually motivated
and self-directed, and supported by a community
of other learners.
A majority of online L/CMS systems tout
pedagogical neutrality; indeed, their respective
designs allow for a spectrum of learning types,
from instructivism to constructivism, automated
to human-mediated, stand-alone or situated, and
rote learning to analytical and creative. These
socio-technical systems are set up for cognitive
flexibility, or a wide range of conceptualizations
and learning. A mix of didactic strategies (Jantke
& Knauf, 2005) needs to be employed for effec-
tive online learning, which focuses on learner
self-dependence (Ivanov & Peneva, 2007).
264
The Applied Uses of L/CMSes
in Adult E-learning
As a central technology, L/CMSes are used for a
range of learning on the formal to informal contin-
uum. Formal learning refers to those sponsored by
institutions of higher education and work places,
as well as some commercial training companies.
These include courses; modules; short-courses
(Bradford & Brown, 2006); live training sessions
via Web conferencing (Fletcher, 2008); compli-
ance trainings; live lectures, presentations, and
demonstrations; field work; case studies; group
learning; role plays and performances; simula-
tions and educational games; problem-based
learning which is the model for simulations and
game-based learning (Sancho, Gómez-Martin,
& Fernández-Manjón, 2008) and project-based
learning; the building of profession-based eport-
folios, and research.
Informal learning tends to be non-facilitated
and learner-guided. These involve discovery learn-
ing and the unguided learning around communities
and networks of practice. General Web informa-
Structuring and Facilitating Online Learning through Learning / Course Management Systems
tion and services (Sabin & Higgs, 2007) enable
learner self-efficacy by providing information-rich
environments for guided self-explorations and
self-assessments.
Building Digital Learning
Objects and Contexts
Digital contents used in L/CMSes may come
from commercial content providers, open and
royalty-free sources (including amateur-created
ones), and self-development. Inherited digital
contents often require adaptation for educational
uses. A wide range of e-learning materials may
be created with a basic computer work station,
with a webcam, scanner, and authoring tools (an
office suite, word processor, screen capture tool,
website design tool, digital imagery editing tool,
simple Flash editors, and video editing software. L/
CMSes enable the building of some contents—au-
dio files, pre-recorded web conferencing lectures
and presentations, online assignments—directly
within the system.
International standardization efforts for digital
learning objects focus on their accurate metadata
labeling, and their technological portability and
pedagogical interchangeability for different learn-
ing contexts. To save on the up-front development
costs of learning objects, these need to be reusable;
however, there are still no all-purpose authoring
tools (Berlanga & Garcia, 2005) for such con-
structs. Various pedagogical models define how
learning objects may be created, with the Cisco
Systems™ Reusable Learning Object Model as
one of the more widely used ones.
The L/CMSes that would be able to use such
learning objects need to be able to maintain learn-
ing objects in a database; launch and dismiss
learning objects based on learner demand; com-
municate with the learning object; update users’
interactions with a particular learning object,
and record their performance (Costagliola, Fer-
rucci, & Fuccella, 2006). These systems need to
be compatible with various labeling systems for
learning objects (Darbhamulla & Lawhead, 2004,
“Paving the way…,” p. 430).
To build learning contexts, learning design-
ers may build a learning context using logos and
imagery, visual design elements, sound effects,
and informational contents. They may also con-
nect designed 3D immersive learning spaces to
the L/CMS.
Knowledge structures (taxonomies, on-
tologies) may be created on the Web to show
relationships between knowledge objects. How
information is structured can affect learning and
problem-solving, particularly in relation to the
“complex and ill-structured problems” faced by
organizations (Argyris, 1982, p. 3). Such structures
often use visualizations for clarity. Ontologies
may also be used to capture institutional memory
(Gulia & Sugumaran, 2008). These may be built
within the content areas of the L/CMS using a
folder structure or built on a website that is linked
into the learning system.
Applied knowledge structures involve decision
support systems that show processes and help
users understand problem-solving in a particular
circumstance. The combining of digital learning
objects into a coherent course is guided by various
quality standards, such as the Quality Matters™
Rubric.
Extra-Curricular Applications
Electronic learning systems are used widely
outside the learning and training realm. Demo
courses may be created to showcase the technolo-
gies. They may be used for student pre-orientation
(Yerk-Zwickl, 2004); committee work; compli-
ance trainings; social networking between student
club members; computer supported collaborative
work and research spaces; retention through
community-building, training documentation
(Guerrazzi & Webster, 2003); and recruitment and
advertising for students (Radenski, 2009). Such
shared spaces may enhance the “student-teacher
relationship and collaborative learning process”
265
 Structuring and Facilitating Online Learning through Learning / Course Management Systems
(Ishaya & Wood, 2005, p. 1); these may stretch
time in blended learning environments (Demo &
Angius, 2007). They mediate virtual office hours
(Malan, 2009).
Less formal collaborations between “periph-
eral” or citizen scientists and professionals in the
field may occur around “collaboratories,” which
also serve to “equalize” access for scientists from
less developed countries for collegial interactions
with peers from more developed ones (Luo &
Olson, 2006).
Communities of practice may emerge from
formal courses or group uses of L/CMSes. To
sustain online learning communities over time,
there must be leadership to build trust and share
knowledge (Thoms, Garrett, Herrera, & Ryan,
2008). Individuals must be able to build a sense
of social capital in their shared online spaces.
They must have strategies for knowledge creation
and management (Yordanova, 2007), which may
include knowledge creation, capture, refinement,
storage, management / update, and dissemination
(Abdelhakim & Shirmohammadi, 2007). These
functionalities all exist in L/CMSes, with their
proper deployment.
FUTURE CONSIDERATIONS
L/CMSes have come a long way since their ini-
tial iterations in the late 1990s, with many more
functionalities integrated within them. A number
of factors influence how these systems evolve:
global and local laws, policies, and stipulations;
technological standards; changing and competing
technologies; the structures of computer operating
systems and mobile device structures; the Internet
and WWW; market requirements, and user (“the
installed base”) expectations. L/CMSes are often
restricted to building onto existing technological
structures while protecting prior contents (known
as “reverse compatibility”). Unless systems start
totally from scratch, the prior substructures will
have a large influence on constraining innovations.
266
These technologies have made headway in
terms of connecting to mobile devices with bridg-
ing interoperability standards. Augmented paper
connects the print world with the electronic one
by tying these with digital systems. RFID ties
to portable devices, smart objects, and wearable
computing extends the reach into real spaces.
SCORM-compliant digital learning objects ex-
perienced on mobile devices may report scores
back to an L/CMS, to further enhance mobile
learning. L/CMSes have rich ways of connecting
to federated digital libraries, repositories, and
online resources. Back-end coding has enabled
deeper customization of learning for a greater
range of learners—based on their identities and
profiles, their online performances, and the optimal
learning tracks of similar learners who’ve gone
before them (Hai-Jew, 2007). Automated intel-
ligent agents have been used to head-off learner
mistakes in problem-solving situations (Chang,
Chang, Lin, & Heh, 2000).
The integration of automated elements will
be an important near-term development, with
many turning to automation for accommodating
a larger number of learners (Suleman, 2008). A
number of online learning endeavors strive to
apply customization and versioning to various
curriculum—for cultural sensitivity, linguistic
variety, learner demographic, and developmental
stage of learning. There are endeavors to automate
some of these assessments and decisions for
learners, in order to lower some of the needs for
human interventions. Some provide support for
at-risk learners (Krichen, 2007); others support
social skills for those with autism (Kerr, 2002).
Near-future demands include system abilities
to verify and authenticate learners per federal
regulations. These may include uses of biometrics,
internet protocol (IP) tracking, and human-based
proctoring of exams. On the flip side, there are
also endeavors to allow for anonymous commen-
tary (Trivedi, Kar, & Patterson-McNeill, 2003;
Monpara & Kar, 2008) by learners.
Structuring and Facilitating Online Learning through Learning / Course Management Systems
There are pressures to automatically enroll
and track learners to enable automated learning.
Others have suggested that federated networks of
L/CMSes recognize and maintain learner identities
and achievements through various systems. This
ambitious vision suggests that learners should be
able to update their training as their attain new
learning and skills without having to create new
accounts or verify past trainings for each new L/
CMS. Some are pushing for continuous learner
accessibility, well beyond their usage in a formal
learning environment, in order to support life-
long learning, discovery learning, and informal
learning. Some researchers are pushing for the
ability to make parts of an L/CMS private and
other aspects public—to showcase research or
digital objects or learner identities. Some want
more non-traditional non-desktop-only visual
user interfaces. At some point, wearable comput-
ers, augmented reality devices, smart furniture,
webcams, and sensors may be linked into online
learning management systems. L/CMSes should
be understood as one of a range of tools being
used for electronic learning, and their flexibility
in integrating devices and functionalities—in a
functional array—will determine their long-term
viability in this competitive field.
CONCLUSION
Future e-learning will put all sorts of pressures
on current learning platforms to be more flexible;
more customizable; less costly; more protective of
privacy, information, intellectual property rights,
and user identities; more interactive with mobile
devices; more location-aware, and smarter. At the
same time, all technological systems have limita-
tions and constraints inherent in their structure.
One decision taken means many others not taken.
There will be limits to innovations.
If “cloud computing” becomes popular, then
it may be that most will go online for the author-
ing of contents and information-sharing, with
fewer programs on people’s desktop, laptop, and
mobile devices.
For all the glamour of other technologies, L/
CMSes are the workhorses of e-learning. If L/
CMSes continue as dominant constructs for online
learning, they will likely go through “punctuated
equilibrium” leaps in which they change their
forms substantively in order to accommodate
the new demands. Technological constraints will
not allow linear progressions for advancements.
It may also be that developed nations will have
more varied forms of online learning than those in
developing countries. No matter what these socio-
technical tools are called in the future, or how they
evolve, there will be a continuing need for ways
to access digital resources, create situated learning
environments, connect with learners and facilita-
tors, record information captures, collaborate both
synchronously and asynchronously, assess work,
and record that performance for adult learning.
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
Thanks to Scott Finkeldei, Rob Caffey, and Dr.
Beth Unger for inviting me into the world of Axio
Learning™ and learning / course management
systems at K-State. Also, I am grateful to Connie
Broughton in her leadership at WashingtonOnline,
which has afforded me many learning opportuni-
ties. Matt Cholick has been a patient and effective
troubleshooter in L/CMSes and has helped me out
a half-dozen times (at least). Thanks to R. Max,
who knew when it was time to make a change.
REFERENCES
Abdelhakim, M. N. A., & Shirmohammadi, S.
(2007). A web-based group decision support sys-
tem for the selection and evaluation of educational
multimedia. ACM Multimedia EMME ’07 (pp.
27–36). Augsburg, Germany: ACM.
267
 Structuring and Facilitating Online Learning through Learning / Course Management Systems

Al-Khalifa, H. S., & Davis, H. C. (2006). The
evolution of metadata from standards to seman-
tics in e-learning applications. Hypertext 2006.
In Proceedings of the 17th ACM Conference on
Hypertext and Hypermedia (pp. 69 -72). Odense,
Denmark: ACM.
Argyris, C. (1982). Organizational learning and
management information systems. Database,
3–11.
Bailie, J. L., & Jortberg, M. A. (2009). Online
learner authentication: Verifying the identity of
online users. MERLOT Journal of Online Learning
and Teaching. Retrieved September 6, 2009, from
http://jolt.merlot.org/vol5no2/bailie_0609.pdf
Beck, E. E. (2005). Learning management sys-
tems: The need for critical analyses. AARHUS ’05
(pp. 173–176). Arhus, Denmark: ACM.
Bedford, W., Gregg, J., & Clinton, S. (2009).
Implementing technology to prevent online cheat-
ing: A case study at a small southern regional
university (SSRU). MERLOT Journal of Online
Learning and Teaching. Retrieved September
6, 2009, from http://jolt.merlot.org/vol5no2/
gregg_0609.pdf.
Berlanga, A. J., & Garcia, F. J. (2005). Authoring
tools for adaptive learning designs in computer-
based education. In Proceedings of CLIHC ’05:
Conferencia LatinoAmericana de interaccion
humano-computadora (pp. 190-201). Cuernavaca,
México: ACM.
Bradford, G., & Brown, H. (2006). How’d they
do that? Modified instructional system. SIGUCCS
’06: Special interest group on university and col-
lege computing services (pp. 32–36). Edmonton,
Alberta, Canada: ACM.
Brown, S. A., & Lahoud, H. A. (2005). An ex-
amination of innovative online lab technologies.
SIGITE ’05: Special interest group for informa-
tion technology education (pp. 65–70). Newark,
NJ: ACM.
Chang, J., Chang, M., Lin, J.-L., & Heh, J.-S.
(2000). Implements (sic) a diagnostic intelligent
agent for problem solving in instructional systems.
IEEE, 29-30.
Chen, N.-S., & Shih, Y.-C. (2000). The operational
model and framework of cyber school learning
park. IEEE, 235-236.
Chin, G., Myers, J., & Hoyt, D. (2002). So-
cial networks in the virtual science laboratory.
Communications of the ACM, 45(8), 87–92.
doi:10.1145/545151.545156
Clear, T., & Kassabova, D. (2005). Motivational
patterns in virtual team collaboration. In Proceed-
ings of the Australasian computing education
conference 2005 (pp. 51-58). Newcastle, Australia:
Association of Computing Machinery.
Costagliola, G., Ferrucci, F., & Fuccella, V. (2006).
SCORM run-time environment as a service.
In Proceedings of the ICWE ’06: International
conference on web engineering (pp. 103-110).
Palo Alto, CA: ACM.
Darbhamulla, R., & Lawhead, P. B. (2004). Cur-
riculum sequencing using quizzes and statistics.
In Proceedings of the Mid-South college comput-
ing conference (pp. 110-122). New York: ACM.
Darbhamulla, R., & Lawhead, P. B. (2004). Paving
the way towards an efficient learning management
system. ACMSE ’04: ACM Southeast conference
(pp. 428–433). Huntsville, AL: ACM.
Davenport, D. (2005). Developing an elearning
support model. In Proceedings of the SIGUCCS
’05: Special interest group on university and col-
lege computing services (pp. 44 – 47). Monterey,
CA: ACM.
Demo, B., & Angius, A. (2007). E-learning: Cou-
pling course management systems and dynamic
taxonomies. In Proceedings of the 18th interna-
tional workshop on database and expert systems
applications (pp. 222-226). IEEE.

268
Structuring and Facilitating Online Learning through Learning / Course Management Systems
Dooley, J. F. (2009). Peer assessments using the
moodle workshop tool. In Proceedings of the IT-
iCSE ’09: Innovation and technology in computer
science education (p. 344). Paris, France: ACM.
Enagandula, V., Juthani, N., Ramakrishnan, I.
V., Rawal, D., & Vidyasagar, R. (2005). Black-
BoardNV: A system for enabling non-visual
access to the Blackboard Course Management
System. In Proceedings of the ASSETS ’05: The
5th international ACM SIGACCESS conference
on computers and accessibility (pp. 220-221).
Baltimore, MD: ACM.
Farooq, U., Carroll, J. M., & Ganoe, C. H. (2005).
Supporting creativity in distributed scientific
communities. In [Sanibel Island, Florida, USA:
ACM.]. Proceedings of the GROUP, 05, 217–226.
Fitch, G. G., & Marceau, J. (2007). The Black-
board performance monitor: A mystery online.
SIGUCCS ’07: Special interest group on university
and college computing services (pp. 101–104).
Orlando, FL: ACM.
Fletcher, K. (2008). Blazing training trails with
Wimba Classroom to avoid travelling ‘round the
mountain. In Proceedings of the SIGUCCS ’08:
Special interest group on university and college
computing services (pp. 181-186). Portland, OR:
ACM.
Guerrazzi, C., & Webster, K. (2003). Using a
course management system to create a training
course for student employees. In Proceedings
of the SIGUCCS ’03: Special interest group on
university and college computing services (pp.
247-248). San Antonio, TX: Association of Com-
puting Machinery.
Gulia, J. A., & Sugumaran, V. (2008). An interac-
tive ontology learning workbench for non-experts.
In Proceedings of the ONISW ’08: Ontologies
and information systems for the semantic web
(pp. 9-16). Napa Valley, CA: ACM.
Guth, S. (2007). Wikis in education: Is public
better? In the Proceedings of the WikiSym ’07:
international symposium on Wikis (pp. 61-68).
Montréal, Québec, Canada: ACM.
Hai-Jew, S. (2007). F2F and Online ‘Live Personal-
ization’ of Learning and Implications for Learning
Object Repositories and Automated eLearning
(A Survey and Analysis). Journal of Interactive
Instruction Development, 19(4), 19–36.
Helmick, M. T. (2007). Integrated online course-
ware for computer science courses. In Proceedings
of the ITiCSE ’07: Innovation and technology
in computer science education (pp. 146-150).
Dundee, Scotland, UK: ACM.
Hill, B. (2008). Defining learning management
system skills for faculty: An instructional design
workshop for faculty technology trainers. In the
Proceedings of the SIGUCCS ’08: Special inter-
est group on university and college computing
services (pp. 121-124). Portland, Oregon, USA:
ACM.
Hoadley, C. M., & Kilner, P. G. (2005). Using
technology to transform communities of practice
into knowledge-building communities. Associa-
tion of Computing Machinery SIGGROUP Bul-
letin, 25(1), 31–40.
Hulme, M., & Locasto, M. (2003). Using the web
to enhance and transform education. Crossroads,
10(1), 6. doi:10.1145/973381.973387
Ishaya, T., & Wood, D. (2005). Enhancing effective
eportfolios through agents. In Proceedings of the
Fifth IEEE International Conference on Advanced
Learning Technologies (pp. 1-5). Kaohsiung,
Taiwan: Association of Computing Machinery.
Ivanov, S., & Peneva, J. (2007). Distance learn-
ing courses in computer science—Initiation and
design. In Proceedings of the International Con-
ference on Computer Systems and Technologies
(pp. IV.8-1 to IV.8-6). Paris, France: ACM.
269
 Structuring and Facilitating Online Learning through Learning / Course Management Systems

Jantke, K. P., & Knauf, R. (2005). Didactic design Leung, C. H., & Chan, Y.-Y. (2007). Knowledge
through storyboarding: Standard concepts for stan- management system for electronic learning of IT
dard tools. Association of Computing Machinery skills. In Proceedings of the SIGITE ’07: Special
International Conference Proceeding Series. In interest group for information technology educa-
Proceedings of the 4th International Symposium tion (pp. 53-58). Destin, FL: ACM.
on Information and Communication Technologies
Li, Q., Lau, R. W. H., Shih, T. K., & Li, F. W. B.
(pp. 20-25). Cape Town, South Africa: ACM.
(2008). Technology supports for distributed and
Jyothi, S., McAvinia, C., & Keating, J. G. (2007). collaborative learning over the Internet. Associa-
An interaction visualization tool for a learning tion of Computing Machinery Transactions on
management system. In Proceedings of the 2007 Internet Technology, 8(2), 10:1-10:24.
Conference of the Center for Advanced Studies on
Li, W. (2001). Constructivist learning systems: A
Collaborative Research (pp. 326-331). Richmond
new paradigm. IEEE, 433-434.
Hill, Ontario, Canada: ACM.
Luo, A., & Olson, J. S. (2006). Informal com-
Kerr, S. J. (2002). Scaffolding—Design issues in
munication in collaboratories. In Proceedings of
single & collaborative virtual environments for
the CHI 2006: Conference on human factors in
social skills learning. In Proceedings of the Eighth
computing systems (pp. 1043-1048). Montréal,
Eurographics Workshop on Virtual Environments
Québec, Canada: ACM.
(pp. 81-91). Barcelona, Spain: ACM.
Malan, D. J. (2009). Virtualizing office hours in CS
Krichen, J. P. (2007). Investigating learning styles
50. In Proceedings of the ITiCSE 09: Innovation
in the online educational environment. In Proceed-
and Technology in Computer Science Education
ings of the SIGITE ’07: Special Interest Group for
(pp. 303-307). Paris, France: ACM.
Information Technology Education (pp. 127-134).
Destin, FL: Association of Computing Machinery. Marshall, B. B., Chen, H., Shen, R., & Fox, E. A.
(2006). Moving digital libraries into the student
Leidl, M., & Rößling, G. (2007). How will future
learning space: The GetSmart experience. As-
learning work in the third dimension? In Proceed-
sociation of Computing Machinery Journal on
ings of the ITiCSE ’07: Innovation and Technology
Educational Resources in Computing, 6(1), 1–20.
in Computer Science Education (p. 329). Dundee,
Scotland, UK: ACM. Marshall, S., & Mitchell, G. (2004). Applying
SPICE to e-Learning: An e-learning maturity
Leitner, L. J., & Cane, J. W. (2005). A virtual
model. Australian Computer Society, Inc. In Sixth
laboratory environment for online IT education.
Australasian Computing Education Conference
In Proceedings of the SIGITE ’05: Special interest
(pp. 185–191).
group for information technology education (pp.
283-289). Newark, NJ: ACM. Masuda, H., Murata, K., Yasutome, S., Shibuya,
Y., & Nakanishi, M. (2008). An integrated Moodle
Leonard, J., Riley, E., & Staman, E. M. (2003).
system using VM technology to achieve higher
Classroom and support innovation using IP video
availability and lower TCO. In Proceedings of
and data collaboration techniques. In Proceedings
the SIGUCCS ’08: Special interest group on
of the CITC4’03: Conference on Information
university and college computing services (pp.
Technology Education (pp. 142-150). Lafayette,
315-318). Portland, OR: Association of Comput-
IN: ACM.
ing Machinery.

270
Structuring and Facilitating Online Learning through Learning / Course Management Systems
Mazza, R., & Dimitrova, V. (2004). Visualising
student tracking data to support instructors in
web-based distance education. In Proceedings of
the WWW 2004: World Wide Web (pp. 154-161).
New York: Association of Computing Machinery.
Mazza, R., & Dimitrova, V. (2005). Generation of
graphical representations of student tracking data
in course management systems. In Proceedings of
the ninth international conference on information
visualization (pp. 253-258). IEEE.
McGrath, O. G. (2008). Insights and surprises
from usage patterns: Some benefits of data min-
ing in academic online systems. In Proceedings
of the SIGUCCS ’08: Special interest group on
university and college computing services (pp.
59-63). Portland, OR: Association of Computing
Machinery.
Meiselwitz, G., & Trajkovski, G. (2006). Effects
of computer competency on usability and learn-
ing experience in online learning environments.
In Proceedings of the seventh ACIS international
conference on software engineering, artificial in-
telligence, networking, and parallel / distributed
computing (pp. 339-342). Paris, France: ACM.
Monpara, V., & Kar, D. C. (2008). An integrated
web-based system for assignment creation, man-
agement, and peer evaluation. Consortium for
Computing Sciences in Colleges (pp. 36–42).
ACM.
Oldenettel, F., Malachinski, M., & Reil, D. (2003).
Integrating digital libraries into learning environ-
ments: The LEBONED approach. IEEE, 280-290.
Olsen, L. (2006). Being there: A ‘teach them to
fish…’ approach to training and support using
WebEx™, video conferencing, and the telephone.
In Proceedings of the SIGUCCS ’06: Special
interest group on university and college comput-
ing services (pp. 295-300). Edmonton, Alberta,
Canada: ACM.
Pérez-Quiñones, M. A., Fox, E., Cassel, L., &
Fan, W. (2006). Work in progress: Personalizing
a course website using the NSDL. In Proceedings
of the 36th ASEE / IEEE frontiers in education
conference (pp. M3F-3 to M3F-4). San Diego,
California: IEEE.
Prakash, L. S., Saini, D. K., & Kutti, N. S.
(2009). Integrating EduLearn Learning Content
Management System (LCMS) with cooperating
learning object repositories (LORs) in a peer
to peer (P2P) architectural framework. SIG-
SOFT Software Engineering Notes, 34(3), 1–7.
doi:10.1145/1527202.1527212
Pribbenow, K., & Nguyen, J. (2002). Developing
a flexible online learning management system
to facilitate various aspects of instructor-led
training and lab administration. In Proceedings
of the SIGUCCS ’02: Special interest group on
university and college computing services (pp.
99-102). Providence, RI: ACM.
Pumipuntu, S., & Phromchanthuek, S. (2008).
‘Collaborative learning,’ the learning method
through Internet. In Third 2008 International
Conference on Convergence and Hybrid Informa-
tion Technology (pp. 1-7). IEEE.
Quarless, D. A. (2007). Redundant features and
design in Blackboard (LMS) and user error.
Inroads: The SIGCSE Bulletin, 39(2), 177–179.
doi:10.1145/1272848.1272904
Radenski, A. (2009). Freedom of choice as moti-
vational factor for active learning. In Proceedings
of the ITiCSE ’09: Innovation and technology in
computer science education (pp. 21-25). Paris,
France: ACM.
Raeburn, S., Kashy, E., Gift, D., Brown, B., &
Kortemeyer, G. (2006). Are two course manage-
ment systems better than one? In 36th ASEE / IEEE
Frontiers in Education Conference (pp. T1F-27
to T1F-32). San Diego, California.
271
 Structuring and Facilitating Online Learning through Learning / Course Management Systems
Ribón, J. R., de Miguel, T. P., & Ortiz, J. H.
(2009). Joint degrees in e-learning environments.
In Proceedings of the EATIS ’09: Euro American
conference on telematics and information systems
(pp. 1-8). Prague, Czechoslovakia: ACM. Rößling,
G., Naps, T., Hall, M. S., Karavirta, V., Kerren,
A., Leska, C., Moreno, A., Oechsle, R., Rodger,
S. H., Urquiza-Fuentes, J., & Velázquez-Iturbide,
J. A. (2006). Merging interactive visualizations
with hypertextbooks and course management. In
Proceedings of the ITiCSE ’06: Innovation and
Technology in Computer Science Education (pp.
166-181). Bologna, Italy: ACM.
Sabin, M., & Higgs, B. (2007). Teaching and
learning in live online classrooms. In Proceedings
of the SIGITE ’07: Special Interest Group for
Information Technology Education (pp. 41-48).
Destin, FL: ACM.
Sancho, P., Gómez-Martin, P. P., & Fernández-
Manjón, B. (2008). Multiplayer role games ap-
plied to problem based learning. In Proceedings
of the DIMEA ’08: 3rd International Conference
on Digital Interactive Media in Entertainment
Arts (pp. 69-76). Athens, Greece: ACM.
Schakelman, J. L. (2001). The changing role of
online pedagogy: How may instructional man-
agement systems, metadata, and problem-based
learning combine to facilitate learner-centered
instruction. In Proceedings of the SIGUCCS:
Special interest group on university and college
computing services (pp. 262-263). Portland, OR:
ACM.
Smith, L. A., & Smith, E. T. (2007). Using
Camtasia to develop and enhance online learn-
ing. [JCSC]. Journal of Circuits, Systems, and
Computers, 22(5), 121–122.
Sokolova, M., & Totkov, G. (2007). Accumula-
tive question types in e-learning environment.
International Conference on Computer Systems
and Technologies (pp. IV.21-1 to IV.21-6). As-
sociation of Computing Machinery.
272
Sugi, Y., Kita, T., Yasunami, S., & Nakano, H.
(2006). Web-based rapid authoring tool for LMS
quiz creation. IEEE.
Suleman, H. (2008). Automatic marking with
Sakai. In SAICSIT 2008 (pp. 229-236). Wilder-
ness, South Africa. ACM.
Thoms, B., Garrett, N., Herrera, J. C., & Ryan,
T. (2008). Understanding the roles of knowledge
sharing and trust in online learning communities.
In Proceedings of the 41st Hawaii International
Conference on System Sciences (pp. 1-10). IEEE.
Tortora, G., Sebillo, M., Vitiello, G., &
D’Ambrosio, P. (2002). A multilevel learning
management system. In SEKE ’02 (pp. 541-547).
Ischia, Italy. ACM.
Trivedi, A., Kar, D. C., & Patterson-McNeill,
H. (2003). Automatic assignment management
and peer evaluation. Consortium for Computing
Sciences in Colleges: South Central Conference
(pp. 30-37). Paris, France: ACM.
Ullery, J. C. (2002). Beyond familiar shores: Fac-
ulty teaching with technology. In SIGUCCS ’02:
Special interest group on university and college
computing services (pp. 148-152). Providence,
RI: ACM.
Ullrich, C., Borau, K., Luo, H., Tan, X., Shen, L.,
& Shen, R. (2008). Why Web 2.0 is good for learn-
ing and for research: Principles and prototypes. In
WWW 2008 (pp. 705-714). Beijing, China. ACM.
Vrasidas, C. (2004). Issues of pedagogy and de-
sign in e-learning systems. In 2004 Symposium
on Applied Computing. SAC 2004 (pp. 911-915).
Nicosia, Cyprus. ACM.
Wainwright, K., Osterman, M., Finnerman, C.,
& Hill, B. (2007). Traversing the LMS terrain.
In Proceedings of the SIGUCCS ’07: Special
interest group on university and college comput-
ing services (pp. 355-359). Orlando, FL: ACM.
Structuring and Facilitating Online Learning through Learning / Course Management Systems
Weber, J. S., & Pollack, M. E. (2005). Simulating
users to support the design of activity management
systems. In Proceedings of the 2005 winter simu-
lation conference (pp. 1043- 1048). New York:
Association of Computing Machinery.
Wulf, T. (2004). Using learning management sys-
tems to teach paperless courses: Best practices for
creating accreditation review record archives. In
Consortium for Computing Sciences in Colleges
(pp. 19–25). Paris, France: ACM.
Xu, B. (2008). Knowledge based learning action
analysis in online co-learning. In Second Inter-
national Symposium on Intelligent Information
Technology Application (pp. 162-166). IEEE.
Yang, H., & Olson, G. M. (2002). Exploring col-
laborative navigation: The effect of perspectives
on group performance. In Proceedings of the CVE
’02: Collaborative virtual environments (pp. 135-
142). Bonn, Germany: ACM.
Yerk-Zwickl, S. (2004). Window to a new world:
Online freshman orientation via portal. In Proceed-
ings of the SIGUCCS ’04: Special interest group
on university and college computing services (pp.
343-345). Baltimore, MD: ACM.
Yordanova, K. (2007). Integration of knowledge
management and e-learning—common features.
In Proceedings of the international conference on
computer systems and technologies (pp. IV.25-1
to IV.25-6). Beijing, China: ACM.
Yue, K.-B., Yang, A., Ding, W., & Chen, P. (2004).
Open courseware and computer science educa-
tion. Consortium of Computing Sciences in Col-
leges (pp. 178–186). New York: ACM.
Yueh, H.-P., & Hsu, S. (2008). Designing a learn-
ing management system to support instruction.
Communications of the ACM, 51(4), 59–60.
doi:10.1145/1330311.1330324
Zanev, V., & Clark, R. (2005). Wireless course
management system. In Proceedings of the 43rd
ACM Southeast conference (pp. 2-118 to 2-123).
Kennesaw, GA: Association ACM.
Zhang, X., Olfman, L., Ractham, P., & Firpo,
D. (2009). The implementation and evaluation
of KEEP SLS: An eportfolio system supporting
social constructive learning. In Proceedings of the
SIGMIS-CPR ’09: ACM special interest group
on management information systems-computer
personnel research (pp. 13-18). Limerick, Ire-
land: ACM.
Zhu, C., Li, K., Lv, Q., Shang, L., & Dick, R.
P. (2009). iScope: Personalized multi-modality
image search for mobile devices. In Proceed-
ings of the MobiSys ’09: 7th annual international
conference on mobile systems, applications, and
services (pp. 277-290). Kraków, Poland: ACM.
KEY TERMS AND DEFINITIONS
Affordance: An enablement or ability, some-
thing that is made possible because of a mediating
technology.
Agnostic: Non-committal in terms of its
reliance on a particular technological system or
underpinning.
Application Programming Interface (API):
The source-code interface through which an ap-
plication program accesses the operating system.
Authoring Tool: Software used by non-
programmers to create and output digital objects
like slideshows, animated tutorials, diagrams,
and multimedia.
Collaboration: The process of working to-
gether.
Compatibility: Congruous, capable of be-
ing connected to another device without special
equipment or software.
Digital Library: A collection of related digital
contents overseen by a librarian or curator.
273
 Structuring and Facilitating Online Learning through Learning / Course Management Systems

Encapsulation: The function of being en- Learning / Course Management System:

closed within another function; the hiding of a A socio-technical system that is used for online
function for simplification. learning and training.
Granularity: The relative size of a digital
object (with atomistic as the smallest size up to
modules to courses to degree programs).

274
 275

Chapter 17
Online Learning:
An Examination of Contexts in Corporate,
Higher Education, and K-12 Environments
Chris Allen Thomas
University of Pennsylvania, USA

Wendy M. Green
University of Pennsylvania, USA

Doug Lynch
University of Pennsylvania, USA

ABSTRACT
The internet and telecommunications technologies have redefined distance learning, while at the same
time led to increased access to students and an expanded breadth of subject offerings. For these and
other reasons, online learning has been embraced by a large number of corporate, higher education, and
K-12 institutions across the nation and globally, reaching billions of students. In order to understand the
relationship between technologies, course design and course delivery, we conducted a survey of content
designers and facilitators in higher education and corporate sectors. Additionally, we interviewed seven
learning leaders who represent organizations involved in online learning in these sectors, as well as
in K-12 education contexts. Results indicate that increased access is a primary strategic advantage of
online learning. Additionally, corporate and educational sectors tend to approach course design and
the choice of technologies in different ways.

INTRODUCTION programs, lifelong learning, and K-12 education.

The internet has revolutionized how we as a society
view distance education, its potential uses, and
its strategic value. Online learning has infiltrated
every learning environment—corporate, techni-
cal and vocational training, university degree
DOI: 10.4018/978-1-61692-906-0.ch017
This is remarkable, if one considers the fact that
internet access has only been widespread in society
for the past decade; the first web-based course was
introduced slightly earlier, in 1995 (Bates, 2001).
Despite the increase in online learning, there is
debate regarding the effectiveness of the overall
educational experience. It is not simply enough
to transfer the face-to-face learning experience to

an online environment and expect similar results.
Designers, developers, and facilitators have to
consider key areas in development and execution
of online learning. Zemsky and Massey (2004)
outline four levels of e-learning adoption. The
first “inject[s] new materials into teaching and
learning processes without changing the basic
mode of instruction” (p. 17) and can include the
use of PowerPoint and email. The second level of
adoption is the integration of learning management
systems which allows for alternative interactions
between students and professors. This can be fa-
cilitated through the use of discussion boards and
online testing and grading as well as distribution
of course materials. The third level allows for pro-
fessors to utilize and embed a variety of learning
objects such as video and simulations. The last
level results in reconfiguration of interactions and
course materials and requires both instructors and
learners to engage with each other in a variety of
ways. It can combine face-to-face, asynchronous
and synchronous technologies to shape a vastly
different learning environment.
BACKGROUND
A Distance Learning Revolution
The role of technologies in redefining distance
learning has been nothing short of revolutionary.
Several technological advances have allowed for
the development of highly sophisticated learning
environments. Clarke and Hermans (2001) note
that the revolution in bandwidth enabled a vast
expansion in corporate e-learning that has facili-
tated strategic alliances among top universities,
e-learning and technology companies to create
and deliver education and training globally to
corporate partners. Additionally, major corpo-
rations have invested heavily in e-learning to
develop their own global learning networks and
corporate universities. While Clarke and Hermans
(2001) argue that most corporate universities
276
Online Learning
were simply glorified names for traditional hu-
man resource development training programs,
some are fully-developed models that include
heavy involvement with knowledge management
technology, academic partnerships, and research
and development. General Motors University was
founded in 1999 with 11 functional colleges and
a steering committee called a Dean’s Council. In
2001, Motorola U had over 300 faculty and staff,
600 external educators, and 330 classes, with
100 of them offered online (Clarke & Hermans,
2001, p. 7).
Developing and Implementing
Effective Online Courses
Tallent-Runnels, Thomas, Lan, Cooper, Ahern,
Shaw, and Ling (2006) completed a review of
the research that in part examined the learning
environment. They found that the learning envi-
ronment was influenced by the learner character-
istics and was more favorable for those who were
comfortable using technology and were highly
self-motivated. Although Zemsky and Massey
(2004) argue the student population may not be
as interested in e-learning experiences as was
originally envisioned. Students are more likely
to be interested in specific types of computing
that include multi-media, self-presentation, and
communication. An additional hurdle to overcome
is the perception that online learning may not be
as effective as face-to-face encounters (Bouhnik,
Giat, & Sanderovitch, 2009).
A 2001 ASTD survey showed that nearly all
respondents who had taken an e-learning course
would take a similar course in the future, although
only 38% preferred the format to classroom in-
struction. Additionally, respondents overwhelm-
ingly preferred to take online courses during work
hours and at work, illustrating that employees like
e-learning, but do not want to complete work-
related coursework at home (ASTD 2001).
The creation and implementation of the online
learning experience is influenced by several fac-
Online Learning
tors, including the theoretical basis for design,
instructor behavior and student engagement. Re-
searchers argue that online learning can support a
variety of learning theories and is evidenced by the
types of activities that are built into the system. In
fact, most online courses “reflect, either purposely
or inadvertently, some model of learning” (Lin
& Hsieh, 2001, p. 378). Courses that integrate
significant student-to-student interactions are
constructivist in nature whereas courses that
have behaviorist or cognitivist foundations may
focus more on teacher-student or content-student
interactions (Anderson, 2003). Others suggest
that newer versions of online learning reflect a
strong constructivist undertone as they are more
focused on collaborative learning and knowledge
construction. However, in order to capitalize on the
collaborative nature of this learning, purposeful
and planned activities should be integrated into
the design (Garrison, 2009).
Despite the developers’ best intentions, it is
difficult for instructors to gauge the students’
level of involvement. Learners may engage with
the materials superficially and fail to experience
higher order thinking. Researchers (e g., Tenen-
baum, Naidu, Jegede, & Austin, 2001) argue that
increased effectiveness of the learning experi-
ence results from students experiencing higher
order thinking such as analysis, synthesis, and
evaluation of the course materials. Instructors
who engage students in higher order activities will
construct more effective learning environments.
Though the use of instructional strategies such as
advance organizers, simulation and role-playing,
and discussion, students can be engaged at higher
levels. In addition, setting up learning communi-
ties at the beginning of a course and expectations
of accountability, not only to the instructor but
to fellow students, can amplify the learning
experiences (Tallent-Runnels et al., 2006). The
inclusion of instructor and student feedback al-
lows for guidance and the opportunity to take into
account student needs and expectations (Zemsky
& Massey, 2004).
Faculty and instructors can shape the nature of
the interactions in an online experience and as a
result, amplify student engagement and learning.
The types of interactions are based on faculty
beliefs and underlying, if unstated, assumptions
about learning. Anderson (2003) argues the type
of online interaction that is incorporated into the
learning experience will effect the engagement
of learners. The model includes three types of
interactions—student-teacher, student-student,
and student-content. In order for the learning
environment to be effective, at least one of these
types of interactions must be present.
While instructors may find the learning envi-
ronment difficult to navigate as they lack direct
control over some of the materials, experiences,
and student responses (Tallent-Runnels et al.,
2006; Tennenbaum et al., 2001), these difficulties
may be circumvented if the instructors assume a
variety of administrative and informational roles in
the classroom. Often, facilitators view e-learning
as a “way to simplify their tasks, not to fundamen-
tally change how they teach their subjects” (Zem-
sky & Massey, 2004). This stance can be modified
if instructors take a multi-dimensional role in the
learning experiences. Facilitators who provide
assistance, guidance, and corrections facilitate
a more effective environment for their students.
Their levels of effectiveness may increase if they
have technical expertise, understand the learning
tools, and are aware of their learner populations
(Tallent-Runnels et al., 2006).
Technological issues are also problematic in
learning environments. Learners’ unfamiliarity
with certain technologies can result in increased
frustration and disengagement (Tenenbaum et al.,
2001). Learner satisfaction increases if they feel
they understand the technology and can control
their environment (Tallent-Runnels et al., 2006).
One way of increasing the amount of instructional
contact students have with facilitators or faculty
is the implementation of a call center. This al-
lows students to contact people who specialize
in technical issues and decreases the amount of
277

time instructors spend on non-academic instruc-
tion (Anderson, 2003). Students are not alone in
their frustration with technology as instructors
and faculty also experience difficulty using on-
line components. They often are daunted by the
availability of a wide-range of materials and do
not view their skill set as transferrable from one
application to another (Zemsky & Massey, 2004).
In 2001, Taylor argued that we were in the
fifth generation of distance learning. Bates (2005)
describes the first two generations of distance
learning as correspondence courses followed by
an integration of both print and broadcast media.
The second generation of was viewed as a scalable
model and increased the numbers of individuals
who engaged in these activities. The third gen-
eration of distance learning is knowledge-based,
post-industrial, and can be mass-produced. In this
generation, professionals as well as educators
were more likely to engage in learning as a way
to engage in continuing education and to gain
professional certifications (Bates, 2005). The
fourth generation incorporated the technologies
of internet access, interactive multimedia, and
computer mediated communication. The fifth
generation, which Taylor dubbed the “intelligent
flexible learning model” expanded the scope of
these three technologies, expanding to include
automated response systems and portal access
to institutional processes and resources (Taylor,
2001, p. 3).
Increasing Access
In a Sloan Consortium report, Allen and Seaman
(2007) discuss a 2006 survey that sought to un-
derstand why online education was strategically
necessary for the institutions that offered distance
learning. Approximately half of respondents saw
such offerings as important or very important to
the goal of reducing or containing costs. Far more
important to respondents, however, was the ability
to improve student access to education. About 75%
of respondents rated benefits of student access a
278
Online Learning
crucial component of their online strategy. This
represents a growing recognition in higher educa-
tion of the needs of populations of ‘nontraditional’
students, adult learners who do not fit into the
stereotypical category of pre-employment, unmar-
ried students who transition directly from high
school to college (Twigg, 2003), although Geith
and Vignare (2008) suggest that the perceived
benefit of serving nontraditional students is not
based in social justice but rather in the recogni-
tion that such students pay a premium for their
education, and many turn to for-profit universities
that offer a wide selection of online courses and
programs. This is mirrored in what Bates (2005)
describes as a movement away from all-inclusive
(Open University) access to a for-profit model.
Geith and Vignare (2008) suggest that the
growth of online learning is evidence of its impact
on accessibility to education. Bates (2005) argues
the advent of distance learning and the online
components resulted in increased access. Initially,
this occurred through the open universities whose
mission was and is to provide access to individuals
who may not be able to access education in more
traditional ways. This population encompasses
individuals who were not able to attend on-site
classes due to geographical constraints, work-
ers, and farmers (Bates, 2001). Bates argues that
“because of the very large student enrolments,
high fixed costs and low marginal costs, [open
universities] bring economies of scale to their
operation, resulting in an average cost well below
those of conventional campus-based institutions
or even dual-mode distance education operations”
(Bates, 2001, p. 21). According to Bates, a shift
has occurred in regard to open learning versus
online learning. The initial goal of online learning
was access and to remove barriers to learning. As
online learning transitions from public universities
to for profit adventures, the goal becomes more
focused on profitability than access (Bates, 2005).
Despite this key change in the mission, online
learning has and continues to provide increased
access to education for a variety of learners.
Online Learning
According to a survey conducted by the Pew
Internet for Life project,1 20 million adults have
taken at least one online course. Anderson (2004)
notes that online access has benefited lifelong
learners. For learners who are geographically
spread out, online programs can gather them
together in cost-effective programs that they
would not otherwise have access to. Access to
learning through online means is also growing
in the corporate sector—perhaps more quickly
than in academia. Schiffman, Vignare and Geith
(2007) report that 30% of corporate training is
available online.
Reducing Costs
Starting in 1999, thirty public and private colleges
and universities from across the United States
took part in a grant-funded project to redesign
instruction in ways that were compatible with
the strengths of online learning. In addition, each
higher education institution conducted detailed
cost analyses of their traditional and online offer-
ings. In reviewing the cost analyses, the Center
for Academic Transformation reported that all
institutions maintained or improved educational
outcomes while reducing costs. On average,
costs for online courses were reduced by 40%,
as compared with traditional courses, with one
college reporting a savings of 84% (Twigg, 2003).
Although Twigg (2003) does not report on how the
30 institutions reduced costs, Shrivastava (1999)
suggests that overall educational costs may be
reduced in a couple ways. In terms of educational
materials, costs can be reduced through access
to free or low cost online materials. By freeing
the institution from time and space constraints,
training can be delivered in situ when and where
needed—a kind of ‘lean’ education. For organi-
zations, the implementation of online learning
programs can offset the costs of travel to and from
training sites (Moller, Roshay, & Huett, 2008).
Another, more contentious area of cost re-
duction lies with the high compensation costs of
tenured faculty. According to Twigg (1994), 80%
of institutional costs come from salaries. Twigg
recognized that an educational model of online,
networked learning communities would have less
reliance on face-to-face instructional hours. Ashe
(2000) argues that tenured faculty can be replaced
with less costly part-time instructors, although
such an approach would likely significantly reduce
the quality of instructors, as well as contribute to
underemployment.
WHAT’S REALLY GOING
ON IN E-LEARNING?
The variety of online learning ideologies, tools,
and methodologies is enormous. Additionally, the
existence of corporate, higher education, adult
learning, and K-12 learning environments and
goals suggests that there would be a rich variation
in conceptualizations of online learning. In order
to understand e-learning, therefore, we decided
that it would be necessary to examine these four
learning industries. To achieve this purpose, we
conducted an online survey of e-learning facili-
tators and content designers. To complement the
data from the survey, a series of 30-45 minute
interviews was conducted with learning leaders
representing organizations that meet the needs of
these four environments.
SURVEY
In order to ascertain the perceptions of individuals
involved in the development and implementation
of online learning, we created a short web-based
survey and sent it out to K-12, higher education,
and corporate online learning organizations. In
addition, the survey web link was posted on sev-
eral web-sites where those who work in online
learning formats visit. The questionnaire consisted
of 18 multiple choice and short-answer questions
grouped into three sections. The first section of the
279

survey asked for organizational information, in-
cluding the number of learners served. The second
area focused on current online learning practices
such as the percentage of learning delivered in
online formats and the types of tools utilized.
The final section solicited opinions regarding
the strategic benefit of implementing to online
learning as well as perceived barriers and costs.
Level of Response
In total, we received 267 responses. Unfortunately,
only 4.5 percent of our respondents worked in
a K-12 setting. As a result, we will not include
their responses in this summary and will focus on
higher education respondents (HER) and work-
based respondents (WBR) giving us a total of 255
responses. Out of the 255 responses, 120 were
situated in higher education and 135 in work-
based environments.
Providers, Purposes, and
Consumers of Online Learning
Not surprisingly, 96% of WBR indicated learning
was focused primarily on increasing work-related
skills and competencies. Forty-five percent of HER
also indicated a focus on work-related curricula,
suggesting that online formats in higher educa-
tion frequently serve vocational programs. This
is augmented by the fact that adult learners (those
who are over 21) were by far the most widely
served populations; 98% of WBR respondents and
78% of HER indicated a focus on adult learner
populations. This might reflect a perception that
online learning is a way to increase access to
non-traditional students and the perception that
such students are interested in work-based and
skills-oriented learning experiences (Jongbloed,
2002; Owen, Lewis, Ritchie, Chappele, Jones,
Simon, & Webb, 2009). The respondents reported
that on average, 37% of the learning experiences
they offer occur online.
280
Online Learning
The organizations and institutions represented
by individual respondents are fairly large in
scope with the mean number of 25,000 individual
learners, while corporate organizations served on
average 7,000 more learners than higher educa-
tion institutions. These numbers reflect a recent
report prepared for the Sloan Consortium which
indicates that larger institutions continue to be
the most significant providers of online educa-
tion – a result not only due to their size but also
to their early adoption of online learning (Allen
& Seaman, 2007). Allen and Seaman argue that
there is a strong correlation between the size of
the institution and the number of online learners.
Strategic Value of Online Learning
A large majority of HER and WBR (aggregate
total, 90%) indicated the initial purpose of creating
online learning environments was to serve more
geographically-distributed populations, with HER
slightly higher in this regard. Our results confirm
Sloan Consortium findings that improving student
access is ranked as the top priority and decreasing
costs is viewed as less important (Allen & Seaman,
2007). Although two-thirds of total respondents
indicated that they believed entrance into online
learning would reduce costs, the numbers varied
significantly when disaggregated. Forty-five
percent of HER viewed online learning as a way
to decrease costs as compared to 82% of WBR.
Interestingly, while 80% of WBR viewed online
learning as a way to optimize the utilization
of organizational resources, only 43% of their
counterparts in higher education held the same
goal. Higher education respondents viewed online
learning as a way to expand their continuing and
professional education programs. Again, these
results confirm the Sloan report that schools are
focusing on increasing their continuing education
studies and view online learning as an important
component (Allen & Seaman, 2007).
Online Learning
Barriers to Online Learning
Approximately 30% of both groups felt there
were no barriers to the implementation of online
learning. Of those who did identify barriers, most
(50% of HER and 62% of WBR) felt that online
learning outcomes are perceived to be of less value
than face-to-face instruction. In higher education,
lack of instructor support was viewed as a barrier
to implementing online learning (40%), but was
only recognized as a barrier by 8% of WBR. HER
respondents (25%) reported lower retention rates
for online courses as a barrier to implementation
or continuation of programs, but only 11% of
WBR considered it a barrier . Twenty-one per-
cent of respondents (no statistically significant
difference between higher education and work)
felt that online learning was too costly to develop.
Interestingly, according to WBR, the cost of one
hour of online learning content was nearly five
times higher than in higher education ($6577 and
$1354, respectively).
Learning Design
Our survey examined the responsibility for design
of online learning experiences. In addition, we
also wanted to discover whether course designers
drew upon learning theories during this process.
A total of 73% of the respondents reported that
they had instructional designers on staff, and 69%
had full time online learning facilitators. However,
when this was disaggregated for higher education
and work-based respondents, slightly over half
(53%) of HER reported they had instructional
designers, while more than four-fifths (84%) of
WBR employed instructional designers. A total
of 61% of all the respondents reported they felt
a dominant learning theory (e.g., cognitivist, be-
haviorist, or social learning theories) underpinned
the development of online learning experiences.
Asked whether a particular learning theory was
evident in the final product, results were compa-
rable among HER and WBR respondents (58%
and 55%, respectively), while about a third of
each group reported that they were uncertain of
evidence of a learning theory in course design.
Additionally, about a third of online learning de-
livered through work is outsourced, while a mere
5% is outsourced in higher education.
Outcomes
Respondents were asked to forced-rank anticipated
outcomes of online learning from most to least
important. Interestingly, both HER and WBR re-
spondents ranked the most important outcome as
enjoyment and personal satisfaction. Higher edu-
cation respondents reported the next two essential
outcomes as employment licensing/certification
and meeting continuing education requirements.
For WBR, meeting continuing education require-
ments was seen as more important than licensing
and certification. It may be in most cases that
licensing/certification is a personal, pre-service
responsibility, while furtherance of degree goals
is a benefit provided by the employing institution.
Surprising, increase in knowledge of subject mat-
ter was ranked lowest among desired outcomes
in both groups. Tying for least important among
WBR respondents was increasing targeted skills,
suggesting that online learning is not a primary
means for skills development. This may be a
reflection of an overall perception that online
courses may not be the most effective way to
teach specific skill sets.
The respondents were asked to rank how they
evaluate success within their online courses. By
far, the most utilized method was course evaluation
(75% of respondents). However, evaluations were
significantly more important in higher education
(83%) than at work (69%). Course completion was
the second highest indicator for success, at 71%.
Again, when the numbers were disaggregated,
the difference was statistically significant, with
65% and 76% for higher education and work,
respectively. Testing was the third most utilized
measurement tool with 2/3rds of both groups
281

indicating it was used as a measure of success
for online learning. Performance evaluations
were also important, but significantly more so
in work (64% of WBR) than in higher education
(50% of HER).
Technologies
Turning to technologies adopted for online learn-
ing, we found that learning management systems
had by far the greatest usage at 85%, with no
statistically significant difference between higher
education and work. For asynchronous learning,
self-contained modules were frequently used in
higher education and at work, with average use
55% and 58%, respectively. Other than learning
management systems, the only learning modal-
ity relied on more heavily in higher education
was the use of asynchronous text (e.g., threaded
discussions, blog posts, and the like). At work,
synchronous text, social media, both synchronous
and asynchronous audio and video, and games/
simulations were all used more frequently than in
higher education, with all but asynchronous video
showing a statistically-significant difference.
INTERVIEWS
To help contextualize the survey data we col-
lected, we identified and contacted 10 leaders
involved in online education for K-12, higher
education, and corporate learning. Of these, 7
agreed to be interviewed. The interviews lasted
from 25-55 minutes in length and the interview
questions were roughly the same as the survey,
but interviewees had the opportunity to expand
their answers considerably. Although the people
we interviewed collectively can provide insight
into online learning for thousands of organiza-
tions and millions of learners, we are cautious
about generalizing these strategic observations to
all organizations, since we spoke with a limited
number of individuals.
282
Online Learning
Barriers to Online Learning
In corporate contexts, one barrier to online learning
that has largely disappeared is cost. In the past,
it was prohibitively expensive to create online
learning, but with technologies such as SCORM
(Sharable Content Object Reference Model), this
is no longer the case. With SCORM, information
can be converted into an online course ready for
consumption within a matter of hours. On the other
hand, such technologies do not by themselves lead
to rich or enjoyable online learning environments,
which are more expensive and time consuming to
develop. Internet courses may tend to be highly
functional and focused on the transmission of
information, and at least in some cases, are not
interesting or particularly liked by employees.
Some companies are still in the early stages
of internet-based learning. One barrier to its
utilization is leadership buy-in, or acceptance of
the online learning modalities. Employees may
not have access to a computer at work or home to
access courses, and may not want to participate
in required work training during off hours even
if they do have their own computers. Regional
managers may need to take the initiative to ensure
electronic learning cafes or provide computer
access to employees in the workplace. Another
critical barrier to online learning is language.
Multinational companies operating in countries
across the globe may have thousands (or tens of
thousands) of employees that speak dozens of
languages even if the company has an official
or standard common corporate language (which
in many cases is English). Course materials may
have to be translated into dozens of other lan-
guages, and costs of high quality translation can
be considerable.
In higher education, the primary barriers to
online learning may be faculty buy-in and satis-
faction with course quality. In higher education,
the faculty tends to have a great deal of status and
classroom presence. The professor is the “sage
on the stage” in a bricks and mortar classroom,
Online Learning
while online environments tend to favor an ap-
proach that requires them to be more of a “guide
on the side.” Even when faculty are interested in
and encourage online learning, it may be the case
that the lack the requisite training and skills to
effectively design and deliver it. Course quality,
as compared to face-to-face instruction is an issue
for the instructor, student, and school.
Another barrier is that schools may not effec-
tively market their online offerings to potential
students outside the schools’ geographical reach,
thus not achieving the student enrollment needed
to make a course viable. Cost—especially start-
up cost—can be a barrier. Maintaining an online
program may not be very expensive, but initial,
or sunk, costs may be high, leading to “sticker
shock,” as one of our interviewees put it.
In K-12 education, cost is a barrier for smaller
schools, which do not have the resources to design
and deliver online courses. Additionally, they
may not have a sufficient number of students to
justify the expense. Such schools can buy courses
or place students into courses run by other com-
panies in order to reduce costs. As with higher
education, lack of teacher buy-in or the lack of
teacher training can be barriers, as well. Teachers
need professional development to engage in online
teaching. Schools are focusing on content and tests,
and they may not prioritize this kind of teacher
development. Additionally, few universities offer
degree programs in education that focus on online
learning. The lack of university involvement in
training instructors for online environments is
sorely needed.
Public policy in the form of governmental ac-
ceptance of online education for K-12 populations
continues to be a barrier. Forty-four states have
policies that allow for online learning. Of those,
some limit it. The northeastern states are falling
behind in accepting online learning—NY, NJ,
DE (which cut funding to its program), RI, VT,
ME (begins fall of 2010) currently restrict online
learning, according to a spokesperson from The
International Association for K-12 Learning On-
line, one of our interviewees. Virtual High School
is based in MA, but the state government offers
few opportunities for students to attend. Only
26 states allow for a student to take a full online
curriculum—up from 18 the year before. Teacher
reciprocity laws are also barriers. Right now, most
states require their own teacher certification. Since
virtual classrooms cross state borders, a teacher
may have to be certified in every state that has
students in the course. Very few states offer full
reciprocity for teachers certified in other states.
DISCUSSION AND FUTURE TRENDS
Internet-based learning serves many functions
across many industries. It fulfills needs in educa-
tion, training and development, certification and
documentation, and lifelong professional and
personal development. In this section, we discuss
the research and future directions of online learn-
ing contexts, taxonomy, learning technologies,
learner populations, and access.
Distance Learning
There has been a lack of consensus with the use of
terms in technology-enhanced learning—particu-
larly online learning. According to some research-
ers, distance learning is generally accepted as the
precursor to the current term ‘online learning’,
although there are dissenting voices who argue
that online education “is a direction descendent
of instructional technology and computer-assisted
instruction” (Garrison, 2009; Larremendy-Joerns
& Leinhardt, 2006). This paper takes the view that
distance learning is simply learning that is done
over a distance, separating learners from each other
or from an instructor or facilitator, and it has been
around for centuries. This method was initially
focused on providing educational experiences to
individuals who were not centrally located within
one geographical location. It enabled land grant
institutions such as Penn State University and
283

the University of Wisconsin to provide services
to all members of their states–a core element of
their missions (Bates, 2001). Through the use of
correspondence (initially by mail), individuals
were able to access a variety of educational and
training programming (Bates, 2005; Tallent-
Runnels, 2003).
Web-based learning includes any delivery that
occurs via the internet but may not be solely offered
online. When it is fully online, it is synonymous
with online learning. Hybrid or blended learning
integrates face-to-face instruction with web-based
learning. A liberal definition of e-learning is that
it refers to any learning that has digital compo-
nents which may or may not be integrated in a
traditional classroom setting (Bates, 2001; Zemsky
& Massey, 2004). Most people we have spoken
to take e-learning to be synonymous with web-
based or online learning. In corporate contexts,
the trend may be moving toward asynchronous
learning using tools to automate the process of
developing content. The trend in education seems
to be moving toward a blended approach—either
blending online and classroom-based learning,
or blending synchronous and asynchronous ap-
proaches within online learning.
Online Learning in Corporate
and Educational Contexts
Before the turn of the century, Hanna (1998) iden-
tified and examined seven models of education
that incorporated online learning, some of which
were in their infancy. Of the seven models, all
continue to exist and exert significant influence
on the landscape of education mediated through
internet and computer technology. Models for
higher education and corporate learning identified
by Hanna (1998) are:
• The extended traditional university, act-
ing as a parent organization sponsoring
and supporting a variety of entrepreneurial
educational programs.
284
Online Learning
• For-profit adult-centered universities,
such as the University of Phoenix, National
University, and ITT
• Distance education/technology-based
universities are common globally, espe-
cially in countries where traditional uni-
versities have insufficient capacity to serve
the population or in areas where there is
a large rural population. This is an exten-
sion of the ‘correspondence universities’
of the 20th century, where work was com-
pleted and sent through the mail. Modern
distance education universities have em-
braced e-learning as a replacement tech-
nology and have expanded their reach.
Open Universities have been around since
the first one opened in the United Kingdom
in 1969. Today, dozens of open universi-
ties can be found on every continent.
Some serve student populations above one
million.
• Corporate universities have been increas-
ing in popularity since the 1980s. The cor-
porate university serves the learning needs
of sponsoring corporations, such as Jet Blue
University and McDonald’s Hamburger
University. Today, most fortune 500 com-
panies have corporate universities, and
many of these embrace internet-mediated
distance learning to serve corporate popu-
lations that are distributed globally. While
very few corporate universities offered
accredited course work in 1998, nearly a
decade later this has changed dramatically.
• University/industry strategic alliances
are alternatives to an independent corpo-
rate university. Forming partnerships with
universities to develop and/or deliver pro-
grams to serve corporate learning needs
has an additional benefit in that some of
these programs are accredited and degreed.
Increasingly, business schools such as
Wharton have developed a wide range of
Online Learning
short-term executive education programs
for corporate clients worldwide.
• Degree/certification competency-based
universities are colleges that specialize in
certification for specific skills in a range
of professions. Many of these focus on the
skills needed to operate software and hard-
ware technologies, and e-learning is an in-
tegral part of such programs.
• Global multinational universities are
still relatively uncommon, but as global
demand for education—and demand for
a ‘global’ education continues to increase,
many have thrived (Citation, additional
info).
These different models can be—and frequently
are—blended. For instance, corporate univer-
sities are often joint ventures with junior col-
leges, universities, or private, for-profit colleges
(Meister, 2000). Other models are emerging that
take advantage of social networking and shared
resources. The Corporate University Xchange is
dedicated to serving the corporate world through
building learning networks among organizations
and executives, sharing knowledge, and providing
access to research and tools.2
In K-12, if the school or district is sufficiently
large or has available resources and institutional
support, they may develop and deliver courses
organically. There are several virtual high schools
in operation throughout the country. Furthermore,
an even larger number of cyber charter schools
exist in states across the United States, where
laws permit.
But for many institutions, sunk costs in devel-
opment of online programs are prohibitive, the
institutions lack the human resources to deliver
programs, or the number of students who benefit
is too small to justify development and delivery
costs. However, the schools may want to expand
the breadth of offerings in the interests of their
student needs. In such cases, many of these insti-
tutions turn to online course brokerages—com-
panies who serve the long tail of online learning
by linking online courses and institutional buyers.
Schools may purchase the content, or they may
purchase both content and delivery, depending on
the particular needs of the school. Of course, in
such cases, schools may have little or no control
over the quality of learning. Additionally, this
approach uses up financial resources, but the
school does not develop any “equity” in online
learning capabilities.
Dual-Mode
Bates (2001) refers to institutions that offer both
distance and on-site learning as “dual-mode,”
while those that offer only distance education
are “single-mode” institutions. Dual-mode, or
dual-sector, refers most generally to a focus on
both academic and vocational learning in higher
education intuitions (Jongbloed, 2002). Online
learning technologies have not necessarily re-
sulted in ideal approaches to course design and
have resulted in myriad online experiences that
have varying degrees of effectiveness. In addition,
a lack of standardization has created problems
with sustainability beyond the initial adopters,
and many course designs have been one-offs
(Zemsky & Massey, 2004). In fact, Zemsky and
Massey argue, e-learning has failed to deliver a
promised “revolution in pedagogy” through the
integration of learning theories and new tech-
nologies. However, others argue that e-learning
has not been widely integrated beyond the early
adopters (Bates, 2001).
Dual-mode institutions tend to be early adopt-
ers of online learning, as it suits the needs of adult
and non-traditional learners who are often not able
to attend full-time programs where classroom
presence is required (Inglis, 2008), but traditional
universities have seen distance education—and
hence, the vocational topics it tends to serve—as of
secondary value to their academic mission (Ding,
1999). Still, by the academic year 2000-2001,
89% of U.S.-based 2- and 4-year public educa-
285

tion institutions were providing distance learning
courses with an enrollment of 2,876,000. The vast
majority of these offerings were in undergradu-
ate programs. Out of these courses, 43% were
delivered over the internet using synchronous,
computer based instruction (Tallent-Runnels et al,
2006, p. 93). These numbers (now near a decade
old) reflect a high degree of adoption to online
learning across sectors and industries; however,
it has not been without difficulty. Despite its
early promise, a “pace cohort-based [approach]
continues to be the norm of both traditional and
dual-mode universities” (Annard, 2007), as many
institutions of learning have not embraced online
formats, and many others have been slow to adopt
new technologies. In fact, researchers argue there
hasn’t been significant change in instructor peda-
gogy as instructors, teachers, and professors tend
to re-create the learning environments in which
they were taught (Zemsky & Massey, 2004). The
integration of e-learning has been used to enhance
or supplement the current model and some argue,
has not resulted in pedagogical change (Bates,
2001; Zemsky & Massey, 2004). Our survey results
indicate that in 2009, lack of faculty buy-in, lack
of clear pedagogical tie-in to learning theories,
and slow adoption in higher education of online
learning modalities continue to be problems. It
is possible that pedagogical changes will occur
sometime in the future as integration of learning
technologies improves.
The Continuing Need for
Standardization
It is no surprise that the myriad ways scholars and
practitioners discuss and approach online learn-
ing complicates any evaluation of online learn-
ing in all its facets. In several of our interviews,
learning leaders discussed language issues. One
interviewee, whose organization works in all
sectors of online learning, notes that because the
learning environments are fundamentally differ-
ent, there is no common understanding of topics
286
Online Learning
such as “instructional hours,” “course length,” or
“course development costs.” Even the definition
of a course does not translate well across contexts.
Another interviewee notes that her organization
is involved in developing a taxonomy and set of
standards for K-12 online learning. There is also
conflict between theory and practice. Corporate
practitioners see little value in the approach of
academic leaders who focus on the relationship be-
tween learning theories, pedagogical approaches,
and course design. This does not mean that the
perspectives are unimportant. But it does mean
that more work must be done to bridge gaps in
the discourses among work-based and education-
based online learning, as well as among K-12 and
higher education.
Learning Technologies and Their
Roles in Online Learning
There are several components to the overall design
and implementation of online learning, and course
designers may integrate one or many technologies
in offerings. The term Asynchronous learning
tools refers to technologies that allow individuals
to deliver or access learning and information at
any time. Such tools allow learners and facilita-
tors to be at a temporal distance from each other.
Before the invention of television and radio, all
distance learning was asynchronous, relying on
mail or some other slow transmission of learning
materials. In online environments, asynchronous
learning tools include the use of email, discussion
boards, threaded discussions, blog posts, video and
text (Bouhnik, Giat, Sanderovitch, 2009). Asyn-
chronous tools have a number of benefits. They
allow learners to work at their own pace. They
may encourage more in-depth responses among
learners and between learners and facilitators.
Additionally, it allows learners to access materi-
als, take tests, and respond to others in ways that
do not require simultaneous co-presence. Finally,
the use of asynchronous tools can provide just-in-
time learning and can be adapted to the particular
Online Learning
organizational or learner needs (Bouhnik, Giat,
& Sanderovitch, 2009).
Synchronous tools for distance learning make
it possible for learners to collect in a virtual space
at the same time through the use of tools such as
webinars, videoconferencing, virtual classrooms,
live radio broadcasts, chats (including keyboard-
ing), and some online games. These tools have the
advantage that they allow for immediate feedback.
Technologies such as the radio and telephone have
allowed for the possibility of synchronous distance
learning throughout the 20th century (but even the
telegraph or any long-distance signal language
made it possible. Synchronous distance learning
requires a geographic separation and a temporal
co-presence. Depending on the geographic disper-
sion of participants, a synchronous format may
be exceedingly difficult due to time differences
across the globe.
The role of synchronous and asynchronous
technologies in online learning may be a divid-
ing line between accepted corporate and higher
education models. In interviews, we discerned
that compliance and documentation were the
most salient outcome goals of much corporate
online learning. These can and are often managed
through asynchronous technologies and the use of
a content management system such as SCORM,
which quickly and cheaply converts documents
into lessons. If institutions feel that it is too costly
or difficult to implement quality online learning,
they may only use asynchronous tools but it also
limits the type of learning that is being utilized.
One drawback is that the products and courses
designed in this way may not be well-liked by
learners. Another drawback is that it is not clear
what, if any, is the relationship between the in-
tervention and subsequent changes in behavior,
especially when compliance and documentation
are the only outcome measures.
On the other hand, educational institutions
often avoid a wholly asynchronous course. Faculty
support may be contingent upon maintaining a
certain degree of synchronous interaction between
faculty and students, as well as among students.
Leaving behind what works well in classroom-
based learning is not an option to pursue in the
development of curricula, according to one of
our interviewees, who scrapped the online learn-
ing program at his institution, a Tier-1 research
institution. Neither can an online program rely
wholly on synchronous technologies. The Sloan-
Consortium, which provides seed money for the
development of online curricula and programs,
will not fund a wholly synchronous online course
because it does not match the desires or lifestyle
needs of many learners.
Learner Populations
Much literature and even more anecdotal evidence
suggests that individuals who access online learn-
ing may differ from those who are considered to
be traditional students. They are referenced in the
research as “older learner” (Tenenbaum, Naidu,
Jegede, & Austin, 2001), lifelong learner (Bates,
2001) and adult learner in others (Snyder, 2009).
Adult learners tend to be older, engaged in work-
place activities, and have their time spread across
a variety of activities in which school may be a
small part (Bates, 2001). As such, they may engage
in online learning for a variety of purposes, such
as increasing knowledge and skills or complet-
ing degrees or professional certifications as well
as the specific skills necessary in the knowledge
economy (Bates, 2001). These learners bring to
the classroom experiences and expectations of
learning that manifest themselves within the on-
line classrooms. Not only is content knowledge
valued, but there is an expectation of measurement
regarding what they can do with this knowledge.
Although adult learners may be self-motivated and
self-directed, there are special considerations for
the type of learning they expect and are willing to
engage in. In addition, if the learners do not have
the same levels of motivation and self-direction,
regardless of their age or experience, additional
supports might need to be in place (Garrison,
287

2009). Online learning may serve the needs of
these students in a more effective manner. Given
the responsibilities of many learners, the ability
to work asynchronously, from any location, and
on their own time frame provides flexibility that
enables them to complete coursework on their
own schedule (Bouhnik, Giat, & Sanderovitch,
2009; Lin & Hsieh, 2001).
With regards to corporate populations, online
learning is not merely a means to serve employee
populations, but also to serve all stakeholder
groups. For instance, the corporate learning leaders
we interviewed both acknowledged that they serve
populations far beyond their employees, to include
suppliers, distributors, joint partners, merchants,
and consumers. In such cases, it is impossible to
determine the size of the learner population that
an intervention is intended to serve. However,
with tracking technologies, it is easy to determine
the number of learners that have been served. An
organization’s responsibility with regard to the
development and delivery of learning is not so
clear cut. But with stakeholder analysis, it may
be easier to determine who an organization has
access to and whether the organization would
benefit from engaging in learning activities.
Access as the Primary Strategic
Value of Online Learning
For three of the organizational leaders we inter-
viewed, online learning is the central purpose of
the organization’s existence. For all organiza-
tions, online formats carried pragmatic value.
The most salient forms of strategic value were
related to access.
For globally-dispersed corporate populations,
online learning adds value by being accessible
anywhere and anywhen. The learning leaders of
both multinational corporations we interviewed
noted that their respective organizations operated
in countries and regions throughout the world, with
employees on every continent. In addition, the
extended network of each corporation—suppliers,
288
Online Learning
distributors, contractors, clients, and consum-
ers—were served by corporate learning networks.
In the case of higher education, access and
quality are two issues that tend to be considered
hand-in-hand. Online learning, as a form of
distance learning, can offer a college expanded
reach to deliver courses to nationally and inter-
nationally distributed populations. In addition,
adult learners who have careers and/or families
may find they have little time or opportunity to
enroll in a traditional, feet on the ground, aca-
demic program. For these students, a program
that offers online courses can give them access
to university degree programs they would not
otherwise have. Embracing online formats can be
a life preserver for some schools that have been
experiencing declining enrollment rates, but is far
less important for large, established universities
where enrollment is stable or growing. Smaller
schools may find it difficult to compete with larger,
resource and faculty rich institutions, particularly
when offering the same degree. Online learning
can allow a school to embrace niche markets by
offering degree programs that no other institu-
tion in the region is offering. But it does not do a
service to the school to become associated with
the delivery of coursework that is sub-standard.
Online learning should be of quality comparable
to or better than the traditional classroom, not just
in the work produced but also in the interactions
the students and professors enjoy.
In K-12 education, access is also a critical is-
sue. Many schools across the country simply do
not have the funds, the resources, or a sufficient
number of students to provide the breadth of
learning they would like to offer. In areas where
there are teacher shortages, such as in rural and
small districts, can benefit from online learning.
Some schools and organizations initially embraced
online learning as a means to expand the breadth of
their offerings—particularly among high schools
in relation to test preparation, some foreign lan-
guages, and advanced placement coursework.
Online courses can aggregate students from
Online Learning
different schools, filling up a course to make it
economically viable to offer, though the school
actually gives up some of its control if it does
not provide the instructor or design the course.
However, with access to a virtual smorgasbord
of course offerings, schools can provide access
to whatever learning is appropriate for and useful
to the student.
Access to quality and useful education is more
than simply increasing the breadth of courses
or expanding geographical reach. For instance,
students who have failed a required course may
encounter the same barriers to success if they are
required to take the same course with the same
teacher, materials, and teaching methodology.
With access to online learning, students can take
a different course, with different teacher and dif-
ferent learning modalities to increase their chance
of successfully passing the course. Additionally,
access to online modalities provides students in
small, rural, or economically-depressed urban
districts can benefit from online learning because
it gives them access to learning modalities that
will enhance their computer skills development
and allow them to better compete later on for jobs
that require such skills.
Finally, access can be conceptualized in terms
of policy. The increasing acceptance of online
learning among K-12 educational institutions
has put pressure on governmental institutions to
improve access to computers. For instance, schools
and governments across the U.S. are embracing
one-to-one laptop/notebook computer initiatives
that ensure each teacher and student has computer
and internet access. The one-to-one initiative is
being carried out in countries throughout the
world, as well.
CONCLUSION
For each sector discussed in this paper—higher
education, corporate learning, and K-12 educa-
tion—online learning has offered a means for in-
creasing access. Access links learners to programs
and instructors, but it also increases the breadth of
available knowledge and the diversity of students.
But access alone cannot make online learning
engaging or successful. To enhance engagement,
program designers have available to them a wide
variety of synchronous and asynchronous tools,
as well as learning management and content
management systems to help create, organize
and deliver material. Because people learn differ-
ently, increasing access must necessarily include
expanding the variety of enlisted technologies. Ad-
ditionally, the value of learner interaction should
not be underestimated and can make the difference
between a learning experience that is engaging and
one that must be endured. A program’s success is
inextricably linked to outcomes. This means that
outcomes must be thoughtfully considered, and
the program should be designed in a way that ef-
fectively leads to those outcomes. The situation
is further complicated when students, facilitators,
and course designers have never met and have
little to no interaction, even during the delivery
of an online learning program. However, one of
the greatest benefits of the internet is its ability to
facilitate collaboration among stakeholders who
are dispersed over great distances or physically
incapable of meeting. We would like to see more
of this spirit of collaboration in the development
of online learning.
REFERENCES
Allen, I. E., & Seaman, J. (2007). Online nation:
Five years of growth in online learning. Needham,
MA: Sloan Consortium.
Anderson, T. (2003). Getting the mix right again:
An updated and theoretical rationale for interac-
tion. The International Review of Research in
Open and Distance Learning, 4, 2. Retrieved
November 9, 2009, from http://www.irrodl.org/
index.php/irrodl/article/view/149/230.
289

Anderson, T. (2004). Toward a theory of online
learning. In T. Anderson & F. Elloumi (Eds),
Theory and practice of online learning (pp. 33-60).
Athabasca, AB: Athabasca University. Retrieved
October 15, 2009, from: http://cde.athabascau.ca/
online_book/pdf/TPOL_chp02.pdf
Annad, D. (2007). Reorganizing universities for
the information age. International Review of Re-
search in Open and Distance Learning, 8(3), 1–9.
Ashe, E. (2000). Digital dilemma: issues of ac-
cess, cost, and quality in media-enhanced and
distance education. Higher Education Reports,
27(5), 1–120.
Bates, T. (2001). National strategies for e-learning
in post-secondary education and training. Pub-
lished in the fundamentals for educational plan-
ning, number 70, UNESCO, 1-135.
Bates, T. (2005). Technology, e-learning and
distance education. New York: Routledge.
Bouhnik, D., Giat, Y., & Sanderovitch, Y. (2009).
Asynchronous learning sources in a high-tech orga-
nization. Journal of Workplace Learning, 21(25),
416–430. doi:10.1108/13665620910966811
Clarke, T., & Hermans, A. (2001). Corporate de-
velopments and strategic alliances in e-learning.
Education + Training, 43(4/5), 256-267.
Ding, X. (1999). Distance education in China
. In Harry, K. (Ed.), Higher education through
open and distance learning (pp. 176–189). New
York: Routledge.
Garrision, R. (2009). Implications of online learn-
ing for the conceptual development and practice
of distance education. Journal of Distance Educa-
tion, 23(2), 93–104.
Geith, C., & Vignare, K. (2008). Access to edu-
cation with online learning and open educational
resources: Can they close the gap? Asynchronous
Learning Networks, 12(1), 22.
290
Online Learning
Hanna, D. E. (1998). Higher education in an era
of digital competition: Emerging organizational
models. JALN, 2(1), 66–95.
Inglis, A. (2008). Costs and quality of online learn-
ing. In W. J. Bramble & S. Panda (Eds.), Economics
of distance and online learning: theory, practice,
and research (132-147). New York: Routledge.
Jongbloed, B. (2002). Lifelong learning: impli-
cations for institutions. Higher Education, 44,
413–431. doi:10.1023/A:1019825803857
Larremendy-Joerns, J., & Leinhardt, G. (2006).
Going the distance with online education. Re-
view of Educational Research, 76, 567–607.
doi:10.3102/00346543076004567
Lin, B., & Hsieh, C. (2001). Web-based teaching
and learner control: a research review. Computers
& Education, 37, 377–386. doi:10.1016/S0360-
1315(01)00060-4
Meister, J. (2000). Ten steps to creating a corpo-
rate university . In Cortada, J. W., & Woods, J.
A. (Eds.), The knowledge management yearbook
2000-2001 (pp. 180–188). Oxford: Butterworth,
Heinemann.
Moller, L., Foshay, W., & Huett, J. (2008). Impli-
cations for instructional design on the potential of
the web. TechTrends, 52(3), 70–75. doi:10.1007/
s11528-008-0158-5
Owen, J., Lewis, M., Ritchie, L., Chapple, F.,
Jones, G., Warren, S., & Webb, S. (2009). Fit-
ting in or cooling out?: Vocational learners in a
traditional university, notes towards a research
methodology. Paper presented for European
Society for Research on the Education of Adults
(ESREA) Access, Learning Careers and Identi-
ties Network Conference: 2008, Seville, Spain.
Retrieved November 17, 2009, from http://
www2.warwick.ac.uk/study/cll/esrea/abstracts/
owen_et_al_paper.pdf.
Online Learning
Paradise, A. (2007). State of the industry report
2007. Alexandria, VA: ASTD Press.
Schiffman, S., Vignare, K., & Geith, C. (2007).
Why do institutions pursue online learning?
Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks,
11(2), 61–71.
Shrivastava, P. (1999). Management classes
as online learning communities. Journal of
Management Education, 23(6), 691–702.
doi:10.1177/105256299902300607
Snyder, M. M. (2009). Instructional-design theory
to guide the creation of online learning communi-
ties for adults. TechTrends, 53(1), 48–56.
Tallent-Runnels, M., Thomas, J., Lan, W., Coo-
per, S., Ahern, T., Shaw, S., & Liu, X. (2006).
Teaching courses online: a review of the research.
Review of Educational Research, 76(1), 93–135.
doi:10.3102/00346543076001093
Taylor, J. (2001). Fifth generation distance educa-
tion. Higher Education Series, Report 40, 8.Twigg,
C. A. (2003/September/October). Improving
learning and reducing costs: New models for
online learning. Educational Review, 8, 29–38.
Twigg, C. (1994/November/Devember). National
learning infrastructure, Part 3. Educom Review,
1-5.
Zemsky, R., & Massey, W. (2004b). Why the e-
learning boom went bust. The Chronicle of Higher
Education. The Chronicle Review 50, 44, b-6.
Zemsky, R., & Massy, W. (2004a). Thwarted
innovation. A Learning Alliance Report, 1-76.
KEY TERMS AND DEFINITIONS
Asynchronous Learning Tools: Asynchro-
nous learning tools include any learning technolo-
gies that facilitate learning that does not occur
synchronously. Instructors deliver and students
access learning at their own pace or at their own
conveniences, and they do not directly interact in
the learning environment. Most online learning
technologies facilitate asynchronous learning—
e.g., wikis, threaded discussions, podcasts, and
any downloadable materials.
Blended Learning: As the name implies, it is a
blend of styles. Traditionally, blended (or hybrid)
learning has described content that is delivered
in both online and face-to-face formats. Blended
learning can also describe the use of a variety of
synchronous and asynchronous learning formats
and tools.
Corporate University: A corporate university
is the strategic tool of a corporation that is designed
to accomplish goals through the development and
delivery of learning important to the organization.
This is accomplished through a variety of means,
often including partnerships with institutions of
higher education. Corporate universities began to
be popular in the 1980s and early 1990s. By the
21st century, over 2,000 corporations had their
own universities.
Cyber Charter School: A growing trend in
the United States, a number of charter schools
deliver their content mostly or completely online.
Not all states allow cyber charters as of yet, but
the trend is growing quickly. Washington State
boasts 10 such schools.
Dual-Mode Institution: Educational institu-
tions that offer both distance and on-site learning.
These institutions specialize in blended learning
approaches.
Open Universities: The first Open Univer-
sity began as a distance education institution in
England in 1969, long before the advent of online
learning. Today, there are dozens of Open Univer-
sities across the globe, with a combined student
population of tens of millions. Open University
of China has 2.7 million students.
SCORM: Standing for “Sharable Content
Object Reference Model,” SCORM is a collection
of standards for learning delivered through the
internet. SCORM protocols perform functions of
291
 Online Learning

a learning management system, such as defining
communication in the run-time environment. It
also defines how content can be packaged and de-
livered. Developed in collaboration across public
and private sectors, SCORM was created as part of
the Advanced Distributed Learning (ADL) Initia-
tive, which was created by executive order under
President Clinton. SCORM-compliant content
has been adopted as the de facto standard across
education and training contexts around the world.
Synchronous Learning Tools: Synchronous
learning tools include any learning technologies
that facilitate distance learning that occurs syn-
chronously, or at the same time (e.g., skype, virtual
classrooms). Although students are not physically
co-present, they are virtually co-present, which
allows for interaction that is similar to face-to-
face settings.
Virtual High Schools: Similar to Open Uni-
versities, Virtual High Schools offer distance
learning through the internet to high school stu-
dents. There are a number of such schools serving
different regions of the United States, Canada,
and the United Kingdom.
ENDNOTES
1
http://pewinternet.org/trends/Internet_Ac-
tivities_8.28.07.htm
2
http://www.corpu.com/

292
 293

Chapter 18
Cross-Cultural Learning and
Intercultural Competence
Pi-Chi Han
University of Missouri-St. Louis, USA

ABSTRACT
Globalization has increased the need to understand the nature of work-related adult learning and devel-
opment across national boundaries. It is driving the demand for the workforce that possesses knowledge
of other countries and cultures and affecting those who are responsible for developing international
learning activities. The author of this chapter calls for adult education and Human Resource Development
(HRD) professionals to learn how to apply adult learning theories in cross-cultural learning to help
individuals with different cultural backgrounds. This would help these professionals acquire intercultural
competence and become successful in international assignments.

INTRODUCTION careers have emerged recently as the significant

Globalization demands are transforming the
boundaries of the world. This change is leading
us into a worldwide global economy where na-
tional boundaries become blurred. In reality, the
globalization of the workplace and workforce has
been a fact of life for many organizations (Roberts,
Kossek, & Ozeki, 1998). Workforces around the
world have become more diverse, more educated,
and more mobile (Briscoe, Schuler, & Claus,
2009). Therefore, global mobility and global
DOI: 10.4018/978-1-61692-906-0.ch018
phenomenon for the global workforce (Lin, Pearce,
& Wang, 2009). As a consequence, the challenge
of developing and managing “global workforce”
has received extensive attention (Briscoe et al.,
2009; Tarique & Schuler, 2009).
In facing the challenge, international orga-
nizations, especially multinational corporations
(MNCs) around the world have tried to seek new
ways in order to survive in the competitive global
arena. Some succeed, but many do not, and the
inability of their managers or expatriates to func-
tion successfully in their global assignments has
been the primary cause of international business
 Cross-Cultural Learning and Intercultural Competence
failures (Apud, Lenartowicz, & Johnson, 2003;
Lee & Croker, 2006). The need of developing
internationally competent workforce becomes
increasingly important. In literature, it shows that
the degree of one’s intercultural competencies to
another culture results in the successful interna-
tional performance (Chuprina, 2001). Learning
in a new culture is a prerequisite to obtain inter-
cultural competencies. Ferraro (2002) asserts that
the essential competency for success in managing
the global organization is also based on learning.
There is a great demand worldwide for high qual-
ity workforce practitioners and adult educators
who can work effectively with cultural diverse
adult learners in the workplaces and facilitate the
cross-cultural learning (Chang, 2004).
The purposes of this chapter are to review the
related literature of cross-cultural learning and
intercultural competence; to explore the relation-
ship between adult learning theories, cross-cultural
learning, and intercultural competence; to offer
feasible solutions and recommendations to the
problems; and to discuss the future trends that help
adult educators and HRD practitioners to facilitate
meaningful cross-cultural learning programs for
adult learners to be successful across cultures.
BACKGROUND
Globalization has increased the need to understand
the work-related adult education programs across
national and cultural boundaries (Chang, 2004).
Most importantly, it is crucial to understand how
adult learners function and learn across cultural
boundaries. The cross-cultural learning and expe-
rience of adult learners can occur in many forms.
One of the most dominant cross-cultural learning
and experiences comes from the expatriation ex-
perience, which is the work-related adult learning
(Yamazaki & Kayes, 2004). Without formal train-
ing or education in the cross-cultural interactions,
the notion of cross-cultural learning has become
the key for the expatriates to obtain intercultural
294
competencies (Yamazaki & Kayes, 2004). A grow-
ing research enhances the notion that successful
expatriate adaptation and cross-cultural learning
depend on how well an expatriate can learn from
experience in the international assignments (Porter
& Tansky, 1999). Many studies have applied and
utilized adult learning theories such as experiential
learning and transformative learning to be the
research theoretical framework to investigate
the work-related cross-cultural learning (Chang,
2004; Chang, 2007; Yamazaki & Kayes, 2004).
Therefore, it is necessary for adult educators
and HRD professionals to understand the nature
of work-related adult learning programs in the
intercultural settings and the need of developing
intercultural competencies (Chang, 2004).
However, scholars, in the different disciplines,
throughout the past 30 years have defined inter-
cultural competence in a variety of ways. In the
literature, the definitions of “competence” are
theoretically and empirically inconsistent. There
was no consensus in the definition of cross-cultural
competence (Baxter Magolda, 2000; Lusting &
Koester, 2003).
Intercultural competence as a concept has been
explored and studied under different terms, such as
cross-cultural effectiveness (Cui & Van Den Berg,
1991; Han, 1997, 2008), cross-cultural adjustment
(Benson, 1978), cross-cultural competence (Ru-
ben 1989), intercultural effectiveness (Cui & Van
Den Berg, 1991; Hanningan, 1990), intercultural
competence (Dinges, 1983), and intercultural
communication competence (Spitzberg, 2000).
In developing cultural competent profession-
als, Campinha-Bacote (2002) has identified five
components: (1) cultural awareness, (2) cultural
skill, (3) cultural knowledge, (4) cultural encoun-
ter, and (5) culture desire. Similarly, Lister (1999)
also has developed taxonomy for the cultural
competent professionals. The taxonomy includes:
(1) cultural awareness, (2) cultural knowledge,
(3) cultural understanding, (4) cultural sensitiv-
ity, and (5) cultural competence. In developing
and managing expatriates, Black and Menden-
Cross-Cultural Learning and Intercultural Competence
hall (1990) suggest three skills to be successful
in a new culture. The first skill is related to the
maintenance of self-psychological and physical
well-being. Another skill is related to relationship
building with host nations through communica-
tions skills, interpersonal, and social skills. The
final skill is related to cognitive skills that promote
a correct perception of the host environment and
its social system.
In addition, Han (1997, 2008) has conceptu-
alized intercultural competency as measurable
intercultural effectiveness (ICE) competencies,
i.e. (1) the ability to handle psychological stress,
(2) the ability to effectively communicate, (3) the
ability to establish interpersonal relationships, (4)
the ability to have cross-cultural awareness, and
(5) the ability to have cultural empathy. Han’s
(1997, 2008) empirical studies have revealed a
positive correlation between adult learning and
HRD programs and intercultural competencies.
Based on the findings, adult learning is crucial to
intercultural competencies. Chuprina (2001) as-
serts that adult learning theories help the individu-
als learn in the cross-cultural adaptation process.
However, there was limited interdisciplinary
research of exploring the relationship between
adult learning theories, cross-cultural learning,
and intercultural competence, and how adult
learning theories help adult learners acquire the
intercultural competence desired. Therefore,
it is necessary to explore the definitions of the
concept of intercultural competence in the first
decade of the 21st century. A summary of findings
is presented in Table 1.
CROSS-CULTURAL LEARNING/
INTERCULTURAL LEARNING
Cross-cultural learning is the process of adapta-
tion to a new environment and its requirements
through obtaining necessary knowledge, skills,
and attitudes (Hannigan, 1990). Researchers seem
to agree with each other that when there is less
cultural dissonance, there is more cross-cultural
learning taking place (Bennett, 1995). Methods for
facilitating cross-cultural learning skills include
assessment of individual commitment and value
(Kayes, 2002), emotion and skill development
(Mainemelis, Boyatzis, & Kolb, 2002), and im-
mersion in different and challenging cross-cultural
interactions (Mintzberg & Gosling, 2002).
In addition, literature has linked intercultural
competence to cross-cultural learning. Scholars
assert that acquiring intercultural competence is a
process of cross-cultural learning (Bartel-Radic,
2006; Hannigan, 1990). The cross-cultural learn-
ing only occurs when the individual has passed
through the realization of the impact of cultural
differences, critical reflections, and practical
experiences (Hofstede, 1994). In this chapter, the
process is called an intercultural or cross-cultural
learning process.
Bartel-Radic (2006) has established a defini-
tion for the intercultural learning as “the acqui-
sition or modification of the representations of
intercultural situations” (p. 652). Through ideas,
concepts, beliefs, knowledge, and desires, an indi-
vidual represents his/her world. In the assumption
of intercultural learning, representations are the
learning outcome, while acquisition and modifica-
tion are the learning process. Intercultural learning
does not mean to change one’s own culture, but
to understand other ways of seeing and finding
the world, and that for effective interaction with
others, the modification process starts to happen.
Therefore, the intercultural learning process has
to include how the individual has been modified
or changed in knowledge, attitude, and skill in
the intercultural situation.
In addition, effective cross-cultural learning
does not always come from a positive experience
but from effective reflection. The reflection is a
cognitive process based on the learner’s personal
maturity level of cognitive development. Mezirow
(1991) views the change or modification from
cross-cultural learning as an integrative and trans-
formative process. It is necessary to explore how
295
 Cross-Cultural Learning and Intercultural Competence

Table 1. Definitions/Perspectives of Intercultural/Cross-Cultural Competence

Authors Concept Definition/ Perspective

Leiba-O’Sullivan (1999) Cross-cultural competency
Cui & Van den Berg (1991) Intercultural effectiveness
Adler & Bartholomew (1992) Global or transnational competency
Gertsen (1990) Cross-cultural competence
Black & Mendenhall (1990) Effective cross-cultural interactions
Earley (2002) Cultural intelligence (CQ)
Hunter (2004) Global competence model
Cross et al. (1989) Cultural competence
Collier (1989); Lusting & Koester (1999) Intercultural communication competence
Spitzberg (2000) Intercultural communication competence is
located in perception rather than behavior.
Deardorff (2004) Intercultural competence
Landreman (2003) Intercultural consciousness
Bartel-Radic (2006) Intercultural competence
Redmond & Bunyi (1993) Intercultural communication competence
(ICC)
Thomas (2003) Intercultural competence
Knowledge, skills, abilities, other attributes
Intercultural success
Specific knowledge, skills, and abilities
The ability to function effectively in another
culture.
Cross-cultural skills development, adjust-
ment, and performance
Cultural intelligence as a person’s capacity
to adapt to new culture based on multiple
facets including cognitive, motivational and
behavioral features.
Knowledge, skills, attitudes, and experiences
are necessary to become global competent.
A set of congruent behavior, attitudes, and
policies that come together to work effectively
in a cross-cultural situation
Intercultural communication competence
“requires that individuals understand the
meanings, rules, and codes for interacting
appropriately” (Collier, 1989, p. 216).
“competent communication requires attention
to the factors of context, locus, and abstrac-
tion” (p. 111).
Pyramid model and process model of inter-
cultural competence
Intercultural consciousness is a more ap-
propriate educational goal than multicultural
competence
The ability to adapt one’s behavior to these
meanings in order to produce effective
behavior.
ICC is defined as “a multidimensional concept
consisting of communication effectiveness,
adaptation, social integration, language com-
petence, and knowledge of the host culture
and social decentering” (Redmond & Bunyi,
1993, p. 1).
The ability to help/shape the process of inter-
cultural interaction, avoid misunderstandings,
and create problem –solving opportunities.

adult learning theories contribute to the process EXPERIENTIAL LEARNING THEORY

of cross-cultural learning and the development
of intercultural competence. In this chapter, the
relationship between cross-cultural learning and
experiential learning theory and transformative
learning theory are explored.
Many scholars have stressed that experience is a
crucial element in adult education and learning
(Fenwick, 2001, 2003; Kolb, 1984; Kolb & Kolb,
2002). In addition, the international business arena

296
Cross-Cultural Learning and Intercultural Competence
research indicates that cross-cultural learning and
experience in cross-cultural settings play a vital
role in developing global managers (Bartel-Radic,
2006). Therefore, international experience has
been a tradition for cultivating senior management
teams in many MNCs (Shen, 2005), as they basi-
cally accept the connection between experience,
learning, and intercultural competencies.
Experience can be the real life textbook of
adult learners. Kolb (1984) asserted that “Learning
is a continuous process grounded in experience.
Knowledge is continuously derived and tested
out in the experience of the learner” (p. 27). Ex-
periential learning focuses on how adult learners
apply their direct experiences with the world in
order to solve problems, to make the meaning
for everyday lives or events, and to create new
knowledge. Experiential learning theory is based
on a variety of assumptions about the nature of
learning. For example, learning is a process that
allows an interchange between a person and his/
her environment, and results in the creation of
new knowledge.
Based on experiential learning theory, we
are able to understand the process of knowledge
transfer (Kolb & Kolb, 2002). Learning has been
considered a vital key to the success of knowledge
transfer. Kayes and Yamazaki (2005) have pointed
out that cross-cultural knowledge transfer is an
issue of cross-cultural learning. “At the heart of
any successful cross-cultural knowledge transfer
effort lies an individual or group of individuals
with the skills to manage a complex ambiguous
and often stressful process” (Kayes & Yamazaki,
2005, p. 87). To develop intercultural competence
in the workplace, it is important for adult learners
to transfer knowledge from one cultural context to
another by their work-related practices and experi-
ence. Cross-cultural learning helps adult learners
to navigate the knowledge transfer process across
national borders. They have concluded that the
better they understand how adults learn during
their experiences in cross-cultural settings, the
better they understand the cross-cultural knowl-
edge transfer process.
Globalization has created a growing interest
in extending experiential learning to new applica-
tions and new ideas. The quest of globalization
and knowledge creation has driven adult learning
theories to explore the cross-cultural learning do-
main. It is clear that learning is the most essential
activity that helps global organization to obtain
success (Ferraro, 2002). Experiential learning
has proven invaluable in developing intercultural
competence for individuals across cultural bor-
ders. In addition, Kolb has described experiential
learning as “a holistic process of adaptation to the
world” (Kolb, 1984, p. 31). Kolb’s experiential
learning theory is one of most influential theories
to explain how managers learn from experience
across culture (Kayes, 2002).
Kolb (1984) states that learning from experi-
ences requires four different kinds of abilities:
(1) concrete experience allowing oneself to be
involved in new experience with his/her openness
and willingness, (2) reflection and observation
allowing oneself to have reflections and observa-
tions to view the new experience from a variety
of perspectives, (3) abstract conceptualization
allowing oneself to analyze from the observation
and integrate concepts and ideas, and (4) active
experimentation allowing oneself to make the
decision and solve the problem by using new ideas
and concepts. He also points out that experiential
learning is the totality of the learning and knowl-
edge creation process, which experience becomes
the foundation of learning.
In a recent study, Fenwick (2003) proposes
“reflection on experience” (p. 22) and empha-
sizes that knowing intertwines with doing and
“Learning is rooted in the situation in which the
person participates, not in the head of that person
as intellectual concepts produced by reflection”
(p. 25). Many scholars have argued that Kolb’s
experiential learning theory needs to take the
learner’s context (Fenwick, 2001, 2003) and emo-
tional influence into consideration (Dirkx, 2001a,
297
 Cross-Cultural Learning and Intercultural Competence
2001b). Fenwick (2001) has asserted “specific
contexts shape an individual’s experience in dif-
ferent ways” (p. 11). Therefore, the individual’s
cultural background, histories, learning methods,
and emotional maturity should all be considered
in the learning and knowledge transfer process.
Kayes and Yamazaki (2005) have extended
Kolb’s (1984) concept to explain how experien-
tial learning theory helps managers to create and
transfer knowledge in the global organizations.
According to the process of knowledge transfer in
the cross-cultural learning, they propose a process
of seven competencies of cross-cultural learning. It
has answered the quest of how managers learn to
be effective in both their home culture and another
or host culture as following: (1) valuing different
cultures, (2) building relationships, (3) listening
and observing, (4) coping with ambiguity, (5)
translating complex ideas, (6) taking action, and
(7) managing others (Kayes & Yamazaki, 2005).
TRANSFORMATIVE
LEARNING THEORY
In literature, transformative or transformational
learning is interchangeable. It is about change in
the way that adult learners see themselves and the
world in which they live. It is defined by Mezirow
(1994) as “The social process of constructing and
appropriating a new or revised interpretation of
the meaning of one’s experience as a guide to
action” (pp. 222-3).
Transformation is a deep and structural shift
in the thoughts, feelings, and actions of a person,
which represents and explains the world around
oneself. Learning is a process of making mean-
ing and about how adult learners make sense of
their own life (Mezirow, 1996). The tranformative
learning process begins with an experience of a
“disorientating dilemma” for learners. In addition,
he asserts that “the process by which we transform
our taken-for-granted frames of reference (mean-
ing schemes, habits of mind, and mindsets) to
298
make them more inclusive, discriminating, open,
emotionally capable of change, and reflective so
that they may generate beliefs and options that
will prove more true or justified to guide action”
(Mezirow, 2000, p. 8).
However, not all learning is transformative.
According to Mezirow’s (1991) work, there are
four components in transformative learning: (1)
experience, (2) critical reflection, (3) reflective
discourse, and (4) action. First, learning begins
with the learner’s experiences. Second, the self-
examined interpretation follows. Third, after test-
ing the new meanings, the learners engage in the
discoursing dialogue to obtain a new and empathic
understanding and assessment of the interpreta-
tion. Last, the learner takes “immediate action,
delayed action or reasoned reaffirmation of an
existing pattern of action” (Mezirow, 2000, p. 24).
The process of intercultural competence is seen
as transformative learning (Kim & Ruben, 1988;
Taylor, 1994). In effect, they seem to indicate that
intercultural competence is a transformative pro-
cess where the learner develops adaptation skills
that allow the learner to effectively understand the
other culture over time. Kim and Ruben (1988)
assert that a learning and growth process develops
where the learner’s old perspectives break down
and new beliefs are constructed by the intercultural
knowledge, attitudes, and behavioral competen-
cies, are facilitated.
Transformative learning in acquiring inter-
cultural competencies is an on-going process of
individual’s internal system. Taylor (1994) views
intercultural competence as an adaptive capac-
ity that allows individuals to become effective
across cultures. Cross, Bazon, Dennis, and Isaacs
(1989) also define cultural competence as a set of
behaviors and attitudes for enabling professionals
to work effectively in cross-cultural situations. In
addition, McPhatter and Ganaway (2003) indicate
that cultural competence is the ability that allows
learners to transform knowledge and awareness.
Kim and Ruben (1988) confirm that the process of
acquiring intercultural competence is transforma-
Cross-Cultural Learning and Intercultural Competence
tional and it is also a learning and growth process
allowing individuals to function effectively across
cultural and national boundaries.
Taylor (1994) has elaborated Mezirow’s (1991)
transformative learning theory and pointed out that
“the literature seems to indicate that intercultural
competence is a transformative process whereby
the stranger develops an adaptive capacity, altering
his or her perspective to effectively understand and
accommodate the demands of the host culture” (p.
155). He states that “the transformation is becom-
ing intercultural competent is anchored within the
individual” (Taylor, 1994, p. 157). He has echoed
Kim and Ruben’s (1988) perspective and viewed
the process of intercultural competence as an indi-
vidual’s internal transformative learning. Gaining
intercultural competencies is the outcome of the
transformative learning, which starts from the
need of change. In conclusion, Taylor (1994) has
offered a linkage between transformative learn-
ing and the process of intercultural competency.
THE ISSUES AND CONTROVERSIES
There are several issues, controversies, and prob-
lems that adult learning and HRD professionals
should give more attention:
1. Pluralist society in the U.S.: The United
States is experiencing a growing immigrant
population. In 2005, immigrants comprised
over 12 percent of U.S. residents and 15
percent of the workforce (Migration Policy
Institute, 2007a, 2007b). The increasing
complexity and diversity of U.S. society has
enhanced the challenge. The need for multi-
cultural learning and educational services has
increased as the new immigrant population
has grown and dispersed across the country.
Due to the limited English proficiency and
distinctive culture, every immigrant has ex-
perienced a certain degree of culture shock,
stress, and sociocultural disruption. As a
result, policy makers, adult learning, and
HRD professionals in public, private, and
non-profit organizations should pay more
attention to applying adult learning theories
in fostering intercultural competencies and
facilitating cross-cultural learning.
2. Imported talents versus brain drain: There
is no doubt that “the single most important
skills to acquire in the 21st century is in-
tercultural competence” (Virjee, 2004, p.
35). However, a shortage of international
managers is a significant constraint for many
MNCs. (Shen, 2005). Richmond (1988) indi-
cates there is a growing demand of importing
highly qualified immigrant talents, which is
known as “brain drain”- intellectual talents
flowing from the less developed to the more
technologically advanced countries. A call
for professionals in international education,
cross-cultural learning, international training
and development, international business, and
adult education to work together is on the
rise.
3. Challenges in higher education: The higher
education institutes have faced the challenge
of how to prepare their graduates with the
intercultural competencies for the global
competition. In addition, Lin, Pearce, and
Wang (2009) state that there is a great de-
mand of American higher education to import
talents such as foreign-born faculty and re-
searchers from other countries. From fluency
in multiple languages to an understanding
of the culture, the immigrant intellects have
encountered many challenges in the host
countries just like academic expatriates.
These two issues have increased the demand
of facilitating cross-cultural learning and
developing intercultural competencies in
the curriculum development.
4. Lacking of the unified definition: Rathje
(2007) has stated that “we see the difficulty in
defining intercultural competence as a key to
communicative efficiency” (p. 259). Lacking
299
 Cross-Cultural Learning and Intercultural Competence
of consensus of definition in intercultural
competence and cross-cultural learning has
presented a problem. To develop a deeper
understanding in the issues of intercultural
competence and cross-cultural learning has
become crucial.
5. The quest for adult learning research: Much
international business research has been
ascribed the high failure of expatriates to a
lack of intercultural competence. Although
Yamazaki and Kayes (2004) have tried to
apply adult learning theory to explain the pro-
cess of knowledge transfer of intercultural
competence as the result of cross-cultural
learning, there is still limited literature avail-
able regarding how adult learning theories
help to develop the global-ready workforce
by cross-cultural learning programs.
6. Experiential learning theory: In Kolb’s
(1984) experiential learning model, the
learner’s context has been neglected. The
learner’s context is mainly formed by the
learner’s culture. Rathje (2007) states that
the external conditions and variables affect
the intercultural success during the cultural
interactions. It is crucial to be aware of the
learner’s cultural context in the cross-cultural
learning.
7. Transformative learning theory: Mezirow
(1990) has stated that learners reflect on
prior information, knowledge, and experi-
ences to determine how they acquire their
beliefs and values and use this information
as a basis for greater understanding of their
own values as well as the values and per-
spectives of others. The core of the learning
process itself is mediated through a process
of critical reflection on one’s assumptions
and beliefs. However, Mezirow’s work has
been criticized in two ways, i.e., there is a
need to explore how emotional and spiritual
dimensions affect adult learning (Taylor,
1997), and different levels of capability in
the meaning making, which is the level of
300
maturity of cognition, influence how adult
learners experience the transformative
learning process (Erickson, 2002; Merriam,
2004). Therefore, it is necessary for adult
learning and HRD professionals to consider
the holistic situation of learners when they
develop, conduct, and deliver cross-cultural
learning for adult learners.
SOLUTIONS AND
RECOMMENDATIONS
Based on the issues and controversies, the prob-
lems, solutions and recommendations are offered
as follows:
1. To facilitate knowledge transfer in the pro-
cess of intercultural competence (Kayes &
Yamazaki, 2005). The knowledge transfer
process plays a vital role in cross-cultural
learning and acquiring intercultural com-
petencies. It is recommended that adult
learning and HRD professionals get involved
in the process of knowledge transfer of
cross-cultural learning in order to develop
intercultural competencies proactively. They
should also develop the capability to transfer
cross-culture knowledge through learning
and development programs.
2. To mandate internationalization in higher
education. Higher education has been a civic
learning organization and played the key
role in making a contribution to sustainable
human development. Specifically, higher
education is now facing the need of directing
higher education toward helping humanize
globalization and to support lifelong learn-
ing (Lin, Pearce, & Wang, 2009; Reimiers,
2009). Higher educational institutions should
keep adding more international courses in
the curriculum and encourage the interna-
tional cooperation. More interdisciplinary
collaborations in higher education or those
Cross-Cultural Learning and Intercultural Competence
outside and in public and private sectors need
to integrate adult learning theories into their
implementations.
3. To foster global literacy and cultivate a global
mindset (Gupta & Govindarajan, 2002). It is
necessary to blend cross-cultural learning in
the formal and informal education systems.
Reimers (2009) recommends that “The
avenues are to make the development of
global competence a policy priority for mass
education systems, to develop a scientific
knowledge base that helps discern the suc-
cess of projects, and to continue developing
rigorous curriculum, instructional materials,
and opportunities for teachers’ education”
(p. 27).
4. To develop adult learning and HRD profes-
sionals as continuous learners (McLean,
2006). Intercultural competencies assist the
organizations in coping with ever-changing
international work environments, and un-
derstanding international markets. There is
also a crucial need to educate a new breed
of adult learner and education professional
that can develop learners’ cross-cultural
competencies and keep up the competitive
advantage for the organization. In addition,
HRD and adult learning professionals should
always answer the following four questions:
(1) how to develop effective cross-cultural
learning programs for adult learners in the
organization, (2) how to cultivate a con-
tinuous learning organization, (3) how to
promote the cross-cultural competent or-
ganizational culture, and (4) how to attract,
retain, and develop a global talented person
in the organization.
5. To include the national culture in develop-
ing of the theory of cross-cultural learning.↜
Chang (2004) recommends that adult learn-
ing programs should include national cultural
differences and adjust programs to accom-
modate learners’ backgrounds. Therefore,
to include the learner’s context in terms of
national cultural background, environmental
or situational variables, and the process of
personal growth should be examined in the
process of developing cross-cultural learning
and acquiring intercultural competence.
FUTURE TRENDS
Adult learning and HRD professionals will need
to pay more attention to the following trends
when they are going to facilitate cross-cultural
learning and develop intercultural competencies
for adult learners:
1. Professional development for adult educa-
tion professionals in cross-cultural learn-
ing: Developing a framework for quality
professional development of adult education
programs and practitioners to facilitate adult
learners in cross-cultural learning and to help
them to acquire intercultural competence
becomes crucial (Schaetzel, Peyton, & Burt,
2007). The content of professional develop-
ment will be focused on the knowledge that
adult education practitioners need in order to
work effectively with broader adult learners
in the programs.
2. Non-western perspectives: One-way assimi-
lation and accommodation of culture and
increasing cultural hegemony will no longer
suffice. The inclusion of all cultures and their
value systems will benefit all concerned
(Olaniran & Agnello, 2008). Understanding
the different values between West and East
will be helpful to manage a multicultural
and multinational workplace. A call for an
inclusive perspective from different cultural
backgrounds is rising.
3. Developing global talent: According to the
Conference Board Report (Kramer, 2005),
a majority of companies want to accelerate
the development of their global talent. The
literature reveals that finding talented global
301
 Cross-Cultural Learning and Intercultural Competence
managers is getting harder due to the lack of
global talent (Bhasin & Cheng, 2001). In the
future, the adult learning and HRD profes-
sionals will need to identify what lessons
and what technologies will help to develop
and train the global talent.
4. Cross-cultural training: Cross-cultural train-
ing, one kind of cross-cultural leaning, has
long been advocated as a means of facilitat-
ing effective cross-cultural interaction and
intercultural competence (Han, 1997, 2008;
Landis & Brislin, 1983; Mendenhall &
Oddou, 1986). In addition, it is important
to continue identifying new technologies
that assist in the development of success-
ful cross-cultural training and intercultural
competence for adult learners.
5. Virtual world and on-line learning: The
virtual workforce has become one of most
radical transformational issues that chal-
lenge adult learning professionals. How
cross-cultural learning and intercultural
competence issues have impacted the virtual
workforce will need to be studied in the field
of adult learning and HRD. Currently, the
new technology has offered new directions
for adult learning and HRD research and
practice with this regard (Chapman, 2008).
CONCLUSION
Organizations have been struggling to survive
under rapid internationalization. It has made a pro-
found impact on the pattern of global competition
and workforce. The request of global managers,
leaders, and talents in the organization has been
launched by many MNCs or even domestic busi-
nesses that are ready and eager to take a leap in the
global market. Educating global-ready graduates
will help bridge the dramatic shift in the global
workforce conditions (Deardorff, 2008). Gupta
and Govindarajan (2002) have stated “Heteroge-
neity across cultures and markets is a pervasive
302
feature of the global economic landscape” (p.
116). They have recommended that cultivating
the global mindset for workforce should be the
answer to the response of the quest of global
competition. Several mechanisms such as formal
education, cross-border teamwork, cross- cultural
immersion experience, and multi-year global
assignments have been recommended (Gupta &
Govindarajan, 2002).
In America, the immigrant labors have long
been the underpinning of the country’s economic
success. However, the dramatic shifts in popula-
tion have impacted the United States in the past
decades. The rapid changes in the population are
widely affecting the demographics of the schools,
societies, and workplaces. While globalization,
global education, and global citizenship have
become the new challenges of learning in the 21st
century (Olaniran & Agnello, 2008), in facing
these challenges, McLean (2006) has offered his
personal learning reflections and recommended
that adult learning and HRD professionals should
improve their understanding of adult learning
across cultural boundaries, avoid ethnocentric
worldview, and continue to grow and learn.
Finally, tomorrow’s leaders must possess a
broad understanding of history, of culture, of
technology, of human relations, and of cross-
cultural learning. Although Hudson (1999) states
that the speedy change we face today has brought
a global chaos to the adult learning and develop-
ment world, it seems that there is a light at the
end of the tunnel by promoting cross-cultural
learning and cooperation. To achieve this goal,
adult learning and HRD professionals need to
review and explore the relationship between
adult learning theories, cross-cultural learning,
and intercultural competence in order to facilitate
cross-cultural learning and develop intercultural
competence for learners. Moreover, they should
take the lead to educate global-ready workforce
in order to function successfully in the United
States and abroad.
Cross-Cultural Learning and Intercultural Competence
REFERENCES
Adler, N. J., & Bartholomew, S. (1992). Academic
and professional communities of discourse: gener-
ating knowledge on transnational human resource
management. Journal of International Business
Studies, 23(3), 551–569. doi:10.1057/palgrave.
jibs.8490279
Apud, S., Lenartowicz, T., & Johnson, J. P. (2003).
Intercultural competence: What do practitioners
really know? In Proceedings of the Academy of
International Business South-East Region Confer-
ence, Clearwater, FL. Retrieved April 10, 2004,
from http://www.aibse.org/proceeding.asp.
Bartel-Radic, A. (2006). Intercultural learning in
global teams. Management International Review,
46(6), 647–677. doi:10.1007/s11575-006-0121-7
Baxter Magolda, M. B. (Ed.). (2000). Teaching to
promote intellectual and personal maturity: Incor-
porating students’ worldviews and identities into
the learning process. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Bennett, C. (1995). Comprehensive multicultural
education (3rd ed.). Needham Heights, MC: Allyn
& Bacon.
Benson, P. G. (1978). Measuring cross-cultural
adjustment: The problem of criteria. International
Journal of Intercultural Relations, 2, 21–37.
doi:10.1016/0147-1767(78)90027-5
Bhasin, B. B., & Cheng, P. L. K. (2001). The fight
for global talent: New directions, new competitors
- A case study on Singapore. Retrieved September
20, 2008, from http://www.emeraldinsight.com/
Insight/ViewContentServlet:jsessionid=7CAD
D0491D61
Black, J. S., & Mendenhall, M. (1990). Cross-
cultural training effectiveness: A review and a
theoretical framework for future research. Acad-
emy of Management Review, 15(1), 113–136.
doi:10.2307/258109
Briscoe, D., Schuler, R., & Claus, E. (2009).
International human resource management.
London: Routledge.
Campinha-Bacote, J. (2002). Cultural competence
in psychiatric nursing: Have you “ASKED”
the right questions? Journal of the American
Psychiatric Nurses Association, 8(6), 183–187.
doi:10.1067/mpn.2002.130216
Chang, W. (2004). Across-cultural case study of
a multinational training program in the United
States and Taiwan. Adult Education Quarterly,
54(3), 174–192. doi:10.1177/0741713604263118
Chang, W. (2007, May). Cultural compe-
tence of international humanitarian workers.
Adult Education Quarterly, 57(3), 187–204.
doi:10.1177/0741713606296755
Chapman, D. D. (2008). Virtual worlds: new
directions for HRD research and practice. ERIC
Reproduction Document Service No. ED 501675.
Chuprina, L. (2001). The relationship between
self-directed learning readiness and cross-cul-
tural adaptability in U.S. expatriate managers.
Unpublished doctoral dissertation. University of
Tennessee, Knoxville.
Collier, M. J. (1989). Cultural and intercultural
communication competence. International Jour-
nal of Intercultural Relations, 13(3), 287–302.
doi:10.1016/0147-1767(89)90014-X
Cross, T., Bazron, B., Dennis, K., & Isaacs, M.
(1989). Towards a culturally competent system of
care. Washington, DC: Georgetown University
Child Development Center, Child and Adolescent
Service System Program (CASSP), Technical
Assistance Center: Vol. 1.
Cui, G., & Van den Berg, S. (1991). Testing the con-
struct validity of intercultural effectiveness. Inter-
national Journal of Intercultural Relations, 15(2),
227–241. doi:10.1016/0147-1767(91)90031-B
303
 Cross-Cultural Learning and Intercultural Competence
Deardorff, D. K. (2004). The identification and
assessment of intercultural competence as a
student outcome of international education at
institutions of higher education in the United
States. Unpublished dissertation, North Carolina
State University, Raleigh.
Deardorff, D. K. (2008). Identification and as-
sessment of intercultural competence as a student
outcome of internationalization. Journal of Stud-
ies in International Education, 10(3), 241–266.
doi:10.1177/1028315306287002
Dinges, N. (1983). Intercultural competence. In
Landis, D., & Brislin, R. W. (Eds.), Handbook of
intercultural training (Vol. 1, pp. 176–202). New
York: Pergamon Press.
Dinges, N. G., & Baldwin, K. D. (1996). Inter-
cultural competence: A research perspective. In
Landis, D., & Bhagat, R. S. (Eds.), Handbook
of intercultural training (2nd ed., pp. 106–123).
Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Dirkx, J. (2001a). Images, tranformative learning
and the work of the soul. Adult Learning, 12(3),
15–16.
Dirkx, J. (2001b). The power of feelings: Emotion,
imagination and the construction of meaning in
adult learning. In S. B. Merriam (Ed.), The new
update on adult learning theory (pp. 63-72). New
Directions for Adult and Continuing Education,
No. 89. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Earley, P. C. (2002). Redefining interaction across
culture and organizations: Moving forward with
cultural intelligence, In B. M. Staw, & R. M.,
Kramer (Eds.), Research in Organizational Be-
havior (pp. 271-299). Oxford, UK: Elsevier.
Earley, P. C., & Ang, S. (2003). Cultural intel-
ligence: Individual interaction across cultures.
Stanford, CA. Stanford: Business Books.
304
Erickson, D. M. (2002). A developmental construc-
tivist examination of meaning making capacity
among peer instructors in learning in retirement
programs. Dissertation Abstracts International,
63(05), 1668A. (UMI No. 3052875)
Fenwick, T. J. (2001). Experiential learning: A
theoretical critique from five perspectives. (In-
formation Series No. 385). Columbus, OH: ERIC
Clearinghouse on Adult, Career and Vocational
Education, Center on Education and Training for
Employment.
Fenwick, T. J. (2003). Learning through experi-
ence: Troubling orthodoxies and intersecting
questions. Malabar, FL: Krieger.
Ferraro, G. P. (2002). The cultural dimensions of
international business (4th ed.). Upper Saddle
River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Gertsen, M. C. (1990). Intercultural competence
and expatriates. International Journal of Human
Resource Management, 11(3), 341–362.
Gupta, A. K., & Govindarajan, V. (2002). Cultivat-
ing a global mindset. The Academy of Management
Executive, 16(1), 116–126.
Han, P. C. (1997). An investigation of intercul-
tural effectiveness of international university
students with implications for human resource
development. Unpublished doctoral dissertation,
University of Arkansas, Fayetteville.
Han, P. C. (2008). An investigation of intercultural
effectiveness for foreign-born faculty in Taiwan.
The International Journal of Learning, 15(10),
165–174.
Hannigan, T. (1990). Traits, attitudes, and skills
that are related to intercultural effectiveness
and their implications for cross-cultural train-
ing: A review of the literature. International
Journal of Intercultural Relations, 14, 89–111.
doi:10.1016/0147-1767(90)90049-3
Cross-Cultural Learning and Intercultural Competence

Hofstede, G. (1994). Vivre dans un monde multi- Landis, D., & Brislin, R. (1983). Handbook of
culturel. Paris: Les Editions d’Organisation. intercultural training (1st ed.). New York: Per-
gamon.
Hudson, F. M. (1999). The adult years: master-
ing the art of self-renewal. San Francisco, CA: Landreman, L. (2003, November).A multidi-
Jossey-Bass. mensional model of intercultural competence: A
reconcepturalization of multicultural competence.
Hunter, A. (2008). Transformative learning in
Paper presented at the annual meeting of the
international education. In Savicki, V. (Ed.),
Association for the Study of Higher Education,
Developing intercultural competence and trans-
Portland, OR.
formation: Theory, research, and application in
international education (pp. 92–107). Stirling, Lee, L. Y., & Croker, R. (2006). A contin-
VA: Stylus. gency model to promote the effectiveness
of expatriate training. Industrial Manage-
Hunter, W. (2004). Knowledge, skills, attitudes,
ment & Data Systems, 106(8), 1187–1205.
and experiences necessary to become globally
doi:10.1108/02635570610710827
competent. Unpublished dissertation, Lehigh Uni-
versity. Leiba-O’Sullivan, S. (1999). The distinction
between stable and dynamic cross-cultural com-
Kayes, D. C. (2002). Experiential learning and
petencies: Implications for expatriates training.
its critics: Preserving the role of experience in
Journal of International Business Studies, 30(4),
management learning and education. Academy
709–725. doi:10.1057/palgrave.jibs.8490835
of Management Learning & Education, 1(2),
137–149. Lin, Z., Pearce, R., & Wang, W. (2009). Imported
talents: Demographic characteristics, achieve-
Kayes, D. C., & Yamazaki, Y. (2005). Transfer-
ment, and job satisfaction of foreign born full
ring knowledge across cultures: A learning com-
time faculty in four-year American colleagues.
petencies approach. Performance Improvement
Higher Education, 57, 703–721. doi:10.1007/
Quarterly, 18(4), 87–100.
s10734-008-9171-z
Kim, Y. Y., & Ruben, B. D. (1988). Intercultural
Lustig, M. W., & Koester, J. (2003). Intercultural
transformation. In Kim, Y. Y., & Gudykunst, W.
competence: Interpersonal communication across
B. (Eds.), Theories in intercultural communication
cultures (4th ed.). Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
(pp. 299–321). London: Sage.
Mainmelis, C., Boyatzis, R. E., & Kolb,
Kolb, D. A. (1984). Experiential learning: Experi-
D. A. (2002). Learning styles and adap-
ence as the source of learning and development.
tive flexibility: Testing experiential learning
Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
theory. Management Learning, 33(1), 5–33.
Kolb, D. A., & Kolb, A. (2002). Bibliography on doi:10.1177/1350507602331001
experiential learning theory. Retrieved September
McLean, G. N. (2006). Rethinking adult
9, 2005, from http://www.learningfromexperi-
learning in the workplace. Advances in
ence.com/Research_Library
Developing Human Resources, 8(3), 416.
Kramer, R. (2005). Developing global leaders. doi:10.1177/1523422306288435
The Conference Board, New York.

305
 Cross-Cultural Learning and Intercultural Competence
McPhatter, A. R., & Ganaway, T. L. (2003). Be-
yond the rhetoric: Strategies for implementing cul-
turally effective practice with children, families,
and communities. Child Welfare, 82(2), 103–125.
Mendenhall, M., & Oddou, G. (1986). Accultura-
tion profiles of expatriate managers: Implications
for cross-cultural training. The Columbia Journal
of World Business, 21(4), 73–79.
Merriam, S. B. (2004). The role of cognitive de-
velopment in Mezirow’s transformational learning
theory. Adult Education Quarterly, 55(1), 60–68.
doi:10.1177/0741713604268891
Mezirow, J. (1990). How critical reflection triggers
transformative learning. In Mezirow, J. (Eds.),
Fostering critical reflection in adulthood: A guide
to transformative and emancipatory learning (pp.
1–20). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Mezirow, J. (1991). Transformative dimensions of
adult learning. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Mezirow, J. (1996). Contemporary paradigms
of learning. Adult Education Quarterly, 46(3),
158–172. doi:10.1177/074171369604600303
Mezirow, J. (1997). Tranformative theory out of
context. Adult Education Quarterly, 48(1), 60–62.
doi:10.1177/074171369704800105
Mezirow, J. (2000). Learning to think like an
adult: Core concepts of transformation theory.
In J. Mezirow & Associates, Learning as trans-
formation: Critical perspectives on a theory in
progress (pp. 3–33). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass
& Associates.
Migration Policy Institute. (2007a). Annual im-
migration to the United States: The real numbers.
Washington, DC: Author.
Migration Policy Institute. (2007b). 2005 Ameri-
can community survey and census data on the
foreign born by state. Washington, DC: Author.
Retrieved August 31, 2007, from http://find-
articles.com/p/articles/mi_qu4052/is_200301/
ai_n9223188/print
306
Mintzberg, H., & Gosling, J. (2002). Educating
managers beyond borders. Academy of Manage-
ment Learning & Education, 1(1), 64–76.
Olaniran, B.A., &Agnello, M. F. (2008). Globaliza-
tion, educational hegemony, and higher education.
Multicultural Education & Technology Journal,
2(2), 68–86. doi:10.1108/17504970810883351
Porter, G., & Tansky, J. W. (1999). Expatriate suc-
cess may depend on a learning orientation: Con-
siderations for selection and training. Human Re-
source Management, 38(10), 47–60. doi:10.1002/
(SICI)1099-050X(199921)38:1<47::AID-
HRM5>3.0.CO;2-1
Rathje, S. (2007). Intercultural competence: The
status and future of a controversial concept. Lan-
guage and Intercultural Communication, 7(4),
254–266. doi:10.2167/laic285.0
Redmond, M. V., & Bunyi, J. M. (1993). The
relationship of intercultural communication com-
petence with stress and the handling of stress as
reported by international students. International
Journal of Intercultural Relations, 17(2), 235–254.
doi:10.1016/0147-1767(93)90027-6
Reimers, F. M. (2009, Winter). Global competency.
Harvard International Review, 30(4), 24–27.
Richmond, A. H. (1988). Immigration and ethnic
conflict. New York: St. Martin’s Press.
Roberts, K., Kossek, E. E., & Ozeki, C. (1998).
Managing the global workforce: Challenges and
strategies. The Academy of Management, 12(4),
93–106.
Ruben, B. D. (1989). The study of cross-cultural
competence: Traditions and contemporary issues.
International Journal of Intercultural Relations,
13, 229–240. doi:10.1016/0147-1767(89)90011-4
Schaetzel, K., Peyton, J. K., & Burt, M. (2007).
Professional development for adult ESL practi-
tioners: Building capacity. Retrieved February
27, 2008, from http://www.cal.org/caela/printer.
php?printRefURL=http%3A/www
Cross-Cultural Learning and Intercultural Competence
Shen, J. (2005). International training and manage-
ment development: Theory and reality. Journal
of Management Development, 24(7/8), 656–666.
doi:10.1108/02621710510608786
Spitzberg, B. H. (2000). What is good communica-
tion? Journal of the Association for Communica-
tion Administration, 29, 103–119.
Tarique, I., & Schuler, R. S. (2009). Global tal-
ent management: Literature review, integration
framework, and suggestions for further research.
Journal of World Business, 46(2), 1–42.
Taylor, E. (1997). Building upon the theoretical
debate: A critical review of the empirical stud-
ies of Mezirow’s transformative learning the-
ory. Adult Education Quarterly, 48(1), 34–50.
doi:10.1177/074171369704800104
Taylor, E. W. (1994). Intercultural compe-
tency: A transformative learning process.
Adult Education Quarterly, 44(3), 154–174.
doi:10.1177/074171369404400303
Thomas, A. (2003). Interkulturelle kompetenz:
Grundlagen, problems and und konzepte. Erwa-
gen, Wissen. Ethik, 14(1), 137–221.
Virjee, Z. (2004). Cross-cultural learning in adult
continuing education. Education Canada, 44(2),
35–37.
Yamazaki, Y., & Kayes, D. C. (2004). An experi-
ential approach to cross-cultural learning: A review
and integration of competencies for successful
expatriate adaptation. Academy of Management
Learning & Education,3(4), 362–379.
KEY TERMS AND DEFINITIONS
Cross-Cultural Learning: It is the process of
adaptation to a new environment and its require-
ments through obtaining necessary knowledge,
skills, and attitudes (Hannigan, 1990). Bartel-
Radic (2006) has established a definition for
the intercultural learning as “the acquisition or
modification of the representations of intercultural
situations” (p. 652).
Cultural Intelligence (CQ): Cultural intelli-
gence as a person’s capacity to adapt to new culture
based on multiple facets including cognitive, mo-
tivational and behavioral features (Earley, 2002).
Experiential Learning: Kolb (1984) asserted
that “Learning is a continuous process grounded
in experience. Knowledge is continuously derived
and tested out in the experience of the learner”
(p. 27).
Intercultural Communication Competence:
It is located in perception rather than behavior.
“competent communication requires attention
to the factors of context, locus, and abstraction”
(Spitzberg, 2000, p. 111).
Intercultural Competence: It, as a concept,
has been explored and studied under differ-
ent terms, such as cross-cultural effectiveness,
cross-cultural adjustment, cross-cultural com-
petence, intercultural effectiveness, intercultural
competence, and intercultural communication
competence. In the literature, the definition was
theoretically and empirically inconsistent.
Intercultural Effectiveness (ICE) Compe-
tencies: It has included five measurable variables
as following: (1) the ability to handle psychological
stress, (2) the ability to effectively communicate,
(3) the ability to establish interpersonal relation-
ships, (4) the ability to have cross-cultural aware-
ness, and (5) the ability to have cultural empathy
(Han, 1997, 2008).
Transformative Learning: In literature,
transformative or transformational learning is
interchangeable. It is about change in the way
that the learners see themselves and the world in
which they live. Mezirow (1994) has defined “The
social process of constructing and appropriating
a new or revised interpretation of the meaning of
one’s experience as a guide to action” (p. 222-3).
307
308

Chapter 19
Applying Web 2.0 Technologies
to Traditional Teaching
Royce Ann Collins
Kansas State University, USA

ABSTRACT
Through out the years, teaching has evolved with each passing generation and adapted to the new
technologies and new ways of instructing as the latest research is published. For example, once typing
was taught with manual typewriters, then electric typewriters. Now, the courses are called keyboarding
and they are taught on computers. Currently, the teaching platform is evolving into a virtual world with
collaborative, interactive web technologies. Addressing teaching from a learner-centered approach, this
chapter will discuss the evolution of teaching as new generations of adults enter the learning environ-
ment and examine a case study of one instructor’s journey in incorporating new Web 2.0 technologies
into courses.

INTRODUCTION traditional classroom, the tables and chairs are

When thinking of traditional teaching, the image
might be a classroom with neat rows of desks, a
white board, a screen, and a podium or stand for
an instructor to lay his/her materials. In this im-
age of traditional teaching, the instructor might
lecture and the students quietly take notes and
raise their hands if they have a question. How-
ever, for this chapter, the image of a traditional
classroom needs to be modified slightly. In this
DOI: 10.4018/978-1-61692-906-0.ch019
set up in a U-shape, the instructor takes on the
role of guide, and the adult students participate
in lively discussions and group activities. What
do these two images have in common? If you
think about the most core use of a classroom, it
is to facilitate and share knowledge between two
entities, typically teachers and students.
Similarly, what is the function of the Web 2.0
technologies? Web 2.0 technologies have changed
the way knowledge is created and shared (Funk,
2009). “The real significance of …Web 2.0 tech-
nologies is the way in which they organize people
Applying Web 2.0 Technologies to Traditional Teaching
and activities, not simply the way in which they
create and distribute information” (Staley, 2009,
p. 38). Collaboration within the classroom has
been the educational movement over the past
20 years. The Web 2.0 technologies hallmark is
their collaboration capabilities across time and
space. For today’s instructor how is teaching in
the classroom different or similar to teaching via
Web 2.0 technologies?
What is an instructor to do? First, examine the
learning created by both face-to-face classrooms
and online Web 2.0 technologies. Second, think
about what is the best means to accomplish the
learning objectives in the time period given for
the course. In all courses, there is the content,
the environment, the students and how they learn
(using their experience, discussion, and collabo-
ration), and the development of higher cognitive
skills (i.e., critical thinking). What is the best
tool or activity to use to accomplish the learning
objective with this population? Third, look at the
student population. Who are the students? What
generation do they represent? Are they Millennials
or the Net Generation, GenXers, or Baby Boom-
ers? We know that all three approach technology
in different ways. The Millennials “have lived
their entire lives surrounded and defined by in-
formation, technology, sophisticated expectations,
and immediate feedback” (Salkowitz, 2008, pp.
18-19), and have been defined as digital natives
(Prensky, 2001). Many of the GenXers and Baby
Boomers have been defined as digital immigrants.
Digital immigrants have adopted aspects of the
new technology, because the world has changed
around them. The technical world is foreign and
new which means they are in the process of learn-
ing a new language (Prensky, 2001). Learners
from each generational cohort approach learning
slightly different.
Back to the question: What are instructors to
do? To answer that question, the author must share
her own bias. As each instructor brings his/her
philosophy of education to the classroom, so this
author brings her philosophy of education to this
chapter. One belief held firmly by the author is
that teaching should be learner-centered. Who are
the learners? What is the best means to help them
learn this content, develop critical thinking skills,
and prepare them for their own future endeavors?
These two key questions focus the development
of each course. Therefore, this instructor believes
that ‘traditional’ teaching is always evolving.
Traditional teaching changes with the student
population being engaged and the tools available.
For instance, with a computer available, there is
no need for typing on a manual typewriter. For
that reason, this chapter will discuss the evolution
of teaching as new generations enter the learning
environment and examine a case study of one
instructor’s journey in incorporating new Web
2.0 technologies into courses.
BACKGROUND
The classroom for the adult learner has evolved
over the past 30 years. In the 1970s, Paulo Friere
(1994) was writing about the need to move away
from the “banking approach” to education. The
instructor would simply pour the knowledge from
their head into the students’ heads. There was
no discussion or incorporation of the students’
experiences or previous knowledge. The student
was just a passive partner in the event of learning.
Friere (1994) believed the learning should instead
involve the learners and engage the learners in
what they wanted to learn or needed to learn. For
him, the learning must resonate with the learners’
culture, not the instructor’s.
In the 1970s and 1980s, Malcolm Knowles
(1980) arrived at some assumptions about teaching
adults. He believed that adults were self-directed
learners; seeking out the information that they
wanted to learn. Another assumption was that
adults are self-motivated; they do not need the
external motivations present in a classroom with
309
 Applying Web 2.0 Technologies to Traditional Teaching
children. He further believed that adults should
be allowed input into the course content; the ap-
proach to instruction should be learner-centric
rather than content-centric. Adults bring a rich
reservoir of experience to the classroom and this
experience should be used as a part of the content
as well. Finally, adult learners want to take the
new knowledge acquired and apply it to their life.
In the 1990s, constructivist approaches to the
teaching/learning dynamic began to gain influ-
ence (Fosnot, 2005). The constructivist instructor
approaches the learning experience with the idea
that knowledge is constructed by the learners, not
bestowed upon them by the instructor. In this class-
room, the environment is created where students
share experiences, discuss with each other and
the instructor problems posed, and arrive at their
own new knowledge. Thus, the students construct
knowledge. An important aspect of this learning
environment is the social aspect of learning and
creating knowledge. Knowledge is not created by
one individual in isolation, but as a result of the
interaction between the members.
The facilitator role that Knowles (1980) was
asking instructors to assume was reinforced by
the constructivist approach. The instructor was
asked to create an environment where learning
could be developed collaboratively, emergent and
uncontrolled. Instructors needed to think about
how to ask the appropriate questions to guide the
discussion versus thinking about what informa-
tion was going to be delivered in the classroom
environment (Collins & Zacharakis, 2009).
Teachers must cede some of the control of the di-
rection of the learning in such a classroom, since
what is learned is oftentimes an emergent function
of the quality of the students and the nature of
their interactions which cannot be fully planned
or controlled by the teacher. (Staley, 2009, p. 40)
Web 2.0 technologies are a platform for this
emergent, uncontrolled development of knowl-
edge.
310
Collaboration has become the hallmark of
corporations and agencies. Software companies,
such as Google and Microsoft, have made it
possible for employees to collaborate in spite of
geographical and time boundaries (Rienzo & Han,
2009). “Prior to 2005, individuals or organizations
needed significant resources to electronically sup-
port collaborative team work” (Rienzo & Han,
2009, p. 123). The two most popular providers
of online collaboration tools have been Microsoft
Office Live (http://www.office.live.com) and
Google Groups (http://www.groups.google.com).
Organizations have created workshops on online
collaboration tools for faculty and administrators.
For instance, the Commission of Accelerated
Programs sponsored a workshop with hands on
sessions in both of these platforms in July 2009,
in which the author participated. The sessions
were led by instructors who had incorporated the
use of these resources into their courses. Their
passion and success with these new tools in their
courses was evident. An article by Rienzo and Han
(2009) also compared the two systems for large
courses and they decided to use Google Groups.
The instructors commented on the “convenience
and effectiveness of shared course connections
enabled by the discussion forums, listserv, tips,
and rubrics available from wikis and shared docu-
ments” (Rienzo & Han, 2009, p. 126).
In addition to the new platforms available,
people are beginning to access and use information
differently. One example of this phenomenon was
the 2008 U.S. presidential campaign. According
to Smith and Rainie (2008), in the U.S. 46% of
Americans used the Internet to gain information
on the candidates and to post their opinions. In
addition, 35% of Americans watched online vid-
eos related to the campaign and 10% used social
networking sites to engage in political activities.
This engagement will only continue to grow with
each passing generation.
Applying Web 2.0 Technologies to Traditional Teaching
GENERATIONAL ATTITUDES
Each generational birth cohort has been affected
by world events and societal changes (Salkow-
itz, 2008). While not everyone in a generation is
exactly the same, there is evidence of develop-
mental trends as generations are defined. Three
generations will be discussed in this chapter: Baby
Boomers, GenXers, and Millennials. Those born
in 1946 were deeply affected by the world stage
at the conclusion of World War II. The generation
born between 1946 and 1962 were named Baby
Boomers. Analysts have stated that this genera-
tion is optimistic, has a team focus, believe in
personal gratification and growth, has a tendency
to be a workaholic, and believe in being involved
in society. The birthrate declined in 1963 and the
smaller cohort of Generation X (born 1963-1980)
“are usually described as cynical, independent,
and distrustful” (Salkowitz, 2008, p. 18). They
also think globally, are self reliant, and pragmatic.
The next generation were named the Millenials
and were born between 1981 and 2000. They are
very socialable, confident, optimistic, and thrive
on continuous feedback. Insights into each gen-
eration give the instructor another lens through
which to understand how students will embrace
the learning context.
While the Baby Boomers and GenXers have
been in adult classrooms for years, the genera-
tion called the Millennials is now entering the
workforce and the adult education classroom
(Salkowitz, 2008). This generation grew up with
technology; it is not a tool. Technology just ex-
ists for this generation. They are proud owners
of websites and electronic media. They enter the
classrooms knowing how to use the Internet as
some instructors knew how to use the library at
their age. They value working together, experi-
ential learning, and social networking.
What does this say to instructors as these people
enter the classroom? Well, for one if Web 2.0 tools
are going to be incorporated into the course, the
instructor must consciously understand how each
generation will reject or accept the technology. For
instance, in 2006, Pew Internet and American Life
Project completed a study on bloggers (Lenhart &
Fox, 2006). It found that most bloggers are under
the age of 30 and blog as a hobby. Compare that
to the Baby Boomer generation who believes that
information must come from reputable sources
or organizations, or credentialed persons. Wikis
(another Web 2.0 tool) are “collaborative infor-
mation repositories where anyone can contribute
or rewrite content” (Salkowitz, 2008, p.83). To a
person who believes that all messages in print must
be validated for truth before disseminated to the
public, this could be a difficult task to complete,
let alone incorporate into a learning environment.
INTEGRATING WEB 2.0
TECHNOLOGIES
Web 2.0 technologies are being incorporated into
many university courses. It has become very popu-
lar to study the use of wikis, blogs, and podcasts in
the learning environment (Greenhow, Robelia, &
Hughes, 2009; Hazari, North, & Moreland, 2009;
Huang & Behara, 2007). Wikis are designed for
collaboration and lend themselves to group proj-
ects or writing assignments. The age old question
of how to grade individual contributions to the
group project is also addressed, since instructors
will usually have access to a history of each wiki
page that archives the contributions by author and
date. Greenhow, Robelia, and Hughes (2009) re-
ported on an instructor who uses Delicious (http://
delicious.com) with her students. Delicious is a
social bookmarking site. “The professor in this
example has begun to cultivate a scholarly life
online… [where] she has compiled vast amounts
of multimedia information on discipline specific
topics” (Greenhow, Robelia, & Hughes, 2009,
p. 252). This is an example of social scholarship
practices “which seek to apply, build on, and
archive the collective intelligence to transform
the practice and consumption of traditional print-
311
 Applying Web 2.0 Technologies to Traditional Teaching
based research” (Greenhow, Robelia, & Hughes,
2009, p. 253).
One hurdle in using Web 2.0 technologies is
convincing faculty of their value, especially those
from the Baby Boomer generation. The virtual
world is a foreign land for many educators (Zhao,
2009). The current world does not just contain
persons that they meet in a physical space, but also
those they meet in a virtual space. “Businesses,
governments, academics, and the media have all
been working hard to interpret the implications
and respond to the challenges of this new world”
(Zhao, 2009, p. 129). For the most part education
has not. Schools and teachers are having difficulty
embracing or thinking about the transformation
which has taken place; yet many instructors still
use new technologies as tools in their work of
education. They have failed to see how the new
technologies have really transformed the way
people gather and construct knowledge. However,
that does not slow down the affect on society or
the students entering the courses.
Web 2.0 technologies are rapidly changing the
way people communicate and how organizations
function. “Smart companies are encouraging,
rather than fighting, the heaving growth of massive
online communities” (Tapscott & Williams, 2008,
p. 1). “This new participation has reached a tipping
point where new forms of mass collaboration are
changing how goods and services are invented,
produced, marketed, and distributed on a global
basis” (Tapscott & Williams, 2008, p.10). It is
also changing how education can be delivered and
how the instructor approaches the act of teaching.
Some authors even believe it is changing the way
people think (Pink, 2006; Prensky, 2001).
There are many Web 2.0 applications: weblogs,
wikis, Google Docs and Office Live, online video,
RSS (real simple syndication), and podcasts, just
to name a few. In this short chapter, an exhaus-
tive list could not be contained. As the author
embarked on her journey with new technologies, a
few of the technology integration guidelines from
Hopper and Hendricks (2008) were considered.
312
(Others were excluded because of their focus on
younger students.) First, “abandon the search for
technology magic, and use technologies at hand”
(Hopper & Hendricks, 2008, p. 11). What are the
technologies the instructor already understands
or has explored? Second, model the use of the
technology. Instructors are known for bringing
to a class session the latest research on a class
topic. By doing this instructors demonstrated
how students can stay apprised of the latest in-
formation and how textbooks can become out of
date in a short period of time. Instructors can use
the Internet to find websites, articles, or blogs
that support ideas in the course. In this case, the
instructor showed how to use technology sensi-
bly and as a part of a routine. Third, “use online
technologies to support the classroom” (Hopper
& Hendricks, 2008, p. 12). There are a range of
choices, including videos on YouTube, websites,
wikis and learning communities. This is a good
way to show multiple sources and opinions about
a topic. Fourth, help students explore and evalu-
ate the resources available on the Internet using
a variety of search engines. This is just a move
from making students proficient at the card catalog
system in the library. To develop lifelong learners,
students must understand where to find excellent
sources of information and be able to evaluate
the information from an informed position. Fifth,
use technologies that may be incorporated into
students’ future professional endeavors. What
technologies will the students most likely en-
counter in their profession? Sixth, prepare for a
mix of technological expertise. Learners bring a
variety of experiences to each educational setting
including expertise with technology. Seventh, put
all technology in its place and use appropriately.
For example, PowerPoint has become a standard
with presentations and many lectures; however,
PowerPoint is not “magically instructive in de-
livering content” (Hopper & Hendricks, 2008, p.
14). Rather than being creative and contributing
to the learning, ‘death by PowerPoint’ has become
a well known phrase.
Applying Web 2.0 Technologies to Traditional Teaching
Society is changing and students are changing.
It is the conviction of this author that instructors
must adapt to the new surroundings or be left
behind. With these strategies and generational
attitudes in mind, she embarked on a journey
with Web 2.0 tools.
USING WEB 2.0 FEATURES
WITH ADULT STUDENTS
With the generational attitudes in mind, this Baby
Boomer author decided to incorporate Web 2.0
technologies (blogs and wikis) into a face-to-face
course. Blogs are excellent for online journaling
and creating links to various websites appropri-
ately related to the course content. It is an excellent
way to expand the in class discussion and keep
students engaged with the course even when they
are not physically present. Wikis are a great tool
for collaboration. The issue with group work is
always who is really doing all the work. Wikis
record the contributors, the contributions made by
each, and track the work in progress. In evaluating
group work, common negatives for instructors
are 1) not knowing who has really contributed
the project, 2) was the work evenly dispersed,
and 3) was the project moved ahead according to
the timeline. The wiki eliminates these negatives
in evaluating collaborative learning exercises.
Since these tools were new for the instructor, the
instructor also consciously decided to create an
assessment to flesh out the students’ experiences.
At the conclusion of each course, students com-
pleted an end of course evaluation. If available, the
student comments were reviewed before the same
Web 2.0 tool was used in the next course offering.
The instructor modified each teaching situation to
address some of the weaknesses highlighted by
previous students. The next section discusses her
journey with incorporating Web 2.0 technologies
into face-to-face courses.
In an effort to embrace or at least become
familiar with new Web 2.0 technologies, the
author incorporated blogs and wikis into three
different courses. The students were enrolled in
a graduate program in adult education and their
generational attitude categories were GenXers
and Baby Boomers. The courses were intensive
in format; these eight week courses met once a
week for four hours of face-to-face class time. The
content of the course varied; one covered teaching
methods, the second was a survey course of the
field of adult education, and the third immersed
the students in social issues (i.e., critical theory,
critical pedagogy, and feminist pedagogy).
In the summer semester, the author taught
two sessions of the course on teaching methods
for adult learners. In preparing teachers of adults
for their future, the instructor consciously decided
that incorporation of Web 2.0 tools was a must for
this course. These future teachers of adults needed
to learn how to use these tools with their future
students, many of whom would be immersed in
the digital world since their birth. Each section of
the course met face-to-face in addition to using
the Web 2.0 tools, blog and wiki. Twelve students
enrolled in the first section and 17 in the second
section. The instructor created a blog and a wiki
site. Not knowing how many of the students in
the summer courses would have experience with a
wiki or blog, on the wiki site she provided a page,
called the ‘sandbox’, to give the students a place
to experiment with the wiki prior to starting their
own page. In reviewing the activity on this page,
not one student ever tried anything in the ‘sand-
box’; thus no student experimented with the wiki.
The author kept a reflective journal of her
teaching experience during the course. She com-
mented several times concerning her frustration
with getting the students engaged in the Wiki and
Blog assignments. Later analysis of these com-
ments and reflection on the population of students
indicated this should have been an expected reac-
tion of the students. Baby Boomers and GenXers
can be classified as digital immigrants (Prensky,
2001). As mentioned earlier, digital immigrants
are those generations who were not born at a time
313
 Applying Web 2.0 Technologies to Traditional Teaching
when computers and digital medium were com-
mon household items. One aspect of the digital
immigrant learning model is to read the manual
first before engaging a computer application
(Prensky, 2001). The author later reflected that
the students would not engage the wiki or blog
until she demonstrated in a classroom environment
how to log on to the sites, how to change the text
on the sites, and how to upload documents. Many
students commented during the class sessions that
they would rather just write a paper than have to
create a wiki page or post a blog. The students
demonstrated the behaviors of digital immigrants.
Some students uploaded a PowerPoint they cre-
ated with the content or a paper they had written
to their wiki page. These students commented
to the instructor that the wiki was too hard to
figure out. Instead of embracing a new learning
experience, they wanted it shaped around the old
way of doing things. Digital immigrants are the
learners who have had things explained, demon-
strated, or modeled before they try the exercise. In
comparison, a digital native would begin to ‘play’
with the wiki and expect to discover how to use it
along the way. By setting up the assignment with
a place for the students to experiment and ‘play’ in
the wiki ‘sandbox’ prior to starting, the instructor
was not taking into consideration the generation
of the audience and how they approached new
technology. The ‘sandbox’ would appeal to digital
natives; only those who are unafraid of ‘trying’
out new technologies.
At the end of each course, students were asked
to comment on their learning experience. One
qualitative question included, which received the
most comments concerning the blogs and wikis,
was “in what ways did this course challenge
you?” Approximately half of the students in the
two courses mentioned the blog or the wiki as
being the most challenging feature of the course.
One student stated, “developing a wiki page was
challenging but worthwhile.” Another student
wrote, “Opened my eyes to the advancement of
technology.” In response to the question, what
314
assignment(s) did you find most helpful in learning
the material, a student responded, “I needed to be
forced to Wiki and Blog. (Doing it once makes
it less scary.)” An additional student commented
that the “hands on experience of the blog and
wiki…ended up being very beneficial.” A third
student remarked that “learning to create the wiki
and blog site was the most helpful.” From these
qualitative responses, the instructor was affirmed
that her decision to include the Web 2.0 techniques
into the course accomplished her intent of expos-
ing the students to new technologies and uses in
courses with an adult population. However, some
students expressed negative comments as well.
On the end of course survey, the instructor in-
cluded these two questions: 1) What assignment(s)
did you find the least interesting? and 2) What
topic(s) would you have liked to spend less time
discussing? In both sections of the course, no stu-
dents included the wiki or blog in their response
to the second question above. In one section, no
students included the wiki or blog in their response
to the first question as well. However, in the
second section of the course, approximately half
of the students mentioned the wiki and/or blog
in their response to the first question, what was
least interesting. One student stated, “I disliked
the many modalities of learning (wiki, blog, and
textbooks).” Another commented, “I did not care
for the wiki assignment, but it did introduce me
to the concept.”
A final qualitative question asked for these
two courses was a sentence completion: “As a
result of taking this course, I will...” Out of the
14 responses, these were the ones that touched
on the technology aspects:
1. will pay more attention to use of wiki and
blogs as educational forums;
2. learn more about wiki, twitters, blogs. I will
move into the 21st century;
3. try to incorporate some form of technology
use in my classes for those that learn best
this way;
Applying Web 2.0 Technologies to Traditional Teaching
4. use technology more as a tool for instruction;
5. incorporate more collaborative learning
(wiki page in the online environment); and
6. use more technology in my programming,
especially a wiki or blog.
Armed with this experience, the instructor
incorporated wikis into the courses for the fall
semester. (Blogs were not used, because journ-
aling was not an aspect of these courses.) With
increased knowledge about incorporating Web
2.0 features into a course, the courses were set
up with in class instructional time concerning
the creation of a wiki page. The wiki assignment
was to help the students see a broad spectrum of
history and the development of the field of adult
education. Instructors need to be cognizant of what
assignments lend themselves to a Web 2.0 tool and
not just use the tool to interject some technology
in the course. Wikis are well designed for col-
laborative assignments including case studies,
group research and writing, brainstorming, and
planning activities (Hsu, 2007). Students were
given an end of course survey to complete using
some of the same qualitative questions that were
asked of the summer courses.
Out of 32 students in the introduction course
of adult education, 13 mentioned the wiki as be-
ing the least interesting assignment. One student
stated that the construction of the wiki was “boring
and painful at times.” Another student stated that
he/she liked the research of the wiki assignment,
but “not working on the wiki.” An additional
student mentioned that the assignment content
was “useful and informative,” but that trying to
master the wiki technology in order to construct
the page took away from the assignment. A stu-
dent admitted that he/she just had a “bias against
computer projects.”
Only seven students mentioned the wiki as the
assignment that was most helpful in learning the
material. The only expanded comment concerning
the wiki for this question was “the wiki exercise
was great.”
Six students commented that the wiki chal-
lenged them the most of all the assignments.
Most of these comments, though, supported the
comments from those who thought the assignment
was least helpful. The theme was the difficulty
working with the technology. Some comments
included 1) “I am not computer savvy;” 2) “Trying
to figure out the wiki (coding, format, etc.) was
tough;” 3) “Didn’t like the wiki (primarily due to
recurring technological issues and restrictiveness
of program used);” and 4) “using the wiki—liked
it once it was completed, but was too difficult to
complete. Spent too much time retyping stuff
that got wiped out for no apparent reason!” One
student was supportive of the wiki assignment,
he/she stated, “The wiki research and construction
was difficult and required a lot of time. Do Not
Drop it; the challenge was good!”
In addition to these qualitative questions, the
survey included additional statements for students
to rate on a Likert scale (1=Strongly Disagree,
2=Disagree, 3=Neutral, 4=Agree, 5=Strongly
Agree). Only 17 students out of a possible 32
(53%) completed this online survey. A few of
the statements were pulled from Hazari, North,
and Moreland’s (2009) article and study of wiki
technology. The author was investigating the use
of wikis in her own courses as a collaborative
learning tool. There were three statements which
were directed at the students’ perception of their
collaborative learning. The first statement (“I liked
seeing other students’ interaction with the material
I posted in the wiki”) received an average rating
of 3.76 with 76% of the responses checking agree
or strongly agree. The second statement (“Use of
the wiki for the assignment helped me interact
more with students”) received an average rating
of 2.94 with 35% of the responses checking agree
or strongly agree. The third statement (“Use of the
wiki promoted collaborative learning”) received
an average rating of 3.76 with 71% of the responses
checking agree or strongly agree. While students
did not perceive the wiki as a tool for helping
315
 Applying Web 2.0 Technologies to Traditional Teaching
them interact ‘more’ with other students, they did
perceive it as a collaborative teaching tool.
Three statements were used to investigate the
students’ perception of the technology. The first
statement (“The wiki interface and features were
overall easy to understand”) received an average
rating of 3.06 with 41% of the students marking
they agreed or strongly agreed. The second state-
ment (“Browsing/editing information in the wiki
was easy”) received an average rating of 2.29
with 24% of the students marking they agreed or
strongly agreed. The third statement (“Technical
features of the wiki did not detract from my learn-
ing”) received an average rating of 2.53 with 24%
of the students marking they agreed or strongly
agreed. These statements coupled with the above
mentioned qualitative statements powerfully rein-
forced the idea that students really struggled with
the hands on creation of the data in the wiki. The
insight gained by the instructor was the need to
look at new ways of approaching this aspect of the
wiki assignment. While the collaborative learning
aspect of the assignment was being accomplished,
most students were obviously frustrated with the
medium. The intent was not to make the technol-
ogy tool a hurdle to the content learning.
The final area the instructor investigated was
the learning aspect. Again students responded to
three statements. The first statement (“use of the
wiki aided me in learning the material) received
an average rating of 3.59 with 53% of the students
responding they agreed or strongly agreed. The
second statement (“I will retain more material as
a result of using the wiki”) received an average
rating of 3.06 with 29% of the students responding
they agreed or strongly agreed. This demonstrates
that most of the students were neutral as to whether
they would retain more information. The third
statement (“I learned more because of the infor-
mation posted by other students in the wiki than
I would have if the material had been covered in
a 20 minute, in-class, oral presentation”) received
a rating of 3.65 with 65% of the students respond-
ing they agreed or strongly agreed. With higher
316
than 3.5 averages and more than 50% agreeing
with the first and third statements, the instructor
perceived that students thought the wiki was a
good tool for assisting them in learning. With
the second statement, the important focus was on
the word ‘retain,’ which caused most students to
remain neutral in their response.
With the added information from this survey
and course experience, the instructor added a wiki
to the final course taught in the fall semester of
2009. Some of the students in this course had
taken the summer course, so there was already
some exposure to creating a wiki page among
the students. In addition, most of the students
were taking another course during the same time
period which also had the students completing an
assignment on a wiki page. The teaching journal
of the instructor revealed she thought it was easier
to sell the students on the wiki assignment. The
end of course surveys confirmed that the students
had a much more positive attitude about the wiki
than any of the previous courses.
The instructor used the same survey form
with the addition of one statement (“I plan to use
wikis in my future endeavors”) and a Likert scale
to gather the quantitative picture of the students’
perceptions. With this course, 29 of the 31 students
completed the survey (93%).
In examining the same three areas (collabora-
tion, technology, and learning), the author noted
the higher ratings and agreement percentages.
Review of the collaboration statements revealed
that 79% of the students agreed or strongly
agreed with the statement: “I liked seeing other
students’ interaction with material I posted in
the wiki.” The average rating for this statement
was 4.03. The second statement (“use of the wiki
for the assignment helped me interact more with
students”) increased the most in this category. It
received a 3.59 average rating with 59% of the
students indicating they agreed or strongly agreed.
The third statement (“use of the wiki promoted
collaborative learning”) increased a little as well.
Seventy-six percent of the respondents agreed
Applying Web 2.0 Technologies to Traditional Teaching

Table 1. Comparison of collaborative learning statements

Survey statement Intro Intro Course Social Trends Social Trends

Course Percentage* Course Rating Course
Rating Percentage*
I liked seeing other students’ interaction with the material I 3.76 76% 4.03 79%
posted in the wiki.
Use of the wiki for the assignment helped me interact more 2.94 35% 3.59 59%
with students.
Use of the wiki promoted collaborative learning. 3.76 71% 4.03 76%
*Percentage who check ‘agree’ and ‘strongly agree’ on a Likert scale.

or strongly agreed with this statement, and it
received an average rating of 4.03. A comparison
of the collaborative learning statements rating and
percentages to the previous course numbers are
listed in Table 1.
Reviewing the two courses’ quantitative num-
bers, confirmed for the instructor that the students’
perception of the collaborative learning aspect of
the wiki remained sound. Regardless of the
positive trend in the qualitative comments on the
wiki at least one student did not see the collab-
orative nature, he/she stated: “I do not think wiki
promotes collaborative learning. The wiki is
impersonal and does not allow the personal inter-
action.” In every course, there is always the po-
tential for outliers.
The three statements that addressed the techni-
cal nature of the wiki were dramatically higher than
the previous course. A side by side comparison
of the technical statements is presented in Table
2. The dramatic difference in the perceptions of
the students in this area should be noted.
The quantitative data comparison between the
two courses showed an impressive change in the
students’ perceptions. The average rating for the
browsing/editing information for the first course
(Intro) was in the ‘disagree’ category. The raw
numbers demonstrated this even more emphati-
cally as 11 out of 17 students responded they
disagreed or strongly disagreed with this state-
ment. Concerning the statement, “technical fea-
tures in the wiki did not detract from my learning,”
for the first course (Intro), 9 out of 17 students
disagreed or strongly disagreed with this state-
ment, while 4 additional students remained ‘neu-
tral’. For the second course (Social Trends), only
4 students (out of 29) disagreed or strongly dis-
agreed with this statement; however, 7 students
remained ‘neutral’. This still demonstrated some
technical expertise issues for students who are
asked to create a wiki page for a course assign-
ment.
There was still some frustration with the
technical aspect voiced in response to the quali-

Table 2. Comparison of technical statements

Survey statement Intro Intro Course Social Social Trends

Course Percentage* Trends Course
Rating Course Percentage*
Rating
The wiki interface and features were overall easy to understand. 3.06 41% 4.07 83%
Browsing/editing information in the wiki was easy. 2.29 24% 3.66 66%
Technical features in the wiki did not detract from my learning. 2.53 24% 3.66 62%
*Percentage who check ‘agree’ and ‘strongly agree’ on a Likert scale.

317
 Applying Web 2.0 Technologies to Traditional Teaching
Table 3. Comparison of learning statements
Survey statement
Course
Rating
Use of the wiki aided me in learning the material.
I will retain more material as a result of using the wiki.
I learned more because of the information posted by other students
in the wiki than I would have if the material had been covered in a
20 minute, in-class, oral presentation.
*Percentage who check ‘agree’ and ‘strongly agree’ on a Likert scale.
tative questions. Only three students mentioned
the wiki as the least interesting assignment. One
specifically stated that it was “the technical aspect
of creating the wiki page.” Another comment
was that the student “worked too hard on ensur-
ing the wiki looked good.” Additional negative
comments were “too hard to edit” and “slow and
hard to figure out, but eventually got the hang
of it. Great source of frustration.” However, the
wiki received some positive comments as well,
as one student remarked, “Loved it once I started
to embrace the technology.”
The instructor can only speculate as to what
caused this item to dramatically improve. A few
actions that could have affected this outcome
include: 1) The students were enrolled in two
courses that were using wikis with the same tech-
nology platform; therefore, they were spending
more time on the wiki and became more skilled
at using the technology. 2) There was one student
in one of the courses who was extremely technol-
ogy savvy; the instructor witnessed him working
with fellow students demonstrating how to do
things on the wiki. 3) In the first face-to-face class
session, the instructor used class time to go over
the technical functions of the wiki and students
started ‘playing’ in the sandbox that evening. 4)
The students had already experienced working in
a wiki environment in previous courses and had
developed some skills.
The final area compared was the students’
perceptions of how the wiki assisted them in
318
Intro Intro Course Social Social Trends
Percentage* Trends Course
Course Percentage*
Rating
3.59 53% 3.76 66%
3.06 29% 3.59 62%
3.65 65% 4.03 72%
learning the content. Again, the students’ responses
demonstrated a more positive outlook on the use
of wikis for learning content. In response to the
statement, “Use of the wiki aided me in learn-
ing the material,” 69% of the students agreed or
strongly agreed. The average rating was 3.76. In
response to the statement, “I learned more because
of the information posted by other students in the
wiki than I would have if the material had been
covered in a 20 minute, in-class, oral presenta-
tion,” 72% of the students responded they agreed
or strongly agreed. The average rating for this
statement was 4.03. The perception of retention of
information showed the most increase in this area.
The statement was “I will retain more material as
a result of using the wiki.” Sixty-two percent of
the students checked agree or strongly agree and
the statement received an average rating of 3.59.
In the previous course (as discussed above), this
statement received a rating of 3.06, but only 29%
of the students indicated they agreed or strongly
agreed. A complete comparison of the ratings for
the learning statements of the survey is listed in
Table 3.
The positive perception of the wiki tool was
also supported by these students’ comments: “My
first wiki and enjoyed it. Something different to
learn.” “I enjoyed the wiki versus having to watch
a bunch of presentations.” “Awesome” “Great
idea and concept allows use of information flow.”
“I enjoyed the wiki.”
Applying Web 2.0 Technologies to Traditional Teaching
The final statement added to the Likert scale
survey was “I plan to use wikis in my future en-
deavors.” Fifty percent of the students agreed or
strongly agreed with this statement. Thirty-five
percent marked this statement “neutral,” and only
15% disagreed (4 out of 28) with the statement.
Additional qualitative responses which support
the intent of the students to use the wiki tool in
the future included: “Good tool and am trying to
incorporate in other areas.” At a later date, two
students (on separate occasions) showed the in-
structor the new wiki they had created and how
they were using it in their profession to promote
lifelong learning.
From this experience, the author took away
several insights. Classroom teaching has evolved
with each generation. Educational techniques have
evolved from lecturing and memorization to dis-
cussion and critical analysis in more recent times.
In the 21st century, if the instructor approaches a
course from a student-centered stance, then he/
she will find new ways of communicating with
a digital native generation; “native speakers of
the digital language of computers, video games
and the Internet” (Prensky, 2001, p. 1). In prepar-
ing future adult educators, this instructor has an
ethical obligation to explore new technologies
and tools and to expose her students, or as one
student said “force us” to incorporate new ways
of teaching into ‘our’ repertoire. At the same time,
this instructor has an ethical obligation to examine
the proper use of each tool and the pedagogical
value it adds to the learning environment. Adult
students will change as each new generation
enters the program. There is a potential to have
adult students from the Millennials, GenXer, and
Baby Boomer generations. Each brings differ-
ent experiences and ways of learning. Quality
instructors have always adapted their classroom
teaching style to enhance the learning potential of
the students. Quality instructors must always be
looking for ways to augment the learning of the
student population taking their courses. Web 2.0
tools are just another way to expand the classroom,
not a replacement. The important issue is for this
instructor to take the available information and
improve each course by addressing some of the
weaknesses exposed by previous students and
maintaining the positive aspects expressed. In
this case, the instructor has already placed in her
teaching folder ways to demonstrate technical
aspects of the wiki to the students prior to asking
them to engage the tool for the assignment. The
instructor modified the assignment directions to
assist the students in grasping the learning objec-
tive for the course.
What are the next steps? This is one example
of an instructor incorporating Web 2.0 technolo-
gies into face-to-face courses. In the near future,
these courses will be adapted to a complete
online environment. The Web 2.0 technologies
used in this face-to-face experience can also be
incorporated into a hybrid or complete online
course experience. The chapter focused on the
generational differences and the incorporation
of Web 2.0 technologies. The learning environ-
ment and incorporation of Web 2.0 technologies
could also be affected by gender, economic class,
educational attainment and background, ethnicity,
and nationality. These could not be addressed in
this chapter, but should be investigated as well.
FUTURE TRENDS
Educators embraced the classroom environment
and have changed that environment as they came
to better understand the development of knowledge
and learning. Educators must also assist students
in developing the necessary skills to deal with a
world that will be increasingly affected by the
Web 2.0 technologies. The educational world of
tomorrow may not be bound by walls, so we must
help the adult students expand their skills and use
of the knowledge-based global economy.
More empirical studies need to be explored with
Web 2.0 technologies. The research is beginning to
flourish in this area; however, much of it is written
319
 Applying Web 2.0 Technologies to Traditional Teaching
about K-12 students or traditional undergraduate
students. The adult student population needs to
be examined as well. However, adult educators
should be reading the reports on undergraduate
student populations now, as they will be the adult
students in their programs soon. These studies need
to look at Web 2.0 technologies in face-to-face,
hybrid, or online learning situations.
CONCLUSION
With all the new technologies being developed, in-
structors must stay grounded in a student-centered
approach to the learning, and then explore the best
tools available to accomplish the learning objec-
tives. Instructors must break down the barriers that
are keeping them from exploring and embracing
new technologies. Educators have to step off the
side line and into the technology whirlpool. The
students may be from any generation. In the above
case study, the instructor only had Baby Boomers
and GenXers; however, in the very near future
there is a potential to have all three generations in a
course. The business world has been experiencing
and examining the generational blends for awhile
(Salkowitz, 2008). The adult education world has
the potential to also experience this blend. Think
how the above course experience might have been
changed by adding more students who are digital
natives rather than just digital immigrants. The
art of teaching should always be remade as new
knowledge is created.
REFERENCES
Collins, R. A., & Zacharakis, J. (2009). Impact
of e-learning on adult education: A postmodern
approach. In Wang, V. (Ed.), Handbook of re-
search on E-learning applications for career and
technical education: Technologies for vocational
training (pp. 286–296). Hershey, PA: IGI Global.
320
Fosnot, C. T. (Ed.). (2005). Constructivism:
Theory, perspectives, and practice (2nd ed.). New
York: Teachers College Press.
Freire, P. (1994). Pedagogy of the oppressed. New
York: Continuum.
Funk, T. (2009). Web 2.0 and beyond: Understand-
ing the new online business models, trends, and
technologies. Westport, CT: Praeger.
Greenhow, C., Robelia, B., & Hughes, J. (2009).
Learning, teaching, and scholarship in a digital
age: Web 2.0 and classroom research: What path
should we take now? Educational Researcher,
38(4), 246–259. doi:10.3102/0013189X09336671
Hazari, S., North, A., & Moreland, D. (2009).
Investigating pedagogical value of wiki technol-
ogy. Journal of Information Systems Education,
20(2), 187–198.
Hopper, K., & Hendricks, R. (2008). Technology
integration in the college classroom: A baker’s
dozen frugal but promising strategies. Educational
Technology, 48(5), 10–17.
Hsu, J. (2007). Innovative technologies for
education and learning. International Journal
of Information and Communication Technology
Education, 3(3), 70–89.
Huang, C. D., & Behara, R. S. (2007). Outcome-
driven experiential learning with web 2.0. Jour-
nal of Information Systems Education, 18(3),
329–336.
Knowles, M. (1980). The modern practice of adult
education: Andragogy versus pedagogy (2nd ed.).
New York: Cambridge Books.
Lenhart, A., & Fox, S. (2006). Bloggers: A portrait
of the internet’s new storytellers. Washington,
D.C.: Pew Internet and American Life Project.
Pink, D. (2006). A whole new mind: Why right-
brainers will rule the future. New York: Riverhead
Books.
Applying Web 2.0 Technologies to Traditional Teaching
Prensky, M. (2001). Digital natives, digital im-
migrants. Retrieved December 29, 2009, from
http://www.marcprensky.com/writing/
Rienzo, T., & Han, B. (2009). Microsoft or Google
web 2.0 tools for course management. Journal of
Information Systems Education, 20(2), 123–127.
Salkowitz, R. (2008). Generation blend: Manag-
ing across the technology age gap. Hoboken, NJ:
John Wiley & Sons.
Smith, A., & Rainie, L. (2008). The internet and
the 2008 election. Washington, DC: Pew Internet
and American Life Project.
Staley, D. (2009). Managing the platform:
Higher education and the logic of wikinomics.
Educause Review, 44(1), 36-47. Retrieved De-
cember 10, 2009, from http://www.educause.
edu/EDUCAUSE+Review/EDUCAUSERe-
viewMagazineVolume44/ManagingthePlatform-
HigherEduca/163579.
Tapscott, D., & Williams, A. D. (2008). Wikinom-
ics: How mass collaboration changes everything.
New York: Penguin Group.
Zhao, Y. (2009). Catching up or leading the way:
American education in the age of globalization.
Alexandria, VA: ASCD.
KEY TERMS AND DEFINITIONS
Baby Boomers: Born between 1946 and 1962.
GenXer (Generation X-ecutive): Born be-
tween 1963 and 1980.
Generational Attitude: Guiding principles
of a certain cohort of people shaped by common
historical experiences.
Millennials: Born between 1981 and 2000,
also referred to as the Net Generation or Nexters.
Social Scholarship: Combining the use of
print research with collaborative capabilities of
Web 2.0 technologies as a means to developing
new research and scholarship.
Web 2.0: The interactive, interconnected, open
source data world available to anyone via the high
bandwidths which allow rich media transmissions;
it is using the Internet to collaborate and share
among users, rather than as a network.
Weblogs: (blogs) is an online journal in reverse
order (showing the more recent entry first).
Wikis: A website which can be updated by
allowed members. It is an excellent tool for col-
laboration (especially when members are geo-
graphically dispersed).
321
322

Chapter 20
Insuring Self-Direction
and Flexibility in Distance
Learning for Adults:
Using Contracts
Mary C. Ware
State University of NY – Cortland, USA

ABSTRACT
Distance learning via the internet has become the key to reaching adult learners globally. Adult learn-
ers have been shown to benefit from such qualities as: provisions for self-directed learning, flexibility,
and frequent communication with the instructor in order to achieve success. Contract learning and
contract grading are two innovations popularized during the “individualized instruction” movement
of the 1970s which are being used to assist instructors of twenty-first century on-line learning courses
in providing for self-direction, flexibility and frequent communication. The chapter which follows will
provide an overview of contract learning and contract grading as it can be used with adult learners in
distance learning courses (e.g., courses supported by WebCT, Blackboard). The chapter will examine
adult learning theories which support contract learning/grading as well as provide information on de-
signing learning contracts and grading contracts which are appropriate for adult learners.

INTRODUCTION • The provision of self-directed learning

As stated by Wang (2006, 2008) distance learning
via internet technologies is becoming the key to
involving adult learners across the globe. The
knowledge already held by specialists in the field
of adult learning gives us much information about
HOW adults prefer to learn. Among the qualities
needed in an effective course for adult learners are:
(pace and choice of options)
• The provision of flexibility (so that the
learning can relate to the experiential needs
of the particular learner)
• Frequent communication with the instruc-
tor (so that students know “how they are
doing”).

DOI: 10.4018/978-1-61692-906-0.ch020
Insuring Self-Direction and Flexibility in Distance Learning for Adults
Figure 1.
Malcolm Knowles, often called the “father
of adult education”, suggests three reasons why
self-directed learning is important:
There is evidence that people who take the initia-
tive in their own learning learn more things, and
learn better, than people who simply wait to be
taught. (Knowles, 1975. p. 14)
Self-directed learning takes advantage of our
natural processes of psychological development.
‘An essential aspect of maturing is developing the
ability to take increasing responsibility for our
own lives - to become increasingly self-directed’
(Knowles, 1975, p. 15).
Most distance learning and technological learning
systems require students to have skills of self-
direction. ‘Students entering [such] programs
without having learned the skills of self-directed
inquiry will experience anxiety, frustration, and
often failure, and so will their teachers’(Knowles,
1975, p. 15).
Flexibility (i.e., provisions for different op-
tions in evidencing one’s ability) is also important
because each adult learner brings different experi-
ences to the learning environment, and the distance
learning course should dovetail with that experi-
ence seamlessly. In order to insure flexibility, a
variety of options must be provided to the learner.
Adult learners tend to be somewhat fearful of
self-directed learning, as well as technologically
mediated learning, and often need guidance to
recognize that they are “doing it right”. Frequent
communication with the instructor assists in assur-
ing them that with self-directed learning, there is
no “one right way” and that they are proceeding
suitably.
BACKGROUND
Pedagogy vs. Andragogy
Many authors have written on the issue of adult
learning (andragogy) and some have contrasted
its principles with those of “pedagogy”, usually
connected with ways of teaching young people.
In recent years, more debate has occurred over
whether andragogy is really a set of principles
of “good teaching” useful for any teacher. The
author has included the chart of contrasts here
(from CASSL, 2009) to highlight the principles of
andragogy, as the author feels learning contracts
help to meet most of the requirements of andra-
gogy. For those who are producing materials for
on-line learning for adults, these principles might
be useful. (See Figure 1)
Another helpful comparison of Andragogy and
Pedagogy appeared in Kelly (2006) (See Table 1)
323
 Insuring Self-Direction and Flexibility in Distance Learning for Adults

Table 1.

Assumptions of Pedagogical and Androgogical Models (Kelly, 2006)

Assumption about: Pedagogy Andragogy
Concept of the learner Dependent on teacher (passive) Increasingly self-directed (active)
Role of the teacher Authority figure Guide and facilitator
Role of the learner’s prior experiences To be added to more than used as a resource A rich resource for learning by self and others.
Readiness to learn Uniform by age level and curriculum Develops from life tasks and problems.
Orientation to learning Subject-centered Task or problem-centered to meet life needs.
Motivation By external rewards and punishments By internal incentives and curiosity.
(“credit”)

These characteristics of andragogy will be
revisited later in the chapter to illustrate ways that
contract learning and contract grading help to
meet the criteria implied by both these matrices.
USING CONTRACTS: A
LOGICAL SOLUTION
It is clear that the instructional designer of on-line
learning experiences for adults must seek ways to
help students become more self-directed, to move
their motivation from “pleasing the teacher” or
“working for a grade” to learning for learning’s
sake. This chapter will introduce contract learning
and contract grading, both ways which the author
and other researchers/practitioners believe can
help achieve those important goals.
In a contract learning setting, students choose
a contract which includes the “body of work” for
which they will be responsible. Once completed,
students will receive the grade for which they
contracted. By definition, the learning contract
helps the student become more self-directed, as
he/she helps to select the items included in the
contract and the means by which competence
will be demonstrated. Because learning contracts
allow the learner to choose among activities, the
contract is flexible. Finally, in an on-line setting,
communication is essential so the three criteria
mentioned earlier (i.e., self-direction, flexibility
and frequent communication) are each “built in”
when contract learning is used in an on-line course.
Contract learning is not a new concept. It has
been used in secondary and higher education since
the 1970s. Contracts may take many forms, which
will be discussed below. The premise, however,
is the provision of choice for students (among
options) to demonstrate their competency; and,
perhaps, in the amount of work they contract to
complete. Much research has shown that when
students exercise choice they are more satisfied
with their education and so satisfaction (as well
as competence,) becomes an added bonus (Filak
& Sheldon, 2003).
DEFINITIONS
It is important to have clear definitions for terms
which will be used often in this chapter. Anderson,
Boud and Sampson (1996) defined a learning
contract as
a document used to assist in the planning of a
learning project. It is a written agreement, nego-
tiated between a learner and a teacher, lecturer
or staff advisor that a particular activity will be
undertaken in order to achieve a specific learning
goal or goals. (p. 2)

324
Insuring Self-Direction and Flexibility in Distance Learning for Adults
Generally a learning contract will include: the
learning objectives/goals of the project; strategies
or resources available to achieve the objectives;
evidence which will be produced to indicate the
objectives have been achieved; and the criteria
used to assess the evidence (1996, p. 4).
An adaptation of the learning contract, one
which the author has also found useful, is the
grading contract. As defined by Harvey (1972) in
a comprehensive literature review, this involves:
a business-like arrangement in which the in-
structor defines the performance for each grade
and the student defines the performance level
toward which he will work, and signs a contract
in which the instructor is committed to assigning
this predetermined grade if the student attains the
appropriate performance level. (p. 42)
A more recent definition (Spidell et al., 2006)
includes much the same description:
a grading contract will refer to an evaluation tool,
either developed by the instructor or co-created
with students, that allows students to choose indi-
vidually the grade they would like to achieve in the
classroom and then outlines specific student and
instructor responsibilities needed for the students
to receive the grade they have chosen. (p. 66)
The author has used grading contracts for a
number of years in her hybrid courses with adult
students (Ware, 2010). This contract system al-
lows students to select the grade they wish to
“work toward” and lists activities which must be
completed in order to receive that grade. These
contracts seem to take the emphasis away from
students’ asking each other “what did you get?”
when they receive papers or assignments back, and
allows instructor feedback to be more construc-
tive and less grade oriented. Grading contracts
are somewhat more structured than learning
contracts (which often allow the student to list
learning opportunities and evaluative activities.)
Both the learning contract and grading contract
are discussed here, because both hold the poten-
tial to assist instructors in reaching adult on-line
learners in ways which meet their learning needs.
HISTORICAL BACKGROUND
Individualized instruction (from which learning
contracts evolved) became a “hot topic” in the
1970s. Several prolific writer/researchers con-
tributed to the body of knowledge at that time. As
early as 1968 William Romey described learning
contracts in his book entitled, Inquiry Techniques
for Teaching Science. Rita and Kenneth Dunn
(1972) wrote extensively about designing student
learning contracts. Thompson and Poppen (1972)
also provided information on learning contracts as
a means for developing individual responsibility
in students.
These early writings were more focused upon
“how to do it” and did not include much theoretical
background. In 1983, Carl Rogers explicated the
theoretical foundation for contract learning in his
oft-quoted work, Freedom to Learn for the 80s.
Rogers characterized the teacher’s role as that
of facilitator and exhorted the instructor to ask:
how can I help him or her find the resources – the
people, the experiences, the learning facilities,
the books, the knowledge in myself – which will
help them in ways that will provide answers to
things that concern them (italics mine), the things
they are eager to learn? And then, later, how can
I help them evaluate their own progress (p. 136).
Malcolm Knowles (1986), one of the most
influential writers on both adult education and
contract learning, continued in this theoretical
bent by suggesting that faculty must
change their psychic reward system from valu-
ing the extent to which the learners conform to
their direction to valuing the extent to which the
325
 Insuring Self-Direction and Flexibility in Distance Learning for Adults
learners take the initiative in directing their own
learning (p. 246).
CONTRACTS TODAY
Learning contracts became popular in the 1970s
and 1980s, but were not the subject of much writ-
ing and research in the late 1980s and 1990s, until
the online learning movement and constructivist
learning theory began to lead instructors back in
that direction. As Codde (2006) stated,
Education needs to be an active, rather than a
passive process. The students’ roles include par-
ticipating in their own learning and developing the
skills of self-directed inquiry. Learning contracts
allow students to structure their own learning and
to be active participants. (n.p.)
The ideas above are echoed in the writings of
those supporting constructivist learning (Brooks
& Brooks, 2002; Fosnot, 1989; Kamii, 1991).
It becomes obvious that constructivists would
embrace learning contracts when one notes that
Teachers who base their practice on constructiv-
ism reject the notions that meaning can be passed
on to learners via symbols and transmission, that
learners can incorporate a teacher’s understand-
ing for their own use (Fosnot & Wakefield, 2005,
pp. 1-2).
An increased interest in contract learning has
occurred since 2000, both because of construc-
tivist learning theory and the growth of on-line
instruction. Current resources still build upon
the precepts of the “founding fathers” (e.g.,
Knowles, 1986; Rogers 1983) and reinforce their
ideas (Guglielmino, Guglielmino, & Durr, 2000,
Mabrouck, 2003).
326
RECENT USES OF CONTRACTS IN
DISTANCE AND HYBRID LEARNING
On-line learning and research related to its imple-
mentation have brought about a resurgence of
interest in contract learning and contract grading.
Because on-line learning requires a strong mea-
sure of self-direction, research on self-directed
learning and ways to motivate adult learners in
non-face-to-face contexts has become a popular
research topic again. Chyung (2007) reviewed
recent literature (1999-2007) on contract learning
and contract grading for a study of motivation of
on-line learners. Chyung discussed self-directed
learning and self-regulated learning as compli-
mentary processes necessary for the adult learner.
As Chyung (2007, p. 22) noted:
The students felt more self-directed and motivated
during contract learning, but what they really liked
was being able to select assignments that were
relevant to their interests and needs.
Contract learning has been shown to increase
the quality of self-directed learning also (Brockett
& Hiemstra, 1991). Chyung (2007, p. 3) sum-
marized work from a number of studies showing
that contract learning had a role in helping create
self-directed learners:
studies have revealed that contract learning is
an effective instructional strategy to address
various factors that potentially lead to improving
motivation, such as confidence, value-recognition,
responsibility, empowerment and satisfaction.
(Bauer, 1985; Boyer, 2003; Chan & Wai-Tong,
2000; Lemieux, 2001; Lewis, 2004; Williams &
Williams, 1999)
Boyer (2003) for example, points out that:
The advent of online learning has created a de-
mand for structures to facilitate the construction
of knowledge, the formation of learning commu-
Insuring Self-Direction and Flexibility in Distance Learning for Adults
nities, and the reinforcement of adult learning
pedagogies…. Using scaffolds to assist with an
autonomous group learning process was found to
be very successful, increasing student satisfaction
and overall learning outcomes. (p. 369)
Chan and Wai-Tong (2000) designed a study
to test the effects of learning contracts with third
year nursing students. The students used a learn-
ing contract in their clinical placement in mental
health. The researchers found that:
students and clinical instructors generally agreed
that there was an increase in students’ autonomy
and motivation in learning with the use of a learn-
ing contract. It [the contract] also increased the
sharing between students and clinical instructors
(p. 298).
Lewis (2004) designed a study to assess the
effects of a learning contract on students enrolled
in a course designed to improve college reading
skills. This study found that ILCS (Independent
Learning Contract System) was an effective learn-
ing strategy for these students.
Other recent work documenting the value
of contract learning includes Berger, Caffarella
and O’Donnell’s (2004) chapter in a basic adult
learning text (Galbraith, 2004) and numerous
website sources (Illinois On-Line Network, 2007),
Saskatoon Public Schools (2008).
The Illinois On-Line Network (2007), ION
for short, includes contract learning as one of ten
strategies which can be adapted from use in the
traditional classroom to that of the on-line setting.
A suggestion from ION (2007) is:
Sample learning contracts can be placed on a
web page for the student to use as examples,
and students can be encouraged to brainstorm
ideas for learning contracts with their online
peers as well as negotiate the final contract with
the instructor through utilizing email or online
conferencing. (n.p.)
SAMPLES OF LEARNING
CONTRACTS AND GRADING
CONTRACTS
In order to visualize the way a contract might
look, a sample template for a learning contract is
included in Table 2. This contract is a guideline for
the student, who will fill in the needed information
(e.g., goal, learning resources, and strategies) and
obtain approval from the instructor to embark on
the contract agreed upon.
Finally, a grading contract (different because
the learning activities are already designated and
the grade is selected by the student) is shown in
Table 3. This contract has been used by the author
in a graduate course in Gender Issues in Educa-
tion.
As can be seen from these tables, a Learning
Contract and Grading Contract differ in terms of
provisions for student autonomy. In the Learning
Contract, the student selects the means of learning
and ways to evidence that learning. In a grading
contract, the student selects the grade to be worked
toward and thus exercises choice mainly on the
amount of work required.
PROS AND CONS OF CONTRACT
LEARNING/CONTRACT GRADING
In searching literature for pros and cons of contract
learning/grading, it is not surprising that more
positive features are noted than negative ones. In
most cases, the authors are proponents of contract
learning and thus emphasize its positives. Taylor
(1980) pointed out that one of the most notable
positive aspects of contract grading is that students
know from the beginning of the course what is
necessary to achieve a given grade. Another posi-
tive aspect is that there is usually the assumption
that students can repeat or improve on assignments
until they reach the desired standard. As Taylor
(1980, p. 18) stated, “the students feel a sense of
freedom from the stigma of permanent failure”.
327
 Insuring Self-Direction and Flexibility in Distance Learning for Adults

Table 2. Learning Contract Template

1. Personal Goal
The personal goal is a brief statement of what the learner intends to accomplish via an independent project.
For example = By the end of the semester I will design and develop (Fill in your course name, topick for study, video, script, etc.).
2. Learning Resources
What resources will be used to accomplish the goal? Specifics are necessary.
When the names of institutions/companies, products, or professional organizations intended for exploration – names and other relevant
information should be identified and recorded, such as:
€€€€€-Print material you intend to use
€€€€€-Websites you plan to use as a resource
Keep a record of your process. Some examples:
€€€€€-Notes on readings
€€€€€-Review of a useful book
€€€€€-Website review/summary
€€€€€-Results of a consultation with an expert
€€€€€-Diagram from a book
3. Learning strategies
For each part of your investigation write a description of your planned strategy.
Examples:
€€€€€-An interview via phone
€€€€€-Email
€€€€€-Site visit
€€€€€-Library research
€€€€€-Websurfing
€€€€€-Review of existing material
4. Timeline
A list of the steps with dates (start/completion) of each step in the project.
5. Results
Indicate expected results from the projects. These items must be something someone else (i.e., classmates, instructor, colleague) can see,
hear or touch.
Results can include and are certainly not limited to:
€€€€€-Presentation
€€€€€-Written/videotape/audiotape or other media work
€€€€€-A website
6. Evaluation Criteria
Describe exactly how the project should be evaluated to determine how the goal has been accomplished. This refers to both Personal
Goal (#1 above) as well as Results (#5).
For example:
If
(a) in the personal goal section it states clearly that learning about writing an evaluation instrument is a primary objective
and
(b) in the results section it states that an example based on the course you are preparing wll be developed,
then
the evaluation criterion could read as follows:
“The example of an evaluation instrument will clearly and specifically show the relationship between that instrument and the course
objectives.”
Adapted from Winters (2000).

Students are also given practice in making com-
mitments to fulfill learning goals.
The ION Network (2007) lists several positive
aspects of contract learning:
Contract learning can bring about many practi-
cal benefits, including deeper involvement of
the learner in the learning activities which they
themselves have been involved in planning. Once
a learner passes through the stage of confusion
and anxiety associated with developing a contract,

328
Insuring Self-Direction and Flexibility in Distance Learning for Adults

Table 3. Sample Grading Contract

Grading Contract: WST 552/EDU 552

Select the grade you wish to work toward – I reserve the right to assign + and -‘s and also to request (if necessary) that you take an INC
to reach the grade’s standard.(this rarely happens – usually relates to quality of written work)
Other than that – you can be assured you will receive the grade contracted for, if youcomplete the requirements of the contract.
Circle the grade you are working toward, sign the contract and return it to the instructor by (date)
For an A:
Regular entries three to four times a week - reflective journal
End of course paper reflecting on journal and one’s growth
Choice of one optional Gender book (read book, design poster session which may be done with a partner, Individual paper integrating
its content with readings/discussions of this class)
Gender Autobiography
WebCT assignment on History of Women’s Education
Gender audit (conducted in a classroom)completed successfully with a paper which analyzes your findings
Class presentation on topical area (may be done with a partner)
Read all course assignments
For a B:
Regular entries at least twice a week- reflective journal
End of course paper reflecting on journal and one’s growth
Choice of one optional Gender book (read book, prepare summary for class)
Gender Autobiography
WebCT assignment on History of Women’s Education
Gender audit OR Gender communication activity (may be done in a
meeting, such as dept meeting, school board, community meeting, etc)
Class presentation on topical area (may be done with a partner)
Read all course assignments
For a C:
Regular entries at least once a week- journal
Gender Autobiography
WebCT assignment on History of Women’s Education
Gender communication activity
Read all course assignments and participate in class

he/she will get excited about carrying out their
own plans. Another benefit of utilizing contract
learning is an increase of accountability, since the
learning contract provides more functional and
validated evidence of the learning outcomes. The
contract also provides a means for the learner to
receive continuous feedback regarding progress
toward accomplishing learning objectives. (n.p.)
On the negative side, it was noted, by Tay-
lor (1980) and other researchers that for a few
students not used to taking responsibility, the
contract system might increase anxiety. In an on-
line situation, where there also might be anxiety
regarding the use of technology, this could be a
major roadblock. Spidell et al. (2006) also found
anxiety and resistance among some composition
students when she introduced learning contracts.
There is also the issue of students being allowed
to repeat or re-do unsatisfactory work. This aspect
of contract learning can increase the workload for
an instructor, who may find him/herself reading
and re-reading assignments (Ware, 2010).
Anderson et al. (1996) mention that contract
learning may also be more difficult for foreign
students, or those whose first language is not
English. These authors also point out that learn-
ing contracts/contract grading may have a socio-
economic bias, with learning contracts reflecting
“the values and aspirations of educated, middle
class society.” (p. 136)
Anderson et al. (1996) summarize the major
objections to contract learning/contract grading
with the following:

329
 Insuring Self-Direction and Flexibility in Distance Learning for Adults
Table 4.
Concept of the learner increasingly self-directed
Role of the teacher Guide and facilitator
Role of the learner’s prior experiences rich resource for learning (self and others)
Readiness to learn develops out of life tasks and problems
Orientation to learning task or problem centered
Motivation internal motivation and curiosity
The use of contracts assumes a willingness on
the part of learners to take a large measure of
responsibility for their learning and while many
are happy to do so, others are more reluctant,
even resistant (pp. 137-138).
PUTTING IT TOGETHER:
CONTRACT LEARNING/
GRADING AND ANDRAGOGY
If we now revisit the qualities set forth for quality
teaching of adults (andragogy) it is possible to
see how contract learning and/or contract grading
can assist to achieve each of these qualities. From
Kelly (2006) we saw the following characteristics
of andragogy (See Table 4)
Focusing upon Kelly’s points (Table 4) one
can see that these are almost identical to the
positive aspects of instruction using learning or
grading contracts. The learner is increasingly
self-directed as he/she develops a learning contract
or selects a grading contract. The teacher is guide
and facilitator, as he/she helps the student find
sample contracts and fill in their details OR pro-
vides a set of options for a grading contract, but
leaves it to the student to select the option(s) he/
she desires. The learner’s prior experience is a
guide when preparing a learning contract and a
resource when completing a grading contract.
Both learning contracts and grading contracts
grow out of life tasks and problems. That means
that the orientation to learning is also task or
problem centered. Finally, the student is self-
330
motivated, as he/she has designed his or her own
learning contract or selected a grading contract
which suits his/her situation.
Although slightly differently categorized, we
saw similar characteristics in the CASSL (2000)
document shown earlier. Using the CASSL cat-
egories, it is possible to see how learning contracts
or grading contracts meet these characteristics:
• Learner structured: A learning contract
is usually designed BY the learner, in co-
operation with, or under the guidance of an
instructor
• Minimal control by the teacher: Learning
contracts vary in how much control is ex-
erted by the instructor, however most
would agree that there is less control than
in a didactic “presentation of information”
class
• Focus on assimilation of learning from
past experience: It is assumed that, since
the learner designs his/her own contract,
he/she would incorporate learning from
past experience. Perhaps in a grading
contract there is a bit less of this quality
involved.
• Encourages divergent thinking: Since
contracts may have many outcomes (e.g.,
the learner selects how he/she will dem-
onstrate learning) the learner is forced, in
some ways, to become a divergent thinker.
Instead of having a common learning ac-
tivity shared by all in the class, a learning
contract allows the learner to design the
Insuring Self-Direction and Flexibility in Distance Learning for Adults
ways he/she wishes to learn, and demon-
strate that learning. This, hopefully, will
encourage divergent thinking. In the au-
thor’s experience, this quality is present
through contract learning, as students of-
ten select very different ways to demon-
strate learning (i.e., when asked to present
a timeline of historical events, in one class,
one student produced a giant set of foot-
steps which led us about 40 feet down the
hall; another student wrote an epic poem;
and another created a mobile which took
up half of the back wall of the classroom).
• Focus on thinking/doing: Since students
design their contracts, and adult students
usually prefer “applied” learning, the em-
phasis will most often be on “thinking/
doing”.
• Content supplied partly by students:
Again, since students design their con-
tracts, it is likely that they will bring to bear
on the task, prior experience and knowl-
edge they have – thus supplying content.
• Outcomes evolve as learning progresses:
A learning contract should be designed as
a structure for guiding learning, early in
the course, however it should be flexible
enough to allow for evolving outcomes.
Thus, based on two models of andragogy, it
is possible to see that using learning or grading
contracts in on-line learning can help the instructor
provide for various facets of self-directed learn-
ing and meet the criteria for good teaching with
androgogical principles.
CONTRACT LEARNING/CONTRACT
GRADING PREMISES
The following premises are derived from literature
review and the author’s experiences with contract
learning:
• Contract learning and contract grading
seem especially promising for use with
adult learners.
• Contract learning tends to increase student
autonomy, and as such, may lead to greater
student satisfaction.
• Both contract learning and contract grad-
ing can help adapt courses to the needs of
adult learners by allowing them flexibil-
ity, both in learning options and grading
options.
• Neither contract learning nor contract grad-
ing simplify an instructor’s task, although
they may appear to at first glance.
• The amount of flexibility allowed in learn-
ing and grading contracts (e.g., number of
choices allowed; flexibility of deadlines)
must match the instructor’s teaching style
and comfort level.
• The amount of flexibility allowed in both
learning and grading contracts is a “two
edged sword” – allowing students free-
dom, but also opening up the possibility
that the instructor will be blamed (in the
end) for the consequences of that freedom
(e.g., students’ leaving items until the last
minute).
Suggestions for the User of
Contracts in an Online Course
The suggestions which follow are derived from the
author’s experience using contract learning and
contract grading in courses designed for adults
and delivered either on line or in a hybrid format:
Orienting Students to Contract
Learning/Grading
Self-directed learning is often new to the adult
learner. In the author’s experience, few if any of
my students had encountered a contract grading
experience during their educational career. Due
to this phenomenon, the burden of explanation
331
 Insuring Self-Direction and Flexibility in Distance Learning for Adults
falls on the instructor using the contract. At the
first meeting of class, the author typically spends
perhaps 30 minutes or so describing the contract
option and the responsibilities it places on both
the students and the teacher. The contract option
is explained in broad terms. At this point it is
also announced that, unless students come into
the course with a certain potential standard of
performance, the contract option may not “work”.
Questions usually are many and the discussion
tends to be positive. The author’s experience has
confirmed a belief that some students come into
her courses expecting a contract (e.g., having
heard about it from former students). They tend
to want the contract option, as they have heard
good things about it. When the author mentions
that writing will be judged as a pre-requisite to
allowing the contract option, they seem motivated
to produce a quality writing sample (so that they
will be “allowed” to have a contract).
Assessing Students’ Entry Abilities
Related to the above comments, the author often
assigns a task in an early class session which will
allow the assessment of the students’ potential to
do self-directed work AND to write at a standard
which will allow the course to progress at an ad-
vanced undergraduate or graduate level. In one
of the author’s classes this assignment is to write
a baseline philosophy of education. It is made
clear that this is a “baseline” (like a pre-test) and
not something on which they will be graded, but
a task used to assess their self-direction and writ-
ing skills. In another course which requires more
introspection, students are required to write an
“autobiography of their learning”. Obviously trust
is an issue in an early class session, but these as-
signments usually provide sufficient information.
First – if any students do NOT hand the assignment
in on time, there is a “warning sign” of lack of
responsibility. If any student shows real difficulty
in writing at a level which would be required for
the course, that student can be counseled to either
332
drop the course or use the services of the writing
center. Either the philosophy of education or the
“autobiography” is suitable as a quick assess-
ment regarding whether the contract option will
be suitable for the class. In almost any course
for adults, similar assignments yielding an early
writing sample would serve the same purpose.
Enforcing Deadlines
As previously noted, one of the difficulties en-
countered with contracts is the issue of deadlines.
The author sees herself as attempting to instill
self-direction in students, most of whom are
adults with other career and personal demands. In
much of the required coursework of the author’s
courses, intermediate deadlines are not essential,
so the author has, in the past, allowed students to
set their own pacing and turn in work when they
are ready. This has caused the author difficulties,
however, as students often leave assignments to the
end (perhaps because of pressure in other classes
which DO have deadlines). These students often
blame their instructor for the backlog they experi-
ence in this course near the end of the semester.
The evaluation backlog also causes the author/
instructor difficulties in handling all the last minute
grading. Given these problem areas, a recommen-
dation might be to include more deadlines within
the contract, and perhaps establish a penalty (if
one finds this necessary) for late work.
Keeping Lines of Communication Open
Perhaps the main recommendation about contract
learning is the admonition to instructors using
these methods to keep the lines of communication
open. Through many conversations with students
over the years, the author has realized that some
students do not TRUST the premise of the contract
and still question the instructor almost daily to
find whether their work is “OK”. Adult students,
especially those returning to higher education
after a hiatus, often question their abilities and
Insuring Self-Direction and Flexibility in Distance Learning for Adults
need reassurance. Frequent communication with
individual students is the key to solving these prob-
lems/issues. The author teaches hybrid courses
(i.e., some face-to-face classes, some on-line)
on a web-based platform (WebCT) which allows
her to communicate with individuals or groups of
students at a moment’s notice. She also makes her
email address available to students and lets them
know that she is an ‘email junkie” who answers
email almost every hour of the day or night. This
“invitation” to communicate with her seems to
make her privy to almost every concern students
have. It is this opportunity for individual dialogue
which can assist in developing trust, in moving
students from depending on their instructor for
quality control to depending on themselves. The
conversations which contracts have opened up
are perhaps almost as important as the contracts
themselves.
A general recommendation borne of these
experiences would be – if you use contracts, make
yourself available to students with feedback as
instantaneously as you possibly can. However…
remember when responding, to continually push
students to do self-evaluation before relying on the
instructor. If the student’s question is an instruc-
tion they do not understand, it may be quickly
clarified – but if the question is, “how much do
you want? Or “how many pages” students are led
to realize those decisions are theirs! A frequent
response is– do what is necessary to accomplish
the task. While this answer is originally frustrating
to students accustomed to quick answers like “7
pages”, the end results are much better, as they
self-regulate and self-direct.
Contract learning and contract grading stimu-
lates many on-line discussions between individual
students and the instructor. All of these exchanges
require extensive out-of-class time, but they re-
sult in what the author would evaluate as added
personal growth, outside the realm of the class
content itself.
Future Trends
A new peak of interest in contract learning has
begun to appear with the advent of widespread
on-line learning and hybrid instruction. Adult
students tend to prefer on-line or hybrid learning,
since these may be incorporated into a lifestyle
that includes full time work, being home-bound,
or other constraints common to adults. For the
same reasons, these adult students tend to prefer
learning contracts which allow self-direction and
flexibility.
The survey of literature above makes a num-
ber of points which can have value in the future,
related to contract design and use in on-line learn-
ing. Chyung (2007) notes the value of variety
in the learning options offered in contracts, as
students appreciate the choices offered, and these
options might more easily be offered in on-line
courses than in face-to-face courses. Spidell et al.
(2006) study of forms of anxiety and resistance
to contracts suggests another focus of research
(e.g., ways to alleviate such anxiety). Another
recent trend is that of mobile learning (e.g., using
personal data assistants, cell phones and other
mobile devices to store and access distance learn-
ing aids). Learning contracts are amenable to any
new technology which will appear (even those
items we cannot yet imagine) because contracts
are “open ended” and flexible. It will be essential
to continue research whose focus is on-learning
contracts as they relate to student’s motivation,
creativity and self-direction in on-line and hybrid
classes, and the impact on faculty using them. It
would also be useful to survey on-line and hybrid
instructors to determine the scope of learning
contracts and/or grading contracts, if any, being
used in these settings.
On-Line Resources for Users
of Contract Learning
Another “future trend” is the unselfishness of
instructional designers who have shared examples
333
 Insuring Self-Direction and Flexibility in Distance Learning for Adults
of their work on the Web. Experts in the field of
adult education have placed many resources in
websites to assist faculty who wish to implement
contract learning. Especially notable is Roger
Hiemstra’s (2009a) website which provides a set
of resources related to adult education in general,
and contract learning in particular. His website
including “ASTD TRAIN-THE-TRAINER PRO-
GRAM” (2009b) contains a wealth of information.
The University of Medicine and Dentistry of New
Jersey (2006) has a website dedicated to “Ac-
tive Learning/Self-directed-Contract Learning”
which is comprehensive and up to date. Sample
contracts are available in many locations includ-
ing the resource (Winters, 2000) noted in Table I
above. The ION network (mentioned previously)
is another valuable resource in this area. These
are only a few of the many resources which can
assist instructors in future implementation of this
valuable concept of contract learning.
CONCLUSION
On-line courses designed for adult students seem
especially suited to the use of learning contracts
and contract grading. This chapter contains refer-
ences to relevant literature in the areas of adult
learning and self-directed learning which may
assist an instructor in incorporating this method
of assessment into his/her on-line course design. It
is especially emphasized that adult learners prefer
to be self-directing, need flexibility in instruction
and need much reassurance (especially early in
an on-line course) if they are to be successful.
All these qualities can be achieved by the use
of learning or grading contracts. An analysis of
several paradigms of andragogy (CASSL, 2000;
Kelly, 2006) have also been used to show the “fit”
between the needs of adult learners and the use of
learning contracts and grading contracts.
A move to contract learning or contract grading
in an on-line course is not offered as a time-saver
for the faculty member – in fact it may lead to
334
more time spent in student/faculty interaction
than existed before. However, contract learning
or contract grading in the on-line learning setting
holds the promise of moving the responsibility
for quality work from the faculty member as
“task master” to the student, as “arbiter of his/
her own best work”. Contracts have the potential
for providing the option of choices which can al-
low flexibility for the adult student; the option of
self-direction, which is needed for adult learning/
motivation and, with careful instructor planning,
the option of frequent communication, which is
needed to assure adult learners’ success in the
on-line teaching/learning environment.
REFERENCES
Anderson, G., Boud, D., & Sampson, J. (1996).
Learning contracts. London: Kogan Page.
Berger, N., Caffarella, R., & O’Donnell, J. (2004).
Learning contracts. In Galbraith, M. (Ed.), Adult
learning methods: A guide for effective instruc-
tion (3rd ed., pp. 289–319). Malabar, FL: Kreiger.
Boyer, N. R. (2003). The learning contract pro-
cess. Quarterly Review of Distance Education,
4(4), 369–383.
Brockett, R. G., & Hiemstra, R. (1991). Self-
direction in adult learning: Perspectives on theory,
research, and practice. New York: Routledge.
Brooks, J. G., & Brooks, M. (2002). In search
of understanding: The case for constructivist
classrooms. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
CASSL. (2009). Adult learning theory. Retrieved
September 8, 2009, from www.crc.losrios.edu/
Documents/cassl/AdultLearningTheory.pdf
Chan, S. W., & Wai-Tong, C. (2000). Implement-
ing contract learning in a clinical context: Report
on a study. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 31(2),
298–305. doi:10.1046/j.1365-2648.2000.01297.x
Insuring Self-Direction and Flexibility in Distance Learning for Adults
Chyung, S. Y. (2007). Invisible motivation of on-
line learners during contract learning. The Journal
of Educators Online, 4(1), 1–22.
Codde, J. R. (2006). Learning contracts in the
college classroom. Retrieved May 13, 2009, from
www.msu.edu/user/coddejos/contract.htm
Dunn, R. S., & Dunn, K. J. (1972). Practical ap-
proaches to individualizing instruction: Contracts
and other effective teaching strategies. West
Nyack, NY: Parker Publishing Company.
Filak, V. F., & Sheldon, K. N. (2003). Student psy-
chological need satisfaction and college teacher
course evaluations. Educational Psychology, 23(3),
235–247. doi:10.1080/0144341032000060084
Fosnot, C. T. (1989). Enquiring teachers, enquir-
ing learners. New York: Teachers College Press
(also published in Portuguese).
Fosnot, C. T., & Wakefield, A. P. (2005). A brief
history of ACT: The association for constructivist
teaching [Electronic version]. The Constructivist,
16(1). Retrieved May 14, 2009, from http://www.
odu.edu/educ/act/journal/vol16no1/index.html
Galbraith, M. (Ed.). (2004). Adult learning meth-
ods: a guide for effective instruction (3rd ed.).
Malabar, FL: Krieger.
Guglielmino, L., Guglielmino, P., & Durr, R.
(2000). Learning contracts: A learning technique
and a developmental process. In G. Piskurich,
Beckschi, & B. Hall (Eds.), The ASTD handbook
of training design and delivery (396-414). New
York: McGraw-Hill.
Harvey, A. (1972). Student contracts – a break
in the grading game. Education Canada. 12(3),
40-44. (Eric Document Reproductions Service
No. EJ 068 037).
Hiemstra, R. (2009a). Roger Hiemstra’s web page.
Retrieved May 14, 2009, from www-distance.syr.
edu/distancenew.html
Hiemstra, R. (2009b). Supportive Materials for
Adult Learning. Session 1. ASTD Train-The-
Trainer Program. Retrieved May 25, 2009, from
http://www-distance.syr.edu/train1.html
Illinois On Line Learning Network. (2007). In-
structional strategies for online courses. Retrieved
May 29, 2009, from www.ion.illinois.edu/resourc-
es/tutorials/pedagogy/instructionalstrategies.asp
Kamii, C. (1991). Toward autonomy: The im-
portance of critical thinking and choice making.
School Psychology Review, 20(3), 382–388.
Kelly, D. (2006). Adult learners: Character-
istics, theories, motivations, learning environ-
ment. Retrieved December 4, 2008, from http://
www.dit.ie/media/documents/lifelonglearning/
adlearn_chars.doc
Knowles, S. (1986). Using learning contracts.
San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Lewis, J. (2004). The independent learning
contract system: Motivating students enrolled in
college reading courses. Reading Improvement,
41(3), 188–194.
Mabrouk, P. (2003). Research learning contracts:
a useful tool for facilitating successful under-
graduate research experiences. CUR Quarterly.
Retrieved May 28, 2009, from www.sc.edu/our/
faculty_learning.shtml
Rogers, C. (1983). Freedom to learn for the 80s.
Columbus, OH: Charles E. Merrill.
Romey, W. (1968). Inquiry techniques for teach-
ing science. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Saskatoon Public Schools website (2008). What
are learning contracts? Retrieved May 29, 2009,
from http://olc.spsd.sk.ca/DE/PD/instr/strats/
learningcontracts/index.html
Spidell, C., & Thelin, W. H. (2006). Not ready to
let go: A study of resistance to grading contracts.
Composition Studies, 34(1), 35–68.
335
 Insuring Self-Direction and Flexibility in Distance Learning for Adults
Taylor, H. (1980). Contract grading - ERIC Clear-
inghouse on Tests, Measurement and Evaluation.
Princeton, NJ. (. Eric Document Reproductions
Service No. ED, 198, 152.
Thompson, C., & Poppen, W. (1972). For those
who care: Ways of relating to youth. Columbus,
Ohio: Charles E. Merrill Publishing Company.
University of Medicine and Dentistry of New
Jersey. (2006). Active learning/self-directed
learning/contract learning. Retrieved May 14,
2009, from http://cte.umdnj.edu/active_learning/
active_sdl.cfm
Wang, V. C. X. (2008). Enhancing the right to
education through distance learning in China.
Asian Journal of Distance Education, 6(2), 66–76.
Wang, V. C. X., & Kreysa, P. (2006). Instructional
strategies of distance education instructors in
China. The Journal of Educators Online, 3(1),
1–25.
Ware, M. (2010). Learning contracts as part of
instructional design and evaluation. In Wang, V.
C. X. (Ed.), Assessment and evaluation of adult
learning in career and technical education (pp.
107–128). Hangzhou, China and Hershey, PA:
ZUP and Information Science Reference.
Winters, E. (2000). Sample learning contract.
Retrieved October 6, 2009, from http://web.mac.
com/ewinters1/ewinters.com/Sample_-_Learn-
ing_Contract.html
KEY TERMS AND DEFINITIONS
Andragogy (more recently spelled “Andra-
gogy”): Andragogy refers to learning strategies
336
focused on adults. It is often interpreted as the
process of engaging adult learners in the structure
of the learning experience.
Assessment: Educational assessment is the
process of documenting, usually in measurable
terms, knowledge, skills, attitudes and beliefs.
Contract Grading: An evaluation tool, either
developed by the instructor or co-created with
students, that allows students to choose individu-
ally the grade they would like to achieve in the
classroom and then outlines specific student and
instructor responsibilities needed for the students
to receive the grade they have chosen.
Contract Learning: A formal agreement
written by a learner which details what will be
learned, how the learning will be accomplished,
the period of time involved, and the specific evalu-
ation criteria to be used in judging the completion
of the learning.
Distance Learning: Field of education that
focuses on the pedagogy and andragogy, technol-
ogy, and instructional systems design that aim to
deliver education to students who are not physi-
cally “on site”.
Hybrid/Blended Courses: Distance learning
courses which combine some face to face classes
with some courses delivered through a distance
format.
On-Line Learning: Distance learning which
is carried out via the internet (e.g., Blackboard,
WebCT, or other platforms).
Self-Directed Learning: Individual learner’s
initiative and responsibility to (with or without
assistance) identify, assess, and set priorities for
learning needs.
 337

Chapter 21
Using Qualitative Methods to
Evaluate Distance Education:
A Case Study
Jules K. Beck
University of Arkansas, Fayetteville, USA

Kit Kacirek
University of Arkansas, Fayetteville, USA

ABSTRACT
Qualitative methods can be useful tools to evaluate the effectiveness of distance education programs. This
analysis examines an interpretive case study conducted using a hermeneutic phenomenology approach
to investigate how nontraditional undergraduate students in a bachelor’s degree completion program
perceived their lives, work, and education as members of a Human Resource Development (HRD) cohort.
The technology-intensive, distance-learning program served students in rural communities, as well as
a small group of students on the main University campus. The blended technology program included
compressed interactive video (CIV); Blackboard, a web-based classroom management system; and a
face-to-face weekend gathering each semester of students and faculty from current cohorts. The signifi-
cance of the case study is in the relationship between a distance education program and the transfer of
HRD knowledge to lives, work, and community roles.

INTRODUCTION to technological advances that overcome previous

Using the web to enhance traditional classroom
instruction is a trend that is growing rapidly in
higher education (Ko & Rossen, 2004). The popu-
larity of degrees now offered online by a number
of major universities as well as exclusively online
programs, such as those offered by Capella and
Phoenix Universities, might be attributable in part
DOI: 10.4018/978-1-61692-906-0.ch021
limitations in program delivery. As Swartz and
Biggs (1999) noted, “distance education is one
example of separation through the imposition
of technological time and space. Separation in
time and space is an artifact of many emerging
technologies” (p. 83). According to Verduin and
Clark (1991), distance learning is “any formal
approach to learning in which a majority of the
instruction occurs while educator and learner are
at a distance from one another” (p. 8). Tallent-
 Using Qualitative Methods to Evaluate Distance Education
Runnels, Thomas, Lan, Cooper, Ahern, and
Shaw et al. (2006), in their metastudy of research
about distance education, defined online classes
as “courses that are delivered completely on the
internet. Hybrid or blended courses are those
that combine online components with traditional,
face-to-face components” (p. 94).
Tallent-Runnels et al. (2006), however, point
out a limitation of traditional approaches to
evaluating distance education that centers about
“empirical research [that] reports about online
course instruction rather than on program descrip-
tions or conceptual articles” (p. 94). Describing
students in distance education courses, they also
found that “the majority of students using online
services were older than the typical undergradu-
ate student. These students were adults who had
significant roles in the community and who were
highly motivated and focused on achieving spe-
cific learning outcomes” (p. 112).
Qualitative Program Evaluation
This chapter explores how program evaluation
that employs qualitative methodology may help
bridge the gap between the empirical focus on
course instruction and the programmatic and
conceptual elements that have been largely miss-
ing from the distance education literature. For the
purpose of this study, evaluation is defined as
“the identification, clarification, and application
of defensible criteria to determine an evaluation
object’s value (worth or merit), quality, utility,
effectiveness, or significance in relation to those
criteria” (Worthen, Sanders, & Fitzpatrick, 1997,
p. 5). Patton (2002) makes a clear distinction
between evaluative research and fundamental
research by suggesting that they serve different
purposes. Evaluative research, “conducted sys-
tematically and empirically through careful data
collection and thoughtful analysis,” examines
program effectiveness and accomplishments to
inform decision making and enhance human ef-
fectiveness whereas the purpose of basic research
338
is “to generate or test theory and to contribute to
knowledge for the sake of knowledge” (p. 10).
The evaluative research presented in this
chapter used an interpretive case to examine the
effectiveness of a blended technology program
that delivered instruction through a combination
of interactive television (Compressed Interactive
Video, or “CIV”), an online class management
system (Blackboard), and a gathering of current
students by cohort each semester at a physical
location selected by the educational institution.
The analysis will be buttressed by additional de-
scription of qualitative methods that a program
evaluator might find useful for determining the
effectiveness of program elements in this as well
as other distance education programs or settings.
BACKGROUND
Since 1996, the CIV program at the University
of Arkansas has provided nontraditional students
an opportunity to join a two-year, undergraduate
degree completion program in Human Resource
Development (HRD). A mostly rural population
has accessed a degree for students whose work,
community, and family life precluded an opportu-
nity to complete an undergraduate program. This
case study addressed the question, What Is It Like
to Be a Student in an HRD Cohort? We hoped to
gain insight through qualitative research into how
this blended technology, hybrid program enabled
nontraditional students to pursue and complete a
degree despite the pressures of full-time work and
competing family and community obligations.
“Continuing education is an all encompassing
term within a broad spectrum of post-secondary
learning activities and programs…. recognized
forms of post-secondary learning activities … in-
clude: degree credit courses … by non-traditional
students…. enrolled part-time” (Farlex, n.d., para.
1-3). This interpretative case study investigated
how nontraditional undergraduate students per-
ceived their lives, work, and education as members
Using Qualitative Methods to Evaluate Distance Education
of an HRD program cohort. A combination of
traditional face-to-face and technology-mediated
distance learning served students in rural com-
munities, as well as a small group of students on
the main university campus.
Tallent-Runnells et al. (2006) further labeled
both hybrid, or blended courses, as well as face-
to-face courses, as traditional approaches to
education (p. 115). Salas, Kosarzycki, Burke,
Fiore, and Stone (2002) define interactive learn-
ing “as either synchronous… or asynchronous”
(p. 137). Lawless and Brown (1997) consider that
technology in education “merely provides a forum
for effective learning” (p. 128). In this distance
learning bachelor’s degree completion program,
the important considerations were to ensure that
the program involved the strengths of each learn-
ing environment and minimized the weaknesses:
While there have been previous distance learning
programs delivered by technology, recognition
of prior work experience and learning, weekend
scheduling, required internships, or articulation
between 2-year and 4-year institutions, to our
knowledge, this is the first HRD program which
combines all of these elements. (Hinton, 1998,
p. 17)
This study is about interaction among students,
technology, and a particular program. Since
qualitative research is time and context-bound, it
is difficult to make inferences that apply across
time and context to all blended technology class-
rooms. This HRD program occurred in a specific
context, with a specific group of people, in spe-
cific places, in specific situations, and at specific
times within the strictures of distance education
technology. HRD cohort students bring to their
junior-senior years two previous years of under-
graduate courses taught in traditional classrooms.
In the junior-senior years, students experienced
distance learning through blended technology in
HRD coursework. The purpose of this interpreta-
tive case study was to determine what students
gained from this distance education model. How
can qualitative research reveal the deeper mean-
ings behind their experience?
Program History
Between 1996 and 2009, 618 students were en-
rolled in the HRD continuing education program
and 417 graduated ─ 67% of the overall student
population. Minority student enrollment com-
prised 22% of the overall student population with
a graduation rate of 59%. Cohorts have ranged in
size from 34 students in the early years to a high
of 83 students in later years. The cohort students
in this case study joined the HRD program in
fall, 2004. Admission requirements included
current full-time employment, five years of work
experience, and two years of undergraduate work.
Their remaining undergraduate studies would
correspond to junior and senior year classes of-
fered through the university’s bachelor’s degree
HRD program. HRD program classes are housed
at local community and technical colleges that
provide reasonable access to most residents of
the state. Students enter a cohort in either an odd
or even-numbered year, according to their home
residences. This collaboration with community
and technical colleges gives the university a pres-
ence across the rural state. Most students maintain
their local residency due to established business,
community and family obligations. Graff in 2003
postulated that nontraditional students in distance
education had a “large number of different learning
styles,” even though they were uniformly highly
motivated (as cited in Tallent-Runnels, et al., 2006,
p. 112). The purposive cohort sample included
students from four sites. The sample contained
three men and seven women with a median age
of 40 years. Four students in the sample were sup-
port staff from state colleges, five were managers,
and one was self-employed. Six students were
married; four had children. Two students were
divorced with children, and two students were
single without children.
339
 Using Qualitative Methods to Evaluate Distance Education
THE HERMENEUTIC
PHENOMENOLOGY TRADITION
An emergent research design was used for this
case study; we did not try to fully explain the
design before beginning the study; rather, our
intent was to discover the overall experience of
being a distance education HRD cohort student.
The central research questions emerged with
the literature review. To discover the meanings
behind their experience as students in a blended-
technology program, we clarified the emergent
design as hermeneutic phenomenology.
Hermeneutic Phenomenology
as Interpretive Research
Hultgren (l989) recalled Taylor’s definition of
interpretive inquiry as “an attempt to make clear or
make sense of a text that is in some way confused,
incomplete, or cloudy” (p. 37). Taylor defined the
object of the interpretation as “to make something
clear or coherent that was previously unclear or
incoherent” (as cited in Bredo & Feinberg, 1982,
p. 123). He described the process as
much like that of a painter who seeing an object
in a certain way, attempts to paint what he sees.
But what he paints on his canvas then modified
the way in which he sees the object, which leads
him to correct his painting, and so on …. The
hermeneutic process may be continued until an
adequately coherent interpretation is reached.
(p. 124)
We have studied the hermeneutic phenom-
enology approach for some time; our continued
research using this procedure has increased our
skills, including the personal qualities associated
with the theoretical sensitivity that enhances a
researcher’s ability to balance what is brought
by the researcher with what comes from the data
(Strauss and Corbin, 1990). As former instructors
of the students, we conveyed what Patton (2009)
340
referred to as Empathic Neutrality to the case
study, building trust with interviewees through
our commonality of experience. We recalled
that we might develop theory using this method;
therefore, we began the case study by examining
the experiences of HRD cohort students in the
distance-learning degree-completion program.
We used an interpretive case study approach to
examine how students perceived their work and
life experiences, as Bredo and Feineberg (1982)
suggested, to understand how students understood
the “the rules that one must know to behave with
propriety” (p. 122). We hoped to uncover the hid-
den reasons or motives, as Bredo and Feinberg
(1982) described to
explain actions in the everyday sense of making
others’ reasons or motives comprehensible…in
terms of their reasons or motives, and in terms
of the system of rules or conventions constituting
these reasons or motives….Sometimes people act
in a motivated way but are systematically unaware
of their motives, and in fact think they are acting
from other motives. (p. 127)
Van Manen (1990) described phenomenology
as a way of thinking or inquiring about the reality
of lived experience rather than about theoretical
abstractions. Hultgren (1989) held that phenom-
enology “does not seek to explain or control
the world, but rather to offer more insightful
descriptions of the way the world is experienced”
(pp. 50-51). The joining of phenomenology and
hermeneutics into interpretive methodology was
summarized by Ricoeur, who suggested that
“phenomenology begins when, not content to
merely live or relive the experience, we interrupt
the experience to give it meaning….Hermeneutics
begins when, not content to merely belong to a
tradition, we interrupt the relation to understand
it” (as cited in Hultgren, 1989, p. 54).
We conducted a hermeneutic phenomeno-
logical study aimed at understanding the personal
and work experience of students in the distance
Using Qualitative Methods to Evaluate Distance Education
education HRD program. There are no specified
procedural steps used in this method: as Hultgren
(1989) noted, “the self engagement in the project
allows one to be led by the questions and the natu-
ral unfolding of the inquiry as it is lived, rather
than prestructured in advance” (p. 52). Hultgren
(1989) saw the purpose of interpretive inquiry as
clarifying, authenticating, or bringing to awareness
the meaning related by people in their everyday
experiences. The purpose of interpretive inquiry
was to understand human cultural activity and
experience from the perspective of those living
the experience.
The purpose of our qualitative interviews with
cohort students was to discover the meanings
behind their experience as students in a blended-
technology program.
Historical Roots of Hermeneutic
Phenomenology
Hultgren (1989) examined historical aspects of
hermeneutic phenomenology, citing Dilthey’s
explorations into the reliability of knowledge in
the study of human phenomena. Dilthey asked
about the methods that “would permit an objec-
tive reading of symbolic structures of any kind,
including actions, social practices, norms and
values” (Hultgren, 1989, p. 39). Dilthey wanted
to raise human phenomena inquiry to achieve
the same confidence that characterized natural
science. Other philosophers had asked about the
conditions “that make it possible for the author’s
message or any message to reach us” (Hultgren,
1989, p. 39).
Hultgren’s view of understanding and interpre-
tation in the human sciences echoed Heidegger,
who believed that understanding was “the basic
form of human existence,” and Gadamer, who
wanted to free hermeneutics from “the obstruc-
tions of the scientific concept of objectivity” to
do justice to the “historicality of understanding”
(Hultgren, 1989, p. 39).
Hultgren (1989) also cited Howard, who posed
the central question of hermeneutic phenomeno-
logical inquiry as, “To what degree do the pur-
poses and intentions of the individual affect the
experiences he has, and consequently the shape
of the reality he apprehends, and consequently the
knowledge he claims to acquire?” (pp. 39-40). Ga-
damer (Hultgren, 1989) believed that the purpose
of the hermeneutic process was to take the “foreign,
strange, or separated in time, space or experience”
and make it “familiar, present, comprehensible .
. . brought to understanding or interpreted” (p.
41). He believed that understanding was always
interpretation, and, therefore, interpretation was
the explicit form of understanding.
Hultgren (1989) summarized the purpose of
interpretive inquiry as seeking to clarify, authen-
ticate, uncover, or bring to full human awareness
the meaning structures expressed by people in their
everyday experiences. The purpose of interpretive
inquiry was to understand human cultural activ-
ity and experience from the view of those living
through the experience.
The origins of phenomenology date to the
pioneer 20th century work of Husserl and Dilthey,
followed by Heidegger, Gadamer, Ricoeur, and
Merleau-Ponty, among other European philoso-
phers. Phenomenology, to Husserl, clarified the
essential structure of the life world, giving form
to experience through the intuitive grasping of
the essences of phenomena. Since essences could
not be seen in the same way as empirical objects,
they had to be brought to consciousness through
phenomenological reflection to reveal the mean-
ing structures taken for granted in everyday life
(Hultgren, 1989).
METHODOLOGICAL STRUCTURE
OF THE INQUIRY
There is no specified set of procedural steps
used in this kind of inquiry, as Hultgren (1989)
noted, instead, that “the self engagement in the
341
 Using Qualitative Methods to Evaluate Distance Education
project allows one to be led by the questions and
the natural unfolding of the inquiry as it is lived,
rather than prestructured in advance” (p. 52). We
incorporated van Manen’s (1990) following six
research activities to guide the study, looking for
the “dynamic interplay” among the activities that
he asserted defined phenomenological research
(p. 30).
Turn to a Phenomenon that
Seriously Interests Us and
Commits Us to the World
As Silvers asserted, the first central feature of the
interpretive process “begins with an existential
stirring of the researcher’s biography” (Hultgren,
1989, p. 52). Our own background in interpretive
research methods led us down the path to analyz-
ing the experience of this group of students as
members of an HRD cohort. We were especially
anxious to learn how their experiences might
contribute to our own understandings of how a
blended-technology program can help this non-
traditional student population complete a degree
program..
Investigate Experience as We Live It
Rather than as We Conceptualize It
To record their experiences as lived, we conducted
in-depth interviews with ten students. While
questioning them, we probed for meaning behind
their stories as they presented their lived attitudes
and experience without prior reflection. Gadamer
(1975) described questioning as an art, “not in
the sense of learned craft, but as in the structure
of experience and thinking of a hermeneutic
consciousness . . . the art of questioning is that
of being able to go on asking questions” (p. 330).
Van Manen claimed that evoking the experienced
description will heighten awareness of different
ways of thinking and acting: “we must ask ques-
tions that penetrate to the core of the everyday life
342
concerns that are taken for granted” (Hultgren,
1989, p. 51).
Whereas most prior research in technology-
supported education focused exclusively on the
online experience, little has been written about the
phenomena associated with a blended-technology
program that sought a deeper understanding of
the student experience. This study involved the
telling about life experiences from the immediacy
of the participants’ own perceptions. During the
interviews, we put aside our own experience so we
could approach the dialogue without preconceived
ideas or assumptions, the “bracketing” described
by van Manen (1990) that allows researchers to
suspend beliefs better to enable “study of the
essential structures of the world” (p. 175). We
discuss participant selection and the interview
protocol in greater depth, below.
Reflect on the Essential Themes
that Characterize the Phenomenon
Van Manen (1990) described reflection as a
thoughtful grasping of what gives a particular
experience its special significance. We first read
all the way through the transcribed texts, seeking
to absorb the totality of the language conveyed
through the interviews. As Gadamer (1975)
proclaimed, “understanding is not so much an
action of subjectivity as it is entering into an
event of transmission, wherein past and pres-
ent are constantly mediated through language”
(pp. 43-44). We next reread each text, searching
for statements that uncovered important facets
about the expectations and experiences, and that
defined for the participant a particularly mean-
ingful moment, feeling, or revelation about self
or the world as immediately experienced. As we
searched for themes, we kept in mind van Manen’s
(1990) distinction between universal theme and
essential theme. Universal themes exist across
phenomena, while essential themes would lose
their fundamental meaning without the phenom-
Using Qualitative Methods to Evaluate Distance Education
enon. That process is discussed in greater detail
in the interview protocol, below.
Describe the Phenomenon through
the Art of Writing and Rewriting
Hultgren (1989) noted the lack of a single method
in phenomenological research; we subscribe to van
Manen’s guideline of phenomenological writing,
attending to “the speaking of language, varying
examples, writing and rewriting” as an existential
investigation that used personal experience to trace
the derivation of words and idiomatic phrases (p.
51). We also used Silvers’ description of emerging
interpretive knowledge resulting from a dialectical
moving “back and forth between the participants’
self-understanding and the subject of appearance”
(pp. 52-53), or between the researcher’s continual
processing of information about the phenomenon
and the phenomenon, itself, being studied.
Maintain a Strong Orientation
On the Fundamental Question
Throughout the interview process, whether con-
ducted in person or by telephone, we kept the
central question before us—what is it like to be
a member of an HRD cohort—to ensure that we
would be able to refocus the participant’s and our
own attention should it wander from the funda-
mental question. That process was occasionally
like walking a tightrope; while we would conver-
sationally probe further to seek the nuances behind
a statement, we found ourselves describing the
interpretive approach of this inquiry when par-
ticipants asked whether we could be more direct
in our questions. We often reminded ourselves of
van Manen’s (1990) caution against being side-
tracked or speculating. While the texts contained
many important issues involved in international
or cross-cultural leadership, our rereading of the
texts and rewriting of the themes helped us more
closely adhere to the messages revealed by the
participants as they related to the central question.
Balance the Research Context By
Considering Parts and Whole
Van Manen (1990) claimed that “it is easy to get
so buried in writing that one no longer knows
where to go” (p. 33), suggesting that the re-
searcher should move back from the material to
regain a perspective of the whole. Hence, during
the continued rewriting of the emergent themes,
we would reflect on how they contributed to our
understanding of the student, work, and life ex-
periences of cohort members.
CRITERIA USEFUL
FOR EVALUATING
INTERPRETIVE INQUIRY
Brown (1989) presented a set of standards for the
qualities of good interpretive research. The fol-
lowing presents her standards and demonstrates
how Brown’s criteria were used to evaluate our
case study.
• “The text selected to interpret is important
in that it is relevant to the practice of life to-
day.” The interviews that were selected to
interpret were relevant to the understand-
ing of the student experience as members
of a cohort, since the texts came from the
extensive experience of study participants
(Brown, 1989, p. 279).
• “The question the research addresses con-
cerns how we are to interpret the meanings
(intentions, conceptual orientations, and
values) in a particular text within cultural
tradition given the historical situation of
the text” (Brown, 1989, p. 280). Our re-
search questions addressed what it was like
to be a member of the cohort, as students
identified their deepest understandings
identified from their own life experiences.
The participants in this inquiry interpreted
the realities of their own natural and social
343
 Using Qualitative Methods to Evaluate Distance Education
worlds. The cultural tradition and history
they brought to the program came from
their previous educational experience as
well as that of the communities in which
they were nurtured and guided.
• “The meaning expressed by the author of
the text is respected in the interpretation”
(Brown, 1989, p. 280). We made every
effort to faithfully honor the participants’
meanings in our interpretation of the texts.
• “The research reflects that interpretation
has been made by interrelating the parts
and the whole of the text” (Brown, p. 280).
We first read through the entire interviews
before singling out discrete comments or
concepts for thematic consideration. After
clustering similar comments or concepts,
we returned to the texts to consider how
the emerging themes fit the context of the
entire set of interviews.
• “The research reflects a search for an inter-
pretation that is reasonable” (Brown, 1989,
p. 281). Our interpretation sought to under-
stand the intentions, meanings, goals, and
values provided in each participant’s text.
That interpretation was reasonable given
the context of cultural traditions, practices,
and institutions.
• “The research shows the researcher’s fa-
miliarity with the topics which are the
subject matter of the text and with the cul-
tural traditions and historical-social con-
text which shaped meaning in the text”
(Brown, 1989, p. 282). Our work and per-
sonal background pointed us to the topic
of understanding how students functioned
and succeeded in a blended-technology
program, and our graduate experience
schooled us in the historical-social context
of applying appropriate research methods
to help understand the nature of the phe-
nomenon studied.
• “The researcher seeks to establish the va-
lidity of the piece of research through
344
the informal logic of validation” (Brown,
1989, p. 282). The repeated testing of the
interview themes provided the intersubjec-
tive validation through which the emergent
themes were massaged, refined, and, final-
ly, revised to reflect participant consensus.
In addition, the third interview open-ended
questions further confirmed the logic re-
sulting from our development and analy-
sis of qualitative themes generated in the
interviews.
• “The interpretation makes clear the mean-
ing of the text (within cultural tradition)
important for the conduct of life” (Brown,
1989, p. 283). We hope that the themes that
emerged from this inquiry will contribute
to the furthering of the profession by guid-
ing academicians and program developers
in their understanding of how blended-
technology programs serving rural popula-
tions can best serve the interests of non-tra-
ditional students as they seek to complete
an undergraduate degree.
CASE STUDY DEMOGRAPHICS
Ten HRD cohort students volunteered to be
interviewed in the spring and fall of 2005 and
again in spring 2006. Students were drawn from
different geographical program sites. Three in-
terviews with each student were conducted in
person or by telephone. Initial interviews were
conducted at the end of the first year in the pro-
gram. Second interviews were conducted during
the third semester of the program, and the third
interview was conducted after all cohort classes
were completed. “Qualitative interviewing begins
with the assumption that the perspective of others
is meaningful, knowable, and able to be made
explicit” (Patton, 1990, p. 278). Interviews were
taped and transcribed verbatim.
We began our review of the case study with a
cross-case analysis, grouping together responses
Using Qualitative Methods to Evaluate Distance Education
from participants to form themes with different
perspectives on the theme clusters (Patton, 1990).
No data were collected other than interviews,
but archived statistical information about the
participants and their backgrounds were used.
A standardized open-ended interview was used
to guide the “descriptive analytical framework
for analysis” (Patton, 1990, p. 376). We began
the “content analysis of the data by identifying,
coding, and categorizing the primary patterns in
the data” (p. 381).
In the examination of participant texts from
the first interviews, we aimed for inter-subjective
reliability by not considering a concept to be a
theme unless at least five participants expressed
a commonality in their experiences. The second
interview confirmed the utility of this approach as
the themes resonated with more participants. “One
major feature…of well-collected qualitative data
is that they focus on naturally occurring, ordinary
events in natural settings” which provide a picture
of what “real life” is like (Miles & Huberman,
1994, p. 10).
INTERVIEW ONE THEMES
The first interview explored the overall experience
of being a distance-education student through
non-directive and open-ended questions, such
as: What is a typical class day like? If you could
describe your experience in three words, what
would they be? Is there a particular incident in
class that sticks in your memory? What is it like
to be a student in an HRD cohort? As students
related their experiences and perceptions, each
response was followed by a probing question, such
as, Was there anything else?, to elicit further the
deepest feelings and perceptions held, seeking to
listen, discover, and understand what it was like
to be a student in an HRD cohort. The interviews
of the first round were 60 to 110 minutes long.
Van Manen’s (1990) method of “bracketing” was
used, where the interviewer is expected to put aside
experiences, feelings, or perceptions that might
bias his or her ability to be true to the informa-
tion conveyed during the interpretive research
process. A thematic analysis of the transcriptions
was conducted to discover commonalties among
student experiences. The texts generated from the
initial interviews were reviewed by the research-
ers, who searched for themes commonly shared
by the students. After noting such themes, the
researchers reread the texts, writing and rewrit-
ing what they believed to be descriptions of the
themes that represented their understanding of the
meaning of what it was like to be a student in an
HRD cohort. A response generally shared by five
or more students represented a theme.
INTERVIEW TWO THEMES
The second interview, conducted midway through
the first semester of the second year of their pro-
gram, asked students to react to summaries of
preliminary findings from interview one. These
interviews were from 15 to 45 minutes long.
As the researchers interviewed the students the
second time, they shared their descriptions of the
18 themes, derived from 51 concepts, to enable
the students to reflect again upon the interview
one questions and to determine how the themes
resonated with their personal experience. The
eighteen themes that emerged in interview one
were combined to generate the following nine
major theme clusters:
• Accessible/Technology
• Hassle/Stressful
• Challenging Interesting/Educational
• Convenient/Flexible
• Rewarding/Transfer to Work/
• Transfer to Personal Life
• Exciting/Exhilarating/Energetic
• Structure
• Group Networking/Group Support
345
 Using Qualitative Methods to Evaluate Distance Education
Theme Analysis
Participant responses in the nine major theme
clusters are reported below, along with embedded
comments from the literature to provide greater
relevancy and meaning to that review of contrib-
uting research.
Access/Technology
Barb, an administrative secretary, saw the program
as “a great opportunity, especially for those that
live in outlying areas and maybe even handi-
capped individuals who can’t get to where they
need to get.” Jerry observed that “you get to have
the quality that you would on a major campus
almost brought into your lap, wherever you are.
It’s made it possible for me, because there’s no
way I could handle a long commute and still do
my job effectively.”
The literature confirmed the importance of
accessibility for certain students, as noted by
Yeaworth, Benschoter, Meeter, and Benson (1995),
who observed that “televised courses and continu-
ing education offerings can make education much
more accessible, particularly in rural areas” (p.
232). Some students emphasized the importance of
technology, as Mark explained, “the technology is
absolutely critical in my estimation.” Diane, like
some, found the technology difficult to get used
to: “It is neat for me, I didn’t know how I would
feel about the computer thing . . . . It scared me
at first, but then once I got through it I see how it
is really amazing how these people who live 70
miles away are actually in the classroom with me.”
The utility of the technology was not a feel-
ing shared by all. A complaint about exchanging
emails or working on the Blackboard Discussion
Board was aired by Holly: “If you don’t respond
in a timely manner, others have gone past it and
they don’t want to go back and go to the very
beginning.”Yeaworth et al. (1995) presented
some caveats, particularly that success in distance
learning requires that equipment function properly
346
and “both students and faculty are well-prepared
for the learning experience” (p. 232).
Other distance education difficulties reported
included adaptation of instructional materials and
“faculty interest, student adjustment, scheduling,
institutional support, and student-faculty contact”
(Siegel, Jennings, Conklin, Napoletano, & Shelly
et al., 1998, p. 73). Swartz & Biggs (1999) recorded
that the main differences between traditional and
distance education “appeared to be classroom
management” (p. 75). Clow (1999) reported that
when comparing instruction in the CIV classes to
traditional classes, “the instructor did not come
across as well as in person...and was not as aware
of students not grasping the material” (p. 101).
Challenging
Maureen described her vision of the program:
“People that I know who have been in the program
before made it sound simpler than it is. For me,
it is a little more difficult and I don’t know if it is
because of my stage of life and my age.” Laurie
cited the need “to work full time, keep a personal
life, and keep [up] your studies.” Holly described
the challenge of adding her reading, preparing for
presentations and exams:
“There were like three weeks that I did not do
anything but my class work. That is okay because
you know it is a short period of time... three weeks
is nothing when you think of the rest of your life.”
Adult students’ work, family, community, and
recreational needs often restricted participation in
further education, requiring flexible approaches to
programming and coursework that would preserve
balance in students’ lives (Kellogg Commission,
1998; Costello, 2001).
Convenient/Flexible
Mark found that “one of the biggest things about
being a student in the HRD program is the con-
Using Qualitative Methods to Evaluate Distance Education
venience ... I wouldn’t be attending these if they
were totally traditional... I would say convenience,
and with that comes the flexibility.” Barb found it
remarkable that she was back in school with “the
opportunity to work through such a neat program
that was accommodating to people who were full-
time employees.” Dick described his work life:
I work 60 hours a week, and I am on call four
hours seven days a week.... when I started this
program I told my employer that Friday night after
4:00 PM I would be gone ... the whole company
knows that Friday after 4:00 PM don’t call until
the middle of the night.
Osguthorpe and Graham (2003) observed
that many working adults sought post-secondary
distance education courses because of the con-
venience and flexibility of scheduling. Hinton
(1998) found that CIV programs offered motivated
adults with work experience an opportunity to
acquire education during evenings and weekends.
Tallent-Runnels, et al. (2006), pointed out that
students welcomed distance education because
of its convenience and autonomy.
Exciting/Exhilarating/Energetic
Barb told about her return to the classroom, finding
it “exhilarating for me because I have been gone
so long and in my previous experience I didn’t do
so hot in school . . . [but now] it is like wow, this
program really works for me.” Dick said that the
class might be surprised by something new they
had not covered, not knowing what to expect,
“but... the material was so interesting.”
Patchner, Petracchi, and Wise (1998) found no
significant differences in attitude or performance
between the host and remote sites; however,
“students in both groups would have preferred
face-to-face instruction, but felt that ITV [CIV]
was a very acceptable mode of instruction for
those having no other means of access to such
education” (p. 34).
Group Networking/Group Support
Students had different preconceptions about
working together in groups. Some preferred to
work independently, while others blossomed in
teamwork. Laurie summarized how students felt
about group underachievers: “I just don’t know
if the true grades in a group are fair, because
you can’t control what anyone else does.” Holly
agreed: “I prefer to work on my own-- that is just
me.” She did recognize that employment often
required cooperative projects:
We do have to work in groups in working situa-
tions….Some people have different approaches
and sometimes it is hard to connect with some
people. For the most part, maybe because we are
adults, we pretty much pulled our weight.
Dick was philosophic about group interaction:
“Sometimes in the groups we have seen that it
is hard to interact with some people, and it was
pretty challenging sometimes, and it was work,
[though] you have learned from the group, the
class, [and] the teacher.” Jerry found that “you
develop a close bond to the guys that you’re on
location with . . . we share so much together . . .
that’s just fun.” Becoming closer as a cohort as
time went by was a common feeling for some,
but not for everyone. According to Maria, “the
smaller the group, the more you could relate to
each other. In our group we worked well with each
other and with some groups they don’t work well
with each other.” Most students came to rely on
their group members for support throughout the
program.
The literature supported the importance of
group interaction in distance learning. Reio and
Crim (2006) and Swartz and Biggs (1999) noted
that a learning environment requires a social
presence where students feel at ease around the
instructor and other students. Reio and Crim saw
that “lack of social presence could lead to more
frustration, dissatisfaction and less participation in
347
 Using Qualitative Methods to Evaluate Distance Education
learning” (p. 967). Tallent-Runnels, et al. (2006)
noted that student-to-student interaction encour-
aged greater use of cognitive reasoning skills. Not
all researchers, such as Faux and Black-Hughes
and Keefe, agreed that the distance-education
model was preferable to traditional classes (as
cited in Tallent-Runnels et al., 2006). However,
blended technology provides one means of ad-
dressing the lack of a face-to-face environment.
Hassle/Stressful
Laurie thought that the work and class loads were
too heavy; she found herself continually trying to
beat deadlines: “my son plays baseball . . . and
then the guy I date is a big fan of horse racing,
so that was consuming on the weekends, so a lot
of personal things came into play.” Maureen de-
scribed the demands for her time between school
and work, finding that a week between classes
was not enough time to get assignments done “as
well as I liked....It seemed a little tough and there
were times when I don’t think I did the quality of
work I thought I could have done if I had more
time.” Holly believed that going back to school
involved sacrifices:
You have the deadlines to meet and if you want to
go out and do things you have to manage your time.
Everyone has to manage their time but when you
work full time and then I don’t have a family but
I have a dog and that is about like having a man.
I have to walk him. I have to feed him. I have to
play with him. I mean I have those responsibili-
ties. I have to keep my house clean and do all the
errands and stuff that I do.
Diane observed that “sometimes now, of
course, I have a little bit of anxiety and stress
about school work and stuff.” Jerry could sum
up this theme:
348
If you’re me, and you’ve been at work since 5:00
AM, and you’ve rushed and don’t even have time
to stop and get a bite to eat, and it’s nine o’clock,
by this point in time, you’re weary. The spirit’s
willing, but the flesh is very, very weak.
The literature identifies stress from uncertainty
about coursework, instructor unavailability, or
technology challenges (Anderson, 2000; Clow,
1999). Anderson (2000) reported that access to a
professor is hard for remote-site students, while
“for those off campus, face-to-face contact with
the professor is nearly impossible” (p. 146).
Interesting/Educational
Dick found that classes were well organized and
“the material was so interesting.” Holly agreed,
noting that “while I am studying I am learning so
much.” Jerry placed his educational experience
in a different context:
instead of getting one viewpoint, you’ve got all
these other perspectives. It’s interesting to me to
hear exactly what people think, and how they feel
the material relates to them . . . . the differences
between them, the text, and the teacher.
Maria discussed the program setup: “You
have different experiences. You have online. You
have in-class. Not only that, but you are not in
only one classroom. You are working with other
groups, other individuals. It was something that
was different for me... very interesting.”
Sikora (2002) reported that in a study of under-
graduate and graduate first-year students, about
one-half of both groups were equally satisfied
with their distance education and regular class-
room courses. Patchner et al. (1998) found that
CIV students performed as well in their studies
as those taking regular, face-to-face instruction.
Using Qualitative Methods to Evaluate Distance Education
Rewarding/Transfer to Work/
Transfer to Personal Life
Cohort participants universally saw the program
as providing both rewarding skills as well as direct
application in their work lives. Mark said classes
made him a better manager, helping him answer
questions of “how do I lead a department and
how do I plan for and get these people the training
that they need to develop in their career-making.”
Maureen found that the program helped her job
performance: “anytime you can teach someone
how to communicate better, it has to help.” Jerry
believed he would use everything he had learned in
class, “and I know that everything that I’m going
to learn is going to make me better at what I do.”
Maria agreed, observing that when dealing with
some work situations she had “already been able
to use some of the things we studied in class.”
Structure
Cohort students were guided through two years
of studies with less uncertainty than a typical
undergraduate education. The predictability of the
program helped students respond to the pressures
of family, community, and work commitments that
had prevented them from completing an education.
As Dick described,
Here you start a program and from the very first
day you know what you are doing and you know
what classes you are going to take each semester...
when you are going to graduate, [ and] what work
has to be done. It’s very structured.
Laurie did not understand program terminol-
ogy or requirements right away, but admitted
that “every day I learn a little bit more what’s
expected of me to get the degree . . . I don’t think I
realized all the pieces of the puzzle that had come
together.” Leona agreed: “It just all fit together.
It is running smoothly . . .‘cause everything is
set there for you . . . and I’m following it all the
way to the end.”
In 2005, Bielawski and Metcalf found a “posi-
tive effect of blended learning on teaching and
learning,” meeting the diverse needs of learn-
ers’ while “improving performance” (as cited in
Lim, Morris, & Kuptriz, 2006, p. 809). A later
study showed that blended instruction overcame
“the shortcomings of online instruction” using
“various instructional sequencing and delivery
strategies to enhance learner satisfaction while
attaining increased learning outcomes” (Lim et.
al., 2006, p. 810).
INTERVIEW THREE: THEMES
AND ANALYSIS
The third interview was conducted at the comple-
tion of the cohort distance education two-year
program. Students were asked to summarize their
overall experience with these questions: What
have you been able to take away from the HRD
program that you’ve been able to use on the job?
What have you been able to take away from the
HRD program that you’ve been able to use in
your personal life? How would you say the past
two years have changed you? An analysis of the
32 conceptual responses to the questions yielded
the following five theme clusters:
• Communication/Connecting/
Understanding personalities
• Confidence
• Relevance to Personal Life
• Relevance to Work/Management/Needs
Assessment/Presentations
• Teamwork
Communication/Connecting/
Understanding Personalities
Students generally benefited from an increased
ability to communicate and understand others.
349
 Using Qualitative Methods to Evaluate Distance Education
As Jerry commented, “one of the biggest things
that I’ve taken away from the program that’s
helped me is learning how to communicate more
effectively.” Dianne said that learning new com-
munication skills helped “especially in my job at
the grocery store with customer service and just
with a lot of my employees [who] are high school
kids.” Laurie saw a wider importance, where
“how your words and how you communicate even
affects your friendships.” Barb’s response could
apply to most students: “the past two years, I’ve
realized the importance of listening to what other
people have to say . . . I’ve really grown more as
a person.”
Confidence
Students described their personal growth in many
ways. Holly shared the confidence gained speak-
ing before class groups, and then at work: “this
is a small thing, but it was a big step for me.”
Diane saw the long-term value of the program:
“I know that I [now] have the skills and the tools
that I can bring with me in any field. That gives
me confidence.” Barb noted that “I have gotten
bolder and more challenging in some things.”
Maureen saw a fundamental change: “I have more
of a sense of pride of an accomplishment . . . I
just have a better sense of being, I guess.” Leona
saw herself as “a shy person [who] gained a lot
of good, positive self-esteem and just the will to
want to do more.”
Relevance to Personal Life
Students had different views on how the program
affected their personal lives. Beyond the confi-
dence that most expressed was a practical side.
Barb related how she now understands time man-
agement and family development “to keep things
working properly. In my house, everything’s kind
of chaotic, so I’ve been able to use certain things
to make the flow smoother at home [using new]
skills and strategies in my personal life.”
350
Laurie believed that “I have grown these
last few years. It’s made me more disciplined.”
Maureen took a broader view: “everything that
I learned [in the program] had to do more with
day-to-day living than just a particular setting.”
Relevance to Work
Cohort interviewees immediately applied their
class learning on the job. Mark told how classes
enabled him to help his staff to “get the training
they need to develop their skills to better work their
profession.” Holly saw her own personal changes
at work: “It seemed like what I was learning in the
classes validated the feelings I was having at my
job. If you do not engage your employees, this is
how they’re going to feel and respon... it’s almost
like they were writing it about me.” Maria had a
similar theme: “I’ve learned how to deal more
in different situations, I’m better at the things I
present in writing and orally.”
Students often cited particular class material
that they brought to the job. As Holly commented,
“every day you use what you learn in all of this.”
Mark became a better supervisor, “looking more
at what my role should be as a manager, taking
care of my people and working with them . . .
looking out for their needs.” Laurie said that the
HRD program helped her most “in just managing
my employees.” She added,
[I] have five employees and I think just about
every semester I have learned something new.
I’ve never looked [before] at how each one of
them is different, and I have to present things
differently to them.
Students found needs assessment skills to be
useful. Diane used those techniques in the grocery
store, while Leona noted that “a lot of jobs are
asking their employees to do needs assessments.”
Students also cited the importance of presentation
skills. Maria became “much better and more or-
ganized and [able] to relay the message simpler
Using Qualitative Methods to Evaluate Distance Education
and easier.” Holly said that she now “observed
how other people do presentations.”
Teamwork
A common outcome cited by students related to
teamwork. Diane claimed that she “learned a lot
about groups” similar to Laurie, who saw how
group activities helped since “a lot of it pertains
to team working at work.” Jerry looked to the
practical side of understanding teamwork: “the
company that I work for isn’t necessarily the most
conducive to the team atmosphere, so I’ve tried
to use some of what I’ve learned there to make
that a little bit better.”
DISCUSSION
This case study addressed how nontraditional,
degree-seeking undergraduate students in a
blended technology junior-senior program offered
through distance education perceived their lives,
work, and education as members of an HRD cohort.
We confirmed our original belief that hermeneutic
phenomenology was the appropriate methodology
to study the interactive nature of distance educa-
tion and technology.
This methodology focused on an emergent
design having a limited number of core questions.
Each answer was subject to probing questions in
what Bredo and Feinberg (1982) describe as the
hermeneutic process that “may be continued until
an adequately coherent interpretation is reached”
(p. 124), and that Kavale (p. 84) describes as “a
hermeneutical circle or spiral … an infinite process
[that] ends in practice when a sensible meaning,
a coherent understanding, free of inner contradic-
tions, has been reached” (as cited in Patton, 1990).
This research was undertaken to study the
phenomenon attending the cohort that inter-
ested us, per Gall, Borg, and Gall (1996): “the
processes, events, persons, or things [such as]
programs, curricula, roles, and events” (p. 545).
We questioned, beyond HRD knowledge, what
junior-senior students were learning from this
distance education program.
DISTANCE EDUCATION AND
TECHNOLOGY
While this case study cannot be generalized to a
larger population, it may guide distance educa-
tion professionals as they develop other outreach
credit programs. According to Tallent-Runnells et
al. (2006), in 2000-2001, “90% of public 2-year
and 89% of public 4-year institutions offered dis-
tance education courses….an estimated 2,876,000
individuals were enrolled in college-level, credit-
granting distance education courses, with 82%
of these at the undergraduate level” (p. 93). This
research used a qualitative design which addressed
a limitation expressed by Tallent-Runnels et al.
(2006) ─ “empirical research reports about online
course instruction rather than on program descrip-
tions or conceptual articles” (p. 94).
We concluded that there was a wealth of infor-
mation to be gained from examining the impact
of a blended-technology, degree-completion
program. The distance learning CIV program
for HRD cohort participants provided access to
higher education that many students had believed
was no longer available to them, given their life
situations. They exchanged the enthusiasm and
hope they brought to the program for practical
skills, confidence, and a sense of self-fulfillment.
The access and convenience of distance learning
technology, combined with a program framework
that stressed flexibility, predictability, and avail-
ability of technical and faculty assistance, pro-
vided a more nurturing foundation than students
had experienced in traditional distance education
programs.
In an era of older and increasingly diverse
workforces, interactive television, combined
with other instructional technology, may be a
critical medium for maintaining and improving
351
 Using Qualitative Methods to Evaluate Distance Education

Table 1. Summary of interview data.

Interview One Overall Experiences = 51 answers

What is a typical class day like?
If you could describe your experience in three words, what
would they be? Each response was followed by a probing question, such as was there anything
else (asked repeatedly).
Is there a particular incident in class that sticks in your memory?
What is it like to be a student in an HRD cohort ?
Interview One Themes Degree Completion, Distance Education Delivery
Transfer of Learning
Blended Technology
Accessible Group Networking €€€Rewarding
Challenging Group Support €€€Transfer to Work
Convenient Hassle €€€Transfer to Personal Life
Educational Interesting
Energetic Stressful
Exciting Structure
Exhilarating
Flexible Technology
Interview Two: Students
were asked what each
theme meant to them.
Results of Interview Two: Rewarding/Transfer to Work/Transfer to Per-
Theme Clusters Accessible/Technology sonal Life
Challenging
Convenient/Flexible
Exciting/Exhilarating/Energetic
Group Networking/Group Support
Hassle/Stressful
Interesting/Educational
Structure
Interview Three: Focused on Transfer of Learning Focused Experiences = 32 answers
What have you been able to take away from the HRD program that you’ve been able to use on the job?
What have you been able to take away from the HRD program that you’ve been able to use in your personal life?
How would you say the past two years have changed you?

Results of Interview Three: Communication/Connecting/Understanding Personalities

Theme Clusters Confidence
Relevance to Work/ Management/Needs Assessment/Presenta-
tions
Relevance to Personal Life; Teamwork

job skills. Hence, qualitative case studies such results, such as those presented here, might allow
as this can help determine changing workplace educators and trainers to better support students
needs that will define educational programs for through blended technology. The convenience of
broadly diverse workforces. Qualitative research the delivery system and the interpersonal support

352
Using Qualitative Methods to Evaluate Distance Education
system of the group learning process were critical
to the success of the program studied here.
TRANSFER OF HRD KNOWLEDGE
The second interview generated results that raised
interesting questions about how students were able
to apply what they learned in their classes. There-
fore, we framed the third interview to explore the
Rewarding/Transfer to Work/Transfer to Personal
Life theme cluster in greater depth. What have the
experiences of students in this cohort revealed
about how transfer of learning takes place in this
distance education bachelor’s degree-completion
program? Most students in this case study wanted
to earn a degree that would move them ahead in
their careers or complete a personal educational
journey. Not only did students find coursework
interesting and challenging, but that their studies
took them beyond a degree or personal journey,
providing them with immediate application to
both work and personal life of the knowledge they
acquired in the program. The enabling mechanism
was the continuing education program accessed
through CIV and web technology that offset the
limitations of their rural settings.
Interviewees did not always distinguish be-
tween personal and work outcomes, noting that
understanding communication helped in both
areas, while management skills often helped at
home. For the most part, the practical side of
instructional outcomes dominated both home and
job experiences, fulfilling a specific goal rather
than a generalized commitment to learning.
The program presented principles and ap-
plications related to organization development,
training, career development, and performance
management. From understanding gained from
these classes in areas such as group dynamics
and communication, students not only better un-
derstood the realities of their work lives, but that
they could productively apply on the job what
they learned in their coursework.
More important to many students was the
gain in confidence and growth they experienced
in their personal lives. The first two interviews
demonstrated that students came to recognize this
connection between theory and practice. We fol-
lowed through on that theme cluster in the third
interview, confirming that these students had
learned how to transfer what they had learned in
the program to both work life and personal life.
The significance of this qualitative research lies
in the notion of transfer of learning (Swartz &
Biggs, 1999).
ALTERNATIVE QUALITATIVE
EVALUATION DESIGNS
Patton (2002) suggests that “one can’t judge the
appropriateness of the methods in any study or
quality of the resulting findings without knowing
the study’s purpose, agreed-on uses, and intended
audiences” (p. 10) and Creswell (2007) suggests
that the research question or problem influences the
research design. This section discusses other evalu-
ative research designs that could have explored
the effectiveness and outcomes of the blended
degree completion program. Various philosophi-
cal orientations that influence qualitative inquiry
will also be discussed, illustrating the “calibrated
flexibility” associated with qualitative inquiry.
Process Evaluation Study
Process evaluation focuses on how something hap-
pens rather than on the outcomes. Patton (1990)
suggests that “qualitative inquiry is appropriate
in studying process because it requires detailed
description; the experience of process typically
varies for different people; process is fluid and
dynamic; and participant perceptions are a key
process consideration” (p. 95). A process evalua-
tion differs from a hermeneutic phenomenological
case study in several ways. The purpose of the
current study was to understand students’ perspec-
353
 Using Qualitative Methods to Evaluate Distance Education
tive regarding “What Is It Like to Be a Student
in an HRD Degree Completion Program?” That
purpose subsequently informed the research de-
sign to explore the question. Had the evaluation
focused on “How Does the Course Rotation Im-
pact Student Retention?,” a process design would
have been appropriate for evaluation. Such a shift
would likely have altered the study population to
include stakeholders other than students, and data
collection might have included focus groups and
document review besides individual interviews.
Implementation Evaluation
Williams’ (1976) work revealed lack of interest
in exploring program implementation as a bar-
rier to analyzing analysis and providing baseline
data for program improvement. Patton’s (1997)
Utilization-Focused Evaluation suggests that
given limited resources, implementation infor-
mation can be more useful than outcome infor-
mation. Naturalistic inquiry is appropriate for
exploring program implementation since these
studies require case data rich in program content
and context. Since it is impossible to anticipate
in advance how programs will adapt to local
conditions, needs, and interests, it is impossible
to anticipate how standardized quantities could
capture the essence of a program’s implementa-
tion (Patton, 2002, p. 162).
Ethnography
Ethnographic studies assume that “every human
group that is together for a period of time will
evolve a culture” (Patton, 1990, p 68.). In eth-
nographic research, “the researcher participates
over an extended period of time, in the lives of
the people you are studying” (Shank, 2006, p.
60). An ethnographic evaluation might focus on
a subculture of the program cohort and how that
subculture makes meaning of the experience, such
as investigating African American subculture
evolution over the course of the program. Data
354
collection techniques here would have relied on
participant observation and long term immer-
sion in an intact subculture group to capture
the shared beliefs and values of its members
(Rossman & Rallis, 2003). Had the researchers
used ethnography to evaluate the blended degree
completion program, the focus might have been
“How African American Students Navigate the
Degree Completion Program. An ethnographic
study using individual interviews to collect data
would be insufficient to understand the cultural
experience of an African American sub-cohort.
The discussion above does not present an
exhaustive list of qualitative designs that could
be used to evaluate the degree completion study.
Instead, it underscores the linkage between the
purpose of the evaluation and its subsequent
design and data collection.
Philosophical Assumptions
and Evaluation Research
Just as the goals of an evaluation shape the evalu-
ation design, qualitative evaluation is shaped by
the evaluator’s philosophical orientation and
world views that influence the design. Creswell
(2007) suggests that in addition to bringing one’s
own interpretive filters to the research, qualita-
tive research begins with certain philosophical
assumptions that lead an individual to conduct
qualitative research.
The assumptions reflect a particular stance that
researchers make when they choose qualitative
research. After researchers make this choice, they
then further shape their research by brining to the
inquiry paradigms or word views. (p 19)
Although classification and terminology of
these philosophical orientations differ among re-
searchers (Denzin and Lincoln (2000); Guba, and
Lincoln, 1988; Lincoln and Guba, 2000; Schwandt,
2000; Crotty, 1998 and Creswell, 1998), there is
general agreement that world view, paradigm, and
Using Qualitative Methods to Evaluate Distance Education
philosophical orientation influence and inform the
practice of research differently.
Post Positivistic World View
Researchers using a post-positivistic world view
“will take a scientific approach to research. The
approach has the elements of being reductionist,
logical and emphasis on empirical data collection,
cause-and-effect orientated, and deterministic
based on a priori theories” (Creswell, 2007 p.
20). Patton (2002) suggests that “post positivists
assert that it is possible, using empirical evidence,
to distinguish between more and less plausible
claims, to test and choose between rival hypoth-
eses (p. 93). This paradigm influences practice in
that “post positivist researchers will likely view
inquiry as a series of logically related steps, be-
lieve in multiple perspectives form participants
rather than a single reality, and espouse rigorous
methods of qualitative data collection and analysis
(Creswell, 2007, p. 20).
Social Constructivist World View
Researchers with a social constructivist world
view are unlikely to start with a theory, but will
inductively develop theory using subjective mean-
ings of multiple experiences.
Social constructivists believe that meaning
is contextual and socially negotiated through
interactions with others. Therefore, according to
Creswell (2007),
in terms of practice, the questions become broad
and general so that the participants can construct
the meaning of a situation, a meaning typically
forged in discussions or interactions with other
persons. They also focus on the specific contexts
in which people live and work in order to under-
stand the historical and cultural settings of the
participants. (p. 21)
Advocacy/ Participatory World View
The advocacy/ participatory world view rejects
post-positivism and constructivism as inadequate
to explore issues of marginalized individuals or
groups, and assumes that “research should contain
an action agenda for reform that may change the
lives of participants, the institutions in which they
live and work, or even the researchers’ lives”
(Creswell, 2007, p. 21). Research questions are
framed around specific social issues, such as op-
pression and inequity, and researchers collaborate
with participants to design questions and data col-
lection methods, involving the participant voice
throughout the process.
Pragmatic World View
Researchers who share the pragmatic world view
are most concerned with the outcomes of the in-
quiry. Patton (1990) suggests that pragmatists look
to “what works,” while the problem studied and the
questions asked are subject to greater focus than
the methods (Creswell, 2007). Pragmatists also
use multiple data collection methods, including
quantitative measures, to ensure that the question
is sufficiently addressed.
Post-positivism, social constructivism, advo-
cacy/participatory, and pragmatism do not offer
an all-inclusive list of the paradigms available
to qualitative evaluation. However, they demon-
strate examples of how a researcher’s worldview,
combined with the purpose of the evaluation, can
influence evaluative research.
FUTURE TRENDS
Qualitative evaluation is especially suited for the
complex social environments that have increas-
ingly come to characterize research across global
boundaries. Issues of cultural influence affecting
political tradition, trade, education, and regional
competition have heightened the need for greater
355
 Using Qualitative Methods to Evaluate Distance Education
understanding of the ways that people and insti-
tutions interact. Contemporary researchers have
become more sensitive to the need for valuing
participant cultural traditions that require a greater
ability to discover meanings and motivations
often hidden to the participants, themselves. For
example, critical race theory, feminism, critical
humanism, queer theory, and critical ethnography
represent evolving subject-sensitive qualitative
research. Denzin and Lincoln (2005) suggest
“it is apparent that the constantly changing field
of qualitative research is defined by a series of
tensions and contradictions as well as emergent
understandings (p. 1084).
CONCLUSION
The researchers believe that this case study use of
an emergent research design, based on hermeneu-
tic phenomenology, revealed the inner meanings
HRD cohort students held about program impact
on their work and personal lives. The distance edu-
cation model studied required that students have
previous work experience, current employment,
and the equivalent of an associate degree, while
students were subject to the work and family com-
mitments, and community obligations roots that
defined their nontraditional student character. That
combination created a readiness and proclivity to
integrate what students learned in the program
with work and personal needs, resulting in an im-
mediate transfer of learning both on the job and at
home. The other qualitative research approaches
described above might reveal similar perceptions
held by students in other HRD cohorts, leading to
the possible conclusion that transfer of learning
may, in fact, be better achieved in programs such
as this distance continuing education model than
in traditional classrooms.
356
REFERENCES
Anderson, L. P. (2000). Interactive televised
instruction: Factors that influence student evalua-
tions of business courses. ProQuest Dissertations
and Theses, 62(1), (PQ No.727909901).
Bredo, E., & Feinberg, W. (1982). The interpre-
tive approach to social and educational research.
In Bredo, E., & Feinberg, W. (Eds.), Knowledge
and values in social and educational research (pp.
115–128). Philadelphia: Temple University Press.
Brown, M. M. (1989). What are the qualities of
good research? In Hultgren, F. H., & Coomer, D. L.
(Eds.), Alternative modes of inquiry (pp. 279–283).
Washington, D.C.: American Home Economics
Association, Teacher Education Section.
Clow, K. E. (1999). Interactive distance learn-
ing: Impact on student course evaluations.
Journal of Marketing Education, 21(2), 97–105.
doi:10.1177/0273475399212003
Costello, T. (2001). The challenge of caring for
children. Family Matters (Melbourne, Vic.), 59,
80–81.
Creswell, J. (1998). Qualitative inquiry & research
design: Choosing among five traditions. Thousand
Oakes, CA: Sage.
Creswell, J. (2007). Qualitative inquiry & research
design: Choosing among five approaches. Thou-
sand Oakes, CA: Sage.
Crotty, M. (1998). The foundations of social re-
search: Meaning and perspective in the research
process. London: Sage.
Denzin, N. K., & Lincoln, Y. S. (2000). Introduc-
tion: The discipline and practice of qualitative
research. In Denzin, N. K., & Lincoln, Y. S. (Eds.),
Handbook of qualitative research (2nd ed., pp.
1–28). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Using Qualitative Methods to Evaluate Distance Education
Denzin, N. K., & Lincoln, Y. S. (2005). Introduc-
tion: The discipline and practice of qualitative
research. In Denzin, N. K., & Lincoln, Y. S. (Eds.),
Handbook of qualitative research (3rd ed., pp.
1083–1087). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Farlex. (n.d.) The free dictionary. Retrieved Janu-
ary 4, 2008, from http://encyclopedia.thefreedic-
tionary.com/continuing+education
Gadamer, H. G. (1975). Truth and method (Barden,
G., & Cumming, J., Trans.). New York: Seabury
Press.
Gall, M. D., Borg, W. R., & Gall, J. P. (1996).
Educational research: An introduction (6th ed.).
White Plains, NY: Longman.
Guba, E. G., & Lincoln, Y. S. (1988). Do inquiry
paradigms imply inquiry methodologies? In Fet-
terman, D. M. (Ed.), Qualitative approaches to
evaluation in education (pp. 89–115). New York:
Praeger.
Hinton, B. E. (1998). Developing a distance learn-
ing HRD baccalaureate degree for working adults.
In R. J. Torraco (Ed.), 1998 academy of human
resource development proceedings (pp.16-22).
Baton Rouge, LA: AHRD.
Hultgren, F. H. (1989). Introduction to interpretive
inquiry. In Cooner, D. L., & Hultgren, F. H. (Eds.),
Alternative modes of inquiry in home economics
research (pp. 37–59). Peoria, IL: American Home
Economics Association.
Kellogg Commission on the Future of State and
Land-Grant Universities. (1998). Student access:
Data related to change (Second working paper).
Washington, DC: National Association of State
Universities and Land-Grant Colleges, Office of
Public Affairs.
Ko, A., & Rossen, S. (2004). Teaching online: A
practical guide. Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin
Company.
Lawless, K. A., & Brown, S. W. (1997). Multi-
media learning environments: Issues of learner
control and navigation. Instructional Science,
25(2), 117–131. doi:10.1023/A:1002919531780
Lim, D. H., Morris, M. L., & Kupritz, V. W.
(2006). Online vs. blended learning: Differences
in instructional outcomes and learner satisfaction.
In F. M. Nafukho & H. S. Chen (Eds.), 2006 acad-
emy of human resource development international
research conference proceedings (pp. 809-816).
Bowling Green, OH: AHRD.
Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (2000). Paradig-
matic controversies, contradictions, and emerging
confluences. In Denzin, N. K., & Lincoln, Y. S.
(Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research (2nd ed.,
pp. 163–188). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Quali-
tative data analysis. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE
Publications.
Osguthorpe, R. T., & Graham, C. R. (2003).
Blended learning education: Definitions and
directions. The Quarterly Review of Distance
Education, 4(3), 227–233.
Patchner, M. E., Petracchi, H. E., & Wise, S.
(1998). Outcomes of ITV and face-to-face instruc-
tion in a social work methods course. Computers
in Human Services, 15(2/3), 23–36.
Patton, M. Q. (1990). Qualitative evaluation and
research methods (2nd ed.). Newbury Park, CA:
SAGE Publications.
Patton, M. Q. (1997). Utilization-focused evalu-
ation: The new century text (3rd ed.). Thousand
Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications.
Patton, M. Q. (2002). Qualitative evaluation and
research methods (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA:
SAGE Publications.
357
 Using Qualitative Methods to Evaluate Distance Education

Patton, M. Q. (2009, February). New directions
in qualitative evaluation approaches. Seminar
presentation, Academy of Human Resource
Development International Conference of the
Americas, Washington, D.C.
Reio, T. G., & Crim, S. J. (2006). The emergence
of social presence as an overlooked factor in
asynchronous online learning. In F. M. Nafukho
& H. S. Chen (Eds.), 2006 academy of human
resource development international research
conference proceedings (pp. 964-971). Bowling
Green, OH: AHRD.
Rossman, G. B., & Rallis, S. F. (2003). Learning in
the field: An introduction to qualitative research.
Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Salas, E., Kosarzycki, M. P., Burke, S. C., Fiore,
S., & Stone, D. L. (2002). Emerging themes in
distance learning research and practice: Some food
for thought. International Journal of Manage-
ment Reviews, 4(2), 135–153. doi:10.1111/1468-
2370.00081
Schwandt, T. (2000). Three epistemological
stances for qualitative inquiry: Interpretivism,
hermeneutics, and social constructivism. In Den-
zin, N. K., & Lincoln, Y. S. (Eds.), Handbook
of qualitative research (2nd ed., pp. 189–214).
Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Shank, G. (2006). Qualitative research: A personal
skills approach. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson.
Siegel, E., Jennings, J. G., Conklin, J., Napoletano,
F., & Shelly, A. (1998). winter). Distance learning
in a social work education: Results and implica-
tions of a national survey. Journal of Social Work
Education, 34(1), 71–80.
Sikora, A. C. (2002). A profile of participation
in distance education: 1999-2000. Education
Statistics Quarterly, 4(4). Retrieved February 25,
2008, from http://nces.ed.gov/programs/quarterly
Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. (1990). Basics of
qualitative research. Newbury Park, CA: SAGE
Publications.
Swartz, J. D., & Biggs, B. (1999). Technology, time
and space or what does it mean to be present? A
study of the culture of a distance education class.
Journal of Educational Computing Research,
20(1), 71–85.
Tallent-Runnels, M. K., Thomas, J. A., Lan, W. Y.,
Cooper, S., Ahern, T. C., & Shaw, M. S. (2006).
Teaching courses online: A review of the research.
Review of Educational Research, 76(1), 93–125.
doi:10.3102/00346543076001093
Van Manen, M. (1990). Researching lived experi-
ence: Human science for an action sensitive peda-
gogy. New York: State University of New York.
Verduin, J. R., & Clark, T. A. (1991). Distance
education: The foundations of effective practice.
San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Williams, W. (1976). Implementation analysis and
assessment. In Williams, W., & Elmore, R. (Eds.),
Social program implementation (pp. 281–282).
New York: Academic Press.
Worthen, B. R., Sanders, J. R., & Fitzpatrick, J.
L. (1997). Program Evaluation: Alternative ap-
proaches and practical guidelines (2nd ed.). New
York: Longman Publishers.
Yeaworth, R. C., Benschoter, R. A., Meter,
R., & Benson, S. (1995). Telecommunications
and nursing education. Journal of Professional
Nursing, 11(4), 227–232. doi:10.1016/S8755-
7223(95)80024-7
KEY TERMS AND DEFINITIONS
Blended Technology: The delivery of a
program through Compressed Interactive Video
(CIV—sometimes referred to as ITV) via satellite
transmission; a web-based classroom manage-

358
Using Qualitative Methods to Evaluate Distance Education
ment system (such as Blackboard or Web-CT);
and possibly one or more face-to-face meetings
of students and instructor.
Bracketing: In research, the ability of the
investigator to isolate his or her own biases so
as not to misinterpret or misreport a subject’s
intended meaning or perceptions.
Cohort: Students who enter a program to-
gether, proceed through coursework at the same
time, and are expected to complete degree require-
ments at the same time.
Critical Theory: Promoting a consciousness
to break down institutional structures that generate
oppression and inequality.
Distance Learning: A formal education where
most instruction occurs while educator and learner
are at a distance from each other.
Hermeneutics: The theory and practice of
interpretation to determine human meaning behind
phenomena.
Interactive Learning: The exchange of
information that can occur either in real-time
or later through technology (synchronous… or
asynchronous).
Intersubjective: The researcher needs others
to develop a dialogic relationship to the phenom-
enon studied to confirm the phenomenon.
Phenomenology: The structure and essence of
how people describe things and experience them
through their senses.
Qualitative Research: A method of research
that assumes that individuals construct their own
social reality in meaning and interpretation, and
which depends on context and time; sometimes
referred to as Interpretive Research.
359
360

Chapter 22
Women, Information and
Communication Technologies,
and Lifelong Learning
Catherine J. Irving
St. Francis Xavier University, Canada

Leona M. English
St. Francis Xavier University, Canada

ABSTRACT
This chapter arises from the authors’ research interests in gender and adult learning in the community,
with a special focus on how gender is enacted in communities of practice such as nonprofit women’s
organizations. These organizations play a key role in adult learning—nonformally through workshops
and programs and informally through mentoring, collaboration, and information sharing. They also work
informally and incidentally through advocacy work for social change to redress systemic gender-based
discrimination. This chapter assesses how well the services and learning that happen in this context have
evolved with the adoption of Information and Communication Technologies (ICTs) by women’s groups,
in this case organizational websites. The authors place this discussion within the context of a small but
growing literature examining the integration of ICTs within community development. In addition, we
draw on feminist theoretical understandings and critiques of technology as it affects the lives of women.
Although ICTs provide opportunities to further the cause of gender equality globally, inequalities persist
to limit the realization of this potential.

INTRODUCTION various forms of continuing education. Nonprofit

Those who work in the nonprofit sector acknowl-
edge that much of the informal learning for women
happens in and through community interactions.
Through myriad organizations and nonprofit
groups, women engage in mentoring, tutoring, and
DOI: 10.4018/978-1-61692-906-0.ch022
feminist and other women’s organizations, rang-
ing from craft guilds to charities, play a key role
in community-based lifelong learning. For the
purpose of this chapter, feminist organizations
are broadly defined as those groups and agencies
that typically have a political mandate to work
for women’s rights and to change the inequalities
that exist in civil society (Ferree & Martin, 1995).
Women, Information and Communication Technologies, and Lifelong Learning
Feminist organizations provide structured and
unstructured learning opportunities and share in-
formation on issues ranging from self-esteem and
personal development to advocacy on structural
injustices that perpetuate poverty and violence.
This chapter revisits the role of women’s or-
ganizations in community-based lifelong learning
and examines the place of ICTs in the services and
activities these groups engage in. The authors draw
from a spectrum of current research to develop the
intersection of nonprofit organizations, women’s
learning, feminist theoretical contributions to the
study of gender and technology, and community
development, notably the recent contribution of
community informatics to lay out an understanding
of the use of ICTs specifically in communities.
Although definitions of Information and Com-
munication Technologies (ICTs) vary, most refer
broadly to the range of technologies created to
facilitate communications and information shar-
ing. Typically these technologies are computer-
mediated forms such as the Internet, including
email and the World Wide Web (popularly called
the net or web). They also may refer to mobile
phones, handheld computing devices, or even
pre-computer technologies such as community
radio (Hafkin & Huyer, 2006).
While learning occurs informally throughout
a person’s life, it is rare to see a focus in the lit-
erature on informal learning through initiatives
promoting ICT skill attainment (Faulkner & Lie,
2007). Most of the available literature that deals
with the potential and usage of ICTs in education
focuses on formal learning environments—class-
room technology as a supplement face to face
interactions, distance e-learning, instructional
methods, performance assessment, course evalu-
ations, and so on.
Nonprofit literature draws out the particulari-
ties of what makes nonprofits distinct from busi-
ness in their use of ICTs and focuses on the issues
that charitable—often volunteer-led—organiza-
tions face in adopting complex technologies as
they fulfill their service mandates. Many feminist
organizations now use ICTs to communicate to
women, educate and lobby about relevant issues,
provide information, and promote services and
events. ICTs have the potential to be an integral
part of this overall mandate of education and
learning for women. Feminist analyses of technol-
ogy have ranged from the utopian to dystopian.
Proponents champion the opportunities ICTs can
bring to women’s organizing potential, while crit-
ics highlight the inherent masculinist biases that
serve to ensure the majority of women remain
excluded, or at best, restricted to the “consumer-
end” of new technologies. While this gendered
analysis helps to uncover hidden biases, there is
the concern that some critiques simply reinforce
gender stereotypes, as writers such as Hayes and
Flannery (2000) note in their studies on women
and learning. This ambivalent relationship clearly
affects the ways women’s groups take on ICTs in
daily practice. Community informatics is useful
in this context as it is an interdisciplinary field
studying the practical application of ICTs at the
community level. The focus of informatics is on
multiple layers ranging from the technology itself
(design, bandwidth), through the ability to use
technology (training, access), to the underlying
issues including the policy environment, and on
through to funding. Community informatics strives
for a critical understanding of the challenges and
opportunities faced by the adoption or adapta-
tion of ICTs to further the work of communities
(Gurstein, 2004).
The fundamental challenge anchoring this
analysis is to explore why community groups
should integrate ICT usage into their activities
at all. Given the hailed potential of technology-
mediated opportunities for people to increase
their interaction with each other, it is time to step
back and critically reflect on the ways citizens
are shaping or are being shaped by technology,
and to what degree citizens are to believe its
promise. The focus of this chapter then is the
use of organizational websites, and the roles they
play as extensions of the work of physically and
361
 Women, Information and Communication Technologies, and Lifelong Learning
geographically located feminist organizations and
women’s resource centres. Drawing on the authors’
recent study of feminist organizations’ websites,
this chapter highlights examples of website use to
promote lifelong learning. The focus is on the ways
that women use the Internet to build community,
provide education and communicate ideas, as well
as organize for action on fundamental notions of
human rights and equity.
BACKGROUND
Through the 1960s to 1980s, feminist groups
throughout the world formed as a result of second-
wave feminism’s slogan that “the personal is
political” and second wave’s call for collective
action to address the social causes of gender-based
discrimination (McPherson, 2000). Many early
consciousness raising groups and protest move-
ments have matured over the ensuing decades to
create resource centres, shelters, health clinics, and
advocacy agencies. These women’s organizations
exist in the nonprofit world to fill the social and
educational needs that the larger civil society has
ignored for women (Irving & English, in press).
They foster basic skills for women, providing
shelters for women who are abused, and facilitating
a range of training and support services. Theories
of women and learning suggest that these informal
spaces need to be as attentive as formal institutions
of higher education to identified characteristics of
how women learn best: women want to get along,
be connected knowers and engage in relational
knowing. The pressures of funding, expectation
and uncertainty in the nonprofit sector can con-
flict with these preferred ways of knowing, and
with the resistance to these as stereotypes, cause
anxiety and lack of organizational effectiveness
(English, 2006).
Business and management research, when it
does pay attention to women, focuses on women’s
preference for cooperation and collaboration in
the workplace (for example, Foster & Meinhard,
362
2003). The nonprofit literature has paid less at-
tention to women’s organizing and when it does,
it often resorts to some of the same stereotypes of
women (see, for example, Bordt, 1997; Ferree &
Martin, 1995). More helpful is the feminist litera-
ture which pays less attention to stereotypes and
focuses more on how these organizations work to
end sexism. Most of these organizations identify
with some form of feminist stance, and play a
significant role in the development of a collective
feminist consciousness and increased learning and
employment opportunities for women. Feminism
is a global movement, that emphasizes the impor-
tance of women working together in solidarity to
identify gender-based inequalities and challenge
sexist oppression, “and it is this politics that en-
ergizes women’s movements, whether or not the
word ‘feminist’ is used” (Antrobus, 2004, p.16).
Though these organizations vary in orienta-
tion to feminism they share a concern to address
social problems—poverty, illiteracy, violence.
While feminism has been a pivotal “though
controversial, force,” many of its positive effects
have been operationalized through the workings
of feminist organizations on the ground (Ferree
& Martin, 1995, p. 3). These organizations have
been active in working for changes through social
action, education, lobbying, and the provision of
a supportive community for local feminists. It is
also often true that nonprofit feminist organiza-
tions support lifelong learning in the context of
their commitment to grassroots activism; as such,
they are especially significant for adult educators
interested in social action. As with much social
movement learning, this learning is often non-
formal since it involves workshops, educational
sessions and short training programs. Some of
it resides in the informal sector since it occurs
in the everyday world of experience in the form
of mentoring, coaching and on-the-job training
such as writing policies or applying for funding
(Coombs, 1973). This is influenced by a relational
view of learning that acknowledges the social
and power dimensions of learning in community.
Women, Information and Communication Technologies, and Lifelong Learning
Learning is embedded in the group’s collective
history and its ongoing community relationships.
Knowledge emerges informally and nonformally
as a result of collaboration.
Feminist organizations have a particularly
challenging task ahead of them. In dealing with
inadequate funding issues, they are on the forefront
of efforts to address poverty, illiteracy, abuse and
patriarchy. Yet, these organizations for the most
part are using 1970s teaching methods of group
work, and their group interactions are often based
in stereotypes of women and learning that were
inadvertently promoted by texts such as Women’s
Ways of Knowing (Belenky, Clinchy, Goldberger,
and Tarule (1986). Because nonprofit organiza-
tions are often dependent on ad hoc government
funding and on volunteer staff and board members,
there is a great deal of anxiety created as they at-
tempt to fulfill their multiple roles as educators,
service providers and activists. This anxiety is
experienced by employees, members and cli-
ents, albeit in varying degrees of intensity. Yet,
today civil society work of protecting victims of
abuse, or providing literacy and pre-employment
training continues, though there is a legitimate
protest from within that many of these services
are the responsibility of the state. Often nonprofit
feminist organizations work with multiple com-
munity partners, including some that are allies in
the feminist movement. It would be common, for
instance, for feminist allies in the nonprofit sec-
tor to partner to create funding strategies, lobby
for rights, and collectively meet the needs of
their female constituency. Feminists in the anti-
poverty movement, for instance, would be likely
partners for women’s organizations since women
are disproportionately affected by poverty, food
costs and housing shortages.
Community development organizations for
women in the majority world are especially
important as they provide a place for women to
come together to resist the effects of patriarchy
in contexts with explicit discrimination, and the
challenges to development such as deterioration
of the natural world and natural resources (Mies
& Shiva, 1993), or the effects of conservative
religious policies on reproductive rights (Gebara,
1995). Journals such as Gender and Development
routinely showcase the ways in which community
based women’s organizations work against such
persistent inequalities locally, and mobilize nation-
ally or globally to press for the implementation
of international and United Nations human rights
instruments such as CEDAW (Convention on the
Elimination of Discrimination Against Women).
Community-based resource centres “serve as
focal points for popular education, community
involvement and valuing local knowledge” (Ad-
ams, Krolak, Kupidura, & Pahernik, 2002, p. 27).
Women’s resource centres are prime examples of
this form of community learning and engagement.
Adams et al. note that the women’s movement “has
challenged gender-based control of information
and knowledge, redressing some of the issues
of access and control that women face as adult
learners” (p. 34). In addition to providing critical
“one-on-one” support and learning opportunities
for their clients, women’s centres actively redress
structural barriers to women’s equality. These
centres play a role in the provision of information
that the Beijing Declaration and Platform for Ac-
tion, at the Fourth World Conference on Women
recognized as key to the development of policies
to overcome gender-based discrimination (Valk,
Dam, & Cummings, 1999).
ISSUES
Women’s nonprofits fill a vital role in the com-
munity sector. They contribute to grassroots
organizing and to filling neglected spaces for
women. They provide not only education but much
needed identity and support services especially for
women in crisis. Beyond the community level, they
work in national and international spheres of the
women’s movement to support each other through
collective advocacy work on policy documents,
363
 Women, Information and Communication Technologies, and Lifelong Learning
networking, and sharing organizational learning.
Given this impetus for learning, collaboration
and networking, it appears that ICTs have great
potential to extend and improve these initiatives.
In the context of the nonprofit sector as a whole,
not to have a web presence can place limits on an
organization’s effectiveness (Kenix, 2008). While
still at the margins of overall research on ICTs
in society, there is a small but growing thread of
analysis considering this potential and challenges
that arise with the integration of ICTs to the work
of women’s organizations. These include: feminist
critiques of technology, adult learning and tech-
nology, use of ICTs by the nonprofit sector, and
implications for lifelong learning. Each of these
is discussed in turn.
Feminist Critiques of Technology
Technology is commonly identified as a mascu-
linist realm (Butterwick & Jubas, 2005, 2006) as
technology is created by men applying their cog-
nitive and conceptual ability, with women’s role
restricted to that of end-users of the tools created
for them. This critique draws from a long history of
feminist criticism of technology. Franklin (1999)
observes that each historical phase of technological
development produces greater fragmentation of
work, with women almost invariably occupying
the “menial” positions, such as cotton mill workers
and telephone operators. Now, with computers, the
roles of designers and programmers are primarily
seen as male occupations, while women’s roles
are assigned as assembly workers or data entry
clerks, with little opportunity for input to shape
technology in the contexts of their experiences.
This is, of course, a sweeping generalization, as
there are women professionals in ICTs and there are
men who work in call centres. Yet, the fact remains
that men are over-represented in formal education
for computer programming and attempts to address
this have been mixed; in fact, women’s rate of
participation is falling (Stross, 2008). A study at
Carnegie Mellon University (Fisher & Margolis,
364
2002) noted that the rate of female participation
in computer science programs is incredibly low.
Fisher and Margolis attribute these rates, in part,
to how women learn. They note that women prefer
to learn about technology if it has an application
to a real life problem, and also note that gender
preference for technology would be identified
when these students were children. Fisher and
Margolis also observe a constant “questioning
of women’s abilities” (p. 80) in these formal set-
tings. They recommend that focus be placed on
interactions and relationship among students and
between students and faculty. They point to the
need for personal connections and relationship
building. Faulkner and Lie (2007) raise the con-
tentious issue of quotas, ensuring a set number of
spaces for women in technology programs, citing
Scandinavian strategies to increase female enroll-
ment. They suggest a “critical mass” is needed;
in other words there must be a good representa-
tion of women in a program before other women
consider it to be a viable option. The visibility
of the program appears to be as important as the
way the program is structured.
The critique that ICTs are created in men’s
interests is challenged by a line of thinking that
looks at gender identity from another perspec-
tive. The counter stance has been that, rather
than excluding women, ICTs are well suited to
women’s predisposition for communication and
collaboration. The 1990s, in particular, saw a
renewed enthusiasm for the potential of ICTs to
further the goals of feminism and the interests
of women willing to embrace technology, as
evidenced by “cyberfeminism,” or the multiple
ways that women organize and collaborate online.
Here the potential for women’s agendas being
played out in the virtual sphere was triumphed
over the barriers that everyday women faced (Van
Zoonen, 2001). This phase sparked a plethora of
pilot programs, online groups, and websites as
women’s organizations rushed to embrace this
potential, and repurpose to their own goals a tech-
nology which had stereotypically been portrayed
Women, Information and Communication Technologies, and Lifelong Learning
as a male domain. Unfortunately, this enthusiasm
masked persistent barriers that so far has failed
to bring to fruition the full potential envisioned
by the cyberfeminist period. Rosser (2005) notes
that work still needs to be done to strengthen the
theoretical framing of cyberfeminism.
Adult Learning and Technology
Butterwick and Jubas (2006) studied some 70
women working in information technology who
have no formal technical training in this field but
who have learned skills on the job. Aware of the
false division between creators (usually men)
and users (usually women) of technology, the
authors probe how these women actually went
about acquiring ICT skills. Their study confirms
the use of a combination of methods, as opposed
to more linear masculinist ways of acquiring the
same skills. Women learned through relationship
building and from one another in the workplace.
Building on the scholarship of Fisher and Margolis
(2002), Butterwick and Jubas observe that women
are more likely to want to connect computer ap-
plications to social needs and to apply computer
technology to real life problems and issues. They
contrast this to male programmers who are more
interested in creating programs and designing
systems.
There is still much debate as educators try to
understand how adults learn in an online environ-
ment. Selwyn, Gorard, and Furlong (2006), for
instance, describe the role of informal learning
in effective attainment of ICT skills, through
which people integrate the use of ICTs into their
everyday activities and practices. Without this
integration of informal learning, ICT training is
useless, or people become actively resistant to
the technology. The authors recommend a much
greater emphasis on the value of informal learn-
ing to increase ICT competency. Unfortunately,
Selwyn et al. add, most funded programs with a
goal to increase ICT proficiency are specifically
ICT training courses, rather than courses on topics
of interest that integrate the use of ICTs to foster
this second layer of learning.
Given the speed at which ICT use has increased,
those who have not kept pace are doubly disad-
vantaged. The difficulty of catching up or coming
on board has increased exponentially and given
timeout from the workforce for women who parent
this can be especially troubling. Challenging the
belief that ICTs can increase learning opportuni-
ties by providing home-based learning platforms,
Selwyn et al. (2006) also state:
Crucially, the majority of variables which could
be used to predict whether or not an individual
participated in formal adult education were those
characteristics already established by schoolleav-
ing age—i.e. sex, parental background and so on.
Access to, and use of, ICTs made no difference
to the statistical likelihood of someone being a
lifelong learner or not (p.174).
Women also are less likely to use the computer
in the home with children or men having prior-
ity of usage (Selwyn et al., 2006). Furthermore,
structured gender roles which assign child care
and homecare responsibilities primarily to women,
cause a further divide in the home. When women,
regardless of outside-the-home roles, are given or
assume the bulk of domestic work, they have less
time for developing computer skills and ICT capac-
ity than their male partners. The mere presence of
a computer in the home or in the community does
not guarantee equal access or equal ICT capacity
(Selwyn et al.).
Nonprofits and Technology—
Community Informatics
A third area of concern in the discussion of women
and ICTs is learning from community informatics,
or the ways in which information technology can
be and is used within community development
activities. Rheingold (2001) simply defines re-
searchers in this field as “people who have tried
365
 Women, Information and Communication Technologies, and Lifelong Learning
to use online media in service of community, then
reported on their results” (p. xx). Community in-
formatics straddles that contested ground of trying
not to be spellbound by the hype that accompanies
new technologies, nor to be demoralized by the
inevitable and equally vigorous critique. The focus
is on how community players can make use of the
technology to conduct their work and learning,
and to develop a critical analysis of the ongoing
challenges faced in the community to integrate and
adapt this technology to the needs and priorities
of people’s realities. This adoption of technology
can be particularly challenging for poorly funded
groups, notably women’s organizations: “While
under-resourced people and organisations are con-
tinuing to address issues of great social and cultural
importance, they face serious questions regarding
the sustainability of projects, working practices,
organisations and workers’ energy” (Scott & Page,
2001, p.149). Green and Keeble (2001) challenge
the field of community informatics to be more
attentive to gender dynamics in the community.
They argue that simply providing access to ICTs
in the community without addressing the social
context merely reinforces gendered divisions.
The very defining of “community” is a challenge.
The digital divide is furthered since men continue
to have more access to funds, greater access to
technology skills and control of the design and
maintenance of websites. Women’s organiza-
tions that are perpetually underfunded already
have difficulty engaging in learning (English,
2006)–a situation that is repeated in the context
of ICT usage.
There is a strong role for community based or-
ganizations to build on their trust and reputation in
a community to be identified as a reliable source of
information on the Internet—relationships of trust
which the nonprofit literature sees as particularly
germane to their success (Te’eni & Young, 2003).
In an overall context of suspicion of the Internet,
with fears about child pornography, cyberstalk-
ing, and identity theft, safe spaces on the web are
important. The most visible educational service
366
provided by violence service websites is lists of
instructions to help women in danger learn how
to erase their digital “footprints” or to hide their
information searches from abusive partners. The
organizations themselves must be trusted as reli-
able sources of information, but this critical role of
trust building is undermined if their websites are
not maintained, contain broken links, or provide
outdated or inaccurate information. Beyond their
credibility to clients, these organizations may lose
their reputation to donors and policy makers who
see evidence to challenge their very viability or
ability to advocate for social change, a situation
that Smith (2007) warns can threaten a nonprofit
organization’s existence.
Nevertheless, many women’s groups are
undaunted, and there are a number of initiatives
underway. In particular, educational and commu-
nity groups in the Global South have been using
the Internet successfully in a variety of ways to
enhance their programs and progress (see Buskens
& Webb, 2009; Hafkin & Huyer, 2006). Commu-
nity informatics develops a decidedly political bent
when it spurs grassroots feminist organizations to
promote democracy and participatory decision
making. In addition, feminism challenges the
inequalities embedded in the technology itself, as
explored in ongoing discussions on the “digital di-
vide” in relation to women, and gendered critiques
of the masculinist culture of ICTs. This feminist
challenge to technology is not intended to define
the technology simply as a male-domain, but to
begin to find ways to address these inequalities
(Buskens & Webb).
Implications for Lifelong Learning
Many women’s centres offer safe and comfortable
places for women to gather which is in concert
with what is known about women and connected
learning (Belenky et al.). The concept of these
centres as “women-only” spaces that provide
safe learning environments, is replicated in their
online counterparts. Women’s centre websites as
Women, Information and Communication Technologies, and Lifelong Learning
“gendered spaces” (Royal, 2008) was strongly
evident in Irving and English’s (in press) survey
of feminist organization websites through the
prolific use of the iconic colour purple (attached to
women’s rights from the time of the suffragists and
reclaimed by second wave feminists), and other
gendered imagery. While the Internet is openly
accessible, the explicit construction of a website
as a gendered space tries to replicate the safe,
welcoming environment women come to expect
of their local women’s resource centre—provid-
ing visual clues to an organization’s purpose and
shared identity so valued by the women’s move-
ment. As an extension of the centres, the websites
for the centres need also to be inviting places that
encourage interaction and relationship building,
dimensions which are integral to women’s learning
in informal (Butterwick & Jubas, 2006) and formal
(Fisher & Margolis, 2002) learning settings. Much
is made in popular culture of the sinister side of
the Internet, so it is particularly noteworthy of the
efforts that are made to present an organizational
face, through website design, that is welcoming to
a wary Internet user. This is not to say that these
sites are particularly sophisticated in their struc-
ture or au courant with the latest design trends,
but clearly attention is made to create a friendly,
feminist space online by using visual clues drawn
from the design of their centres.
Insights from women and learning literature
and the literature on gender suggest that women-
only spaces for learning about ICTs are still im-
portant, given that some women prefer a sense
of safety, learning in relationship, connecting
personal experience to content, and developing
relationships in the learning environment (Green
& Keeble, 2001). Though there is a potential
danger in essentializing women and their learn-
ing in setting up these divided classes, literature
such as Belenky et al. (1986) suggests that there
is value in these women’s only places which mini-
mize fear of technology and replicate everyday
spaces, women’s centres are especially helpful
and accessible spaces for ICT education given that
they provide many of the environmental aspects
valuable to women.
Vehviläinen and Brunila (2007) note the sig-
nificance of female educators in ICT training.
Vehviläinen observed a project developed to im-
prove women’s ICT skills. The trainers employed
“woman-positive” learning methods, such as
women-only environments, experientially con-
nected content, and an attention to disadvantaged
groups, and the basic training was provided by
women. However, this basic work was supple-
mented by a series of workshops conducted by
male instructors:
This perpetuated the idea that there are certain
areas in ICT education that cannot be taught by
women and must be left to male teachers…women
can teach everyday skills but there is a domain
beyond the reach of women where only men can
be experts (p. 395).
Vehviläinen and Brunila argue that this
bifurcated practice simply reinforced the very
gender stereotypes the project was attempting
to overcome. The project points to the need for
more careful and deliberate division of labour in
teaching and learning environments.
Yet, there are issues in community-based learn-
ing. For instance, learning which starts with the
learner identifying her own needs can cause its
own dilemma, in the sense that it can self-limit
women, for instance those who express interest
in learning only word processing (typing) skills
that would continue to ensure low-end employ-
ment opportunities (Mackeough & Preston, 2004).
According to the researchers who studied such a
program, the women’s self-limiting identifica-
tion of their learning needs was not challenged
by the training providers. In fact, a man was
hired to provide the training because no female
applicant possessed the necessary qualifications
and experience at community-based training. The
authors observed that the organization providing
the training did not use ICTs much in their own
367
 Women, Information and Communication Technologies, and Lifelong Learning
operations, so there would not be an environment
conducive to informal skill attainment, whereby
women could learn from each other as they ex-
plored the potential uses of ICTs to further their
activities and interests.
Women have traditionally pursued learning
through craft organizations, suffrage and temper-
ance movements, cooperative ventures, and librar-
ies, along with state-sanctioned higher education
(English, 2006). Informal routes continue to attract
them, even though the types of learning venues
may have changed. For working class, low literate,
and vulnerable populations of women, feminist
nonprofit centres may provide a sustainable and
safe lifelong learning pathway. Access to and as-
sistance with ICT will be invaluable to them, as
long as educationists continue to interrogate the
practices (Irving & English, in press).
EXAMPLES OF USE
A review of the literature reveals few compre-
hensive surveys or case studies which focus on
the level of women’s community organizations
and activism. In fact the engagement of ICTs by
nonprofit sector as a whole continues to be an
under-researched area. The following case from
the United Kingdom appears, at the outset, to
integrate elements that would address many of
the issues highlighted above.
The Women Connect (Scott & Page, 2001)
project was developed to provide women’s or-
ganizations the technical and social support to
increase their skills and improve their ability
to engage in ICTs. As the project evolved, the
initial goal of providing hardware and training
was complemented with an identified need for a
strengthened networking strategy to link partici-
pating organizations. While the groups identified
an increased proficiency in computer use through
office operations, communications and service
extension, the networking aims were not achieved.
The project coordinators realized that simply par-
368
ticipating in this project was not incentive enough
for the various organizations to be motivated to
network with each other. The experience did,
however, appear to increase groups’ interest in
forging their own networks with agencies they
wanted to work with. Project coordinators were
forthcoming in their evaluation of the project,
the challenges faced, and their efforts to address
them. Unfortunately, the Women Connect website
itself disappeared in early 2009, with a loss of
the vital central link to this work. This appears
to be a systemic problem in this area, with pilot
after pilot optimistically launched, but no secure
long-term support. Once the project ended, the
web presence of this initiative was lost as well.
Another study (Irving & English, in press)
examined 100 websites of feminist organizations
in Canada. The researchers were interested in
identifying the degree to which these groups used
their sites for educational outreach, advocacy and
organizational operations. Although that study
focused on Canadian sites, the issues emerging
bear strong resemblance to barriers identified in
other countries, including issues cited above. The
analysis of these 100 websites was guided by a
number of questions including:
1. To what degree does the website educate;
(useful information for clients)
2. To what degree does it engage in advocacy;
(policy and research on social justice)
3. To what degree is it publicly accountable to
funders; (identify donors, report on funded
research)
4. To what degree does it encourage social
interaction and online engagement; (mem-
bership and volunteer information, donation
information)
5. How well is the website maintained (current
and accurate information on events, links to
other sites)
Overall, half of the organizational websites
surveyed failed to meet set criteria of content and
Women, Information and Communication Technologies, and Lifelong Learning
function. These sites did not provide program
information or event listings that were current, or
post relevant organizational information including
annual reports, donor support, or membership and
volunteer involvement. Of particular concern was
that fact that fewer than one quarter of the sites
identified as resource centres provided substantive
educational content such as fact-sheets, commu-
nity or policy research, newsletters, educational
toolkits or “how-to” guides. The majority of the
sites provided only “brochureware” (Cukier &
Middleton, 2003), basic organizational informa-
tion that one would typically find in a brochure,
providing little if any incentive for a person to
visit the site more than once, let alone come to
rely on it as a useful source of information or
sharing of ideas.
While most websites provided lists of links
to other websites, only one in five organizations
maintained links that were accurate. There were
countless cases of broken links or domain names
that had been sold, potentially undermining the
credibility of the information the organization
was providing. In other cases, the links had no
particular purpose given the organization’s man-
date, leaving one to wonder how much care had
gone into deciding what to include and how these
listings would be used by their clients, or foster
their networking goals. Given the explicit mandate
of feminist resource centres to be active players
in women’s lifelong learning, the recognition
of an organization’s website as an extension of
on-site services, for the most part, has yet to be
realized. The research included geographically
dispersed organizations, so it was a concern that
in rural and socially distant locations, where the
use of websites for sharing information would be
particularly useful, there was not a reliable transfer
of services through organization websites.
According to the Irving and English (in press)
study, organizations with a singular focus to sup-
port women who were victims of domestic vio-
lence were much more likely to have considered
the types of information their clients may require
through their website. This included legal advice,
telephone directories for area shelters, suggestions
for providing support to victims of abuse, and
Internet privacy and safety guides.
The study by Irving and English (in press)
pointed to major impediments (primarily finan-
cial) in the use of the Internet, which push these
organizations far behind their nonprofit peers in
other sectors. Yet, lessons can be learned from the
following cases from that research in the ways they
share information and engage with the community.
Case 1: http://www.sjswc.ca
Located in the Canadian province of Newfound-
land and Labrador, The St. John’s Women’s
Status of Women’s Council and Women’s Centre
(SJSWC) demonstrates a full range of information,
services and support to their client base, as well
as to the broader community. The comprehensive
newsletters produced by the SJSWC do a good
job of documenting the council’s work, educating
readers about relevant and timely social issues.
They also ensure that their advocacy work is well
documented through their archive of media clip-
pings. Research reports and toolkits are of use to
other women’s groups looking for programming
ideas, including their “Hammer and Nail” proj-
ect analyzing the precarious housing situation
low-income women faced in the region. Any
potential client or donor would only have to check
the website of the St. John’s Status of Women
Council and Centre to know of its activities and
its services. Events listed are general, ongoing
activities. While this might be a strategic decision
to provide general information that does not need
to updated on a weekly or monthly basis, it does
limit the potential of the website to be a place that
someone would check on regularly to see what’s
going on. This is the weak link of an otherwise
useful extension of the resource Centre’s physi-
cal operations. There is no mention of computer
support or learning opportunities.
369
 Women, Information and Communication Technologies, and Lifelong Learning
Case 2: http://www.
goldenwomencentre.ca/
The Golden Women’s Resource Centre Society
in Golden, British Columbia has a site that, while
on initial glance looks outdated in design, clearly
replicates the services, activities, and collectivity
of this women’s organization. In exploring this
site, not only is the site well organized, but it
contains a wealth of current information, including
funding, staffing, annual reports and a newslet-
ter archive documenting the Centre’s work. The
range of programs are well documented, including
the findings from a recent workshop on financial
literacy, and the findings of their funded research
exploring rural women’s employment options.
They work to attract young women and offer pro-
grams for school girls aged 10-15, as well as for
adult women and parents. There is every indication
from this website that the organization is proactive,
helpful and actively involved in its community.
Again, the diverse funding base is an indicator
that this is an organization not held to the narrow
restrictions of a single government or foundation
funder. The one section that shows little activity
is the online discussion board. While the focus of
our research was formal, organizational websites,
for the most part, online interactive tools such as
blogs and discussion boards, when present, were
rarely used. As with the Women Connect (Scott
& Page, 2001) experience, simply providing the
platform for interaction is not enough, there must
be a perceived need or interest in communicating
through this medium. Computer support is offered
at the centre with training provided by a volunteer.
Unfortunately, the information on this training is
a year out of date. Even within organizations that
provide comprehensive information overall, gaps
in maintenance are evident.
Case 3: http://www.oawc.org
The Ontario Association of Women’s Centres
(OAWC) demonstrates a less active website.
370
OAWC is an umbrella “network for dialogue and
collaboration” that is intended to enable women’s
centres in the Canadian province of Ontario to
lobby collectively for rights. This site, however,
misses the opportunity to provide a good strong
access portal for women’s resources or to bring
together these organizations in a meaningful way.
Most of the content of the site is “brochureware”
and there is little that can be said of connectiv-
ity or actual engagement with the view of the
site. The site itself provides no venue for shar-
ing information, or for showcasing the work or
promoting the activities of the region’s centres.
Even the basic information for this organization,
the directory of women’s centres, is outdated and
inaccurate, which provides a challenge to those
using this portal to network with other centres.
This highlights a persistent problem in most of
the websites studied, that of poorly maintained
lists of links to other sources of information on
the Internet. Given the potential of this site and
this organization to lobby for change, rights and
funding for women’s organizations in Canada’s
most heavily populated province, the website does
little to help the association’s mandate. Notably,
OAWC operates only on membership fees from
the province’s centres, and the website was built
under a government project grant—an example
of a short-term project to create a site. Given the
inactivity, this appears to demonstrate the prob-
lem of long-term sustainability of a short-term
funding process.
Case 4: http://www.
womenshealthclinic.org/
Of the four cases presented here, The Women’s
Health Clinic in Manitoba is the most impres-
sive. Of special note in this website is that the
organization has a mandate oriented to women’s
health, reflecting the finding from our research
that single focus agencies tended to have more
relevant content available for their clients. This
site is evidence of what can be done with secure,
Women, Information and Communication Technologies, and Lifelong Learning
diversified, long-term funding. While the focus of
this organization is health, it takes a comprehen-
sive view on the issue and delves into issues not
expected of a “clinic.” Services identified include
wellness programs, advocacy and research, health
education in the community and to the profession,
information, as well as training and experience
opportunities for volunteers and students. As
a proponent of lifelong learning, the clinic has
a particular mandate to promote education of
women. It offers specific and current program-
ming in issues such as self esteem, food issues,
and body image for both youth and adults. What is
striking about this website is that the information
is current, well focused, comprehensive and very
accessible. One can tell from this website that the
organization not only looks at the issue of health
but to all the contributing factors that affect health
such as housing, poverty and education then lob-
bies on behalf of women to change policies and
to educate them about the social determinants of
health. This is a website that makes clear what
the organization does: it provides comprehensive
research, health education information, and en-
courages community participation and support.
These four cases demonstrate the spectrum of
quality in websites available for women’s organi-
zations. Contrary to common wisdom, the more
effective sites do not necessarily have advanced
technological capabilities; the better sites are
notable more by content than style with current
material, helpful information, consideration of
audience and updated links. The actual require-
ments for usability, credibility and trustworthiness
are quite minimal, yet this modest skill set still
appears to be beyond the capabilities of half the
organizations studied.
RECOMMENDATIONS AND
FUTURE TRENDS
The role of resource centres in adult education
today continues to be an area that is inadequately
researched (Adams, 2005), so extrapolating from
this, the role of women’s resource centres is an
even more marginalized area of understanding.
Yet, every day around the world, women rely
on a local resource centre to assist them to deal
with such varied issues as abusive relationships,
poverty, isolation, skill development, and health
concerns. Women’s resource centres play a vital
role in preserving and sharing women’s collective
knowledge in cultures that continue to marginalize
women’s knowledge and expertise. How these
varied roles can best be achieved in a digital age
requires much more study. Broader issues of so-
ciety and women’s learning have benefitted from
decades of ongoing research and critique. It will
take time for women’s interaction specifically with
ICTs to follow this same maturation process. The
study by Selwyn et al. (2006) of adults in the UK
is a helpful contribution to the role of informal
learning and adult learning behaviour in the context
of ICTs. More research with a gender analysis is
required of non-traditional learners and lifelong
learning in this ICT environment.
A women’s centre, according to the literature
cited earlier, has the potential to provide an ideal
environment to encourage women’s effective
development of ICT awareness and proficiency.
However, as Mackeough and Preston (2004)
observe, there is a limitation in student-led pro-
gramming. If the organizations providing the
training do not provide encouraging environments
for women to explore further than their narrowly
defined gender roles, this cycle will continue.
Given our concern that women’s centres have,
at best, demonstrated sporadic ICT skill acquisi-
tion, greater work needs to be done to develop
organizational capacity in order for this to have
meaningful impact on their client services and
training.
While the issue of funding may at times appear
to be an overworked complaint, “if only we had
the funding....” there are real issues at play. The
availability of money alone is not the solution.
Vehviläinen and Brunila’s (2007) study which
371
 Women, Information and Communication Technologies, and Lifelong Learning
describes government mandated programs, identi-
fies problems arising due to the ways programs
are implemented, even in a policy environment
with a commitment to support programming to
make ICTs more inclusive for women. As much
as the availability of funds in the first place is
important, how those funds are administered is
equally vital. Mackeough and Preston (2004) also
examine this, and looked at it in the context of
the types of programs government wants to fund,
rather than what is really effective. Their case
study highlights a key issue: while much of the
current research identifies the value of providing
women-only learning spaces, there is a reluctance
to fund projects that are explicitly identified in
those terms. Projects in the community, they note,
reflect existing gender dynamics. Community-
based funding initiatives are not unproblematic.
Far too many programs are funded as short-
term pilot projects with little attention paid to
how these initiatives will be maintained. The
most significant underlying issue in this area is
long term sustainability. Until that issue is suc-
cessfully tackled, we will continue to see pilot
projects that go nowhere, and valuable learning
lost. Predictably, that those sites which identify
a broad spectrum of funding sources ranging
from government to private sector and founda-
tions, typically have the better maintained and
more informative sites. When an organization is
struggling for survival, the ability to devote time
into a website is often undermined, catching the
organization in a trap as it cannot invest time and
resources into a function that ultimately could
help build its sustainability.
Stereotypical gender roles do not only nega-
tively affect women. As with broader discourses
of gender and development, the default under-
standing has been studies of women with a focus
on their exclusion to full participation in society.
In development research, there is a growing
body of literature on men’s roles, both in terms
of encouraging men’s participation in ensuring
women’s equal rights, but also analyses of those
372
sectors of men who are overlooked in the dominant
discourse. In a field that is repeatedly identified as
a masculine sphere, the ways that ICT initiatives
at the community level include or exclude men
also requires more research. The males identified
as leaders in ICT in the west are typically white,
well educated, urban, and usually young. Older,
rural labourers, with limited formal educational
background continue to be overlooked, except
in the context of specific government mandated
retraining programs for low paying ICT jobs when
their traditional occupations have disappeared.
Some research has noticed the implications for
men (Selwyn et al., 2006; Faulkner & Lie, 2007;
Mackeough & Preston, 2004), but there is room
for more intentional studies in this area.
The chapter authors also struggle with the
essentialist tone of research on gender, learning,
and technology; at the same time recognizing the
evidence supporting the value of women-only
learning spaces. Rosser’s (2005) critique of cyber-
feminist theories suggests that gender theorizing
must continue in this field. Some emergent trends
from the social sciences which bring in critiques
of “heteronormativity” may also help to unsettle
the dichotomized discussions. For example, Land-
ström (2007) uses this approach to challenge the
impression that all women relate to technology
in homogenous “feminine” ways, and that men
relate in opposite “masculine” ways.
In the Global South, women’s uses of mobile
phones are often cited as successful ICT initiatives,
enabling them to gain direct access to markets
for their products, and to ensure communication
links in regions lacking land-line telephone infra-
structure (Buskens & Webb, 2009). Two recent
edited collections of research on the empowerment
potential and practice of women’s use of ICTs
(Buskens & Webb; Hafkin & Huyer, 2006) are
helpful to showcase the innovative projects that
women are involved in, and also to emphasize
the deeper social conditions that must be worked
on for women to be able to make significant
Women, Information and Communication Technologies, and Lifelong Learning
progress, particularly for those women living in
extreme poverty.
Buskens and Webb (2009) refer to “empow-
erment thresholds,” the points at which people
break through a social barrier to a new level of
autonomy facilitated by ICT use. These are in-
triguing stages, and more work needs to be done
to understand how these thresholds are achieved.
As these authors note:
While we recognize ICTs can be used to enhance
our lives and contribute to our well-being, ef-
fective use of time, economic development and
so forth, they can also exacerbate gendered life
situations, relationships and images and thus play
a conservative, reactionary role. As such the crux
of the matter is not so much the issue of access
and affordability, although these are significant
factors; it is more a question of experiencing the
right and having the space for self-determination
(p. 4).
Deeper research on how such spaces are cre-
ated reveals important observations and lessons.
Much can be learned from successful experiments,
and lessons from these cases demonstrate that for
the poorest women, even low cost technology is
still prohibitively expensive, that many women
simply do not have the time to obtain ICT train-
ing, and that ICT use can reinforce gender roles
rather than breaking them down. This collection
is a helpful example of the research that must
continue to be done.
In a field where rapid change is the norm, a
study of a project three years ago can appear to
be hopelessly out of date as desktop computers
are replaced by notebook computers, and again by
hand held computing devices. One thing, however,
recurs through much of the research of the past
decade—uncritical adoption of ICTs will continue
to replicate existing social inequalities. Selwyn et
al. (2006) observe, “Above all, effective digital-
age policymaking requires a recognition that the
underlying causes of exclusion from the informa-
tion society are the same non-technological issues
which underlie exclusion from society in general”
(p. 197). It is not surprising then that multiple
fields and experts have attempted to address this
issue as it related to women and learning: manage-
ment, nonprofit experts, feminists, adult educa-
tors, and community development practitioners.
The unfortunate reality is that these people have
worked independently and not together. The silos
are problematic. Each of our fields can only be
strengthened by cross-disciplinary learning and
collaboration to deepen our understanding of this
intertwined social context (Irving & English, in
press).
CONCLUSION
The intersection of women, ICTs and the non-
profit sector is of increasing concern to women’s
organizations. Given the rapid speed at which
technology in a variety of guises has come to
infiltrate everyday life, there is a perceived need
to create opportunities for women to become more
technologically literate and for these organizations
to communicate and reach out to women through
various ICTs. In some cases, this need has been
met by informal training for women in terms of
one-on-one instruction, short course and pre-
employment training to bolster computer skills.
In other cases, it has resulted in the nonprofit
organization’s increased attention to a website
which can provide information and assistance to
women, especially those who are rural and at a
distance from a women’s centre. The success of this
increased attention to websites has been hampered
by funding shortages, lack of adequate skills and
the continuing digital divide which lessen oppor-
tunities for women to learn and apply ICT skills.
Without attention to how women learn and their
preference for connected and relational knowing,
indications are that this divide will continue. The
field of lifelong learning has a considered role to
373
 Women, Information and Communication Technologies, and Lifelong Learning
play in addressing these barriers and promoting
opportunities for learning.
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
The authors would like to acknowledge the So-
cial Sciences and Humanities Research Council
of Canada for partial financial support for the
development of this chapter.
REFERENCES
Adams, S. (2005). Libraries. In English, L. M.
(Ed.), International encyclopedia of adult educa-
tion (pp. 367–369). Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave
Macmillan.
Adams, S., Krolak, L., Kupidura, E., & Pahernik,
Z. P. (2002). Libraries and resource centres: Cel-
ebrating adult learners every week of the year.
Convergence, 35(2-3), 27–39.
Antrobus, P. (2004). The global women’s move-
ment: Origins, issues and strategies. London:
Zed Books.
Belenky, M. F., Clinchy, B. M., Goldberger, N. R.,
& Tarule, J. M. (1986). Women’s ways of knowing:
The development of self, voice, and mind. New
York: Basic Books.
Bordt, R. L. (1997). The structure of women’s
nonprofit organizations. Bloomington, IN: Indiana
University Press.
Buskens, I., & Webb, A. (Eds.). (2009). African
women and ICTs: Investigating technology, gender
and empowerment. London: Zed Books.
Butterwick, S., & Jubas, K. (2005). Being a girl
in the boys’ club: Lessons of gender politics from
the centre and fringes of the knowledge-based so-
ciety. In Proceedings of the 24th National Annual
Conference of the Canadian Association for the
Study of Adult Education (pp. 38-43). University
of Western Ontario, London, ON.
374
Butterwick, S., & Jubas, K. (2006). The organic
and accidental IT worker: Women’s on-the-job
teaching and learning experiences. In Proceed-
ings of the 25th National Annual Conference of
the Canadian Association for the Study of Adult
Education (pp. 19-24). York University, Toronto,
ON.
Coombs, P. H. (1973). New paths to learning for
rural children and youth. New York: International
Council for Education and Development.
Cukier, W., & Middleton, C. A. (2003). Evaluating
the web presence of voluntary sector organiza-
tions: An assessment of Canadian web sites. IT
& Society, 1(3), 102–130.
English, L. M. (2006). A Foucauldian reading
of learning in feminist nonprofit organizations.
Adult Education Quarterly, 56(2), 85–101.
doi:10.1177/0741713605283429
Faulkner, W., & Lie, M. (2007). Gender in the in-
formation society: Strategies of inclusion. Gender,
Technology and Development, 11(2), 157–177.
doi:10.1177/097185240701100202
Ferree, M. M., & Martin, P. Y. (1995). Doing the
work of the movement: Feminist organizations.
In Feminist organizations: Harvest of the new
women’s movement (pp. 3–23). Philadelphia:
Temple University Press.
Fisher, A., & Margolis, J. (2002). Unlocking
the clubhouse: The Carnegie Mellon experi-
ence. ACM SIGCSE Bulletin, 34(2), 79–83.
doi:10.1145/543812.543836
Foster, M. K., & Meinhard, A. G. (2003). How
women’s voluntary organizations differ in the
factors defining predisposition to collaborate. In
Proceedings of the Annual ASAC Conference (pp.
90-101). Halifax, NS.
Franklin, U. (1999). The real world of technology.
Toronto: House of Anansi.
Women, Information and Communication Technologies, and Lifelong Learning
Gebara, I. (1995). The abortion debate in Brazil.
Journal of Feminist Studies in Religion, 11(2),
129–135.
Green, E., & Keeble, L. (2001). The technologi-
cal story of a women’s centre: A feminist model
of user-centred design. In Keeble, L., & Loader,
B. D. (Eds.), Community informatics: Shaping
computer-mediated social relations (pp. 53–70).
London: Routledge.
Gurstein, M. (2004). Editorial: Welcome to the
Journal of Community Informatics. Journal of
Community Informatics, 1(1), 2–4. http://www.
ci-journal.net Retrieved November 25, 2009.
Hafkin, N. J., & Huyer, S. (Eds.). (2006). Cin-
derella or cyberella?: Empowering women in the
knowledge society. Bloomfield, CT: Kumarian
Press.
Hayes, E., & Flannery, D. D. (2000). Women
as learners: The significance of gender in adult
learning. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Irving, C. J., & English, L. M. (in press). Com-
munity in cyberspace: Gender, social move-
ment learning and the Internet. Adult Education
Quarterly.
Kenix, L. J. (2008). Nonprofit organiza-
tions’ perceptions and uses of the Internet.
Television & New Media, 9(5), 407–428.
doi:10.1177/1527476408315501
Landström, C. (2007). Queering feminist tech-
nology studies. Feminist Theory, 8(1), 7–26.
doi:10.1177/1464700107074193
Mackeough, C., & Preston, P. (2004). Strategies
of inclusion: A case study from Ireland. Gender,
Technology and Development, 8(2), 231–253.
doi:10.1177/097185240400800204
McPherson, K. (2000). First-wave/second-wave
feminism. In Code, L. (Ed.), Encyclopedia of femi-
nist theories (pp. 208–210). London: Routledge.
Mies, M., & Shiva, V. (1993). Ecofeminism.
London: Zed.
Rheingold, H. (2001). Foreword. In Keeble, L.,
& Loader, B. D. (Eds.), Community informatics:
Shaping computer-mediated social relations (pp.
ixx–xxi). London: Routledge.
Rosser, S. V. (2005). Through the lenses of
feminist theory: Focus on women and information
technology. Frontiers, 26(1), 1–23. doi:10.1353/
fro.2005.0015
Royal, C. (2008). Framing the Internet: A
comparison of gendered spaces. Social Sci-
ence Computer Review, 26(2), 152–169.
doi:10.1177/0894439307307366
Scott, A., & Page, M. (2001). Change agency and
women’s learning: New practices in community
informatics. In Keeble, L., & Loader, B. D. (Eds.),
Community informatics: Shaping computer-
mediated social relations (pp. 147–174). London:
Routledge.
Selwyn, N., Gorard, G., & Furlong, J. (2006). Adult
learning in the digital age: Information technol-
ogy and the learning society. London: Routledge.
Smith, M. M. (2007). Nonprofit religious or-
ganization web sites: Underutilized avenue of
communicating with group members. Journal of
Media and Religion, 6(4), 273–290.
Stross, R. (2008, November 16). What has driven
women out of computer science? New York Times.
Retrieved from http://www.nytimes.com
Te’eni, D., & Young, D. R. (2003). The chang-
ing role of nonprofits in the network economy.
Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 32(3),
397–414. doi:10.1177/0899764003254900
Valk, M. Dam, van H., & Cummings, S. (Eds.).
(1999). Women’s information services and net-
works: A global source book. Amsterdam: Royal
Tropical Institute.
375
 Women, Information and Communication Technologies, and Lifelong Learning
Van Zoonen, L. (2001). Feminist Internet
studies. Feminist Media Studies, 1(1), 67–72.
doi:10.1080/14680770120042864
Vehviläinen, M., & Brunila, K. (2007). Cartog-
raphy of gender equality projects in ICT: Liberal
equality from the perspective of situated equality.
Information Communication and Society, 10(3),
384–403. doi:10.1080/13691180701410067
KEY TERMS AND DEFINITIONS
Community: A contested term since defini-
tions of community vary with the speaker and the
context. For the most part, in this chapter, at the
term is used in the context of how geographically
located community-based organizations function.
Community Informatics: The ways in which
information technology can be and is used within
the field of community development.
Feminism: Any political movement to work to
end the oppression of women. There is, however,
no single definition of feminism as theories run
the gamut from liberal feminism that empha-
sizes the need for equal opportunities for women
within society, to radical feminism, influenced by
Marxism which seeks an end or transformation
of institutions and social structures that collude
in the oppression of women.
Gender: A sociological term that refers to the
ways in which men and women are socially con-
ditioned to take on constructed male and female
roles in society.
Information and Communication Technolo-
gies (ICTs): The range of technologies created to
376
facilitate communications and information shar-
ing. Typically computer-mediated forms such as
the Internet, including email and the World Wide
Web (popularly called the net or web), they also
may refer to mobile phones, handheld computing
devices, and earlier technologies such as com-
munity radio, particularly in the Global South.
Lifelong Learning: An all encompassing term
that refers to the spectrum of learning that we all
engage in as human beings. Lifelong learning en-
compasses informal (everyday), nonformal (short
courses and workshops) and formal (schooling and
higher education) learning. UNESCO favors the
term lifelong over adult education—in 2006 the
name of UNESCO’s Institute for Education was
changed to the Institute for Lifelong Learning, to
reflect this shift in preference.
Nonprofit Organizations: Exist in the social
sector mainly and are usually geared to grassroots
activity and to improving societal and economic
conditions of the population.
Resource Centres: Provide information sup-
port for community development. They are seen
to be more directly connected to the work of
community development than other information
centres such as libraries. Resource centres are often
tied to a specific social movement such as those
for the environment or women (see Adams, 2005).
Women and Learning: How women learn; it
pursues epistemological questions of the particu-
larities of women’s learning and of the pedagogi-
cal practices that might facilitate this. In this line
of inquiry, there is a persistent tension between
essentialising women as being all the same, and
of negotiating or recognizing difference among
women and between men and women.
 377

Chapter 23
Gender Impact on
Adult Education
Lesley S. J. Farmer
California State University, Long Beach, USA

ABSTRACT
As society becomes more pluralistic, it behooves adult education to understand how gender intersects
adult education so that equitable means of learning and teaching can empower all adults. In order to
address gender issues in technology-enhanced adult education, the contributing factors of developmen-
tal learning need to be examined. Gendered learning has both biological and social constructs, which
impact experiences in adulthood. Adult education needs to help learners re-negotiate their personal
and social identities. In the process, educators can help students learn different ways to interact socially
as well. Several gender-linked issues impact adult education; for example teaching across generations
has a new twist because of socially-contextualized technology. In providing distance education, adult
educators need to incorporate gender-sensitive resources, learning activities, technical issues, student-
teacher relations, and assessment. Twenty-first century trends of changing economies, global interaction
and interdependent literacies can help both genders learn optimally.

INTRODUCTION almost two-thirds of jobs require technology skills,

Women now constitute the majority of workers
and formal adult education learners in the United
States. They realize that education can provide
them with a means to gain access and succeed in
today’s economy. This need for adult education
is especially true relative to technology because
many of which were not even in existence a decade.
Recently, more attention has been paid to gen-
der-linked ways of knowing. As society becomes
more pluralistic, it behooves adult education to
understand how gender intersects adult education
so that equitable means of learning and teaching
can empower all adults.

DOI: 10.4018/978-1-61692-906-0.ch023

BACKGROUND
In order to address gender issues in technology-
enhanced adult education, the contributing factors
of developmental learning need to be examined.
Gendered learning has both biological and social
constructs, which impact experiences in adult-
hood.
Gendered Learning
Learning is both biologically and socially deter-
mined in that the brain processes information in
unique ways, and the interaction of individuals
and their environments impact their learning. This
reality is echoed in the terms of “sex” (which is
biologically determined) and “gender” (which
meaning is socially constructed). It should be noted
that these distinctions are not mutually exclusive
but rather nature lays a foundation upon which
education efforts build. Without acknowledging
or understanding that foundation, adult educators
risk overlooking important aspects of the learn-
ing environment and teaching techniques within.
While differences between females and males
are significant, in total more variation exists within
each sex. Additionally, as boys and girls mature
and grow older, they have even more in common.
Other factors -- individual, cultural, and situational
-- largely shape adults. Nevertheless, long-term
impact of gendered education has to be recognized,
and strategies to acknowledge such practices and
offer gender-equitable learning activities need to
be implemented. Ultimately, though, adults have
the most need to see how gender impacts their own
self-perception and learning; by embracing their
own gender and understanding their counterparts’
approach, all adults can learn more effectively.
Do boys and girls experience school in the same
way? Yes and no. In general, girls work harder,
are more motivated, make better grades and are
more satisfied with school than are boys. Boys
are less comfortable with rules and authority than
girls, and are more apt to think that their teacher
378
Gender Impact on Adult Education
does not like them (Black, 1995). Wherein lies
the issue?
Gender differences in school behavior start
from the first year. In examining how children
interact in playground games, Pellegrini et al.
(2002) found that boys played a greater variety
of games, especially chase and ball games, and
that girls played more verbal games. Facility in
playing games was an accurate predictor of boys’
social competence, and both genders’ adjustment
to first grade. Boys tended to express their emo-
tions through actions while girls used words,
which also reflected boys’ interest in things and
girls’ interest in people and relationships.
Girls develop earlier than boys, so their bodies
can process stimuli meaningfully at a younger
grade. It takes boys longer to learn, yet they have
shorter attention spans and need more teacher time
than girls. Gender-linked subject matter, linked
to kinds of reasoning, already surfaces by third
grade. Boys demonstrated better general math
skills and three-dimensional reasoning, and girls
excel in verbal and reading abilities. Learning
disabilities start early too as boys are more likely
to be hyperactive and need reading remediation.
Moreover, more boys are held back in grades
than girls.
Puberty accentuates other gender-linked learn-
ing issues. For instance, boys achieve academically
after puberty while girls start to drop out of some
advanced science courses. Girls’ IQ scores drop
off during middle school, although they rise again
in high school. Boys tend to pursue power while
girls pursue a comfortable environment. Boys’
social acceptance is usually based on physical
strength and athleticism, and while girls’ accep-
tance is typically based on beauty and peer rela-
tionships. Additionally, boys’ social hierarchies
tend to be stable while girls’ are fluid. Girls are
more likely to be depressed, but boys are more
likely to successfully commit suicide. Still, teens
look for experiences that create intense feelings
(Park, 2004). Because learning is largely a social
process, the emotional lives of adolescents needs
Gender Impact on Adult Education
to be acknowledged and leveraged to bring out
the best in each gender – and build up their less-
utilized traits. Indeed, a New Boys Movement has
focused on the plight of adolescent boys, noting
how society has constrained boys’ psychological
options (e.g., boys don’t cry, boys should hide
their feelings, etc.) (Smith & Wilhelm, 2002).
Higher education by its nature both conserves
and questions knowledge, and exhibits a range of
attitudes of learning: from traditional canon to
cutting-edge possibilities. Females are less likely
than males to question authority or take intellectual
risks. In that respect, lectures might be seen as
favoring females; however, such directive teach-
ing does not play into females’ propensities for
collaborative learning. Similarly, the university’s
hierarchical structure counters feminist belief in
shared power and responsibility. Females’ seem-
ingly conservative attitude can disadvantage
females who may be subject to traditional sexual
stereotypes and roles that still exist in some hard
sciences (Sevo, 2008). In fact, the percentage of
women in technology majors has been shrinking
for decades (Lips, 2007).
As part of this psychological picture, the
issue of motivation needs to weigh in. Martin
(2002) found that males exhibit significantly
less cognitive engagement and less concentration
than females. On the other hand, Scherer (2002)
asserted that males are less stressed and fearful
than females about learning, and may more a more
playful attitude about learning, which can motivate
them and help them achieve. Scherer (2002) also
noted that a student’s personal status or response
to a situation (e.g., family stress, or a disruptive
classroom) also impact motivation. Pintrich and
Linnenbrink (2002) posited four components of
motivation: self-efficacy, attribute theory, locus
of motivation, and achievement goal theory. Fe-
males tend to under-estimate their self-efficacy.
Moreover, females tend to blame themselves for
their failures while males tend to blame others;
in contrast, successful females think they are
lucky while males who achieve pat themselves on
their back (American Association of University
Women, 1992). Females’ intrinsic motivation is
more likely to be based in interpersonal factors
than for males, which complements achievement
goal theory, in which males are more performance
oriented while females are mastery oriented.
Males also actively seek a “zone of flow,” where
total attention is paid to the activity at hand to the
exclusion of any other matter (Csikszentmihalyi,
1998). Being aware of learners’ self-perceptions
and interests can help adult educators look for ways
to provide intriguing learning activities that foster
intellectual risk-taking in a safe environment.
Gendered Adult Education
Overall, today’s adults reflect a wide range of
interests and learning styles. Individual differences
overrule sex-linked traits. Perhaps because the
United States has become more pluralistic, life-
styles have become less stable, and social messages
have diversified, adults’ personal experiences are
more varied. However, social expectations can
shape individuals’ self-perceptions. On one hand,
television and other forms of instantaneous com-
munication have helped spread common cultural
experiences such as The Simpsons and American
Idol. On the other hand, stereotypical images and
expectations are communicated daily in the mass
media and in daily life. Particularly when learners
are stressed or uncertain about themselves, they
are more likely to regress to stereotypical behav-
ior. In brief, adults exert their identities within
society, displaying a dynamic between personal
uniqueness and social acceptance, both of which
involve gender issues.
Adult education provides a unique oppor-
tunity for adults to change and transform their
self-identity and relationship with the rest of the
world. Particularly for adults who re-enter the
formal education environment after extensive
life experiences, they realize the need for change.
Even if forced to be retooled by their employers,
379

adult learners see that they can control aspects of
their self-view.
Women dominate adult education for both
professional and personal growth. Women’s adult
lives are filled with change: children grow up, par-
ents age, household expenses rise, marriages fail,
health status changes. Simultaneously, women’s
roles and expectations have changed significantly
as the women’s movement and its subsequent
manifestations. The thirty-year old woman has
a different set of experiences and social realities
than a fifty-year old, which colors each one’s
adult learning. Nevertheless, their current societal
environments also impact their educational atmo-
sphere, and both need to interact with the present.
While men’s lives also change, the social expec-
tations have not been as dramatic; women have
had to negotiate their changing self-identifies to
a greater extent than men. What is not as obvious
is determining whether adult education itself has
changed in light of these gendered realities. Have
curriculum and instruction changed? Has adult
education pro-actively helped women learners
re-negotiate their personal and social identities?
Feminism and Learning
Today’s female Millennials believe that they can
be anything, although they might not think they
want to be anything or have the ability to be any-
thing. At this point, their biggest barriers might
be adults holding more traditional views.
In the 21st century, feminist critical theory
and women’s studies hold their own in academia.
While not as high-profile as they were in the last
two decades, their perspectives have been main-
streamed and diversified. The second generation
of feminists did not “suffer” for their economic
and social gains to the same extent as their moth-
ers. Feminism experienced a third, more nuanced
and particularized wave that explored differences
among women and fostered women’s studies;
male-bashing practically vanished, although wage
discrepancies and promotional glass ceilings still
380
Gender Impact on Adult Education
exist in some occupations. A fourth wave of femi-
nism has now begun, which seems to be striving
for more inclusivity.
In terms of learning, students are starting to
be exposed to feminist points of view in their
research. Although most of this writing is geared
to academic audiences, the underlying ideas of
populist points of view, contextual reality, and
issues of social justice permeate high school cur-
riculum, and help students question the status quo
and gather more data in order to develop a fuller
understanding.
On the other hand, more writings about male
issues have emerged. As boys fall behind aca-
demically in comparison to girls, particularly in
reading, more attention has been paid to raising
sons. Such treatment has focused on interventions
rather than a world view of education or social
status, which makes sense since male-oriented
scholarship has dominated education for centuries.
The fallout from such attention is that older adult
males may still avoid reading and writing, so that
educators have to consider other ways to access
and communicate information. In that respect,
technology can be a real godsend.
The Impact of Technology
on Learning
Since 80% of future jobs involve technology, is
makes sense for adults to use technology as part
of their learning experience. Additionally, the
characteristics of technology can engage learners
and help them focus their attention on the task at
hand. The combination of text, sound, and image
that technology facilitates enables learners with
different learning styles to interact with the content.
Technology’s digital features allow students to ma-
nipulate and repurpose information according to
their needs and interests. Additionally, technology
weakens the lines between school and the world
through Internet access and telecommunications.
Learning with technology may be considered
from two different standpoints: attitudes toward
Gender Impact on Adult Education
technology and use of technology to do tasks. The
former includes the factors of affinity, confidence,
lack of anxiety, and perceived usefulness (Gressard
& Loyd, 1986). When Ames (2003) examined
learning styles and computer attitudes, she did not
see any significant gender difference in computer
attitude, but she found that abstract sequential
learners, who tend to be male, like to interact with
computers more than abstract random learners,
who tend to be female. Ames recommended that
students be introduced to computer use early so
their brains can be changed more easily. If such
early training does not occur, then adult educators
need to be aware of gendered attitudes, and help
women compensate for possible reticence.
Another way to approach technology and
learning is in terms of the resources and tools
that are available for learners that would not be
otherwise possible. Technology provides more
access to resources, particularly in terms of global
information, and it motivates learners because of
its novelty and multimedia choices. For females,
though, novelty is not enough. Information usu-
ally to be purposeful, be it to connect with others
or to improve a situation. In that respect, access
to more information means that the chances that
a problem is more likely to be solved because
someone has the solution at hand, which is a
comforting feeling for females.
It should be noted that gender expectations
relative to technology have changed over the
years. Today’s youngest adults – the NextGens
or Millennials – differ from prior generations,
particularly relative to their association with tech-
nology. The proverbial Digital Divide is largely a
generational issue now, between youth and their
elders; if young people want to get their hands
on a computer, they can find a way. As Abram
and Luther (2004) contend, today’s youth were
“born with the chip.” As evidenced by their active
use of instant messaging (IMing) and a variety of
electronics, both sexes can now multitask, holding
multiple conversations simultaneously. Millen-
nials have also spawned the first generation of
self-confident tech-savvy female “techies.” These
twenty-something women feel comfortable with
their femininity as they enjoy technology, and their
sisterhood extends to helping their younger sisters
in embracing the relevant aspects of technology.
These changes impact education, if for no other
reason than Millennials expect to use technology
in school. Depending on the work situation, some
employees have incorporated technology into their
practice for decades while others are just now us-
ing computer technology as a productivity tool to
aid in record-keeping or communication. In some
cases, younger adults may have used technology
more in their personal life rather than in work
settings, so while they may be expert bloggers,
these beginning employees might not know how
to manage a dozen computer systems within a
work unit. This complex mix of experiences re-
quires instructional finesse, particularly to later
technology adopters who may feel embarrassed
or singled out by their lack of knowledge. Adults
who are used to being considered experts may
feel uncomfortable learning from youngsters;
they may well leave digital technology in the
hands of younger generations, which can seri-
ously jeopardize older adults’ own independence
and lifelong learning as well as their economic
circumstances (Istance, Schuetze, & Schuller,
2002). In terms of gendered learning, women may
acquiesce to males, and not demonstrate their own
competence; technology-based training might
need to be provided in single-sex environments
in order to let women feel more comfortable and
supported in their technological learning (Cooper
& Weaver, 2003). In any case, providing a safe
environment, offering buddy coaching, and find-
ing ways to enable such learners to practice on
their own time can ameliorate the situation. The
greatest challenge may be training older faculty
to incorporate technology authentically into learn-
ing activities – and to learn in concert with their
adult students.
381

GENDER-SENSITIVE
ADULT EDUCATION
The central factor for student achievement is the
design and implementation of a series of mean-
ingful learning activities within a positive learn-
ing environment. These activities should align
outcomes, strategies, resources, and assessments
-- and they need to consider the varying needs of
learner subgroups and individuals, including the
issue of gender.
Curriculum
Looking specifically at how gender play out in
adult education curriculum, several issues arise.
Are students tracked into academic vs. vocational
programs, and are those tracks gender-linked?
Does a wide range of courses enable students
to explore career possibilities based on their
interests, such as fashion or construction? Does
enrollment in advanced classes, be it English or
the sciences, reflect the relative proportion of
males and females? Are both sexes encouraged
to take engineering or home economics classes?
Is content itself gender-conscious, addressing
social issues affecting both males and females
(i.e., sexual identity, health and fitness, career
choices)? At the least, adult educators needs to
affirm learners’ curricular strengths, provide a
broad-based curriculum to accommodate dif-
ferences in background knowledge and interest,
and help adults improve in those curricular areas
where they are less well developed.
Instructional Design
In the field of adult development, current instruc-
tional design focuses on learners. Wiggins’ and
McTighe’s (2001) model of understanding by
design starts with the desired student outcome, and
works backward to develop the curriculum that
will enable the learner to perform successfully;
the Association for Supervision and Curriculum
382
Gender Impact on Adult Education
Development provides online templates and a
forum for exchanging units following this model
(http://www.ubdexchange.org). Another popular
model uses the acronym ADDIE to facilitate fol-
lowing the steps.
1. Analyze needs: check learner current level
of knowledge and learning style prefer-
ences using check sheets, observation,
questionnaires.
2. Design instruction: identify outcomes,
resources, and strategies such as lectures,
displays, videos, panels, online experts,
demonstration, role-playing, simulations,
videotaping.
3. Develop/produce/locate resources and learn-
ing environment.
4. Implement the plan, including monitoring
of processes.
5. Evaluate: collect data and analyze it in order
to improve the design using tests, check
sheets, interviews, observation, peer evalu-
ation (Dick & Carey, 1996).
Instructional design is best considered as a
process that should include all stakeholders (e.g.,
employers, clientele, support staff, learners) since
all parties should know what is going on and have
ownership in the learning. The following scenario
demonstrates how the librarian can collaborate
with the adult educator to provide gender-equitable
learning experiences.
Ms. T, a chemistry teacher, notices how gender
is affecting student perception of course content
and learner behavior: females take fewer risks,
males are condescending toward females. Ms. T
also realizes that the chemistry textbook protrays
more males than females. In the library, Mr. L
the librarian sees that males use the computers
more than females. He also notices that the two
genders approach research processes differently
and handle frustration differently, to the detri-
ment of the females. The two educators decide
Gender Impact on Adult Education
to address gender issues as a means to change
student behavior.
As the content matter specialist, Ms. T analyzes
what adults already know and what they need to
know, pre-requisite skills, so all students can start
at a reasonably equitable playing field. Ms. T looks
at possible gender-sensitive chemistry content,
and makes sure that both sexes can related to the
topic. Are gender stereotypes reinforced, such as
male researchers or female lab writers, in texts
or in classroom behavior? Are these gender dif-
ferences acknowledged?
As the expert in resources and information
literacy, Mr. L identifies those competencies and
prerequisites linked with the content area gender
issue. For instance, if the information skill entails
locating and comparing textual material, do learn-
ers know how to locate scholarly articles? If not,
the learning activity may need to be modified. Mr.
L. also needs to be sensitive to possible gender in-
equities relative to information skills; for instance,
males may be more comfortable using comput-
ers for Internet searching because they have had
more experiences and take more intellectual risks
with remote online databases. In this scenario, a
supplemental session might be provide to get all
adults up to speed in computer use.
The instructional design needs to consider:
1. Time frame: both content and informa-
tion skills require time to assimilate, with
extra time needed to address technology
pre-requisites.
2. Resources: Ms. T and Mr. L should examine
available resources that fit both outcomes,
that is textual material that shows a variety
of gender roles.
3. Grouping: Ms. T knows how students inter-
act, and Mr. L can suggest student group-
ings that best facilitate research and content
analysis, such as same-sex researching and
jigsawed mixed-sex paired content analysis.
4. Instruction: Ms. T and Mr. L have to negoti-
ate who will teach each process, and how
students will get help or clarification in view
of their learning needs and preferences.
As an overarching concern, Ms. T and Mr. L
need to assess the process and outcome of their
instructional design. How will students’ percep-
tions and behaviors change; how will such learn-
ing be measured? In addition, how will did the
instructional design facilitate the learning, and
how well did the collaborative planning occur?
Choosing Resources
The scenario above demonstrates how resource
choice can impact adult learning relative to gender
issues. What resources do adult learners have ac-
cess to, and what resources do they actually use?
Textbook remain the principle learning resource so
teachers need to examine them carefully to ensure
equity. When students are involved in examining
textbooks from a gendered perspective they can
realize for themselves the need for other resources
in order to provide a more well-rounded perspec-
tive on content. Other supplementary textual
material may focus on one perspective, such as
women’s diaries or Civil War soldier life, but the
available collection of resources should provide a
spectrum of viewpoints across the curriculum so
all students can experience different ideas. These
resources should also reflect different learning
styles, so various formats should be available.
While resources are considered mainly in
terms of content information, resources should
also include production tools: ways to manipulate
and produce information. Thus, manipulatives
can help kinesthetic learners explore mathemati-
cal principles. Productivity application software
such as authoring programs and computer-aided
design provide content-neutral, open-ended struc-
tures for structuring learning. Cameras and video
equipment enable students to gather information
in situ, and then edit it in order to justify a stance
or demonstrate knowledge. Even simple drawing
tools offer a way to understand and express ideas.
383

Some of these tools are best used individually, such
as reflective journaling, and others lend themselves
to collaboration, such as videotaping. By provid-
ing a variety of manipulation tools, each aligned
with the intended learning outcome, educators
can acknowledge the learning differences and
commonalities of all their students.
Assessment of Adult
Learner Performance
Likewise, how adult learners demonstrate how
they meet those standards bears close scrutiny.
Do students have a variety of ways to show com-
petency? To what extent can they choose how to
perform? Do expectations differ between sexes?
What is truly being measured: knowledge or
presentation? For instance, when teachers grade
literacy portfolios, students with more organized
and tidier portfolios often tend to get higher marks
than students with sloppy products. As females
tend to place more importance on appearance,
their grades may be artificially inflated because
the writing looks good.
Similarly, students who think globally rather
than sequentially (more likely females), or who
experience difficulty with the physical process
of writing (more likely males), might solve a
mathematical problem mentally without writing
down the steps and have points subtracted for
their work, even though they know the underly-
ing mathematical principles. In the above cases,
alternative ways to demonstrate mathematical
processing include drawing diagrams, orally
tracing the mental steps, or walking through the
problem using a graphing calculator.
The assessment process also needs to take under
consideration who is doing the assessment. It may
be difficult for some adult educators to acknowl-
edge their gender biases as they grade, and make
appropriate modifications accordingly. Moreover,
students should have opportunities to learn and
practice assessment skills in order to self-assess
their work and review their peers’ efforts. This kind
384
Gender Impact on Adult Education
of shared decision-making may be threatening for
some teachers – of either sex – because it implies
sharing power. However, if adult educators are
serious about lifelong learning and contributing
citizenship, then evaluation and decision-making
processes need to be part of the curriculum as
well. Males and females may well differ in their
criteria for judging and in their conclusions, but
such differences should be brought to light and
analyzed in order to determine the basis for such
perspectives and then to teach alternative ways
of approaching decision-making. For example,
females tend to under-rate their academic com-
petency, and males tend to over-rate themselves.
Females consider education more important than
males, with their performance a matter of higher
stakes (Newkirk, 2002).
This chart identifies representative practices
of exclusionary and gender/diversity-affirming
communities (Farmer, 1995). (See Table 1)
The range of practices reflects, among other
factors, gender-sensitive approaches. It should be
noted that as adult education communities move
from exclusionary to inclusive structures, those
who are apt to lose power may fight to maintain
their balance of power. Especially as women have
traditionally experienced lower status, they may
find it hard to assert their rights, even in today’s
society. Fortunately, as business practices have
started to acknowledge the need for collaboration
and affective leadership, adult education has also
been more receptive to non-traditional governance
structures and practices. Some of the factors that
facilitate change include a shared articulate vision,
broad-based consistent communication, open and
inclusive climate, thorough training, and sup-
portive administrative management. Nevertheless,
change can be difficult and self-conscious. Con-
flicting values need to be discussed, and support
for change should be forthcoming. Positive change
needs to be not only recognized, but also inte-
grated and institutionalized so that a new equilib-
rium exists that absorbs a gender-equitable school
culture.
Gender Impact on Adult Education
Table 1.
EXCLUSIONARY
No mission or clear purpose
Rigid, outdated norms
Arbitrary, unarticulated curriculum
Poorly trained staff with low morale
Lecture and rote memorization
Worn, outdated texts; no library or non-print resources
Cramped, inadequate classrooms; no labs
No assessment or accountability
THE SOCIAL SIDE OF INSTRUCTION
It has been said that teachers teach students –
teachers don’t teach subjects. The underlying
message is that without students, no teaching
occurs. Regardless of an adult educator’s exper-
tise, if positive interactions do not occur, then
the adult education program will suffer – as will
the students. Thus, for adults to learn, educators
need to provide opportunities for their students
to be actively engaged, participate in groups, get
timely and specific feedback, and see connections
with real world contexts.
Before thinking about learner socialization,
educators need to examine their own social style.
Introverts may interact with students differently
from extroverts, intuitive thinkers may behave
differently from individuals who prefer reacting
to concrete external realities. Even the comfort
zone of physical space between two individuals
differs by culture and personality. Some people
prefer interacting with others of the same sex
while others enjoy working with the opposite sex
more. Some educators like whole-class discussion
while other prefer coaching individuals. Whatever
the social style of the adult, self-awareness can
help explain the reasons for initial adult-student
GENDER/DIVERSITY-AFFIRMING
Strong mission statement supported by all stakeholders
Open, positive and evolving norms based on community-wide
consensus
Cohesive, comprehensive scope and sequence with opportunities for
cross-curricular options
Highly prepared, motivated staff; good student-faculty ratio
Wide variety of instructional modes to fit content and needs
Ample and current textbooks and library collection; fully integrated
technology
Well-maintained and spacious facilities supporting institutional
mission
Broad-based criteria and evaluation method to insure fair account-
ability and effective improvement plans
interaction. Even though the two parties may
have different ways of reacting to one another, it
is frankly the responsibility of the adult educator
to identify the possible disconnect and figure out
ways to overcome those first miscommunications.
In the process, educators can help students learn
different ways to interact socially as well.
Socialization
In adult education, teacher-student relationships
can be impacted from both sides. For instance,
males may question their female instructors’ abil-
ity (Brown, Cervero, & Johnson-Bailey, 2000).
Other factors such as age (with the older person
receiving more respect) and culture (particularly
where teaching roles are traditional and gendered)
can impact the quality and frequency of teacher-
student interaction. Students’ “social capital”
can also affect teacher-student interaction, even
though it may be unconscious. Family background,
neighborhood status, community ties, social status
among students all constitute social capital factors.
With females’ sensitivity to relationships, it might
be assumed that they would have more social
capital, but males who are more aggressive may
“work” their social capital to gain power more
385

effectively than females. Since students with high
social capital tend to achieve more academically,
educators need to be aware of these influences,
and work to nurture those students in particular
who need more social assets – across gender lines
(Beaulieu et al., 2001). Fortunately, adult educa-
tion theory encourages a safe and collaborative
learning atmosphere that builds upon everyone’s
experiences and expertise. Adult educators also
try to help their students negotiate possible chang-
ing relationships with their fellow workers and
families. In short, socialization is a vital part of
education, and should address issues of diversity,
including gender.
Socialization in learning should transcend the
classroom to include the community, both physical
and virtual. Service learning, which enables stu-
dents to test their understanding and assumptions
of academic concepts in real-world settings, offers
a way for adults to contribute to their community
and bring their life experience into the classroom
to refine their subject matter learning. This ap-
proach to teaching and learning can resonate with
both sexes. Females, who tend to favor relational
experience, can see service learning as a practical
way to contextualize abstract notions. Males, who
tend to favor kinesthetic learning, can appreciate
the problem-solving aspects of service learning
as they seek ways to improve their livelihoods.
Service learning also helps each six experience
other points of view and increase their repertoire
of learning tools, empowering them. In short,
service learning helps adults make a difference
in their lives.
Expectations
One aspect of the social side of teaching focuses
on expectations. Educators tend to treat students
differently based on their expectation of their learn-
ers’ capabilities. When these lowered expectations
are based on prejudice – of sex, ethnicity, social
status, etc. – the results can be especially damag-
ing because they force false labels upon groups of
386
Gender Impact on Adult Education
individuals. Some of the manifestations of such
differentiated expectations include:
• waiting less time for students to answer
• giving less credence to students’ ideas
• giving less informative feedback and giv-
ing inappropriate reinforcement (e.g., re-
warding wrong answers)
• interacting less both verbally and
non-verbally
• placing students farther back in the room
• demanding less
• emphasizing lower thinking skills and
impoverishing the curriculum (Nichols &
Good, 2004).
As a result, those students cannot assess
themselves as accurately and have fewer tools
to improve their performance. They have less
autonomy, less choice, and fewer opportunities
to learn.
Expectations also impact the notion of com-
petition and cooperation. Traditional education
in the United States has tended to focus on indi-
vidualistic competition. Student achievement is
measured relative to each other’s performance.
This approach assumes a zero-sum solution where
someone wins and another loses. With the advent
of standards-based education, the emphasis has
shifted to some extent to “meeting the bar” of
excellence; in a way, students are competing
against a set level of competence. In this alterna-
tive scenario, everyone could theoretically “win”
or be successful. Where individual progress is
measured, students compete against themselves,
in effect. The trouble with competition is that it
fosters gender differentiation because boys tend
to be more aggressive, which is reinforced in a
competitive environment, and girls are reinforced
to be quiet. In addition, girls are more likely to
look at context and collections rather than giving
the right answer, which is more symptomatic of
competitive activity.
Gender Impact on Adult Education
Collaboration
An alternative educational socialization skill,
therefore, is collaboration, which tends to favor
females’ approaches to learning. Complex tasks
that require a variety of skill sets offer authentic
learning experiences that also draw on learn-
ers’ social competency and help them to work
autonomously. The interdependence inherent in
collaborative work also helps adults respect each
other’s abilities and learn how to negotiate. Toward
this end, learners should have opportunities to
work together in single- and mixed-sex groups.
Even though students do teamwork from the ear-
liest grades, learning how social interaction can
optimize production needs to be taught explicitly.
Beyond the general idea of active listening and
distributed leadership, other social skills need
to be monitored by the group: setting standards,
calling persons by name, maintaining eye contact,
sharing feelings, responding to ideas, checking
for agreement, and easing tension (Dishon &
O’Leary, 1994). Learners may also need training
on performing various roles within groups:
• Coordinator/facilitator: makes sure every-
one participates.
• Recorder: documents the group’s work.
• Reporter: shares the group’s work with the
rest of the class.
• Reader: reads the task and clarifying group
opinions.
• Materials handler: gathers and keeps track
of needed resources.
• Checker: makes sure all group members
know the correct answers.
• Assessor: makes sure cooperative skills are
used.
• Timekeeping: keeps the group on task
(Farmer, 1999).
During the actual practice of collaborating,
educators need to make sure that both sexes have
a chance to learn and practice these roles. For
instance, educators can assign roles, taking into
consideration the students’ sex. If all the recorders
are females one time, then the next time all can be
males. When learners share computers, educators
can monitor keyboard and mouse use to ensure
equitable use. Regardless of the activity, group
practice should be observed; when inequitable
behaviors occur, interventions can be made in a
timely manner. Classes should also debrief after
an activity to check their progress in social skills,
and discuss ways to improve their behaviors as
needed.
One solution to the competitive-collaborative
conundrum is to foster collaboration within groups
and encourage competition, against a standard,
between groups. In that manner, both approaches
to group dynamics can be usefully employed to
address the learning preferences of both sexes.
Social Changes
Within the last half century, societal expectations
about females and males have been tested repeat-
edly; today’s youth grow up in a different social
climate than their parents or grandparents, by and
large. Many businesses reflect “flatter” bureau-
cratic hierarchies, and deal with organizational
well-being as much as the bottom line. The glass
ceiling has become more permeable, and career
options have increased for both males and females.
Both sexes can self-realize their full potential to
a greater extent.
During this same period, more attention has
been paid to females’ ways of knowing, which
are based on Gilligan (1982) and Belenky (1986).
Belenky noted that women:1) keep silent about
their knowledge; 2) listen to others’ voices, known
as received knowledge; 3) listen to their inner
voice, known as subjective knowledge; 4) look
for separate and connected knowledge, known as
procedural knowledge; and 5) integrate different
points of view contextually, known as constructed
knowledge.
387

As a result of these different dynamics,
gendered roles and expectations are not easily
explained or designated in many parts of the
United States. So even while traditional roles and
social messages sound loud and clear, nuances
and contradictions pose alternative options, which
provide more options for both genders – but more
difficult decision-making.
GENERATIONAL ISSUES
IN ADULT EDUCATION
As the retirement age has risen, it is possible
that five generations of adults may be working
together. This range of ages and experiences can
lead to philosophical clashes in terms of gender
and adult education. For instance, traditionalists
born before 1945 tend to like the status quo and
want to build a legacy; they are used to hierarchi-
cal educational systems. Their mothers may be
worked in World War II, but most were brought
up to see the importance of the homebound moms.
The boomers, born after the war, are typically
the power figures in education, but still believe
in ideals and teamwork. Their own education
ranged from Skinnerian behaviorialism to open
classrooms, from a heavy emphasis on science to
whole language reading. They experienced the
second wave of feminism of the 1960s and 1970s,
and may have the scars to prove their professional
advancement took a toll. Younger boomers, born
between 1956 and 1964, have been labeled the
Me generation because they didn’t have to deal
with Vietnam or bra-burning women’s liberation
but they feel that they deserve the benefits of their
parents and older siblings; still, they have delayed
commitments and now may be experiencing mid-
life crises (Sheehy, 1995). Generation Xers, who
were born between 1965 and 1980, feel a real need
to balance work and family; practical at heart,
they are busy building their repertoire of skills so
they can handle downturns in the economy. This
generation experienced the third wave of femi-
388
Gender Impact on Adult Education
nism with its focus on different ways of knowing
and gender studies; in contrast, their education
reflected:A Nation at Risk (1983), sometimes
reverting to essentialism and sometimes reaching
to critical theory and cultural literacy. The newest
adult generation, the Millennials, are digital na-
tives. They are ambitious, busy, family-oriented,
pluralistic, and stressed. They make short-term
decisions and are committed to truth-telling (Howe
& Strauss, 2000; Leo, 2003). Intuitively, this
new generation learns experientially, and favors
higher-level thinking over facts and rote learning.
When these generations mix, their expectations
and needs may conflict, so the push for a more
inclusive and gender-equitable learning culture
can face complications along the way. However,
the negotiations involved in finding a mutual
ground of understanding and cooperation provides
a positive model for all populations.
Adult educators need to take into account
several generational factors as they design and
deliver curriculum.
• Content knowledge. Each person comes
with a set of experiences and intellectual
knowledge about the world, the potential
of which has been exponentially expanded
because of technology (e.g., television and
telecommunications). Nevertheless, basic
cultural literacy may be sadly lacking be-
cause of limited curriculum and increasing
migration. Adult educators cannot assume
that adult learners know about Cold War
(which is now the name of a rock band)
or about the Depression (beyond a mental
condition). On the other hand, people may
be more globally conscious and exposed
to social issues that were hidden in earlier
times.
• Career knowledge. Some formal education
programs provide pre-service training. In
most cases, employees need to provide in-
duction. Many careers offer in-service staff
development as well, particularly as pro-
Gender Impact on Adult Education
cesses change. Beyond task-based instruc-
tion, informal workplace learning involves
organizational “norming” and social ex-
pectations that impact corporate interac-
tion and career ladder success. Oftentimes
recent college graduates lack workplace
experience and knowledge, thinking that
they deserve supervisory positions on their
basis of their academic credentials; they
might not realize that sometimes tacit se-
niority promotion agreements “trump” for-
mal education. In that respect, elders have
valuable corporate knowledge that lends
them credibility and gravitas.
• Technology knowledge. Because technol-
ogy encompasses so many skills and re-
sources, it is safe to say that no one is a
technology master. However, it is often dif-
ficult to discern areas of technology com-
petence. The retiring gentleman may be an
IBN executive; the cell phone addict may
be clueless about search engines. Many
Millennials are technology proficient, on a
personal level, but lack research-oriented
technical skill. Even within the framework
of the Internet, individuals may rely only on
free websites, and consider the Wikipedia
to be the ultimate resources. Others may
use online trade information and scien-
tific databases regularly but be unaware of
streaming video sources (Aubele, Jackson,
& Farmer, 2007).
GENDERED ASPECTS OF
DISTANCE ADULT EDUCATION
Increasingly, people are seeking distance educa-
tion delivery options in order to get the training
needed from experts who may reside far away,
or to address time constraints. In providing dis-
tance education, adult educators need to address
and accommodate gendered realities. Specific
strategies exist to incorporate gender-sensitive
resources, learning activities, technical issues,
student-teacher relations, and assessment.
Most institutions of higher education now
incorporate some type of online presence, be it
email or Web-packaged courseware, as part of
their educational delivery system. Particularly
as the Internet becomes ubiquitous, Web-based
products can facilitate asynchronous learning and
address issues of space constraints in education.
Generally, faculty gravitate towards Web pages
or courseware, depending on their prior experi-
ence and needs. For most faculty, courseware
offers easy one-stop access to resources and
telecommunications. Particularly with robust
programs, students can consider the courseware
as a learning space that gives them individual
control of their learning. Courseware also offers
non-linear learning experiences that respond to
student’s immediate needs. Its hyperlink features
provide another dimension to learning as students
self-identify the amount of detail they need in
their learning journey. Additionally, hyperlinks
facilitate access to resources worldwide, and help
address copyright and duplication issues since the
original file remains on the creator’s server. Most
courseware also provides real-time conversation
(e.g., chats) as well as asynchronous sharing of
reflective learning. On the instructor’s part, most
courseware includes grading, calendaring, and
monitoring features that help one manage the
course. Typical courseware packages include
the following features: announcements, course
information, staff information, course documents,
assignments, communication, links, and resources.
Equity of Distance
Education Learners
Web-based distance education (DE) has sometimes
been touted for its convenience and richness.
However, the reality is far more complex, and
encompasses equity issues. Women are more
likely to want to take advantage of adult educa-
tion because they realize the possibility of second
389

chances for success, and see DE as a feasible way
to accommodate family and workplace demands.
However, DE learners need to have physical
and intellectual access to the technology, both
of which conditions favor males (von Prummer,
2007). Adult educators need to make sure that
females have equitable opportunities to use tech-
nology competently: through equipment lending,
supplemental technology training, and chances
for technology sharing as a learning community.
Online course design largely controls the type
and equality of interaction, unlike face-to-face en-
vironments where some learning may be spontane-
ous and students can more easily interact socially
informally. Teachers’ ideology and instructional
approaches are more codified in distance educa-
tion, partly because there is less chance to negotiate
meaning. While technology can facilitate various
forms of communication and collaboration, if
the instructor does not incorporate technology
knowledgeably, distance education may assume
the nature of a socially-isolated correspondence
course. Learners who value social connectivity,
which reflect female sensibilities, may find such
courses psychologically unfulfilling. On the other
hand, when educators know how to use technology
to engage and empower adults through person-
ally meaningful learning activities within a social
context, female – and male -- learning can flourish
(Care & Udod, 2000).
Taxonomies of Courseware
Use: Gender Implications
As instructors have incorporated courseware into
their course delivery, patterns of use have emerged.
Greg Gay (1997) provided a good overview of
the earlier research relative to distance learn-
ing. This work is closely related to the domain
of computer supported cooperative work (Ellis,
Gibbs, & Rein, 1991).
Salmon’s 2000 model of Web-based course
development focused on e-learning, and posits
five phases, stepwise leading to increased learning.
390
Gender Impact on Adult Education
He also recognized the technical and instructional
aspects of online course development, and folded
those elements into each phase. Gender equity
places a role at each point, as the italics content
exemplifies.
1. Student access requires setting up the system,
as well as welcoming students. Physical ac-
cess needs to accommodate beginning tech
users and address the sociological aspects
of access.
2. Socialization requires telecommunications
set-up as well as facilitating interpersonal re-
lationships. Females value relation-relevant
learning; technology can be leveraged to
facilitate such connections.
3. Information exchange requires orientation to
the software as well as providing feedback.
Intellectual access is as important as physi-
cal access; technology use requires explicit
training, particularly for females who have
not had as much technical experience as
males. Both sexes appreciate feedback; fe-
males favor text-based feedback, and males
prefer visuals (Cooper & Weaver, 2003).
4. Knowledge construction requires collabora-
tive tools set-up as well as facilitating group
dynamics. Collaboration favors females’
way of knowing.
5. Learning development requires links as
well as monitoring. Males excel in abstract
learning, and females like to contextualize
learning.
Broadbent (2002) identified four key attri-
butes to online instruction and learning: learning
professionals, learners, content, and technology.
She then identified characteristics of each attri-
bute and how each figures in the online learning
environment. Italics again address gender issues
within this framework. Thus,
• Learning professionals need to be skillful
developers, and should act knowledgably.
Gender Impact on Adult Education
Instructors need to consider gendered
learning attributes.
• Learners need to be computer proficient
coming to the course, and need to act in-
dependently to achieve. Technology train-
ing needs to be explicitly incorporated into
instruction; instructors cannot assume that
adults are technologically adept.
• Content must be authoritative, and deliv-
ered in the optimum way online. Males are
more likely to question content authority.
Instructors should match the type of con-
tent with the most effective format to de-
liver it.
• Technology needs to reliable and robust
during its use online. (129) If failures oc-
cur, females are more likely to think that
they are to blame
Northrup focused on interactivity in framing
web-based instruction. Building on Moore’s clas-
sification of engaged learning (1989), Northrup
identified five attributes of interaction on the Web:
(1) interaction with content; (2) collaboration;
(3) conversation; (4) intrapersonal interaction;
(5) performance support. Within this framework,
Northrup asserted that the approach to these at-
tributes may be instructor- or student-centered.
Adult education normally strives for student-
centric instruction. The interactivity also leverages
females’ strength in interpersonal relationships.
Gallini (2001) provided the most complex
model to describe the relationships between
variables while studying technology-mediated
learning environments. She posited three domains:
background, design, and impact. A gender lens,
shown in italics, can be applied to this model.
• Background deals with the instructor’s
and student’s beliefs, and instructional
goals. Adult educators should acknowl-
edge learners’ backgrounds, and facilitate
learners’ linkage between course content
and personal life. This approach is par-
ticularly effective for females.
• Design deals with type of technology, de-
gree of technology integration, degree of
online task structure, and online technol-
ogy tools. Adult education courses usually
have a broad spectrum of technology us-
ers. Taking advantage of females’ prefer-
ence for sharing knowledge, instructors
can have females help each other.
• Impact is student-centered; it includes
learning assessments, interaction, student
engagement, and collaborative learning.
Instructors should provide a variety of
ways to demonstrate knowledge, and as-
sess both individual and group work be-
cause males and females sometimes learn
differently.
FUTURE TRENDS
Daniel Pink’s 2005 book A Whole New Mind
posited that society is entering a “conceptual age”
where creators and empathizers are highly valued.
He asserted that globalization, technology, and
abundance (increased choice and emphasis on
service) define the new economy. In this society,
emotional intelligence is as important as mental
intelligence. Pink suggested several assets or
“senses” that lead to “high concept, high touch.”
These factors also impact gendered practices
within adult education. Italics note gender im-
plications.
1. Story: using narrative to persuade, not
just argument. Both sides of the brain are
engaged.
2. Symphony: big picture coordination balances
attention to details. Males tend to abstract
and females focus on concrete details.
3. Empathy: engaging emotion. Males tend to
focus on logic, and females typically exhibit
more empathy.
391

4. Meaning: processes are more important
than the goal, and its meaning is personally
derived. Females tend to favor this approach
to learning.
Adult education practices should consider
these twenty-first century trends, which should
help both genders learn optimally.
Within Pink’s construct is the emphasis on
globalization. Web 2.0 has facilitated communi-
cation and collaboration that transcend time and
space. While both sexes use Web 2.0 technology,
women constitute the majority of Internet users,
taking advantage of this global communication
channels to keep in touch with each other. The
global nature of telecommunication also enables
women of different cultures to interact, getting
to know each other and share their knowledge.
Adult educators can leverage Web 2.0 interactiv-
ity as they design and deliver instruction to foster
greater interdependence and increased cultural
competence for both sexes.
Likewise, Pink’s predictions employ twenty-
first century learning skills, which transcend
traditional literacy and align with new trends in
adult education. The Partnership for 21st Century
Skills posits four interdependent skill clusters.
• Life and career skills: flexibility and adapt-
ability, initiative and self-direction, leader-
ship and responsibility
• Learning and innovation skills: creativ-
ity and innovation, critical thinking and
problem-solving, communication and
collaboration
• Information, media and technology skills:
information literacy, media literacy,
ICT (Information, Communications and
Technology) literacy.
As adults need to retool themselves throughout
their lives, they need to focus on those skills that
can be transferred from one career to another.
Because their brains tend to bridge left- and right-
brain functions more than males’ brains, females
392
Gender Impact on Adult Education
are likely to gain competence in these clusters and
apply them to real-world situations more easily
than males. Adult educators need to ensure that
both sexes can have opportunities to learn and
practice these skills.
CONCLUSION
As women now constitute the majority of work-
ers in the United States, they also constitute the
majority of adult education students. Nevertheless,
traditional higher education has been structured
with male dominance in mind (Care & Udod,
2000). Current adult education practice builds
more on learner experiences, and offers greater
empowerment for women. Likewise, technology,
which has been considered a masculine domain,
now encompasses interactive features that speak
to females’ interest in interpersonal sharing.
Distance learning has the potential to provide
equitable and open adult education, depending
on the ability of adult educators to effectively
incorporate technology and foster collaboration.
In any case, gendered differences in learning need
to be addressed squarely and resolved so that all
adults can learn optimally.
REFERENCES
Abram, S., & Luther, J. (2004, May 1). Born with
the chip. Library Journal, 129(8), 34–37.
American Association of University Women.
(1992). Shortchanging, girls, shortchanging
America. Washington, DC: American Association
of University Women.
Ames, P. (2003). The role of learning style in uni-
versity students’computer attitudes: Implications
relative to the effectiveness of computer-focused
and computer-facilitated instruction (Doctoral
dissertation, The Claremont Graduate University,
2003). ProQuest Dissertations and Theses (AAT
3093249).
Gender Impact on Adult Education
Aubele, J., Jackson, S., & Farmer, L. (2007).
Technology impact on information needs and
behaviours of the academic community. In Farmer,
L. (Ed.), The human site of reference in informa-
tion services in academic libraries (pp. 1–17).
London: Chandos.
Beaulieu, L. (2001). For whom does the school bell
toll? Multi-contextual presence of social capital
and student educational achievement. Journal of
Socio-Economics, 30(2), 121–127. doi:10.1016/
S1053-5357(00)00090-1
Belenky, M., Clinchy, B., Golberger, N., & Ta-
rule, J. (1986). Women’s ways of knowing: The
development of self, voice, and mind. New York:
Basic Books.
Black, G. (1995). CSMpact for education:
Do boys and girls experience education
differently?Rochester, NY: Harris Interactive.
Broadbent, B. (2002). ABCs of e-learning. San
Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Brown, A., Cervero, R., & Johnson-Bailey, J.
(2000). Making the invisible visible: Race, gender,
and teaching in adult education. Adult Education
Quarterly, 50(4), 273–288.
Care, W., & Udod, S. (2000). Women in distance
education: Overcoming barriers to learning. New
Horizons in Adults Education, 14(2), 4–12.
Cooper, J., & Weaver, K. (2003). Gender and
computers: Understanding the digital divide.
Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Csikszentmihaly, M. (1998). Finding flow: The
psychology of engagement with everyday life.
New York: Basic Books.
Dick, W., & Carey, L. (1996). The systematic
design of instruction (4th ed.). New York: Harper
Collins.
Dishon, D., & O’Leary, P. (1994). Guidebook of
cooperative learning. Holmes Beach, FL: Learn-
ing Publications.
Ellis, C., Gibbs, S., & Rein, G. (1991). Groupware:
Some issues and experiences. Communications of
the ACM, 34(1), 35–58. doi:10.1145/99977.99987
Farmer, L. (1995). Informing young women:
Gender equity through literacy skills. Jefferson,
NC: McFarland.
Farmer, L. (1999). Cooperative learning activi-
ties in the library media center. Westport, CT:
Libraries Unlimited.
Gallini, J. (2001). A framework for the design of
research in technology-mediated learning environ-
ments: A sociocultural perspective. Educational
Technology, 41(2), 15–21.
Gay, G. (1997) Using research to design effective
distance education. Paper presented at the Ontario
Institute for Studies in Education, Toronto.
Gilligan, C. (1982). In a different voice. Cam-
bridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Gressard, C., & Loyd, B. (1986). Validation stud-
ies of a new computer attitude scale. Association
for Educational Data Systems Journal, 18(4),
295–301.
Howe, N., & Strauss, W. (2000). Millennials ris-
ing. New York: Vintage Books.
Istance, D., Schuetze, H., & Schuller, T. (2002).
International perspectives on lifelong learning:
From recurrent education to the knowledge soci-
ety. New York: Open University Press.
Leo, J. (2003). The good-news generation. U.S.
News & World Report, 135(15), 60.
Lips, H. (2007). Gender and possible selves. New
Directions for Adult and Continuing Education,
114, 51–59. doi:10.1002/ace.256
393

Martin, A. (2002). Improving the educational
outcomes of boys. Canberra, Australia: Depart-
ment of Education. Retrieved November 3, 2009,
from www.decs.act.gov.au/publicat/pdf/Ed_Out-
comes_Boys.pdf
Newkirk, T. (2002). Misreading masculinity:
Boys, literacy, and popular culture. Portsmouth,
NH: Heinemann.
Nichols, S., & Good, T. (2004). America’s teenag-
ers—Myths and realities. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence
Erlbaum.
Northrup, P. (2001, March). A framework for
designing interactivity into web-based instruction.
Educational Technology, 41(2), 31–35.
Park, A. (2004). What makes teens tick? Time,
163(19), 56–65.
Partnership for 21st Century Skills. (2009). Frame-
work for 21st century learning. Retrieved Novem-
ber 21, 2009, from http://www.21stcenturyskills.
org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view
&id=254&Itemid=120
Pink, D. (2005). A whole new mind. New York:
Riverhead.
Pintrich, P., & Linnenbrink, E. (2002). Motiva-
tion as an enabler for academic success. School
Psychology Review, 31(3), 313–327.
Salmon, G. (2000). e-Moderating: The key to
teaching and learning online. London: Kogan
Page.
Scherer, M. (2002, Sept.). Do students care about
learning? Educational Leadership, 60(1), 12–17.
Sevo, R. (2008). Momox 10 x 10 recommendation
list. Retrieved November 3, 2009, from http://
momox.org
Sheehy, G. (1995). New passages. New York:
Random House.
394
Gender Impact on Adult Education
Smith, M., & Wilhelm, J. (2002). Reading don’t
fix no Chevys: Literacy in the lives of young men.
Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
U.S. Department of Education. (1983). A nation
at risk. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of
Education.
Von Prummer, C. (2007). Distance education.
In Bank, B. (Ed.), Gender and education (pp.
163–170). Westport, CT: Praeger.
Wiggins, G., & McTighe, J. (2001). Understanding
by design. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
KEY TERMS AND DEFINITIONS
Collaboration: The process of sharing re-
sources and responsibilities to create shared
meaning and attain a common goal; interdependent
cooperation.
Courseware: An online application that allows
course elements (e.g., content, communication,
grading) to be “packaged” together.
Distance Education: An educational delivery
system that offers remote access: correspondence
courses, videotape courses, and online instruction
are typical means.
E-Learning: electronic or online-based learn-
ing.
Empowerment: Process of giving or enabling
another person to have power or authority.
Expectations: Assumptions about predicted
behaviors.
Gender Equity: A social condition whereby
males and females have the same opportunities
and constraints in participating in and contribut-
ing to society.
Globalization: The process of integrating
regions via communications and economics.
Instructional Design: A systematic analysis
of training needs and the development of aligned
instruction.
Gender Impact on Adult Education

Millennials: The generation born since 1980. Web 2.0: Interactive Web; enables people to
Socialization: The process of adopting the collaborate and share online.
behavior patterns of the surrounding culture.

395
396

Chapter 24
Comparing Lecturing and
Small Group Discussions
Gregory C. Petty
University of Tennessee, Knoxville, USA

Ernest W. Brewer
University of Tennessee, Knoxville, USA

ABSTRACT
This chapter contains a description and discussion of the teaching and learning methods of the lecture
(content delivery method) and small group discussion (interaction method). It also addresses the vari-
ous steps in using each of these two techniques and compares them along with identifying the strengths
and weaknesses of each technique. These formats are explored and discussed regarding procedures for
facilitating and presenting and a planning sheet and an evaluation form for each is included. Major
studies are cited and used to support strategies and techniques presented. In summary, these instructional
techniques are compared and contrasted for their respective benefits for the adult learner.

INTRODUCTION A lecture is when the subject matter expert

Typically when an instructor or teacher thinks
about instruction or teaching, lecturing is the mode
of instruction that comes to mind. The lecture is
an old, traditional teaching method that has been
criticized because it provides no opportunity for
the audience to participate in the presentation.
Telling people what you want them to know, or
lecturing, is still one of the most common methods
of teaching (Parker, 1993).
DOI: 10.4018/978-1-61692-906-0.ch024
gives an organized, in-depth presentation to an
audience. The delivery of a lecture can be formal
or informal and is usually accompanied by the use
of audiovisual aids. It is a convenient and usually
effective method for presenting a large amount of
information to an audience in a relatively short
time (Brewer, 1997; Brewer, DeJonge, & Stout,
2001; Henson, 1993). The lecture is a method of
presenting facts, information, or principles ver-
bally with little or no participation from the audi-
ence. The lecture is a carefully prepared talk given
by a qualified person (Claycomb & Petty, 1983;
Parker, 1993). McKeachie and Svinicki (2006)
Comparing Lecturing and Small Group Discussions
notes that lectures are good for maining several
reasons. They are appropriate for presenting up-
to-date information, summarizing matereial, and
focusing on key concepts or ideas (p. 58).
In contrast, a small group discussion is sim-
ply that—a small group that has been organized
to discuss a topic of interest, ostensibly for the
purpose of learning about the topic. The typical
small-group discussion can serve intellectual,
emotional, and social purposes. Emotionally,
the participants may have some sort of personal
involvement in the issue they are discussing, mak-
ing it important to them (Brewer, 1997; Brewer
et al., 2001). Socially, group discussion builds a
sense of cohesion and trust with one another (Lee
& Ertmer, 2006; Sweet & Michaelsen, 2007).
A well-conducted group discussion will end
in acceptance of different opinions, respect for
well-supported beliefs, and improved problem-
solving skills. Overall, it will promote the sharing
of information and all members will gain insight
concerning the thoughts of others before reaching
consensus on a topic (Young, 2007).
Most of us interface in small groups all the
time. Of course most people have work groups
in their organization but small groups include
school, social, religious, and professional groups
as well. The dynamics of a group usually reveal
certain features that characterize the group. This
chapter will examine some of these characteristic
features, including leadership, status, roles, norms
of behavior, pressures to conform, and cohesive-
ness (Brewer, Hollingsworth, & Campbell, 1995).
Both the lecture and the small group discussion
seek to educate the participants on a topic. Each
method has strengths and weaknesses. This chapter
will address and describe these methods and the
advantages and disadvantages of each. However,
before going into the strengths and weaknesses, it
would be helpful to identify several operational
definitions relating to these instructional methods.
They are presented at the end of this chapter.
BACKGROUND
Procedural Steps in
Using the Lecture
The lecture technique begins with careful prepara-
tion on the part of the presenter. For the lecture to
be effective, the presenter must know his or her
subject matter. Any attempt to learn as you go
can be easily revealed in the lecture presentation
(Petty, 1999; Wood, 2005).
Once the presenter is prepared, the lecture is
simply a matter of presenting the material to the
audience in a way that will keep them interested
and get the material across clearly (Brewer, 1997;
Brewer, DeJonge, & Stout, 2001; Toole, 2000).
To do this, the following steps must be taken.
Step 1: Outline Your Presentation
Careful preparation is essential because the pre-
senter will lose the audience at the first sign of
rambling. Every good lecture begins with a good
outline. The outline will not only keep the presenter
focused but also provide a good checkpoint for the
listeners. Share your outline with the audience by
telling them what points you are going to cover
and then talking about each point in order. Keep
the outline simple so it doesn’t become a distrac-
tion from your lecture.
Step 2: Keep It Simple
Most audiences can only absorb a few main ideas
at each sitting. Generally, two to four main ideas
should be the maximum presented during a lec-
ture. Although the concepts can be complicated,
the structure of the lecture should be kept simple.
A good start can set the tone for the whole
lecture. It also helps to establish the purpose of
the lecture both in your mind and in the mind of
the listeners. The introduction should be carefully
planned and as interesting as possible.
397
 Comparing Lecturing and Small Group Discussions
Audiences listen better and retain more when
they know what to listen for and what the purpose
is. Spell out your objectives at the beginning.
Repeat them at the end. Repetition is important
for retention. Important points need to be repeated
at least three times in order to be remembered.
Step 3: Use a Conversational Approach
Conversational style is important to the lecture
process. The presenter should know his or her
audience and tailor the lecture to their level. This
includes avoiding unfamiliar words and stiff
formal presentations. Brewer and Traver (1976)
support using humor, anecdotes and visual aids
to help keep the audience alert and involved in
the lecture process.
The presenter should arrange his or her ma-
terial so that the ideas are expressed clearly. Be
specific. Use short sentences for emphasis. Terms
such as however, nevertheless, then and finally are
important transitions for the listeners.
Step 4: Vary Your Speech Rate
Audience interest and retention depends upon
how well the material is presented. An average of
100 to 150 words per minute is considered a safe
speed for oral presentation. The lecturer should
remember to slow down for more difficult mate-
rial, present simple material at a faster rate, and
pause often so that the listeners can comprehend
what is being said.
Step 5: Show Enthusiasm
An appropriate level of enthusiasm conveys the
presenter’s attitude toward the subject matter. If
the presenter demonstrates a high level of enthu-
siasm, the audience will tap into this energy and
be encouraged to listen. Presentation and delivery
are keys in sustaining participants’ interest. Bellon,
Bellon, and Blank (1992) link presenter enthusi-
asm with participant achievement through the use
398
of varied voice level, energy, body gestures, eye
contact, facial expression, and descriptive words
(Brewer, 1997; Brewer et al., 2001; Brewer &
Burgess, 2005).
Step 6: Show Physical Behavior
Moving freely around the front of the room can
be a great aid in keeping your audience alert.
However, some mannerisms are distracting and
run the risk of becoming the focus, rather than
the lecture. Leaning on the podium or playing
with coins, papers, or a pointer are examples of
distracting mannerisms.
Keep good eye contact. Look at the audience
in the same way you would if you were carrying
on a conversation with them.
Step 7: Keep the Purpose of
the Lecture Clearly in Mind
Before beginning the lecture or the outline, write
down the purpose of the lecture. This purpose
should be specific.
It is helpful to begin with an advanced orga-
nizer—a new introductory idea or concept that
can be incorporated by the audience with their
existing knowledge of a subject. This helps the
lecturer show the audience how his or her infor-
mation is important to them, thus clarifying the
purpose. Joyce, Weil, and Showers (1992) agree
that if an appropriate advance organizer is chosen,
accompanied by a strong delivery of organized
information, successful learning will occur. If
the lecturer doesn’t know his or her purpose, the
listeners will have a difficult time understanding
the lecture.
Step 8: Use Audiovisual Materials
and Follow-up Groups
The pure lecture can be greatly enhanced by the
use of charts, graphs, handouts, filmstrips, pictures,
models, chalkboards, and other interest-arousing
Comparing Lecturing and Small Group Discussions
aids. Brookfield (1990) suggests that another
way to spark interest is to end the lecture with a
question related to the topic to initiate a thought-
provoking free flow of ideas among individuals
within a group. Follow up the lecture with buzz
groups or discussion groups. Interactive discus-
sion allows the listeners to clarify and retain the
material (Toole, 2000; Walls, 2005; Young, 2007).
Variations of the Lecture
The pure lecture has a few variations. Lectures can
be formal or informal and can be given in person,
by tape recording, or on videotape.
A formal lecture is most effective (useful)
when introducing new or complicated concepts
or ideas or when there is a need to cover several
concepts or ideas in a short period of time. The
formal lecture is usually given to large groups.
The presenter will lecture during the entire allotted
time with little or no interaction from the audience.
The formal lecture can be greatly enhanced by
techniques that offer some audience participation.
Such techniques include the use of the informal
lecture, audiovisual aids, and discussion groups
(Petty, Lim, & Zulauf, 2007).
An informal lecture is designed for smaller
groups and lends itself to more interaction with the
audience. The presenter can encourage questions
and comments and still maintain the lecture format.
Another variation of the informal lecture is
the lecture forum. The lecture forum is a talk
given by a qualified person that is followed by
open discussion with other experts (Toole, 2000;
Wood, 2005).
Appropriate Uses, Suggestions,
and Cautions for the Lecture
Because the lecture is a passive form of learning,
it must be used carefully and not overused. The
lecture technique is best used under the following
circumstances (Brewer, 1997; Brewer et al., 2001;
Brewer & Burgess, 2005):
• When the audience is large
• When there are many ideas to present in a
short period of time
• When the information is not readily avail-
able because the topic is too current for
textbooks
• When introducing a new subject
• When summarizing or giving directions
• When presenting analysis of a controver-
sial issue (however, here the lecture is
more likely to be called a speech)
Points to watch when using the lecture method
include the following:
• Know the material.
• Know your audience and watch for signs
of fatigue or disinterest.
• Keep the number of points to to a minimum.
• Keep the presentation simple and conver-
sational, avoiding unfamiliar words and
long sentences.
• Present summaries at the beginning and
end.
The informal lecture is especially good for
smaller groups and encourages the audience to ask
questions and add their comments. Because it is not
a discussion group, the lecturer can still maintain
control of the information being presented but
keep the listeners interested by asking questions.
The questions can be designed for the listeners
to answer on the spot, or they can be rhetorical
questions—ones the lecturer asks, then answers.
The use of audiovisual aids has become ex-
tremely popular in the lecture method. Whether it
is an overhead projector with computer-enhanced
graphics or the chalkboard, the audiovisual adds a
helpful learning style or aid to the lecture method.
Brewer, Hollingsworth, and Campbell (1995) and
Parker (1993) suggest that lectures should use
visual imagery that ties in with the words in the
lecture so the viewer can retrieve a mental picture
of the subject to reinforce learning.
399
 Comparing Lecturing and Small Group Discussions
Discussion groups, sometimes called buzz
sessions, are additions to the lecture method that
help the presenter check to see if his or her mes-
sage has been communicated effectively (Brewer,
1997; Brewer et al., 2001).
Breaking into smaller groups to either complete
an assignment—written or oral—or to discuss a
particular issue that was covered in the lecture
increases the effectiveness of this traditional teach-
ing method. During the discussion, the lecturer
should move from group to group, checking for
comprehension (Wood, 2005).
Advantages, Disadvantages,
and Limitations of the Lecture
When using the lecture instructional strategy,
the presenter should be aware of the following
advantages, disadvantages, and limitations of this
technique (Brewer, 1997; Brewer et al., 2001;
Brewer & Burgess, 2005; Petty, Lim, & Zulauf,
2007).
Advantages of Lectures
Lecture is still the most common method of instruc-
tion. Part of the reason for this is the manner and
efficiency of which the material is presented to the
learner. These advantages can be summarized as:
• Require little prior participant knowledge
about subject matter.
• Material can be presented rapidly and
logically.
• Convenient for large groups.
• Directions can be given clearly, therefore
ensuring that all participants have the nec-
essary information.
• Economical with classroom time because it
immediately focuses the presenter’s ideas.
• Easier for presenter to coordinate and
control.
400
Disadvantages of Lectures
As with any form of instruction there are some
disadvantages of the lecture method. The instructor
should be aware of the following caveats that may
affect the outcome of this methodology:
• The audience is less likely to retain a large
percentage of the material.
• Overuse of lectures that are too long can
lead to boredom on part of audience.
• The possibility of miscommunication is
greater.
• Reflective thinking on the part of the audi-
ence is not encouraged.
• Henson (1993) states that lectures are the
least effective teaching method to promote
long-term retention.
Limitations of Lectures
In addition to advantages and disadvantages there
are limitations to the lecture format. It is important
that the instructor consider these limitations in
constructing or initiating a lecture. These limita-
tions are as follows:
• Not appropriate for hands-on type of skill
training.
• Limited feedback from the audience.
• Puts responsibility for material on the
presenter.
• Difficult to evaluate.
• Not appropriate for abstract, complex, or
highly detailed material.
Examples or Applications
Examples of the lecture include formal or infor-
mal classroom settings, after-dinner speeches,
sermons, political speeches, and some training
sessions.
The most effective application of the lecture
is as a part of the whole. The lecture can be used
Comparing Lecturing and Small Group Discussions
for an introduction and as a summary. It can be
especially effective when applied with other tools,
such as audiovisual aids and limited discussion
groups (Petty, Lim, & Zulauf, 2007).
Summary of Lecture
A lecture should be kept short and interesting,
the presenter should have a concrete knowledge
of the subject matter, and the presentation should
be well organized. When used properly, the lec-
ture can be an effective teaching tool. It is most
successful when used informally and enhanced
by other methods, such as audiovisual aids and
discussion groups. Gilstrap and Martin (1975)
note the range for the lecture method by noting
that the lecture can “challenge the imagination
of each student, arouse curiosity, develop his [or
her] spirit of inquiry, and encourage his [or her]
creativity” (p. 7).
SMALL GROUP DISCUSSION
The Small Group
A contrast to the lecture method is small group
discussion. Creating small groups for discussion
is one of the easiest methods for an instructor
to enhance learning. However, establishing an
instructional small group must be done correctly
and with an interface or consideration to the over-
all instructional process. To properly deliver this
process or method of instruction the components
and problems facing group interaction must be
understood (Brewer, Klein, & Mann, 2003).
Small-group discussion allows presenters to
announce a topic or idea for group discussion
among participants. A small-group discussion fol-
lows democratic guidelines and allows everyone
to contribute many ideas for others to discuss and
reflect upon. Discussion allows for an interchange
of ideas within the context of a group under the
direction of a presenter (Nussbaum, 2002).
Organizations consist of various groups of
individuals working together to achieve common
goals. The fact that members must work together
leads to their relationships with one another. The
social process by which people interact face to
face in small groups is known as group dynamics.
Utilization of group dynamics is a component of
small group discussion (Sweet & Michaelsen,
2007).
Whenever groups of people congregate in the
same place, they will talk with one another. It is
human nature to be curious about our surround-
ings and other people, and the best way to find
out answers to our questions is to talk with one
another. A discussion may be information based,
concentrating on facts, or it may focus on personal
opinion and feelings. People enjoy discussions
and the arenas of thought they uncover. Talking
with friends reveals attitudes and values and offers
insight into ways of solving personal problems
(Firestien & McCowan, 1988; O’Connor, 1980;
Vora & Akula, 1978).
New ideas can be evaluated and tested using
the discussion method. Small-group discussions,
under the guidance of a facilitator, allow partici-
pants to discuss issues to achieve understanding
and consensus after consideration of the view-
points and ideas of others. Its goals are to spark
new thought and concept exploration, encourage
analysis of factual information, and develop open-
mindedness toward new attitudes and beliefs,
so as to accept the opinions of others (Sweet &
Michaelsen, 2007).
Small-group discussions serve intellectual,
emotional, and social purposes. Intellectually,
discussion helps participants become aware of the
diversity of opinions on an issue. It also allows
participants to realize the complexity of issues
when they walk away from a discussion with more
questions than when they went into the discus-
sion. This is good because it helps them to think
401
 Comparing Lecturing and Small Group Discussions
about all the possibilities. The participants must
discern the difference between fact and opinion
and thus they must practice the skill of listening.
Emotionally, the participants may have some
sort of personal involvement in the issue they are
discussing, making it important to them. Others
should be sensitive to this. Participants want others
to realize that their opinions matter, and once the
group responds to this, each participant retains a
feeling of self-worth. This is an important affective
quality that is key to the building of self-confidence
and a sense of belonging.
Socially, group discussion builds a sense of
cohesion and trust with one another. Discussion
groups are an arena in which differences in opinion,
race, gender, and participation should be accepted
and celebrated. Differences allow for the diffusion
of new ideas and attitudes. Group work of any sort
helps participants build their interpersonal skills
and confidence about offering individual opinions
in a group atmosphere (Firestien & McCowan,
1988; O’Connor, 1980; Vora & Akula, 1978).
A well-conducted group discussion will end
in acceptance of different opinions, respect for
well-supported beliefs, and improved problem-
solving skills. Overall, it will promote the sharing
of information and all members will gain insight
concerning the thoughts of others before reach-
ing consensus on a topic. Bellon, Bellon, and
Blank (1992) believe participants in small groups
concentrate better on the topic at hand due to the
support of their peers and individual motivation.
Features of a Small Group
Whether we realize it or not, small groups have
definitive features that can be recognized and
described. Small groups have some form of leader-
ship, a “pecking order” or status of members, and
specific roles that members assume or are assigned
(Firestien & McCowan, 1988; O’Connor, 1980;
Vora & Akula, 1978).
402
Leadership of Small
Group Discussion
One of the most important features of a small
group is leadership. The leaders of a small group
are awarded leadership status by members for
any of a number of reasons, including influence
with administration or the instructor, seniority,
experience, and personality. Although the group
leader may have no formally designated authority
to act as group leader, he or she guides or influ-
ences the group.
Status or Pecking Order
Another important characteristic of small groups
is status, which refers to the group’s pecking order.
The amount of status accorded to various group
members depends on factors such as seniority,
expertise, job classification, and job location.
Higher-status individuals--they may get preferred
seating at meetings, have their ideas solicited by
other members, or be the first to receive grapevine
information. Lower-status members may refrain
from disagreeing with higher-status members in
hopes of gradually gaining increased group status
and improving their place in the pecking order.
Roles of Group Members
Roles are the behaviors expected of group mem-
bers. Formal roles are written out in job descrip-
tions, whereas informal roles develop as a result
of the dynamics within the group. Some of the
group roles that may be played are leader, elder
statesperson, and those accorded to higher- and
lower-statue group members.
Norms of Behavior
Small groups have norms of behavior, which
define what is and is not acceptable behavior
within the group. The following are some exmples
of Group-Behavior Norms:
Comparing Lecturing and Small Group Discussions
1. Members dress neatly at work.
2. Members do not tattle to management about
fellow members.
3. Members voluntarily assist other members.
4. Members don’t engage in horseplay on the
job.
5. Members adhere to time limits for lunch and
breaks.
6. Members don’t exceed specified perfor-
mance levels.
7. Members call in sick only when it is abso-
lutely unavoidable.
8. Members don’t volunteer suggestions or
ideas to management.
9. Members don’t work more than a few min-
utes past quitting time.
10. Members don’t badmouth their work group.
11. Members cooperate with people from other
departments.
12. Members don’t use profanity.
Why do such norms, or codes of conduct, ex-
ist? The reason is that group members stand to
benefit from them in several ways. Observing the
norms may protect jobs, ensure an orderly flow
of work, or enhance status.
Pressures to Conform
Another important characteristic of small groups
is their ability to pressure their members to con-
form to established group norms. Individuals who
violate group norms or drift from them too badly
may be subjected to a form of group discipline.
THE NONCONFORMING
SMALL GROUP MEMBER
Sometimes group members themselves can po-
tentially derail an effective group discussion. The
following scenario is an example of this problem:
Before the meeting started the participants sat
around the large conference table laughing and
telling stories. Bill who always had a good story
or joke seemed to be in his element with lively
conversation. After the meeting began he contin-
ued the banter with his those seated next to him.
This seemingly uncooperative manner was very
distracting to all those in attendance. Finally, the
person who had the floor turned and said, “Dog
Gone It! Bill, we’ve had enough of you. Will you
quit acting like a child or get out of here so every-
body else can learn something? For the duration
of the meeting, he paid attention and participated
on a level equal to that of the group members.
Since group members’ needs are satisfied by
their inclusion in the group, there can be strong
pressure to conform to other members’ expecta-
tions. Possible punitive actions by a group include
subtle verbal or nonverbal reprimands, a temporary
cold shoulder from other members, or even per-
manent ostracism. Extreme possibilities include
physical threats or bodily harm.
Cohesiveness of the Group Members
Cohesiveness is the degree to which group mem-
bers pull in the same direction and have unity.
When group membership is attractive to members
and meets their needs, there is a greater likelihood
that the group will be cohesive. Like glue, cohesive
groups stick together. The more cohesive a group,
the more likely it is that its members will accept
the group’s behavior norms, go along with group
decisions, and defend group goals and individual
members. Cohesive groups have a higher level of
friendly, open communication, higher levels of
trust among members, and generally less internal
friction than less cohesive groups.
This statement is not meant to imply that co-
hesive groups do not have or fully air dissenting
viewpoints on issues. It means, however, that,
once these have been aired and discussed, the
decisions made will be supported by all members.
403
 Comparing Lecturing and Small Group Discussions
Main Procedural Steps in Using
Small-Group Discussion
The purpose of the small-group discussion is to
contribute and circulate information on a particular
topic and analyze and evaluate the information
for supported evidence in order to reach an agree-
ment on general conclusions. To do this, several
steps must be taken when conducting small-group
discussions (Brewer, 1997; Brewer et al., 2001;
Brewer & Burgess, 2005; Firestien & McCowan,
1988; O’Connor, 1980; Vora & Akula, 1978).
Step 1: Introduction
The presenter must prepare before the discussion
for it to be successful. The presenter should try to
introduce a topic on which all of the participants
have some background knowledge so they have
a basis for discussion. If the participants are in-
troduced to a topic that is familiar to them, each
will have something to contribute that another
participant may not have thought of, thus moving
the discussion on its way with many new avenues
of thought to explore. The introduction should
have four parts.
1. Instructional Objective. An instructional
objective should be given to the participants
at the beginning of the discussion.
2. Purpose. The presenter should explain why
the groups will be discussing the chosen
topic.
3. Relationship. The presenter must explain
how this information fits in with what has
already been learned or what will be learned
in the future.
4. Advanced Organizer. An advanced organizer
is some sort of attention-grabber that attracts
participants’ interest. Many discussion topics
fail because participants aren’t drawn into
the discussion at the beginning.
404
The presenter may have to help the participants
understand how small-group discussion works to
help them make the most of their time. Partici-
pants must understand the difference between a
discussion and an unguided expression of opinion
without pertinent information or facts. Participants
might have to do a little research beforehand to
get acquainted with the presenter’s selected topic.
Brookfield (1990) suggests choosing topics that
are not too fact oriented or lacking in controversy
to spark creative thought and diverse responses
(Cohen, 1994).
Step 2: Directing the Discussion
The presenter is in charge of directing the discus-
sion to get it started. The presenter should ask the
participants if they have questions about the topic
at hand. These questions can start the discussion,
or the presenter may want to ask a few questions
from a prepared list to stimulate thought toward
the topic. Another way to begin the discussion is
to ask the participants to recall and share personal
events that have happened in their lives that relate
to the topic. This is a good way to get everyone
involved. Questions are excellent motivators for
discussion.
Sometimes the participants will take different
thought paths and deviate from the instructional
objective, so the presenter might have to reroute
the thinking. Leading questions from the presenter
can direct the participants back to the topic. These
questions should not be answered with a yes-or-
no answer. They should contain key words and
relate to the objective of the discussion. These
presenter-guided questions will be a model for
participants to ask of the peers in their group. King
and Rosenshine (1993) found that participants
who ask thought-provoking questions in small-
group discussions encourage creative answers that
increase the learning potential for all.
Once the discussion begins, questions are es-
sential in keeping the discussion moving. They can
bring the discussion back on track or emphasize
Comparing Lecturing and Small Group Discussions
an important concept. They can draw in shy or
non-participating individuals and can be key in
checking for understanding.
As the presenter directs the discussion, he or
she should decide whether or not the participants
are spending too much time on insignificant points.
The presenter should try to keep control of the
discussion, yet not dominate it. To avoid having
the discussion centered around the presenter, he
or she should try to enter in only when necessary.
Step 3: Summarizing the Discussion
Sometimes the participants may be confused or
retain a wrong idea as right. The presenter should
summarize to make sure the participants under-
stand what has been discussed. For small-group
discussions seeking consensus, it is important to
summarize to make sure all the participants are
thinking along the same lines. A final summary is
essential at the end of the discussion. Conclusions
should be recorded on the chalkboard so all can
see them. The presenter should ask the participants
how they would use the information. At times, a
discussion will result in the participants’ having
incorrect ideas. Basically, summarization is help-
ful for clearing up confusion, covering main points,
ending a discussion, and conveying consensus.
Variations of Small-
Group Discussion
In the following variations of small group discus-
sion, each type of group method is described. It
is critical that in each case the facilitator achieve
closure. Achieving closure means reaching a con-
clusion with respect to a given agenda item that
has been discussed. Typically this is accomplished
by acclimation or by all members agreeing on the
discussion topic. Sometimes this may mean that
the group agrees to disagree.
Cooperative Learning Groups
In cooperative learning, a small group of partici-
pants works together to achieve a common goal.
Cooperative learning operates on the premise
that participants achieve more when they work
together. Henson (1993) noted that small-group
discussions allow the participants to get to know
each other on a personal level and give them a sense
of belonging to a team. The goals of cooperative
learning are positive interdependence, face-to-
face interaction among participants, individual
accountability within the group, and interpersonal
and small-group skills. This teaching method fos-
ters cognitive development in the areas of reten-
tion and achievement and affective development
through socialization and self-esteem (Davidson,
1990; Garfield, 1993).
Problem-Solving Groups
These groups exist in order to cooperate, dis-
cover, inquire, and think critically. For example,
several participants might work together to solve
mathematical problems through exploration.
The purpose of the problem-solving groups is to
approach real-life problems with an appropriate
strategy. The participants find many approaches to
the problem and test them for the best possible so-
lution. Cooper (1990) states that problem-solving
groups help participants come to logical solutions
and make responsible decisions.
Group Investigation
The presenter breaks participants up into small
groups based on particular interests. Each group
has a certain category, and they gather informa-
tion and analyze it for meaning. The participants
then prepare and deliver a presentation to the
class about what they discovered. The process
405

Table 1. Handling Inappropriate Behavior
Think of Some Actions for Handling Disruptive and
Inappropriate Behaviors at Meetings
Type Behavior Suggested Response
Hostile
Know-It-All
Loudmouth
Interrupter
Interpreter
Gossiper
Whisperer
Silent Distracter
Busy-Body
Latecomer
Early Leaver
teaches participants to work together, listen to
one another, and support each others’ work and
opinions. This is a group-skill-building teaching
method that strengthens peer interaction.
Handling Inappropriate Behavior
It can be predicted that any group made up of
individuals with different personalities will have
different forms of behavior exhibited. The in-
structor or facilitator should respond differently
to these individuals. Depending on the situation
or outside influences some members may be
deemed as hostile or know-it-all. Other group
members may be classified as loudmouth or as an
interrupter. Equally frustrating for the facilitator
is the interpreter, that is one who decides to re
interpret what others say even though that is not
needed or asked for.
Other types of disruptive group members are
the gossiper, whisperer, silent distracter, busy-
body, latecomer and the equally disruptive early
leaver. These are summarized in Table 1. Since
every group is different, the facilitator should plan
in advance different methods for responding to
this behavior. Keep in mind one of the most useful
tools for a facilitator is the power of peer pressure.
406
Comparing Lecturing and Small Group Discussions
Appropriate Uses, Suggestions, and
Cautions of the Group Discussion
The group discussion requires great skill on the
part of the presenter. The presenter must encourage
participants to participate freely and still keep the
discussion on the topic. During the discussion, the
presenter must help the participants to understand
how all the opinions and facts relate to the topic.
For the presenter to conduct the discussion success-
fully, he or she must carefully plan it in advance
(Brewer, 1997; Brewer et al., 2001; Brewer &
Burgess, 2005; Cohen, 1994).
The presenter must identify the objectives of
the discussion. These objectives should be relevant
to the needs of the participant, and the participants
should have some prior knowledge of the topic.
An introduction should be used to explain to the
participants why they need to accomplish this
objective. The presenter should conduct the small-
group discussion with leading questions. Table 2
notes some factors in using questioning techniques
effectively. In addition, summaries should be
used by the presenter to check for agreement and
understanding. Charts, models, or actual objects
might help the participants understand what is
being discussed.
Each topic of a small group should begin with
leading questions to direct participants in the
desired pattern of thought toward a topic; for
example, “What is the whole impact of recycling
on a global basis, and what actions can we take
to continue this renewing process?” or “How
serious is the damage we have done to our earth?”
or “What can we do individually or collectively
to make a difference?”
A few cautions are in order. Some participants
may want to talk all at once. The group will have
to generate some sort of courtesy system to allow
everyone to express his or her opinion at different
times so all may hear. Some participants may not
want to talk at all. The presenter may have to ask
a few leading questions and encourage one of
the more aggressive participants in the group to
Comparing Lecturing and Small Group Discussions
Table 2. Use Questioning Effectively
Questioning Skills A key skill is the ability to use questions to involve individual members or the entire group in the communication process.
Think of some questioning techniques that can be used by the meeting leader.
Questioning Techniques for Leaders of Meetings
€€€€€€€€€€• Clarifying or elaborating on a point made by someone.
€€€€€€€€€€• Calling on someone who is reluctant to talk.
€€€€€€€€€€• Getting specific facts.
€€€€€€€€€€• Examining possible alternatives.
€€€€€€€€€€• Initiating group discussion.
€€€€€€€€€€• Obtaining more participation from the group.
€€€€€€€€€€• Guiding the meeting tactfully in certain directions.
€€€€€€€€€€• “Testing the water” as to the group’s feeling.
speak. One or two participants might monopolize
the conversation. The presenter should explain the
importance of letting everyone contribute. Some
participants may strongly disagree on points and
fight with one another. In this case, the presenter
must carefully draw the topic to a neutral point
so both may see the strengths and weaknesses of
their arguments.
Advantages, Disadvantages,
and Limitations of Small-
Group Discussion
When using the small-group discussion, the
presenter should be aware of the following ad-
vantages, disadvantages, and limitations of this
instructional strategy (Brewer, 1997; Brewer et
al., 2001; Brewer & Burgess, 2005; Cohen, 1994;
Firestien & McCowan, 1988; O’Connor, 1980;
Vora & Akula, 1978).
Advantages of Small-Group Discussion
Instructors and facilitators should consider the
advantages of group discussion so this method
of instruction can be used when appropriate for
the lesson. Each of these advantages offers the
group member an opportunity to learn from the
group process itself. These advantages are sum-
marized as follows:
1. All participants in the group can participate.
2. It is a good way to get participants interested
in a topic.
3. Participants may more easily understand
another participant’s explanation than a
presenter’s explanation.
4. The presenter can identify participants who
need assistance.
5. The presenter can identify individual opin-
ions about the topic.
6. It helps the participant see relationships
among ideas or concepts related to the topic
at hand.
Disadvantages of Small-
Group Discussion
Of course as with any instructional methodology
there are disadvantages that should be considered.
While some of these disadvantages may be obvi-
ous to the facilitator these disadvantages can be
ameliorated by careful planning and consideration.
These disadvantages are summarized as follows:
1. It is time-consuming.
2. Some participants in the group may do all
the talking.
3. It involves less presenter involvement than
other methods.
4. The discussion can easily get off track.
407
 Comparing Lecturing and Small Group Discussions
Limitations of Small-Group Discussion
Careful planning for a small group discussion must
consider this method’s limitations. An understand-
ing of these limitations can help the facilitator
utilized the small group more effectively. These
limitations are as follows:
1. It is not a method that transmits information
or facts.
2. It involves more talk and less action.
3. The discussion must be carefully planned,
not impulsive, to be effective.
CONCLUSION
With lecture the instructor of adult learners can
present a lot of information to a large group very
quickly and efficiently. The negative is that many
adults are not engaged as learners in a lecture
format. On the other hand, small-group discussion
develops the cognitive and affective abilities of
participants. It is a process of freely sharing infor-
mation and insights among peers in a welcoming
environment under the guidance of a facilitator.
Individual effort is encouraged to make a strong
team with creative ideas. Meloth and Deering
(1994) note that groups are more likely to devote
a collective effort toward their prescribed task
and become more focused on their goal when in
cooperative groups.
Issues, Controversies, Problems
The most effective application of the lecture is
as a part of the whole. The lecture can be used
for an introduction and as a summary. It can be
especially effective when applied with other tools,
such as audiovisual aids and limited discussion
groups (Claycomb & Petty, 1983; Petty, Lim, &
Zulauf, 2007).
408
An issue for instructors is that they should keep
their lectures short and interesting. It is important
to have a solid knowledge of the subject matter,
and be well organized. When used properly, the
lecture can be an effective teaching tool. It is most
successful when used informally and enhanced
by other methods, such as audiovisual aids and
discussion groups.
The small-group discussion should have as its
aim to come to some sort of definite goal or deci-
sion based on consensus; for example, “What is the
best way for participants to study Shakespeare?”
But small-group discussion can also be used for
stimulating new ideas and insights without really
aiming for a particular decision (Gokhale, 1995).
An example of such a question is: “What are some
ethical guidelines politicians should follow?”
A controversy and problem with small group
discussions is the sometimes lack of definitive
outcomes. There is a tendency by some facilitators
to allow the discussion to become a “bull” session
or “complaints” center. While this may fit some
needs of the organization, these outcomes do not
allow for instructional benefits.
Solutions and Recommendations
By following the simple guidelines offered in this
chapter, instructors can utilize the advantages of
lecture and the advantages of small group discus-
sions to maximize the instructional benefits to
the adult learner. The facilitator should carefully
measure the disadvantages and limitations of both
to avoid the pitfalls each presents. The key to both
techniques of planning and understanding of how
each technique should be utilized.
FUTURE TRENDS
Instructional technology is constantly changing
our own teaching and learning methods in working
with our students. Overhead projectors are almost
Comparing Lecturing and Small Group Discussions
obsolete. The Blackboard (an online interactive
application that allows students to take courses) is
being used constantly for posting lectures, pow-
erpoint presentations, and so forth. McKeachie
and Svinicki (2006) noted that technology will
enhance teaching and learning. They identified
four ways how instructional technology serves
useful functions in the classrooms. They are:
1. Providing new opportunities for enhancing
student learning that otherwise would be
impossible or very difficult.
2. Addressing specific learning goals more
effectively.
3. Taking advantage of the rich information
now available online.
4. Preparing students for life in a wired world.
(pp. 230-231).
McKeachie and Svinicki ends by saying that
“successful incorporation of technology tools de-
pends on the extend to which they are connected to
course goals, combined with effective pedagogies,
and designed to improve student learning rather
than being used for their own sake (p. 231).
As instruction is being delivered by electronic
technology, it was effect how we deliver instruc-
tion in using the lecture and small group discus-
sion. Virtual educational networks, interactive
TV lectures, satellite downlinks, computer-based
instruction, group and project-based learning
technologies, communities of learners, and dis-
tance learning, just to name a few of the current
technologies that we should try to incorporate in
our teaching and learning activities. Brewer, De-
Jonge, and Stout (2001) wrote a book that deals
with moving from in-class instruction to on-line
learning that deals with with learners participat-
ing synchronously and asynchronous in learning
and teaching. The synchronous learning activities
provide for real-time interaction among the learn-
ers who are at different geographical locations.
SUMMARY
It has been made clear that there is a place for both
lecture and small group discussion in programs
of adult learning. Prudent and conscientious
instructors should review these methods when
planning curriculum or instruction and offer a
balanced instructional plan using both techniques
when possible.
The instructor as the “sage on the stage” can be
effective as a lecturer when planning and effort is
put into this method. The facilitator as the “guide
on the side” can be equally effective in instruction
by encouraging controlled discussion with defini-
tive outcomes. There is a place for both and by
integrating both the instructor can maximize the
instructional process.
REFERENCES
Artzt, A., & Newman, C. (1990). How to use
cooperative learning in the mathematics class.
Reston, VA: National Council of Teachers of
Mathematics.
Bellon, J., Bellon, E., & Blank, M. (1992). Teach-
ing from a research knowledge base. New York:
Merrill.
Brewer, E. W. (1997). 13 proven ways to get your
message across: The essential reference for teach-
ers, trainers, presenters, and speakers. Newbury
Park, CA: Corwin Press.
Brewer, E. W., & Burgess, D. (2005). Professor’s
role in motivating students to attend class. Journal
of Industrial Teacher Education, 42(3), 23–47.
Brewer, E. W., DeJonge, J. O., & Stout, V. J.
(2001). Moving to online: Make the transition
from traditional instruction and communication
strategies. Newbury Park, CA: Corwin Press.
409
 Comparing Lecturing and Small Group Discussions
Brewer, E. W., Dunn, J. O., & Olszewski, P. (1988).
Extrinsic reward and intrinsic motivation: The vital
link between classroom management and student
performance. Journal of Education for Teaching,
14(2), 151–170. doi:10.1080/0260747880140204
Brewer, E. W., Hollingsworth, C., & Campbell,
A. (1995). Accelerated learning and short-term
instructional programs: Sustaining interest and
intrapersonal growth. Journal of the Southeastern
Association of Educational Opportunity Program
Personnel, 14(1), 57–85.
Brewer, E. W., & Traver, G. J. (1978). The funniest
jokes: A collection of the funniest jokes ever to
hit the human ear. Oregon: Maverick Publishers.
Brewer, S., Klein, J., & Mann, K. (2003). Using
Small Group Learning Strategies with Adult Re-
Entry Students. [from Education Full Text data-
base]. College Student Journal, 37(2), 286–297.
Retrieved September 22, 2009.
Brookfield, S. D. (1990). The skillful teacher. San
Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Claycomb, D., & Petty, G. C. (1983). A three year
longitudinal study of the perceived needs for assis-
tance as ranked by vocational agriculture instruc-
tors. The Journal of the American Association of
Teacher Educators in Agriculture, 24(4), 28–33.
Cohen, E. G. (1994). Restructuring the classroom:
Conditions for productive small groups. Review
of Educational Research, 64(1), 1–35.
Davidson, N. (Ed.). (1990). Cooperative learning
in mathematics: A Handbook for teachers. Menlo
Park, CA: Addison Wesley.
Firestien, R., & McCowan, R. (1988). Creative
Problem Solving and Communication Behavior in
Small Groups. [from ERIC database]. Creativity
Research Journal, 1, 106–114. Retrieved October
18, 2009. doi:10.1080/10400418809534292
410
Garfield, J. (1993). Teaching statistics using small-
group cooperative learning. Journal of Statistics
Education, 1(1), 1–6.
Gilstrap, R. L., & Martin, W. R. (1975). Current
strategies for teachers. Pacific Palisades, CA:
Goodyear.
Gokhale, A. A. (1995). Collaborative learning
enhances critical thinking. Journal of Technology
Education, 7(1), 22–30.
Henson, K. T. (1993). Methods and strategies for
teaching in secondary and middle schools. New
York: Longman.
Joyce, B., Weil, M., & Showers, B. (1992). Models
of teaching. Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
Lee, Y., & Ertmer, P. (2006). Examining the effect
of small group discussions and question prompts
on vicarious learning outcomes. [from ERIC
database]. Journal of Research on Technology in
Education, 39(1), 66–80. Retrieved September
17, 2009.
McKeachie, W. J., & Svinicki, M. (2006). McK-
eachie’s teaching tips: Strategies, research, and
theory for college and university teachers. Boston,
MA: Houghton Mifflin.
Nussbaum, E. (2002). The process of becoming a
participant in small-group critical discussions: a
case study. [from Education Full Text database].
Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 45(6),
488–497. Retrieved September 17, 2009.
O’Connor, G. (1980). Small Groups: A General
System Model. [from ERIC database]. Small
Group Behavior, 11(2), 145–174. Retrieved Octo-
ber 18, 2009. doi:10.1177/104649648001100202
Parker, J. K. (1993). Lecturing and loving it.
Clearing House (Menasha, Wis.), 67(1), 8–10.
Petty, G., Lim, D. H., & Zulauf, J. (2007). Training
performance transfer between CD-ROM based
instruction and traditional classroom instruction.
The Journal of Technology Studies, 33(1), 48–56.
Comparing Lecturing and Small Group Discussions
Petty, G. C. (1999). Preparing vocational teacher
via e-learning: A solution to the impending teacher
shortage. International Journal of Vocational
Education and Training, 7(1), 23–30.
Sweet, M., & Michaelsen, L. (2007). How group
dynamics research can inform the theory and
practice of postsecondary small group learning.
[from Education Full Text database]. Educational
Psychology Review, 19(1), 31–47. Retrieved Sep-
tember 22, 2009. doi:10.1007/s10648-006-9035-y
Toole, R. (2000). An additional step in the guided
lecture procedure. [from Education Full Text da-
tabase]. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy,
44(2), 166–168. Retrieved October 18, 2009.
Vora, J., & Akula, W. (1978). Peer and self as-
sessments in small groups. [from ERIC database].
Small Group Behavior, 9(3), 427–434. Retrieved
October 18, 2009. doi:10.1177/009055267893014
Walls, C. (2005). Some strategies for balancing
economies of scale and interaction in online/dis-
tance education courses. [from ERIC database].
E-Journal of Instructional Science and Technol-
ogy, 8(1), 15–18. Retrieved September 17, 2009.
Wood, B. (2005). Lecture-free teaching in
seven steps. [from Education Full Text data-
base]. The American Biology Teacher, 67(6),
334–335, 337–342. Retrieved October 18, 2009.
doi:10.1662/0002-7685(2005)067[0334:LTISS
]2.0.CO;2
Young, J. (2007). Small group scored discus-
sion: Beyond the fishbowl, or, everybody reads,
everybody talks, everybody learns. [from Edu-
cation Full Text database]. The History Teacher
(Long Beach, Calif.), 40(2), 177–181. Retrieved
September 17, 2009.
KEY TERMS AND DEFINITIONS
Collaborative Learning: An instruction
method in which students work in groups toward
a common academic goal.
Cooperative Learning: Is a topic frequently
mentioned in conversations about improving
education, regardless of the discipline or level of
instruction. An activity involving a small group of
learners who work together as a team to solve a
problem, complete a task, or accomplish a common
goal (Artzt & Newman, 1990). A task for group
discussion and resolution (if possible), requiring
face-to-face interaction, an atmosphere of coop-
eration and mutual helpfulness, and individual
accountability (Davidson, 1990).
Critical-Thinking: Items that involve analy-
sis, synthesis, and evaluation of the concepts.
Drill-and-Practice Items: Items that pertain
to factual knowledge and comprehension of the
concepts.
Group Cohesiveness: The degree to which
group members pull in the same direction and
have unity.
Individual Learning: An instruction method
in which students work individually at their own
level and rate toward an academic goal.
Lecture: A method of presenting facts, in-
formation, or principles verbally with little or no
participation from the audience. The lecture is a
carefully prepared talk given by a qualified person.
411
 Comparing Lecturing and Small Group Discussions

APPENDIX

Table 2. The Lecture Planning Sheet

Date:_________Time:__________Site:_________________ Instructor:___________________________
Intended Audience:
Topic Statement:
Objective(s) of Session:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Main Ideas of Lecture:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.

Media Needed:
Handouts:
Follow-up Activity(ies):
Summary Notes:

412
Comparing Lecturing and Small Group Discussions

Table 3. The Small Group Discussion Planning Sheet

Date:_________Time:__________Site:_________________ Instructor:___________________________
Purpose Statement:
Specific Topic/Question to Be Discussed:
Relationship(s) to Former/Future Learning:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Advanced Organizer(s):
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.

Directions for Organizing Groups:

1.
2.
3.
Directions for Discussion:
1.
2.
3.
Plan for Sharing With Entire Assembly:
Handout(s) (if any):
Equpment (if any):
Summary Notes:

Table 4. The Lecture—Evaluation Sheet

Item Yes No (Explain)

Was the lecturer’s purpose clear?
Was the pace appropriate? (slower for difficult material, faster for easier
ideas and review)
Was the lecture delivered in an enthusiastic manner?
Were audiovisuals helpful for clarifying or expanding ideas?
Was follow-up activity used? (If so, were directions clear?)
Did the audience participate enthusiastically?
Item Discussion

What contribution did the follow-up make to the purpose/message of this

session?
What was the general level of audience interest?
What was especially effective about this session?
Suggestions for improvement:
(You may wish to have someone else consider these items, as well as evaluating yourself.)

413
 Comparing Lecturing and Small Group Discussions

Table 5. The Small-Group Discussion—Evaluation Sheet

Item Yes No (Explain)

Was the purpose stated clearly?
Was there a clear relationship to former/future learning?
Was the topic appropriate for these participants?
Were directions clear and logical?
How well did the facilitator manage any tendency to stray from the topic?
Was there a sharing of information with the entire assembly?
Did this contribute to general understanding?
Did the summary clarify and bring effective closure to the activity?
Item Discussion

How well did the advanced organizer engage participants?

Was the specific topic/question a natural outgrowth of the advanced organizer?
What was the most effective aspect of this learning session?
Suggestions for improvement:
(You may wish to have someone else consider these items, as well as evaluating yourself.)

414
 415

Chapter 25
Design Tools and Processes
for Building E-Learning
Shalin Hai-Jew
Kansas State University, USA

ABSTRACT
To harness information communications technologies (ICT) for adult e-learning, instructional designers
and developers use a range of design tools to capture, analyze, document, and use critical information.
Their design tools help them define the learning objectives, explore the learning domain, study embedded
principles and values in the learning domain; define the projected learners and their needs (based on
developmental levels, languages, cultural backgrounds, demographics, and others); define the specific
project parameters (talent, timeline, resources, and budget); and identify suitable authoring tools and
platform technologies. The culmination of the relevant information will optimally lead to a tailored
pedagogical strategy and plan, and an effective development, alpha and beta testing, and deployment.
This chapter defines the main tools used in instructional design—as a combination of methodologies
and related technologies. Understanding these tools will help faculty and designers conceptualize in-
structional design more efficaciously and deploy the wide range of tools more strategically.

INTRODUCTION main, the learning organization, the learners, the

The successful use of information communica-
tions technologies (ICT) for adult e-learning
often involves an in-depth planning process.
This pre-design process involves the collection
of relevant information from the environment,
pedagogical theories, the particular learning do-
DOI: 10.4018/978-1-61692-906-0.ch025
technologies, and the specific requirements of the
project. Instructional designers need to identify
the differences between expert and novice ap-
proaches in the domain field are also important,
along with strategies for closing this analytical
gap (Winterbottom & Blake, 2008). The research
findings are used strategically to design and de-
velop the electronic learning (e-learning) and the
related artifacts (both front- and back-end ones).
 Design Tools and Processes for Building E-Learning
Design tools may be methodologies—ways
to gather information and contents and to place
information in particular sequencing and order.
Design tools may be technologies harnessed for
the purpose of creating a digital learning object
or syllabus or curricular program.
Some of these tools are stand-alone. However,
often, the design tools and processes for building
e-learning are deeply integrated. For example,
digital knowledge structures, taxonomies, and
ontologies combine contents and relationships
in an integrated way whether these are spatially-
oriented contents, websites, digital repositories,
or wikis. Two-dimensional flowcharts integrate
both information and process. Prototypes are often
built as interactive Web structures that simulate
the navigation known as “wireframes” (which
“materialize” concepts into interactive Web-based
structures); these are often iterative and evolved
based on preliminary feedback from develop-
mental team members and even potential users
(who participate in experiential walkthroughs,
usability testing, and heuristic evaluations).
Schematics represent contents albeit without
images, although these may use simple color and
typography on a particular screen (Newman &
Landay, 2000). Design templates fully embody
the design concepts and navigational structures.
Brainstorming tools capture concepts and their
interrelationships. Design tools may help design-
ers capture information; conceptualize the data;
brainstorm and prioritize design features; create
digital contents, and deliver the online learning.
Instructional design is the development of
instruction based on specified learning goals and
objectives, created based on data and theoretical
principles and usability. Instructional design,
which lies between the ICT and adult e-learning,
requires plenty of improvisation within an en-
vironment of constraints or limitations. How an
e-learning experience may be designed depends
on common e-learning practices in the larger
environment and competitive courses or train-
ings. The laws and policies affecting intellectual
416
property, accessibility, learner privacy, and other
aspects will add more environmental constraints.
The applicable pedagogical theories related to
that type of e-learning will add another layer of
limitations. For example, the learning built for a
virtual lab will be informed by a different set of
pedagogical theories than the learning built for
a socially focused immersive virtual world. The
particular values, principles, and practices of a
learning domain inform the design. The particular
educational institution, company, non-profit orga-
nization, or government office or agency’s internal
culture also add constraints to an e-learning design.
Most specifically, the instructional design depends
on the following factors: the targeted learners
(their cultures, demographics, languages, learning
preferences, and prior learning and work); modern
technologies (authoring tools, learning / course
management systems, socio-technical spaces,
WWW and Internet technologies, and others),
and defined project requirements. A design is
defined by requirements and constraints. Figure
1: “Instructional Design in an Environment of
Constraints” offers a graphic of this environment
of constraints.
Digital design tools affect the range and types
of ideas that may be captured, and with recent
advances, annotations go well beyond the tex-
tual to audio, imagistic, and video types of idea
captures. These enablements go well beyond
pencil and paper designs, which are often limited
in terms of navigational structure, design look-
and-feel, interactivity, and complexity; however,
some designs may start as traditional drafts and
evolve into design captures using digital design
tools. Also, the emphasis on virtual collaborations
and virtual teaming may mean greater synergies
between individuals from cross-domain fields.
These efforts at assessing the situations and plan-
ning are to reduce risks, given the high costs of
multimedia development and the permanence of
sunk costs and endeavors. These are also to offer
evidence for strong designs that may be cutting-
Design Tools and Processes for Building E-Learning
Figure 1. Instructional Design in an Environment of Constraints
edge but also may be executed upon for actual
proof-of-concept.
Maintaining instructional design tools enable
solid learning development for e-learning spaces.
These also support speedy designs for deadline-
driven trainings developments and offer strategic
design and development efficiencies.
Drawing from various fields. Others have
observed that designing course delivery in the
online environment has some analogous processes
to those related to the development of software
systems (Ellis, Hafner, & Mitropoulos, 2004, p.
T1H-1). Those in the visual interaction design
community have been called to share their exper-
tise with educators and instructional designers to
enhance e-learning (Marshak, 2001). The growing
access to more simplified development authoring
tools and learning / course management systems
is a move to enhancing the DIY (do-it-yourself)-
aspects for subject matter experts. Game design
is “looted” for instructional design ideas because
of how games require players to “analyze, synthe-
size, and to use critical thinking skills” (Dickey,
2006, n.p.).
To examine design tools used in instructional
design for adult e-learning, developers need to
have an understanding of the general phases
of an instructional design. Figure 2: “Generic
Instructional Design Phases” shows a general
process that begins with information collection,
proceeds to design, then raw content capture and
development, then prototyping, then testing, and
full production and deployment to live use. This
process is a non-linear one, with plenty of moving
back-and-forth between phases; this also suggests
that e-learning is part of a larger life cycle, with a
need to update the contents and learning strategies,
along with the upgrading of technologies. That
flexibility is especially critical for courses with
rapidly evolving technologies as base learning
contents (Helps, 2007).
417
 Design Tools and Processes for Building E-Learning
Figure 2. Generic Instructional Design Phases
BACKGROUND
Articulating the research findings that inform
an instructional design makes elusive and tacit
ideas tangible and defined (Teo & Gay, 2007).
They enable the development team to engage
the concepts and to apply them in a logical and
purposive way, to build coherent learning. For
workplace considerations, these documented plans
offer evidentiary grounds for taking certain paths
and not others. Documenting the planning builds
a shared memory around the design, in case there
is a need for building further learning.
Design guidelines. Design guidelines under-
gird the instructional design; these include ethical
and aesthetic values, social mores, and principles.
What are the positive or negative effects of the
particular learning objects, modules, or courses
for society? What opportunities for creativity of
all learners is afforded by the learning (in a socio-
cultural perspective) (Cook, Teasley, & Ackerman,
2009)? What will be the various granularities of
the learning contents? What is an atomic-sized
418
resource (a single file, presentation or video)
(Simōes, Luis, & Horta, 2004)?
What cultural impacts (Lee, Evenson, & Bu-
chanan, 2009) will this e-learning have? What are
the standards for the integration of information into
the learning? How accurately is reality portrayed
from physical realities to culture to virtual humans
(Fishwick, Henderson, Fresh, Futterknecht, &
Hamilton, 2008)? How will the didactic design
assure quality in the e-learning (Jantke & Knauf,
2005)? How will the design adhere to applicable
laws? How will learning remediation (Krichen,
2005) be addressed to capture those novice out-
liers on the low-end of the learner bell curve?
How will expert needs be addressed for those at
the high-end of the learner bell curve? How will
“cognitive apprenticeship” be enhanced through
scaffolding interactions between experts and nov-
ices (Caspersen & Bennedsen, 2007, p. 114)? Is
truth seen as singular and defined or multi-faceted
and interpretive (Winterbottom & Blake, 2008)?
Pedagogical theories and modeling. Basic
pedagogical theories affecting adult learning in-
Design Tools and Processes for Building E-Learning
clude andragogy, which highlights adult learner
preferences for self-direction, practicality, internal
motivations, professional and social role focuses,
and decision-making (Merriam & Caffarella,
1999, pp. 272 – 273). Fundamental theories that
inform adult learning theory involve behaviorism,
social cognition, cognitivism, constructivism, and
humanism (Coverstone, 2003).
A raft of pedagogical theories influence a
pedagogical design based on the particulars of a
learning situation. A virtual learning environment
may be informed by ideas of situated cognition,
constructivism, and the zone of proximal devel-
opment. Simulations, educational games (Bayliss
& Schwartz, 2009), and immersive virtual world
spaces may be informed by “flow” theory for deep
learner engagement. Knowledge structures may
be informed by schemas and conceptual models.
Digital learning objects, defined as “structured,
standalone media” resources (Nugent, Soh, Samal,
Person, & Lang, 2005, p. 370)—may draw on
cognitive load theory; this approach suggests the
importance of learner focus on relevant learning
information without extraneous messages. This
also suggests the importance of clear organization,
contextual framing, concept mapping, applying
metaphors and analogies, rehearsing learning,
and offering “advance organizers” to help learn-
ers transition to new topics (Neris, Anacleto,
Mascarenhas, & Neto, 2005, p. 2).
Learning objects adhere to standards of “re-
usability, adaptability, flexibility, interactivity
and customizability” (Chudá, 2007, p. IV.15-3).
These “ilities” include accessibility from multiple
locations, interoperability between systems, du-
rability over technological evolution and changes
(“without costly redesign, reconfiguration, or
recoding”) (“Frequently asked questions about
SCORM,” nd).
Soft skills simulations draw on communica-
tions theories and constructivism (Gaffney, Dag-
ger, & Wade, 2008), as well as situated cognition.
Adaptive hypermedia may focus on learning styles
theories (De Assis, Danchak, & Polhemus, 2005).
Authentic problem-based learning and project-
based learning may focus on the transferability
of knowledge through active learning (Atkinson,
Atkinson, & Smith, 2001). Applied real-world
work should connect with what is done in indus-
try (Bachetti, 2005), beyond textbook learning.
Theories related to virtual teaming and computer
supported cooperative work may inform the use of
social media to encourage individualized cultural
experiences for museum visitors (both online
and physical) (Watkins, 2007) and “computer
graphics, virtual reality, 2D/3D animations, and
interactive technology in gallery exhibits, learning
games, films, and online presentations” interpre-
tive engagement with digital artifacts (Lin & Din,
2008, n.p.).
Various models that guide instructional designs
tend to be fairly general, like the ADDIE model
(which stands for “Analysis, Design, Develop-
ment, Implementation and Evaluation”). ADDIE
is often applied in the context of instructional
systems development, an atheoretical approach
which focuses on using relevant information to
identify learning gaps that may be addressed with
a training intervention. These approaches suggest
an understanding of human cognition, behaviors,
and affect, for the most effective learning. Dick
and Carey’s nine-stage model (1996) is based
on front-end analysis of instructional goals;
instructional analysis; the identification of entry
behaviors and learner characteristics; the writing
of performance objectives; the development of
“criterion-referenced test items”; the development
of an instructional strategy, then instructional
materials, and finally formative and summative
evaluations; Kemp’s instructional design plan
(1996) focuses on a cyclical process of planning,
design, development and assessment (as cited in
Wettasinghe & Koh, 2007, pp. 169 – 170). Other
theories point to different levels of learning from
shallow to deep, memorization to analysis and
problem-solving.
Other models describe how to build particular
learning objects, like the Cisco Systems Reusable
419
 Design Tools and Processes for Building E-Learning
Learning Object Model, or how to create both
learning objects and systems that use these objects
such as the SCORM model (Sharable Content
Object Reference Model). There are models for
different ways to label digital learning objects and
information with metadata for interoperability,
reusability and context-aware data management
(Candan, Cao, Qi, & Sapino, 2008).
Basic strategies for learning design involve the
definition of learning objectives and the alignment
of learning activities, assignments, and assess-
ments, around those objectives. Another tactic
involves strategic segmentation to break complex
systems into more elemental components. They
involve developmental structures, from basic to
more complex. Modular designs coalesce learning
information, activities, and assessments around
particular related topics or developmental phases.
Instructional design often involves learner sup-
ports at each juncture of learning; it also involves
a range of assessments to offer learners feedback
about their progress. “Reverse engineering” de-
scribes a process of beginning with the desired
end product and back-tracking each of the design
steps to see how to arrive at the end product.
Learning theories define the conditions of
learning, the effects of peers on learning, how
past and current learning meld, where truth
originates from, and how to effectively design
instruction. Designers of online learning need
to distill practical values from various applied
theories (Winterbottom & Blake, 2008).
Team members to an e-learning design and
build. The members of a development team creat-
ing online learning include subject matter experts,
instructors, instructional designers, content devel-
opers, and administrative and support staff. More
complex builds may involve computer scientists,
network administrators, database administrators,
and designers of simulations. Photographers and
graphic artists may be brought on for captur-
ing particular digital resources. Professional
testers—who write technology tests to assess
technological systems—may also be employed to
420
ensure the robustness of a socio-technical tool or
space. Oftentimes, team members play multiple
roles in supporting the e-learning build. These
team members use a toolbox of design tools and
processes to evolve a workable design to meet the
needs of the project, the project clients, and the
anticipated learners—as well as the larger society.
A delimitation. Some authoring tools may
involve built-in end-to-end automated creation
of online learning materials (Cuthbert, Ieong,
Kubinec, Wei, Tanis, & Schlossberg, 2005;
Valverde-Albacete, Cid-Sueiro, Diaz-Pérez,
Pedraza-Jiménez, Molina-Bulla, & Vázquez,
2003). Other systems involve automated capturing
of traditional lectures through automated camera
work (Heck, Wallick, & Gleicher, 2007). However,
this chapter does not address systems that pack-
age the e-learning contents. Rather, this focuses
more on the typical building-from-scratch for the
greatest cognitive flexibility.
DESIGN TOOLS AND PROCESSES
The design tools and processes used for building
e-learning cover a range of necessary functions.
The first three address administrative functions.
“Project management” supports the administrative
work related to an instructional design build. The
“information capture, documentation, analysis,
and visualization (for decision-making)” tools
enhance the research and analysis process by
enabling the capture of rich types of information
and their visualization for analysis. “Virtual col-
laboration” points to mediated methods for virtual
teams to share ideas and designs.
The latter elements address the actual design
of the ICT-enabled adult e-learning. The “learner
orientation” function helps situate the learning for
each learner. The “navigational structure” tools
help instructional designers conceptualize how
learners navigate through the learning object,
module, training, course, or site. The “aesthetic
design” tools help designers create a particular and
Design Tools and Processes for Building E-Learning

Table 1. Design tools and processes for building e-learning

Functions Design Tools and Processes

Project Management Stylebook
Information Capture, Documenta- Digital repositories, digital libraries, websites, online user surveys, for research; texts, audio, video,
tion, Analysis, and Visualization (for and diagramming for annotations; databases for documentation archival; database cross-referencing;
Decision-making) information visualizations; decision trees
Virtual Collaboration Web conferencing tools; remote desktop sharing; designed collaboration spaces (collaboratories,
editing sites); virtual worlds; micro-blogging; VOIP; message boards; electronic mailings lists;
email systems; learning / course management systems (L/CMSes); digital libraries; wikis and
blogs; and social networking sites
Learner Orientation User interface designs; site map; mini-maps in 3D spaces; progress bars in sequenced learning;
comprehensive syllabi; clear labeling; ubiquitous directions; a “start here” folder; introductory
videos; folder naming protocols; self-populating grades
Navigational Structure Authoring tools; wireframing and prototyping software; website design with usability interfaces;
navigational templates; site maps; flow charts; informational visualizations
Aesthetic Design Prototypes, storyboards, navigational templates, design templates
Learning Processes and Paths Flowcharts and storyboards, e-books, pacing strategies
Learning Artifacts Lectures, videos, slideshows; text transcripts, simulations, simple games, study guides, case studies
Learner Interactivity and Collaboration Anonymous peer review systems, shared video editing, web conferencing, VOIP, live chat,
online text messaging, immersive spaces, serious games;
L/CMS datamining, recorded interactions
Learner Assessments Mobile devices, digital cameras, authoring tools, digital video cameras, eportfolios, assessment
suites in L/CMSes
E-Learning Testing Student data; surveys and questionnaires; L/CMS data mining; alpha and beta tests; checklists

consistent look-and-feel for a particular training.
The “learning processes and paths” instruments
help in the conceptualization of the e-learning
path or e-learning trajectory for particular learn-
ers. “Learning artifacts” are the content-bearing
pieces in online learning that may be exchanged
or streamed. “Learner interactivity and collabora-
tion” describes the tools used to create occasions
for learner interactivity—whether continuous or
sporadic, structured or unstructured, informal or
formal, and for mediated collaboration—whether
dyadic, small-group, or large-group; whether for
short-term or continuing shared work, and whether
for cooperative or competitive scenarios. “Learner
assessments” refer to tool suites that aid in the
building of various types of informal to formal
assessments, self-assessments to standardized
ones. “E-learning testing” refers to the tools used
to assess the efficacy of the teaching and learning
in context. Table 1: “Design Tools and Processes
for Building E-Learning” summarizes these func-
tions and then highlights some of the design tools
and processes that support the particular functions.
The following sections address each of these
functions and elaborate more on the tools and
processes used within each general category. Many
of these instruments combine software and infor-
mation.
Project Management
In higher education, principal investigators (PIs)
on grants and team leaders often provide the project
management expertise that supports instructional
builds for adult learning. These leaders hire the
members of the team; assign work roles; sched-
ule the work; make critical decisions; supervise
the reportage of progress to the grant funders,
and oversee the budget. Theirs is critical work,
and stylebooks (also known as “statements of

421
 Design Tools and Processes for Building E-Learning
work” and “proposals of work”) are critical tools
for project management. This defines the work
through timelines, deadlines, and budget tables.
Stylebooks capture critical information before
a project begins, during the project, and well after
the project. They assimilate the definitions of the
curriculum in the grant or the formal document
approving the work; capture the teams’ decisions
about the work during the planning and develop-
ment phases, and offer clear standards and guide-
lines for future inheritors of the curriculum—for
application when they update contents or add
pre- or post- learning. Stylebooks must be con-
tinually kept up-to-date because it is the one main
overlapping document used by all members of the
team in their respective work, and if a hand-off
needs to be made at any time, the stylebook is the
“go-to” document.
What then are the contents of a generic style-
book? A stylebook has a project description that
includes parameters of the work. This includes
project goals and defined professional standards
(for accessibility, for technologies used and file
types, for metadata collection, for raw digital files
collection, and for the pedagogical standards).
A stylebook defines the “design principles”—in
terms of ethical values, professional standards,
aesthetics, and branding. Stylebooks tend to be
highly specific, defining software programs down
to the version and addressing color templating to
the exact Web colors by hexadecimal codes.
This document describes what the “deliver-
ables” of the project will be. Some of these may
be tangibles on portable storage devices. These
may be the delivery of contents to mobile devices
such as handheld computers, wearable computers,
netbooks, and other input / output devices. Vari-
ous types of middleware enhance the usability of
mobile devices, such as to enable task-specific
sequences through the highlighting of particular
aspects of an interface based on a trace of a user’s
interaction with a Web application (Nichols &
Lau, 2008).
422
A stylebook may even include flow charts to
describe the order of the work and to set clear
expectations for all team members. This also ad-
dresses decision junctures and how decisions will
be arrived at for the numerous decisions that need
to be made during a curricular build, including
conflicts between different sources (Candan, Cao,
Qi, & Sapino, 2008).
A stylebook often addresses legal issues—such
as the ownership of the curricular materials and
their uses; the standards for using materials without
contravening others’ intellectual property, patent,
or trademark rights; the handling of trade secrets,
and accessibility standards. A stylebook addresses
how the teams’ work will be documented, the
standards for the inclusion of research information
and content, and where the raw digital files (for
example, of photos, of video, of research) will
be kept. Information handling—including file
naming protocols; metadata collection, which is a
complex endeavor (Heath, McArthur, McClelland,
& Vetter, 2005); byline crediting—is also defined.
A stylebook includes personnel information
for the team, including organizational charts,
positions, and contact information. A stylebook
may include forms used for media releases, copy-
right releases, user testing of curricular contents,
and other forms used both within and outside the
organization.
This document may capture best practices.
For example, building course lectures based on
outlines or storyboards for video recording may
be advisable (Lorenzen & Sattar, 2008, p. 101),
to avoid having to re-capture a lecture. Special
directions on successfully capturing video with-
out common problems may be included (Adams,
Venkatesh, & Jain, 2005).
Digital stylebooks come in many forms. Some
are text files that are stand-alone documents. Oth-
ers are placed on a shared wiki in distributed files.
And still others are hosted on intranets. Many
stylebooks have privy information or processes
used within an organization, so stylebooks are
Design Tools and Processes for Building E-Learning
often kept confidential to the particular team.
Each project has a unique stylebook based on
the unique needs of that project. However, some
organizations use stylebook templates in order
to capture typical information necessary for a
project’s progress and successful completion.
Information Capture,
Documentation, Analysis, and
Visualization (for Decision-Making)
Team members must decide what information is
relevant to the curricular design. They may probe
various data repositories and digital libraries for
information. They may conduct online learner
surveys. They may review curricular materials
created by other learning content producers. The
team may consult with various subject matter
experts to understand the field more clearly. How
much weight each piece of information has will
depend on the stated design principles of the
group. When sufficient relevant information has
been collected, the design team may annotate their
contents and visualize the information collected
through diagrams that represent information
through imagery, labeling, and linkages that are
interpreted and reasoned-over in a cultural context
(Goncu, 2009, p. 50). Visualization tools may be
two-dimensional diagrams that convey informa-
tion structures or modular relationships or 2D or
3D maps of learning spaces. Visualizations have
become much more sophisticated and allow for
various data sets to be triangulated and cross-
analyzed. These allow desktop screens to contain
multiple information streams that may coalesce
for meaningful information. Data sets may be
depicted visually or layered on top of maps or
other visuals. Decision trees (which depict flows
of various options at different decision junctures)
may be used for methodical decision-making and
a weighing of options.
Virtual Collaboration
Various Web conferencing tools enable real-time
sharing of ideas through written text and audio
channels; shared visuals; shared annotations; we-
bcams, and even remote desktop sharing. These
mediated collaborations may be recorded and
archived for review. Designed spaces for particular
collaborations—around scientific endeavors (like
collaboratories), book writing, academic article re-
viewing—create efficiencies for the shared work.
Virtual worlds allow for real-time 3D collabora-
tions. Real-time micro-blogging enables shared
live events, like “flash mob” actions. VOIP (voice
over IP) offers real-time and often-free distance
calling. Many other tools support asynchronous
collaborations such as through message boards,
electronic mailing lists, and email systems. Some
learning / course management systems (L/CMSes)
have been harnessed for group collaborations.
Some digital libraries have added wikis and blogs
to enhance the collaboration potential around in-
formation. Social networking sites enable groups
to form around shared interests and activities.
Learner Orientation
Instructional designers have various tools around
which to build “learner orientation,” or to help
learners understand where they are in a particular
aspect of online learning. So as not to lose learn-
ers, site designers apply user interface designs to
make each screen navigable and clearly defined.
One researcher analogizes user-centered interface
design with “student-centered education” (Traver,
2007, p. 58).
A site map may indicate where a user is on
a site (particularly in the context of the other
informational contents and features); a mini-map
may give users in immersive environments a
sense of where they are in 2D space; a “progress
bar” may show a learner how far he or she is in
a particular learning sequence. The standards of
the Web are universal access and “global avail-
423
 Design Tools and Processes for Building E-Learning
ability” even for those who have limited skills
with computer applications (Fraternali, 2000, p.
227). One technology system allows for real-time
user interface designer collaboration with users
collocated in a room and connected through a
synchronous sketch and speech recognition sys-
tem that records the interactions for later referral
(Zenka & Slavik, 2004).
In e-learning delivered through learning /
course management systems (L/CMSes), compre-
hensive syllabi, clear labeling, ubiquitous direc-
tions, a “start here” folder, introductory videos,
and clear learning sequencing through folder
naming may create a sense of learner orientation.
Self-populating grades will also offer an indication
of what learners have successfully completed.
Different learners will have different needs
in an online learning space; for example, highly
anxious learners benefit from structured teaching
strategies (Salcedo, 2003). Teaching laboratory-
based research online to undergraduate learners
as part of a retention strategy (Dahlberg, Barnes,
Rorrer, Powell, & Cairco, 2008) involves different
strategies and supports than for graduate students.
Particularized information about the unique
learners in a situation will be critical to tailoring
learning to meet their unique needs.
Navigational Structure
How a learner navigates or moves through an e-
learning experience is a critical part of successful
learning. Most structures are not simply linear ones
that are step-by-step. And much online learning
is not completed in one sitting but may be spread
out over time. Some online learning will require
learners to move between different platforms and
online systems. Information design involves the
chunking of similar information. Others involve
informational architectures that may be changing
and updated at different intervals.
Designers of e-learning may use authoring
tools with built-in structuring of interactive sites
or simple simulations; these software programs
424
output “wireframes” that carry information about
navigation, semantics, and designs. Many website
design tools offer wizards and built-in aids for a
usability interface. Others offer multiple repre-
sentations of websites as creators move through
the design process
Designers also employ multiple tools during the
course of a project, including graphic design, web
development, presentation, and word processing
software, as well as pen and paper. Sketching on
paper is especially important during the design
exploration phase of a project, when designers
wish to explore many design possibilities quickly
without focusing on low-level details. Web site
design tools intended to support the early phases
of the design process should employ informal
interaction techniques, should support multiple
site representations, and should integrate well
with other applications that designers use regularly
(Newman & Landay, 2000, p. 263).
Those who want to build from more raw tools
may engage navigational templates, site maps, and
flow charts to design their learning, for functional
architectures. Some informational visualization
sites (like wikis) offer built-in structures to convey
information.
A navigational structure may also be more
free-form for discovery learning spaces and digital
repositories in a phenomena termed “searching to
learn,” “investigative browsing,” and “serendipi-
tous browsing” (Marchionini, 2006, p. 43). For
example, interfaces to digital video libraries may
involve video surrogates (selected keyframes)
that stand-in for videos and represent the video
contents (Wildemuth, Marchionini, Yang, Geisler,
Wilkens, Hughes, & Gruss, 2003). Searches of
the future will likely be more context-sensitive
based on various “situation parameters” (Dietze,
Gugliotta, & Domingue, 2008, p. 129). Digital
libraries, collections, repositories, and referato-
ries may be more navigable with clear labeling
of contents based on categories and clear search
tools and even recommender systems.
Design Tools and Processes for Building E-Learning
Figure 3. Sample Storyboard of an Instructional Design Lecture
Aesthetic Design
In the global e-learning marketplace for adults,
standing out from competitors is an important
aspect to survival. Branding refers to the creation
of a clear identity for the curriculum or program
of learning. This often involves appropriate logo
design, graphical look-and-feel, consistent ter-
minology, and trademarking of these elements.
Exploratory prototypes embody abstract or
elusive ideas related to information structure,
navigation, and aesthetics. These are used to
solve design challenges in fluid situations. The
research literature points to various types of pro-
totypes. A mock-up is a type of non-functioning
model or prototype; a “throwaway” follows the
specifications of a “executable system” but may
not generally be used in the production design;
a “quick and dirty” prototype is done quickly,
without prior analysis and design (or with very
little); a “design-driven” prototype is designed for
a “pre-finalization test-drive”; whilst an “evolu-
tionary” prototype is an actual working model that
may be developed into a final part of a software
system (Granlien, Pries-Heje, & Baskerville,
2009, p. 2). Prototyping may be participatory
(inclusive of potential users of the end product)
and democratic (Spinuzzi, 2002), with some risks
of being too participatory in a collaborative de-
sign process (Luke, Clement, Terada, Bortolussi,
Booth, Brooks, & Christ, 2004).
Preliminary contents for a curricular build
does require quality multimedia creation to set
high standards for the actual development—even
if placeholder imagery, text, and video are used.
Designers may use storyboards to show se-
quences of online learner experiences (“usage
scenarios”) (Binemann-Zdanowicz, Kaschek,
Schewe, & Thalheim, 2004) or interaction se-
quences (Newman & Landay, 2000). Storyboards
425
 Design Tools and Processes for Building E-Learning
Figure 4. A Flowchart Showing Steps to Handling Digital Imagery for an Instructional Design Project
may involve annotations. They may involve
specific directions for image captures and scripts.
People may use navigational templates to show
the clarity of movement from screen-to-screen.
They may employ design templates to explore
various looks-and-feels for the e-learning arti-
facts—like slideshows, videos, and other elements.
To offer a more intuitive sense of structure, the
developers may explore how sound integrates
with lead-ins and conclusions to videos. Videos
may be informed by “shot lists” that explain the
episodes, shot names, locations, items needed,
and actors involved (Anders, 2009).
Learning Processes and Paths
The focus on adaptivity and customization in on-
line learning suggests the importance of tailoring
learning to particular learner needs, which is a
426
critical instructor role. Some automated learning
and tutorial systems use artificial intelligence
to create unique touches and logical branching
depending on learners’ actions (Corbett & Trask,
2000) and profiles. The definition of a learning path
also suggests the importance of comfortable pac-
ing, while avoiding the risks of interruptions and
divided attention to learning (Horvitz & Apacible,
2003). Learning flowcharts and storyboards may
enhance the sense of learning processes and paths.
Figure 4, “A Flowchart Showing Steps to Han-
dling Digital Imagery for an Instructional Design
Project,” highlights the nuances of the steps within
the following main phases: imagery origins, the
intake process, information processing, storage,
image editing, and image integration.
Interactive electronic-books may also structure
a learning path even though these are highly
navigable and interactive (Davison, Murphy, &
Design Tools and Processes for Building E-Learning
Wong, 2005). The sequencing of contents in the
table of contents offers a recognizable sequential
or developmental structure.
A learning process or path may be understood
as directional; it may also be understood as pac-
ing and speed, such as the timing of a video for
procedural knowledge (Ertelt, Renkl, & Spada,
2006). Dynamic visualizations such as anima-
tions and videos may also benefit from proper
pacing (and designed interruptions for learning
reinforcement) to the learning.
Learning Artifacts
Models of digital learning artifacts are often used
to help a design team define the “information
structure” of the various objects. A typical course
may involve captured lectures, demonstrations,
and groupwork (through video, through web
conferencing software, and screen capturing
software); videos; slideshows; text transcripts;
simulations; simple games; study guides, and
case studies. Actual mock-ups of these various
learning objects or even full-fidelity examples of
these contents may be used to set standards for
the team and to define parameters.
Learner Interactivity
and Collaboration
More complex learning often involves learner
interactivity and inter-communications and col-
laborations around shared tasks: problem-solving,
project management, research, presentations, and
design. Some systems enhance the distributed
review process between learners, including the
gathering and distribution of anonymous reviews
(Reily, Finnerty, & Terveen, 2009). Other systems
enable interactive “watch-and-comment” video
editing (Cattelan, Teixeira, Goularte, & Pimentel,
2008).
Web conferencing enables free-form interac-
tivity and sharing of digital files in synchronous
time. VOIP allows free voice interactivity; live
chat and online text messaging offer live written-
language interactions. Immersive spaces and
serious games may allow teamwork on shared
goals and troubleshooting.
Tools used for the design of learner interactiv-
ity and collaboration involve L/CMS’s back-end
functionalities for informational visualizations
and datamining of learner interactivity. Recorded
interactions of synchronous and asynchronous
events (like message board interactions) may
enhance the design as well.
Learner Assessments
The elicitation of original work is one form of
learner assessment. The popularization of amateur-
created multimedia has inspired programs to en-
able mobile devices to archive audio and video at
the point-of-capture and to archive and edit these
from mobile devices (Wu, Teng, Chen, Lin, Chu,
& Hsu, 2007). Structured learning experiences
may be built around informal photographic cap-
tures (Hall, Jones, Hall, Richardson, & Hodgson,
2007). Feature-rich authoring tools may enhance
user creativity and self-expression.
On the high end, tools have improved even
more: “Film-making is still about telling stories
and immersing the consumer in a fictive world
– only the underlying technology to create this
fictive world has changed” (Lugmayr, Adrian,
Golebiowski, Jumisko-Pyykko, Ubis, Reyman,
Bruns, Kybartaite, Kauranen, & Matthes, 2008,
p. 26:2). Some on-campus media laboratories
are moving to high-def work stations for edit-
ing. E-portfolios store digital learning artifacts
and the various annotations by learners and their
instructors. More traditional assessments are
enabled by assessment suites in learning/course
management systems.
E-Learning Testing
The efficacy of a curriculum is often cursorily
measured through student completion and reten-
427
 Design Tools and Processes for Building E-Learning
Figure 5. A Checklist for Slideshow Quality
tion rates (Matsuo, Barolli, Xhafa, Koyama, &
Durresi, 2008). Learner satisfaction surveys with a
course and the teaching are another measure. The
variances in different types of e-learning require
different tools to evaluate the efficacy of that
learning. One e-learning application usability test
involves questionnaires (Zaharias, 2006). Alpha
and beta tests may be written to assess particular
functions and to identify unintended effects.
Checklists that address particular standards may
be employed to ensure tight clean-up of contents.
Figure 5: “A Slideshow Checklist” highlights this
quality control measure. This figure was extrapo-
lated from a live instructional design project.
Future Design Tools and Processes
Soon designing for the emotional aspect of learn-
ing in pervasive learning environments (Shen,
Wang, & Shen, 2009) may become a critical part
of considering whole learners; a holistic approach
428
considers full-person needs, beyond the cognitive
and skills focuses. Animated autonomous charac-
ters in virtual worlds and simulations may make
learning more immersive and engaging (Tomlin-
son, 2005). Instructional tools include virtual 3D
signing animation for learners, with avatars that
have “rudimentary facial expressions” (Saksiri,
Ferrell, & Ruenwongsa, 2006, p. 40).
More e-learning will go to “digital air” with
“the emergence of a reliable and affordable
mobile infrastructure” and portable devices (Le-
frere, 2009). In augmented reality spaces, radio
frequency identification (RFID) carried in mobile
devices (or wearable computing) may enhance the
human uses of shared physical spaces and allow
RFID-based events (Welbourne, Khoussainova,
Letchner, Li, Balazinska, Borriello, & Suciu,
2008). The learning in real space will enhance
learning that requires kinesthetic and spatial
intelligences. Some learning already integrates
Design Tools and Processes for Building E-Learning
motion-controlled sensors and activities that
involve structured movements (Walsh, 2009).
Different sensations may be brought into play
with the growing popularization of tactile / haptic
interfaces with computers. One innovation has
been tactile sculpting and modeling of digital
substances (Creighton & Ho-Stuart, 2004).
Value may be added to digital video contents,
such as through geo-tagging (the adding of location
metadata to media to be read by location-aware
devices), to allow “joint location-time space”
(Pongnumkul, Wang, & Cohen, 2008, p. 13).
Learners may stroll through a space with their
location-sensitive devices and call up related
imagery, audio, and video related to that locale.
Instructional design addresses issues of blend-
ed learning, with mixes of face-to-face and online
interactions. It considers multi-dimensionality
and multi-modal interactions with a variety of
e-learning technologies. This work must consider
the growing diversity of learners as well as their
disparate needs in terms of accessibility accom-
modations and interfaces.
Additional tools may be developed for high-
speed instructional design assessment, design, and
development work, given the myriad contexts in
which instructional design is used for e-learning
development.
CONCLUSION
Strategically used design tools and processes
enable the complex work of instructional design
for adult e-learning, with improved decision-
making, better-informed work, and workflow
efficiencies. As design technologies add more
functionalities—the work of managing projects;
capturing information, documenting, analysis,
and visualization (for evaluation and decision-
making); collaborating virtually; orientating learn-
ers; creating a navigational structure; enhancing
aesthetic design; engineering learning processes
and paths; creating digital learning artifacts; build-
ing learner interactivity and collaboration, creating
learner assessments, and alpha- and beta-testing
e-learning—will be done more efficiently and
effectively. Those who design online instruction
should continually seek new ways to exploit these
methodologies and technological instruments for
quality work. Homegrown and organic processes
within respective organizations may define what
is most suited for those different environments.
Thanks to Phyllis Epps for keeping me well
stocked with necessary fundamental technologies
for my work. I am grateful to the various principal
investigators and grant recipients for remembering
the information technology (IT) piece in design
and ensuring that we have state-of-the-art equip-
ment and software—as far as the budgets will
stretch. I appreciate all the leads on projects who
encouraged risk-taking and fair play. They know
who they are.
REFERENCES
Adams, B., Venkatesh, S., & Jain, R. (2005).
IMCE: Integrated media creation environment.
ACM Transactions on Multimedia Computing.
Communications and Applications, 1(3), 211–247.
Anders, B. (2009). Suzy’s study strategies sHOT
lIST. Unpublished.
Atkinson, T., Atkinson, R. H., & Smith, D. (2001).
GOALS (Graduate online active learning strate-
gies). Consortium for Computing in Small Col-
leges, JCSC, 17(3), 251–264.
Bachetti, E. (2005). But where’s the spec? – Learn-
ing through collaborative development & discov-
ery. In Proceedings of the 43rd ACM Southeast
conference: ACM Southeast regional conference
(pp. 380-381). Kennesaw, Georgia: ACM.
429
 Design Tools and Processes for Building E-Learning
Bayliss, J. D., & Schwartz, D. I. (2009). Instruc-
tional design as game design. In Proceedings of
the ICFDG 2009: International conference on
the foundations of digital games (pp. 10-17).
Orlando, FL: ACM.
Binemann-Zdanowicz, A., Kaschek, R., Schewe,
K-D., & Thalheim, B. (2004). Context-aware
Web information systems. Australian Computer
Society, 37-48.
Candan, K. S., Cao, H., Qi, Y., & Sapino, M. L.
(2008). System support for exploration and expert
feedback in resolving conflicts during integration
of metadata. The VLDB Journal, 17, 1407–1444.
doi:10.1007/s00778-008-0109-y
Caspersen, M. E., & Bennedsen, J. (2007). In-
structional design of a programming course—A
learning theoretic approach. In Proceedings of
the ICER ’07: International computing educa-
tion research workshop (pp. 111-122). Atlanta,
GA: ACM.
Cattelan, R. G., Teixeira, C., Goularte, R., & Pi-
mentel, M.D.G.C. (2008). Watch-and-comment
as a paradigm toward ubiquitous interactive
video editing. ACM Transactions on Multimedia
Computing, Communications and Applications,
4(4), 28:1 – 28:24.
Chudá, D. (2007). Visualization in education of
theoretical computer science. International Con-
ference on Computer Systems and Technologies
(pp. 15-1-15-6). ACM.
Cook, E. C., Teasley, S. D., & Ackerman, M. S.
(2009). Contribution, commercialization & audi-
ence: Understanding participation in an online
creative community. In Proceedings of the GROUP
’09 [Sanibel Island, FL: ACM.]. Group, 07, 41–50.
Corbett, A., & Trask, H. (2000). Instructional
interventions in computer-based tutoring: Dif-
ferential impact on learning time and accuracy.
CHI 2000. The Hague, Amsterdam. CHI Letters,
2(1), 97–104.
430
Coverstone, P. D. (2003). IT training assessment
and evaluation: A case study. In Proceedings of the
CITC4’03: Conference on information technology
education (pp. 206-215). Lafayette, IN: ACM.
Creighton, I., & Ho-Stuart, C. (2004). A sense of
touch in online sculpting (pp. 118–122). ACM.
Cuthbert, A., Leong, F., Kubinec, M., Wei, L.,
Tanis, D. O., & Schlossberg, D. (2005). Ad-
vanced technology for streamlining the creation
of eportfolio resources and dynamically-indexing
digital library assets: A case study from the digi-
tal chemistry project. In Proceedings of the CHI
2005: Conference on human factors in computing
systems (pp. 972-987). Portland, Oregon, USA.
Dahlberg, T., Barnes, T., Rorrer, A., Powell, E.,
& Cairco, L. (2008). Improving retention and
graduate recruitment through immersive research
experiences for undergraduates. In Proceedings
of the SIGCSE ’08: ACM special interest group
on computer science education (pp. 466-470).
Portland, OR: ACM.
Davison, G., Murphy, S., & Wong, R. (2005).
The use of ebooks and interactive multimedia as
alternative forms of technical documentation. In
Proceedings of the SIGDOC ’05: ACM special
interest group on design of communication (pp.
108-115). Coventry, UK: ACM.
De Assis, A. S. F. R., Danchak, M. M., & Polhe-
mus, L. (2005). Instructional design and interac-
tion style for educational adaptive hypermedia.
In Proceedings of the CLIHC ’05: Conference
on human-computer interaction (pp. 289-294).
Cuernavaca, México: ACM.
Dickey, M. D. (2006). “Ninja looting” for instruc-
tional design: The design challenges of creating a
game-based learning environment. In Proceedings
of the ACM SIGGRAPH 2006: Special interest
group on graphics and interactive technologies
(n.p.). Boston, MA, USA.
Design Tools and Processes for Building E-Learning
Dietze, S., Gugliotta, A., & Domingue, J. (2008).
Towards context-aware semantic Web service
discovery through conceptual situation spaces. In
Proceedings of the CSSSIA 2008: Context enabled
source and service selection, integration and
adaptation (pp. 129-132). Beijing, China: ACM.
Ellis, T. J., Hafner, W., & Mitropoulos, F. (2004).
Automating instructional design with eCAD. 34th
ASEE / IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference:
Savannah, Georgia, USA. T1H-1 to T1H-6.
Ertelt, A., Renkl, A., & Spada, H. (2006). Mak-
ing a difference—Exploiting the full potential
of instructionally design on-screen videos. In
Proceedings of the ICLS 2006: International
conference of the learning sciences (pp. 154-160).
Bloomington, IN: ACM.
Fishwick, P. A., Henderson, J., Fresh, E., Futter-
knecht, F., & Hamilton, B. D. (2008). Simulating
culture: An experiment using a multi-user virtual
environment. In Proceedings of the 2008 winter
simulation conference (pp. 786-794). Miami,
Florida, USA.
Fraternali, P. (2000). Tools and approaches for
developing data-intensive Web applications: A
survey. ACM Computing Surveys, 31(3), 227–263.
doi:10.1145/331499.331502
Frequently asked questions about SCORM. (n.d.).
Advanced distributed learning. Retrieved Sept. 15,
2009, from http://www.adlnet.gov/Documents/
SCORM%20FAQ.aspx
Gaffney, C., Dagger, D., & Wade, V. (2008). A
survey of soft skill simulation authoring tools. In
Proceedings of the HT ’08: Hypertext 2008 (pp.
181-185). Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, USA: ACM.
Goncu, C. (2009). Generation of accessible
diagrams by semantics preserving adaptation.
SIGACCESS Newsletter, 93, 49–74.
Granlien, M. S., Pries-Heje, J., & Baskerville,
R. (2009). Project management strategies for
prototyping breakdowns. In Proceedings of the
42nd HICSS: Hawaii international conference on
system sciences (pp. 1-10). Waikoloa, Big Island,
Hawaii: IEEE.
Hall, L., Jones, S., Hall, M., Richardson, J., &
Hodgson, J. (2007). Inspiring design: The use of
photo elicitation and lomography in gaining the
child’s perspective. In Proceedings of the HCI
2007: Human computer interaction (pp. 227-
236). ACM.
Heath, B. P., McArthur, D. J., McClelland, M., &
Vetter, R. J. (2005). Metadata lessons from the iLu-
mina digital library. Communications of the ACM,
48(7), 68–74. doi:10.1145/1070838.1070839
Heck, R., Wallick, M., & Gleicher, M. (2007).
Virtual videography. ACM Transactions in
Multimedia Computing. Communications and
Applications, 3(1), 1–28.
Helps, R. (2007). Dancing on quicksand grace-
fully: Instructional design for rapidly evolving
technology courses. In SIGITE (pp. 1-7). Destin,
FL: ACM.
Horvitz, E., & Apacible, J. (2003). Learning and
reasoning about interruption. In Proceedings of
the ICMI’03: International conference on multi-
modal interfaces (pp. 20-27). Vancouver, British
Columbia, Canada: ACM.
Jantke, K. P., & Knauf, R. (2005). Didactic de-
sign through storyboarding: Standard concepts
for standard tools. In Proceedings of the 4th
international symposium on information and
communication Technologies (pp. 20-25). Cape
Town, South Africa.
Krichen, J. P. (2005). Dynamically adjusting to
learner’s competencies and styles in an online tech-
nology course. In Proceedings of the SIGITE ’05:
Special interest group for information technology
education (pp. 149-154). Newark, NJ: ACM.
431
 Design Tools and Processes for Building E-Learning
Lee, K., Evenson, S., & Buchanan, R. (2009).
More than kimchi and cash: Designing for cultural
identity. In Proceedings of the CHI 2009: Special
interest group on computer human interaction (pp.
2663-2666). Boston, MA: ACM.
Lefrere, P. (2009). Activity-based scenarios for and
approaches to ubiquitous e-learning. Personal and
Ubiquitous Computing, 13, 219–227. doi:10.1007/
s00779-007-0188-6
Lin, J. Q.-P., & Din, H. W.-H. (2008). Using
animation and interactive virtual technology to
create interpretive materials for museum learn-
ing and promotion. In Proceedings of the ACM
SIGGRAPH ASIA 2008: Special interest group
on graphics and interactive technologies (n.p.).
Singapore: ACM.
Lorenzen, T., & Sattar, A. (2008). How to create an
online Internet course. Inroads –. SIGCSE Bulletin,
40(4), 100–102. doi:10.1145/1473195.1473231
Lugmayr, A., Adrian, H., Golebiowski, P., Ju-
misko-Pykko, S., Ubuis, F., Reymann, S., Bruns,
V., Kybartaite, A., Kauranen, J., & Matthes, D.
(2008). E= MC2 + 1: A fully digital, collaborative,
high-definition (HD) production from scene to
screen. ACM Computers in Entertainment, 6(2),
26:1-26:33.
Luke, R., Clement, A., Terada, R., Bortolussi, D.,
Booth, C., Brooks, D., & Christ, D. (2004). The
promise and perils of a participatory approach to
developing an open source community learning
network. In Proceedings of the participatory
design conference (pp. 11-19). Toronto, Canada:
ACM.
Marchak, F. M. (2001). Visual interactive instruc-
tional design. SIGCHI Bulletin, 10.
Marchionini, G. (2006). Exploratory search: From
finding to understanding. Communications of the
ACM, 49(4), 41–46. doi:10.1145/1121949.1121979
432
Matsuo, K., Barolli, L., Xhafa, F., Koyama, A.,
& Durresi, A. (2008). Implementation of new
functions for improving learners motivation in
a Web-based e-learning system. In Proceedings
of the iiWAS 2008: Information integration and
web-based applications services (pp. 359-366).
Linz, Austria: ACM.
Merriam, S. B., & Caffarella, R. S. (1999). Learn-
ing in adulthood: A comprehensive guide (2nd ed.).
San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers.
Neris, V. P. A., Anacleto, J. C., Mascarenhas, S., &
Neto, A. T. (2005). Hyper documents with quality
for distance learning: Cognitive strategies to help
teachers in the navigational project and content
organization. In Proceedings of the 11th Brazilian
symposium on multimedia and the web (pp. 1-7).
Pocos de Caldas, Minas Gerais, Brazil: ACM.
Newman, M. W., & Landay, J. A. (2000). Sitemaps,
storyboards, and specifications: A sketch of web
site design practice. In Proceedings of the DIS
’00: Designing interactive systems (pp. 263-274).
Brooklyn, NY: ACM.
Nichols, J., & Lau, T. (2008). Mobilization by
demonstration: Using traces to re-author existing
web sites. In [Maspalomas, Gran Canaria, Spain:
ACM.]. Proceedings of the IUT, 08, 149–158.
Nugent, G., Soh, L.-K., Samal, A., Person, S., &
Lang, J. (2005). Design, development, and valida-
tion of a learning object for CS1. In Proceedings
of the ITiCSE ’05: Integrating technology into
computer science education (p. 370). Monte de
Caparica, Portugal: ACM.
Pongnumkul, S., Wang, J., & Cohen, M. (2008).
Creating map-based storyboards for browsing
tour videos. In Proceedings of the UIST ’08: User
interface software and technology (pp. 13-22).
Monterey, California, USA: ACM.
Design Tools and Processes for Building E-Learning
Reily, K., Finnerty, P. L., & Terveen, L. (2009).
Two peers are better than one: Aggregating peer
reviews for computing assignments is surprisingly
accurate. In [Sanibel Island, Florida, USA: ACM.].
Proceedings of the GROUP, 09, 115–124.
Saksiri, B., Ferrell, W. G., & Ruenwongsa, P.
(2006). Virtual sign animated pedagogic agents
to support computer education for deaf learn-
ers. Accessibility and Computing, 86, 40–44.
doi:10.1145/1196148.1196158
Salcedo, M. (2003). Faculty and the 21 st
century student in USA higher education.
Inroads—. SIGCSE Bulletin, 35(2), 83–87.
doi:10.1145/782941.782987
Shen, L., Wang, M., & Shen, R. (2009). Affective
e-Learning: Using “emotional” data to improve
learning in pervasive learning environment.
Journal of Educational Technology & Society,
12(2), 176–189.
Simōes, D., Luis, R., & Horta, N. (2004). Enhanc-
ing the SCORM metadata model. WWW 2004:
World Wide Web Conference (pp. 238-239). New
York: ACM.
Spinuzzi, C. (2002). A Scandinavian challenge,
a US response: Methodological assumptions in
Scandinavian and US prototyping approaches. In
Proceedings of the SIGDOC ’02: Special interest
group on design of communication (pp. 208-215).
Toronto, Ontario, Canada: ACM.
Teo, C. B., & Gay, R. K. L. (2007). A knowledge-
driven model to personalize e-learning. Associa-
tion of Computing Machinery, 6(1), 1–15.
Tomlinson, B. (2005). From linear to interactive
animation: How autonomous characters change
the process and product of animating. ACM Com-
puters in Entertainment, 3(1), 1–20.
Traver, V. J. (2007). Can user-centered in-
terface design be applied to education? In-
roads. The SIGGCSE Bulletin, 39(2), 57–61.
doi:10.1145/1272848.1272885
Valverde-Albacete, F. J., Cid-Sueiro, J., Diaz-
Pérez, P., Pedraza-Jiménez, R., Molina-Bulla,
H., & Vázquez, A. (2003). InterMediActor: An
environment for instructional content design based
on competencies. In Proceedings of the SAC ’03:
Symposium on applied computing (pp. 575-579).
Melbourne, FL: ACM.
Walsh, G. (2009). Wii can do it: Using co-design
for creating an instructional game. [Boston, MA:
ACM.]. CHI, 2009, 4693–4698.
Watkins, J. (2007). Social media, participatory
design and cultural engagement. In Proceedings of
the OzCHI 2007: OZCHI (pp. 161-166). Adelaide,
Australia: ACM.
Welbourne, E., Khoussainova, N., Letchner, J.,
Li, Y., Balazinska, M., Borriello, G., & Suciu, D.
(2008). Cascadia: A system for specifying, detect-
ing, and managing RFID events. In Proceedings
of the MobiSys’08: Mobile systems, applications,
and services (pp. 281-294). Breckenridge, Colo-
rado: ACM.
Wettasinghe, C. M., & Koh, T. H. (2007). The
analysis, comparison, and redesign of curricu-
lum for special education using the principles
of axiomatic design. In Proceedings of the First
International Convention on Rehabilitation En-
gineering & Assistive Technology (pp. 169-173).
New York: ACM.
Wildemuth, B. M., Marchionini, G., Yang, M.,
Geisler, G., Wilkens, T., Hughes, A., & Gruss, R.
(2003). How fast is too fast? Evaluating fast for-
ward surrogates for digital video. IEEE, 221 – 230.
Winterbottom, C., & Blake, E. (2008). Construc-
tivism, virtual reality and tools to support design.
In DIS 2008 (pp. 230-239). Cape Town, South
Africa: ACM.
433
 Design Tools and Processes for Building E-Learning
Wu, C.-I., Teng, C.-M. J., Chen, Y.-C., Lin, T.-Y.,
Chu, H.-H., & Hsu, J. Y.-J. (2007). Point-of-cap-
ture archiving and editing of personal experiences
from a mobile device. Personal and Ubiquitous
Computing, 11, 235–249. doi:10.1007/s00779-
006-0082-7
Zaharias, P. (2006). A usability evaluation method
for e-learning: Focus on motivation to learn. In
Proceedings of the CHI 2006: “Interact, inform,
inspire,” conference on human factors in comput-
ing systems (pp. 1571-1576). Montréal, Québec,
Canada: ACM.
Zenka, R., & Slavik, P. (2004). Supporting UI
design by sketch and speech recognition. In Pro-
ceedings of the TAMODIA 2004: Task models and
diagrams for user interface design (pp. 83-90).
Prague, Czech Republic: ACM.
KEY TERMS AND DEFINITIONS
Design Principle: A guiding value which will
affect the choices made in an instructional design.
434
Design Template: A mock-up of the “look
and feel” of a particular learning object, website,
or learning tool.
Flowchart: A visual diagram, showing anno-
tated shapes with interconnected lines, that shows
a process or system.
Information Architecture: The integration
of information, interrelationships within that in-
formation, expressed in a navigational structure.
Pedagogy: The art and science of teaching
or instruction.
Prototype: The original design or pattern.
Screen Capture: A visual image of all the
contents on a computer screen.
Storyboard: A sequence of sketches showing
planned scenes or actions.
Stylebook: A “book” with the rules of design
(technological, aesthetic, pedagogical, and other
rules).
Template: A pattern that is used for design.
 435

Chapter 26
Participatory and Appreciative
Adult Learning and Reflection
in Virtual Environments:
Towards the Development of an
Appreciative Stewardship
Simona Marchi
University of Rome, Italy

Emma Ciceri
Postel, Italy

ABSTRACT
Information Communication Technology, largely thanks to the development of web 2.0 resources, has
encouraged the development of participatory learning processes beyond the logic of the individual learn-
ing/learners. Moreover, it has allowed the transition from a learning approach based on the development
of individual capacity of critical reflection on experiences to an appreciative approach of learning, based
on value creation, creativity, innovation, and based on the valorizationof the positive aspects of individual
and collective experiences. These aspects will be approached with regard to the contribution offered by
PAAR’s (participatory and appreciative action and reflection) theoretical and methodological perspec-
tives and to the most recent contributions coming from learning in virtual environments. Eventually, we
will suggest a facilitating model of learning partnership development in online environments.

INTRODUCTION ments we are referring to a specific segment of

Throughout a day’s time, an average adult person
logins and logouts of websites a number of times
which undoubtedly varies according to age, genre,
geographical area where he/she lives, revenues.
When we talk about learning in virtual environ-
DOI: 10.4018/978-1-61692-906-0.ch026
the population: on average, people who are young,
wealthy and living in most developed areas in
the world. Given that this relativates the follow-
ing topics into a specific population area, while
still keeping an overall interest, we must ponder
upon the customary action of getting into and out
of virtual environments: does anything happen
 Participatory and Appreciative Adult Learning and Reflection in Virtual Environments
in between these actions and is it by any chance
related to participation and learning? What pushes
professionals to take part in virtual environments?
Which features do virtual environments have for
producing relevant learning experiences?
There are four features linking either indi-
viduals and communities to virtual environments
which are: fun, need, sharing, learning. These
simple features give way to a complex system of
interactions where different actors play funda-
mental roles such as: individuals, communities,
technologies, expectation systems. The fact that
the system involves adult people, participating
to and interacting with other complex systems
at the same time, makes things get much more
complicated.
When we refer to learning in virtual environ-
ments, as we are doing in this chapter, we are
suggesting a very strong thesis: learning together
without being together physically (Wenger, White
& Smith, 2009). Learning online means learning
along with other people that sometimes we know
and sometimes we don’t. It could be through
synchronous or asynchronous course formats
but it also means using technology as a means
for learning. In this case, technology and virtual
environments become key actors in the learning
process.
There are some aspects to consider in the
learning process in virtual environments:
• Learning in virtual environments. How do
users learn browsing among different vir-
tual environments?
• Learning to participate. What does partici-
pation in virtual environments mean? What
are the relationships between participation
and learning in virtual environments?
• Learning together through the use of tech-
nologies. What kind of relationship is there
between technology and participants?
How does technology enable individuals
and communities and vice-versa?
436
In this chapter we will address these ques-
tions and make reference to participatory and
appreciative learning principles (Ghaye, 2008).
To accomplish this goal we will consider three
metaphors: the journey metaphor, the participa-
tion metaphor and the metaphor of community.
We will also identify features of learning together
and participating to virtual environments. Finally
we will consider a participatory and appreciative
approach to facilitating learning, action and reflec-
tion in virtual environments.
BACKGROUND
Learning in Virtual Environments:
Nomadism and parkour
The Journey Metaphor
The first element to consider is linked to the social
body pulverization and to what Maffesoli (1994)
refers to as values transmutation: nowadays there
are new subjects of a polimorphical societality
where reason ideals have been replaced by feel-
ings and emotions, while logics of identity has
been replaced by logics of affection. It is time
of networks, of small groups, of tribes: in this
way online virtual communities can be defined
as emotional communities, born and existing on
sharing images, styles, personal forms (Maffesoli,
2000). Also time is experienced in a different way,
socially and individually. The main value is in
sharing the experience. The same relational logics
has already started to gain the market, known and
used as characterizing itself by viral marketing,
that aims to generate and strengthen the feeling
of being a community among users-consumers
by means of products and strategies studied in
order to cluster a community and support its own
development, self-recognition, self-alimentation
(Cova, Giordano, & Pallera, 2008).
Michel de Certeau (2001) describes the city
as a concept generated by strategic interactions
Participatory and Appreciative Adult Learning and Reflection in Virtual Environments
among governments, corporations, and other in-
stitutions (through the production of maps the city
is therefore seen and regarded as a unique place).
A citizen, a tourist, simply a pedestrian moving
in the city moves, instead, in tactical ways, never
completely determined by institutional planning;
he may choose to cut short or wander aimlessly:
he consciously or unconsciously creates paths,
using and re-imagining places. According to de
Certeau (2001) everyday life acts like a “poaching”
process on a territory ”other than”, recombining
in new ways: images, rules and objects already
existing in culture.
In the web, even though the single user moves
using tactics and paths that are influenced by
general online navigation rules, they are never
simply given or motivated by rational inputs. It
is important in this case to point out an approach
for possible patterns in “the web place” able to
facilitate participation and relationship also among
these single users, or for those who do not enter
in a virtual community by choice.
Parcour, subsequently transformed into par-
kour, is a movement that was born as a form of
military training and then spread on the outskirts of
French cities in the ‘80s as “l’art du déplacement”
and developed as a sport, discipline, performance
in the world, mainly through web video posting.
The goal of parkour is action, agile and quick
movement, beyond the potential barriers that the
city imposes. Today, in fact, parkour, despite the
forms of marketing and spectacularization it has
undergone over the years, appears as a movement
of reappropriation of places, cities, through a posi-
tive and creative use of potential barriers, fences,
walls that the city enforces, and of one’s own
body constantly challenging the force of gravity
in relation to distances, heights, goals seemingly
impossible. We believe that parkour, or more
generally the journey, is a good metaphor of the
“l’art du déplacement” and browsing the web.
The aim of parkour is to move, without specific
tools or strategies, in the most efficient way using
only “natural environmental elements” present on
the spot. In the same way, for parkour users, it is
possible to conceive learning in the social web as
an appropriation of spaces activity, of inventing
rules, of co-building new activity systems, of
boundary crossing, of continuous and spontaneous
learning with experts, peers and with technology.
The journey metaphor is related to a specific kind
of learning and acting in virtual environment,
based on sensemaking processes driven by feel-
ing, choosing and acting between communities
and technologies.
Learning to Participate in Web
2.0: The Participation Metaphor
Amin and Roberts (2006) proposed a distinc-
tion between communities aiming at learning
development and communities where learning
“happens.” Keeping in mind the two typologies
are on a continuum, the first type of community is
also known as reflective or epistemic community.
At the same time, though, one can’t say web 2.0
resources help to generate environments where
learning simply “happens”. The new idea of so-
ciality these resources embed provides: support
for conversational interaction; support for social
feedback; support for social network and relation-
ships among people (Boyd, 2007).
Web 2.0 resources such as blogs, social network
software, wikis, social bookmarking and media
sharing, put a single user or a group in the condi-
tions to start a process of choice and co-building of
an architecture of participation (O’Reilly, 2004).
The strategies of participation describe the nature
of systems that are designed for user contribution,
based on modalities of interaction, communica-
tion, generation and sharing of digital artifacts
among groups and individuals. Such architectures
developed in a spontaneous, free, emotional way.
Lave and Wenger (1991) discuss learning as
participation in a social world describing how
people learn better in social settings and through
social interaction. Brown and Duguid (2002) sug-
gested that situated learning is “knowing how to be
437
 Participatory and Appreciative Adult Learning and Reflection in Virtual Environments
in practice”, rather than “knowing about practice”
(p. 138), and it concerns processes of identity
building for participants: for newcomers through
participation to the practice of the community. Fox
(2000) illustrated the activity of learning how to
be in practice in virtual environments using the
concept of networked learning that underlines the
relationship between participation, learning and
identity co-construction: “(networked learning)
has the capability to facilitate and enable a new
form of imagined community” (p. 108).
As McLoughhlin & Lee (2007) stated, partici-
pating in web 2.0 multiplies learning forms and
ways. They describe pedagogical P’s in web 2.0,
that are: personalization, participation and pro-
ductivity. Personalization emphasizes the power
of choice each single user has (learner choice),
the power of action each single user has (learner
agency), personalization strictu senso (customize)
and self-regulating and management mechanisms.
Productivity underlines the generative aspects
(generativity) inside web 2.0 participating and
sharing logics, the development and expression of
creativity and innovation (creativity and innova-
tion), co-generation of knowledge (contribution to
knowledge) and putting at the center the single user
in producing contents (learner-created content).
According to Surowiecki (2008), participation is
made of four C’s: communication, collaboration,
connectivity and community.
Considering the three P’s and the four C’s,
learning to participate in web 2.0 refers mainly to
two concepts: affordance in learning (Anderson
& Elloumi, 2004; Gibson, 1977;) and expansive
learning (Engestrom, 1987). The first can be
translated into “invitation” to action, an invita-
tion neither belonging to the object itself, nor to
its user, but arising from the relationship between
them. It is a “distributed” property. In web 2.0
affordance can be identified in the interactions
and multiple possibilities to communicate, share,
interact, using resources, creating virtual public
and private environments.
438
Expansive learning is related to the concept
of system affordance and refers to processes ac-
tivated by subjects in situations that appear to be
highly contradictory, or new and unknown. These
processes concern, in particular, the individual
and collective activity of distancing oneself from
a specific action setting in order to build a bigger
picture with a view to expanding the setting itself,
and in order to build a broader range of criteria,
a wider object of activity as well. In this, partici-
pants can free themselves from the limits of the
setting in which they are acting and in which new
criteria for choice and action can be constructed.
This is a matter of learning something that is not
yet there, in a place where the subject is learning
while building a new identity.
Learning in web 2.0 is primarily learning to
participate, that is, learning how to be in practice
in specific virtual environments with other users,
through: communication, collaboration, connec-
tion and practices of community. This means mak-
ing the conceptual shift from user to participant.
Learning Together through
the Use of Technologies: The
Community Metaphor
Wenger, White and Smith (2009) identified com-
munity of practice as a community where learning
is central. By virtual environments we mean online
contexts of sharing practices. They can be either
institutional and well defined in their localization
and borders like Virtual Communities of Practice
(VCoPs) or distributed all over the net on the
basis of joint resources utilization. This leads
us to consider technology as a social practice
(Suchman, Blomberg, Orr and Trigg, 1999) and
emphasizes co-definition, co-projecting, simulta-
neous co-building of practice of community and
virtual environments “a system development is not
the creation of discrete, intrinsically meaningful
objects, but the cultural production of new forms
of practice” (p. 394).
Participatory and Appreciative Adult Learning and Reflection in Virtual Environments
Things are not simple. To thoroughly under-
stand the meaning of the challenge, we should take
into account two types of starting cases:
• A case in which a community of practice,
which already exists offline (in real work
contexts and not in online settings), de-
cides to set up a virtual environment in or-
der to expand its possibilities to share and
learn to improve professional practices.
This helps us see technology through the
lens of community.
• A case in which a virtual environment en-
ables one or more communities of practice.
This helps us see community through the
lens of technology.
In the first case we need to make a distinc-
tion between a team and a community of prac-
tice. Sticking to the definition of community
of practice we have given here, teams can’t be
considered as communities of practice: the core
aspect intertwining people belonging to a team is
not learning, but goals achievement, tasks shared
within an organization, established rules and
roles. In communities of practice learning is the
core aspect, participants are partners in learning
and “learning together depends on the quality
of relationships of trust and mutual engagement
that members develop with each other” (Wenger,
White & Smith, 2009, p. 8).
This first case requires that the community al-
ready exists (it must not be a task force or a team)
or, if necessary, it requires the shift from team
or task force to community; secondly it needs to
create a virtual environment taking into account
the conditions to generate sharing, trust, mutual
engagement, learning partnership. What are these
conditions? Seeing virtual environments through
the lens of a community of practice leads us to
consider some fundamental principles of participa-
tory and appreciative approaches (Ghaye, 2008;
Ghaye, Melander-Wikman, Kisare, Chambers,
Bergmark, Kostenius, & Lillyman, 2008).
In the second case there is a situation where
online resources and environments already exist,
they are shared by several participants who, over
time, can build communities of practice, because
either they establish learning partnership relation-
ships. Technology acts in a selective manner,
therefore, depending on the way tools and virtual
environments have been thought and planned, on
the kind of relationships they endorse and limit.
At the same time participation in virtual environ-
ments allows users to personalize, to transform or
to create ex-novo environments and it allows to
identify, to co-define, to co-construct communi-
ties: “it allows communities to emerge in public,
opening their boundaries limitlessly, but it also
makes it easy to set up private spaces that are
open only to members. It affords many ways to
limit access, expressing intimacy or privilege, or it
can greatly enlarge a group’s periphery” (Wenger,
White & Smith, 2009, p. 11).
Seeing a community through the lens of a virtu-
al environment allows us to resort to contemporary
developments in practice-based studies literature
(Barry & Hansen 2008; Gherardi, 2000; Suchman,
2002) and to activity theory (Engestrom, 1987).
Seeing virtual environments through the
lens of community of practice.Sfard (1998)
identifies two learning metaphors: the acquisition
metaphor and the participation metaphor. The
first one mainly refers to a process of acquiring
information and the second one considers learn-
ing as a participation process to various cultural
practices and sharing learning activities. The
metaphor of learning as a participation process
is particularly suitable for virtual environments
configured through social software, developed
to support interactions within a group (Shirky,
2003). It means analyzing which features do
practice communities and virtual environments
already have or may have to keep participation
and learning process as the core aspect.
However, it still has to be understood what
participation means, which are its features, prac-
tically. Participants in the learning process can
439
 Participatory and Appreciative Adult Learning and Reflection in Virtual Environments
be motivated by one or another logic or by both.
The two metaphors underline the importance of
interaction between learner and technologies,
among the learners themselves through one or
more technologies. It means that virtual learn-
ing environments should be able to sustain and
support both processes. A community is an ideal
learning structure thanks to a various number of
elements: “a shared perspective on a domain, trust,
a communal identity, long-standing relationship,
an established practice” (Wenger, McDermott &
Snyder, 2002, p. 41). If we consider virtual envi-
ronments by this perspective we will find out that
very few of them are co-generated, accepted by a
community of practice. At least one, if not all, of
these elements are put to test in virtual environ-
ments. But this is also the strength of web 2.0. It
does not mean that most of virtual environments
are not learning places. Rather the opposite is
true. It simply means they are not communities
of practice.
Seeing community of practice through the
lens of technology. According to structurationist
approaches (Giddens, 1984) technology contains
structures configured by design engineers at the
moment of their creation; users take possession and
apply them when starting interacting with technol-
ogy. On the basis of literary reviews concerning
the subject of Virtual Communities of Practice
(VcoP) Dubé, Bourhis and Jacob (2003) have
built a typology considering 21 structural features
organized in 4 main dimensions: demographics;
organizational context; membership character-
istics; technological environment. Within each
dimension each one of the 21 features can vary
within a continuum delimited by two poles. This
means that to any variation of these 21 feature
corresponds a variation of VCoP. The outcome
of this study affirms that what holds together an
online CoP is not the choice of technological in-
struments, that is, the inner features of V itself, but
it is the new idea of sociality that CoP interacting
with V succeeds in co-generating and supporting.
440
Processes facilitating participation, coordi-
nation, leadership come to play a fundamental
role within virtual environments. A dialogical
coordination founded on collective sensemak-
ing processes, reflection on action and in action,
discussion/conversation, boundary crossing and
breaking protocols seems to be more efficient
than a skills coordination (Faraji & Xiao, 2006)
founded on protocols, community structuring and
predefined ways of knowledge sharing.
As we mentioned above, technology can be
considered as a social practice. It means looking at
technology as technologies-in-practice, that is, as
“sets of rules and resources that are (re)constitued
in people’s ongoing interaction with technolo-
gies” (Orlikowsky, 2000, p. 407). According to
Orlikowsky technologies include material and
symbolic properties, and they are structures of use
emerging through practices. Therefore, technol-
ogy value and sense emerge through a practice
and through interactions. With reference to this
Dron (2007) wrote: “social software is… (where)
control and structure can arise through the process
of communication, not as result of design, but as
an emergent feature of group interaction” (p. 233).
To look at community of practice through the
lens of technology therefore means to focus on
the word “practice”. It is a strong epistemological
option already addressed in practice-based stud-
ies. In particular Gherardi (2008b) in the article
“From community of practices to practices of a
community: brief history of a travelling concept”
emphasizes how online and offline collaborative
forms have put to test the concept itself of com-
munities of practice (CoP) and suggests shifting
from communities of practices to the concept of
practices of communities (PoC) where the main
reflection remains anchored to practice, and
therefore, to coordination and interaction forms.
According to this viewpoint the common aspect
between technology and community is the concept
of practice. In this case technology and humans
are not separated but both are actors, linked in a
symmetrical relationship based on practice. This
Participatory and Appreciative Adult Learning and Reflection in Virtual Environments
implies considering practice as “an ecology of
interactions structured by a pragmatic and epis-
temic mediation between heterogeneous materials,
such as human and non human, knowledge, and
whatever else situated in the context” (Gherardi,
2008a, p. 30).
FACILITATING PARTICIPATORY
AND APPRECIATIVE LEARNING
AND REFLECTION IN
VIRTUAL ENVIRONMENTS
Towards an Architecture
of the Heterogeneous
In a virtual community the activities setting must
follow patterns of transparency and coherence.
Often complex communities do not fill a single
virtual “space”, but are disseminated in several
places (forum, social network, public areas, in-
tranet), each of them bearing peculiar functions,
characteristics (and technical features), limits and
potentials well defined. It means we need to take
into consideration the three metaphors of com-
munity, participation and journey.
Therefore it is important for each setting to
have a clear characterization of these factors so
users know what to expect as they enter them.
Facilitating the use/familiarization of a virtual
environment can allow and improve users’ em-
powerment and ensure ethical, transparent and
horizontal communication and story-telling. This
requires two practical and conceptual shifts: from
“user” to “participant” and from “virtual environ-
ments” conceived as online technological settings
to an “architecture of participation” conceived as
participants’ interaction and practices.
These two shifts are driven and limited by the
existence of some key aspects:
• Participation. The participatory aspect
(Jacobs, 2006) of learning together online
means not only individual participation but
also stating conditions for a more open in-
clusion of different ways of knowing, un-
derstanding, seeing one’s own experiences
and those of others. It means considering
differences as a good resource for learning.
• Ethical form of inquiry and sharing.
Developing a dialog with the situations
valorizes and makes explicit perspectives
from which knowledge and learning are
created. Developing and ethical form of in-
quiry and sharing is a way to democratize
learning contexts thorough peer-relation-
ships, giving and making voice to different
perspectives (Ghaye, 2008).
• Safe environments (Schön, 1983). It is not
necessary for virtual environments to re-
main private, closed and protected to be
safe. Being safe is linked to the quality of
interaction and relationships that come into
being. A safe environment is characterized
by positive interactions, not based on crit-
ics or judgment, but mainly based on ap-
preciative intelligence (Thatchenkery &
Metzker 2006), “in the sense that it seeks
to build and sustain positive and enabling
relationships between all those involved”
(Ghaye, 2008, p.11).
• Reflection. It is based on reflection on ac-
tion, in action and on significant experienc-
es from all those involved (Schön, 1983). In
this sense the reflective conversation with
a situation or with a significant experiences
involves knowledge production from epis-
temic subjects. In online learning practices
the path of these processes of involvement
and collective production of knowledge
can be reconstructed through a synchro-
nous reading of the object-comment re-
lationships and through an asynchronous
reading of the concepts that have emerged
and are incorporated in the system. Thus,
resource configuration also influences the
perception of one’s individuality as well
as a change of network structures and the
441
 Participatory and Appreciative Adult Learning and Reflection in Virtual Environments
way of communicating and relating with
the outside world.
• Concerted and sustainable engagement.
It is based on a concerted engagement in
sustainable, improvement-type practice
that is conscious, systematic, rigorous and
collective (Ghaye, Melander-Wikman,
Kisare, Chambers, Bergmark, Kostenius,
& Lillyman, 2008)
They are not structural features as they refer
to types of relationships and action.
The above-mentioned features are part of
approaches linked to participatory and action
research and the use of appreciative intelligence
(Ghaye, 2008). Participatory and appreciative ac-
tion and reflection (PAAR) is an emergent form
of reflective learning which involves a change
in mindset away from deficit-based discourses,
towards more strengths-based conversations
(Ghaye, 2008). To ignite this change, we need to
use the power of the appreciative question to build
better futures from aspects of the positive present
(Thatchenkery & Metzker, 2006). Questions of this
kind are aligned with authentic participation, an
appreciation of individual and collective gifts and
talents, an understanding of the complementary
way creative and critical thinking interact and the
need for moral courage and ethical behaviours.
PAAR requires those involved to develop their
appreciative ‘gaze’, their ability to re-frame
current realities, create an ethical space where
collective wisdom can be developed and which
enables individuals and agencies to demonstrate
achievement and move forward with conviction.
In participatory approach using appreciative
intelligent is crucial because it enables to go
beyond a problem-oriented view of the world.
Moving beyond this view means setting par-
ticipants capabilities free to develop innovative
ideas and theories, to imagine new scenery, in-
creasing participant commitment and generating
strengths-based dialogues required for sustainable
improvement. Appreciative inquiry (Cooperrider
442
& Whitney, 2005) uses this appreciative dimension
for the purpose of overcoming limitations given
by approaches only based on critical reflection
oriented to problem solving. Participatory and
Appreciative Action and Reflection (PAAR) is
action-oriented, co-operative research where
participants generate really useful knowledge that
helps them understand the root causes of their suc-
cess and how to build and sustain a better future
from this (Ghaye, 2008).
PAAR can be useful to understand the com-
plexity of the relationship between community
of practice and virtual environments and to un-
derstand under which conditions they can meet
and co-generate in a virtual way. This is more
important if we consider that “communities of
practice are not defined by place or personal
characteristics, but by people’s potential to learn
together” (Wenger, White & Smith, 2009, p. 11).
The recognition of expertise and of the mo-
tivation of participants is the starting point for
developing action learning methodologies and
patterns in online settings.
In the preparatory phase some key questions
must be shared in order to define an initial archi-
tecture based on the expertise of participants, on
their previous participation in forums, blogs and
communities, on their familiarity with browsing
the online environments (internet and intranet)
and on their related capacity to manage different
formats/documents.
Some aspects as: simplicity, users inclusion,
good targeting, modifying in progress, short
number of clicks, high number of links to other
virtual environments, are key features to enact
participation in virtual environments.
In order to avoid every possible exclusion due
to the digital divide and, at the same time, in order
to valorize individual expertise it’s important to
share, since the beginning, some key principles
of participation in virtual environments and to
keep an open dialogue between developers and
planners, facilitators and participants. In this case
co-constructing “architecture of participation”
Participatory and Appreciative Adult Learning and Reflection in Virtual Environments
Figure 1. Fruition and production processes in
virtual environments
is conceived as a continuous work in progress,
constantly monitored and liable for changes and
improvements according to the evolving needs
of community.
Rethinking Relationship between
Fruition and Production
Content’s fruition and production is based on two
different steps, during which a facilitator’s role
becomes fundamental. The first step is fruition,
or foraging (look, search and skim), at a first
stage it might even be superficial, that must be
guided and facilitated and that allows the user
to gain consciousness about his own role and to
decide how to relate inside a community. This
explorative stage becomes reflective (user gains
consciousness of being, he makes a real log-in
into the community) and bases are cast for the
following steps of co-building. He is not oriented
towards a specific material production, but eased
into gaining self consciousness of his own needs.
A second step is that of real individual and
innovative contribution (sensemaking, sharing,
distribution), for which the user decides to take
action regarding the gathered information and
selected material, reworking and distributing to
himself (for future reference), to proximate others
(as feedback, as shared ideas), to public others (as
knowledge exchange).
More traditional approaches to fruition and
production are based on oriented production for
targeted users and are based on co-promotion,
forwarding of content already existing.
Participative and appreciative (PAAR) ap-
proach to fruition is based on a reflective process
of co-construction, concerning the actions and
relationships participants can shape in virtual
environment.
In the same way, PAAR is based on innovative
processes of co-production of contents, along with
ways of being present and with structural features
of the same virtual environments.
Managing Participation in
Virtual Environments
Considering users’ point of view taking part to
communities, participation may be analyzed on
a double level:
1) behavioural level, that is, on one side fre-
quency, occasions and modalities of partici-
pating, on the other side choosing criteria of
users;
2) motivational level, that is the personal level
of involvement, motivation dynamics that
lead to decisions to be there, to listen to, to
give, to take, and also the meanings the fact
of being there assume for each one.
Such levels are substantial as stated by Turkle
(1996) the seemingly weakness of virtual com-
munities, contrasting strongly structured real
societies, allows in fact to establish community
ties not on the basis of power, but on free choices
driven by interests’ affinity. In this perspective,
such a weakness becomes a positive value.
It is therefore possible to figure out four
macro typologies of participation: continuous
involvement, periodical involvement, occasional
involvement and active involvement (Figure 2),
that help find the main forms of participation,
trying to answer two important questions: what
443
 Participatory and Appreciative Adult Learning and Reflection in Virtual Environments
Figure 2. Forms of participation in virtual environments
drives individuals to participate to virtual com-
munities and how can these be organized in order
to facilitate and strengthen active and positive
participation? These areas represent four forms
of participation emerging from the intersection
of two axes: the axis of choice (institutional or
individual) and the axis of rationality (economic,
emotional). The four typologies represent: con-
tinuous involvement, based on rational participa-
tion related to a value or to a personal conscious
choice; periodical involvement, based on rational
participation (costs-benefits analysis) related to
an institutional objective; periodical involvement,
based on emotional participation related to an
institutional objective; active involvement, based
on emotional participation related to a value or to
a personal and conscious choice.
Every choice and every approach imply a dif-
ferent way of “being there” in virtual relations
and with different expectations. Moving along
the choice axis, towards the personal and conscious
choice involvement becomes either active in the
emotional and personal approach, and continuative
in the economic one. This semi-axis of choice is
444
founded on a complex system of expectations
based on different types of feedbacks.
The closer we get to the semi-axis of institu-
tional type of choice, driven by external demands
other than individual motivations, the lesser emo-
tive and continuative the involvement becomes.
Participation is aimed at achieving certain goals.
This pattern does not allow classification of
participation but it does allow mapping forms of
participation. All participants in fact can place
themselves in different areas of the map, and
can express different forms of being present and
different expectations systems.
To date, many VCoPs are considered as static
and vertical structures (i.e. from base to vertex:
access, motivation, online socialization, informa-
tion living and receiving, knowledge construction,
development), therefore they do not refer com-
pletely to emotional and motivational dynamics,
typical of online participation and learning.
Web 2.0 social network is constantly moving
in the same way micro-groups and communities
manage and develop often unattended processes
on different levels, not always matching pre-
structured schemes.
Participatory and Appreciative Adult Learning and Reflection in Virtual Environments
Facilitating the Development of
Appreciative and Reflective Learning
Partnership in Virtual Environments
The evolution of a community of practice is reli-
ant upon the effective communication between
members: web 2.0, as offline with face-to-face
meetings, can function as a medium for managing
relationships as well as a facilitator for interaction
and communication. Communication, therefore,
is fundamental in the development of trust. And,
along with trust, communication allows the CoP
to grow, change and achieve its objectives.
Social networks characterizing web 2.0 merge
three main elements: cognitive, coordination and
cooperation (Surowiecki, 2008). A cognitive one
is about finding an answer to complex questions;
coordination is about acting according to the oth-
ers’ behaviour; cooperation is about settling with
others’ action.
The term “crowdsourcing” defines the process
of using interconnected groups to answer col-
lectively to complex questions needing an expert
opinion. About the crowdsourcing process De
Rosnay (2008) says: “First stage, search engines:
‘I know’. Second stage, collaborative intelligence:
‘We know together’. Third stage, crowdsourcing:
‘We also know what others know’” (Surowiecki,
2008, p. 5).
The difference with individual information
searching is clear: personal interests become
collective advantages (and therefore also bearing
economic value): an individual, simple action as it
can be linking a website we like, or publishing a
comment on a book, or answering to a blog, when
it is multiplied and more and more frequently co-
generated, becomes useful for millions of people:
“community is not based on common essence,
but on being-in-common, that is an extension of
the offering and the retreat logic. Communicate
means be in common or co-appear in the systems
of discourse” (Nancy, 2000, p. 161).
Facilitating learning in virtual environments
becomes fundamental. Depending on the online
environment it is operating in, the facilitation
activity must assume different roles and commu-
nication forms, constantly creating and recreating
supporting fences and process.
The expression learning facilitation originally
comes from Rogers (1973). As Rogers indicated, if
it is true that each individual tends to accomplish
his own possibility to make significant experi-
ences with a personal involvement concerning
both affective and cognitive dimensions, the task
of a reflective and appreciative facilitator will not
be “to educate” but rather to improve significant
interactions and to test “the climate” of group
experiences, helping to clarify goals and to select
adequate resources to achieve them.
Wenger, White, and Smith (2009) identify a
form of leadership coming from the relationships
between new technologies and communities which
is based on stewarding technology for communi-
ties. Its task is to help communities build and live
in digital habitats from the technological choices’
point of view and supporting their use in commu-
nity of practices. In doing this stewards take into
account what happens spontaneously, and what
happens deriving from a plan.
We believe facilitating learning in virtual en-
vironment, which puts together different subjects
through different technological resources, requires
an appreciative stewardship. This concept allows
facing the concept of technology stewardship, that
of leader as steward (Senge 1998), and that of ap-
preciative reflection (Ghaye, 2008). Appreciative
stewardship underlines a further aspect which is
the shift from participation as a learning activity
to participation as developing positive partnership
in learning.
For a facilitator it means being able to play
different roles (figure 3), but most of all being
able to support the development of positive part-
nerships in learning.
The ways appreciative stewardship can be
expressed in virtual environments are described
in the facilitation model we called PAAR online
445
 Participatory and Appreciative Adult Learning and Reflection in Virtual Environments
Figure 3. Virtual environments and facilitator’s roles
(Participatory and, Appreciative Action and Re-
flection within online virtual environments):
• developing an appreciative attitude: This
activity allows, in starting stages of a com-
munity life in online environment, to de-
velop a greater consciousness of the state
of the art, to value what single participants
can give in terms of presence and in con-
tributions, technologies knowledge and
understanding of individual and collective
expectations;
• creating a safe context with clear and sus-
tainable participation rules: This facilita-
tion step concerns the activation of a mini-
mum set of rules of participation. These
apply to the dimensions of ethics, mutual
respect and acceptance of the other in an
online relationship.
• reframing participants’ experiences:
Thinking of an adult participant, activity
should be conceived as learning facilitating
aimed at, on one hand, strengthening and
recontextualizing existing competencies,
also considering experience (professional
and offline ones too) already lived by par-
ticipants. On the other hand creating new
learning experiences placing actions at the
446
center of the learning process. Thus, the
learning process moves along the eman-
cipatory dimension represented by knowl-
edge as empowerment and valorization of
potential, up to reaching the performing
and generative dimension represented by
knowledge an better practicing.
• facilitating an expansive learning and the
development of a creative and planning
activity: Expansive learning refers to pro-
cesses activated by subjects in apparently
new or highly contradictory situations. It
is about processes concerning particularly
individual and collective activity of fur-
thering a certain context full of obstacles
in order to build up a bigger image, aiming
at expanding the same context. A variety
of larger criteria may be built along with
a wider object of activity, where it will
be possible to set free of limitations the
setting we act in, to build new criteria of
choice and action.
• acknowledging goals achieved and move
on, pursue actions: This step concerns ap-
preciation and valorization of positive out-
comes of collective work, celebration of
success and acquired capabilities.
Participatory and Appreciative Adult Learning and Reflection in Virtual Environments
FUTURE TRENDS
PAAR online is an approach that allows us to col-
lect concepts already quoted (ethics, participation,
reputation, learning, facilitation) and to arrange
them according to learning in virtual environments.
The PAAR online approach, based on an appre-
ciative stewardship, emphasizes the active role of
the user/participant who creates new places, new
relationships and collaboration forms, recognizing
and valuing new social forms.
From a technological point of view it is hard
to forecast the future: more and more, it happens
that it is the user who is shaping technology and
not vice-versa.
CONCLUSION
In this chapter we identified three key situations
of adults participating and learning in virtual
environments, relating them to three metaphors:
journey, participation and community. We assessed
the relationship between technologies and partici-
pants underlining different forms of participation
and learning. We considered learning as a situ-
ated social activity that largely comes from our
experience of participating and engaging in dif-
ferent virtual environments. We regarded learning
as related to the activity, context and culture in
which it is used/produced. We have experienced
that talking about virtual environments requires
understanding the nature of the activities and
relationships in specific online settings. We took
into account two shifts: from users to participants
and from virtual environments to architecture of
participation. Then we explored some features of
an architecture of participation in online settings
regarded as the base of learning processes. We
deepened the concept of participation proposing
shifting to the concept of learning partnership. The
role of facilitator and the ways by which he/she
co-builds the forms of participation and relation-
ship becomes a key role. Eventually we proposed
a model of PAAR facilitating online based on the
concept of appreciative stewardship.
Appreciative steward has a dynamic role:
its functions should be explicated according to
typologies and dynamics of transversal users’
groups created in projects or within other groups,
keeping in mind that participants can modify their
participation mode over time (in a more or less
excellent way). Because of this reason it is not
possible to consider classical segmentations of
“users,” instead, it is important to aggregate on
the basis of the dynamics of membership able to
amplify the value of relationships and positively
consider continuous open contributions and dis-
cussions.
The aim of the facilitator is not only the ef-
ficiency of a virtual place (to reach a goal), but
most of all, it is represented by the effectiveness
and the authenticity of relationships (to succeed
in involving and valorizing participants).
REFERENCES
Amin, A., & Roberts, J. (2006, August). Commu-
nities of practices? Varieties of situated learning.
Paper presented at EU Network of Excellence
Dynamics of Institutions and Markets in Europe
(DIME).
Anderson, T., & Elloumi, F. (2004). Theory and
practice of online learning. Athabasca, AB: Atha-
basca University.
Barry, D., & Hansen, H. (2008). The SAGE
handbook of new approaches in management and
organization. London: Sage Publications.
Boyd, D. (2007). The significance of social
software. In Burg, T. N., & Schmidt, J. (Eds.),
Blogtalks reloaded: Social software research &
cases (pp. 15–30). Norderstedt, Germany: Books
on Demand.
447
 Participatory and Appreciative Adult Learning and Reflection in Virtual Environments

Brown, J. S., & Duguid, P. (2002). The social life Ghaye, T., Melander-Wikman, A., Kisare, M.,
information. Boston: Harvard Business School Chambers, P., Bergmark, U., Kostenius, C., &
Press. Lillyman, S. (2008). Participatory and apprecia-
tive action and reflection (PAAR) – democratiz-
Cooperrider, D., & Whitney, D. (2005). Apprecia-
ing reflective practices. Reflective Practice, 9(4),
tive inquiry: A positive revolution in change. San
361–397. doi:10.1080/14623940802475827
Francisco: Berrett-Koehler.
Gherardi, S. (2000). Practice-based theorizing on
Cova B., Giordano A., & Pallera M. (2008).
learning and knowing in organizations. Organiza-
Marketing non-convenzionale. Viral, guerrilla,
tion, 7, 211–224. doi:10.1177/135050840072001
tribal e i 10 principi fondamentali del marketing
postmoderno. Italia: Edizioni Il Sole 24 Ore Libri. Gherardi, S. (2008a). Apprendimento tecnologico
e tecnologie dell’apprendimento. Bologna: il
De Certeau, M. (2001). L’invenzione del quotidi-
Mulino.
ano. Roma, Italia: Edizioni Lavoro.
Gherardi, S. (2008b). Dalla comunità di pratica alla
De Rosnay, J. (2008). Preface à l’édition française.
pratica delle comunità: breve storia di un concetto
In Surowiecki, J. (Ed.), La sagesse des foules (pp.
in viaggio. Studi Organizzativi, 1(1), 49–72.
5–15). Paris, France: Jean-Claude Lattès.
Gibson, J. J. (1977). The theory of affordances.
Dron, J. (2007). Control and constrain in e-
In Shaw, R., & Bransford, J. (Eds.), Perceiving,
learning: choosing when to choose. Hershey, PA:
acting, and knowing: Toward and ecological
Information Science Publishing.
psychology (pp. 67–82). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Dubé, L., Bourhis, A., & Jacob, R. (2003). Towards
Giddens, A. (1984). The constitution of society.
a typology of virtual communities of practice
Outline of the theory of structuration. Cambridge:
(online). Chaiers du GReSI. Montreal: HEC.
Polity Press.
Engeström, Y. (1987). Learning by expanding. An
Jacobs, G. (2006). Imagining the flowers, but
activity-theoretical approach to developmental
working the rich and heavy clay: participation
research. Helsinki: Orienta-Konsultit.
and empowerment in action research for health.
Faraji, S., & Xiao, Y. (2006). Coordination in Educational Action Research, 14(4), 569–581.
fast-response organization. Management Science, doi:10.1080/09650790600975809
52(8), 1554–1168.
Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning:
Fox, S. (2000). An actor-network critique of com- legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge,
munity in higher education: Implications for net- UK: Cambridge University Press.
workedlearning. StudiesinHigherEducation,30(1),
Maffesoli, M. (1994). Nel vuoto delle apparenze.
95–110. doi:10.1080/0307507052000307821
Italia: Garzanti.
Ghaye, T. (2008). An introduction to participa-
Maffesoli, M. (2000). L’instant éternel. Paris,
tory and appreciative action research (PAAR).
France: Denoël.
Gloucester, England: New Vista Publications.

448
Participatory and Appreciative Adult Learning and Reflection in Virtual Environments
McLoughlin, C., & Lee, M. J. W. (2007). Listen
and learn: A systematic review of evidence that
podcasting supports learning and higher education.
In C. Montgomeries & J. Seale (Eds.), Proceedings
of World Conference in Educational Multimedia,
Hypermedia and Telecommunications (pp. 1669-
1677). Chesapeake, VA: AACE.
Nancy, J. L. (2000). L’esperienza della libertà.
Torino, Italia: Einaudi.
O’Reilly, T. (2004). The architecture of participa-
tion. Sebastopol, CA: O’Reilly Media. Retrieved
September 20, 2009, from http://www.oreillynet.
com/pub/a/oreilly/tim/articles/architecture_of_
participation.html
Orlikowsky, W. J. (2000). Using technology
and constituting structures: A practice lens for
studying technology in organizations. Organi-
zation Science, 11(4), 404–428. doi:10.1287/
orsc.11.4.404.14600
Rogers, C. (1973). Libertà nell’apprendimento.
Firenze, Italia: Giunti e Barbera.
Schön, D. (1983). The reflective practitioner.
How professionals think in action. New York:
Basic Books.
Senge, P. (1998). The practice of innovation.
Leader to Leader, 5(9), 1–11.
Sfard, A. (1998). On two metaphor for learning
and the danger of choosing just one. Educational
Researcher, 27(2), 4–13.
Shirky, C. (2003, April). A group is its own worst
enemy: Social structure in social software. Paper
presented at the O’Reilly Emerging Technology
conference, Santa Clara, CA, Retrieved September
20, 2009, from http://www.shirky.com/writings/
group_enemy.html
Suchman, L. A. (2002). Practice-based design
of information systems: Note from the hyperde-
veloped world. The Information Society, 18(2),
139–144. doi:10.1080/01972240290075066
Suchman, L. A., Blomberg, J., Orr, J. E., & Trigg,
R. (1999). Reconstructing technologies as a social
practice. The American Behavioral Scientist, 43(3),
392–408. doi:10.1177/00027649921955335
Surowiecki, J. (2008). The Wisdom of crowds:
Why the many are smarter than the few and how
collective wisdom shapes business, economies, so-
cieties and Nations. New York: Doubleday Books.
Thatchenkery, T., & Metzker, C. (2006). Apprecia-
tive intelligence: Seeing the mighty in the acorn.
San Francisco: Berrett-Koehler.
Turkle, S. (1996) La vita sullo schermo. Milano,
Italia: Apogeo.
Wenger, E., McDermott, R., & Snyder, W. R.
(2002). Cultivating communities of practices.
Boston, Massachusetts: Harvard Business School
Publication.
Wenger, E., White, N., & Smith, J. D. (2009).
Digital habitats. Stewarding technologies for
communities. Portland, OR: CPsquare.
KEY TERMS AND DEFINITIONS
Appreciative Facilitation: Process that em-
phasizes what works well and concentrates on
success and achievement.
Appreciative Stewardship: A way to facilitate
learning in virtual environments based on the de-
velopment of an appreciative gaze and of learning
partnerships.
Architecture of Participation: A way to con-
sider and build virtual environments underlying
the importance of rules and tools that encourage
user participation.
Crowdsourcing: A method that involves and
uses “crowds” (i.e., large, undefined, randomly
distributed, undirected, unsupervised groups of
people) to perform tasks and accomplish goals.
Participation: The process during which in-
dividuals, groups and organizations are consulted
449
 Participatory and Appreciative Adult Learning and Reflection in Virtual Environments
about or have the opportunity to become actively
involved in a project or program of activity.
PAAR Online: A methodological approach
to learning together online based on participatory
and appreciative action and reflection.
Technology in Practice: The use of the arti-
facts (human and non-human) and tools that make
it easy to contribute and access the community’s
knowledge and practices.
Virtual Community of Practice: Community
of individuals who share a domain of interest
450
about which they communicate online. Partici-
pants share resources (i.e., experiences, problems,
solutions, tools, methodologies) and contribute to
the knowledge development within the domain.
Virtual Learning Environment: A designed
information space, a place or a configuration of
places where people can interact, that can support
learning activities.
 451

Chapter 27
Successful Strategies in the
Online Learning Environment
Based on Theories, Styles,
and Characteristics
Leane B. Skinner
Auburn University, USA

ABSTRACT
With the continuous increase in online student enrollment, it is important to examine the learning/teaching
process in the online learning environment in order to develop the most effective model in this unique
environment. This chapter will explore various e-learner and e-educator styles and teaching strategies
in the online environment. Theories and an evaluation of their appropriateness in an online learning
environment will be presented. The impact of learning styles, social styles, decision styles, and genera-
tional styles in the online learning environment will be analyzed. Additionally, there will be a discussion
of the characteristics and traits of the successful e-learner, successful e-educator, and successful course
and curriculum design model based on specific theories and styles.

INTRODUCTION learning/teaching process in the online learning

For years there has been an attempt to identify
the ideal learning/teaching model. Knowledge
transfer, understanding, and retention are impor-
tant aspects of every educational experience. As
researchers, a drive has always existed to dissect
the learning/teaching process in order to develop
the most effective model of learning/teaching.
With the continuous increase in e-learning stu-
dent enrollment, it is important to examine the
DOI: 10.4018/978-1-61692-906-0.ch027
environment in order to develop the most effective
model. E-learner enrollment more than doubled
from 1.6 million in 2002 to 3.94 million in 2007
(Allen & Seaman, 2007).
Today a new classroom exists; in fact, there
may not even be a classroom. In the 2006-2007
academic year, 66% of the 4,160 Title IV degree-
granting postsecondary institutions offered
distance education courses (National Center for
Education Statistics [NCES], 2008). This num-
ber is projected to continue to increase. Online
learning via the Internet offers exciting opportu-
Successful Strategies in the Online Learning Environment Based on Theories, Styles, and Characteristics
nities for both learning and teaching. However,
this new online learning environment demands
a re-evaluation of designing the most effective
learning/teaching model.
One attempt at better understanding the learn-
ing/teaching model is the consideration of various
e-learner and e-educator styles. Learning styles
have been considered in designing curriculum for
many years. Although there are various definitions
of learning styles, Kolb, Rubin, and McIntyre
(1974) defined learning styles as an individual’s
inherited foundation, particular past life experi-
ence and the demands of the present environment
that emphasize some learning abilities over others.
While there has been much controversy, learner
and teacher understanding of learning styles may
influence the learning/teaching process.
Several other style analyses, typically used in
psychology and management, may be beneficial
when attempting to design the most effective
learning/teaching model for the online environ-
ment. Research supports (Edelstein & Edward,
2002; Funk, 2007) the need for collaboration
and interaction in the online environment. Social
styles are defined as “a pervasive and enduring
pattern of interpersonal behaviors” (Bolton &
Bolton, 1984, p. 3). Understanding personal so-
cial styles and social styles of others is based on
behavior rather than personality and may improve
communication and teamwork in the online envi-
ronment. Social styles may explain the behavior
when interacting with others in an online course.
Decision styles are based on risk-taking, locus of
control, tendency to procrastinate, impulsiveness,
emotion control, and confidence. Understanding
the decision-making style of online educators
and online students may present opportunities to
improve the learning/teaching model. Genera-
tional learning styles may be another source of
information for the e-educator and e-learner and
refers to understanding the course and curriculum
design expectations based on the environment a
person has experienced in their lifetime.
452
In addition to new learning environments,
today’s learner has been influenced by the many
technology advancements. Teaching models and
student expectations have been transformed by
these advancements. Technology advancements
have also had an impact on the skills that employ-
ers are demanding from employees. As a result,
it is necessary to determine the essential factors
and tools that will assist in designing the most
effective teaching/learning model for the online
learning environment.
This chapter will explore various e-learner and
e-educator styles and effective teaching strategies
in the online environment. A historical view of
theories and an evaluation of their appropriateness
in an online learning environment will be pre-
sented. Andragogy, Heutagogy, Constructivism,
Connectivism, and Metacognition will be included
in the discussion. The impact of learning styles,
social styles, decision styles, and generational
styles in the online learning environment will be
analyzed. Additionally, there will be a discussion
of the characteristics and traits of the successful
e-learner, successful e-educator, and successful
course and curriculum design. Furthermore, future
trends will be included.
BACKGROUND
Growth of the Online
Learning Environment
In a study by the Association of Public and Land-
grant Universities – Sloan National Commission
on Online Learning (Sloan-C, 2009) more than
one-third of public university faculty have taught
an online course. In addition, almost 64% of faculty
reported that online teaching requires additional
effort to develop and teach than face-to-face
(F2F) teaching. E-learning student enrollment has
more than doubled since 2002 from 1.6 million
to 3.94 million in 2007. Based on responses from
over 2,500 colleges and universities, 88% expect
Successful Strategies in the Online Learning Environment Based on Theories, Styles, and Characteristics
their e-learning enrollments to increase (Allen &
Seaman, 2007). A down turn in the economy and
increase in job loss may send more students back
to school. There is a good chance these students
will choose learning in the online environment.
Theoretical Framework
Although many theories may relate to the online
learning environment, the appropriateness of
Andragogy, Heutagogy, Metacognition, Construc-
tivism, and Connectivism, will be considered.
Andragogy is based on self-directed learning
theory (Gibbons & Wentworth, 2001). Andragogy
has been defined as the art and science of help-
ing adults learn. Six assumptions regarding adult
learners are made (Isenberg, 2007):
• Adult learners are self-directed
• Adult learners have gained experience that
becomes a learning resource
• Adult learners have learning needs based
on their social roles
• Adult learners have a need for immediate
application of learning
• Adult learners are intrinsically motivated
and want to problem-solve
• Adult learners want to know the relevance
of what they are learning
“With the emergence of Internet learning,
many adult educators have sought to apply sound
andragogical learning theory” (Isenberg, 2007,
p. xviii). Andragogy should be considered when
courses and curriculum are being designed for the
online learning environment. Later in the chapter,
there will be a discussion of specific strategies
and tools that can be incorporated in the online
learning environment that align with the above as-
sumptions and meet the needs of the adult learner.
Heutagogy, an extension of andragogy, was
introduced by Stewart Hase, an Australian profes-
sor of organizational learning (Isenberg, 2007).
Heutagogy is centered on self-directed learning,
an important aspect of the online environment.
Heutagogy is guided by the following:
• Learning how to learn
• Double loop learning – understanding
one’s own assumptions, values, and beliefs
• Universal learning opportunities – the
importance of the informal learning
experience
• Nonlinear processing
• Learner self-direction
“Until adults learn how to learn the “link to the
world” may merely be an information box, not a
tool for learning” (Isenberg & Titus, 1999, p. 1).
Heutagogy looks to the future where knowing
how to learn will be a required skill consider-
ing the rate of innovation and the changes in the
design of communities and workplaces (Hase &
Kenyon, 2000). Learning how to learn is a key
to life-long learning. E-educators must teach the
e-learner how to think (Isenberg, 2007).
Closely related to Heutagogy is Metacognition.
Metacognition is the awareness of the learning
process; in other words knowing how to learn.
Metacognition is self-knowledge. E-learners
must have the metacognitive ability to identify
what they do and do not understand (Battalio,
2009). Metacognition is the e-learner’s ability to
recognize their cognitive abilities and use this to
improve the learning process. Cognitivists view
learning as an internal process. This internal
process involves thinking, reflecting, motivation,
and metacognition (Ally, 2008). Metacognition is
higher-order thinking about thinking. Metacogni-
tion includes knowledge about when and where
to use particular learning strategies for problem
solving. As students gain a better understanding
of metacognitive strategies, they gain confidence
in the learning environment and become more
independent, self-directed learners. E-educators
should work toward enhancing the metacognitive
capabilities of e-learners.
453
Successful Strategies in the Online Learning Environment Based on Theories, Styles, and Characteristics

Constructivism is defined as “constructing
one’s own knowledge from one’s own experi-
ences” (Kamthan, 2009, p. 203). Prior knowledge
plays a significant role in constructivism. Learning
management systems such as Blackboard supports
constructivism (Kamthan). Constructivism is as-
sociated with cognitive science, social psychol-
ogy, and social learning. E-educators must design
online learning courses and curriculum to allow
the e-learner to build upon prior knowledge and
experiences.
Connectivism theory is appropriate for the
digital age where individuals learn in a networked
environment. Because the network continually
changes, there is requirement for continuous learn-
ing, unlearning, and relearning. Adapted from Ally
(2008) the following guidelines for developing
online learning curriculum are suggested:
• E-learners should explore and research for
current information. With the rapidness of
new information this is an important life-
time skill.
• Information that is valid today may not be
valid tomorrow. Therefore, e-learners have
to be able to transfer the knowledge.
• E-learners must be able to differentiate
important information from unimportant
information.
• E-learners must be willing to be life-long
learners and stay up to date.
• E-learners should take advantage of
the diversity of globalization to expand
knowledge.
• Information for learning should come from
a variety of telecommunication sources.
how an e-learner thinks and learns based on vari-
ous learning styles, social styles, decision styles,
and generational styles, the greater opportunity
for success in the online learning environment.
Of equal importance is the self-awareness of the
styles of the e-educator and the influence this may
have on teaching style and course and curriculum
design. Success in the online learning environment
and various learning styles, social styles, decision
styles, and generational styles will be discussed
in the next section. (See Figure 1)
Styles and Characteristics of the
E-Educator and E-Learner
Learning Styles
Online courses need to be designed to accommo-
date various e-learner styles (Harris, 2006). Earlier
in the history of consideration of learning styles
the term “cognitive style” was used (Swanson,
1995). “A learning style is a composite of char-
acteristic cognitive, affective, and physiological
factors that serve as a relatively stable indicator
of how a learner perceives, interacts with, and
responds to the learning environment. Learning
Figure 1.

Connetivism can be used to guide the develop-

ment of course and curriculum design in an online
learning environment.
The model below demonstrates the relation-
ship between metacognition and various styles.
Since metacognition is the awareness of the
learning process, the greater self-awareness of

454
Successful Strategies in the Online Learning Environment Based on Theories, Styles, and Characteristics
styles also refer to the preferred way an individual
processes information” (Bates & Leary, 2001, p.
45). Understanding learning styles can be a guide
for curriculum and course development in the
online environment.
In 1976, David Kolb developed the Learning
Styles Inventory based on experiential learning.
This inventory ranks strengths and weaknesses
in four abilities: (1) Concrete experience (CE),
(2) Reflective observation (RO), Abstract con-
ceptualization (AC), and Active experimentation
(AE). Kolb’s research was grounded in the works
of Dewey, Lewin, and Piaget. The four learning
styles developed by Kolb are:
• Divergers – these learners are imaginative
and need to be personally engaged in the
learning process.
• Assimilators – these learners are pragma-
tists and place high value on skill develop-
ment and problem-solving.
• Convergers – these learners learn sequen-
tially and are attentive to detail and thor-
oughness. This style has great advantages
in decision-making, problem-solving, and
practical applications. Learners may be in-
ferior in social and interpersonal skills.
• Accommodators – these learners welcome
change, risk-taking, and flexibility. These
learners usually deal with others easily.
Celli-Sarasin (1999) suggested the following
characteristics of learners:
• Auditory – these e-learners need to hear in-
formation, and usually prefer the informa-
tion to be in chunks. They need to under-
stand the relationship between the concepts
they are learning and an organized struc-
ture. In the online environment, synchro-
nous presentations, videoed presentations,
and podcasting are examples of tools that
may be compatible with auditory learners.
• Visual – these e-learners require visual aids
to comprehend new knowledge. Possible
examples are charts, graphs, graphic maps,
concept maps, video demonstration, role-
playing, and graphics.
• Kinesthetic – these e-learners learn by do-
ing. It has been said that Kinesthetic learn-
ers are the most neglected at the postsec-
ondary level. Kinesthetic e-learners may
experience internships, simulations, field
trips, virtual field trips, experiential activi-
ties, audio, video, and discussions.
The Soloman and Felder’s Index of Learning
Style (n.d.) model considers learner preferences
in the following categories
• Reflective – learners who prefer to think
more than interact
• Intuitive – learners who prefer discovery
rather than facts
• Verbal – learners who prefer words to vi-
sual presentations
• Global – learners who see the big picture
rather than linear (http://www.engr.ncsu.
edu/learningstyles/ilsweb.html)
Research indicates that reflective learners are
well suited for the online learning environment
(Battalio, 2009). Certainly the other learning pref-
erences can be addressed in the design of online
courses and curriculum as well.
Phil Darg identified four types of online learn-
ers (“Understand Online Learner Types,” 2005):
• Achievers – typically make up 10 to 20
percent of online students. They are highly
motivated and self-directed, and have good
computer skills.
• Taskers – typically make up 40 to 50 per-
cent of online students. They are moti-
vated by due dates and grades. They need
structure.
455
Successful Strategies in the Online Learning Environment Based on Theories, Styles, and Characteristics
• Ball-droppers – typically make up 20 to 25
percent of online students. They are mo-
tivated after missing due dates and have
poor to moderate computer skills. They are
lacking discipline.
• Ghosts – typically make up 5 to 10 percent
of online students. They have poor com-
puter and academic skills. They are unmo-
tivated and disconnected.
It is possible for a student to change types
since computer skills play a role. Computer skill
assessment should be a requirement during the
e-learner orientation prior to taking a course in
the online learning environment.
Research indicates a statistically significant
correlation between learning styles that are in-
dependent and self-directed and attrition in the
online environment (Harris, 2006; Parker, 2003).
Additionally, self-motivation can be enhanced
with ideal curriculum and course design. Better
online course and curriculum development is
based on individual student styles. Each learning
style creates a different challenge for course and
curriculum development. Even though learning
styles should be considered in course design, it is
important for all types of learners to be exposed
to a variety of learning experiences to become a
more versatile student and worker.
Social Styles
Effective communication between e-educators
to e-learners and e-learner to e-learner is a very
important aspect of the online learning environ-
ment. Many of the tools used to enhance learning
in the online environment require collaboration
and communication. Even though there is an
extensive assortment of electronic tools for com-
municating in the online learning environment, it
is the human interaction through these tools that
makes the difference (Wilson, 2004).
The social style concept was introduced by
David Merrill and has been considered possibly
456
the most effective tool for assisting people in the
workplace understand each other. No one social
style is considered superior. Thomas Jefferson
was an analytical, Barbara Walters was a driver,
Gerald Ford was an amiable, and Franklin Roos-
evelt was an expressive (Bolton & Bolton, 1984).
With communication being such an important
aspect of the effective online learning environ-
ment, the social style concept is also appropriate
for e-learning. Understanding various social styles
can improve the online learning experience. Both
the e-educator and the e-learner need to be aware
of various social styles in order to enhance the
online learning experience. Social styles focus
only on observable behaviors; it does not measure
intelligence or personality. Social style is how
others see you.
Based on 40 years of research about observ-
able human behavior, four social styles have been
identified (Wilson, 2004). The e-learner online
course expectations are added by the author:
(See Table 1)
The social style matrix has two dimensions.
Assertiveness refers to the measure of influencing
the thoughts and actions of others. The assertive-
ness scale contains a spectrum from “ask-direct-
ed” to ‘tell-directed.” Those on the “ask-directed”
end of the spectrum tend to be more indirect in
the way they try to influence others and often
remain calm when communicating. By contrast
those on the “tell-directed” end of the spectrum,
tend to be more direct in the way they try to influ-
ence others. There is no perfect place to be on the
assertiveness spectrum, just different places. The
second dimension is responsiveness. Responsive-
ness refers to the perception of how people express
themselves when relating to others. There are also
two ends of the responsiveness spectrum. “Task-
directed” people are typically more reserved in
expressing their emotions. They prefer to focus
on a task rather than sharing personal feelings and
thoughts. Those on the “people-directed” end of
the responsiveness spectrum typically express
their emotions openly. They prefer to develop an
Successful Strategies in the Online Learning Environment Based on Theories, Styles, and Characteristics

Table 1.

Style E-Learner Characteristics E-Learner Online Course Expectations

Analytical Detail-oriented, well-organized, studies options carefully, lets
others take social initiative, business-like approach, prefers
information to be presented in a systematic manner, technically
oriented, independent, excels at planning and organizing, enjoys
discovering new ways to solve problems
Drivers Like to challenge new ideas, make quick decisions, have strong
opinions, like to initiate and control, runs on self-motivation,
hard-working, focused on bottom-line, confidence, ability to
coordinate others, a sense of responsibility for making things
happen, enjoys a challenge, quick to correct others, serious,
independent, relationships not as important as the task, tend to
be busy people with tight schedules
Amiable Minimize interpersonal conflict, easy to get to know, quiet,
cooperative, supportive, positive attitude, friendly, good lis-
tener, enjoys personal contact, enjoys collaboration, needs a
lot of information to make decisions, prefers group consensus,
interpersonal relationships more important than goals, prefers
to work with others, not risk-takers
Expressives Talkative, intuitive, likes an audience, risk-taker, competitive,
visionary, creative, inspirational, enthusiastic, emotional,
fast-paced, takes social initiative, friendly conversationalist,
ambitious, prefers to work with others, moves fast, motivating,
likes to be recognized, outstanding mentor
Task-oriented approach, well prepared, focused,
quick confirmation of expertise, detailed, provide
solid evidence, provide periodic reviews, realistic
deadlines
Task-oriented approach, make the most efficient use
of time, provide insightful useful information earlier
rather than later, get what they need, choices so they
can make the final decision, a need for clear guide-
lines for success and failure, stay on task, establish
credibility, conservative behavior, clear objectives
Honesty, time spent to develop relationship, discuss
values, personal support, not a risk-taker, needs clear
guidelines, praise, show personal interest
Friendly learning environment, need to see the big
picture first, collaboration, competent and confident
e-educator, want to know others on a personal level,
want praise for good work or ideas, to understand
purpose for learning a particular concept, to un-
derstand the purpose for an assignment, ask their
vision for the course, keep discussions fast-paced,
focused, and moving forward, question, summarize,
celebrate successes and completions

interpersonal relationship prior to dealing with
the task at hand (Wilson, 2004).
Understanding the various social styles will
provide e-educators and e-learners the tools to
adjust their assertiveness and responsiveness when
communicating with others. Less effective com-
munication can be improved by style modification.
“Using Social Styles will give you an objective
way to understand the behavior of others and to
adapt your own, in order to improve communi-
cation” (Wilson, 2004, p. 56). Wilson identifies
three steps that occur in human communication:
• Observation
• Conclusions are drawn
• Reaction takes place
Wilson (2004) uses the following analogy,
“It’s like the old football coach who knows that
some people need a hug and others need a swift
kick to be inspired to do their best” (p. 172). Un-
derstanding the needs of students and educators
with different social styles makes a difference in
the effectiveness of the online learning environ-
ment and creates situations for e-learner success.
Decision Styles
Participation in the online learning environment
requires extensive decision-making. These deci-
sions shape the level of success of online learning
of the e-learner. Decision-making skills can be
improved with metacognition. Robbins (2004)
identified the following decision-making steps:
• Identify and define the problem
• Identify decision criteria
• Give weight to the criteria

457
Successful Strategies in the Online Learning Environment Based on Theories, Styles, and Characteristics
• Come up with alternatives
• Evaluate each alternative
• Select the optimal alternative
Decision-making is classified as either rational
or intuitive. Rational includes a logical deliberate
approach, while intuitive involves feelings. The
rational approach is sometimes referred to as think-
ing styles. Rational styles stress facts, details, logic,
without emotion. Albert Einstein and Bill Gates
are examples of rational decision-makers. Intuitive
styles stress possibilities and relationships between
ideas usually based on personal values. Mikhail
Gorbachev and Eleanor Roosevelt are examples
of intuitive decision-makers (Robbins, 2004).
Several factors influence decision-making
styles:
• Risk Taking – Some people are more will-
ing than others to take risks. High risk tak-
ers are more likely to take an online course
and experiment with new technologies.
• Locus of Control – Some people believe
they control their own destiny, while oth-
ers believe fate is in control. Whether an
e-learner has internal or external locus of
control will impact the level at which they
accept responsibility for their own learn-
ing. It will also impact the target for blame
when there is failure in the online learning
environment.
• Procrastination – Some people have a ten-
dency to delay action or decision-making.
Because of the demands in the online
learning environment, procrastinators typi-
cally have negative experiences.
• Impulsive – Some people have a problem
focusing and enjoying mental challenges.
The online learning environment requires
both e-learner focus and mental challenges.
• Emotion Control – Emotions are feelings
about people or things. Anger, anxiety, de-
pression, and excitement are all emotions.
The online learning environment can be
458
stressful, especially for first timer online
learners.
• Confidence – Good decision-making re-
quires confidence in knowledge. The on-
line learning environment requires e-learn-
ers to have a certain level of confidence
in being successful. E-learners must have
the confidence to seek answers for gaps in
knowledge.
Robbins (2004) is an excellent source for
determining self-awareness of the above decision-
making styles. Because e-learners must be self-
directed and self-motivated for success, effective
decision-making is crucial in the online learning
environment.
Generational Styles
There are also generational learning styles. Even
though all generations can learn and participate
in various types of learning, typically learners
will have different comfort zones based on their
generation. E-educators must understand how
to design an online learning environment that
considers the generational diversities. With the
current economic conditions, younger students
are continuing their education longer because
they are not able to secure employment. Older
displaced workers are returning to the online
learning environment hoping to update and secure
employment.
There are presently four generations of adults
working and learning in the same communities.
• Traditionalists – Born before 1943
• Baby Boomers – Born between 1947 and
1965
• Gen X – Born between 1966 and 1980
• Gen Y - Born between 1981 and 2000
E-educators are challenged to understand each
generation and how they embrace technology.
This understanding is essential when developing
Successful Strategies in the Online Learning Environment Based on Theories, Styles, and Characteristics
courses and curriculum for the online environment.
Traditionalists and Baby Boomers may have more
problems with technology and resist seeking help.
Gen Y (sometimes referred to as the Net Generation
or Millennials) expect the following in an online
learning environment: digital content, connection,
experiential learning, immediate learning, social-
ization, visual learning, and relevant learning.
They were raised in an environment that looks
nothing like the environment most e-educators
experienced (Manathunga & Donnelly, 2009).
Gen X and Gen Y workers comprise 22% of the
workforce and this number is expected to increase
to 46% by 2020 (Hemby, 2009)
SUCCESS IN THE ONLINE
LEARNING ENVIRONMENT
For success of learning in an online environment,
both the e-teacher and the e-learner must be
prepared. In a study by the Association of Public
and Land-grant Universities – Sloan National
Commission on Online Learning (Sloan-C, 2009)
more than one-third of public university faculty
have taught an online course. Universities must
design models to train and support e-educators; this
model should include peer-mentoring. Since most
e-educators are Baby-Boomers or Traditionalists,
it is important for the training model to include
education on the preferences and learning styles
across generations (Silverman, 2006).
Just as an e-educator needs training prior to
teaching in an online environment, an e-learner
needs a thorough orientation prior to learning in
the online environment. It is important to assess
the readiness of the e-learner during the orienta-
tion. E-learner orientation is an excellent place to
assess various styles and to raise self-awareness
leading to better metacognition.
E-learner success in an online environment may
be impacted by several factors such as learning
styles, social styles, decision styles, generational
styles, and metacogntion. These various styles
describe motivation, decision-making, values,
maturity, and technical proficiency, as well as
other characteristics. Understanding of e-learner
styles by both the e-learner and the e-educators
has positive implications for online course design.
E-Learner Characteristics
Not all students are cut out for online learning.
Some students prefer to be spoon-fed learners who
are not inclined to become self-directed, there-
fore have minimal opportunity for success in the
online learning environment (Silverman, 2006).
By nature the online environment mandates self-
motivated, independent, and self-directed students
(Headley & Brewer, 2002). Based on the various
learning styles, social styles, decision making
styles, generational styles, learning theories, and a
review of literature (Battalio, 2009; Harris, 2006;
Herrington, Oliver, & Reeves, 2002; Palloff &
Pratt, 2007) the following e-leaner characteristics
are considered essential for success in the online
learning environment. (See Table 2)
In a study of 386 faculty, lack of time manage-
ment skills was the most common identified
factor for determining success in the online en-
vironment. E-educators reported that the most
successful students participate early, participate
often, and complete all assignments (Battalio,
2009). For a successful online learning experience,
e-learners must make a commitment to be self-
sufficient, responsible, and actively involved in
the learning experience (Ally, 2008; PCBEE,
2009). E-learners must overcome the idea of tak-
ing the course to strictly learn from the e-educa-
tor and be open to peer and self-directed learning
(Palloff & Pratt, 2007). The number two cited
determinant in success for the e-learner was mo-
tivation. Internal motivation is important in every
accomplishment or failure, but in the potentially
isolated online environment it is essential (Ally,
2008). E-learner attitude and initiative are also
considered important factors to success.
459
Successful Strategies in the Online Learning Environment Based on Theories, Styles, and Characteristics
Table 2.
ESSENTIAL E-LEARNER CHARACTERISTICS
Organized Critical thinker
Self-motivated Organized decision making
Independent Research skills
Self-directed Higher–order thinker
Committed Time manager
Perseverance Active participant
Strong work ethic Positive attitude
Realistic view of online work-
Ability to apply learning to life
loads
Locus of control is a concept introduced by
Julian Rotter and suggests that people relate dif-
ferently to their environment depending on their
perception of control over the environment. In
other words, students who feel course outcomes
are directly related to their control are more likely
to be successful in an online environment.
E-Educator Characteristics
Learning in an online environment requires new
skills required for lifelong learning and success
in the workplace. Today’s e-learners value time,
productivity, and measureable results (Gibbons
& Wentworth, 2001).
Because both the e-learner and the e-educator
must be prepared for the online learning environ-
ment; training for the e-educator is essential. E-
educators in the adult online learning environment
need to acquire both technological and andragogi-
cal skills; the focus of the training should be on
andragogy (Dooley, Lindner, & Dooley, 2005).
Development of new appropriate instructional
strategies requires innovative, creative, and open-
minded e-educators. Universities should reward
outstanding e-educators for the development of
outstanding online courses and curriculum. The
evaluation of the online courses and curriculum
may be based on innovation, learner impact, and
460
Environment conducive to
Non-procrastinator
learning
Takes initiative Problem-solver
Life-long learner Ability to work with others
Enjoys new technology Focused
Strong communication skills Responsible for learning
Academic honesty – Ethical
Resourceful
behavior
Access to technology Goal setter
Internal locus of control Autonomous
appropriate use of tools, quality, and transfer-
ability.
Online course development and teaching may
revitalize the educator. An entrepreneurial spirit
is required by the educator. Some faculty avoid
this revitalization of becoming an e-educator by
complaining about the time involved for curricu-
lum and course development. However, electronic
courses and resources once developed can be
updated much quicker and should be updated
often (Harris, 2006; Jakobsen, 2009).
Based on the various learning styles, social
styles, decision making styles, generational styles,
learning theories, and a review of literature (Ally,
2008; Dooley, Lindner, & Dooley, 2005; Harris,
2006; Jakobsen, 2009; PCBEE, 2009) the fol-
lowing e-educator characteristics are considered
essential for success in the online learning envi-
ronment. (See Table 3)
E-educators must design online courses and
curriculum that conveys their passion for educa-
tion and their personality. It is important for the
e-educator to think outside of the mortar class-
room. There is a link between e-learner retention
and e-educator attitude. Good e-learner advising
can help provide correct information about an
online course and possibly avoid attrition (Loren-
zetti, 2005). E-educators need to be committed
to ongoing professional development related to
Successful Strategies in the Online Learning Environment Based on Theories, Styles, and Characteristics
Table 3.
ESSENTIAL E-EDUCATOR CHARACTERISTICS
Modeling excellent communica-
Innovation
tion skills
Continuous professional develop-
Creativity
ment
Open-mindedness Stimulating questioning
High visibility in the online
Enthusiasm
classroom
Sense of pride and ownership of
Excellent e-learner advising
courses
teaching in an online environment (PCBEE, 2009).
Online course and curriculum designers typi-
cally use teaching strategies that are closely re-
lated to their own learning styles (Kelly, 2009).
Therefore, metacognition is very important for
the e-educator. The e-educator must be visible to
e-learners (Harris, 2006). Interaction between
e-educator and e-learner is more important than
the assignments, textbook, and lectures (Battalio,
2009). An important supplement to instructor
interaction is a comprehensive well-designed
course and curriculum.
Course and Curriculum Design in
the Online Learning Environment
Course design should focus on learning theories
and practices proven to be effective in an online
environment. What worked in the past F2F de-
sign may not be effective in the online learning
environment. Research has indicated that student-
centered learning is a more relevant model. An
online learning environment sets the perfect stage
for student-centered learning.
Based on the various learning styles, social
styles, decision making styles, generational styles,
learning theories, and a review of literature (Ally,
2008, Dooley, Lindner, & Dooley, 2005; Harris,
2006; Isenberg, 2007; Jakobsen, 2009; Kelly,
2009; Palloff & Pratt, 2007; PCBEE, 2009) the
following e-course characteristics are considered
Encouraging Experience as an online learner
Volunteering to teach online
Mentorships
(Passionate)
Embracing new technologies Willingness to seek assistance
Awareness of e-learner styles Self-awareness of styles
Organized Motivating
essential or recommended for success in the online
learning environment: (See Table 4)
Pedagogical strategy is an important aspect of
online environment course design since the need
to engage students is vital to reduce attrition.
Andragogy is based on self-directed learning
theory and should be considered when designing
courses and curriculum for the online learning
environment (Gibbons & Wentworth, 2001). E-
learners want to know why they are learning a
concept.
Collins and Berge (1996) described four re-
sponsibilities for e-educators:
• Pedagogical
• Social
• Managerial
• Technical
E-educators should use the experiential model
that is learner-centered and dialogue-based rather
than lecture-based. Experiential learning aligns
with constructivism meaning that students learn
from their experiences. According to Harris
(2006), course design is very important in the
online environment. The new paradigm is e-learner
focused (Funk, 2007; Isenberg, 2007). A shift from
instructor with all the knowledge to the e-educator
that facilitates and creates an online environment
for collaborative exploration is essential (Palloff
& Pratt, 2007).
461
Successful Strategies in the Online Learning Environment Based on Theories, Styles, and Characteristics

Table 4.

ESSENTIAL AND RECOMMENDED E-COURSE CHARACTERISTICS AND TOOLS

Utilize an instructional design
concept map
Authentic learning opportunities
Activities that do not have a final
answer
Inclusion real-life examples
Help forums
Consideration of various learn-
ing styles
Consideration of decision styles
Assessment of metacognition
skills
Video content
Problem-based learning activi-
ties
Communities of practice
Use of webcam
Use of Games
Use of blogs
Use of podcasting
E-learner construction of
knowledge
Standardized course templates
Formative and summative as-
sessment
Human touch
Providing a course roadmap to
e-learners
Field trips (may be virtual)
Continuous student engagement
Appropriate reading materials
Appropriate activities
Provide opportunities for e-
learners to facilitate learning
Peer mentoring
E-learner assessment of various
learning styles
E-learner assessment of decision
styles
E-educator presence
Audio content
Cooperative learning environ-
ment
Student-centered learning
Assistance with transfer of
knowledge
Simulations
Moblogs
Wikis
Creativeness that encourages
student engagement – Students
must want to participate often in
the online course
School-branded handouts
Teaching assistant support
Mid course feedback
Online office hours
Internships
Appropriate assessments
(Self, peer, and e-educator)
Communication of reasons
for selection of readings,
activities, and assessments
E-learner choices in activities
and assignments
Promoting feedback from all
e-learners
E-learners evaluating there
own level of participation
Consideration of social styles
Consideration of generational
styles
Exploratory learning by both
e-educator and e-learner
Written content
Higher-order objectives
Role playing
Discovery learning
Social networking
Focus groups
E-Portfolios
Timely feedback
Effective course enrollment
size
M-learning
Guidelines for course par-
ticipation
Graphic organizers
Technical support 24/7
Introductions to encourage
learning community
KWL to determine what e-
learners already know, want to
know, and end up knowing
Utilize e-learner problems,
interests, and experiences as a
springboard for learning
Resource sharing
Creation of a sense of com-
munity
E-learner assessment of social
styles
E-learner assessment of genera-
tional styles
Course materials available at
the beginning of online course
to assist e-learner with time
management
Organized logical navigation
Creating a learning network
Synchronous chats
Development of e-learner
research skills
Learning object repositories
Vlogs
Interactive resources
Netiquette
Various course materials and
formats
Short lectures
Personalize learning
Student presentations
Opportunities for e-learner
reflection

Institutional support is very important for Recognition by administration that additional

successful online course and curriculum design. time is involved for online course and curricu-

462
Successful Strategies in the Online Learning Environment Based on Theories, Styles, and Characteristics
lum development is essential for success (Long-
Goding, 2006).
A sense of community is important in the on-
line environment (Long-Goding, 2006; PCBEE,
2009). According to Berns (2005), video and
audio offer a sense of community. It is essential
to establish communication and interaction in
absence of F2F (Edelstein & Edwards, 2002). Well
designed asynchronous discussions are “critical
thinking and application-based and are relevant
to nontraditional learners’ current life tasks and
problems” (Gibbons & Wentworth, 2001, p. 3).
Collaborative and cooperative learning activities
should be included in course and curriculum design
to facilitate constructivist learning (Ally, 2008).
In October 2009, the Policies Commission for
Business and Economic Education (PCBEE) re-
leased Policy Statement 85 titled “This We Believe
About Virtual Learning Environments.” Today’s
learners live in a technology advanced world;
therefore, these e-learners demand a learning
environment compatible with their everyday life.
Virtual learning comes in many different packages;
courses may be synchronous, asynchronous, or
blended. Various delivery methods include mobile,
web-based, and distance. Online environments
encourage e-learners to become more engaged in
the process of learning and support a variety of
learning styles. With proper course and curriculum
development, the online learning environment will
provide opportunities for e-learners to develop
important problem-solving and critical thinking
skills that are demanded by employers.
Gould and Padavano (2006) identified seven
ways to improve student satisfaction in online
courses:
• Post the course syllabus on the web.
Be clear about course expectations and
requirements.
• Administer a learning styles inventory.
This can be an ice-breaker exercise that
helps students understand the strengths and
weakness of themselves and each other.
• Explain benefits of working in teams.
• Require group contracts.
• Utilize a variety of assessments.
• Be flexible.
• Provide frequent interaction with students
and among students.
Benefits of including audio, hyperlinks, images
and videos outweigh time involved in develop-
ment. These resources may be shared with other
colleagues (Jakobsen, 2009). Video and audio
offers opportunities for e-educators to highlight
important points and to connect with e-learners
(Berns, 2005).
Presence of faculty, time management, and self-
sufficiency leads to success in the online learning
environment (Long-Goding, 2006; PCBEE, 2009).
Computer/technology skills, reading, writing and
communication skills are very crucial (Battalio,
2009; Long-Goding, 2006;). E-learners must be
comfortable with technological skills or at least
be willing to commit the time to learn. Having
reliable Internet access is another necessity for
success in the online learning environment.
As suggested by Chickering and Gamson
(1987), time on task or time spent engaged in
the course is important for a successful learning
experience. Motivation plus effort plus time can
lead to e-learner success in an online environment
(Harris, 2006). Learning Management Systems
like BlackBoard have features that allow the in-
structor to monitor the amount of time spent in the
online environment by the e-learner. Collaboration
in the online environment allows students with
diverse talents to learn from each other’s strengths
and weaknesses. Considering the various student
learning styles when designing an online course
will increase the potential of increased learning
by e-learners.
Hirumi (2002) designed the Student-Centered,
Technology Rich Learning Environment Model.
Recommended are eight instructional stages for
constructing knowledge and developing metacog-
463
Successful Strategies in the Online Learning Environment Based on Theories, Styles, and Characteristics
nitive skills. Original descriptions are modified
for the online learning environment:
• Learning challenge – Learning outcomes
are in an authentic context.
• Negotiate learning goals and objectives
– Individual learning goals and objec-
tives are negotiated between e-learner and
e-educator.
• Negotiate learning strategy – E-learners
determine how they will achieve goals and
objectives.
• Construct knowledge – E-learners work in-
dividually and in collaboration to construct
their skills and knowledge (Ally, 2008).
• Negotiate performance criteria – • Increased accountability in the online
Assessment criteria is negotiated between
e-learner and e-educator.
• Conduct self, peer, and expert assessments
– The key is to have self-assessment, re-
flection, and peer assessment. The purpose
is continuous improvement.
• Monitor performance and provide feed-
back – This takes place throughout the
course. Feedback is generated by e-educa-
tor and peers.
• Communicate results – There is continu-
ous informal communication. At the end
of the learning process, there is a formal
portfolio with work samples and narratives
submitted.
Another possible model is Collaborative
Project-Based Learning (CPBL). CPBL is a
pedagogy that prepares learners for these new
learning expectations by conceiving, developing,
and implementing projects relevant to the learners’
and the communities’ needs. This active learning
process teaches critical thinking, problem solving,
teamwork, negotiation skills, reaching consensus,
using technology, and taking responsibility for
one’s own learning (Wolff, p. 3).
464
FUTURE TRENDS
Continuous expected growth in the online learning
environment offers many challenges and many
opportunities. Anticipation of future trends in the
online learning environment allows e-educators
to prepare rather than to react. Some of the an-
ticipated future trends are:
• Expansion of life-long learning to all gen-
erational groups
• Increased technology advancements and
options (Including Web 3.0)
• Increased competition in the online learn-
ing environment
learning environment demanding better re-
search and data collection
• Increased adjunct faculty teaching in the
online learning environment
• Increased investment in technology
• Increased use of technology in the online
learning environment
• Increased importance of metacognition
• Continued movement toward student-cen-
tered constructivist learning
• Increased online learning customized for
individual e-learner preferences, styles,
and needs – Personalized learning
• Increased number of courses offered in the
online environment at all levels
• Mobile computing will lead to complete
time and place independence in the online
learning environment
• Increased emphasis on creating a “commu-
nity of learners”
• Increased development of reusable interac-
tive learning objects
• Increased use and ease of use of conferenc-
ing tools
On-going professional development will be a
necessity for e-educators. It is going to be very
important to anticipate the trends rather than react-
Successful Strategies in the Online Learning Environment Based on Theories, Styles, and Characteristics
ing to the trends. E-educators will need technol-
ogy training and effective course design in the
online environment training. This course design
training must include a thorough understanding of
related learning theories, various e-learner styles,
and effective teaching strategies and tools for the
online learning environment. With the emergence
of Web 3.0, 3D graphics will provide e-educators
the opportunity to develop highly interactive and
realistic learning (Ally, 2008).
CONCLUSION
Celente (1997) predicted the impact of the online
learning environment, “Interactive, on-line learn-
ing will revolutionize education. The education
revolution will have as profound and far-reaching
effect upon the world as the invention of print-
ing. Not only will it affect where we learn, it
also will influence how we learn and what we
learn” (p. 249). Over the last 12 years, we have
certainly witnessed a revolution in education.
As the revolution continues, consideration of the
various styles of e-learners should be a driving
force in the design of courses and curriculum in
the online environment.
Metacognition should also be a driving force
in the design of courses and curriculum in the
online environment. Metacognition will lead to
self-awareness of weaknesses that may increase
chances of success in the online learning environ-
ment. According to the PCBEE (2009), learners
must adapt to the online environment by becoming
aware of their own learning styles. Fink (2003)
suggests that e-learners need to be taught how to
learn including: (1) teaching students how to learn,
(2) teaching students to construct knowledge, and
(3) how to become self-directed. Using the model
suggested in this chapter, awareness (metacog-
nition) of both the e-educators’ and e-learners’
various styles (Learning, Social, Decision, and
Generational) will improve the opportunity for
success in the online learning environment.
In addition, effective preparation of both the
e-educator and the e-learner is essential for a suc-
cessful online learning environment. This includes
an orientation for e-learners and training for e-
educators. The e-learner orientation should include
the essential e-learner characteristics discussed in
the chapter. E-educator training should include
the essential e-educator characteristics and the es-
sential and recommended e-course characteristics
and tools. The equation for success in the online
learning environment is aligning instructional
strategies with various styles of e-educators and
e-learners and incorporating effective learning
theories.
REFERENCES
Allen, I. E., & Seaman, J. (2007, October). Online
nation – Five years of growth in online. Needham,
MA: Sloan-C. Retrieved October 1, 2009, from
http://www.sloan-c.org/publications/survey/pdf/
online_nation.pdf
Ally, M. (2008). Foundations of educational
theory for online learning. In Anderson, T. (Ed.),
The theory and practice of online learning (pp.
15–34). Athabasca University Press.
Bates, B., & Leary, J. (2001). Supporting a range
of learning styles using a taxonomy-based design
framework approach. Retrieved October 1, 2009,
from http://www.ascilite.org.au/conferences/
melbourne01/pdf/papers/batesb.pdf
Battalio, J. (2009). Success in distance education:
Do learning styles and multiple formats matter?
The American Journal of Distance Education. Re-
trieved October 1, 2009, from http://pdfserve.infor-
maworld.com/734709_731169728_911230171.
pdf
Berns, S. (2005). Streaming audio, video level the
online playing field. Distance Education Report,
9(23), 5–6.
465
Successful Strategies in the Online Learning Environment Based on Theories, Styles, and Characteristics
Bolton, R., & Bolton, D. (1984). Social style/
management style. New York: AMACOM.
Celente, G. (1997). Trends 2000. New York:
Warner Books.
Celli-Sarasin, L. (1999). Learning style perspec-
tives: Impact in the classroom. Madison, WI:
Atwood.
Chickering, A., & Gamson, Z. (1987). Seven
principles for good practice in undergraduate
education. Retrieved October 1, 2009, from
http://honolulu.hawaii.edu/intranet/committees/
FacDevCom/guidebk/teachtip/7princip.htm
Collins, M., & Berge, Z. (1996). Facilitating
interaction in computer mediated online courses.
Retrieved October 1, 2009, from http://www.
emoderators.com/moderators/flcc.html
Dooley, K., Lindner, J., & Dooley, L. (2005).
Advanced methods in distance education: Applica-
tions and practices for educators, administrators,
and learners. Hershey, PA: Information Science
Publishing, Edelstein, S., & Edwards, J. (2002).
If you build it, they will come: Building learning
communities through threaded discussions. Re-
trieved October 1, 2009, from http://www.westga.
edu/~distance/ojdla/spring51/edelstein51.html
Fink, L. D. (2003). Creating significant learning
experiences: An integrated approach to designing
college courses. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Funk, J. (2007). A descriptive study of retention
of adult online learners: A model of interventions
to prevent attrition. Unpublished doctoral dis-
sertation Capella University, Minneapolis, MN.
Gibbons, H. S., & Wentworth, G. P. (2001). An-
drological and pedagogical training differences
for online instructors. Retrieved October 1, 2009,
from http://www.westga.edu/~distance/ojdla/
fall43/gibbons_wentworth43.html
466
Gould, M., & Palavano, D. (n.d.). 7 ways to improve
student satisfaction in online courses. Retrieved
October 1, 2009, from http://www.magnapubs.
com/products/506ocff.html?s=jrj&p=MFCFEZ
Harris, S. (2006, June). Common factors influenc-
ing success in the online environment. Sydney
Center for Innovation in Learning. Retrieved
November 22, 2009, from http://www.scil.nsw.
edu.au/documents/scil_success_online.pdf
Hase, S., & Kenyon, C. (2000). From andragogy
to heutagogy Retrieved November 22, 2009,
from http://ultibase.rmit.edu.au/Articles/dec00/
hase1.pdf
Headley, S., & Brewer, M. (2002). Identifying
critical needs for student success in online learn-
ing. 2002 International Conference on Computers
in Education. New Zealand: Auckland.
Hemby, V. (2009). Managing organizational
change to effectively meet the needs of a changing
membership. Delta Pi Epsilon Newsletter, Fall,
2009, pp. 1-2.
Herrington, J., Oliver, R., & Reeves, T. (2002).
Patterns of engagement in authentic online learn-
ing environments. Retrieved November 22, 2009,
from http://www.ascilite.org.au/conferences/
auckland02/proceedings/papers/085.pdf
Hirumi, A. (2002). Student-centered, technology-
rich, learning environments (SCenTRLE): Opera-
tionalizing constructivist approaches to teaching
and learning. Journal of Technology and Teacher
Education, 10(4), 497–537.
Isenberg, S. (2007). Applying andragogical
principles to internet learning. Youngstown, NY:
Cambria Press.
Isenberg, S., & Titus, T. (1999). The impact of
the Internet on research –to-practice in adult,
continuing, extension, and community educa-
tion. In Proceedings of the 18th annual Midwest
research-to-practice conference (pp. 142-147).
St. Louis, Missouri, CD Rom.
Successful Strategies in the Online Learning Environment Based on Theories, Styles, and Characteristics

Jakobsen, L. A. (2009). Embedding e-learning in National Center for Education Statistics [NCES].
further education. In Donnelly, R., & McSweeney, (2008). Distance education at degree-granting
F. (Eds.), Applied e-learning and e-teaching in postsecondary institutions 2006-2007. U.S. De-
higher education (pp. 108–128). Hershey, PA: partment of Education.
Information Science Reference.
Palloff, R., & Pratt, K. (2007). Building online
Kamthan, P. (2009). A methodology for integrat- learning communities. San Francisco: John Wiley
ing information technology in software engineer- & Sons.
ing education. In Donnelly, R., & McSweeney,
Parker, A. (2003). Identifying predictors of aca-
F. (Eds.), Applied e-learning and e-teaching in
demic persistence in distance education. USDLA
higher education (pp. 201–219). Hershey, PA:
Journal. Retrieved October 1, 2009, from http://
Information Science Reference.
www.usdla.org/html/journal/JAN03_Issue/ar-
Kelly, D. (2009). Modeling best practices in ticle06.html
web-based academic development. In Donnelly,
Policies Commission for Business and Economic
R., & McSweeney, F. (Eds.), Applied e-learning
Education (PCBEE). (2009). This we believe about
and e-teaching in higher education (pp. 35–55).
virtual learning environments. Retrieved October
Hershey, PA: Information Science Reference.
1, 2009, from http://www.nbea.org/curriculum/
doi:10.4018/978-1-59904-814-7.ch003
no_85.pdf
Kolb, D., Rubin, L., & McIntyre, J. (1974). Learn-
Robbins, S. R. (2004). Decide and conquer: Mak-
ing and problem solving: On the management
ing winning decisions and take control of your life.
and the learning process. Englewood Cliffs, NJ:
Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education, Inc.
Prentice Hall.
Silverman, D. (2006, April 1)... Distance Educa-
Kolb, D. A. (1976). The Learning Style Inventory:
tion Report, 10(7), 5.
Technical Manual. Boston, MA: McBer.
Sloan, C. (2009, August 31). Strong faculty
Long-Goding, J. (2006). Student success in an
engagement in online learning APLU reports.
online learning environment. Retrieved October
Retrieved October 1, 2009, from http://www.
1, 2009, from http://www.decadeconsulting.com/
sloanconsortium.org/APLU_Reports
dc/documents/StudentSuccess.pdf
Soloman, B., & Felder, R. Index of learning Styles
Lorenzetti, J. P. (2005, November 15). Address-
Questionnaire. Retrieved October 1, 2009, from
ing retention in distance education: The SIEME
http://www.engr.ncsu.edu/learningstyles/ilsweb.
model. Distance Education Report, 9(22), 1–6.
html
Manathunga, C., & Donnelly, R. (2009). Opening
Swanson, L. J. (1995). Learning styles: A review
online academic development programmes to in-
of literature. (ERIC Document Reproduction
ternational perspectives and dialogue. In Donnelly,
Service No ED387067)
R., & McSweeney, F. (Eds.), Applied e-learning
and e-teaching in higher education (pp. 35–55). Understand online learner types – Create more
Hershey, PA: Information Science Reference. effective courses (2005, September 15). Distance
Education Report, 9(18), 3-5.
Wilson, L. (2004). The social styles handbook.
Nova Vista Publishing.

467
Successful Strategies in the Online Learning Environment Based on Theories, Styles, and Characteristics
Wolff, S. (2002). Design features for project
based learning. Retrieved October 1, 2009, from
http://www.designshare.com/Research/Wolff/
Wolff_DesignShare_3_7_02.pdf
KEY TERMS AND DEFINITIONS
Andragogy: The art and science of helping
adults learn.
Connectivism: The integration of principles
explored by chaos, network, and complexity and
self-organization theories.
Constructivism: Constructing one’s own
knowledge from one’s own experiences
Decision Styles: Characteristics of risk-taking,
locus of control, tendency to procrastinate, impul-
siveness, emotion control, and confidence.
468
E-Learner: A learner participating in an online
learning environment.
E-Educator: An educator teaching in an online
learning environment.
Generational Styles: Characteristics based
on a person’s generation.
Heutagogy: Centered on self-directed learn-
ing.
Learning Styles: An individual’s inherited
foundation, particular past life experience and
the demands of the present environment that
emphasize some learning abilities over others.
Metacognition: The awareness of the learn-
ing process.
Social Styles: A pervasive and enduring pat-
tern of interpersonal behaviors.
 469

Chapter 28
Teaching Adults across
Cultures, Distance, and
Learning Preferences:
Universal Tools for the 21st Century
Gabriele Strohschen
DePaul University, USA

ABSTRACT
This chapter focuses on the underlying principles of instructional design and delivery as means for adult
education practitioners to discern which instructional methods and strategies are suited to learners and
learning tasks. The considerations here are intended to assist the educator in grasping key elements
of ISD that work across cultures, distance, and learning needs, styles, and preferences of adults. It of-
fers a strategy for determining key components of instructional technology. As such, this chapter is a
foundation that provides data points for decision-making about instructional design and delivery for
today’s adult educators.

INTRODUCTION or community circumstances. In today’s intercon-

In any adult education endeavor, philosophy alone
cannot address the contextual needs of today’s
adult learner; nor can technology bring about
success in teaching and learning without clarity
of why we use the tools. Adults return to educa-
tion and training settings for a variety of reasons.
Their goals include bridging a performance gap
within their respective work environment; gain-
ing knowledge and skills desired for personal
development; or improvement or chance of family
DOI: 10.4018/978-1-61692-906-0.ch028
nected world, a world where technology is highly
valued and prolific in every aspect of life, the
task of educating ought to be based on a thorough
understanding of our practices and options that
best lead learners to their goals. Moreover, adult
education practitioners need to acknowledge that
there may not be quick fix or one size fits all or
instant customization to special needs solutions
to facilitating the learning process for adults, lo-
cally or globally, in virtual or real time settings.
Whether ICT-based or in basements of churches;
whether in seemingly homogeneous groups of
learners or across borders of culture and geog-
 Teaching Adults across Cultures, Distance, and Learning Preferences
raphy, instruction by, with, and for today’s adult
learners requires a solid, examined foundation
of instructional design and delivery principles.
Teaching successfully across a variety of pur-
poses, cultures, distance, and learning preferences
necessitates a strategy for selecting instructional
technology appropriate to the context and task at
hand. Adult educators need to be able to discern
good practices, effective methods, and appropri-
ate media for instructional design and delivery.
It is at the intersection of educational philosophy,
theoretical frameworks, and instructional technol-
ogy with a keen understanding of the tools we are
to apply in our practice that we strengthen our
practice of instructional support to adult learners.
A theoretical base about key elements of our
practice, such as learning needs assessment and
analysis, design of learning events, and delivery
of learning activities that result in evaluated
outcomes exists, and it can scaffold our practice,
irrespective of the conceptual frameworks (e.g.,
from behaviorist to constructivist) or philosophical
values that undergird it. In other words, there is a
universality in instructional methods and strategies
which encompasses fundamental, key elements of
facilitating the learning process for adults. Over the
decades, models and paradigms for instructional
design and delivery have abounded (Reigeluth,
1983). Bloom et al. (Bloom, Madeaus, & Hast-
ings, 1981) interjected their concept of mastery
of learning into the dialogue that emphasized the
need to individualize the instructional process. A
rich history of ISD is detailed here that spans over
five decades of instructivist or objectivist designs.
In his recent volume for ICT-based designs, Willis
(2009) brings together an array of constructivist
design concepts, ranging from the early linear
designs based on information processing theory
to current constructivist ones that value more and
more iterative flows of the design and delivery
phases. The latter designs put the learner at the
center. Any of the described models include
very basic and similar elements that had been
developed at Florida State University in 1975.
470
These elements of analysis, design, development,
implementation, and evaluation (ADDIE) remain
stable and standard as phases or chunks in any
instructional design today. Whether dominated
by behaviorist or constructivist concepts, for ex-
ample, the primary need in ISD has always been to
develop approaches that teach the person as well
as the content. Students and trainees in the 21st
Century, in the USA or abroad, are characterized
by a multi-layered diversity with respect to their
backgrounds and learning needs. Individualizing
instructional approaches to meet disparate needs
is of the essence in today’s education and train-
ing settings
The UNESCO Asia and Pacific Regional
Bureau for Education (1998), headquartered in
Bangkok, reported that between 1960 and 1995
student enrollment worldwide has increased six
fold, from 13 million to 82 million, while the so-
called third world countries sorely lagged behind
in their ability to provide educational services.
With the increased globalization of the workforce,
multinational corporations, for-profit education
program providers, and not-for-profit educational
institutions from North America, Australia, and
Great Britain are sending trainers and educators
to Asia, Eastern Europe, and Africa to fill this
education gap. This trend of exporting education
and training will continue to grow. For instance,
the median ages of workers in India and China are
currently 24 and 30 respectively, who are relatively
inexperienced; so, the need to educate and train
workers to acquire new skills in this global market
alone is high (Karoly & Panis, 2004).
The training and education models we gener-
ally export to foreign constituencies do not differ
much in their methods and approaches from what
we use with the Native language speakers and the
large Spanish language population in workforce
education and adult basic education programs in
the USA. Karoly & Panis (2004, p. 205) point
out that the “current U.S. education and training
system largely evolved to meet the needs of the
early twentieth century workforce, and the basic
Teaching Adults across Cultures, Distance, and Learning Preferences
parameters have changed little since that time.”
They call this system “less relevant” as it does not
address current workforce development needs.
Education and training is a matter that is shaped
by both local and global geo-political trends and
adult educators can have significant impact on the
value, outcome, and professional implementation
of education programs for adults. If we are to
succeed in meeting crucial world-wide education
needs, including but beyond workforce prepara-
tory ones, then we need to be versed in instructional
strategies that are timely, relevant, and effectively
address adult learners’ needs.
This chapter offers a strategy of how to deter-
mine appropriate instructional design and delivery
options in the context of culture-; distance-; and
learning style preferences. These design consider-
ations are based on basic elements of instructional
design that have stood the test of time and have
survived variations on the theme within many an
educational philosophy.
CONSIDERATIONS ACROSS
TECHNOLOGY, CULTURE,
AND SPECIAL NEEDS
In our profession, we tend to hover at the abstract
discourse level regarding instruction, and we
do not share our insights upon examining our
experiences of teaching and learning in simple,
practical ways. Both are needed. It may well be
that we hesitate to be prescriptive, although our
literature abounds with best practices. There are
basic, conceptual tools for today’s adult education
practitioner that cut across the boundaries created
by technology, culture, and special needs of learn-
ers. In order to appreciate the validity of these
basic tools, a brief excursion into our assumptions
and beliefs about technology, culture, and special
needs will frame the subsequent description of
these universal components of instructional design
and delivery.
With the emergence of global learning com-
munities and the attendant multi-ethnic and in-
tercultural considerations, the professional who
designs and delivers instructional programs could
conceivably become lost in Tower of Babel-like
confusion over ways to accommodate every
interest. Today’s climate of identity politics and
litigious inclinations almost certainly ensures that
we will offend one group at the expense of trying
not to offend the other. From a humanistic adult
education perspective, however, diversity and
learning needs among adult learners are acknowl-
edged beyond ethnicity, culture, geographical
location, or learning preferences. Any instructional
setting is diverse by definition that each learner
differs from the other in some ways; and the
educator’s task is, indeed, to facilitate learning
for each person that meets the varying needs of
adult students (Knowles, 1970).
The Medium May be the
Message, But…
The medium is not the method. All too often, we
allow the medium, i.e., technology, to drive our
design and delivery of instruction. With new me-
dia, we are able to more efficiently repeat the same
ineffective instructional methods and strategies
that have not served us well or we can thoughtfully
improve them. We start with the wrong premises
for sound instructional design, irrespective of the
content or setting, when we do not rely on a strategy
that helps us determine which medium lends itself
to addressing which learning task. Particularly
with the rapidly changing technology and wealth
of “new and improved tools,” which are offered
in the burgeoning market place of eLearning,
we may find ourselves at a loss to determine the
functions, values, and responsibilities of using
technology in our instructional practice.
Today’s means of potential oppression or
miseducation within the field of adult educa-
tion, particularly in a global context, come in
many forms; misguided use of “technology” is
471
 Teaching Adults across Cultures, Distance, and Learning Preferences
definitely one. The profession of adult education
is at high risk to be outsourced and co-opted by
technicists and “learning officers” in the escalat-
ing Mcdonaldization (Jarvis) of adult education
on a global scale.
Vendor-driven IT choices and the commoditi-
zation of content are usurping our roles, as vendors
are rarely grounded in sound instructional design
and delivery skills that meet the needs of learners
and program goals. We have become enamored
with the tool du jour itself and move away more
and more from clarity of how to use a given
tool and why we use it. Processes of facilitating
learning are invented and reinvented by anyone
working with adults, who lays claim to expertise
in adult education and proclaims to be an adult
educator. Harsh as that may sound, we need to
acknowledge this concern of the usurping of our
profession by technicists and vendors of tools,
and deal with its consequences that all too often
remove qualified practitioners from the tables
where C-level decisions are made with respect
to instructional design and delivery.
This is particularly the case when we consider
the exporting of education programs to countries
with emerging economies where local knowledge
and systems are uprooted and replaced with design
and delivery options without involvement of local
SMEs, teachers, business leaders, and learners.
Recently, several adult educators from around the
globe (Strohschen et al., 2008) unapologetically
declared that our profession is at a crossroads and
insisted that adult educators are “poised to take
the role of paradigm shifting leaders, across any
kind of border” (p. 7).
As practitioners we may think of not having
the power to make such changes; as scholars
we may be too slow in seeing the writing on the
virtual walls. Ruark, working as a research ana-
lyst with the American Society of Training and
Development (ASTD) reminds us poignantly that,
“accountability plays a major roles, and while
research can deliver it, technology cannot and
never will” (2008, p. 44). And he goes on, “for
472
our L&D community, evidence-based practice
is about every entity conducting its day-to-day
practice as evidence-based professionals. This
means that they are doing so in accordance with
the most current and credible research evidence on
effective instructional design, learning optimiza-
tion, and instructional delivery systems available”
(p. 47). And with that, Ruark, in essence, delivers
a wake-up call to adult education professionals
to recapture their practice, standards or profes-
sionalism, and know-how in a world where the
medium is not only the message but threatening
to usurp the method, too.
Culture and Learner Diversity
We define learner diversity by associating it to
culture, race, nationality, religion, gender, age,
and the like. Such categories are not necessarily
useful when it comes to the education of adults,
as Nguyen (2002, p. 171) supports, “Even as we
use these categories to combat the problems of
the moment, we cannot ignore the reification that
is inherent in their deployment.” Such categories
are only secondarily important for instructional
design and for the process of facilitating learning
when viewed from a humanist adult education
perspective. In this perspective, each adult is
considered as an individual different from any
other with unique needs and interests, period.
It is not my intent on dismissing the validity of
culturally-relevant and culturally-grounded adult
education, in content and in its associated pro-
cesses of instructing. Too little ground has been
conquered, or reclaimed if you will, in our field as
it is that respects the need for valuing histories of
knowledge and acknowledging modes of evidenc-
ing learning that go beyond prevailing, Western
ideals. I wish to impress upon us, however, that
one, when not a member of any given culture,
cannot possibly through learning facts about that
culture comprehend it fully enough to be teaching
in a so-termed culturally-grounded or culturally
relevant manner. What we can accomplish through
Teaching Adults across Cultures, Distance, and Learning Preferences
thoughtful inquiry and critical reflection is an
understanding of a) ourselves and our ways of
learning and teaching, and b) the fact that there
exist different ways of learning and teaching that
are equally valid as one’s own. Then, we can
move to interdependently create teaching-learning
environments. I hope this underscores my initial
point that a few facts learned about anyone other
from self do not make us culturally sensitive
instructors. What we can achieve with the study
of instructional design and delivery practices are:
• The ways of assessing and analyzing learn-
ing needs of adults in any context, setting,
or culture
• The stocking of our tool box with tools ap-
propriate to different learning tasks
• The knowledge of instructional methods
and strategies fitting different learning
tasks
• The skills to apply the methods and
strategies.
Today’s Adult Learners’ Needs
Locally as much as globally, diverse adult learn-
ers need to meet their learning needs in order to
participate in our rapidly changing transnational
and intercultural workforce and communities,
both locally and globally. International or inter-
cultural no longer means that we travel across
physical space to encounter otherness or engage
in exchange with people from cultures or countries
different from our own. Our communities and
workplaces, needless to point out, are international
and intercultural, whether we experience these in
real-time, face-to-face settings or within virtual
environments over distance.
Employment opportunities remain key criteria
for adults for the selection of education programs;
and retraining, re-skilling, and assisting adults with
recurrent education has long been a critical task
for educators of adults. It is debatable whether
or not the adult education field as such has thus
far adequately responded to the vocational and
professional training needs of adults, who are
seeking to better their lives through recurrent
education. We do know that adults in the 21st Cen-
tury workforce will need to be versed in different
ways of knowing within a diverse, intercultural,
and interdisciplinary context. Problem-solving,
communication, and working in diverse teams are
skills increasingly required at all levels of work and
life anywhere (Karoly & Panis, 2004). Hayes and
Wynyard (2002) pointed out that, “the training of
the mind is no longer the central role for academ-
ics who are now in the business of ensuring that
their teaching has a vocational ethos.” Underlying
any of such discussion remains the fact that we
teach the person not content only. In our global
knowledge-based economy, a premium will be
placed on the kind of educational systems and
on the sort of educators that can rapidly respond
to the ever-changing and lifelong learning needs
demanded by transforming global dynamics.
Surely, this includes knowing of and applying a
broad array of teaching methods and strategies to
address the learning needs effectively, whether for
vocational purposes or liberatory learning.
Hence, teaching successfully across cultures,
distance, and learning preferences requires a
strategy for determining the key components of
instructional technology to enable us to discern
good practices, effective methods, and appropri-
ate media. The migration to the classroom setting
for teaching during the industrial revolution was
a pivotal change in where and how workers were
trained and, as Sleight chronicles (1993), the post-
WW I needs for workers or the military training
needs during WW II resurrected on-the-job train-
ing, in other words a form of apprenticeship. The
four steps for “consistent and efficient training in
order to quickly produce trained workers” (Allen
as cited in Sleight, 1993), as repulsive as this may
sound to the ears of many an adult educator, hold
value and actually adhere to sound adult education
principles. These four steps
473
 Teaching Adults across Cultures, Distance, and Learning Preferences
1. Show or prepare
2. Tell or present
3. Do or apply
4. Check or inspect
These are the basic design pillars of the AD-
DIE model.
These steps are, or ought to be, familiar to the
instructional designer and to the teacher when
juxtaposing the essential tasks inherent in those
steps with those of the ADDIE model.
INSTRUCTIONAL DESIGN
AND DELIVERY
Basic Components of our Practice
Fundamental to teaching across distance, cultures,
and learning preferences are three basic com-
ponents, which serve as measures to hold adult
educators accountable:
1. Clarity on the mission of adult education and
consequent role of the educator, expressed
in her credo
2. Knowledge of the frameworks that scaffold
our practice and guide our creativity and
flexibility in meeting students’ and other
stakeholders’ needs and goals
3. Skills in designing and delivering instruc-
tion based on adult learning principles and
proven methods, strategies, and techniques.
The Humanistic Adult
Education Perspective
Most seasoned adult educators would nod in agree-
ment when we say that there are no two learners
alike or that no one lesson plan really works twice
in the same way. If there were a hallmark of adult
education, it surely would have the concepts of
needs analysis and contextualizing of instruction
to the group of learners in its seal. Adult educa-
474
tors know that one of the great strengths in our
practice is our ability to adapt instruction to the
learning needs and preferences of the students.
Adult students have long benefited from adult
education’s unconventional approaches and
eclecticism when it comes to selecting methods
and strategies for facilitating their learning. Adult
educators are keenly aware that we really do not
have control over our learners’ learning. We do
not learn people. We teach people, not topics or
subjects or content. We can and do direct and
manipulate certain variables in the instructional
setting in order to foster learning; and then only
successfully with adult learners when we care-
fully plan, and then make the plan and subsequent
teaching processes transparent to the learners.
This conceptual framework is part of our adult
education knowledge base, stated in the annals of
our practices: we collaborate with our learners to
understand their learning needs and preferences
prior to designing effective instruction.
The fact that there are myriad considerations
in learner need and learning preference analyses
should suggest that it would be impossible to
design and deliver instruction that would satisfy
all the varying interests typically associated with
diverse learners. The perspective I present here
relates a process that allows educators of adults to
address diverse learning needs in an instruction-
ally sound manner and inclusive fashion. It goes
beyond generally defined and accepted categories,
and stubbornly makes the point that each learner
is unique and different from the other: inter-
ethnically, inter-culturally, and internationally.
The most fundamental techniques involve the
modification of the three variables in the learning
setting that can be manipulated1 by the instruc-
tor. These are time, content, and methods. This
approach is based on an assumption of equity
regarding race, nationality, religion, gender, age,
abledness, and the like. Moreover, it does not
falsely base instruction on the premise that the
medium is the method. Therefore, irrespective of
the learner and the medium or tool used, sound
Teaching Adults across Cultures, Distance, and Learning Preferences
instructional techniques are sound instructional
techniques.
Techniques not Technology
The manipulation of these three variables assists
educators in developing a flexible set of ap-
proaches that applies adult learning principles.
This ensures that instruction addresses the multi-
tude of learning styles and preferences to achieve
maximum learner success and, simply, respects the
multi-ethnic and multicultural realities of learners
in any setting. Properly designed, instruction, built
on this perspective, offers an approach to facili-
tating learning that values and supports adults’
learning preferences across individual differences.
Principles and Needs in
Adults Learning
A sound instructional program for adults, grounded
in humanist adult education principles, considers
the needs of the learners first and foremost with the
goal of addressing them by means of instruction.
As we know from the basic principles of adult
education (Knowles, 1964), a formal needs analy-
sis process should include a thorough analysis of
the learner population prior to program design.
When Malcolm Knowles (1973, 1998) outlined
principles of adult learning, he reflected in them
the preferences that adults have in the learning
process. These principles essentially describe
the accommodations, which instructors of adults
need to make in order to successfully facilitate
the learning process. Knowles identified several
principles of adult learning, summed up in these
statements, which have stood the test of time:
1. Adults bring considerable experience with
them. They wish to speak, participate, and
contribute. They dislike long lectures and
one-way communication.
2. Adults have something to lose. They have
a strong need to maintain their self-esteem.
They should be listened to and we should
set up the course so they will be successful.
3. Adults want courses that focus on real-life
problems and tasks rather than academic
material. A strong how-to focus is desired.
They become restless if their time is being
wasted.
4. Adults see learning as a means to an end rather
than an end in itself. They must know what
there is to gain and they must see progress
being made.
5. Adults have a here-and-now viewpoint and
wish to focus on current issues rather than
material that may be useful in the distant
future.
6. Adults are accustomed to being active. They
should be given an opportunity for active
participation whenever possible.
7. Adults are accustomed to being self-directed.
They have expectations and wants that need
to be met. Instructors must consult and work
with adults rather than be too directive.
These principles of adult learning are at the
base for instructional design that supports learn-
ers’ differences.
Learning preferences are grouped along
many paradigms. Needless to say, that a person’s
backgrounds moulds her perspectives. Through
our lenses of one’s race, ethnicity, age, gender,
experiences, and abledness we filters our percep-
tion. One prevailing model of learner difference
and preferences is that of multiple intelligences
introduced by Howard Gardner (1999). Gardner
arranged learner differences within domains
that need to be identified in learning style needs
analyses and covered in the assessment, design,
delivery, instruction, and evaluation phases of
instruction. He identified a variety of learning
styles and noted differences in the way each
learner acquires, stores, and retrieves informa-
tion. Correspondingly, he suggested strategies to
teach to the intelligences of learners, irrespective
475
 Teaching Adults across Cultures, Distance, and Learning Preferences
of teacher assumptions regarding ethnic, cultural,
or national boundaries.
These two sources alone regarding adult learn-
ing principles and learning process preferences can
aid educators of adults in understanding the needs
of the adult learner across differences in postional-
ity (Taylor & Tisdell, 1999). If the primary task
of the educator of adults is to support learners in
strengthening their individual and group power
and self-determination with more education, then
the most fair and most equitable and most profes-
sional action for these educators is to provide sound
instruction. In the international and intercultural
context of training and education programs in
the USA and abroad, adults can empower them-
selves more readily when they own the skills and
knowledge to participate fully in their work and
life settings. “More educated workers tend to be
reemployed more rapidly than their less-educated
counterparts,” reason Karoly & Panis (2004, p.
129). If adult students choose to fully participate
in the workforce and seek education and training
to do so, then equity and respect for diversity can
be achieved best when individual learning needs,
styles, and preferences are identified and addressed
with sound instructional methods and strategies.
Addressing these needs most effectively is
the mandate for the adult educators, which they
may best achieve by using the proven tools of
their trade. In their train-the-trainer curricula,
Langevin, Inc. (2005) has distilled and put forth a
set of key questions that will guide the education
practitioner in meeting adult learners’ needs in the
instructional process. They ask if adult learners:
• Have an opportunity to reason through re-
al-life situations?
• Read the materials and take notes?
• Talk to each other?
• See the task being performed?
• Have the ability to be physically active and
perform the task?
• Hear the instructions spoken?
476
• Reflect on the content and determine how
it applies?
The answers to these questions determine to
what extent educators will continue to rely on a
limited array of instructional methods that address
primarily verbal-linguistic, logical, introspective,
linear-based methods of instruction. Aside from
excluding other intelligences (e.g., physical, spa-
tial, musical, and interpersonal ones), generally,
instructional methods are age, culture, gender, and
language-bound and do not inquire first into the
learning preference and need of today’s learners.
Often, teachers’ teaching styles are not factored
into the equation, which further blocks a clear
path to developing sound instructional delivery
techniques. Educators need to understand their
own limitations and strength. It would go a long
way in guiding educators toward understanding
their teaching styles and preferences, and suc-
cess of their approaches would we exist in an
environment that values critical self-reflection
(Brookfield, 2005) and feedback with the goal of
improving our practice. All too often, student or
client reaction to instruction is all we measure;
rather than building evaluation of evidence-based
performance of the teachers as they design and
deliver instruction that meets students’ needs
and is iteratively evaluated based on measuring
outcomes of learning and successful application
of the learning.
Generally, technological advances and inter-
cultural settings now create space for experiment-
ing with a variety of methods. The andragogical
principles and the multiple intelligences approach
can be easily applied to planning, design, and
delivery phases of instruction by manipulating
the variables of time, content, and method. To
do so an instructional systems design, such as
the ADDIE, spells out specific instructional
strategies. The next section briefly describes the
ADDIE model, which incorporates key elements
from planning to evaluation. We can then move
Teaching Adults across Cultures, Distance, and Learning Preferences
to detail the aspects of instruction over which the
adult educator has control.
The ADDIE Model and the Three
Variables in Instruction
The ADDIE instructional systems design is one
model to follow in the design and delivery of
instruction. It has enjoyed longevity and exhibits
stamina in surviving fads and trends in ISD. Its
basic elements are outlined below as a framework
for instructional phases and for developing strate-
gies for instruction.
A - Analysis
The first step is to determine whether there is a
legitimate need for the instruction, that is, what
gap is it intended to fill; what outcomes do we
anticipate for the instruction? If it is a knowledge
and skill gap, then there is justification for the in-
struction. Any other type of gap, need or outcome
would require a different solution. The subsequent
steps, therefore, are based upon the assumption
that there is a legitimate need for an education or
training program that provides instruction.
The next steps involve analyzing the learners’
needs (Zemke, 1981), logistics, program admin-
istration, personnel needs, design considerations,
budget, time, etc. This is when the most appropri-
ate strategies for administering the program are
determined, that is:
• Group instruction
• Self-paced instruction
• Instruction that takes place on the job or in
the environment
• Reliance on job aids/instructional aids.
Typically, a combination or blend of these
strategies is used; hence, the term blended learning
according to Langevin (2007). This step includes
making decisions on the appropriate technologi-
cal supports for these strategies, e.g., traditional,
e-based, or m-based.
D - Design
At this stage, decisions are made about the specific
content and design of the learning activities, uti-
lizing the most appropriate instructional methods
and media to close the knowledge or skills gap.
Appropriate metrics and assessments to help de-
termine if the learners have achieved the intent of
the instruction are chosen. Design performance
support activities to strengthen transference of
learning, e.g., post-course activities, homework, or
coaching (Fuller, 1997), for example, are selected.
D - Development
The deliverables, such as the course materials,
texts, teacher guides, lesson plans, visual aids, per-
formance support materials, etc. using traditional
or computer-assisted tools are identified with the
understanding that the development of the type of
materials is dictated by the blend of strategies cho-
sen in the planning (analysis) and design phases.
Selection of strategies and materials is done in
consideration of the broad diversity of learners’
styles and preferences in order to maximize the
support in the learning environment. Validation
of the materials is critical before they are used.
That is, piloting of instruction is a vital step to
successful teaching that is all too often foregone.
I - Implementation
This is the stage when the instruction is implement-
ed. Whether delivered through traditional group
instruction in a physical classroom, in a virtual
environment, or in a self-paced mode, this is when
the learner is engaged in the learning activities
designed and developed for this purpose. There
are three phases of instruction, which include
presentation, application, and feedback. Previous
development of specific instructional activities
477
 Teaching Adults across Cultures, Distance, and Learning Preferences
round out well-designed learning environment,
particularly in training settings where application
and feedback are essential to immediate skill de-
velopment. The strategies, methods, materials, and
media, which are chosen now all come together
to meet the intent of the instruction.
E - Evaluation
This post-instruction evaluation step determines
whether or not the activities, methods, materials,
content, plan of instruction, and so forth, in fact,
did close the knowledge or skill gap. Evaluation
will identify whether or not the instructional ef-
forts resulted in the intended outcome. This is
the time to review all the considerations from
the front-end objectives, based on the analysis,
to identify next steps, if any. Lessons learned
are reviewed. Input during this evaluation phase
should be solicited from all stakeholders who are
essential for appropriate improvements that need
to be made. The program assessment methods and
process chosen during the development phase can
vary depending on program intent. It is important
to select a model of evaluation (e.g., Kirkpatrick,
1998; Phillips, 1997; Boudreau & Berger, 1985)
that is appropriate to the kind of outcome for
which instruction was designed.
Time, Content, and Method
As stated above, we do not learn people; we de-
liver instruction in ways that create environments,
which support learning. Within the framework of
any ISD model, actually, the variables over which
we have control as designers and instructors are
limited. To reiterate, they are time, content, and
method.
Time
Making Time
Inevitably, in our fast-paced eLearning courses
with modules that have assignments due every
478
week and last for 10 weeks only, we “lose”
students who cannot keep up or who need more
germination time. A chunk of content delivered or
a course squeezed into an institutional timeframe
does not necessarily for learning make. Examples
of how we provide flexibility in our learning
environments are project-based learning or
asynchronous participation in learning activities.
With openness to co-design options with students,
we create individualized learning and practice
activities at a pace that matches students’ needs.
A most commonly known tactic to alter the time
variable is to assign homework. In eLearning, on
so many levels, most of the study is “homework.”
Other options are that students can access module
content weeks before the course starts to prepare
at their own pace; grouping students so they can
engage in practice sessions with feedback from
the instructor throughout the course based on
their need; or providing the option to students
to complete tasks past the end of courses with
extended grade options that do not punish them
with incomplete status and automatic conver-
sion to fail grades after a term or two. All of this
requires preparation and continuous support by
the instructor and the institution.
Time on a learning task is the variable that can be
adjusted to address needs of the learner to embrace
content or practice skills should they need more
than the allotted seat time given to a particular
structured instructional event. The type of activity
devoted to a learning task and its specific content
can be offered in a synchronous or asynchronous
manner. In fact, with eLearning, asynchronous
access to content and learning activities eases the
challenge of reaching a learning objective within a
specific and delimited time frame, such as a class
session. Depending on the task and the needs, time
can be shortened, extended, or eliminated. Time
on task can be decided by the instructor or by
the learner or by both. Timing can be situational
or standardized. As learners work individually,
in groups, in peer-assisted ways, or one-on-one
Teaching Adults across Cultures, Distance, and Learning Preferences
with an instructor, it is time on a task, project, or
activity that can be varied to accommodate the
disparate learning preferences and styles as much
as the barriers or opportunities afforded by the
setting of a given learning activity or institutional
requirements.
The key aspect here is that as teachers manipu-
late (i.e., segment, condense, expand or parallel)
the time variable, they give opportunities to the
students to spend time on task in a variety of ways,
which meets the identified needs of the students.
Content
Meeting Students
During the second week of the class, I finally got
around to making telephone calls to all of my
students in an online course. Internet telephone
options like Skype allow for inexpensive or free
calls around the globe. The course had been pre-
designed by experienced instructional designers
of my college and sported many exciting techno-
logical features, such as video-streaming wherein
graduates shared experiences with the course,
and synchronous discussions during WIMBA ses-
sions. What became clear during the telephone
conversation was that much of the material I was
to present, however interactively and with trendy
tools during the course, was already known to
this group of adults or focused on nice-to-know
information that was not relevant to their learn-
ing goals at hand. Within our conversations we
easily determined where the focus should be in
our coverage of the content. Moreover, I was
able to adapt instructional activities in ways that
included student-led instruction, self-paced read-
ings, and in-the-environment projects for students
to “get at” the content. Our role in asynchronous
eLearning activities then moved to debriefing and
providing feedback by and for students as well.
The delivery of content can be adjusted to the
needs of individual learners even when content
has been pre-determined. Applying the principles
of adult learning, we know that the background
knowledge and experience of the learner are two
major considerations when determining what
content to present at what time in the process of
facilitating learning. Content can be modified or
customized to address diverse needs. The exist-
ing and needed knowledge and skills of learners
determine in which ways to present particular
content so that learners are enabled to absorb it
in a way appropriate to their style, preference,
and need. Content can be modified to address
individual learning needs according to preferences
depending on language, culture, gender, age, race,
abledness and so forth. Important to note here is
that content need not be presented by the teacher
only. Although this is old news to most seasoned
instructors, it warrants reconsidering. The burn-
ing of the overhead or the pontification with
PowerPoint presentations are still standard fare in
instruction irrespective of the appropriateness of
their use in presenting content. A video-streamed
lecture is still in the talking head, sage on the stage
mode of delivery of content. When technology
drives the delivery of content, we lose our ability to
individualize instruction. When needs assessment
and analysis are conducted carefully with the aim
of engaging the students in their learning and the
design and managing thereof then the question on
how to get at content becomes easy to answer.
It requires more planning and preparation with
respect to getting to know the students but saves
time, and everyone from frustration, in the long
run. The old approach to building curricula and
then marketing programs to students may have
been recognized to be inappropriate to adults’
learning. Because it is not in our power as instruc-
tors within institutionalized schooling approaches,
we, nonetheless, can adapt this content variable
in ways that meet students’ needs.
479
 Teaching Adults across Cultures, Distance, and Learning Preferences
Method
Instructors’ Roles and Responsibilities
“I never know the difference between designing
and developing.” This statement made to me by
a colleague tasked with coordinating an adult
education program brought home the fact that
many instructors lack a basic knowledge of ISD
and IT. Small wonder, then, that we use syllabi as a
means for assessing quality of instruction, or that
lesson plans in many educational institutions are
unheard of. Instructors rely on knowing content
and their experience in facilitating discussions.
The dialectical approach is overvalued as much
as alleged adaptations, which can, perhaps, be
called distortions of constructionism. Seldom do
faculty or training staff meetings grapple with
the differences between training, education, and
development and the corresponding methods of
facilitating the learning process. Seldom do we
admit that we have basic ISD and delivery skills
to learn.
A variety of methods can be selected that ad-
dress learning preferences and match the skill
or knowledge desired to learning objectives and
outcomes. There are literally hundreds of methods
from which to select. A method needs to match the
particular phase of the instruction to be effective
in achieving the desired outcome. Instructional
methods need to be categorized as: methods to
present content, methods for application of the
content, and methods for feedback on how well the
content was mastered. Methods need to be applied
to content in appropriate ways, which is dependent
upon the nature of the content and task or topic.
Methods can be used to introduce such content,
help learners apply the content, and ensure that
feedback is given on how well content has been
mastered. A few examples of such methods are
480
• Lecture
• Neighbor discussion
• Role plays
• Case studies in all of its variations
• Practice exercises
• Work sheets in the presentation and appli-
cation phases
• Tests, observation, peer review or perfor-
mance checklists in the feedback phase.
Variety will also assure adherence to adult
learning principles. All learners cycle through vari-
ous stages of learning, have preferences for how
they learn a given task or content, and cognitively
process this new knowledge in individual ways,
representing the spectrum of intelligences. When
educators rely on a limited selection of methods to
teach toward a variety of learning styles and intel-
ligences, they risk minimizing important forms of
knowing. Method selection should factor in the
use of all of our senses. The selection of methods
is dependent on learner preference, and needs to
be appropriate to the task or topic, learning style,
the sensory modalities, emotional intelligence, and
level of desired interactivity. Methods should be
selected to maximize engagement of the learner
in the learning process.
Three Variables Considered
These three variables can be manipulated during
the planning, design, and delivery (implementa-
tion) phases of instruction. For example, if the
target audience has language and experience vari-
ances, these differences can be considered in the
design of the content. The method for delivery of
this content may be the same, but instruction may
occur at different times. In other words, instruc-
tors can vary any and all of the factors to create
educational programs that address the common
denominators in any learning situation regardless
of the diversity of the group. The objective is to
sort through the differences among the learners
Teaching Adults across Cultures, Distance, and Learning Preferences
and focus on what each learner needs in order to
be successful.
In manipulating these variables, content is the
primary determinant for the design of time and
method selections. Content is, in short, the criti-
cal aspect in instructional design and delivery of
the three variables. Content, therefore, has to be
developed in such a way that use of particular varia-
tions of time and method is the logical outcome.
Again, time, method, and content are selected in
conjunction with these strategies:
• Self-paced instruction
• Group instruction
• Learning in active environment
(experiential)
• Instructional or job aids
• Any blend of the above.
Content determines when to select a group
setting for the learning situation. Group settings
can also happen asynchronously. The benefit of
group settings lies in their interaction, collabora-
tion, and peer aspect, all of which supports learn-
ing in groups.
Self-paced approaches are justified when the
task requires time for an individual to focus on
a task or topic in a timeframe that is convenient,
appropriate or necessary to the individual and
the task. Self-paced approaches may be used
synchronously or asynchronously through the
use of technology.
Learning in the environment (i.e., experiential
or on the job) requires the real time, synchronous
or asynchronous engagement of students. It can
be simulated and modified so that a consequence
of failure can be minimized. Therefore, content
and method can be modified to reduce or enhance
experiences. This can be done in groups or indi-
vidually, with or without the instructor.
Instructional aids or job aids can be modified
for brevity, language, text, graphics, and address
auditory, visual or tactile, and virtual modes.
They are adaptable and can be personalized,
permanent or temporary etc. Instructional aids
assist in mastering a task or content and they
can be incorporated into any of the three above
strategies and into any method.
CONCLUSION
In a pure sense, we are all different from one
another and, therefore, diverse. In the interest of
understanding our reluctance to engage in point-
less semantics, when referencing this term we
assume the commonly accepted categorizations
based on race, ethnicity, culture, nationality, color,
gender, different abledness, sexual orientation,
minority group status, language, religion, age,
and so forth. And even this list is not all-inclusive.
In fact, Training Magazine (2004), highlighted
corporations’ diversity activities and exercises,
depicting that the Marriott Corporation classifies
individuals on public assistance, i.e., those who
participate in their Pathways to Independence
welfare-to-work programs, in the “diversity”
category. Whether the classifications expand or
contract, the adult education practitioner needs
strategies and tools to adapt to a broad variety of
adult learners. Within the field of adult education,
we have long recognized the reality of individual
learners being “different-from” one another when
we speak of learners in any setting and the need
to address disparate learning styles and learning
preferences. Moreover, we also acknowledge that
different learning goals determine the learning
tasks at hand and that our role as educators is to
assist the adult in closing the skill of knowledge
gap, in other words, to teach the person. We have
managed to learn by trial and error or by design, in
formal, informal, and non-formal adult education
settings, to apply the very principles and good
practices of adult education in the learning set-
tings that distinguishes our discipline in the first
place as different from pedagogy. As such, the
practice in humanist adult education of carefully
and mindfully assessing each learner’s need with
481
 Teaching Adults across Cultures, Distance, and Learning Preferences
respect to learning goal, style, and preference is
a timeless approach to ensure that we meet the
education, training, and development challenges of
the learners. When we combine this understanding
with appropriate strategies in a teaching process
that respects and values adult learners’ experi-
ence, goals, and capacity to co-design the learning
activities (or to learn to do so) then we remain
true to an authentic and accountable practice of
our profession.
Using contemporary technology in instruction
has potential advantages and disadvantages, no
doubt. Unexamined reliance on technology, how-
ever, can mean that we allow the tools to dictate
instructional design and delivery decisions. When
basing our selection of technology on examined
criteria for appropriate ISD, the benefit of such
tools lies in their assistance to successfully cross
distances and address learning preferences.
Decisions about how best to facilitate the
learning processes to serve adult learners across
cultures, distances, and learning preferences ought
to be based on universal principles of instructional
design. There are common denominators in the vast
array of ISD models and they move, iteratively,
through needs assessment and analysis, design,
development, implementation, and evaluation.
With that, the ADDIE model provides a solid
framework within which to examine good prac-
tices for instruction.
Therefore, recognizing the fact that there are
phases of instruction and that different methods
and strategies need to be applied during each
phase, the adult education practitioner can adapt
instruction to fit the diverse needs of adults across
cultures and distance with appropriate use of the
21st Century tools.
REFERENCES
Bloom, B. S., Madeaus, G. F., & Hastings, J. T.
(1981). Evaluation to improve learning. Colum-
bus, OH: McGraw Hill.
482
Boudreau, J. W., & Berger, C. J. (1985b). Toward
a model of employee movement utility. In Row-
land, K. M., & Ferris, G. R. (Eds.), Research in
personnel and human resource management (pp.
31–53). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.
Gardner, H. (1999). Intelligence reframed: Mul-
tiple intelligences for the 21st century. New York:
Basic Books.
Gardner, H. (2006). Five minds for the future.
Boston: Harvard Business School Press.
Hall, B. (1997). Web-based training cookbook:
Everything you need to know for online training.
New York: John Wiley & Sons.
Hayes, D., & Wynyard, R. (Eds.). (2002). The
McDonaldization of higher education. Westport,
Ct: Bergin & Garvey.
Karoly, L. A., & Panis, C. W. A. (2004). The 21st
century at work: Forces shaping the future work-
force and workplace in the United States. Santa
Monica, CA: Rand Corporation.
Kirkpatrick, D. L. (1998). Evaluating training
programs: The four levels. San Francisco: Berrett-
Koehler Publishers.
Knowles, M. S. (1964). The field of operations in
adult education. In Jenson, G., Liveright, A., &
Hallenbeck, W. (Eds.), Adult education: Outlines
of an emerging field of university study (pp. 41–68).
Washington, D.C.: Adult Education Association
of the U.S.A.
Knowles, M. S. (1970). The modern practice of
adult education: Andragogy versus pedagogy.
New York: Association Press.
Knowles, M. S. (1973). The adult learner: A
neglected species (Rev. ed.). Houston: Gulf Pub-
lishing Company.
Knowles, M. S., Holton, E. F., & Swanson, R.
A. (1998). The adult learner (5th ed.). Houston:
Gulf Publishing Company.
Teaching Adults across Cultures, Distance, and Learning Preferences
Langevin Learning Services. (2005). How adults
learn. Workshop Handbook. Ottawa, Ontario,
Canada: Langevin.
Langevin Learning Services, Inc. (2007). New
trainer’s survival guide. Ottawa, Canada: Lan-
gevin Learning Services, Inc.
Magnusen, P. (2008). Business-industry partner-
ship. Retrieved October 10, 2008, from http://
region2conference.wordpress.com/2008/10/10/
business-industry-partnerships/
Nguyen, V. T. (2002). Race & resistance: Lit-
erature & politics in Asia America. New York:
Oxford University Press.
Phillips, J. J. (1997). Handbook of training evalua-
tion and measurement methods (3rd ed.). Woburn,
MA: Butterworth-Heinemann.
Reigeluth, C. M. (1983). Instructional design
theories and models: An overview of their current
status. Mahwa, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Ruark, B. E. (July 2008). ARDDIE. The year 2013:
ARDDIE is in - ADDIE is out. T+D Training +
Development, 7(62), 44-49.
Sleight, D. A. (1993). A developmental history of
training in the United States and Europe. Retrieved
June 30, 2008, from www.msu.edu/~sleightd/
trainhst.html.
Strohschen, G., Elazier, K., Yu, T. C., Chuprina,
L., Sun, L., & Molina Lopez, M. L. (2008). Glo-
balization across cultures and the role of the 21st
century adult educator: Perspectives from Europe,
North America, Latin America, and Asia. In J.
Groen & S. Guo (Eds), Online proceedings of the
Canadian Association for the Study of Adult Edu-
cation (CASAE) (pp. 424-429). Thinking beyond
borders: Global ideas, global values.
Taylor, E. W., & Tisdell, E. J. (1999). Adult
education philosophy informs practice. Adult
Learning, 11(2), 6.
UNESCO. (1998). World declaration on higher
education for the 21st century: Vision and action.
Bangkok, Thailand: UNESCO Asia and Pacific
Regional Bureau for Education.
Willis, J. E. (Ed.). (2009). Constructivist instruc-
tional design: Foundations, models, and examples.
Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing.
Zemke, R., & Zemke, S. (1981). 30 things we
know for sure about adult learning. Training (New
York, N.Y.), 18(6), 45–50.
KEY TERMS AND DEFINITIONS
ADDIE: This acronym’s letters represent each
phase of the instructional design process: analysis,
design, development, implementation, and evalu-
ation. It is an ISD concept and was first developed
by Florida State University in 1975 and adopted
by the military for training program designs.
Adult Learning Principles: These refer to
the tenets about adults’ learning as set forth by
Malcolm Knowles and they are widely used with
variations and interpretations nowadays without
reference to their originator.
Diversity: In the context of this discussion,
diversity is seen from a humanist perspective in
that each human being, i.e., the adult, is seen as
distinctly different from another. Based on this
premise, then, instruction by definition of such
diversity of learning needs, must be individual-
ized to fit learners’ needs, styles, and preferences
irrespective of the culture, setting (e.g., with use
of eTools or in group instruction in f2f settings),
or knowledge or skill learning task at hand.
Instructional Methods: Instructional methods
are kinds of instructional ways or activities used
to guide the facilitation of learning in each phase
of the instructional process. There are hundreds
of variations. Examples are lectures, case studies,
journals, blogs, story telling, peer feedback, quiz-
483
 Teaching Adults across Cultures, Distance, and Learning Preferences
zes, performances, brainstorming, video taping
and review, etc.
Instructional Strategies: These refer to the
ways instruction is “presented,” and include group
instruction, self-paced instruction, instruction that
takes place on the job or in the environment, and
reliance on job aids/instructional aids.
ISD: This acronym stands for Instructional
System Design and was originally disseminated
widely in the 1970s. In the training field, ISD
became known as SAT, i.e., Systems Approach
to Training. Key to this concept is the notion of
chunking of components of the instructional cycle,
such as can be seen in the ADDIE model.
Phases of Instruction: These phases represent
the portion of an instructional design that addresses
484
the presentation of content, its practice, and cor-
responding feedback.
ENDNOTE
1
“Manipulate” has a connotation of coercion
in common usage of the word. The use of
this word here is to emphasize the intent of
control as the word describes that an educator
can influence, maneuver, and direct certain
aspects with the full knowledge and support
of the learner, thus control, which is not the
case with many other variables in the learn-
ing setting.
 485

Chapter 29
Library Issues in Adult
Online Education
Linda Marie Golian-Lui
University of Hawaii at Hilo, USA

Suzy Westenkirchner
Auburn University, USA

ABSTRACT
Adult online learners have unique information and technology needs which are best met by libraries
and library professionals. Combining the concept of andragogy along with best practices for the library
profession significantly assists librarians in providing meaningful learning opportunities. Effective library
support for adults in online learning experiences incorporates the concepts of learning style theories,
thinking style theories, and library anxiety research. Best practices in information literacy and technol-
ogy literacy assist librarians in supporting the broad needs of adult online learners.

INTRODUCTION highlighting librarianship and andragogy, learn-

Foundational concepts in the field of library infor-
mation science and the theory of adult learning,
a.k.a. andragogy, are a natural partnership for the
support of adult online education. This chapter
highlights how the library science profession
strongly embraces the concepts of andragogy, and
provides specific examples how the library science
profession supports both formal and informal adult
online education situations.
The chapter includes definitions and practical
suggestions. It is organized into eight sections
DOI: 10.4018/978-1-61692-906-0.ch029
ing styles, thinking styles, information literacy,
technology literacy, library anxiety, best practices
and future trends. The chapter concludes with
comments about the future role of libraries and
librarians in the area of adult online education.
BACKGROUND
Librarianship & Andragogy
The beginning of the modern library coincides
with the eve of the industrial revolution, significant
increases in world population, and the dawn of

the Enlightenment Age (Rogers & McChesney,
1984). Historically, libraries have fulfilled signifi-
cant social functions by meeting specific societal
needs such as the dissemination of information
and knowledge.
Libraries and educational institutions have
been inseparably tied due to these societal, re-
pository, and information providing roles. Similar
to other educational institutions, libraries are
fundamentally viewed as educational rather than
recreational organizations.
The information seeking needs of today’s
library patron includes library visits that are
irregular and for a brief period of time. This is
because today’s library patron typically makes
the voluntary decision to visit the library to meet
some type of self-directed learning need. It is not
unusual in online educational environment for
virtual library visits.
Like other educational institutions, libraries
are facing a need to provide increased services
that place an emphasis on lifelong learning, self-
directed learning, and support for distance or
online educational experiences. Today’s society
requires more from their educational institutions in
meeting the informational needs of their citizens.
Utilizing the concepts of andragogy signifi-
cantly assists libraries and librarians in providing
meaningful learning opportunities. Incorporating
modern technology and the needs of the adult
online learner are essential educational program
issues that must be addressed.
Andragogy can be defined as the art and
science of helping adults learn. It can also be
considered another model of learning that can
be used alongside the pedagogical model of as-
sumptions in helping children learn (Knowles,
1980). Adults participating in online educational
experiences greatly benefit when andragogical
practices are combined with the best practices of
the library science profession. The andragogical
approach indicates that effective adult educators
possess both technical and interpersonal skills to
be an effective facilitator of learning (Galbraith,
486
Library Issues in Adult Online Education
1990). It is suggested that the learning experience
is centered around principles of voluntary partici-
pation, a culture of mutual respect, collaborative
facilitation, praxis, facilitation of critical refection,
and empowerment (Brookfield, 1986).
The principles of caring, respect, and partner-
ship continuously reappear in the literature as ma-
jor attributes of effective adult learning programs,
including online education programs. Therefore,
effective adult educators, including librarians,
must possess the ability and desire to work well
with others in creating a conducive learning en-
vironment and experience. Adult educators who
do not believe in these fundamental concepts are
quickly identified by adult learners, and when
possible, they and their learning programs are
avoided.
When an adult educator believes in the prin-
ciples listed above, little effort is required for the
incorporation of these principles in the creation
of online learning programs. For example, librar-
ians can create online learning tutorials that are
available 24 /7 to support the needs of the library
patron’s schedule. Online learning tutorials should
be recommended, but not required. Online tutorials
should be created in such a way as to motivate and
invite adult online learners to use the tool. Online
learning activities should include opportunities
for reflection and feedback from the adult online
learner.
In addition to the core andragogical principles
listed above, library educators should also be aware
of, and incorporate, six (6) identified components
of effective adult education programs using an-
dragological concepts. These six characteristics
include: (1) establishing an organizational climate
and structure, (2) assessing learner needs and
interest, (3) defining purposes and objectives,
(4) designing a comprehensive program, (5)
operating a comprehensive program, and (6)
evaluating a comprehensive program (Knowles,
1980). Of these six components, establishing an
organizational climate and structure is perhaps the
most critical for effective adult online education
Library Issues in Adult Online Education
programs. An educational climate consists of two
major components, the physical environment and
the psychological climate.
In an online environment, the educator loses
significant control of the traditional physical
learning environment. Therefore, the physical
learning environment becomes the electronic
point of interaction. The need to develop easy to
find and visually appealing web tutorials becomes
significantly more critical when a physical learn-
ing environment is not available.
Helping adult online learners can be chal-
lenging, exciting, and rewarding. Combining
andragogical concepts, learning and thinking
style theories, andragogical principals, and best
practices in utilizing modern technology allows
librarians to create and provide unique adult online
learning opportunities.
LIBRARIANSHIP AND
LEARNING STYLES
Effective education for adults in online learning
experiences incorporates the concept of learn-
ing style theories. The term learning style can
be defined as a self-directed persistence and
preferred method(s) individuals use to encode
input information into the cognitive domain for
comprehension, the ability to understand, and for
the ease in replicating. It encompasses the entire
learning situation as well as the learner, including
the preferred way individuals desire to engage
in and process information in learning activities
(Kolb, 1984). Learning style theory is not the
same as sensory learning, or the incorporation of
multiple senses (auditory, visual, or kinesthetic)
into the learning process.
Elements of learning styles research appear in
the literature as early as 1892. This includes signifi-
cant research conducted prior to 1940 concentrat-
ing on the relationship between student memory
and teaching methods (Keefe, 1987). Educational
services have always been a significant portion
of library mission statements. Beginning in the
fifties, libraries became increasingly involved and
supportive of educational activities with a grow-
ing emphasis in information literacy. The White
House Conference on Library and Information
Services held in 1979 added the incorporation of
learning theory and the incorporation of assess-
ment in achieving this mission (Chobot, 1989).
Focusing upon the literature’s diversity, Kolb
(1984) developed a learning style mode based upon
experimental learning theory. His model concep-
tualized the learning process as a four-stage cycle
that indentifies four unique learning styles upon
an individual’s self-directed persistence. Kolb’s
learning cycle includes concrete experience (CE),
reflective observation (RO), abstract conceptual-
ization (AC), and active experimentation (AE).
Kolb theorized that people learn from concrete
experience, and then concrete experience forms
the basis for observation and reflection, which
leads to the formation of abstract concepts and
generalizations. The formation of concepts and
generalizations allows the learner a choice of
new experiences.
Learning styles are adaptive and that they could
be modified and accentuated in such a way to match
an individual’s characteristics and environmental
demands. This matching comes about in two ways.
Either the environment engenders change in an
individual’s characteristics for adaptation, or the
individual places them self in environments that
are consistent with their characteristics.
Based on this conceptual framework, Kolb
(1984) devised an instrument called the Learn-
ing Style Inventory (LSI) to map an individual’s
learning style into four preferred learning style
quadrants. The four quadrants are: accommoda-
tor, diverger, converger, and assimilator. Below
is a synthesist of Kolb’s (1984) four preferred
learning styles:
Accommodators are defined as people prefer-
ring learning situations with concrete experiences
and active experimentation. They are good at
caring out plans, and are considered risk-takers.
487

They are commonly found among people with
business and management backgrounds.
Divergers are defined as people preferring
reflective and concrete learning modes. Divergers
tend to be emotional and interested in people. The
style is characteristic of people with humanities
and liberal arts backgrounds.
Convergers are defined as people preferring
abstract and active learning modes. They have
strengths in the practical application of ideas,
and tend to be unemotional. They prefer to deal
with things rather than people. Assimilators are
defined as people referring abstract and reflective
learning modes. They are less interested in people,
and are also less concerned with the practical use
of theories. The style is characteristic of people
in science careers or information careers such
as teachers, librarians, ministers, or university
professors. Effective instruction for adult learn-
ers in online environments must begin with an
assessment of the learner(s) needs. In addition,
clearly articulated and written vision and goals
of the instructional experience, incorporation of
learning style knowledge, and a major amount
of flexibility and understanding by the learning
facilitator and institution.
The learning experience should incorporate
multiple senses of sight, touch, and sound. Web
pages and learning exercise should be designed
with different learning style quadrants of accom-
modator, diverger, converger, and assimilator.
Activities are created to allow adults to customize
the learning experience to a specific and current
real life need. Learning tools are created that can
be done independently or as individuals in support
of learning style preferences and personal needs.
As indicated by learning style theories, adult
learners do have preferences in how they learn
and acquire new information for their cognitive
domain. When educators, including librarians, cre-
ate flexible learning experiences that allow learn-
ers to acquire new information in their preferred
learning style, learning is easier, and connections
with other acquired information is quicker.
488
Library Issues in Adult Online Education
Facilitating adult learning is a complex psy-
chosocial drama in which the personalities and
learning style(s) of the learners and the facilitators
involve divergent experiences and expectations
brought to the educational encounter. Creating
educational programs must be flexible and take
into account the wide variety of learning style
preferences in order to best meet the needs of
adult online learners.
LIBRARIANSHIP AND
THINKING STYLES
In addition to incorporating the concept of learn-
ing style theories, effective education for adults
in online learning experiences incorporate the
concept of thinking style theories. Thinking can
be defined as a complex cognitive process in-
volving the manipulation of perceived, learned,
remembered, and encoded input information and
experiences. It is an internal cognitive process that
in some instances can result in an external behav-
ioral process (Mayer, 1983). The term thinking
style can be defined as the preferred method(s)
individuals use to manipulate and processes en-
coded information in order to act, reason, make
decisions, inquire, communicate, infer, or create
new knowledge. It is a consistent preference for
approaching, solving, and resolving situations
(Harrison & Bramson, 1984).
Thinking styles can be defined as the self-
directed persistence and preferred method(s) indi-
viduals use to encode input information into their
cognitive domain for comprehension, the ability to
understand, and for the ease in replicating while
thinking styles can be defined as the preferred
method(s) individuals use to manipulated and
processes encoded information in order to act,
reason, make decisions, inquire, communicate,
infer, and create new knowledge (Harrison &
Bramson, 1984).
Exploring the field of thinking style theory can
be attributed to work associated with Aristotle as
Library Issues in Adult Online Education
early as 400 B.C (Harrison & Bramson, 1982).
Harrison and Bramson (1982) are recent research-
ers exploring this theory, with their conclusions
primarily based upon the collective research con-
ducted by C. West Churchman, Justus Buchler,
and Carl Jung.
As part of their research investigation, Harrison
and Bramson conducted a series of seminars. From
these seminars they inferred that the incongruities
between learning and thinking were attributed to
individual differences in ways thinking rather than
attributes of personality.
Their research identified five specific ap-
proaches in the way an individual perceives,
makes meaning, and communicates. The five
dimensions of thinking are synthesist, idealist,
pragmatist, analyst, and realist.
Synthesist are learners with a preferred dimen-
sion of thinking associated with concentrating on
underlying assumptions and abstract ideas. The
orientation of synthesist thinkers is focused on
integration while their behavior is often viewed
as challenging.
Idealists are learners with a preferred dimen-
sion of thinking associated with focusing on
process, aspirations, and values. The orientation
of idealist thinkers is focused on assimilation
while their behavior is often viewed as receptive.
Pragmatists are learners with a preferred di-
mension of thinking associated with examining
with their situational context. The orientation of
pragmatist thinkers is focused on payoff while
their behavior is often viewed as adaptive and
incremental.
Analysts are learners with a preferred dimen-
sion of thinking associated with abstracting facts
into theories and problem-solving approaches. The
orientation is focused on method while behavior
is often viewed as prescriptive and logical.
Realists are learners with a preferred dimension
of thinking associated with emphasizing available
resources and apprehendable facts. The orientation
of realist thinkers is focused on the task at hand
while their behavior is often viewed as empirical
and objective (Harrison & Bramson, 1982).
As indicated by thinking style theories, adult
learners do have preferences in how they use and
manipulate encoded information in order to act,
reason, make decisions, inquire, communicate,
infer, and create new knowledge.
When educators, including librarians, create
flexible learning experiences that allow learners
to manipulate new information in their preferred
thinking style, learning is faster, less confusing
and more meaningful.
In creating library instructional materials that
support adults in the online environment, incorpo-
rating thinking style preferences is recommended.
They should also be aware of associated behavioral
clues of different thinkers.
Synthesist thinkers prefer challenging, skepti-
cal or amused in learning situations. They like to
express concepts and opposite points of view. Their
tone may sound argumentative or sardonic. They
enjoy intellectual and philosophical arguments.
They use qualifying phrases and adjectives when
they communicate. They dislike talking about
simplistic concepts and superficial issues. When
stressed in a learning situation they poke fun at
the instructor or others.
Idealist thinkers prefer attentive, receptive
or supportive in learning situations. They like to
express feelings and personal values. Their tone
may sound tentative, hopeful or resentful. They
enjoy learning discussion concerning feelings.
They use indirect questions when they commu-
nicate. They dislike participating in factual or
dehumanizing conversations. When stressed in
a learning situation they can appear to look hurt.
Pragmatist thinkers prefer open, sociable or
humorous in learning situations. They like to
express non-complex ideals and to share personal
anecdotes. Their tone may sound insincere. They
enjoy learning discussions that include brainstorm-
ing and lively give-and-take. They like to learn
with case studies and illustrations. They dislike
participating in learning situations that might be
489

dull or humorless. When stressed in a learning
situation they can appear to look bored.
Analyst thinkers prefer studious learning situ-
ations that include ample time for quiet reading
and reflection. They like to discuss logic, facts,
rules and data. Their tone may sound careful and
dry. Some instructors may perceive them as stub-
born. They enjoy learning discussions that include
rational examination not issues. They prefer to
communicate with long discursive and well-
formulated sentences. They dislike participating
in learning situations they perceive as abstract
or aimless. When stressed in a learning situation
they can appear to look withdrawn.
Realist thinkers prefer direct and quick non-
verbal learning situations. They like to express
opinions and anecdotes when learning. Their tone
may sound dogmatic and forthright. They enjoy
learning with short, direct and factual discus-
sions. When they communicate they like direct
descriptive statements. They dislike participating
in learning situations that are too theoretical or
impractical. When they are stressed in a learning
situation they can become easily agitated (Har-
rison & Bramson, 1982).
Effective facilitation of adult online learning
programs is a complex practice that requires an
understanding of the cognitive process. It is im-
portant for educators to realize that the thinking is
like breathing, it can be taken for granted (Parlette
& Rae, 1993), and that including thinking style
preferences in the development of adult online
educational programs can make a significant dif-
ference for the learner. Similar to the incorporation
of learning style theories with adult learners in the
online environment, there is no one best think-
ing style to use when facilitating adult learning
experiences. Different approaches for different
learners are needed to create effective on-line
opportunities.
490
Library Issues in Adult Online Education
LIBRARIES AND LIBRARIANS ROLE
IN ADULT INFORMATION LITERACY
The American Library Association’s (ALA)
Association of College and Research Libraries
(ACRL) provides clear directives for libraries and
librarians in relation to their ongoing opportunities
and challenges in providing support and services
for distance education for adult online learners.
In the 2008 ACRL report, Standards for Distance
Learning Library Services, the necessary com-
mitment of libraries and librarians to individuals
and services is confirmed. This conviction applies
uniformly to those on campus, off campus, en-
rolled in distance learning courses, or any location
outside of a traditional physical campus or library.
These standards note that library personnel
from the originating institution are the source for
implementation and delivery of library resources
and services to the distance education community.
Those same guidelines articulate the necessity
that each institution provides distance learning
students with instructional services equivalent
to those provided on campus. In essence, library
instruction programs must be designed to instill
independent and effective information literacy
skills while specifically meeting the learner sup-
port needs for each distance learning community.
Traditionally, librarians have provided services
to students, staff, and faculty on campus by means
of collection development, liaison activity, instruc-
tion programs, access to information, and reference
assistance. While these services continue to be the
bulk of work conducted in libraries, the delivery
has been dramatically altered due to the internet
and other invariable changes and opportunities
in technology.
Variety exists in how libraries assign personnel
to the delivery of modern library services. Some
institutions provide a dedicated distance librarian
while others combine duties with existing subject
specialists. Either way, both types of librarians
are dedicated to distance services and adult on-
line learners. Whether the job title is a distance
Library Issues in Adult Online Education
education or a subject specific position, managing
patron information requests is important.
Responding to changing patron needs, today’s
library job market reveals the need for providing
increased support for adult online learners. This
has resulted in an increase of entry level jobs
emphasizing bibliographic instruction and tech-
nology skills in addition to special subject area
expertise (Sproles & Ratledge, 2004).
Information literacy (IL) is the skill set requir-
ing individuals to recognize when information is
needed and having the ability to locate, evaluate,
and use the information effectively (ALA, 1989).
Learners gain information literacy competencies
when their prior experience is emphasized, dif-
ferent learning styles are considered, a supportive
and inclusive environment exists, and the need
for practical application is met (Knowles, 2005).
Information literacy supports the basis for
lifelong learning and is associated with a wide
variety of educational environments. As schools
and colleges strengthen mandates surrounding
core competencies and re-align their goals with
producing lifelong learners, information literacy
becomes a crucial societal commodity. Informa-
tion literacy is also an important factor in obtain-
ing successful employment for today’s society
(Doyle, 1994).
Libraries and librarians need to address the
specific information literacy needs of adult learn-
ers in online education. Librarians understand how
information is organized and disseminated while
valuing the use of technology tools. Identifying
user needs and how to meet those needs is the first
step in providing assistance. Access to resources
and services is vital for adult online learners.
For example, librarians are leaders in creating
and providing a 24/7 environment that allows
access to information for adult online users. This
information includes digital collections, full text
electronic articles from scholarly journals, and
electronic books. Social networking software,
mobile technology, and text messaging aid the
adult online learner in accessing this information
surplus.
Librarians assist learners in acquiring infor-
mation literacy skills by helping learners assess
their information seeking behaviors. Librarians
aid learners in reflecting upon the formation of
inquiry statements and reviewing search tech-
niques, keywords, subject topics, and tools used.
This process helps the adult online learner con-
nect the current learning experience with prior
experiences (Knowles, 1980).
Potential reasons why adult learners shy away
from technology in the information seeking
process are due to differences in learning styles,
motivation, multimedia options, and navigation
techniques of those resources. The term techno-
phobia refers to a disdain for the use of technology
(Cameron & Treagust, 1997). Technophobia is a
learning barrier that librarians must also address
in the information literacy process.
It is essential that information literacy be in-
tegrated across the curriculum. It must occur at
the institutional level including everyone involved
with initiating policies, programs, and curriculum.
Including information literacy in organizational
strategic planning aligns this important society
need with curriculum reform. It is a necessity to
have organizational support and document estab-
lished policies, programs, and curriculum. Librar-
ians must actively and consistently be involved
with curriculum development and instructional
design in order to meet the aggressive objectives
in organization literacy initiatives (Owusu-Ansah,
2004).
Librarians are meeting a leadership challenge
by participating in efforts to integrate information
literacy across the curriculum. This includes mul-
tiple instruction sessions rather than one sporadic
library skills class. It is the collaboration and
creation of complex curriculum integration with
other units in the learning organization (Owusu-
Ansah, 2004).
Multiple national programs assist librarians
as advocates for curriculum integration. Project
491

SAILS, a standardized test for information literacy
skills, allows libraries to document, evaluate, and
access the information literacy proficiency levels
of students and to identify areas for progress. The
University of Texas Libraries at Austin’s Texas
Information Literacy Tutorial (TILT) is available
under Open Public License for download, http://
tilt.lib.utsystem.edu/yourtilt/ and can be modified
and hosted locally.
Another Texas initiative from Trinity Univer-
sity is called Expanding Horizons. This initiative
aims to systemize information literacy goals across
the campus in developing a process in which
librarians work hand-in-hand with instructional
faculty to design new or enhance existing cur-
riculum (Millet, Donald, Wilson, 2009). The many
initiatives and support generated on campuses is
encouraging. These efforts and future projects
express how teachers and librarians can polish
information literacy aspirations.
Knowles (1980, 2005) principles provide a
foundational goal for critical thinking and learn-
ing skills that are especially useful for developing
information literacy skills for adult online learners.
When applied cohesively with the ALA’s infor-
mation literacy standards, they bring meaningful
acquisition of knowledge to adult learners in a man-
ner in which they comprehend, share, and apply.
LIBRARIES AND LIBRARIANS ROLE
IN ADULT TECHNOLOGY LITERACY
The internet onslaught, variety of web based tech-
nologies, and ease of access to information are all
factors of the reality of change in the lives of adult
online learners. The never-ending improvements
in technology and the rapid shift to internet-based
research tools such as library catalogs, electronic
journals, and live online chat, have permanently
positioned libraries and librarians as significant
partners in the adult online learning environment.
Continuous improvement in the delivery of infor-
mation resources and services is quickly closing
492
Library Issues in Adult Online Education
the gap between on- and-off-campus distinctions
and services http://nces.ed.gov/fastfacts/display.
asp?id=80.
The National Center for Education Statistics
(NCES, 2006-07) is the principal federal unit for
collecting, analyzing, and reporting educational
data in the United States. Their report Distance
Education at Degree-Granting Postsecondary
Institutions: provides revealing insight into the
current condition of education in the United States.
According to the NCES report, during the
2006–07 academic years, 2-year and 4-year
institutions reported an estimated 12.2 million
enrollments in college-level credit-granting
distance education courses. Of these distance
education enrollments, 77 percent were reported
in online courses, 12 percent were reported in
hybrid/blended online courses and 10 percent
were reported in other types of distance educa-
tion courses.
In this same NCES report, two-thirds, or 66
percent, of 2-year and 4-year Title IV degree-
granting postsecondary institutions reported
offering online, hybrid/blended online, or other
distance education courses, while 65 percent of the
institutions reported college-level credit-granting
distance education courses, and 23 percent of the
institutions reported noncredit distance education
courses.
Online courses can be defined as a course
offered entirely online. Instruction occurs in an
online environment, synchronously (real time)
or asynchronously (multiple different times), or
both. Meaning, face-to-face (F2F) meetings are
not required for the course. Instructors provide
all materials, course activities, assignments, and
discussions in an online environment. Hybrid or
blended courses can be defined as when instruc-
tion is required in both face-to-face (F2F) and in
an online environment. Class meetings and F2F
are a part of the classes as well as online sessions.
For student accessibility, most materials, course
activities, assignments, and discussions must be
Library Issues in Adult Online Education
available in an online environment http://www.
scps.virginia.edu/OnilneBlended.htm.
In addition to the NCES report, the Pew Internet
and American Life Project revealed that one-fifth
(20 percent) of today’s college students began
using computers between the ages of five and
eight. The report highlights that by the time they
reach 18, all of today’s current college students
had begun using computers. Nearly four-fifths (79
percent) of college students agree that internet use
has had a positive impact on their college academic
experience (Jones & Madden, 2002).
In summary, the NCES report indicates a
strong growth in distance education enrollment
with strong indicators for continued growth in
distance education courses. The Pew internet
report validates the education expectations and
internet use of this digital generation.
Today the way technology delivers adult on-
line courses is continually evolving and rapidly
transforming. Both synchronous (real time) and
asynchronous (multiple different times) delivery
enables users convenient access to learning. Some
of the ways in which librarians deliver high impact
content and services include: chat service, email,
subject guide wikis, class guides, electronic da-
tabase tutorials, threaded discussion lists, e-mail
online reference, electronic course reserves, and
online request forms for document delivery. For
example, inter-library loan service provides fac-
ulty members refereed articles, using on-demand
desk top delivery. Another scenario occurs when
a student is unable to access an e-book, using the
wireless internet chat service allows the student
immediate instructions to obtain crucial research
materials.
Librarians partner and share experiences and
exchange knowledge with colleagues within their
academic institution and form partnerships with
other learning institutions to further expand and
enhance best practices in technology literacy.
Therefore, numerous services and devices con-
tinue to evolve, adapt, and mature through time.
Today’s adult online learner is demanding
options for remaining connected to available
resources and educators. Libraries and librarians
are responding by extending services and service
hours for adult online learners by offering web
based tutorials and using Skype or Wimba tech-
nology. Additional innovations include mobile
devices, Camtista or Jing, You Tube and course
management systems like Blackboard. No mat-
ter what the path, the digital generation expects
mobile, transportable, and convenient information
at the speed of light.
Regardless of the technology, libraries and
librarians continue to be an indispensable asset
to faculty, students, and the adult online learning
community. The emergence of technology is a
growing and powerful educational tool. It has
the potential of involving librarians in all ele-
ments of the educational process, and creating
strategic alliances to strengthen the role of the
library within the learning organization’s mission
(Warnken, 2004).
Results from a Colorado State University sur-
vey concluded that the internet and other forms
of information and communication technology
such as word processors, web editors, presenta-
tion software, and e-mail are regularly redefining
the nature of literacy. To become fully literate in
today’s world, adult online learners must become
proficient in the new ICT literacy. Therefore,
librarians have a responsibility to effectively in-
tegrate these technologies into their educational
curriculum and learning tools in order to prepare
students for the future they deserve (Kaminski,
Seel, & Cullen, 2003).
The terms involving digital literacy, computer
literacy and technology literacy have blurred over
the decades. Definitions are discussed but rarely
agreed upon. These terms are distinctly different
yet incorporate relationships between them. Tech-
nology implies computerized tools, hardware, and
application software. Digital or computer literacy
entails the ability to understand and make use of
information in a variety of formats. Technology
493

literacy represents the aptitude to use media, such
as the internet to access and interact with informa-
tion. A combination of related terms is common
vernacular among educators (McMillan, 1996).
The 2005 National Forum on Information
Literacy defines information communication and
technology (ICT) literacy as using digital tech-
nology, communications tools, and/or networks
to access, manage, integrate, evaluate, and create
information in order to function in a knowledge
society. It includes the ability to understand and
work with computers, networks, and software.
It combines this ability to understand with the
skillfulness to locate, evaluate and effectively
use information. The treatment of those skills
requires a broader proficiency, encompassing
information literacy.
Information Technology Skills (ITS) incorpo-
rates basic skills such as the use of the keyboard,
mouse, printer, scanner, and file management
protocols with a learner’s knowledge and ability
to use standard software such as word processors,
database management features, and spreadsheets.
It also includes the learner’s ability to effectively
use network applications such as e-mail, web
browsers, internet, and navigation methods, in
conjunction with the learner’s recognition for the
need for information, evaluation, and effective
use of information.
Technology, modern gadgets, computers and
the internet have changed the way we learn, gather
information and interact with the information
around us. The changes in information access and
retrieval options make it vital for students to be able
to work fluently with computers. In this current
academic environment students must know how
to accomplish many technology tasks. Students
must know how to access the information, connect
remotely, and use subject and multi-disciplinary
databases.
Librarians and educators have always cher-
ished their roles in helping students develop
research skills. With the relentless seduction of
494
Library Issues in Adult Online Education
the internet, educators face a great challenge of
teaching literacy in many formats for their learners.
There are many forms of literacy in practice in
this information age. Under the broad umbrella of
critical thinking rests the tenant of multiple litera-
cies and the need to recognize both IL and ICT
function synergistically. Students need to know
the relevance and accuracy of the information
they locate. Therefore, in order to thrive in an
online environment, adult learners must acquire
technology literacy in addition to information
literacy (Kaminski, Seel, & Cullen, 2003).
Faculty’s time to teach both course content
and technology is limited. Adult online educators
need to adapt curricula so that technology use
supports learning goals, with technology used
as a tool, and not as a substitute, for instruction
(Rice-Lively & Racine, 1997). Partnership with
librarians affords additional support in helping
faculty teach and reinforce technology skills so
instructional time is not lost.
One of the most engaging and successful ways
in which libraries and librarians are adapting to the
changing needs of learners is the implementation
of the information commons concept. This trend
involves providing a one-stop shopping experience
for adult learners. It is a learning place that com-
bines instructional support, technology support,
library research support, writing center support,
and a copying/duplicating hub. This concept
merges several service points in one location to
better meet the need of the learner.
The information commons model endorses
cross training of library staff for both the on-
and-off campus distance education support. By
combining IT technical support, library access
services and reference guidance, online learners
garnish the advantages of a solid infrastructure
dedicated to better meet learning needs. Beatty and
White (2004) performed an environmental scan
of information commons. The scan identified the
following essentials in a flourishing information
commons center:
Library Issues in Adult Online Education
• Face to face learning support – librarians,
technical experts, learning experts,
• Virtual instruction support – tutorials for
software, hardware, subject guides,
• Formal learning support – classrooms with
instructional tools, instruction by experts,
• Formal instruction to students – library
skills, technical skills, learning skills, and
• Informal learning support – group rooms
for collaboration, software and hardware
that enable collaboration, pleasant envi-
ronment, extended open hours, social ar-
eas, group tables, and a café.
Technology literacy needs are constantly
changing and the librarian’s role will continue
to grow in tandem with those needs. Librarians
that continue to develop and promote technology
skills individually, in turn provide support and
instruction for students to increase technology
fluency. Regardless of the language or delivery
style, librarians remain an important bridge con-
necting sources and learners.
OVERCOMING LIBRARY ANXIETY
In addition to the challenges of information
literacy and technology literacy, library users
are overwhelmed by the excess of information
choices (Klapp, 1986; Akin, 1997). This explo-
sion of information often causes anxiety, stress,
and procrastination for adult learners. In efforts to
lessen library anxiety, librarians infuse effective
strategies for information and technology literacy
into adult learning opportunities.
Library anxiety is defined as the negative and
uncomfortable thoughts and feelings experienced
by many adult learners when using, or contemplat-
ing using, the resources or services of a library.
The effects of library anxiety include feelings of
hopelessness, frustration, and a lack of competency
(Onwuegbuzie & Jiao, 1998; Onwuegbuzie, 1997).
Library anxiety theory was presented by Mel-
lon (1986, 1989) following a two-year qualitative
study with undergraduate students. Mellon’s study
concluded that 75-85 percent of initial library
research experiences by participants induced anxi-
ety. This anxiety culminated in search-avoidance
behaviors, which, in turn, prevented learners from
developing library skills (Jiao, Onwuegbuzie, &
Lichtenstein, 1996).
Bostick (1992) developed a method to assess
and measure library anxiety entitled the Library
Anxiety Scale (LAS). This research study con-
cluded that library anxiety is situation specific
and affects all types of users with different levels
of distress. A key problem associated with library
anxiety includes information overload from
significant amounts of irrelevant information
retrieved, especially from the internet. Additional
adult learner difficulties causing anxiety identi-
fied include trouble locating books from library
shelves, struggles in finding full-text materials,
and problems deciphering the amount and quality
of online results retrieved.
Librarians can relieve anxiety for adult students
in an online learning environment by providing
a high-tech and high-touch library experience
(Kwasi, 2000). This can be attained by having a
librarian available for electronic chat, email, or
telephone communication during high demand
times to minimize learner stress. Authentic human
contact and conversation provides opportunities
to develop relationships that eases information
overload. Teaching library instruction in multiple
formats, while incorporating learning and thinking
style preferences also alleviates library anxiety.
Library anxiety is lessened when librarians
solicit opinions, identify information-seeking
behaviors, and inquire about the specific infor-
mation needs of adult online learners. Invoking
the help of learners by implementing advisory
committees generates feedback, suggestions, and
ideas for genuine improvements in library educa-
tional programs. Hosting these types of working
groups further instills positive perceptions among
495

learners of the value and dedication of libraries
and librarians.
In an attempt to lessen library anxiety, librar-
ians teach adult learners how to select the most
pertinent databases for specific information needs
and offer suggestions for succinct keywords in a
vernacular related to the specific research disci-
pline. By reinforcing successful search strategies
and teaching databases unique features, librarians
help students save time, weed out any unnecessary
items, and retrieve substantive results.
False and negative perceptions held by adult
online learners affect their capacity to approach
librarians for assistance. For example, some adult
learners have the misperception that librarians
are too busy and do not want to be bothered by
learners needing assistance. Some learners also
regard their own questions as unintelligent and
juvenile or they do not want to waste the time of
the librarian. To reduce anxiety, it is critical that
librarians build positive and flourishing relation-
ships with each library patron and encounter,
including distance learners, to diminish these
misperceptions (Onwuegbuzie, 2004).
Knowledge is power, and knowledge about
available resources is critical for relieving the
anxiety of adult online learners. Librarians have a
responsibility to market databases, guides, tutori-
als, and wiki’s which are available for distance
learners. Knowledge concerning information
options helps adult online learners to diminish
uncertainty and increase information seeking
accomplishments.
In reducing library anxiety, it is important to
make the library webpage attractive and content
as easy to use as possible. Many adult online and
distance learners never step foot in the library, so
an online learner’s initial inquiry typically involves
visiting the major library outreach vehicle, the
library website. Quick and purposeful navigation
of the library website by adult online learners
requires thoughtful and appropriate graphics,
fonts, and colors from website developers. The
intentional process of instructional design, along
496
Library Issues in Adult Online Education
with cohesive and content-rich materials, aids adult
online learners in their ability to quickly locate
and utilize much needed resources. An admirable
example can be found at Arizona University Li-
brary, http://lib.asu.edu.
Additional techniques in decreasing library
anxiety for the adult online learner includes, but
are not limited to:
• promoting on the library web page a data-
base of the month,
• providing federated searching software to
make searching library resources easier,
• providing article linker software and em-
bedding links in heavily used databases,
• highlighting interlibrary loan options,
forms and documents for downloading and
submission
• creating tutorials on the web page for pa-
trons to learn how to use databases, feder-
ated searching, and article linker embed-
ded services,
• librarians meeting online learners in their
space,
• creating 24/5 or 24/7 electronic reference
services,
• allowing patrons to make appointments via
the web page to discuss learning needs and
challenges,
• posting all library policies on the web page
(i.e. who can get books in the mail), and
• creating special events and inviting dis-
tance learners for educational sessions in
the library during nontraditional hours.
The professional, caring, pleasant, and ap-
proachable librarian is the best product in combat-
ing library anxiety. Librarians go to great lengths
to advertise, offer, and recommend individual
resources, search strategies, and online educational
aides. Helping users overcome their reluctance
to ask questions diminishes significant barriers
to getting help. Encouraging and praising adult
online learners contributes to the learner’s ability
Library Issues in Adult Online Education
to grasp the research process and successfully
engage with locating, evaluating, and using their
online informational resources.
REQUIRED LIBRARIAN SKILLS
To best serve adult online learner, librarians require
an ambitious set of skills to perform their respon-
sibilities competently, effectively, efficiently, and
resourcefully. Traditional library services include
helping users locate books or journals. A growing
number of libraries only exist in virtual environ-
ments, so locating library resources in an online
environment takes on a significant importance.
Librarians must remain current and relevant in
a wide variety of subject areas while pursuing
trends and advancements in the publishing and
technology fields (Erdman, 2007).
Librarians must exhibit both sets of skills,
information literacy and technology literacy.
The demand for technology savvy and computer
literate librarians is crucial. Librarians must be
able to demonstrate use of current technologies
and the ability to translate those skills into real
life solutions for their users. The instructional
component requires them to demonstrate how to
locate and acquire quality information, while the
technology component requires them to access it.
Librarians routinely assist patrons in navigating
and accessing all types of sources of superior
data. This includes remotely accessible databases,
online books, and digital collections.
Librarians have a strong service philosophy
and enduring commitment to users. The need for
librarians to incorporate talents such as instruc-
tional design, search discovery models, and web
tools is especially important for adult online learn-
ers. Librarians add value in the selection process,
manage and provide the most relevant information
available to the user, and significantly contribute
to the learning and teaching process.
The attitude of the librarian requires special
examination. By creating a comfortable setting
and offering gentle reinforcement, librarians
successfully assist learners in gaining confidence
and increase competency levels. This results in
learners becoming more information literate and
better scholars.
By supporting and understanding both local and
remote learning needs, librarians reassure students
of their capability in dealing with information
overload. The proficiency of dealing with both
print and electronic media is constantly changing.
How to access it and deliver it requires regular
training and constant professional development.
Librarians can facilitate a learner’s efforts to
manage information and technology overload by
becoming information advisors. This is done by
directing learners to the best databases, print or
electronic resources for their particular informa-
tion need, and teaching learners how to focus or
narrow their searches (Ezzo & Perez, 2000).
Librarians create and provide searching
aids, online encyclopedias, e-dictionaries, tips/
techniques web guides and FAQ documents for
patrons. Librarians supply the best-of-the-best to
learners and lead them on the path to supplemen-
tary discovery tools.
To support adult online learners, librarians
require strong and flexible oral and written
communication skills. They require the ability
to integrate learning objectives and outcomes
into routine reference desk transactions and in
structured 50-minute instruction modules. Critical
thinking skills and strong andragogical teaching
talents are essential.
Libraries and librarians provide unique ser-
vices and resources for the adult online learner.
Librarians with specialized skill sets that support
information literacy needs, technology literacy
proficiency, subject area expertise, and best prac-
tices in teaching adults maintain a special relevance
in the mounting information universe.
497

BEST PRACTICES FOR
SUPPORTING ADULT
ONLINE EDUCATION
Adult online education requires more than savvy
technology abilities and information seeking
skills. Sound instructional theory must remain
integral regardless of the environment or delivery
method. Courses offered via a distance learning
modality are still education and therefore, require
a set of design strategies that accommodate good
educational practice (Smith, 2006). Numerous best
practices models exist in the education community
for librarians to apply in library online education
and tutorials.
Effective online teaching strategies include
communication, interactive features, and col-
laboration. Librarians that incorporate solid in-
structional design theories deliver a challenging
learning atmosphere that is succinctly student
centered. Overarching instructional goals involve
critical thinking skills and the promotion of further
inquiry (Chickering & Ehrmann, 1996; Marzano,
Pickering, & Pollack, 2001).
Best practices when creating adult online
learning modules indicate that communication,
information literacy, and instructional design be
addressed. Below are some suggestions for using
these practices that can increase student achieve-
ment and sustain retention rates. Librarians who
purposefully develop online learning modules that
include authentic learning projects, active learning
components, and problem solving activities will
deliver an altruist, engaged learning experience.
1. Communication. The success of a collab-
orative learning venture lies mainly with
communication (Fletcher, Hair & McKay,
2004). The learning opportunity requires
active participation from both instructor
and learner. Effective facilitation and com-
munication promotes mutual respect and
shared expectations.
498
Library Issues in Adult Online Education
2. Information Literacy. Selecting appropri-
ate search tools and resources, conducting ef-
fective searches, defining information needs,
evaluating resources, and recognizing legal
and ethical issues surrounding information
retrieved are important instructional com-
ponents for librarians and their adult online
learners. Faculty and librarian collaboration
is an essential component in information
literacy instruction competencies. Online
instruction includes interactive features that
support andragogical theory and allows per-
sonal meaning to be attached to the learning
experience. Information literacy is viewed
as more than a one shot instruction session
or encounter. It is more than teaching a set
of skills. Information literacy is viewed as
a process that transforms both learning and
the community’s culture (Bruce & Candy,
2000).
3. Instructional Design. A well developed
instructional program includes substan-
tive and achievable learning objectives. It
implements learning strategies developed
for web based and distance learning instruc-
tion. It takes advantage of the rich online
environment and easily accessible tools.
Instructional design includes interaction,
learning goals and objectives, learning ac-
tivities, and assessment or evaluation. All
the elements must be genuine, continuing,
multidimensional, and thoughtful. The intent
of instructional design is to increase higher
order critical thinking skills and promote
further inquiry. Web-based instruction en-
compasses the integrated design and delivery
of instruction resources and promotes student
engagement with text-based, hypermedia,
multimedia, and collaborative resources
(Bannan-Ritland, 2004).
Evidence that libraries are applying best
practices to their approach will overlap with insti-
tutional philosophies and pedagogies. Nurturing
Library Issues in Adult Online Education
communication across the academic community
earns support for information literacy initiatives.
The importance of instructional design is integral
to distance teaching. The visual layout in relation
to learning strategies plays a significant role in
learner’s ability to make use of course materials.
By applying instruction methods that are most
appropriate for student, librarians contribute to
the progress of the lifelong goals of adult online
learners.
FUTURE TRENDS
Although doomsday enthusiasts report the demise
of the book and libraries, others delightfully dis-
agree. Books and libraries will not disappear in the
future, rather, both will continue to exist as they
transform in appearance, availability and delivery.
The concept of library as a place will continue
to expand and develop as a preferred information
access point among the myriad of choices that
bombard society. The desire of learners to access
information anywhere at any time is the current
reality. Therefore, libraries can no longer exist as
storehouses for books and objects with librarians
serving as caretakers. Librarians have the potential
to be viewed as critical information partners for
adult online learners. To do this, librarians must
innovate and broaden their role in assisting adult
online learners in the competitive and confusing
information and technology landscape. Michael
Schrage, a research fellow at the Center for Digital
Business at the Massachusetts Institute of Technol-
ogy remarked at the 2008 ALA Annual meeting
that in order to meet learner needs in a competitive
market, librarians should try new things, but more
importantly, apply new things toward the goal of
giving users the value that they seek (Information
Today, 2008). In essence, today’s status quo of
information access does not meet the needs of to-
morrow’s adult online learner (Information Today,
2008). The library of the next decade will take on
new responsibilities and multiple services. Below
are four key aspects that will shape the future of
libraries and librarians in providing services for
adult online learners.
1. Integrated Library Systems will provide in-
creased lending opportunities, broader loan
capabilities, and virtual access to massive
digital collections and shared media storage
vaults. It will be a mutual space of open
content, access, and resource sharing. For
example, libraries will increase consortium
agreements to provide more databases with
24/7 electronic access (Marcum, 2003).
2. Information Commons or Learning
Commons will become the norm instead of
the exception. As technology advances it
will increase the mobility of study space to
better fit the need of adult online learners.
Students will have the ability to create and
modify their own custom learning environ-
ment, with virtual learning hubs becoming
an environment for work, social networking,
and scholarly endeavors (McHone-Chase,
2009).
3. Services, including library instruction, will
increase virtual access for learners. Personnel
from all service points in the library will be
cross trained as service agents. Librarians
will create information profiles for stu-
dents to maintain online, which will allow
rich, dynamic content to be pushed to their
personal accounts. Library services will be
continually upgraded and re-invented. The
services provided by librarians will move
outside the physical library, surviving less
behind the desk and more virtual in context.
Librarians will be going to the users, preserv-
ing the educational mission of the library and
corresponding institutional values (Marcum,
2003).
4. Open Access or open information will greatly
increase. Recognizing the need for increased
free access to research and scholarship
materials, Clifford Lynch of the Coalition
499

for Networked Information (CNI) strongly
advocates that information environments
promote open access to electronic resources
including the lending, storing, preserving,
accessing, and sharing of collective wisdom
(Lynch, 2008). Open source sharewares, like
Virginia Tech’s Lib X, Harvard’s Digital
Access to Scholarship (DASH) are examples
of the growing support for open access
(Lynch, 2008).
The only certain facet about the future is
change. Libraries will maintain a prominent posi-
tion in supporting the needs of adult online learners
if they continue to move from a service model of
limited or local access, to an expanded universal
access model (Anunobi & Okoye, 2008). Proac-
tive engagement and innovation will continue to
keep libraries relevant in an information saturated
society seeking specific resources. People are the
most important resource in a library. Therefore,
librarians that have the ability to adapt to the
incessant tide of change will continue to provide
exemplary services and access for the learners
of tomorrow.
CONCLUSION
S. R. Ranganathan is known as the father of li-
brary science in India. He proposes that the field
of library science consists of five basic laws: (1)
books are for use, (2) every reader has his or her
book, (3) every book has its reader, (4) save the
time of the reader, and (5) the library is a growing
organism (Ranganathan, 1931).
The first law relates to the use of library ma-
terials and urges librarians to select and create
materials that are readable and pleasing to the
eye. In today’s online learning environment the
ability to easily find electronic data and the clarity
of online educational tools is especially important.
500
Library Issues in Adult Online Education
The second law relates to accessing library
materials and urges librarians to create fair and
equable access to all materials. For the adult on-
line learners, access to materials is not only key,
but access to library professionals who can help
guide them with specific information seeking
needs is critical.
The third law relates to a library’s collection
and the learners who utilize this resource. If a
book or library resource is not being used often,
librarians must take a proactive role in the promot-
ing that book or resource. Marketing and making
educational resources known and reachable to
all patrons is especially important in the online
environment.
The fourth law relates to the motivation of
library users. When library patrons find what
they are seeking in a timely manner, patrons will
be more satisfied, are more likely to feel like
their needs have been met, and are more likely to
conduct future searches. Technological advances
have made the information seeking process more
complex for all library users, especially adult
online learners. Therefore, special emphasis must
be placed on creating web tutorials and guides to
help assist learners easily locate resources.
The fifth law comments on how the library
is an organization that is dependent on people
and change. Without human and organizational
changes, libraries would not properly function or
meet their societal mission. Libraries are organiza-
tions that grow in accordance with contemporary
technologies. Therefore, libraries and librarians
must embrace change and technology to meet
learner needs.
The role of librarians and educators in helping
adult online learners is challenging, exciting, and
rewarding. Combining andragogical concepts,
learning and thinking style theories, best practices
in supporting learners in acquiring information
literacy skills, and best practices in supporting
learners in utilizing modern technology allows
Library Issues in Adult Online Education
librarians to create and provide unique adult online
learning opportunities.
Libraries and librarians have a special role in
becoming educational change agents, especially in
organizations of higher education due to increas-
ing emphasis placed by accrediting agencies on
information literacy on their list of requirements
and standards. To be successful, librarians must
place more emphasis on student-centered and
self-directed learning concepts. Librarians must
continue to embrace instruction and instructional
support with sound andragogical practices while
fostering communication and collaboration
amongst various educational organizations and
professionals.
In summarizing this chapter, four basic issues
emerge for the future of librarians and libraries in
supporting adult online learners: (1) the need for
libraries and librarians to continue to partnership
with other learning professionals in redefining our
roles, (2) the need for libraries and librarians to
ask, listen, and respond to the relentless chang-
ing needs of today’s adult online learner, (3) the
need for librarians and libraries to stay abreast
of rapidly changing technology and develop best
practices in utilizing technology, and (4) the need
for more libraries and librarians to learn and em-
brace the concepts of andragogy and incorporate
those concepts into instructional programs and
materials for learners (Travis, 2008).
In conclusion, andragogical theory, learning
style theory, thinking style theory, information
literacy best practices, and technology best prac-
tices indicate that there exists no one best way of
facilitating adult learning, and thus, no one best
way to instructional enlightenment for learn-
ers, including adult online learners. The current
norm, and the norm of the future, indicates that
flexibility and different approaches for different
learners is required.
REFERENCES
Akin, L. K. (1997). Information overload, a
multi-disciplinary explication and citation ranking
within three selected disciplines: Library studies,
psychology/psychiatry, and consumer science:
1960-1996 (Doctoral dissertation, Texas Woman’s
University, 1997). Dissertation Abstracts Inter-
national. (AAT 9733456)
American Library Association. (1989). Presi-
dential committee on information literacy. Final
Report. Chicago: American Library Association.
Anunobi, C. V., & Okoye, I. B. (2008). The role of
academic libraries in universal access to print and
electronic resources in the developing countries.
Lincoln, NE: University of Nebraska.
Association of College and Research Libraries.
(2008). Standards for distance learning library
services. Retrieved September 14, 2009, from
http://www.ala.org/ala/mgrps/divs/acrl/standards/
guidelinesdistancelearning.cfm#services
Bannan-Ritland, B. (2004). Web based instruction.
In Kovalchik, A., & Dawson, D. (Eds.), Education
and technology: An encyclopedia (p. 638). Santa
Barbara, CA: ABC-CLIO.
Beatty, S., & White, P. (2004). Information com-
mons – Models for e-lit and the integration of
learning presentation. Retrieved October 3, 2009,
from http://www.jelit.org/52/01/JeLit_Paper_16.
pdf
Bostick, S. L. (1992). The development and
validation of the Library Anxiety Scale (Doctoral
dissertation, Wayne State University, 1992). Dis-
sertation Abstracts International. (AAT 9310624)
Brookfield, S. D. (1986). Understanding and
facilitating adult learning. San Francisco: Jossey-
Bass.
501

Bruce, C., & Candy, P. (2000). Information lit-
eracy around the world: advances in programs
and research. Wagga Wagga, N.S.W. Centre for
Information Studies, Charles Sturt University.
Cameron, D., & Treagust, D. (1997). Navigation
performance with interactive media: Impact of
learning characteristics. Retrieved October 09,
2009, from http://www.ascilite.org.au/confer-
ences/perth97/papers/Cameron/Cameron.html
Chickering, A., & Ehrmann, S. (1996, October).
Implementing the seven principles: technology
as lever? AAHE Bulletin. Retrieved October
1, 2009, from http://2md.osu.edu/edtech/pdfs/
seven_principles.pdf
Chobot, M. C. (1989). Public libraries and mu-
seums. In Merriam, S. B., & Cunningham, P. M.
(Eds.), Handbook of adult and continuing educa-
tion (pp. 369–383). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Doyle, C. S. (1994). Information literacy in an
information society. A concept for the informa-
tion age. Syracuse, NY: ERIC Clearinghouse on
Information Resources.
Erdman, J. (2007). Education for a new breed of
librarian. The Reference Librarian, 47(98), 93–94.
doi:10.1300/J120v47n98_08
Ezzo, A., & Perez, J. (2000). The information
explosion: Continuing implications for reference
services to adult learners. The Reference Librar-
ian, 33(69/70), 5.
Fletcher, J., Hair, P., & McKay, J. (2004). On-
line-librarian–real time/real talk: An innovative
collaboration between two university libraries.
Breaking boundaries: Integration & interoperabil-
ity Conference. Melbourne, Australia. Retrieved
October 22, 2009, from http://www.vala.org.au/
vala2004/2004pdfs/20FlHaMc.PDF
Galbraith, M. W. (1990). Adult learning methods:
A guide for effective instruction. Malabar, Florida:
R.E. Krieger.
502
Library Issues in Adult Online Education
Harrison, A. F., & Bramson, R. M. (1984). The
art of thinking. New York: Doubleday.
Information Today. (2008). ALA ‘08: The Future
of Libraries. [from Academic Search Premier.].
Information Today, 25(8), 29–31. Retrieved No-
vember 1, 2009.
Jiao, Q. G., Onwuegbuzie, A. J., & Lichtenstein,
A. A. (1996). Library anxiety: Characteristics of
‘at-risk’ college students. Library & Information
Science Research, 18(2), 151–163. doi:10.1016/
S0740-8188(96)90017-1
Jones, S., & Madden, M. (2002). The Internet
Goes to College; how students are living in the
future with today’s technology. Pew Internet and
American Life Project. Retrieved October 25,
2009, from http://www.pewinternet.org/~/media//
Files/Reports/2002/PIP_College_Report.pdf.pdf
Kaminski, K., Seel, P., & Cullen, K. (2003). Tech-
nology literate students? Results from a survey.
Educause Quarterly, 3. Retrieved October 13,
2009, from http://net.educause.edu/ir/library/pdf/
eqm0336.pdf
Keefe, J. W. (1987). Learning style theory and
practice. Reston, Virginia: National Association
of Secondary School Principals.
Klapp, O. E. (1986). Overload and boredom:
Essays on the quality of life in the information
society. New York: Greenwood Press.
Knowles, M. S. (1980). The modern practice of
adult education: From pedagogy to andragogy.
Englewood Cliffs: Prentice Hall/Cambridge.
Knowles, M. S. (2005). The adult learner: The
definitive classic in adult education and human
resource development. Amsterdam, Boston:
Elsevier.
Kolb, D. (1984). Experimental learning. Engle-
wood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall.
Library Issues in Adult Online Education
Kwasi, S. M. (2000). Reference services for the
adult learner: Challenging issues for the tradi-
tional and technological era. New York: Haworth
Information Press.
Lynch, C. (2008). Digital libraries, learning com-
munities and open education. In Iiyoshi, T., &
Kumar, M. S. V. (Eds.), Opening up education:
The collective advancement of education through
open technology, open content, and open knowl-
edge (pp. 106–119). Cambridge, Massachusetts:
MIT Press.
Marcum, J. W. (2003, May). Visions: The Aca-
demic Library in 2012. D-Lib Magazine, 9(5), 3-7.
Retrieved October 23, 2009, from http://www.dlib.
org/dlib/may03/marcum/05marcum.html
Marzano, R., Pickering, D., & Pollack, J. (2001).
Classroom instruction that works: Research-based
strategies for increasing student achievement.
Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and
Curriculum Development.
Mayer, R. E. (1983). Thinking, problem solving,
cognition. New York: W. H. Freeman.
McHone-Chase, S. (2009). Transforming library
service through information commons: Case
studies for the digital age. Reference and User
Services Quarterly, 48(4), 416–417.
McMillan, S. (1996). Literacy and computer lit-
eracy: Definitions and comparisons. Computers
& Education, 27(3/4), 161–170. doi:10.1016/
S0360-1315(96)00026-7
Mellon, C. A. (1986). Library anxiety: A grounded
theory and its development. College & Research
Libraries, 47, 160–l65.
Mellon, C. A. (1989). Library anxiety and the non-
traditional student. Paper presented at the 16th
National LOEX Library Instruction Conference,
Bowling State Green University, Ohio. May 5-6.
Millet, M., Donald, J., & Wilson, D. (2009).
Information literacy across the curricu-
lum: Expanding Horizons. College & Un-
dergraduate Libraries, 16(2/3), 180–193.
doi:10.1080/10691310902976451
National Center for Education Statistics. (2006-
07). Distance Education at degree-granting
postsecondary institutions: 2006–0. Retrieved
October 4, 2009, from http://nces.ed.gov/fastfacts/
display.asp?id=80
National Forum on Information Literacy. (July
2005). Definitions, standards, and competencies
related to information literacy. Digital transforma-
tion: A framework for ICT literacy, 2002. Retrieved
September 30, 2009, from http://www.infolit.org/
definitions.html
Onwuegbuzie, A. J. (1997). Writing a research
proposal: The role of library anxiety, statistics
anxiety, and composition anxiety. Library &
Information Science Research, 19(1), 5–33.
doi:10.1016/S0740-8188(97)90003-7
Onwuegbuzie, A. J. (2004). Library anxiety:
theory, research, and applications. Lanham, MD:
Scarecrow Press.
Onwuegbuzie, A. J., & Jiao, Q. G. (1998). The
relationship between library anxiety and learning
styles among graduate students: Implications for
library instruction. Library & Information Science
Research, 20(3), 235–249. doi:10.1016/S0740-
8188(98)90042-1
Owusu-Ansah, E. (2004). Information literacy
and higher education: Placing the academic li-
brary in the center of a comprehensive solution.
Journal of Academic Librarianship, 30(1), 3–16.
doi:10.1016/j.jal.2003.11.002
Parlette, N., & Rae, R. (1993). Thinking about
thinking. Leadership, 45(1), 70–74.
503

Ranganathan, S. R. (1931). The five laws of
library science. Madras, India: Madas Library
Association.
Rice-Lively, M., & Racine, J. (1997). The role of
academic librarians in the era of information tech-
nology. Journal of Academic Librarianship, 23(1),
31–41. doi:10.1016/S0099-1333(97)90069-0
Rogers, A. R., & McChesney, K. (1984). The
Library in society. Littleton: Libraries Unlimited.
School of Continuing and Professional Studies
(SCPS). 2009. Definition of Online vs. Blended
Courses. Retrieved September 3, 2009, from the
University of Virginia, School of Continuing and
Professional Studies Web site http://www.scps.
virginia.edu/OnilneBlended.htm
Smith, L. M. (2006). Effective science tools sup-
porting best practice methodologies in Distance
Education. Distance Learning, 3(4), 47–57.
Sproles, C., & Ratledge, D. (2004). An analysis
of entry-level librarian ads published in American
libraries, 1982-2002. Electronic Journal of Aca-
demic and Special Librarianship, 5(2/3), 1–17.
Travis, T. A. (2008). Librarians as agents of
change: Working with curriculum committees
using change agency theory. New Directions
for Teaching and Learning, 2008(114), 17–33..
doi:10.1002/tl.314
Warnken, P. (2004, March). Managing technol-
ogy: The impact of technology on information
literacy education in libraries. Journal of Academic
Librarianship, 30(2), 151–156. doi:10.1016/j.
acalib.2004.01.013
KEY TERMS AND DEFINITIONS
Blended or Hybrid Courses: Courses that can
be defined as when instruction is required in both
face-to-face (F2F) and in an online environment.
504
Library Issues in Adult Online Education
Computer Literacy: Entails the ability to
understand and make use of information in a
variety of formats.
Information Commons / Learning Com-
mons: A new type of technology-enhanced
collaborative facility on college and university
campuses that integrates library and computer
application services (information, technology, and
learning) in a single floor plan, often equipped with
a wireless network and, in some cases, equipment
for multimedia production.
Information Communication and Technol-
ogy: Information Communication and Technol-
ogy (ICT) Literacy is using digital technology,
communications tools, and/or networks to access,
manage, integrate, evaluate, and create informa-
tion in order to function in a knowledge society.
Information Literacy: Information literacy
(IL) is the skill set requiring individuals to rec-
ognize when they have an information need and
have the ability to locate, evaluate, and use the
information effectively.
Integrated Library System: Integrated
library (automation) systems (ILS) provide
libraries with a variety of integrated computer-
ized functions—Cataloging, Circulation, (Online
Public Access Catalog) OPAC, Acquisitions, and
Serials Control.
Library Anxiety: Library anxiety is defined
as the negative and uncomfortable thoughts and
feelings experienced by many adult learners when
using, or contemplating using, the resources or
services of a library. The affects of library anxiety
include feelings of hopelessness, frustration, and
lack of competency.
Open Access: Digital works that are made
available frequently at no cost to the reader on
the public Internet for purposes of education and
research.
Lib X: Lib X is a browser plug-in, fully cus-
tomizable, for Firefox or Internet Explorer that
provides direct access to your library’s resources,
specifically the OPAC.
Library Issues in Adult Online Education

Technology Literacy: Technology literacy
represents the aptitude to use media, such as the
internet to access and interact with information.
Technophobia: Technophobia refers to a
disdain for the use of technology and can be a
learning↜barrier that librarians must also address in
the information literacy process. It is an aversion
to or fear of technology, especially computers.

505
506

Chapter 30
Online Adult Education:
Policy, Access, Completion and Equity
Victor C. X. Wang
California State University, Long Beach, USA

ABSTRACT
To serve a significant portion of the student population, adult learners, in the academy in the 21st century,
this chapter argues that online education (e.g., e-learning) has the potential to open wider the door to
greater access and advancement for learners across their life spans than the traditional four walled
classroom. Some of the major issues revolving around online education and adult learners such as policy,
access, completion and equity have been addressed in this chapter. The purpose of this chapter is to show
how we can rely on practice and research to harness the great yet untapped potential of online educa-
tion to promote online education programs especially among adult learners. Policy, access, completion
and equity must be well addressed if online adult education is to be employed effectively and efficiently.

INTRODUCTION The bright side of online education is the simple

As King (2006, p. 15) reflected upon online
education, she indicated, looking at online edu-
cation for the last 20 years, one cannot help but
realize that the field has expanded dramatically.
We have lived through a time of great advances
in technology, policy, educational readiness, and
societal technology adoption, but at the same time
we have also struggled with great challenges in
these same areas.
DOI: 10.4018/978-1-61692-906-0.ch030
fact that it reaches learners anywhere, any time and
that learners enjoy the flexibility online education
can provide for them. In addition, proponents of
online education promote it in any imaginable,
innovative ways in order to maximize learning on
the part of learners. Even though online education
has been in use for 20 some years, it is still in its
infancy. What makes the picture rather bleak is
the fact that some faculty, policy makers, practi-
tioners including some scholars do not buy into
the notion of online education. It is these people
who challenge the very existence, popularity, and
Online Adult Education
effective use of online education. It is these people
who refuse to buy into the research results about
the effective use of online education. It is these
people who fail to see the benefits and value of
online education.
In addition to assisting with learning anywhere,
any time, online education by nature is omnipotent
(Wang, 2008). It is omnipotent in the sense that
it affects online education program development
and delivery. It extends the reach of online edu-
cation through partnerships. It increases higher
education opportunities. It prompts researchers
to study its instructional effectiveness through
online education.
Online education increases access and comple-
tion and equity. Online education can assist with
professional development. The benefits and in-
fluence online education can provide go beyond
the above list. One important and prominent
benefit online education can provide is that adult
learners in particular have been relying on online
education to complete their college degrees and
to accomplish their educational goals for the past
20 years. Adult learners by nature have multiple
work and family responsibilities (Wang, 2007;
Wang, 2008, p. 76).
By no means can they become full time students
just like pre-adults or children. While children en-
joy the benefit of full time students, adult learners
have to come to college campuses in the evening
or on the weekend to receive their education and
training. When this does not work out for them,
adult learners simply depend on online education
which can ensure that learning occurs not only in
the classroom, but also at home or at work. It is no
exaggeration to say that online education and adult
learners have become inseparable in this digital
age (Wang, 2005). Online education has become
a vehicle of instruction in adult education. It is not
surprising if we hear that a university has put one
third of its courses online in order to accommodate
the needs of adult learners on campus. Towards
this end, giant online universities have emerged
to promote adult education online.
For example, in 2002, the University of
Phoenix, part of the Apollo Group, saw its en-
rollment surpass 100,000 students-making it the
largest institution of online higher learning in
the United States (Bash, 2003). No need to say
that this enrollment figure must include students
from overseas. Walden University, Northcentral
University and Cappella University (all online
universities) have never stopped promoting their
educational programs among potential adult
learners in order to catch up with the University
of Phoenix’s enrollment.
In short, both traditional universities and pure
online universities have realized the potential
educational market among adult learners and have
started promoting online education programs.
Indeed when we compare online education with
traditional classroom education, we cannot help
but realize the following advantages that online
education has over traditional four-walled class-
rooms:
• Instantaneous (synchronous) and delayed
(asynchronous) communication modes.
• Access to and from geographically isolated
communities around the globe.
• Multiple and collaborative among widely
dispersed individuals.
• Ultimate convenience, when and where
you choose.
• Interaction with and among individuals
from diverse cultures.
• Ability to focus on participants’ ideas,
without knowledge of age, race, gender, or
background. (Shrum, 2000)
To echo the above advantages of online edu-
cation, King (2006, p. 16) in her award winning
book Harnessing Technology in Higher Educa-
tion: Access, Equity, Policy, & Instruction defined
online education by using interesting comparisons:
• The working mother in rural Nebraska
completing her bachelor’s degree online
507

through her local state university while her
children sleep at night.
• The single young man in New York City
studying for the GED exam via public tele-
vision and telephone tutoring.
• The mid-career business woman executive
pursuing her doctorate in education via a
hybrid online and residency program in or-
der to change careers.
• The retired bus driver engaged in a col-
laborative webinar for his class through a
University of Beijing class on the Eastern
perspective of global issues.
It is not hard to tell that the key feature King
describes in her definition of online education is
the fact online education serves its chief clientele,
that is, adult learners.
While online education has achieved some
popularity among adult learners, this is not to
say that there are no barriers to promoting online
education programs even among adult learners
themselves. Hurdles come from within some edu-
cational institutions that have hired faculty, policy
makers and staff who have negative attitudes to-
wards the omnipotent nature of online education.
Unless their old school mentality towards online
education can be successfully changed, online
education will fail to provide its benefits to the
fullest, let alone address higher education issues
such as access, equity, policy and instruction.
The purpose of this chapter is to first discuss
the relationship between online education and
adult learners, proceed to address in depth is-
sues revolving around promoting online educa-
tion programs, point out future trends regarding
online education and adult learners and finally
come to a conclusion by summarizing the major
points of this chapter in order to conform to the
theme of this encyclopedia, that is, to show how
educational institutions could easily handle the
hurdle or promoting the online programs especially
among adult learners worldwide. This chapter
508
Online Adult Education
has focused only on adult learners at the higher
education level.
BACKGROUND
Online education originates in distance educa-
tion with its roots in correspondence education
and correspondence education has a more than
150-year history in the United States (Gibson,
2006). Almost simultaneously, correspondence
education appeared in other parts of the world.
Later, in the 1940s, 1950s and even 1960s, radio
and TV broadcasts were used to deliver courses
to learners in other countries.
Prior to the advent of online education, eight
types of distance education were widely used in
China and some other countries as well:
• Radio/TV universities
• Correspondence departments of regular
institutions
• Evening colleges attached to regular
institutions
• Workers’ colleges
• Independent study examination for higher
education
• In-service colleges for administrative staff
• In-service teacher-training colleges
• Peasants’ colleges (Yu & Xu, 1988).
According to Gagne, Wager, Golas and Keller
(2005), the Internet was first called ARPANET
(Advance Research Project Agency Network),
and it was designed as early as in the 1960s in
the United States under the aegis of the U.S.
Department of Defense. Then, in the 1980s, the
military and universities began to use this network
through telephone lines. The network was built
to connect users to solve technical problems and
other problems by sharing and communicating
information through written communication.
Later, universities began to use the network to
Online Adult Education
deliver courses to students who were unable to
come to campuses to take courses.
By 2002, the Internet had become an interna-
tional platform with over 680 million users (Global
Reach, 2003). Even universities in developing
countries began to deliver courses via the Internet.
The Internet has truly become the chief delivery
mode of distance learning around the globe. For
instance, four major Internet networks have been
used to deliver online education programs in
China. They are the China Network, the China
Golden Bridge Network, the China Education
and Research Network, and the China Science
and Technology Network (Tang, 2000).
Unlike radio or television, the Internet is ca-
pable of delivering instruction asynchronously,
which means learners don’t have to take a course
with an instructor at the same time. In addition,
the Internet offers a plethora of features that can
accommodate learning anywhere, any time.
As e-portfolios, blogging, wikis and wik-a-
longs emerge; the educational implications of
these tools will continue to subordinate the pre-
eminence of traditional synchronous proximity to
the needs of individual learners (Brown, 2006, p.
107). Brown continues to argue about the influ-
ence of online education,
Real time and space education is rapidly becom-
ing, ironically, yet another option rather than a
requirement, another of many means to instruction
in increasingly diverse contexts. As we already
are witnessing the demise of seat time and the
traditional classroom-based community, we can
anticipate individual learners, communities of
learners, and professionals more and more often
interacting with individuals and communities
beyond the old boundaries of space, time, and
status. (p. 107)
Any discussion of instructional effectiveness is
incomplete if it neglects the role of the instructor
and the characteristics of the learners as we ponder
the implications of online asynchronous models
and emerging hybrid models. As traditional age
students are increasingly comfortable communi-
cating, gaming, multi-tasking and experiencing
the world from the vantage of the mobile and
co-located (Brown, 2006, p. 108), non-traditional
age (adult learners) have found online education
especially suits their learning needs to complete
a college degree at home or at work. Based on
the characteristics of adult learners, Knowles, the
father of adult education, predicted in the early
1970s that education in the 21st century would
be delivered electronically (1970, 1975). His
prediction came true as giant online universities
emerged and most universities/colleges put one
third of their courses online not only to serve the
needs of more than 45% of the student population
(adult learners) (Bash, 2003), but also to serve
the needs of an emerging learning society. Why
do adult learners particularly enjoy online educa-
tion? Is this because they cannot afford to come
to campuses to interact with their instructors face-
to-face? One primary reason is that adult learners
are capable of self-directed learning given the
fact that they have a reservoir of prior experience
which can serve as the best resource for learning.
In addition, adult learners are internally motivated
to learn rather than externally motivated to learn.
Adult learners have so many specific develop-
mental tasks and problems in life that learning
can tackle these tasks and solve these problems.
When traditional four-walled classrooms fail to
serve their learning needs, adult learners begin to
seek information technologies in this digital age
to assist them with learning.
As Bash (2003) noted about the relationship
between adult learners and technology, he has
this to say,
As the academy enters the 21st century, certain
market realities have forced most colleges and
universities to rethink their priorities and mission.
Among dramatic new demographics that include
the “graying of America,” a level of competition
among schools that approaches cutthroat aspects
509

more common in business practice, technologi-
cal advances moving at light speed, and slimmer
operational margins, many schools are facing
challenges that threaten their very existence. One
of the central strategies being employed by many
institutions is the meaningful integration of adult
programs to support what has become a significant
portion of the student population. (p. 3)
To address this significant portion of the student
population, many universities have spent time,
effort and investment on the online course design
process. Towards this end, many universities have
purchased services provided by Elluminate.Com
to add more interaction between instructors and
students in the online learning environment by
incorporating audios, videos and a live whiteboard.
Now the focus, according to Brown (2006, p. 102),
is moving from teacher and content-centered to
learning-centered instruction. He continues to
argue that effective design focuses first on goals,
and then the activities that students will engage
in order to meet those goals. Content like learn-
ers’ prior experience is a resource for learning.
Brown (2006) found that this simple conceptual
shift challenges the way faculty think of them-
selves. In fact in order to implement effective
online education, faculty have turned to rely on
principles of adult learning. Based on the art and
science of helping adult learners learn, faculty
are supposed to be learning facilitators instead of
knowledge providers in the online environment.
Because of a different online teaching/learning
environment, the way knowledge is delivered
is totally changed. Brown (2006) uses interest-
ing analogies to describe the new role of online
course instructors,
Faculties are no longer math or physics or writ-
ing teachers. They become, rather, scholars who
teach students about math, physics, or writing.
This manifestation of moving from the “sage on
the stage” to the “guide on the side,” and a guide
who is increasingly distributed and asynchronous
510
Online Adult Education
from learners, is neither a subtle nor easy shift. Yet
it represents the newly recognized core of what it
means to be an effective educator in new learning
environments in which there is collaboration with
peers, graduate students, technology profession-
als, experts, or professionals in the field, and,
ultimately the larger community of those who hold
a stake in education. (pp. 102-103)
Indeed, our traditional role as faculty has been
challenged in this digital age. No longer can we
still consider ourselves as pedagogical instructors
who assign learners a submissive role of simply
following their instructors. Given the nature of
adult learners and online education, Knowles
(1998) reminds us,
Finally, I found myself performing a different set
of functions that required a different set of skills.
Instead of performing the function of content
planner and transmitter, which required primarily
presentation skills, I was performing the function
of process designer and manager, which required
relationship building, needs assessment, involve-
ment of students in planning, linking students
to learning resources, and encouraging student
initiative. (p. 201)
There is no doubt that the new role of faculty
will help with the online course design process.
This online design process will definitely affect
the way knowledge is delivered in the online
teaching/learning environment. The next section
of this chapter focuses on pertinent issues regard-
ing how we can better promote online education
among learners, especially adult learners in the
education arena.
ADDRESSING POLICY, ACCESS,
COMPLETION AND EQUITY
There are several definitions of the adult learner.
One defines the adult learner as the one who has
Online Adult Education
reached 18 years of age and who has shouldered the
responsibility of making major decisions for their
own lives, such as obtaining a driver licence, get-
ting married without the consent from their parents
and making important decisions regarding what
to learn and how to learn. According to the adult
education literature (Brown, 2006; King, 2006),
these adult learners are technology savvy and
they are ready to learn on the Internet. Promoting
online education programs to reach these learners
should not be an issue as these learners enjoy the
convenience of learning anywhere and any time in
cyberspace. It may be true that these learners have
more computer skills than their course instructors
who received their advanced degrees ten, twenty
or thirty years ago. However, there are some adult
students who are not that technology savvy. The
adult learners who were born after the Second
World War are the so-called baby boomers who
are about to retire. Once retired, they will have
the absolute freedom to learn what they wish
to learn, where to learn and how to learn. Since
these learners are technology challenged, promot-
ing online education may become an issue. This
outstanding issue may require institutions to be
innovative in terms of how they can promote and
market online education programs among these
important adult learners. Unlike traditional age
learners, adult learners have multiple family/work
responsibilities (Wang, 2008). Gradually, online
education programs will become more important
than the traditional four walled classroom teaching.
No institutions of higher learning wish to let go
of the opportunity of providing important online
education programs for adult learners.
Now that we have the potential educational
market among adult learners to initiate online
learning activities, a plethora of issues challenge
today’s universities and colleges. Worthy of note
will be policies that need to be created or revised
at the institutional levels. Some of the questions
that come to mind can be as follows:
• What course management system can be
used?
• Who will be qualified to teach an online
course?
• How can faculty be rewarded for their on-
line teaching instead of four walled class-
room teaching?
• What will be some of the residency re-
quirements when students are virtually
anywhere around the globe?
If we fail to answer the above questions, we
will definitely fail to promote online education
programs among adult learners. Although adult
learners are self-directed in learning, they still need
either a directing relationship with their course
instructors in the online environment or a helping
relationship with their course instructors (Wang,
2005). The online environment is a vacuum; rather,
it is filled with human interaction (Wang, 2005, p.
51). One of the ways to organize the diversity of
policy issues, according to Blustain (2006) is to
use what King and others (2002) developed as a
“three-tiered policy analysis framework:
• Faculty (rewards, support, technology edu-
cation, intellectual property)
• Students/participants (support, advising,
requirements and records, transfers)
• Management and organization (tuition and
fees, funding, collaboration, financial sup-
port, programming/curricula, delivery)
The way institutions address the varied con-
cerns of the faculty, the way institutions work
together with each other and the way institutions
divide up costs and revenues will directly affect
the way knowledge is delivered in the online
environment. Adult learners do not expect insti-
tutions and faculty to dump university courses
on computer screens; they expect them to use
principles of adult learning to design meaning-
ful courses in the online environment. It is true
that institutions are faced with a whole range of
511

policy issues involved in launching and promoting
online education programs. Perhaps it is safe to
be aggressive but to bite off only what they can
chew (Blustain, 2006).
The rapid expansion of Internet access and
the development of online development software
made it possible for institutions of higher learning
to extend their reach beyond the campus. If online
education fails to reach learners far and wide, its
very existence can be questioned. While some
institutions do better in terms of reaching learn-
ers beyond the campus, other institutions have
not achieved much in terms of reaching learners
because of failed policies or financial constraints.
Like traditional age learners, non-traditional age
students are an increasingly diverse student popu-
lation, most of whom have special needs because
of, among other issues, their ethnicity, geographi-
cal location, health, job or family obligations.
They are the ones who demand universities and
colleges meet their education and training needs
via online education.
Lewis’s (2006) research found that through
collaboration and partnership, institutions were
able to take full advantage of the new technological
advancements to address the education and train-
ing needs of adult learners. In addition, partners
were able to get started more quickly and were
less likely to encounter unforeseen political and
philosophical obstacles. (Baer & Duin, 2004, p. 6)
Often times, political and philosophical ob-
stacles come from within institutiotns of higher
learning rather than from partners. Some adminis-
trators are babyboomers themselves. These people
have never taken online courses before and they
are charged with important responsibilities such as
assigning online classes to faculty. Because they
don’t really understand the dynamics of online
teaching and learning, they often assign important
courses to wrong faculty who are not that quali-
fied in their particular fields of study. Who is to
blame for this? Well, the university administrators
should be careful in assigning those middle level
administrative positions to adult learners. Their
512
Online Adult Education
age is not tantamount to their knowledge and skills
or attitudes towards online education programs.
Those younger adult learners who are technology
savvy, who have practical working philosophies
should be assigned important positions such as col-
lege deans or department chairs. It is these people
who often seek collaboration and partnership with
experts from certain fields of study.
Those administrators who do everything by
the book will fail to promote online education
programs among adult learners. Because these
administrators such as college associate deans
or department chairs may have predudice against
online education programs, they may create admis-
sion barriers to adult learners. They want all adult
learners to get matriculated into their university
systems as traditional age students. Because of
their special characteristics (e.g., multitple work/
family responsibilities), these adult learners will
not buy in whatever university deans or depart-
ment chairs want them to do. Adult learners will
look for programs that can help them enrol in
classes in an instant. Then, tension between col-
lege deans/department chairs and faculty will
occur. Faculty will consider these administrators
inflexible or incompetent. Eventually, these ad-
ministrators will be removed from their positions.
No instutitions of higher learning want “dogs in
the mangers.” There are many innovative and
creative ways to accommodate the needs of adult
learners. No institutions of higher learning want
to lose this important group of learners especially
when these learners can bring to the universities/
colleges a large sum of money via tuition fees
that will ultimately support institutions’ fancial
insfrastructure. The 47% of the adult population
(Wang, 2005) has almost become the main body
of student population on any university campuses.
Recently, the California State University Sys-
tem (23 campuses throughout the state of Cali-
fornia in the United States) provided an excellent
example in terms of promoting online education
programs. As some campuses created barriers to
adult learners in the area of admissions into certain
Online Adult Education
online education programs, the system’s Chancel-
lor’s Office issued a memo which addresses using
creating/flexible ways to enrol adult learners in any
online education programs on a timely basis. The
memo was shared with college deans who shared
the memo with program coordinators. This high
level order from the Chancellor’s Office indicates
that promoting online education programs among
adult learners would not be possible without ad-
ministrative support especially from the higher
level. As some incompetent college deans violate
university policies, luckily leaders at higher levels
choose to supprt online adult education.
Barriers to online adult education programs
for adult learners in institutions of higher learn-
ing are manifold. It is these barriers that make
promoting important online education programs
difficult. Administrative understanding of the
dynamics of online teaching and learning is the
first step towards successfully promoting online
education programs among adult learners. This
requires faculty and adult learners to “educate”
university/college administrators to change their
mindset or prejudice against online education.
To change the mindset of these college deans or
department chairs is not easy. This may involve
in sharing pertinent journal articles, book chaptes
and other important publications regarding the
effectiveness of online education programs. Once
they see tangible results, there may be a “buy in”
on their part. Again, faculty need to be patient with
some ignorant administrators. It takes time to learn
anyway. Sound educational policies come from
the collective wisdom of administrators, faculty
and students. No university administrators should
make policies single handedly. Promoting online
education programs rests with creating thinking of
the administrators, faculty and students together.
Although decentralization is the hallmark of
U. S. higher education, the disadvantage is the
fact that differences in curriculum and policy
create new barriers to student access. Online
education is designed to surmount barriers to ac-
cess to higher education. Indeed, creative use of
technology and partnerships can extend the reach
of programs to serve new groups of students and
address workforce shortages (Phelps, 2006, p. 77).
As institutions focus primarily on students 18 to
25 years of age, despite the efforts of continuing
educators, access to higher education has often
been difficult for adults who face barriers related
to the time and place where education is offered.
Online education can help make higher education
more available to adult learners. Phelps (2006)
made the following observations:
The availability of instruction “any time, any
place” has made higher education more accessible
to adults and individuals living in remote loca-
tions. In a very short period of time, e-learning
has gained wide acceptance as a legitimate form
of education. Still, educators have yet to exploit
fully the application of new technologies to extend
and enrich opportunities for increasing access to
higher education. (p. 78)
However, in addressing the barriers to adult
students’ access to higher education, hurdles do
exist. According to the National Center for Educa-
tion Statistics (1995, 2002), many factors including
poverty, inadequate academic preparation, lack of
knowledge and role models, and cultural barri-
ers limit opportunities significantly for minority
and low-income adult students. Hamlin (2006)
addressed the new name of online learning by
using e-learning:
By 2005 online learning, often termed “e-
learning,” was almost wholly internalized in
higher education. Few institutions are ignoring
online learning. Even institutions that do not of-
fer courses and programs in distance format use
Web applications and resources in classrooms.
Today, e-learning is also thought to be appropriate
for younger college students and higher school
students. E-learning has come a long way in a
short time. (p. 112)
More importantly, if used positively and
effectively, e-learning can support retention of
513

distance learners and eventual program comple-
tion. To ensure retention of distance learners and
eventual program completion, Hamlin (2006, pp.
124-127) made the following recommendations:
• Institutions should be sure students are
technology literate;
• Results must be measured in order to be
meaningful;
• Collaborations create cost efficiencies...
and complication;
• Partnerships between business and educa-
tion are a plus, sometimes a necessity;
• Staffing projections must be realistic;
• Tutoring might be more broadly conceptu-
alized as “learning support”;
• Planning for sustainability is important;
• It is desirable to strive for a holistic ap-
proach to online student services.
No doubt, e-learning has the potential to
provide education for all. However, in any given
society, we have “special populations”—persons
of color, those whose first language is not English
(often referred to as language minorities), those
who are differently-abled, as well as those who
are denied access to traditional higher education
due to geographic location or life’s work (Gibson,
2006, p. 133). It is these special populations who
can present special challenges when confronted
with technological solutions. Therefore, flexible
access to education remains a key to serving these
special populations including working adults.
One solution to the issue of access to education,
according to Gibson (2006), is to provide access
to technology to overcome barriers of time, place,
pace and disability. She continues to suggest that
special consideration be given:
To design for and ensure that learners have
appropriate technology skills, academic prepa-
ration, learning skills, language skills, and self-
management skills. Further, design educational
experiences that are relevant to the distinct aspects
514
Online Adult Education
of these students’ culture, life situation, and lan-
guage abilities. (p. 134)
To ensure access and success and guarantee
that e-learning can be well accepted among work-
ing adults including ethnically diverse, language
minorities and differently-abled populations, the
U. S. Department of Education’s Learning Any-
time Anyplace Program (LAAP) has given us a
ready to do checklist of areas when conducting
teaching and learning with technology such as in
the online environment:
• Support for the technological infrastructure;
• Inclusive, but also accessible for different-
ly-abled or those for whom English is not
their first language;
• Learner support including preparatory ed-
ucational experiences to help learners at a
distance, learn with technology, and learn
in adulthood;
• Technology support to ensure both facul-
ty and learners are able to function in the
environment and have ready help when
needed;
• Faculty support for teaching with technol-
ogy and the design instruction.
One last issue facing online education and adult
learners is the issue of faculty development. The
explosion of the Internet and of Web-based courses
has led to a rapid change in how professional de-
velopment programs are delivered (Hardy, 2006,
p. 152). Addressing this rapid change, Hardy has
the following to say:
Faculty at colleges and universities are commonly
involved in committee work, research, and service.
Making time for professional development during
the week is not a high priority, and many do not
wish to have their weekends disrupted by attend-
ing face-to-face workshops on campus. Providing
professional development online (where educators
Online Adult Education
access content 24 hours a day, seven days a week)
gives instructors control of time. (p. 152)
No need to say that online courses are a conve-
nient method of delivering professional develop-
ment programs and other programs as well. Unless
faculty is willing to engage in online professional
development opportunities, they won’t be able to
help market online programs among learners. John
Cotton Dana’s famous proverb can be changed
to “who dares to teach online must never cease
to learn online.” Based on her own research as
well as current research, Hardy summarized the
benefits and challenges when conducting teaching
and learning with technology. It is imperative that
we be aware of these advantages and challenges
when promoting online programs among learners.
The more we know these benefits and challenges,
the better we can help learners learn. Some of
the benefits or advantages online education or
e-learning can provide are as follows:
• Are flexible;
• Are convenient;
• Are adaptable to individual differences,
customization;
• Create a learning community—which can
be local, national, or global;
• Help participants master technology;
• Provide more choices than are available in
a face-to-face workshop;
• Can have specific goals;
• Provide regular ongoing contact with
colleagues;
• Can provide regular support from an on-
line facilitator;
• Remove geographic distance;
• Provide for time to reflect on and prepare
assignments and postings;
• Lead to thoughtful discussion;
• Can be cost effective;
• Allow those who are usually quiet an op-
portunity to participate.
Challenges can be summarized as follows:
• A need for self-discipline among partici-
pants (even among cohorts);
• The lack of spontaneous conversation;
• A need for participants to be resourceful;
• Acknowledgement that much of the online
program may rely on independent learning;
• Awareness that some participants have dif-
ficulty accessing the Internet;
• Writing is usually the sole source of
communication;
• Technology issues can hamper success of
the program;
• Participants may not be used to the lack of
immediate feedback;
• In most cases, little or no personal contact.
Promoting online education programs among
adult learners is not the sole effort undertaken
by faculty alone. It involves active collaboration
on the part of administrators, staff, practitioners,
technologists, technicians, scholars, and students
themselves. Before conducting teaching and
learning with technology, issues revolving around
policy, partnerships, instructional design, access,
professional development, equity must be success-
fully addressed. While the benefits of e-learning
support the marketability of online education pro-
grams, the challenges may provide opportunities
for us to be innovative in overcoming barriers to
meaningful online education experiences.
FUTURE TRENDS
As we consider the simultaneous but often con-
tradictory landscapes of online education, adult
learners and technology, it is no surprise that on-
line education has become such a demanding and
exciting field. Numerous journals on e-learning
have been launched in the field to address pertinent
issues about online education. Both scholars and
practitioners provide their insights, making a con-
515

scientious effort to resolve issues revolving around
effectiveness of online education. Faculty, staff
and administrators attend and present at confer-
ences on e-learning, hoping to bring back to their
universities and colleges solutions to e-learning
problems that they cannot possibly solve given
their limited resources. Looking at the landscape
of online education, it would seem that future
trends would continue to rest with some of the old
issues that have not been successfully addressed.
Among a plethora of issues, the following jump
out as salient that cannot escape our attention:
• How does policy affect online education
program development and delivery?
• How do we extend the reach of online edu-
cation through partnerships?
• How do we use online education to in-
crease higher education opportunities?
• What are the new perspectives on in-
structional effectiveness through online
education?
• How do we use Web-based online learning
to increase access and completion?
• What do we do to increase equity?
• How can we make all faculty accept tech-
nology assisted professional development?
• How do we harness the power of technol-
ogy to better serve the adult population and
special populations?
A closer look at these trends reveals that our
time/effort/expertise/ investment etc. should be
focused on faculty, students/participants and
management and organization at the institutional
levels. Another future trend that is worthy of note
is the fact that we will continue to find ways to
surmount challenges of online education. Some
scholars point out that hybrid courses will be one
easy solution. Clearly, more research needs to be
conducted to confirm this projection in the field.
Challenges of online education come not only from
technology itself, but also from faculty, administra-
tors and students who resist the use of technology
516
Online Adult Education
for educational pursuits. Research into changing
these people’s attitudes towards online education
will be perennial in the future. The reason is simple:
times change, not everyone changes with times.
Another reason could be some faculty refuse to
change their teaching philosophies to fit an online
environment. Thinking of challenges of online
education should not take away our opportunities
to develop and market our educational programs
through online education (e-learning). The field
is demanding but exciting. Some other possible
trends that we can think of based on this chapter
and the theme of this encyclopedia can be:
• How can we provide greater access to edu-
cation for underserved populations?
• How do we champion lifelong learning
among the general population by building
greater and easier continuity and pathways
among educational pursuits?
• How do we provide greater opportunities
for technology literacy for groups of all
ages and people?
• How do we close the achievement gap in
literary, academic study, and math, science
and technology?
• How do we promote innovations to facili-
tate global cross-cultural communication,
understanding and appreciation?
• How do we develop innovative partner-
ships to reach greater purposes together
than alone?
• How do we promote understanding, strat-
egies and support for policy making and
change across and within organizations?
• How do we explore instructionally-focused
and innovative online education technolo-
gies and delivery systems?
• How do we create faculty development
content, delivery, rewards systems, models
and theories?
• The Internet is only the second genera-
tion. What do we need to do to prepare
Online Adult Education
ourselves when the third, fourth, and fifth
generations become available soon?
• Online education works well with adult
learners. How do we integrate principles of
adult learning into an online environment?
Will these principles be discarded when
new generations of the Internet emerge?
Some of these trends have been explored in the
field but will continue to be explored in the future.
According to King and Biro (2006, p. 181), online
education via distance learning technologies has
been continually moving towards convenience
and adoption. The ultimate goal of promoting
online education programs should move towards
convenience and adoption. Otherwise, overcom-
ing the hurdles, barriers and challenges of online
education would be meaningless.
As we continue to explore future trends in
online education, we will be taken to places yet
unknown. However, we have tremendous techno-
logical opportunities continually opening ahead
of us to address educational, social, economic
and political needs. Rather than letting the field
be dominated by technology breakthroughs, we
can chart a course of educational excellence and
innovation (King & Biro, 2006, p. 182).
CONCLUSION
Online education has the potential to open wider
the door to greater access and advancement for
adult learners across their life spans. Because
of the asynchronous and synchronous nature
of e-learning, it has successfully replaced other
electronic modes of education such as radio and
television. With the advent of new information
technologies, more and more interactive activi-
ties between instructors and students have been
arranged in a cost-effective manner. It is believed
that new information technologies will overcome
many of the challenges online education faces
today. Indeed, no one is to underestimate the
omnipotent nature of online education in the 21st
century. Not only did Knowles’s prediction about
the electronic mode of education come true in
this new century, but also it has provided benefits
that traditional four-walled classrooms dared not
even think of.
This chapter has provided an integrated over-
view of the relationship between online education
and adult learners. It has demonstrated major is-
sues revolving around online education. Whether
these issues can be successfully solved will affect
online education programs especially at the tertiary
level. Among those important issues, this chapter
addressed how policy may affect online program
development and delivery, how to extend the reach
of online education through partnerships, how to
use online education to increase higher education
opportunities, what are the central issues revolv-
ing around effective instructional design, how to
use e-learning to increase access and completion
and issues affecting equity. These issues do not
deviate too far from those advantages and chal-
lenges associated with online education. In fact,
these benefits and challenges all have a “ripple
effect” on these major issues. The purpose has
been to provide a substantial resource of infor-
mation, guidance, and controversy that will not
only serve as a basis for practice and research to
harness the great yet untapped potential of that
“tiger” of online education (King & Biro, 2006)
in order to market our online education programs
among adult learners in the 21st century.
When we think of online education, we can-
not help but imagine many of its benefits that
traditional four-walled classrooms cannot even
think of. The benefits are made possible with the
innovations in information technologies. Indeed,
e-learning has the potential to span:
• Geographical boundaries;
• Languages;
• Learning styles;
• Learning disabilities;
• Physical disabilities;
517

• Time and space limitations;
• Technological limitations;
• And many more parameters.
All these parameters are challenges imposed
on adult learners. Unless we are willing to learn to
use information technologies to design and deliver
innovative and effective teaching and learning in
the online environment, we will fail to serve this
student population, adult learners, in the academy
in the 21st century.
A final quote from King and Biro (2006) re-
minds us that not only do we need to change our
old school attitude towards e-learning, but also
what we can do proactively to promote online
education programs among learners:
We urge you, our colleagues, to never be satisfied
with the status quo in education, but to seek out
the opportunities to use every means available to
advance teaching and learning. For many years,
distance education has been part of this innovative
and effective creative movement to discover new
dimensions of teaching and learning, and we see
no indication of this receding in years to come.
More than ever, we need experienced, talented,
visionary, and persistent educators to harness the
power of this tiger. (p. 183)
Indeed, it is our responsibility to help our adult
learners reach into their futures to realize their
dreams and online education is needed throughout
our lifetime to help our learners respond to changes
in the nature of work, navigate passages from one
stage of development to another, accommodate
new personal and professional situations (Lamdin
& Fugate, 1997).
REFERENCES
Baer, L. L., & Duin, A. H. (2004). Exploring suc-
cess indicators for partnerships. Washington, D.
C.: Fund for the Improvement of Postsecondary
Education.
518
Online Adult Education
Bash, L. (2003). Adult learners in the academy.
Bolton, MA: Anker Publishing Company, Inc.
Blustain, H. (2006). Policy affecting distance
education program development and delivery. In
King, K. P., & Griggs, J. K. (Eds.), Harnessing
innovative technology in higher education: Access,
policy, & instruction (pp. 29–46). Madison, WI:
Atwood Publishing.
Brown, G. (2006). New perspectives on instruc-
tional effectiveness through distance education.
In King, K. P., & Griggs, J. K. (Eds.), Harnessing
innovative technology in higher education: Access,
policy, & instruction (pp. 97–109). Madison, WI:
Atwood Publishing.
Gagne, R. M., Wager, W. W., Golas, K. C., &
Keller, J. M. (2005). Principles of instructional
design (5th ed.). USA: Thomson Learning Inc.
Gibson, C. C. (2006). Increasing equity: Seeking
mainstream advantages for all. In King, K. P.,
& Griggs, J. K. (Eds.), Harnessing innovative
technology in higher education: Access, policy, &
instruction (pp. 133–150). Madison, WI: Atwood
Publishing.
Global Reach. (2003). Global internet statistics.
Retrieved from http://global-reach.biz/globstats/
index.php3
Hamlin, A. J. P. (2006). Promising practices:
Using web-based distance learning to increase
access and completion. In King, K. P., & Griggs,
J. K. (Eds.), Harnessing innovative technology in
higher education: Access, policy, & instruction
(pp. 111–132). Madison, WI: Atwood Publishing.
Hardy, D. W. (2006). No time to spare: Technology
assisted professional development. In King, K.
P., & Griggs, J. K. (Eds.), Harnessing innovative
technology in higher education: Access, policy, &
instruction (pp. 151–168). Madison, WI: Atwood
Publishing.
Online Adult Education
King, J. W., Nugent, G. C., Russell, E. B., Eich,
J., & Lacy, D. D. (2002). Policy frameworks for
distance education: Implications for decisions
makers. Retrieved from http://www.westga.
edu/~distance/king32.htm.
King, K. P. (2006). Introduction. In King, K. P.,
& Griggs, J. K. (Eds.), Harnessing innovative
technology in higher education: Access, equity,
policy, & instruction (pp. 15–28). Madison, WI:
Atwood Publishing.
King, K. P., & Biro, S. C. (2006). Conclusion:
Harnessing the power of innovative technology
in higher education. In King, K. P., & Griggs,
J. K. (Eds.), Harnessing innovative technology
in higher education: Access, equity, policy, &
instruction (pp. 169–183). Madison, WI: Atwood
Publishing.
Knowles, M. S. (1970). The modern practice of
adult education: Andragogy versus pedagogy.
New York: Association Press.
Knowles, M. S. (1975). Self-directed learning:
A guide for learners and teachers. New York:
Association Press.
Knowles, M. S., Holton, E. F., & Swanson, A.
(1998). The adult learner. Houston, TX: Gulf
Publishing Company.
Lamdin, L., & Fugate, M. (1997). Elderlearning:
New frontier in an aging society. Phoenix, Arizona:
The Oryx Press.
Lewis, R. J. (2006). Extending the reach of dis-
tance education through partnerships. In King, K.
P., & Griggs, J. K. (Eds.), Harnessing innovative
technology in higher education: Access, equity,
policy, & instruction (pp. 47–76). Madison, WI:
Atwood Publishing.
National Center for Educational Statistics. (1995).
Event, status, and cohort dropout rates. Retrieved
from http://nces.ed.gov/pubs/dp95/9747.asp.
National Center for Educational Statistics. (2002).
Student effort and educational progress—comple-
tions. Retrieved from http://nces.ed.gov/pro-
grams/coe/2002/section3/indicator25.asp.
Phelps, M. R. (2006). Using distance education to
increase higher education opportunities. In King,
K. P., & Griggs, J. K. (Eds.), Harnessing innovative
technology in higher education: Access, equity,
policy, & instruction (pp. 77–96). Madison, WI:
Atwood Publishing.
Schrum, L. (2000). Online teaching and learning:
Essential conditions for success! In Lau, L. (Ed.),
Distance Learning technologies: Issues, trends
and opportunities (pp. 91–106). Hershey, PA:
Idea Group Publishing.
Tang, J. (2000). Recent Internet develop-
ments in the People’s Republic of China.
Online Information Review, 24(4), 316–321.
doi:10.1108/14684520010350669
Wang, V. (2005). Perceptions of Teaching Prefer-
ences of Online Instructors. Journal on Excellence
in College Teaching, 16(3), 33–54.
Wang, V. C. X. (2007). Adult learners’ perceptions
of the teaching preferences of online instructors.
International Journal of Instructional Technology
& Distance Learning, 4(6). Retrieved from http://
itdl.org/Journal/Jun_07/article02.htm.
Wang, V. C. X. (2008). Facilitating adult learning:
A comprehensive guide for successful instruction
(Rev. ed.). Boston, MA: Pearson Education.
Yu, B., & Xu, H. Y. (1988). Adult higher educa-
tion: A case study on the workers’ colleges in the
People’s Republic of China. Paris, UNESCO:
International Institute for Educational Planning.
519

KEY TERMS AND DEFINITIONS
Access: It refers to the ability, right or per-
mission to approach, enter, speak with or use;
admittance.
Asynchronous: Not occurring at the same
time.
Challenges: It refers to difficulty in a job or
undertaking that is stimulating to one engaged in it.
E-Learning: E-learning sometimes refered to
as electronic learning of eLearning is a term used
for web-based distance education without face-to-
face interaction between instructors and learners.
520
Online Adult Education
Equity: It refers to the quality of being fair or
impartial; fairness; impartiality.
Instruction: This term also means educa-
tion, which refers to the teaching and learning of
knowledge, skills and attitudes.
Omnipotent: It means powerful, mighty,
supreme or infinite in power.
Policy: It is typically described as a deliber-
ate plan of action to guide decisions and achieve
rational outcomes. Each university has a set of
policies in terms of E-learning.
Synchronous: Occurring at the same time.
 521

Chapter 31
Blended Learning Primer
Geraldine Torrisi-Steele
Griffith University, Australia

ABSTRACT
Whilst the potential of blended learning to provide cost effective and quality learning experiences in adult
education is generally acknowledged, deciding ‘what to blend?’ and ‘how to blend?’ is challenging. The
design and implementation of blended learning is specific to the learning situation. Given the range of
possible learning situations and the wide array of possible tools there are virtually endless possibilities
for the blended learning designs. Those first embarking on blended learning ventures are faced with
the task of surveying the vast quantity of resulting literature to gain a fundamental understanding of the
concept and its implementation. For those beginning to implement blended learning in adult education
contexts, this chapter attempts to provide a starting point for further exploration. This chapter seeks to
lay foundations for understanding the concept of blended learning by firstly defining the term, and then
highlighting key design concepts by discussing appropriate philosophical foundations and instructional
design principles. An overview of some of the existing models and frameworks for blended learning in
adult education is then given. Finally, some of the advantages and challenges of blended learning are
discussed and future directions and research issues are identified.

INTRODUCTION educational institutions and corporate organiza-

In the ongoing pursuit of cost effective, quality
teaching and learning practices in adult educa-
tion contexts, blended learning has emerged as
an option with significant potential. Both tertiary
DOI: 10.4018/978-1-61692-906-0.ch031
tions are investing considerable resources into the
implementation of blended learning environments
for learning and training. The blended learning
landscape is complex and dynamic, shaped by
the varied demands of a wide array of learning
situations and by an ever-changing technological
landscape. Attempts to understand ‘what to blend?’

and ‘how best to blend?’ have precipitated a large
volume of literature. Insights presented in literature
form an important foundation for the design of
future implementations of blended learning. This
chapter presents some fundamental ideas about
blended learning and is aimed at those making
their first forages into blended learning in adult
education contexts. It is intended that this chapter
will serve a launching point for further exploration
into other literature.
The chapter firstly provides a context for the
concept of blended learning by briefly exploring
the ideas of multimedia, e-learning and flexible
learning from which blended learning evolved.
Blended learning is then defined. This is followed
by focus on the design of blended learning environ-
ments. An understanding of the design of blended
learning environments is developed by discuss-
ing three important components: philosophical
foundations, appropriate instructional design
principles and some frameworks and models to
guide implementation. Finally, the key advantages
and challenges of blended learning are discussed
and some insight given into future trends and
research directions.
BACKGROUND
The understanding of blended learning is assisted
by a brief discussion of multimedia, e-learning
and flexible learning from which blended learn-
ing evolved.
In the early 1990’s the emergence of multime-
dia delivered on CD ROM heralded a new era for
technology based learning. ‘Multimedia’ being
any technology making possible “the entirely
digital delivery of content presented by using an
integrated combination of audio, video, images
(two-dimensional, three-dimensional) and text
along with the capacity to support user interac-
tion (Torrisi-Steele, 2004, p. 24)”. The promise
of multimedia was the use of multiple modalities
which would be supportive of individual learning
522
Blended Learning Primer
styles, enabling learners to construct individual
pathways through content and use of interaction
as a way of actively engaging learners (Butcher-
Powell, 2005).
Shortly thereafter the emergence of the internet
and in particular, the development of the World
Wide Web expanded the array of technologies
available for teaching and learning endeavours.
The graphical user interface (GUI) offered by
the World Wide Web rapidly facilitated its use in
educational contexts. Terms such as ‘e-learning’,
‘online learning’ (sometimes used interchange-
ably) became common use. ‘E-learning’ refers
to “online access to learning resources, anywhere
and anytime” (Holmes & Gardner, 2006, p.14).
E-learning primarily viewed as “an alternative
way [to face-face teaching] to teach and learn”
(Alonso, Lopez, Manrique & Viñes, 2005, p. 218).
An important characteristic of e-learning is that
it frees the access to information and learning
materials from the constraints of specific time
and place.
Alongside the development of the internet, the
growing availability of networks made way for
a range of communications tools for both online
synchronous (same time/same place, same time/
different place) and asynchronous (different time/
different place) communication. These tools en-
abled the formation of e-learning communities.
E-learning communities are a powerful feature
of e-learning environments. When learners are
able to engage in shared learning activities (Hol-
mes & Gardner, 2006; Alonso et al., 2005) more
meaningful learning occurs because learners
have the opportunity share and questioning their
understandings (Laurillard, 1993).
The flexibility of time, place and collaborative
opportunities at a distance, made possible by e-
learning precipitated strong focus on the idea of
flexible learning. Flexible learning may be defined
in terms of approaches to teaching and learning
that are learner centred, free up the time, place
and methods of learning and teaching and use ap-
propriate technologies in a networked environment
Blended Learning Primer
(Moran & Myringer, 1999, p. 60). Taylor, Lopez
& Quadrelli (1996) recognise flexible learning as
a combination of “philosophy and technology”
embodying the open learning concepts of student
centred education, distance education delivery
systems which allows off campus participation
and the utilisation of information technologies.
Fundamental to the popularity of flexible learning
approaches in adult education was the recognition
that collaboration is an “essential characteristic of
the information economy” and that it is essential
to enabling organisations to “achieve competi-
tive advantage” (Australian Flexible Learning
Framework, 2001, p. 8)
Within literature the question of ‘whether or
not to use technology for teaching and learning’
quickly became redundant. Literature was domi-
nated by focus on the benefits of new technolo-
gies over face to face and an exploration of the
potential of the new and emerging technologies
to re-shape teaching and learning practices.
Exploration was based on the belief that imple-
mentation of new technologies acts as the cata-
lyst for a shift in practice away from traditional,
teacher-centred face-face instruction towards
constructivist, student centred approaches (Relan
& Gillani, 1997; LeFoe, 1998; Richards & Nason,
1999, Torrisi-Steele, 2004). What was initially
viewed as a technology option became viewed
as a ‘technology imperative’ (Holt & Thompson,
1998) due to economic, social and pedagogical
reasons. Educational institutions began investing
considerable time and effort into the inclusion of
technology in educational contexts.
Founded on this heritage, blended learning,
represents the next evolutionary step, moving
beyond concerns of “what is most effective for
teaching and learning: technology or face-face?”
to concerns about “what is the best combination of
face-face and technology that can be seamlessly
integrated to serve the needs of the learning situ-
ation? Significantly, and unlike preceding ideas
about e-learning the concept of blended learning
recognises the value of both technology and face
to face teaching.
The definitions of blended learning are many
and varied. Some may argue blended learning
refers to a blend of learning theories or instruc-
tional methods, others argue it refers a blend of
modalities. In some instances blended learning has
been defined as learning which uses a variety of
instructional modalities (Singh & Reed, 2001). The
latter definition is too broad and under it almost
teaching approach can be classified as blended
learning. More commonly, it is recognised that
the combination of face-face teaching and tech-
nologies is a distinguishing feature of blended
learning. Garrison and Kanuka (2004 p. 96) view
“… blended learning [as] the thoughtful integra-
tion of classroom face-face learning experiences
with online learning”. Kaye (2003) observes that,
blended learning is an “opportunity to integrate the
innovative and technological advances offered by
online learning with the interaction and participa-
tion offered in the best of traditional learning”.
Such views of blended learning acknowledge that
blended learning is “effective integration of the
two main components (face-face and technology)
such that we are not just adding on to the exist-
ing dominant approach or method” (Garrison &
Kanuka, 2004. p. 97). It is this view of blended
learning that is adopted as working definition for
this chapter.
The idea of ‘integration’ is an important
component of the blended learning definition. As
Garrison and Vaughan (2008 p. 148) observe “the
word blended is used to suggest that it is more
than a bolting together of disparate technologies
with no clear vision of the result”. If blended
learning is to impact positively on the quality
of teaching and learning then, as is the case for
other technology orientated teaching endeavours,
an integrated rather than superficial approach
will drive the required re-examination of exist-
ing approaches and subsequent adoption of new,
enriched strategies. (Torrisi-Steele, 2004; Tearle,
Dillon, & Davis, 1999).
523

BLENDED LEARNING
ENVIRONMENT DESIGN
The design of blended learning environments is a
challenging endeavour. In adult learning environ-
ments there is a vast array of potential contexts
for implementation, a diverse range of learning
and training objectives, and a rich mixture of
learning styles, experiences, cultures, ages and
abilities within the learners themselves. Coupled
with the wide choice of delivery strategies the
possibilities for design are almost infinite. An
understanding of the fundamentals of blended
learning environment design is facilitated by first
examining relevant philosophical foundations and
appropriate underlying principles of instructional
design. Against this background some of the many
possible models and frameworks developed to
guide implementation are then presented.
Philosophical Foundations
Whilst constructivist philosophy often dominates
as the philosophical foundation for the design of
blended learning, others also argue that blended
learning is a blend of tools and as well as a blend
of philosophies. From this perspective the best
designed learning experience will draw on a blend
of philosophies including performance support and
cognitivism as well as constructivism (Carmen,
2002; Rossett, Douglis, & Frazee 2003; Zemke
2002). The goal is to have the right theory for the
right situation.” (Rossett, as cited in Zemke 2002).
The core notions of constructivism, conversa-
tion theory, cognitivism and performance support
are presented below.
Constructivism and Social
Constructivism
Constructivism, both cognitive constructivism
and social constructivism, is one of the most
widely accepted philosophical foundations for
blended learning. Based on the work of Piaget
524
Blended Learning Primer
(1952), cognitive constructivism acknowledges
the learner as the focus of the learning experience.
Learners are an active force in the construction of
their own knowledge whilst the instructor’s role
is that of facilitator. The instructor is responsible
for structuring the learning environment and
providing guidance such that individual learners
are able to actively explore knowledge and form
their own understandings. Individuals construct
their own knowledge by engaging in meaningful,
authentic experiences. This is in contrast with
traditional, instructivist philosophy whereby the
instructor is at the focus of the learning experience
and is responsible for ‘passing’ on knowledge to
a relatively passive learner.
Social constructivism, formulated by Vygotsky
(1978) also acknowledges the learner as active but
places emphasis on the importance of interaction
with others (peers, teachers, experts) as a way of
exploring knowledge and forming deep under-
standing. Vygotsky identifies a ‘zone of proximal
development’. The zone of proximal development
refers to the range of knowledge that can be de-
veloped with guidance or peer collaboration. This
knowledge exceeds what can be obtained by the
learner working alone. The idea that full cognitive
development can only be attained through social
interaction and especially with the help of a men-
tor is at the crux of Vygotsky’s theory.
Dewey (1916, 1938) like Vygotsky, recognises
the importance of social interaction for knowledge
formation. However, unlike Vygotsky who places
emphasis on a mentor, Dewey expects learners to
be self-directed. Dewey views inquiry as the core
of the learning experience. From Dewey’s perspec-
tive “inquiry is both a reflective and collaborative
experience” (Garrison & Vaughan, 2008, p. 14).
More specifically, Dewey envisages the learn-
ing environment as a community of inquiry. The
concept of a “community of inquiry” is oftentimes
recognised as the “ideal and heart of a higher
education experience” (Garrison & Vaughan,
2008, p. 14) and thus is gaining popularity as a
Blended Learning Primer
foundational philosophy for the development of
blended learning environments.
Conversational Perspective
Aligned with the social construction of knowledge
is conversation perspective by theorists such as
Gordon Pask, Bernard Scott and others. Conversa-
tion theory proposes that conversation is a vehicle
by which knowledge is made explicit. Conversa-
tions are recursive and iterative, continuing until
mutual understanding is achieved. In conversation
theory, the basic principles are: students must
learn relationships among concepts in order to
learn, the explicit explanation or manipulation
of content assists understanding (“teachback”),
individuals differ in their preferred way of learn-
ing relationships.
Performance Support Paradigm
The performance support paradigm is particularly
relevant to adult learning in task orientated envi-
ronments. As advocated by Gery (2002) focuses
on the notion that “learning can occur either as a
result of doing or at the moment of need” (p. 26).
Gery proposes that there is a need to harness the
potential of technology in order to create learn-
ing environments that “have the explicit goal of
generating immediate work performance” (p. 29).
The paradigm focuses attention to the number of
elements within the system, the integration of
those elements, if and how resources are filtered
and the basis on which they are, the appropriate-
ness of elements, balance between structure and
freedom and the “nature and degree of task auto-
mation and deliverable creation provided within
the application” (p. 30).
Cognitivism
The main concern of cognitivism is the internal
mechanism of human thought. In order to un-
derstand how people learn there must be insight
into the inner mental processes such as thinking,
memory and problem solving. Knowledge is
formed by the acquisition or re-organization of
symbolic mental constructions (schema). Within
the cognitivist view, learning is conceptualized as
a three stage ‘information processing’ occurrence:
input enters from the senses (sensory register),
some of this input is transferred to short term
memory (can be retained here longer through
repeated rehearsal and chunking of material into
meaningful parts) and then may be committed to
Long-term memory and storage through processes
such as rote and memorisation or by, at a deeper
level generating linkages between previously
acquired information and new information. The
congnitivist philosophy includes notions such
as: meaningful and contextualised information is
easier to learn and remember, practice improves
retention, prior learning will have effects on new
learning, it is easier to remember information that
is categorised, and preparing learners for material
they are about to learn (advance organisers) will
help learners make better sense of the material.
Principles of Instructional Design
Blended learning designs are by nature complex.
There is large range of possible approaches and
tools that must be cohesively integrated to support
learning outcomes and as Garrison and Vaughan
(2008, p. 105) observe, the integration of face to
face and online learning in order to realise the
‘transformative nature of blended designs’ is chal-
lenging. Consequently, blended learning does not
lend itself to a single “prescriptive instructional
design template” (Garrison &Vaughan, 2008, p.
105).
The following principles and perspectives are
presented in this chapter as valuable instructional
principles for the design of blended learning
environments:
• Jonassen’s (1994) constructivist guided
design principles
525

• the seven principles of good universi-
ty teaching by Chickering and Erhman
(1996),
• Laurillard’s conversational framework,
• Salmon’s (2000) five step model for
e-moderation,
• Garrison and Vaughan’s (2008) commu-
nity of inquiry perspective
and
• Oliver, Herrington & Reeves’ (2006 au-
thentic learning perspective.
Jonassen’s (1994) Constructivist
Guided Design Principles
Adult learners are generally prompted to learn
when their situation creates a need to learn. On
this basis adults are usually very motivated to learn
and thrive best in an environment that acknowl-
edges the individuality of the learner, presents
learning that is clearly relevant to their real life
situation and that implements strategies requiring
problem solving and thought (Knowles, Holton,
& Swanson, 1998) These characteristics of adult
learners are consistent with constructivist design
principles such as those presented by. Jonassen’s
(1994). The following constructivist principles
presented by are thus useful in guiding the design
of blended learning environments:
• Provide multiple representations of reality;
thereby represent the natural complexity of
the real world;
• Focus on knowledge construction, not
reproduction;
• Present authentic tasks (contextualising
rather than abstracting instruction);
• Provide real-world, case-based learning
environments, rather than pre-determined
instructional sequences;
• Foster reflective practice;
526
Blended Learning Primer
• Enable context-dependent and content-
dependent knowledge construction; and
supporting collaborative construction
of knowledge through social negotia-
tion, not competition among learners for
recognition.
Seven Principles of Good
University Teaching
The seven principles of good practice in university
teaching articulated by Chickering and Ehrman
(1996, online) also form a useful foundation
for the instructional design of blended learning
environments.
Good practice in teaching:
1. Encourages contact between students and
faculty↜Communications technologies have
expanded opportunities for communication.
Some may find the online environment less
intimidating and convenient than face-face.
2. Develops reciprocity and cooperation
among students.↜Learning is a collaborative
endeavour.
3. Encourages active learning. ↜“apprentice-
like” learning is supported by traditional
methods but enhanced by new technologies.
4. Gives prompt feedback.↜Feedback helps
students identify what they do and don’t
know and so focus their learning. The stor-
age capacity of technology can be used as
a way of ‘recording’ growth of knowledge
and understanding.
5. Emphasizes time on task↜Flexibility in ac-
cess and more convenient access encourages
participation.
6. Communicates high expectations.↜The po-
tential to explore real-life problems through
the use of new technologies motivates stu-
dents to achieve.
7. Respects diverse talents and ways of learn-
ing.↜An increased array of tools and strategies
Blended Learning Primer
become available to satisfy the differing
learning needs of individual students.
Laurillard’s (1993)
Conversational Framework
Arising from conversation theory, Laurillard’s
(1993) conversational framework is highly rel-
evant to the design of blended learning environ-
ments given the core role of collaboration in adult
learning and in particular in workplace training
settings. The basic premise of Laurillard’s (1993)
work is that learning is more effective when a
learner converses with a partner and engages in
iteratively refining understanding by sharing and
questioning their understandings. The ‘partner’
may be another student or a teacher. Luarillard’s
(1993) framework specifies four kinds of activi-
ties or communication forms:
• discussion between teacher and learner
(both agree on learning objectives and in-
dividual conceptions should be accessible
by both),
• adaptation of the learner actions and of
teacher’s constructed environment (taking
into account existing conceptions, teacher
adapts objectives and learners integrate
this feedback and link back to their own
conceptions),
• interaction between learner and environ-
ment as defined by the teacher (teacher
focuses on learner support and gives ap-
propriate feedback to the learner; teacher
creates a learning environment appropriate
to the learning task that has been given to
the learner)
and
• reflection on the learner’s performance by
both learner and teacher.
In order to assist with media choices in the
conversational learning environment, Laurillard
(1993) classifies instructional media based on the
type of interaction it is capable of supporting. Nar-
rative media includes print, audio, film and video
and only offers descriptions with no opportunity
for refinement or iteration. Adaptive media refers
to computer based media that is interactive. This
media has the ability to offer feedback and make
changes on the basis of user actions. Hypertext and
web based resources are multimodal and offer a
degree of response to users and enable a degree of
user control. This is referred to interactive media.
Communicative media enables technology medi-
ated discussion and includes synchronous and
asynchronous media. Media such as paper, discs
and networks are referred to by Luarillard (1993)
as productive media since it enables learners to
make contributions.
Salmon’s (2000) Five Step Model
Along a similar vein to Laurillard, Salmon (2000)
recognises the importance of interaction in online
environments. Salmon (2000) recognises that
successful online interaction does not happen
spontaneously but rather requires careful manage-
ment on the part of the instructor. Salmon (2000)
presents a five step model in order to address the
issue of the need to guide online interaction in
order to engage students in meaningful learning.
The first step of the model focuses on access and
motivation. This includes making sure students
are well equipped to access the technology from
passwords and instructions about how to use the
system and motivating students to begin using the
online environment by welcoming, re-assuring stu-
dents and ‘selling’ the idea that it is a new way of
learning. Step two of the model is the socialisation
stage. Within this stage, students are familiarised
with how the technical environment works, made
aware of etiquette and are encouraged to establish
their online identities. Within the third step of the
model, exchange of information, learners interact
527

with course content and engage in co-operative
tasks. The e-moderator sets up a variety of tasks
and activities to suit different learner needs. Dif-
ficulties among participants are also dealt with.
Knowledge construction stage at the fourth step
seeks to help learners become more independent
in the use of the technology. The e-moderator is
very active at this stage and strives to encourage
participants to reflect, respond and collaborate and
makes it clear all contributions are valued. The
final stage, development, encourages reflection on
the learning process. The e-moderator becomes
less active, encouraging students to e-moderate
their own conferences and help others to develop
e-moderating skills.
Community of Inquiry Framework
Garrison and Vaughan (2008) view the instruc-
tional aims of blended learning as creating a
purposeful, open and disciplined community of
inquiry. Within the community of inquiry frame-
work, attention is directed towards: the social
presence (the ability of participants to express
themselves via a communication medium), the
cognitive presence (extent to which learners are
able to arrive at understanding through focused,
sustained, reflective discourse) and the teaching
presence (design and facilitation of cognitive
and social presence so as to achieve meaning-
ful learning outcomes). Against this framework,
the instructional design principles proposed by
Garrison and Vaughan (2008) focus on design,
facilitation of discourse, direct instruction and
assessment:
• Design
◦⊦ Build in support for open communi-
cation. An environment of trust is a
prerequisite for this
◦⊦ Supporting cognitive presence
through opportunities for critical re-
flection, discourse and collaboration
leading to systematic inquiry.
528
Blended Learning Primer
◦⊦ Ensure students understand their
role and that of the teacher. Teacher
as moderator not dominator of
discussion
• Facilitation of discourse
◦⊦ The learning experience is designed
to sustain the community and by
nurturing cohesive and purposeful
responses.
◦⊦ The online environment is more con-
ducive to critiquing ideas of fellow
students than the face-face environ-
ment and so it is better suited for
more reflective discussion. Face-face
situations are better suited to activi-
ties that rely on verbal and visual ex-
change e.g. debate, brainstorming.
◦⊦ The role of the teacher is to support
and guide the progress of inquiry by
asking stimulating questions, keeping
discussion focused and progressing
and identifying issues for clarification
• Direct instruction
◦⊦ Attaining a balance between direct
leadership and allowing students to
take self-direct. At times the educa-
tional experience will require more
direct leadership rather than facilita-
tion. Collaborative relationships must
be managed to generally support stu-
dents’ increased assumed responsibil-
ity for learning
◦⊦ Direct instruction can support in in-
creased meta-cognitive awareness
when it is used to summarise, synthe-
sise, offer alternative ideas, diagnose
misconceptions and ‘keep students
on track’
• Assessment
◦⊦ Must be congruent with learning
outcomes
◦⊦ Online environments offer a variety
of possibilities for assessment tech-
niques. Peer and self-enhancement
Blended Learning Primer
opportunities are enhanced within the
online environment.
◦⊦ Clear assessment criteria and rubric
must be provided to help students
understand how online discourse is
being assessed and also to facilitate
metacognitive awareness.
Authentic Learning Framework
Whilst Garrison and Vaughan (2008) frame the
instructional design of blended learning in terms
of the development of learning communities,
Oliver et al. (2006) place emphasis on the poten-
tial of blended learning environments to exploit
the development of authentic learning activities.
Rooted in constructivist philosophy, authentic
learning environments enable learning to occur in
contexts that have real-world relevance so encour-
aging learners develop a strong sense of purpose
and meaning. Oliver et al. (2006) draw strong
links between the characteristics of authentic
activities and the capabilities of blended learning.
Real-world relevance can be provided by online
communication tools allowing learners to connect
with the workplace and other experiences beyond
the classroom. Authentic tasks challenge learners
to clearly define the activity by identifying tasks
and subtasks. Face-to-face teaching can support
students in the strategic thinking required to find
task solutions. The integration of online and face
to face opportunities in blended learning can also
provide varied opportunities for students to gain
different perspectives, from a variety of sources
as well as providing opportunities for collabora-
tion, team work and opportunities for reflection
on personal beliefs and values. The authentic
learning perspective is critical in adult educa-
tion. From the perspective adult learning, and in
particular of corporate training, blended learning
provides opportunities for engaging adult learners
in tasks that they would experience in the ‘real
work environment’. Thus the authentic learning
view of blended learning facilitates the develop-
ment of skills and knowledge easily transferable
to the workplace. The authentic learning concep-
tualisation of blended learning effectively shifts
focus away from content delivery as the primary
goal to what learners need to be able to do and
in what situations. This has obvious implications
for performance in the workplace and return on
investment.
Models
The question of “how to blend?” leads to a wide and
varied range of models and frameworks. A num-
ber of authors have sought to categorise blended
learning models so as to facilitate understanding of
blending possibilities whilst others have presented
frameworks for model implementation. Some of
these models and frameworks, applicable to adult
learning contexts, are presented below.
Blended learning models may be categorised
as occurring at different levels (Graham, 2006).
Blending may occur at activity-level so that
learning activities themselves contain a both face-
face and technology components. Course-level
blending entails a range of distinct or overlapping
face-face and technology orientated activities. The
face-face and technological orientated activities
support each other. Program-level blending is
oftentimes found in higher education in which
students are able to choose a “mix of face-face
courses and online courses or one in which the
combination of the two is prescribed in the pro-
gram” (Graham, 2006, p. 11). Institutional level
blending can be found in many corporations and
higher education environments that have made an
organizational commitment to blended learning
in their educational offerings (Graham, 2006).
Graham (2006) identifies three categories
of blended learning systems according to their
impact on pedagogy. Enabling blends aim to
provide flexibility of access with little impact on
pedagogy. Enhancing blends may result in some
minor changes to pedagogy and take the form of
additional resources and supplementary materials.
529

Transforming blends focus on the engaging the
learner in active construction of knowledge and
result in” transformation of the pedagogy (p.13).
Verkroost et al. (2008) also draws attention
to degrees of implementation but the focus is
on the relative balance of structure, group learn-
ing, distance and self direction. In a completely
structured situation students learn in a “prescribed
order and learn the concepts as defined by the
teacher” (p. 503). At the other end of the con-
tinuum, unstructured learning enables students
to choose learning paths and develop their own
concepts and understandings, similarly, structure
in pacing ranges from completely self paced in
which students “determine how they divide their
time over different learning activities” (p. 503).
Learning may occur at individual level in isola-
tion or at a collaborative and cooperative level.
Activities may range from face-face within the
classroom to at-a-distance online activities. The
degree of teacher direction in learning may range
from none (entirely student directed) to fully
teacher directed and initiated learning activities.
The relative balance across each of the dimensions
is dependent on the needs of the learning situation
and the objectives.
Rossett, et al. (2003, online) provide a frame-
work for design based on three constraints: stabil-
ity and urgency, touches and costs and learning
resources and experience. Stability and urgency
focuses on questions as to the volatility of the
content and the implementation time available. For
example, stable content (i.e. content that will last
for one or two years) and a short development time
would indicate the use of workbooks, online help
systems, live e-learning. In contrast volatile con-
tent with short development time might indicate
the use of an online database, phone coaching, live
online briefings. The second constraint identifies
is touches and cost. The focus here is on human
or technology interaction and on the amount of
money available for development. For example,
a controversial or complex program will require
human interactions more so than system interac-
530
Blended Learning Primer
tions. The third constraint is learning resources
(instruction to extension) and experience (social
or independent). For example, if people are faced
with complicated changes, overloaded informa-
tion, complicated materials then extended access
to these resources is required
To support the framework, Rossett et al. (2003,
online) identify six approaches that can constitute
a blended learning approach. These include: face-
face formal approaches (instructor lead classroom,
workshops, coaching, mentoring, on the job
training), face-face informal approaches (col-
legial connections, work teams, role modelling),
virtual collaboration/synchronous approaches
(live e-learning, e-mentoring), virtual collabora-
tion/asynchronous approaches (email, bulletin
boards, online communities, listservs), self-paced
learning (web learning modules, online resource
links, simulations, scenarios, video and audio CD/
DVDs, online self-assessment and workbooks)
and performance support (help systems, print
job aids, knowledge databases, documentation,
performance/decision support tools).
Valiathan (2002, online) identifies three
blended learning models on the basis of the learn-
ing situation: Skill driven, attitude driven and
competency driven. Skill-driven blended learning
model characterised by interaction with instructor
(electronic or face-face) in order to develop very
specific knowledge and skills. Activities include
synchronous and synchronous learning labs, long-
term project work and group/self-paced learning
tasks with tight supervision.. The attitude driven
blended learning model is focused on developing
specific behaviours or new attitudes. Role play,
synchronous online meetings and offline group
project are some suitable activities. Competency-
driven blended learning environments make use of
support tools and mentoring aimed at developing
workplace competencies. Activities emphasise
interaction with professional experts and make
use of a learning/content management system as
a knowledge repository.
Blended Learning Primer
In a similar spirit to Valiathan, Singh and Reed
(2001) identify that a blended learning program
may combine or more of the following:
• Offline and online learning,
• self –paced and live collaborative learning,
• structured and unstructured learning,
• custom content with off the shelf content,
• blended learning practice and performance
support.
Badrul Khan (2005) suggests an Octagonal
framework for blended learning. Khan’s frame-
work focuses attention not just on learning con-
siderations but on the entire context within which
the blended learning environment will exist. Khan
(2005) identifies the following dimensions or
issues that should be taken into account by orga-
nizations in order to facilitate effective learning
and return on investment.
• Institutional – administrative concerns,
academic administration
• Pedagogical – instructional and content
design, goal analysis, audience analysis
• Technology – infrastructure
• Interface design – look and feel
• Evaluations – evaluation of materials and
learners
• Management – updating etc
• Resource support – hours, money, techni-
cal counselling etc
• Ethical – geographical diversity people –
consider time zones, accessibility, legal
issues
The blended learning curriculum (BLC) model
proposed by Huang, Ma and Zhang (2008, p.
71) identifies three main components of blended
learning. The outcomes of each component feed
into other components and in so doing draw at-
tention to the entire context within which learning
will occur:
1. Pre-analysis (learner characteristics, learn-
ing objects, environmental features)
2. Activity and resource design (overall de-
sign of blended learning – learning unit,
delivering strategy, learning support; unit
design –define performances, objectives,
organization and assessment of unit; design
and development of resources – selection
of content, development of cases, present
design and development)
3. Instructional assessment (learning process,
curriculum, activity organization)
The 3C-model of blended learning (Kerres &
Witt, 2003) identifies content, communication
and construction as the components of a blended
learning environment. Content is the learning
material available to the learner. The communi-
cation component may be local, remote, between
students, teachers, individuals, groups, whole
class. The construction component guides indi-
vidual and co-operative learning activities. The
relative weighting of each component is variable
and depends on the goals and objectives of the
learning encounter. For example, if the objective
is the recall and acquisition of basic knowledge
then the content component will be dominant.
Wenger and Ferguson (2006) discuss an ecol-
ogy framework as a blended learning model. The
core intent of the learning ecology model is to
present a framework that was coherent, simple
and flexible. Within a two dimensional matrix
with learner self-navigation through to guided
self navigation on one axis, and content delivery
focus through to experience and practice focus
on the second axis, four general learning modali-
ties are identified: studying, practicing, teaching
and coaching. A potential menu of learning
options and appropriate tools is given for each
potential situation. For example, in the studying
quadrant (content delivery focus and learner self-
navigation) tools and approaches might include
books, articles, guides, references, asynchronous
content, job aids and glossaries. In the coaching
531

quadrant (an experience and practice focus and
guided navigation) tools and approaches might
include exercises, diagnostic labs, practice labs,
mentoring/tutoring, experiments.
Somewhat critical of existing models and
frameworks for blended learning Yoon and Lim
(2007) advocate a blending learning framework
that places emphasis on strategic blending and
performance solutions (SBLPS). Their frame-
work consists of five procedural phases that aim
to “form a strategic match between the goals and
needs of an organization, performance solutions
and delivery methods (p. 481). According to this
framework, strategic blending is based upon a
“clear business and human resources strategies”
(p. 481). The foundation to the framework is
the Business and HR strategies analysis phase.
In this phase the performance problems within
an organization are identified by incorporat-
ing perspectives from different organizational
levels. Yoon and Lim (2007) call for a “detailed
analysis of the workplace” (p. 482) in this phase.
The detailed analysis of work environments
should address elements such as organizational
resistance, peer/supervisor support, availability
of performance tools and mentors, reward sys-
tems, and readiness of technology infrastructure.
The performance solutions component of the
framework includes both instructional solutions
(live classes, workshops, coaching tutoring) and
supporting non-instructional solutions including
feedback, reward systems, resources and institu-
tional support. In the media selection component
of the framework, like other frameworks, SBLPS
places emphasis on selecting appropriate face-to
face interaction and technology tools. The choice
of technology tools influenced by the type of
learning activity and a consideration of economy
of scale. Finally, the framework places emphasis
on the need to evaluate the “inputs and outputs
of the strategic blending. Whether one conducts a
summative evaluation to measure the results of a
blended solution (e.g., knowledge improvement,
behavioural change, or [return on investment], or
532
Blended Learning Primer
a formative one with respect to the mix and fit of
the blended media, evaluation and improvement
of methods should always focus on supporting
of the business strategy directly” (Yoon & Lim,
2007, pp. 485-486).
BLENDED LEARNING ADVANTAGES
AND CHALLENGES
Learning institutions and corporations are invest-
ing considerable time and money into blended
learning. The advantages of blended learning for
adult learning contexts are to be found in pedagogy,
flexibility and cost-effectiveness. Whilst blended
learning is perceived as having a positive impact
in learning, it must be recognised that blended
learning is complex. Success in both design of and
learner engagement in blended learning requires
some specific skills and knowledge. Some of the
key advantages and challenges of blended learning
are discussed below.
Advantages
The potential of blended learning to transform
pedagogy is grounded in the vastly varied and
increased opportunities to support reflective,
free and open communities of inquiry (Garrison
& Vaughan, 2006) and authentic learning (Oli-
ver, et al.,2006). Opportunities for deeper, more
meaningful learning are potentially maximised
within the blended learning environment. The
range of tools and strategies available can be
exploited to cater for a large range of individual
needs and learning styles, thus improving learn-
ing outcomes. “As learners are diverse in terms
of learning styles, learning proficiency, as well as
learning ability, blended learning can …[make]
it possible for individualised learning and self-
regulated learning to happen (Huang et al., 2008, p.
67). Blended learning is forcing a re-examination
of traditional “objectivist models that have per-
vaded existing eLearning and CBT courseware to
Blended Learning Primer
date” within adult learning environments. These
traditional models are beginning to be integrated
with knowledge and performance (Bielawski &
Metcalf, 2003).
The inclusion of technology and range of
tools in the blended learning environments al-
low for flexibility of time and place for students
for both access of content and collaboration. In
adult learning environments, the power of col-
laboration outside the constraints of place and
time cannot be overstated. Workplace learning
and similar concepts are demanding closer ties
between training organisation and industry. These
demands can be satisfied effectively by collabo-
ration and networking opportunities offered by
blended learning environments. Learning spaces
can be designed to meet the needs of the entire
spectrum of the varied learning situations found
in adult learning environments.
The ability of blended learning environments
to reach a larger more dispersed audience blended
learning can provide a large return on investment.
In business and corporate situations, blended
learning environments reduce the time away from
the workplace.
Challenges
Instructors are faced with the challenge of redefin-
ing their roles to as facilitators and guides in what
can be a complex teaching landscape. Furthermore,
whilst most instructors are well versed in skills
to promote discussion and reflection in face-face
situations, they may not be so well equipped to
handle guiding and moderating an online forum.
On a basic level, instructors are faced with the
challenge of expanding their knowledge of what
tools are available, what are the pedagogic ad-
vantages and disadvantages of those tools, how
to best integrate those tools within the learning
environment they are designing, what infrastruc-
ture is available/needed to support the tool use.
Blended learning increasingly brings the role of
instructional designer to the skill set of educators.
The design of blended learning environments
potentially increases demands on instructor time.
Given the large body of knowledge required for
instructors to effectively design blended learning
environments there is a need for professional
development programs.
From the perspective of learners, success
in blended learning environments may demand
well developed technological skills and a good
level of learning independence and well devel-
oped metacognitive skills. Design of blended
learning environments must give consideration
to supporting self-direction and learner inde-
pendence and the students’ metacognitive skills.
The expectations of the blended learning process
must be clearly established and communicated.
Scaffolding and activities aimed at developing the
required metacognitive skills needs to be given
due consideration.
There are infrastructure issues that need to
be considered. The implementation of blended
learning environments is based on organizations
commitment to, and provision of, technological
infrastructure. There is thus a need to create a
“clear institutional direction and policy” (Gar-
rison & Kanuka, 2004, p. 102). (Alongside this
issue, Graham (2006) also directs attention to the
digital divide. There is still no firm answer as to
whether affordable blended learning models can
be developed that “still address the needs of dif-
ferent populations with different socioeconomic
conditions around the world” (p. 16).
Finally, given the vast potential for innovation
the ongoing challenge is “finding an appropriate
balance between innovation and production” to
produce cost effective solutions (Graham, 2006,
p. 16).
BLENDED LEARNING FUTURE
DIRECTIONS AND RESEARCH
Bonk, Kim and Zeng (2006) observe that blended
learning will increase in use in both corporate
533

and higher education settings. Bonk et al. (2006)
predict that “blended learning is a permanent
trend rather than a passing fad (p. 554). Blended
learning design rides on the waves of techno-
logical innovation. Each new technology expands
the possibilities. Reusable content objects and
knowledge management tools are set to have the
most impact on the delivery of e-learning (Bonk,
et al., 2006). Bonk et al. (2006) identify 10 trends
and predictions related to blended learning. These
include increased focus on:
• the use of mobile and handheld devices,
• visual and hands on activities,
• learner responsibility for deciding pro-
grams and courses,
• community building and global
connections,
• authentic learning experiences and on-de-
mand learning,
• reinforcing the link between work and
learning,
• less strictly defined scheduling of learning,
• courses and programs designated as blend-
ed learning options
• shifting instructor roles to mentor, coach or
counsellor
• emergence of specialist blended learning
designers.
The matrix of possibilities of blended learning
models is vast, having an increasing number of
available tools along one dimension and a large
range of implementation contexts along another
dimension. This almost infinite range of pos-
sibilities means that there is still relatively little
informed research about how to design and imple-
ment blended learning in ways that significantly
impact on learning outcomes. Future research
should focus on the learning effectiveness of
blended learning environments and shed light on
issues such as the affordance of face-to-face and
534
Blended Learning Primer
technology mediated context, “emerging models
for assessing learning outcomes” (Graham & Dziu-
ban, 2008, p. 274). There is a need to “articulate
conceptual frameworks (Graham & Dziuban,
2008, p. 274) so that designers can draw on them
in order to best design for their own contexts.
The role of face-face interaction and technology
mediated interaction needs deeper exploration in
terms of impact on the learning experience. The
affordances of the vast range of interactions and
activities that are possible must be explored in
depth so that designers can make informed deci-
sions about what and how to use tools in what
situations (Graham & Dziuban, 2008).
Research into learning effectiveness must be
accompanied by institutional research (Graham
& Dziuban, 2008). The motivations as to why
instructors adopt certain models and the basis
of their instructional choices must be explored.
The transformative potential of blended learning
can only be driven by insight into how and why
courses are redesigned (Graham & Dziuban,
2008). What models and instructional strategies
are leading to transformation? What models and
instructional strategies are not transformative
and need to be avoided? The effective design of
blended learning models must also consider the
student perspective. How do students perceive
various blended learning models? What are their
expectations? What is their perspective on the
value of different tools and approaches?
Alongside such investigations, the issue of sup-
port and training for both instructors and students
needs to be addressed. What kind of professional
development is required by instructors in order to
best prepare them for successful blended learning
designs? What skills and attitudes do students need
to develop in order to be successful in blended
learning environments and how can these skills
and attitudes be best developed.
Blended Learning Primer
CONCLUSION
In an effort to provide a starting point for those
embarking on the design of blended learning
environments in adult education contexts, this
chapter has presented some ideas fundamental to
forming an understanding of what blended learn-
ing is, how to implement it and raising awareness
of advantages and challenges.
In arriving at a definition of blended learning
it was noted that blended learning is at the nexus
of face-face teaching and learning technologies.
The aim of blended learning design is to integrate
face to face approaches with technological ap-
proaches, so as to optimise learning opportunities
and thus precipitate substantially better learning
outcomes. Preceded by multimedia, e-learning and
flexible learning, effective blended learning design
inherits four key pedagogical characteristics: the
importance of integration (rather than superficial
use) of varied approaches, the potential to cater
for individual differences among learners, the
facilitation of active, student centred approaches
and flexibility of time and place for learning
experiences.
In addressing the question of “how to blend”,
the chapter firstly identified constructivism, social
constructivism, conversation theory, cognitivism
and performance support as suitable philosophical
foundations for the design of blended learning in
adult education and training. Against this philo-
sophical foundation instructional design principles
were presented. It was then argued that blended
learning design is complex by virtue of the large
range of tools and strategies available and as such
there is no single model of blending. The ‘blend’ is
very much determined by the needs of the learning
situation and the learning objectives. The diversity
of learning situations and needs encountered in
adult learning have given rise to a large range of
frameworks and models. The core ideas found in
a selection of these frameworks and models were
then presented.
The key advantages of blended learning for
adult learning were identified as being found in
relation to pedagogy, flexibility and cost effective-
ness. Whilst there are potential positive impacts
of blended learning, it was also recognised that
blended learning is complex and innovative and as
such poses challenges for instructors (role redefi-
nition, technological skills, teaching skills in new
contexts), learners (self-direction and metacogni-
tive abilities) and organizations (clear policies,
addressing the digital divide, achieving balance
between innovation and cost-effectiveness).
Adult learning is often characterised by ‘need
driven’ learning, for a diverse range of learners,
alongside a demand for flexibility, in time and
place, in content delivery, instruction and col-
laboration. The concept of blended learning is
highly congruent with these key characteristics
of adult learning situations. Thus post-schooling
educational institutions and business organizations
have invested and will most likely continue to
invest considerable effort into the implementation
of blended learning. For optimal effectiveness
blended learning environments must be designed
to address the needs of the specific learning or
training situation. On this premise designing
blended learning environments forces attention
to the details of each aspect of the learning situa-
tion including infrastructure, availability of tools,
instructor beliefs, knowledge and skills, learner
characteristics, the needs of the organisation and
the learning objectives. Given the complexity of
variables that drive blended learning design deci-
sions, realising the potential of blended learning
rests on continuing research into optimal blend-
ing practices across a diverse range of learning
contexts in parallel with professional development
and supporting structures. The focus for research
in blended learning now and in the future must
be finding out: ‘what organisations are doing?’,
‘what works?’, ‘in what situations it works?’ and
‘why it works?’.
535

REFERENCES
Alonso, F., López, G., Manrique, D., & Viñes, J.
M. (2005). An instructional model for web-based
e-learning education with a blended learning
process approach. British Journal of Educational
Technology, 36(2), 217–235. doi:10.1111/j.1467-
8535.2005.00454.x
Australian Flexible Learning Framework. (2001).
Australian flexible learning framework for the
national vocational education and training system
2000-2004, ANTA. Retrieved April 15, 2009.
from http://flexiblelearning.net.au/aboutus/key-
documents.htm.
Bielawski, L., & Metcalf, D. (2003). Blended
eLearning: Integrating knowledge, performance
support, and online learning. HRD Press. Book-
s24x7. Retrieved December 13, 2009, from http://
common.books24x7.com.libraryproxy.griffith.
edu.au/book/id_4920/book.asp
Butcher-Powell, L. M. (2005). Teaching and learn-
ing multimedia. In Mishra, S., & Sharma, R. C.
(Eds.), Interactive multimedia in education and
training (pp. 60–72). Hershey, PA: Idea Group.
Carmen, J. M. (2002). Blended learning design:
five key ingredients. Journal of Educational
Media, 28(2/3), 165–178.
Chickering, A., & Ehrmann, S. (1996). Imple-
menting the seven principles: technology as lever,
Retrieved August 20, 2009 from http://www.
tltgroup.org/programs/seven.html
Garrison, D. R., & Kanuka, H. (2004). Blended
learning: Uncovering its transformative potential
in higher education. The Internet and Higher
Education, 7(2), 95–105. doi:10.1016/j.ihe-
duc.2004.02.001
Garrison, R., & Vaughan, H. (2008). Blended
learning in higher education: Framework, prin-
ciples and guidelines. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
536
Blended Learning Primer
Gery, G. (2002). Performance support – driving
change. In Rossett, A. (Ed.), The ASTD e-learning
handbook. Best practices, strategies, and case
studies for an emerging field (pp. 24–37). New
York: McGraw Hill.
Graham, C. (2006). Blended learning systems:
Definition, current trends, and future directions.
In Bonk, C., & Graham, C. (Eds.), Handbook
of blended learning: Global perspectives, local
designs (pp. 3–21). San Francisco, CA: Pfeiffer.
Graham, C., & Dziuban, C. (2008). Blended learn-
ing environments. In J. M. Spector, Merrill, M.
D., Van Merrienboer, J. & Driscoll, M.P. (Eds.),
Handbook of research on educational communica-
tions and technology (pp. 269-274). New York:
Taylor & Francis e-library.
Holmes, B., & Gardner, J. (2006). E-learning
concepts and practice. London: Sage.
Holt, D., & Thompson, D. J. (1998). Managing in-
formation technology in open and distance higher
education. Distance Education, 19(2), 197–227.
doi:10.1080/0158791980190203
Huang, R., Ma, D., & Zhang, H. (2008). Towards
a design theory of blended learning curriculum.
In Proceedings of the 1st international confer-
ence on Hybrid Learning and Education (LNCS
5169, pp. 66-78).
Jonassen, D. H. (1994). Thinking technology:
Toward a constructivist design model. Educa-
tional Technology Research and Development,
34(4), 34–37.
Jonassen, D. H. (1994). Thinking technology:
Toward a constructivist design model.
Kaye, T. (2003). Blended learning: how to in-
tegrate online & traditional learning. London:
Kogan Page Limited.
Kerres, M., & de Witt, C. (2003). A didactical
framework for the design of blended learning
arrangements. Journal of Educational Media,
28, 101–114.
Blended Learning Primer
Khan, B. H. (2005). Managing e-learning: design,
delivery, implementation and evaluation. Hershey,
PA: Information Science Reference.
Knowles, M. S., Holton, E. F. III, & Swanson, R.
A. (1998). The adult learner (5th ed.). Houston,
TX: Gulf Publishing.
Laurillard, D. (1993). Rethinking university teach-
ing: A framework for the effective use of educa-
tional technology. London, New York: Routledge.
Lefoe, G. (1998). Creating constructivist learning
environments on the web: The challenge of higher
education. Conference proceedings ASCILITE ‘98,
571-583 Retrieved April 15, 2009, from http://
www.ascilite.org.au/conferences/wollongong98/
ascpapers98.html
Moran, L., & Myringer, B. (1999). Professional
reflective practice and lifelong learning. In Keith,
H. (Ed.), Higher education through open and dis-
tance learning (pp. 57–61). London: Routledge.
Oliver, R., Herrington, J., & Reeves, T. (2008).
Creating authentic learning environments through
blended-learning approaches. In Bonk, C., &
Graham, C. (Eds.), Handbook of blended learning
(pp. 502–515). New York: Pfieffer.
Relan, A., & Gillani, B. (1997). Web-based instruc-
tion and the traditional classroom: Similarities
and differences. In Khan, B. H. (Ed.), Web-based
instruction (pp. 25–37). Englewood Cliffs, NJ:
Educational Technology.
Richards, C., & Nason, R. (1999). Prerequisite
principles for integrating (Not Just ‘Tacking-on)
new technologies in the curricula of tertiary educa-
tion large classes, In J. Winn (Ed), ASCILITE ‘99
responding to diversity conference proceedings
(pp. 285-292). Brisbane: QUT.
Rossett, A., Douglis, F., & Frazee, R. V. (2003).
Strategies for building blended learning. Learning
Circuits. Retrieved August 30, 2009, from http://
www.astd.org/LC/2003/0703_rossett.htm
Salmon, G. (2000). E-Moderating: The key to
teaching and learning online. London: Kogan
Page.
Singh, H., & Reed, C. (2001). A White Paper;
Achieving success with blended learning. ASTD
State of the Industry Report, American Society
for Training and Development. Centra Software.
Taylor, P. G., Lopez, L., & Quadrelli, C. (1996).
Flexibility, technology and academics’ practices:
Tantalising tales and muddy maps. Brisbane:
Griffith Institute for Higher Education.
Tearle, P., Dillon, P., & Davis, N. (1999). Use
of information technology by English university
teachers. Developments and trends at the time
of the National Inquiry into Higher Education.
Journal of Further and Higher Education, 23(1),
5–15. doi:10.1080/0309877990230101
Torrisi-Steele, G. (2004). Toward effective use of
multimedia technologies in education. In Mishra,
S., & Sharma, R. C. (Eds.), Interactive multimedia
in education and training (pp. 25–46). Hershey:
Idea Group.
Valiathan, P. (2002). Blended learning models.
Learning Circuits. Retrieved August 30, 2009,
from http://www.astd.org/LC/2002/0802_vali-
athan.htm.
Verkroost, M., Meijerink, L., Lintsen, H., &
Veen, W. (2008). Finding a balance in dimen-
sions of blended learning. International Journal
on E-Learning Academic Research Library, 7(3),
499–522.
Wenger, M. S., & Ferguson, C. (2006). Blended
a learning ecology model for blended learning
from sun microsystems. In Bonk, C., & Graham,
C. (Eds.), Handbook of blended learning: Global
perspectives, local designs (pp. 76–91). San Fran-
cisco, CA: Pfeiffer.
537

Yoon, S., & Lim, D. (2007). Strategic blending:
A conceptual framework to improve learning
and performance. International Journal on E-
Learning, 6(3), 475–489.
Zemke, R. (2002). Who Needs Learning Theory
Anyway? Training Magazine, 39(9), 86–88.
KEY TERMS AND DEFINITIONS
Blended Learning: Creating optimal learning
opportunities by selecting and integrating the best
of face-face approaches with the best of technol-
ogy mediated approaches.
Cognitivism: A view of learning focusing on
knowledge being formed by the acquisition or
re-organization of symbolic mental constructions
(schema). Learning is viewed as a three stage
‘information processing’ occurrence: input enters
from the senses (sensory register), some of this
input is transferred to short term memory (can be
retained here longer through repeated rehearsal
and chunking of material into meaningful parts)
and then may be committed to Long-term memory.
Constructivism: A philosophy of teaching and
learning advocating learner-centred approaches.
The learner is an active participant in the con-
538
Blended Learning Primer
struction of knowledge. The instructor acts as a
facilitator and guide.
Conversation Theory: The view that learning
occurs by achieving mutual understanding through
recursive and iterative conversation.
E-Learning: Refers to access to learning re-
sources, via technology, outside the restrictions
of time and place.
Flexible Learning: Approaches to teaching
and learning that are learner centred, free up the
time, place and methods of learning and teaching
and use appropriate technologies in a networked
environment (Moran & Myringer, 1999, p. 60).
Multimedia: “The entirely digital delivery of
content presented by using an integrated combi-
nation of audio, video, images (two-dimensional,
three-dimensional) and text along with the capacity
to support user interaction (Torrisi-Steele, 2004,
p. 24)”.
Performance Support: A paradigm that advo-
cates learning for immediate use. “Learning can
occur either as a result of doing or at the moment
of need” (Gery, 2002, p. 26).
Social Constructivism: Constructivist phi-
losophy stressing the importance of social interac-
tions in the construction of knowledge.
 539

Chapter 32
Using Technology in the
Assessment of Adult
Learners in Online Settings
Steven W. Schmidt
East Carolina University, USA

Jeremy Dickerson
East Carolina University, USA

Eric Kisling
East Carolina University, USA

ABSTRACT
This chapter utilizes instructor experiences and reflections as the bases for framing assessment theory
and practice of online learning in adult education. It begins with a general discussion of assessment in
the field of adult education. Following that overview, the chapter describes ways to assess students by
providing examples of methods, techniques, and technologies that can be utilized by adult educators
as they endeavor to assess online learners. Lastly, the chapter concludes with an in-depth analysis of a
specific assessment strategy and technology that utilizes software simulation to train and assess student
skills in popular productivity software packages.

INTRODUCTION that in the 1999-2000 school year, eight percent of

Online learning has taken the field of adult educa-
tion by storm, changing our current realities as
well as shaping our future possibilities. Adults are
now able to participate in a myriad of educational
opportunities simply by logging on to the Internet
in the privacy of their own homes. The National
Center for Education Statistics (NCES) reports
DOI: 10.4018/978-1-61692-906-0.ch032
all undergraduate students participated in distance
education, and of that number, almost one third
were enrolled in entirely online programs (NCES,
2002). A more recent study conducted by The Sloan
Consortium (2007) reported that approximately
3.5 million higher education students took at least
one online course during the fall 2006 term. That
number represents almost 20 percent of all U.S.
higher education students, and is a 9.7 percent
increase over the same time period in 2005. The
 Using Technology in the Assessment of Adult Learners in Online Settings
study concludes that the number of online learners
will continue to grow, although not at the strong
pace seen in the past few years. The Consortium
found that while almost all types of institutions
of higher learning grew in terms of online student
participation, the highest growth rates were found
at two-year associate-degree institutions (The
Sloan Consortium, 2007).
This move to online learning has meant many
changes in the traditional roles of both educators
and students. Instructors who teach online no
longer have class during set hours of the week.
They no longer have to be in certain classrooms
during specific times to teach to their students.
In the online environment, class is always in
session, as students can log on, post comments
and questions, and interact with fellow students
at any time of the day or night. In the traditional
classroom, instructors present formal, prepared
lectures, whereas the online instructor functions
as more of a guide or facilitator for learning.
Students who are used to attending traditional
courses, in which the instructor lectures and they
take notes, are finding that they must be much
more self-directed in online classrooms (Schmidt,
Dickerson, & Kisling, 2009). They must have the
personal motivation to read assigned articles, par-
ticipate in discussion, and complete assignments
without having the structure of the traditional
classroom as a guide or anchor.
One of the main differences in the online rela-
tionship between instructor and student is the lack
of face-to-face presence between the two entities.
Instructors may never actually meet, in person,
the students they are teaching. Instructors who
teach online are finding that many of the duties
associated with teaching are different for online
instructors. One aspect of teaching that is very
different online is that of assessment. Assessment
of students in online classrooms has changed in
many ways. Two examples of the ways in which
assessment is different are described by Bauer and
Anderson (2004). “Classroom attendance as an
assessment tool becomes extinct, whereas class
540
participation becomes quantifiable. Verbally acro-
batic students in traditional classrooms are forced
in the online classroom to showcase their wares
in print to maintain their preeminence.” (p. 65).
The issue of assessment of adult online learn-
ers will be addressed in this chapter. The topic of
assessment in general will be presented, followed
by a discussion of issues present in the assessment
of online learners. There are a variety of tools that
can be used in the assessment of online learners,
as well as many suggestions, recommendations,
and best practices for evaluating online learners.
A connection between theory and practice will
be made with a discussion of those practices,
procedures and tools that practitioners can use
in the assessment of online learners.
BACKGROUND
Why Assess Student Learning?
It is important to understand the overall purpose
of assessment, as well as its value and its scope,
if proper judgments about assessment are to be
made. Everyone is familiar with assessment in the
traditional classroom. It may be in the form of a
test, quiz, project or assignment that the student
must complete and submit to the instructor. Typi-
cally, the instructor provides guidelines for the
assignment or subject-matter areas that are to be
covered on the test or quiz. This subject matter is
usually content that has been recently taught to the
student, and hopefully there is a match between
the subject matter covered and the content on the
test or quiz, or the requirements for the assign-
ment. The instructor assesses the work done by
the students, and assigns them a letter or number
grade on their work. This grade then becomes a
component or element of the student’s overall
grade for the course.
Many would examine the above scenario and
conclude that the main purpose of assessment is
so the instructor can assess how well the student
Using Technology in the Assessment of Adult Learners in Online Settings
understands the subject taught. Some might note
that the purpose is so the instructor can assign a
grade to the student that represents the student’s
understanding of the concept and/or the student’s
performance in the course. These conclusions
are certainly true, but there is much more to the
concept of assessment than simply assessing stu-
dent progress and understanding. Assessment is a
multi-layered and complex topic. While its main
purpose may be to assess student performance in
a course, it serves many different purposes, and is
of value to many different stakeholders.
In addition to assessing student performance,
assessment helps the instructor and other stake-
holders make decisions about the course itself.
Assessments reveal student understandings of
exactly what was learned (which may aligned
with or different than course goals). For example,
the assessment of student work may reveal that
an aspect of a course topic was not emphasized
enough, was not taught correctly, or could have
been presented in a different way. Perhaps the se-
quencing of course topics could have been different
or the instructor could have approached a topic
from a different angle, to which students could
better relate. Maybe too much content was covered
in too short of a timeframe, resulting in students’
understanding of a topic at more of a surface-
level. Instructional resources can be assessed
using student assessments as well. The instructor
might conclude that more practice exercises, case
studies, or activities could have helped strengthen
student understanding of a topic. Information on
all of these issues can become clearer as a result
of assessment, and in these ways, assessment
benefits the instructor as well.
The benefits of assessment do not stop at the
student and instructor levels. Often, individual
courses that comprise an educational program
or degree have goals that tie into larger program,
college, or university goals. These goals may re-
late to institutional standards or accreditation. In
theory, the goals of a course should relate to the
goals of an overall program of study (assuming
that the course is one of several that comprise
the program of study). The assessment of student
performance at the course level can help admin-
istrators determine whether or not course goals,
and thereby program goals, are being met. Just
as instructors can make changes to courses as a
result of information garnered in student assess-
ments, administrators can make larger curriculum
changes based on that same information.
When to Assess?
The assessment of adult learners can be done
both on an ongoing or formative basis and on a
concluding or summative basis. Each has benefits
for the student and the instructor. Formative (as
in formation or the forming of a whole) assess-
ment is conducted at various times throughout
the course or educational program. It includes
the assignments, projects, tests and other forms
of assessment that are done throughout a course.
Because in most cases, each activity focuses on a
piece of the course, formative assessments happen
throughout the run of the course, and the focus
is on individual pieces or aspects of the course.
It is helpful for the students in that the quantity
of content covered in the assessment is usually
smaller and more specific than in a summative-
type assessment. From the instructor standpoint,
benefits of formative assessment are that the
instructor can assess student progress as those
students work through the course. Based on that
assessment, the instructor can change or tweak
aspects of the course to better meet the needs of
the learners. The instructor can also make notes
on trends that could result in more major course
changes to be considered the next time the course
is taught, although this is more a function of sum-
mative assessment.
Summative assessment takes place at the end
of the course or educational activity. Examples
of summative assessment (as in summation or
conclusion) include final exams or final projects.
These types of assessment typically require the
541
 Using Technology in the Assessment of Adult Learners in Online Settings
student to synthesize many or all different topics
discussed in class. The individual pieces are still
important, but equally (if not more) important is
the student’s ability to synthesize and summarize.
It is more extensive in nature than formative assess-
ment. From the instructor standpoint, information
garnered as a result of summative assessments can
be used to make more major changes to the course.
Both formative and summative approaches are
important in the assessment of adult learners in
online or traditional classroom situations. Typi-
cally, a mix of approaches is used so instructors
can assess student performance from a variety of
perspectives.
The Assessment Process
The processes associated with learner assessment
are similar regardless of whether the learner is
online or in a traditional face-to-face classroom
situation. The methods, however, can be somewhat
different, as can be the obstacles and issues faced
by instructors interested in evaluating their online
courses. Assessment efforts should start with a
plan that includes the following steps:
1. Determination of objectives.
2. Determine the type of design to be used in
the assessment.
3. Conduct the assessment and gather the
evidence.
4. Analyze data and interpret results.
A well-constructed assessment plan should
always start with the objectives to be covered in
the course. Often assessment is done based on fac-
tors other than course objectives. Instructors may
choose projects that they enjoy grading or that are
easy to grade. Sometimes, projects are assigned
based on more obscure elements of the course,
rather than the major objectives. The bottom line
is that the assessment of student performance in
a class should be based on the objectives of that
course.
542
Once course objectives are determined, the
instructor should determine the type of activities,
projects, tests or other means of assessment that
will be used in the course. In order to most ac-
curately measure student learning, there should
be a variety of different ways performance is
assessed. As noted earlier, good assessment is
both formative and summative, so both types
of assessment should be considered in this plan.
Detailed guidelines should be developed for each
assessment piece so that expectations are clear. The
value of each particular assessment as a component
of the overall course assessment should be clearly
communicated to the student as well. Because
of issues of distance and because of the lack of
face-to-face communication in online classes,
this information should be communicated to the
student at the start of the course. It is typically
included in the course syllabus or in documents
that support the syllabus.
The collection of assessment data (or the
collection and grading of assignments) happens
throughout the run of the course. Instructors should
be clear in their comments to students and should
again consider issues of distance and communica-
tion, and provide the student with ample feedback
on anything on which the student is assessed. The
instructor can used assessment data, both forma-
tive and summative, to make decisions on both
the short and long-term objectives of the course
(and whether or not the assessment choices made
were appropriate).
Issues in the Assessment
of Online Learners
Many theorists believe that the emphasis must be
placed on the study of online learning because the
development of online learning is out-accelerating
the research. This is certainly the case with regard
to assessment of online learning. Ke and Hoadley
(2009) note that “Despite an increasing interest
in designing and implementing online learning
communities, there have been few attempts to
Using Technology in the Assessment of Adult Learners in Online Settings
identify whether a particular online community
is successful in fostering explicit learning activi-
ties” (p. 488). (“The term community refers to a
group of individuals who belong to a social unit,
such as students in a class” Picciano, 2002, p.
22) A review of literature on different aspects of
online learning was conducted in 2006 by Tallent-
Runnels, Thomas, Lan, Cooper, Ahern, Shaw
and Liu. With regard to the issue of assessment,
the authors concluded that much of the focus of
online learning is on issues other than assessment.
“Although this review of literature did not reveal
much discussion of assessment in online courses,
it is an important issue to consider in online
teaching and learning (p. 103). Ironically, this is
similar to the way that assessment is treated in
traditional learning situations. It is often addressed
as an afterthought and is typically not given the
emphasis necessary to make it a valuable part of
the educational program planning process. Ke and
Hoadley (2009) found that the assessment of online
communities of learning varies radically. This
may be related to the variety of subjects covered
in online educational programs, as subject matter
is a key factor in the assessment planning process.
As is the case in the traditional classroom, there is
not one model that can be used when evaluating
online students. Assessment depends on the goals
of the course, the materials to be covered, and a
variety of other factors. The fact that a course is
online influences the assessment process, but it
is not the only thing to consider when evaluating
students in online courses.
There are a few aspects associated with online
learning that affect the assessment process in gen-
eral. The fact that online learning is a relatively
new concept in the grand scheme of educational
methodologies means that both instructors and
students may be newcomers to online learning.
Formative assessment, which deals with more
specific details and aspects of the online class, is
particularly important in these types of situations.
Adult online learners can benefit from formative
assessment because they are able to understand
relatively early in the whether or not their study
habits and routines are effective or not. This type
of information is best learned earlier, rather than
later in the class. The instructor can learn whether
or not course materials are presented in proper
quantity and in the best possible sequence. It may
be the case that concepts students easily understand
in the traditional face-to-face classroom require
different presentation or extra time or effort in
the online classroom. The use of formative as-
sessment can show the instructor whether or not
they are effective as well. The instructor may
have to consider different methods of teaching
course materials or helping students to understand
concepts. Again, formative assessment is key in
these cases so both students and the instructor
can adjust their strategies to make the learning
experience most effective.
Another issue associated with assessment of
online learners is that of the authenticity of the
student’s work. In other words, did the student
do his or her own work or did they cheat? Issues
of cheating, plagiarizing, and copying are very
different in the online classroom.
Students are no longer in close proximity. In fact,
they may be separated by thousands of miles. Dis-
tance, however, does not diminish the possibility of
students cheating, with or without an accomplice,
in online assessments; instead of developing codes
or passing answers, students pass private e-mails
which instructors have no means of intercepting.
Instead of using crib notes or writing answers
within the margins of textbooks or on the desktop,
students simply use the “verboten” sources during
the assessment. Instructors can no longer depend
on different handwriting, a change in ink color, or
the detection of eraser marks on an assessment
as evidence that a student has changed answers
after having taken the assessment. (Olt, 2002) ↜
All of these issues make the possibility of
academic dishonesty much more of a concern
in online learning environments. However, there
543
 Using Technology in the Assessment of Adult Learners in Online Settings
are ways of minimizing this potential issue in the
online classroom. The remainder of this chapter
will address systems and tools that can be used
in the assessment of online learners.
Techniques and Technologies
for Assessing Adult Learning
in Online Settings
As previously mentioned, online education is a
major component of many educational programs
and has become particularly important with adults
because of its ability to allow mature, self-directed
individuals with busy lives to pursue educational
opportunities. These opportunities may be in the
forms of online courses to supplement high school
curriculum, online courses for college credit, voca-
tional training, military training, or online modules
for use in the corporate sector. With the unusually
high unemployment rate in 2009, colleges and
universities have started to use online education
to serve large numbers of adults from a distance
to re-enter the workforce. Online education has
in many ways become the “right thing at the right
time” in today’s economy given the current unem-
ployment and economic conditions in the United
States. There are many people struggling to learn
how to join (or re-join) the workforce in their thir-
ties, forties, and fifties, while they maintain their
homes, families, and other responsibilities. This,
along with the well-noted popularity of online
courses by the “I-Generation” (those born after
the Internet) who are now entering college, has
made online courses a primary component of the
post-secondary education field.
What does this mean for adult educators? Many
adult educators have had their careers affected by
the increased prominence of online education.
Ouzts (2006) posits that teachers need to learn
about teaching online to avoid some of the dif-
ficulties they may experience when transitioning
from face-to-face instruction. For veteran adult
educators, the phenomena of online learning
may still be difficult to conceptualize due to their
544
experience in providing face-to-face instruction
and working through the challenges associated
with that medium. These veteran instructors need
specific training with online tools so that they can
successfully design courses, communicate, and
assess students at a level that is acceptable and
adequate for their program’s needs. In terms of
new educators, Maor (2003) suggested that people
just beginning their careers need to be prepared to
teach online and may benefit from mentoring by
experienced online instructors. Adult educators
who are online instructors must have the ability
to design, develop, deliver, and assess students in
online courses – as well as defend their positions
and decisions concerning the delivery and assess-
ment methods. Educational programs using online
courses have historically come under scrutiny
by those who believe in the value of traditional
face-to-face programs. The traditionalists claim
that online education “just isn’t the same” as the
formal classroom, and that is certainly the case.
However, different does not necessarily mean less
useful or less effective. Reisetter, LaPointe, and
Korcuska (2007) suggested that online teaching
and learning has some distinctly different con-
siderations than face-to-face instruction. One of
these different considerations is the way in which
educators assess students, and the issues surround-
ing assessment at all levels (student-level, course
level, and program level). The understanding of the
methods, techniques and technologies associated
with online assessment is paramount.
Educators have long taken for granted the
ease that face-to-face education has provided for
assessing students. This is largely due to the fact
that up until recently, most educators never imag-
ined teaching and learning occurring anywhere
other than in face-to-face real time situations.
Technological capability and feasibility is no
longer a limitation to teaching online courses.
The use of course management systems such as
BlackBoard® with high quality streaming video,
audio and interactive communication tools is now
the standard. Additionally, the issue of cost is
Using Technology in the Assessment of Adult Learners in Online Settings
diminishing because of the availability of open
source course management technologies such as
Moodle® and an array of other inexpensive or free
video and audio conferencing technologies. The
technology typically used by the learners has also
advanced. High speed data and wireless network-
ing is now common in many homes, as well as
wireless technologies that are freely provided by
municipalities and companies (such as cafés and
restaurants) seeking to boost business.
Instructional design and course development
not only includes the design, development and
presentation of content material, it also includes
assessment and design of effective assessment and
assessment activities (Smith and Regan, 1993).
Kifer (1995) describes assessment as disciplined
inquiry to determine worth of programs; while
Stiggins (2008) defines assessment as the process
of gathering evidence of student learning to inform
instructional decision making.
Morrison, Ross and Kemp (2004) suggest
that there should be a direct relationship between
instructional objectives and assessment strategies.
In other words, what is taught is what should
be assessed. Like traditional instruction, online
courses are only as effective as the assessments
which are used to determine the degree to which
the learners achieved instructional goals and objec-
tives. Unfortunately, unlike face-to-face courses,
teachers of online courses do not have the luxury
of regularly having students in controlled personal
environments, such as the traditional classroom,
where they can monitor behavior and measure
competence through observable tasks. This is why
online assessment strategies and technologies must
become an area for research and study. Online
course development technologies have become
more sophisticated, effective, accessible, and af-
fordable than ever before. These technologies are
the key to designing and implementing effective
student assessment strategies.
During the 1990’s, it was common for the
emphasis of online courses to be content design
and delivery. In the early days of online learning,
many colleges focused on developing and deliv-
ering fully online courses using static web pages
and links to generally low quality video clips and
basic PowerPoint® presentations. This type of
course design relied on assessment techniques
that were still very traditional. They included
site-based proctoring of tests and assignments,
site-visits at student “hubs” for instructors to be
face-to-face on weekends or nights for specific
assessments or exams, pledges of authenticity
for non-proctored assignments, and synchronous,
traditional telephone discussions. Such methods
were the bases of many arguments about the value
and validity of online courses, with some calling
the methodology a “new form of correspondence
course”. Today, these methods still exist, but they
are used much less frequently due to advanced
technologies which offer capabilities to see and
hear students doing work and interacting with
others in the class. These technologies have
opened the door for better assessment and have
encourage researchers and educational practitio-
ners to re-assess the worth and effectiveness of
online courses.
Traditional assessment strategies generally
consist of a written question and a written re-
sponse in a transactional student-teacher exchange
(Posner & Rudnitsky, 2001). This is sometimes
referred to or considered “right or wrong” re-
sponses which are a result of rote memorization
and lacking critical thinking. Many problems can
arise when traditional assessments are the only
form assessments used in the online arena. Even
though technology has advanced to enable the use
of a wide range of assessment techniques, many
online instructors still rely on traditional assess-
ments requiring students read/review content, then
complete an activity or project on their own with
little input or guidance. Online testing has also
become popular, where students receive a timed
exam consisting of multiple choice, true/false or
fill in the blank questions. According to Ko and
Rossen (2004), online testing should not be relied
on due to issues of security and academic dishon-
545
 Using Technology in the Assessment of Adult Learners in Online Settings
esty, and if used, they should only be in conjunction
with other assessment methods. These scenarios
often require online students to sign an “oath”
that they will not use external resources (such as
other books, the Internet, or people), however,
often this oath ends up being more an assessment
of students’ honesty than of their knowledge of
the material. As online learning methods and
technologies become more sophisticated, online
instructors must take their assessment strategies
to a higher level. As opposed to basic traditional
assessments, technological advances now make
the use of “authentic” activities in fully online
courses possible (Woo Herrington, Agostinho,
& Reeves, 2007). Herrington, Oliver and Reeves
(2003) describe authentic assessments as having
some of the following characteristics;
1. Real world application
2. The need for complex student investigation
3. Loosely defined requirements, prompting
student effort to clarify
4. Different outcomes based on individual
student input
5. Opportunity for reflection
These aforementioned characteristics are
critical in the assessment of products produced
by online learners. Assessment in online courses
should be authentic, rigorous, and include ac-
tivities requiring active student performance.
Technologies can be the key to integrating student
performance, improving assessment techniques,
and ensuring student achievement of learning
objectives from a distance. The following sec-
tions provide examples of technologies along with
general ideas for assessment in online settings.
Video Presentations/Reports
and Live Video Discussions
Video technologies are an effective and user
friendly medium for assessing students largely
because of their prominence in the social main-
546
stream and their ability to allow students to “show
what they know”. Tools like GoTo Meeting®,
YouTube®, and inexpensive handheld video re-
cording devices have made these types of methods
familiar because of widespread personal use and
mass Internet connectivity. Video can be used in
the creation of pre-recorded (and nicely edited and
produced) video presentations on given research
topics as well as formal oral assessments in real
time video conferencing, which are similar to
“oral defenses” in some programs. Having stu-
dents prepare visual video presentations along
with a well-written response to questions allows
instructors to see how well students have internal-
ized course content through their use of relative
language and comfort with the knowledge which
was to be learned. Video presentations (sometimes
referred to as video reports) require the student
to study, read, prepare a statement and perspec-
tive and/or answer in depth questions about a
topic of study. If the assignment is made with
enough forethought and complexity, it can result
in a significant amount of rigor while diminish-
ing (not extinguishing) the misuse of forbidden
resources. Instructors are able to clearly tell if the
level of planning and effort has been put into the
work as they watch the video. Typically, these
video reports are usually 3-6 minutes in length
and are not graded on the level of technological
sophistication as much as the level of perceived
knowledge and planning which has been used in
creating the work.
Live video conferences are an effective way
to hear exactly what students think (without as-
sistance) from a distance and to interact with
students as if they were setting in a class. Video
conferences sometimes carry a higher level of
“performance anxiety” for students because they
need to be ready for the instructor to question
them and move the conversation off the expected
path as necessary to probe for understanding. This
technique encourages students to study and to be
well prepared because of their desire to perform
given the open-ended nature of the situation.
Using Technology in the Assessment of Adult Learners in Online Settings
Having students prepare to participate in a live
video conference or to create a video presenta-
tion requires them to rehearse, read, practice,
and become fluent with material. Instructors can
grade video presentations on content acquisition,
presentation style, proficiency in use of technol-
ogy, use of professional dress and language, and
use of visual aids. Additionally, instructors can
see the student performing in this process. These
elements allow video presentations to be a far
more dynamic medium than traditional stand-
alone written assignments or multiple choice tests.
Until recently, the use of student video presen-
tations was cumbersome and could be problematic
because of slow network speeds, low availability
of high speed home networking equipment, poor
performing or very expensive camera technolo-
gies, slow personal computers, and overall cost
prohibitive solutions. Now, broadband network-
ing and video technologies is wide-spread among
students of all ages. By using a computer-based
camera, students can participate in Internet video
conferencing and basic video production at a very
low cost. With the computer camera, along with
video editing software which is standard on many
personal computers such as iMovie®, Windows
MovieMaker®, or ZS4® freeware video editing
software, students can design develop and produce
video assignments which are professional artifacts
of their learning. Advanced video conferencing
technologies such as Saba Centra®, Wimba®,
SightSpeed®, CU-SeeMe®, and iVisit® (among
many others) can all be used for video presenta-
tions and synchronous video discussions in real-
time. These products are more commercial or
“pro-sumer” (professional/consumer) grade than
those previously mentioned and can still be cost
prohibitive in some cases. In addition to their own
video footage, students can also create motion
video screen recordings to demonstrate their use of
computer technologies and software applications.
Using Camtasia®, students can develop video
segments displaying their use of various computer
applications. If video storage or server space is
limited in size or prohibited by policies, online
students can also upload video they create to other
media venues such as YouTube®, as well as in
e-portfolio products (LiveText® or TaskStream®)
and in conventional course management systems
such as BlackBoard® (if the course management
system is configured to do so).
Interactive Audio Discussions,
Audio Presentations and
Audio with Digital Images
When video is unavailable, the next best thing is
audio, and audio coupled with still imagery. Audio
allows an instructor to hear students prepare re-
sponses, describe, and discuss their understanding
of material. Audio allows students to express emo-
tion and explain their feelings and perspectives in
regards to materials they are to have studied. The
pervasiveness of mobile phone technologies along
with inexpensive calling plans and conference
call features has made synchronous discussions
a feasible assessment technique which could be
used in conjunction with online course delivery.
Many phones now have conferencing capabilities
which facilitate group work for multiple students
at a distance. Additionally, students and instructors
can also use Internet-based audio conferencing
programs such as Skype® for little or no charge to
speak over the Internet in real time. Online audio
real time conferencing is a great option for online
students who live in areas where mobile service
is less than perfect.
If two-way or multi-point discussions or
conferences are not necessary, students may use
simple audio recorders such as those located in
the Windows® operating system to produce an
audio report. Audio reports allow students to give
audio explanations or perspectives on a topic of
study. Audio-based presentations allow the student
to speak freely on a topic and express themselves
with emotion and enthusiasm while discussing
their knowledge of a given topic or question. Audio
reports can also be paired with a prepared written
547
 Using Technology in the Assessment of Adult Learners in Online Settings
paper and/or PowerPoint® presentation or other
digital photo collection to provide an additional
means of allowing students to explain or prove
what they have learned.
Audio technologies provide assessment op-
portunities that allow synchronous discussions
and asynchronous audio reports through a variety
of technologies both easily and inexpensively. In
many online programs, the usefulness of audio
technologies has been overlooked. Products like
Audacity® and Winamp® allow students to edit,
manipulate, and add effects to their audio reports
with little technical knowledge. Students may also
choose to make audio podcasts of their work so
that they may create broadcast and document their
learning from anywhere. The podcasting concept
also allows students to share their knowledge (as-
sessment product) with anyone if they desire – not
just the instructor for a grade.
Film-based camera technologies now seem
a distance past as the abundance of digital still
photography has made the use of digital images
both simple and feasible for online classes. Digital
still images allow students to take real authentic
images of evidences that they have been in directly
in contact with which document their learning and
connect them with course materials. The popularity
and relative inexpensive nature of standard digital
cameras and phone-based cameras has put digital
photography in a position to be used as a tool
for demonstrating and documenting learning in
online environments. Digital still images can also
be used as stand alone documentation of support-
ing materials in the development of e-portfolios,
student websites, visual aids for PowerPoint®
presentations, and visual evidences which can be
embedded in written work products. Having stu-
dents use digital cameras, mobile phone cameras,
PDAs, webcams, and screen shots are all ways
online students can display their competence if
online instructors weave these techniques into their
assessment strategies. An interesting concept is
to use a tool such as Photostory®, PowerPoint®,
Flickr® or even MovieMaker® to incorporate
548
digital still images along with audio narration
or explanation. The incorporation of these two
technologies provides a platform for learners to
demonstrate and discuss their abilities, skills, or
knowledge of many topics.
Simulations and Virtual
Technologies in Student Assessment
Simulations and virtual environments are a grow-
ing component of online education because of
their ability to enhance online course delivery in
terms of course design, delivery, and assessment
process. Products such as Course Technology’s
SAM® Training and Assessment and Pearson’s
MyITLab® are simulated desktop application
environments which allow users to interact with
simulated software environments while their ac-
tions are being tracked and assessed automatically.
These tools are examples of simulation software
packages that combine the look and feel of a
software experience along with a systemic way of
providing feedback and grading/scoring students
on objectives which should be learned and are
part of the course objectives. These simulations
even check for “copy and paste” features and file
sharing and alert the instructor when such events
have occurred. These tools are terrific examples
of “intelligent” assessment in the online world.
There are many simulation programs available
for a wide variety of skill application in terms of
computer training and beyond.
Picciano (2001) suggests that mankind has
had a long fascination with virtual space and
time, and distance education has a place in this
overarching conceptual framework of anytime,
anywhere or perhaps multiple times and multiple
places. Second Life is a free, three dimensional,
virtual world which allows users to interact via
electronic beings called avatars. These avatars
represent individuals in a class or other instruc-
tional setting as designed by an instructor. This
is usually a complementary product to standard
course management programs such as Black-
Using Technology in the Assessment of Adult Learners in Online Settings
board® or Moodle®. Virtual world technologies
allow students and instructors to socialize, share
information, chat, teach and learn within the
constructs of a visual atmosphere. Virtual worlds
bring real place and time to online learning and
help stimulate the senses in ways online course
management systems do not. Instructors can use
virtual worlds to help assess students in numerous
ways. For example, having students in a virtual
allows an instructor to see a student build or cre-
ate something visual (like a room or studio), then
decorate or stage it with products thematically
based on course objectives.
MyIT Lab® Simulation:
In Depth Computer Skills
Assessment at a Distance
Years ago, educational institutions dictated that
online students would come to campus to take
their assessments in a face-to-face setting. Once
students from far distances began taking online
courses, these educational organizations had the
student arrange a date and time and proctor to
administer the exam (Yang, Hsiao, Liu, & Lin,
2009). While this was beneficial for the student,
there was still an issue of trust on the part of the
education institution and the student in regards
to honesty and integrity toward assessing the
learning of the student. Now there are biometric
devices that institutions can use to proctor the
online students (Foster, 2009). While technology
advances enable work to be completed more ef-
ficiently, they also can have a negative effect of
invasion of privacy for the student. One solution
may be to use simulations along with programs
that ensure plagiarism has not occurred.
One simulation application that is used in online
education for computer literacy education is Pear-
son Prentice Hall’s MyITLab®. This web-based
application is designed to be an online assessment
and training program for Microsoft® Corpora-
tion’s Office® 2007. It has built in plagiarism tools
for informing instructors when the possibility of
cheating may have occurred, customizable study
plans, project-based and skill-based assessments,
and outcomes-based training. All of these features
of MyITLab® make it a powerful online simula-
tion program. But how does one move from paper
in the classroom to the simulation in the online
environment?
Assessing students in a classroom is normally
done through the use of a problem set that is solved
on paper. The problem set could range from essay
to multiple choice formats. In a computer lab, the
instructor would still offer students a paper test
and the students would work out the problem
using their workstation computer. To ensure that
students would not take advantage of the Internet
connection they had access to, instructors would
restrict Internet access to the computers in the lab.
This may have been done by simply unplugging
the network cable in each machine or by arranging
their university’s information technology support
unit to deactivate Internet access in the lab the
students were being tested. While these methods
may have been cumbersome for the instructor,
they knew that their students would be unable to
access outside help to assist in their performance
on their test.
The concept of authenticity in assessment of
students in the online environment is a concern
to higher education institutions. It is a simple
procedure to proctor an assessment in a classroom
or laboratory, but proctoring an assessment in the
online environment can be very difficult. The
advantage of having a program that is web-based
and simulates the actual topic being learned is
the software’s ability to proctor the assessment
activity through the application itself. MyIT-
Lab® simulates activities that individuals would
actually perform when using the applications in
Microsoft® Corporation’s Office 2007. These
applications are Office 2007 Word®, Office 2007
Excel®, Office 2007 Access®, and Office 2007
PowerPoint®. Students are able to complete tasks
within each application for assessment purposes.
While these simulations assess students, the pro-
549
 Using Technology in the Assessment of Adult Learners in Online Settings

Table 1. Methods components for transferring from the classroom to the online environment

ITEM
Provide explicit instructional support and
structure
Building students’ self-efficacy
Scaffolding online discussions
Provide student-faculty contact
Provide social interaction among students
Engage in active learning
PURPOSE
To provide students with reflection activities in order to self-monitor their own understand-
ing (Davis & Linn, 2000)
To assist learners to identify and set challenging, proximal goals (Dabbagh & Kitsantas,
2004) and providing students with timely, honest, and explicit feedback (Bangert, 2004;
Wang & Lin, 2007)
To provide teaching practices that facilitate productive discourse where students are to be
engaged in meaningful interactions, to develop higher levels of critical thinking, and to
realize other learning outcomes (Whipp, 2003).
To provide motivation for peak performance of students through the instructor exhibiting
the following characteristics: Friendliness, interest in student learning, enthusiasm, good
communication skills, and accessibility to students (Young & Shaw, 1999)
To provide an environment that fosters sharing and communication of ideas among students
to assist in improving thinking and deeper understanding of subject matter (Chickering &
Erhmann, 1996)
The capabilities for incorporating audio, video, and links to other virtual worlds allow
instructors to create authentic, interactive problem-solving activities that augment student
efforts to actively construct meaningful knowledge (Pahl, 2003)

gram can also train students in the use of each
application. Through the activity of training,
students become prepared for the assessments
through activities that are similar in purpose. For
example, if the assessment activity in Office®
2007 Word is to insert the Author field in the
footer of the document, the training function of
the simulation will assist the student in learning
about how to modify footers within documents.
The training function is design to not duplicate
the exact assessment activity that each student
will have to accomplish, but to enable students
to learn and have the skills necessary to accom-
plish the assessment tasks. Through performing
the training activities, students should become
prepared to perform at a higher skill level on the
simulation’s assessment activities.
MyIT Lab® is a powerful tool that instruc-
tors can use to accomplish online assessment of
students learning Microsoft® Corporation’s Of-
fice 2007. The method of transferring from the
classroom to the online environment has been
adapted from Artino and Stephens (2009) and from
Bangert (2004) and consists of six components.
Table 1 lists each component and the component’s
purpose below.
These six components allow instructors or
departments to work out a strategy for moving a
class from the face-to-face environment to the
online environment. By providing students with
the opportunity to set goals, see feedback from
assignments in a timely manner, participate in
online discussions to express ideas, have a social
presence in the course, be engaged by the assign-
ments, and be provided with ways to reflect, in-
structors and departments will find it easier to
have a successful online experience for themselves
and their students.
Assessments used in computer literacy courses
need to verify skill acquisition, show the replica-
tion of activities, and be authentic to the real world.
Students need active learning activities in order
to see the relevance of learning how to properly
use office suite applications and how to critically
think and solve problems (Williams, 2004). The
type of assessments can range from conceptual
tests to capstone projects. Students must also work
collaboratively and contribute to the knowledge
creation of their employer, their education institu-

550
Using Technology in the Assessment of Adult Learners in Online Settings
tion, society, and themselves (Long & Holeton,
2009). Using simulation can offer these types of
assessment and can be a powerful tool if used in
partnership with the six items to consider when
moving online.
Pearson Prentice Hall’s MyIT Lab® fulfills
three of the six components by offering authentic
activities through active learning, student-in-
structor communication, and builds self-efficacy.
MyIT Lab® provides instructors the ability to
offer students training simulations, video tutori-
als, audio tutorials, written information such as
PowerPoint® presentations and worksheets for
the tutorials, authentic simulation assessments,
and finally projects. All of these can be used to
assess the learner. Each assessment activity can
be modified for each individual user. MyIT Lab®
offers activities for multiple types of learners from
audible to visual to hands-on learners. A strength of
the simulation is that it allows instructors to provide
assessment activities that benefit each individual
learner in the online environment. Activities allow
for the learning of Microsoft® Corporation’s Of-
fice® 2007 applications at a higher performance
level. MyITLab®’s training component allows
instructors to create an activity that the student
can perform and learn how to use the particular
Microsoft® Corporation’s Office 2007 applica-
tion. The student is able to use the simulation as
he or she would on their own machine running
the actual application. This experience enables the
student to learn the application and when given an
assessment using MyITLab® the student is able
to complete the assessment successfully.
Training assignments involve the student going
through an activity until the activity is mastered.
Once the student successfully works through
training, they then do a study plan involving a
pretest and a posttest. The pretest takes the student
through a simulation activity asking to perform
either skill-based questions or project-based ques-
tions. If the student does not pass the pretest, they
proceed to the posttest. The posttest uses either
skill-based questions or project-based questions,
but its questions are not identical to the pretest.
Students use the video and audio tutorials to
learn about the Microsoft® Corporation’s Office
2007 applications and how to use them. Each
tutorial teaches the student multiple concepts
concerning a Microsoft® Office 2007 applica-
tion. These concepts may deal with one or more
learning objectives. The video tutorials lead the
student through the process of learning the skills
through hands-on activities. The audio tutorials
have PowerPoint® slides with the tutorial that
give the student visual cues along with the audio
they are listening to while learning the material.
The PowerPoint® presentations and worksheets
provide the students learning objectives’ informa-
tion that go along with the tutorials.
The capstone projects that MyITLab® offers
involves a student downloading an application file
and an instruction file that directs them on what to
manipulate in the application file. These capstone
projects give each student a real world situation
in which they are to determine what needs to be
done to complete the assignment. Students must
have Microsoft® Corporation’s Office® 2007
installed on their personal computer to perform
the projects. The student performs the task as
directed by instruction sheets, and once finished,
the student uploads the application file back into
MyITLab®. MyITLab® then checks the file for
plagiarism, copying and pasting, and then for
correctness. If the file comes up with a plagiarism
problem, it is flagged and the MyITLab® notifies
the instructor of the problem. The instructor can
then contact the student to determine what the
problem may be.
MyITLab® offers the ability for instructor-
student interaction through its communication
tab. Announcements can be made daily, weekly,
or even monthly by the instructor to keep students
informed of due dates, new material postings, and
other informational announcements. Students can
use MyITLab®’s email function to send internal
emails to other classmates, the instructor, or to
551
 Using Technology in the Assessment of Adult Learners in Online Settings
everyone. The students can also have MyIT Lab®
send the emails to eternal email accounts. This
functionality of MyITLab® allows for one-on-one
to one-on-many communication opportunities.
The ability of MyITLab® to give instantaneous
feedback once an assessment has been completed
is one of the powerful features it has. This feature
allows students to see how they are doing on a
single activity, or in the class as a whole. Students
can run performance reports to determine exactly
what they did and what they need to correct. All
of the features of MyITLab® allows instructors
to provide rich experiences for the students when
transforming a face-to-face classroom course into
an online course. MyITLab® allows students
to know how they are doing and how they can
improve. The application provides instructors
with student performance information to allow
the instructor the ability to contact the student if
the student’s performance merits it.
DISCUSSION BOARDS,
REFLECTION, AND
VIRTUAL WORLDS
Although the simulation power of MyITLab®
offers several advantages, it still does not offer
the connection of online chats, social presence,
and reflective activities. Important in any assess-
ment is a mix of activities and assignments. An
instructor can improve the assessment power of a
course by adding online discussion assessments,
a reflection assignment, and introducing the use
of virtual reality. Adding these components to
the online course will enhance its effectiveness
in terms of moving it from the classroom to the
online environment.
The use of discussion boards has been a
component of distance education for the past
fifteen years (Wang & Lin, 2007). The purpose
of the discussion board is for students to answer
questions that the instructor has posted. The
questions are open-ended and relate the readings
552
and instructional objectives for any given week.
Students are able to post their understandings and
opinions about the topics within the questions and
to respond to their peers. The students may also
be required to post a current event that relates to
that week’s topics and learning objectives. The
instructor is able to assess the students’ understand-
ing of course materials and learning objectives by
reading through the posts and commenting to the
students. This can be done throughout the week
and students can be assessed based upon quality
of posts and quantity of posts.
Including a reflection assessment in an online
course allows the instructor to determine the
effectiveness of the learning objectives of the
course. Students can be asked to comment on
their three main takeaways that they are leaving
with from the course. The reflection can also ask
students to comment on the learning objectives,
the schedule, and the effectiveness of the course.
The instructor can take the reflections and deter-
mine if the course needs to be modified from its
current configuration. It allows the instructor to
also reflect upon the types of assessments that are
being used in the course.
The use of virtual worlds in distance education
is growing among higher education institutions
(Warburton, 2009). One particular virtual world
in use today is Second Life®. According to War-
burton (2009), Second Life® is one of the best
virtual worlds for the creation and use of virtual
learning spaces in education today. It is a 3-D
virtual world which is created and developed by
its inhabitants. The virtual environment provides
avatars with a sense of “being immersed in-world”.
Students are able to interact in real time as if they
were in a face-to-face classroom. The instructor
can use this environment for assessment purposes
through the use of oral quizzes, project creation
assignments, and visual observations. While this
is a new frontier in education, virtual worlds are
environments that students and higher education
institutions are beginning to adopt. Recently, the
University of Texas system purchased 49 Second
Using Technology in the Assessment of Adult Learners in Online Settings
Life® “islands”, which are spaces in the Second
Life® environment, and invested hundreds of
thousands of dollars into Second Life® (Geiser,
2009). This is the first statewide adoption of Sec-
ond Life®. As more institutions become involved
in virtual worlds for online education, assessing
student performance will become increasingly
more dynamic.
FUTURE TRENDS
Future trends in the assessment of adult online
learners will see the types of learning assessments
described in this chapter become increasingly more
complex and accurate. The future of assessment
is also in simulation. The power of simulation has
allowed learners to be immersed into the simulated
environment and assessed on their performance.
Simulation is powerful because it gives instant
feedback to the learner and to the instructor.
Students are able to see whether they know the
material or need to study more. Instructors can
determine if they are giving students the necessary
guidance and materials to be successful. Simu-
lations allow learning outcomes to be achieved
through the objectives being built into the system.
The future of assessment is also in virtual worlds,
which are useful in encouraging engagement and
reflection within an online course.
While the methods of assessing adult online
learners will become more complex, the basic
principles of assessment will remain the same.
Despite changes in educational methods and
course delivery, the goals of assessment have not
changed. The reliable and valid examination and
evaluation of student performance in a course
is still the goal of effective assessment, and it is
important to keep that goal in mind as the tools
for assessment become more complex.
CONCLUSION: WHAT IS NEXT?
Online education is not a trend, fad, or “get rich
quick” scheme as some believe. Online courses
represent the intersection of education and the
greatest and most profound invention in the last
fifty years – the Internet. Even though some op-
ponents see online education as lower quality,
proponents of online courses will attest that when
properly designed and delivered, online courses
provide both rigor and socialization at a level not
seen before. Education courses will continue to
move into the online delivery in the coming years
due to students’ desire for flexibility and because
of rising costs in construction and transportation.
Assessment is a major component of online learn-
ing. Assessment of students, courses, program,
instructors and universities must be valid and
reliable if online courses are to continue opening
doors. Educators must consider a variety of tech-
nologies and assessment philosophies to avoid the
use of “correspondence” techniques, recycled and
antiquated face-to-face assessment methods, and
other measures of student learning which do not
allow students to demonstrate their knowledge,
skills and understanding of learned concepts.
As demonstrated in this chapter, assessment
of adult online learners is done in a number of
ways using an array of methods. This chapter has
looked at how the assessment of adult learners has
transformed with the advent of online learning.
Several types of assessments were examined for
their ability to enable online learners to achieve
course objectives and learning goals.
Assessment is an important component to the
continued legitimization of online learning. In
the online environment, educators must devise
methods of evaluating students that are accu-
rate, effective, valid and reliable. The examples
presented in this chapter are a few of many that
can be used to implement creative and innovative
ways of assessing adult learners from a distance.
553
 Using Technology in the Assessment of Adult Learners in Online Settings
REFERENCES
Artino, A. R., & Stephens, J. M. (2009). Academic
motivation and self-regulation: A comparative
analysis of undergraduate and graduate stu-
dents learning online. The Internet and Higher
Education, 12(3-4), 146–151..doi:10.1016/j.
iheduc.2009.02.001
Bangert, A. W. (2004). The seven principles of
good practice: A framework for evaluating online
teaching. The Internet and Higher Education, 7,
217–232. doi:10.1016/j.iheduc.2004.06.003
Bauer, J. F., & Anderson, R. S. (2000). Evaluating
students’ written performance in the online class-
room. New Directions for Teaching and Learning,
84, 65–71. doi:10.1002/tl.849
Chickering, A. W., & Erhmann, S. C. (1996).
Implementing the seven principles: Technology
as lever. AAHE Bulletin, 49(2), 3–6.
Dabbagh, N., & Kitsantas, A. (2004). Supporting
self-regulation in student-centered Web-based
learning environments. International Journal on
E-Learning, 3(1), 40–47.
Davis, E. A., & Linn, M. C. (2000). Scaffolding stu-
dents’knowledge integration: Prompt for reflection
in KIE. International Journal of Science Educa-
tion, 22, 819–837. doi:10.1080/095006900412293
Foster, A. L. (2009). New systems keep a close
eye on online students at home. Education Digest,
74(7), 45–47.
Geiser, A. (2009, September 17). UT System
invests thousands for land in virtual reality.
The Daily Texan Online. Retrieved from http://
www.dailytexanonline.com/top-stories/ut-
system-invests-thousands-for-land-in-virtual-
reality-1.1882344#5
Herrington, J., Oliver, R., & Reeves, T. C. (2003).
Patterns of Engagement in Authentic Online
Learning Environments. Australian Journal of
Educational Technology., 19(1), 59–71.
554
Kifer, E. (1995). Assessment: A general view. In
Instructional technology, past, present and future
(2nd ed.). Englewood, CO: Libraries Unlimited,
Inc.
Ko, S., & Rossen, S. (2004). Teaching online –
A practical guide (2nd ed.). Boston: Houghton
Mifflin.
Long, P. D., & Holeton, R. (2009). Signposts
of the revolution? What we talk about when we
talk about learning spaces. EDUCAUSE Review,
44(2), 36–48.
Maor, D. (2003). The teacher’s role in developing
interaction and reflection in an online learning
community. Educational Media International, 40,
127–137. doi:10.1080/0952398032000092170
Morrison, G., Ross, S., & Kemp, J. (2004). De-
signing Effective Instruction (4th ed.). Hoboken,
NJ: Wiley/Jossey-Bass.
Olt, M. R. (2002). Ethics and distance education:
Strategies for minimizing academic dishonesty
in online assessment. Online Journal of Dis-
tance Learning Administration, 5(3). Retrieved
September 11, 2009, from http://www.westga.
edu/~distance/ojdla/fall53/olt53.html
Ouzts, K. (2006). Sense of community in online
courses. Quarterly Review of Distance Education,
7(3), 285–296.
Pahl, C. (2003). Managing evolution and change
in Internet-based teaching and learning environ-
ments. Computers & Education, 40, 99–114.
doi:10.1016/S0360-1315(02)00100-8
Picciano, A. G. (2001). Distance learning: Making
connections across virtual space and time. Upper
Saddle River, NJ: Merrill, Prentice Hall.
Picciano, A. G. (2002). Beyond student per-
ceptions: Issues of interaction, presence, and
performance in an online course. Journal of
Asynchronous Learning Networks, 6(1), 21–40.
Using Technology in the Assessment of Adult Learners in Online Settings
Pope, J. (11/9/2006). Number of students taking
online courses rises. USA Today.
Posner, G., & Rudnitsky, A. (2001). Course
design—a guide to curriculum development for
teachers (6th ed.). New York: Longman.
Reisetter, M., LaPointe, L., & Korcuska, J. (2007).
The impact of altered realities: Implications of
online delivery for learners’ interactions, expecta-
tions, and learning skills. International Journal
on E-Learning, 6(1), 55.
Smith, P., & Ragan, T. (1993). Instructional ge-
sign (1st ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Merrill,
Prentice Hall.
Stiggins, R. (2008). An introduction to student-
involved assessment for learning (5th ed.). Upper
Saddle River, NJ: Merrill, Prentice Hall.
Tallent-Runnels, M. K., Thomas, J. A., Lan, W.
Y., Cooper, S., Ahern, T. C., Shaw, S. M., & Liu,
X. (2006). Teaching courses online: A review of
the research. Review of Educational Research,
76(1), 93–135. doi:10.3102/00346543076001093
The Sloan Consortium. (n.d.). A consortium of
individuals, institutions and organizations com-
mitted to quality online education. Retrieved May
15, 2007, from http://www.sloan-c.org/
U.S. Department of Education, National Center for
Education Statistics. (2003). Distance education
at degree-granting postsecondary institutions:
2000-2001 (NCES 2003-017). Retrieved May 4,
2007, from http://nces.ed.gov/fastfacts/display.
asp?id=80.
Wang, S., & Lin, S. S. J. (2007). The application
of social cognitive theory to web-based learning
through NetPorts. British Journal of Educational
Technology, 38, 600–612. doi:10.1111/j.1467-
8535.2006.00645.x
Warburton, S. (2009). Second Life in higher educa-
tion: Assessing the potential for and the barriers of
deploying virtual worlds in learning and teaching.
British Journal of Educational Technology, 40(3),
414–426..doi:10.1111/j.1467-8535.2009.00952.x
Whipp, J. L. (2003). Scaffolding critical reflec-
tion in online discussions: Helping prospective
teachers think deeply about field experiences in
urban schools. Journal of Teacher Education, 54,
321–333. doi:10.1177/0022487103255010
Williams, J. B. (2004). Creating authentic as-
sessments: A method for the authoring of open
book open web examinations. In R. Atkinson, C.
McBeath, D. Jonas-Dwyer, & R. Phillips (Eds.),
Beyond the comfort zone: Proceedings of the 21st
ASCILITE Conference (pp. 934-937). Perth, 5-8
December. Retrieved from http://www.ascilite.
org.au/conferences/perth04/procs/pdf/williawi.
pdf
Woo, Y., Herrington, J., Agostinho, S., & Reeves,
T. C. (2007). Implementing authentic tasks in
Web-Based learning environments. EDUCAUSE
Quarterly, 30(3), 36–43.
Yang, J. F., Hsiao, C., Liu, H., & Lin, N. C.
(2009). Modes of delivery and learning objectives
in distance education. International Journal of
Instructional Media, 36(1), 55–71.
Young, S., & Shaw, D. A. (1999). Profiles of
effective college and university teachers. The
Journal of Higher Education, 70(6), 670–686.
doi:10.2307/2649170
KEY TERMS AND DEFINITIONS
Assessment: The evaluation of student per-
formance and understanding of course concepts.
Effective assessment is both a reliable and valid
examination of student performance and under-
standing. In this chapter, the terms assessment and
evaluation are used interchangeably.
555
 Using Technology in the Assessment of Adult Learners in Online Settings
Evaluation: See above definition of assess-
ment. In this chapter, the terms assessment and
evaluation are used interchangeably.
Nontraditional Student: A student with any
of the following characteristics: has delayed en-
rollment, attends part time, works full time while
enrolled, is considered financially independent
for purposes of determining financial aid, has
dependents other than a spouse, is a single parent,
or does not have a high school diploma (NCES).
Online Classroom: Nontraditional classroom
in which learners and instructors are not in physical
proximity with each other. An online class can be
conducted synchronously or asynchronously. An
556
online course is managed and communication is
conducted through various electronic methods.
Traditional Classroom: Learning space in
which the teacher provides face-to-face instruc-
tion to students and communication between and
among teacher and students is face to face.
Traditional College Student: A student who
is between the ages of 18 and 22, who lives on or
near campus, is a full-time student, and receives
financial support from parents.
Virtual Environment: A computer-generated
environment or space in which learners interact
with classmates and instructors.
 557

Chapter 33
Self-Assessments in
Contemporary Adult E-Learning
Shalin Hai-Jew
Kansas State University, USA

ABSTRACT
With the ever higher costs of human-led instruction, much of adult electronic learning (e-learning)
has become automated, independent, dispersed to open-source locales, and open learning. There has
been a growing focus on adult learner self-initiative in identifying and pursuing learning opportunities
independently. Such discovery learning is not just for practical and informal work but has now reached
well into formalized trainings and deeper lifelong learning. This phenomenon has led to a variety of
methods for adult learner self-assessment of their own learning—ranging from pre-determined scripted
responses to live human feedback to mixed-methods feedback. Feedback loops for learner self-assessment
are critical to support learner engagement, actual learning, learner self-efficacy, decision-making, skills
acquisition, and human development; these also enhance mutually supportive collaborations and innova-
tions between co-learners; and they enable workplace and higher education credentialing needs. This
chapter highlights the importance of self-assessments and learner feedback in e-learning, and proposes
some foundational design strategies.

INTRODUCTION Knowledge of the self may be hard to come by

“If you know the enemy and know yourself, you
can win a hundred battles without a single loss.”
– Sun Tzu in The Art of War (6th century BC)
DOI: 10.4018/978-1-61692-906-0.ch033
in a range of fields, particularly when the learner
is a novice or an amateur. However, the current
electronic learning environment encourages ex-
ploration and requires enriched self-assessment
feedbacks for modern online learners—in order
to enhance the online learning experience.
Contemporary adult electronic learning (e-
learning) involves both formal and informal e-
 Self-Assessments in Contemporary Adult E-Learning
learning. Formal e-learning for adults involves
those sponsored by work places and institutions
of higher learning. These may include full-length
courses, simulated experiences, project-based
learning, problem-based learning, and field trips.
These may include formal training that may earn
university or college credit for prior experiential
learning (assessed by professionals in the field
based on the adult learners’ portfolios). Informal
e-learning refers to the pursuit of knowledge and
skills outside any formal workplace or educational
structure. Amateurs, novices, and experts will
pursue informal e-learning, which may involve
automated experiences, modules, and courses;
educational gaming; virtual simulations; 3D
immersive spaces; discovery learning spaces
and exploratoriums; and virtual communities of
practice around shared interests. Some types of
informal learning involve casual play, a form of
entertainment. Contemporary adult learners may
sample widely across both the formal and the in-
formal, with each type of learning supplementing
and enhancing the other.
The half life of information is getting ever-
shorter, and the freshly-minted degrees date out
in terms of their informational value within a
few years. To function, much less compete, in
the modern world, people need to learn continu-
ally. This pressure has clashed with another real-
ity—the need for higher education and corporate
cost-savings. This economic reality has meant
increasing student-to-faculty ratios in academia.
Greater demands on faculty time [“the need to be
seen as ‘research active’, the generation of funding,
public service, and intra-institutional administra-
tion” (Yorke, 2003, p. 483)] also detracts from
instructional pursuits. A tougher economy has also
meant a diminishment of human-facilitated train-
ings and a turning to computer-based trainings.
Recent moves to offer ubiquitous mobile learn-
ing for “anytime, anywhere” learning has focused
on meeting the needs of busy adult workers. Adult
learners want hands-on applied learning in real
context; they want to make decisions about their
558
own learning; they tend not to like being assessed
(Merriam & Caffarella, 1999). This mix of realities
has led to a great importance of adult e-learner
self-assessment delivered by Web.
BACKGROUND
Literature Review
Self-assessments have played a lesser role in higher
education than more summative and high-value,
high-consequence assessments. Self-assessments
are learner-centered, which means they focus on
the learning process: how students learn, what they
are learning, the student retention of learning, and
their application of the learning in applied situa-
tions. These also focus on the learner’s continuing
role into the future as a lifelong learner.
Traditionally, self-assessments have been used
for top-end outliers on a learning bell curve as part
of scaffolding additional learning projects. They
have been used to ascertain individual internal
states—such as attitudes, beliefs, values, emotions,
and past experiences. They have been employed
for learners to self-assess their ways of learning to
enhance meta-cognition: focused autobiographical
sketches; checklists about interests, knowledge,
and skills; goal ranking and matching; self-assess-
ments of ways of learning; productive study-time
logs; punctuated lectures; process analysis, and
diagnostic learning logs (Angelo & Cross, 1993,
pp. 281 – 315), all of which may be used online
in various instructor-facilitated learning contexts.
Meta-cognition may involve individual senses of
performance on assessments—as a prediction prior
to the exam and a “postdiction” after (Murphy &
Tenenberg, 2005, p. 148).
Assessments also assist learner meta-cognition
or their thinking about their own thinking, particu-
larly in relation to external standards (McMillan
& Hearn, 2009). Formative self-assessments may
surface tacit knowledge in a particular field. Self-
assessments may prime learners for future learning
Self-Assessments in Contemporary Adult E-Learning
or prompt individuals towards further analysis and
thought. They may enhance the learners building
of mental models and to bring those in closer
alignment to conceptual ones. Self-assessments
enhance learner autonomy and decision-making.
Ultimately, the promotion of learner success is seen
as a critical part of a student retention strategy.
In the era of e-learning, adult learner self-
assessments have been tapped for amateur self-
training. In a “DIY” (do-it-yourself) sphere,
self-assessments inform learner choices, and this
in turn sparks their help-seeking behavior. People
may use help tools inefficiently or even may be
“ignorant” of these functions (Bartholomé, Stahl,
& Bromme, 2004, p. 81). Not all help-seeking
is alike. Those who ask more high cognitive
questions in a learning environment often learn
better (Godbole-Chaudhuri, Winters, Azevedo, &
Hofman, 2006, p. 928). Those who may properly
break through the defensive routines that limit
learning may achieve relevant change (Argyris,
1993). People who strategically identify the in-
formation and help they need, plan and pursue
social goals effectively, and forage successfully
for information demonstrate crucial expertise in
the modern learning space (Gattis, 2002). Learn-
ing spaces may be scaffolded for easier learner
maneuverability such as through the powerful
organization of contents (such as through tax-
onomies); framing the underlying structures of
related information; concept maps and diagrams
to “express temporal, categorical, causal, hierar-
chical and other relationships”; metaphors and
analogies; rehearsals (such as practices of the
learning contents), and “advance organizers” or
“remarks by teachers to help students move to
new topics” (Neris, Anacleto, Mascarenhas, &
Neto, 2005, p. 2).
Those who wish to self-manage their health
may have the support of “persuasive technologies”
to measure their physical states and to encour-
age and direct their behaviors (Lacroix, Saini, &
Goris, 2009); these technologies may enhance
“behavioral regulation, types of motives, and self
efficacy” (p. 1). Popular movements towards self-
managed healthcare (or “lay care”) include “health
maintenance and illness prevention, symptom
evaluation and self-diagnosis, self-treatment, and
consultation with a variety of informal and formal
health care practitioners” (Segall, 1990, p. 301).
Some technologies encourage goal setting such as
integrating physical activities into daily life (Saini
& Lacroix, 2009). Those who are building greater
emotional self-awareness may use biofeedback
sensors through their desktop or laptop comput-
ers, or even mobile devices.
Learning requires adaptations that challenge
people’s emotional systems (Chanel, Rebetez,
Bétrancourt, & Pun, 2008). Emotional recogni-
tion of user states in a game may modulate game
difficulty through physiological measures and
player self-reportage. The authors conceptualize a
helpful middle ground between anxiety (“negative
excited”) and boredom (“negative calm”), with the
middle path of engagement (“positive excited”)
as most preferable; this state is what they term
the “flow channel” (after M. Csikszentmihalyi,
1991). Others have been working on automatic
emotion assessment tools based on biometric data
acquisition to examine the predominant emotional
state of the user (Teixeira, Vinhas, Oliviera, &
Reis, 2008). Learner emotions are an important
aspect of learning, and measuring it in its “range of
expressive possibilities” while not removing “all
ambiguity” is an important goal (Isbister, Höök,
Sharp, & Laaksolahti, 2006, p. 1163). Emotional
data is harnessed in pervasive learning environ-
ments to modulate the learning (Shen, Wang, &
Shen, 2009).
Self-assessments may take the form of self-
expressions of intangible information in tangible,
expressive form—to enhance learner sense-mak-
ing (Qu & Furnas, 2005). Writing is also a tool for
meta-cognition (Hanson & Williams, 2008). The
writers may become aware of their own thoughts
and knowledge base through the physical and
mental act of making their own ideas tangible on
paper or in digital form. The act of drafting im-
559
 Self-Assessments in Contemporary Adult E-Learning
ages and creating prototypes, similarly, help ideas
to form and solidify (Csikszentimihalyi, 1996).
At the high-end of self-assessments may be
the discovery of insights, described as nontrivial,
“complex, deep, qualitative, unexpected, (and)
relevant” (North, as cited in Yi, Kang, Stasko,
& Jacko, 2008, p. 2). Learner reflection has long
been identified as a critical aspect for deep learning
that is accurate, enduring, and applicable to differ-
ent situations, and various technology programs
have been designed to encourage such reflection
(Kay, Li, & Fekete, 2007). Self-assessments, if
designed well, may enhance autonomous and
self-reliant lifelong learning. These may raise
learner awareness in the classroom by encouraging
more reflection around the defined learning goals
(Watterson, 2007). Self-assessments promote
active learning in a virtual learning environ-
ment (Bromham & Oprandi, 2006). They may
help learners push beyond rote memorization to
deeper learning (Brookhart, Andolina, Zuza, &
Furman, 2004). For example, one such tool may
be self-assessment rubrics applied to long-term
projects and portfolios; these may spell out in-
structor expectations by “delineating clear paths
toward progress” (Geeslin, 2003 p. 857); these
may enhance student-teacher relationships and
peer interactions (Ishaya & Wood, 2005); these
also empower students in goal-setting regarding
their own learning and taking responsibility. If
students are able to assess their own works, that
awareness will enable them to improve that work
(Andrade, 2008). Alternate assessments may slow
the pace of the revelations of what is not work-
ing in a student’s learning and allow learners to
self-guide these revelations (Hargreaves, Earl, &
Schmidt, 2002). “The development and growth
of the learner over a certain period of time can be
inspected and assessed in terms of the creation of
a Web-based portfolio, with particular attention
to factors such as reflection, goal setting and self-
assessment” (Barrett, 2000, as cited in Chang &
Tseng, 2009, p. 358).
560
E-learning enables a much wider range of
self-assessments than scripted answers presented
to particular responses. Artificial intelligence may
define unique learning feedback for different learn-
ers and make adjustments for different learning
orientations. Web-based tools have been widely
deployed for self-assessment (Hamada, 2007)
because of the ease of automated delivery of feed-
back and distance mitigations between learners
and subject matter experts. Learning objects, with
built-in responses based on learner behaviors, may
be highly portable and used in different contexts
such as learning / course management systems
(L/CMSes), websites, online discovery learning
spaces, and immersive spaces.
Teaching is always a social process because
of the inherent sociability of a majority of people.
Computer-based training systems now are not
only about delivering information but also about
“vicarious modeling and enactive learning” from
social cognitive theory for social learning (Gupta
& Bostrom, 2006, p. 177). Learning may be per-
ceived as more meaningful in the presence of other
people, such as in game situations (Gajadhar, de
Kort, & IJsselsteijn, 2008), especially those in
persistent virtual worlds (Castronova, 2007).
Virtual communities may be built around
integrated constructivist environments. The
popularization of virtual communities has added
layers of live human responsiveness—as novices,
amateurs, peers, and experts—to independent
learners. Problem Solving Virtual Communities
(PSVC) may affect the motivations of its various
members through “codification, communication
methods, virtual community norms, (and) iden-
tity management”; such spaces need to encour-
age knowledge contribution by its members by
promoting individual member motivations for
“active learning, self-enhancement, reciprocity,
reputation, enjoyment of helping others, self-
protection, moral obligation and advancement of
virtual community motive” (Yu, Jiang, & Chan,
2007, p. 144). The authors J. Yu, Z. Jiang and
H. C. Chan cite the expectancy-value theory to
Self-Assessments in Contemporary Adult E-Learning
explain how people may respond to the expec-
tancy of success and the value of the end-goal.
A shared virtual space should capture member
contributions, offer rich multimedia ways to
communicate, encourage reciprocity behavior and
mutual accommodation, and enhance the salience
of personal identities and social reputation build-
ing (2007). Open-ended group projects challenge
learners to think critically and problem-solve in
an open environment with an eye towards their
role as future professionals (Hauer & Daniels,
2008). Various socio-technological systems cap-
ture, distribute, and encourage discovery of new
knowledge (Becerra-Fernandez, 2006).
Most general assessments complete the learn-
ing cycle by tying the course objectives with
the learning assignments to the measureable as-
sessment outcomes; these elements are aligned
with Bloom’s taxonomy (recall, comprehension,
application, analysis, synthesis, and evaluation),
with the requisite performance for the beginner,
intermediate and expert levels (Starr, Manaris, &
Stalvey, 2008, p. 263).
Delimitations to Self-Assessments
Self-assessments are often used for applied work
competencies and productivity (Gupta & Bostrom,
2006), not full competencies of a complex learning
domain. For more complex learning, subject mat-
ter expert (SME) direction is seen as much more
critical and relevant. Self-assessment instruments
are necessarily limited even having undergone
item analysis (for multicollinearity), reliability
testing, construct validity, and other tests. Self-
assessments are usually used in non-competitive,
low-value situations (Simŏes & Papanastasiou,
2002), including for ethics compliance trainings
and new software mastery. While faculty members
often give credence to student self-reports (Mur-
phy & Tenenberg, 2005), these self-assessments
are not often used for accreditation, certification,
degree-granting, or direct pay raises linked to
formal trainings. Students themselves may not
take self-assessments seriously (Walsted, 2001).
The fear of subjectivity tainting self-assessments
is one reason for the hesitancy towards treating
self-assessments as objective measures that affect
workplace rewards and staffing hierarchies.
Biases in Self-Assessment. Studies of adult
self-attribution suggest that people draw con-
clusions about themselves by examining their
own achievements (Rosenberg, 1981, as cited in
Owens, Mortimer, & Finch, 1996). Adults tend
to more favorably evaluate themselves through
their life-spans even as their baselines for that
assessment change with various life circumstances
(Demo, 1992). Oftentimes, adults will perceive
enhanced “current selves” by disparaging their
past selves (Ross & Wilson, 2003). Excessive
self-assessments may turn into an exercise in
narcissism and self-indulgence:
As with the classic narcissistic personality,
individuals who are engaged in continuous self-
reflection can become “boundless selves” (Har-
greaves, 1994) who learn no limits to their own
egos and desires and overestimate their ability to
transform the world. Thus, in the absence of honest
criticism, young people may be induced to parade
their psyches in public, irrespective of the quality
or worth of their achievements (Hargreaves, Earl,
& Schmidt, 2002, p. 91).
Network prominence (defined as visibility,
connectedness to others, and professional affilia-
tion) has been found to lead to distortions in self-
estimation, with actors not accurately perceiving
their productivity levels. Those who credit their
stature with to their own internal efforts tend to
overestimate their productivity; those who credit
their stature to external circumstances will under-
estimate their productivity (Cerulo, 1990).
Common weaknesses in learner assessments
may involve a lack of full comprehension; not
fully considering questions; wasting time on
unnecessary tasks; misusing the software, and
not exploiting course contents (Hollocks, 2005).
561
 Self-Assessments in Contemporary Adult E-Learning
Online learners may experience challenges to
their learning productivity because of “distracting
elements” defined as advertisements, invitations
to social networks, entertainment, and “content-
heavy web pages” (Assiter, 2008, p. 219). Learners
may be tempted to engage in instant messaging,
email, social networking, building personal web-
pages, checking the news, and playing games, and
this may result in “distractability, impulsivity,
(and) hyperactivity”(Assiter, 2008, pp. 220 - 221).
People are also known to have “selective blind-
ness” in their evaluation of situations (Schaefer,
2009, p. 2).
Not all learning assessable. Also, not all learn-
ing is able to be assessed, and even those that may
be articulated and measured, these may not be
best assessed by the individual learner. Complex
learning domains with nuanced information may
be difficult to evaluate through self-assessments.
One example may involve mixed skills like
muscle memory, physical exertion, (and) spatial
competence (Seitinger, 2009); high-pressure
performances, and physical capabilities (Price &
Sears, 2009, p. 10); and disaster communications,
in an emergency simulation (as in an augmented
reality situation with digital information over-
lays such as GPS mapping visuals, audio feeds,
historical information delivered in a multimedial
way, and others).
WHY FEEDBACK FOR ADULT
E-LEARNER SELF-ASSESSMENT
Adult e-learners use feedback for four general
realms: the areas of human development (actual-
ization of self), community building and social-
izing (collective efficacy, civic health), fulfillment
of workplace and higher education learning
(workplace training and development needs),
and creation and innovation (the advancement of
learning domains). Table 1. “Four Areas Where
Adult E-Learners Apply the Learning Feedback”
showcases four general areas where feedback is
562
critical. At the “Human Development” level may
be the urge for self-actualization and personal
challenge. The “Community Building and So-
cializing” area refers to the need for meaningful
friendships, professional ties, and interactions
with others. The “Fulfillment of Workplace and
Higher Education Learning” deals with the need
for learner for employment and job skills. The
“Creation and Innovation” domain refers to the
particular fields in which adult learners specialize
and their need to create original works and learn-
ing to benefit those fields (and their place in it).
Types of Feedback
E-learning feedback comes in many forms for
online learners. Some of it may be immediate
and real-time; others may be delayed or asyn-
chronous. Feedback may come from scripted
machines that have been programmed to give
particular responses to particular actions; artificial
intelligence programs may offer more stochastic
types of interactivity. Then, there are live human
feedback loops, from peer participants in virtual
spaces or from subject matter experts in formal
courses. Online spaces may offer a mix of scripted
and human responses. Feedback to learners may
fall on a continuum of low to high intensity. There
may be low to high informational value—in
terms of substance; there may be broad variance
between the standardizing of responses vs. their
customizing (to the learner). Feedback may be
delivered through various media: textual, auditory,
visual, video, haptics, or a mix of multi-media
responses. Some feedback may be low-value and
not recorded while other feedback may have huge
implications on people’s credentials, livelihoods,
and careers. The feedback systems may be opaque
on one polar end vs. transparent and visible on the
other. The feedback may be one-to-one (dyadic
relationships), one-to-many (such as a critique
of a team project by a professional in the field),
many-to-one (as in the assessment of a single
learner’s work by a group of practitioners or a
Self-Assessments in Contemporary Adult E-Learning

Table 1. Four Areas Where Adult E-Learners Apply the Learning Feedback

Human Development Community Building and Fulfillment of Workplace and Creation and Innovation
--- Socializing Higher Education Learning ---
(actualization of self) --- --- (the advancement of learning
(collective efficacy, civic (workplace training and domains)
health) development needs)
Learner motivations (and need Stress reduction Credentialing Research and development
for encouragement) Intercommunications Compliance training Creativity
The management of learner Sharing Applied skills Publishing / dissemination
affect Socialization needs Decision supports in the field
The management of learner Empathy Achieving required job skills
arousal and valence Recognition and respect through self-assessments
Human discipline, self-regu- Social competence (Ketchel & Douglass, 1981)
lation Virtual teaming Maintaining workplace rel-
Learner confidence and self- evance
efficacy Continuing competencies
Achievement of adult learner
goals
Emotional intelligence and self-
awareness
Meta-cognition
Learner strategizing and deci-
sion making
Discovery learning
Preview to a high-value test
Learner reflection
Impetus to learner help-seeking
(“failing well”)
Self-help interventions

community of practice), and many-to-many (as
in a virtual community of practitioners).
Not all feedback is created equal. One way to
conceptualize e-learning feedback is as a hierarchy.
At the base of the triangle in Figure 2: “A Hierarchy
of E-Learner Feedback for Self-Assessments” are
the more pre-scripted types of feedback, As one
progresses up the triangle, there’s more human
effort and customizing for feedback for the adult
learners. The feedback transitions from mass-
produced contents to customized “hand-crafted”
contents, from objective to subjective information.
At the top then is adult learner self-assessment,
which is informed by a range of feedback types
and is influenced by learner meta-cognition and
skill sets. Only the adult learner himself or herself
can truly offer insightful and deep self-assessment
based on cumulative learning (and a range of types
of feedback). That integrative approach supports
e-learner development and decision-making for
further learning and professional choices.
That ability to self-assess may also lead to
smoother collective efficacy (Creighton & Singer,
2008, p. 24)
—or the synergies between collaborators
working towards shared outcomes in a virtual
community. “The construct of collective efficacy
extends self-efficacy to organizations and groups,
referring to beliefs about collective capacities
in specific domains” (Carroll, Rosson, & Zhou,
2005, p. 1).
Figure 1, “A Hierarchy of E-Learner Feedback
for Self-Assessments” places the various types of
assessments in a hierarchy with the most simple
ones at the base and building up to the most com-
plex. Pre-designed, automated feedback tends to
be the simplest. Next, there are mirror reflections

563
 Self-Assessments in Contemporary Adult E-Learning

Figure 1. A Hierarchy of E-Learner Feedback for Self-Assessments

that reflect back what an individual has posted in Figure 2. Q&A with Feedback
a space—through substance and metrics (counts
of hits, downloads, others’ comments, and so on).
Then there are artificial intelligence (AI) responses
that are tailored to respondents based on their ac-
tions and their profiles. Then, there’s direct human
feedback, which is more customized and often
more high-value than machine-feedback. There
are mixed-stream feedbacks, which combine hu-
man and machine intelligence for the information.
And at the highest, the e-learning self-assessment
is the top-level to this conceptualization, with
longitudinal and synthesized analysis—that only
learners can bring to their study. This level also
promotes collective efficacy—with the assump-
tion that those who master various skills and are
willing to share their insights will ultimately
support collective efficacy.
Examples follow for each of the hierarchies
above, beginning at the base.

564
Self-Assessments in Contemporary Adult E-Learning
Level 6. Pre-Designed
Automated Feedback
To elaborate, the “6. Pre-designed Automated
Feedback” may refer to simple learning modules
or simple games, which provide factual feedback
through typical true-false, multiple-choice, match-
ing, categorizing, crossword, word-find, flash-
cards, short games, or other types of assessments.
These types of feedback are closed “homeostatic”
ones, without true or open unpredictability. A
common form involves scripted questions, such as
that suggested in Figure 2. “Question and Answer
(Q&A) with Feedback”.
Some types of self-assessments relate to how
well a user may deploy a particular technology or
software program. If the program is unresponsive
after some tries, a user may self-assess from the
software feedback that help-seeking is necessary.
Many software programs offer context-sensitive
help systems that link users directly to informa-
tion that may help them use a particular tool or
achieve a particular task. This just-in-time ap-
proach is a critical design feature of many types
of help systems linked to self-assessments. For
example, a dictionary or thesaurus function is
similar in terms of providing focused information
at a time of user-perceived need. Remote help-
giving may be needed, with necessary “articulation
work and methodical ways” needed to coordinate
the problem-solving between non-experts and
the help desk professionals (Crabtree, O’Neill,
Tolmie, Castellani, Colombino, & Grasso, 2006,
p. 221). ‘Do it yourself’ (DIY) learners often
have to follow instructed actions, troubleshoot
their technologies, and access decision-support
systems; they may even have to de-bug software
(Kissinger, Burnett, Stumpf, Subrahmaniyan,
Beckwith, Yang, & Rosson, 2006).
Various designers are focusing on natural hu-
man help-seeking behaviors and their resistance
to advisement in order to design more supportive
help systems (especially in the areas of “adaptivity,
communications and creativity”) (Willis, 2006,
p. 433). Willis’ “A Combined Model of Human
Help Seeking Behaviour (sic) in an Application
Environment” shows how individuals first must
become aware of their need for help, decide to
seek help, identify potential helpers, use strategies
to elicit help, and then evaluate the help-seeking
episode (Willis, 2006, p. 435). Online learners
on a digital campus are expected to have a wide
range of skills related to information retrieval,
multimedia comprehension, self-management
of time, self-expression regarding ideas and
feelings, interacting constructively with others,
self-assessing, providing critical feedback to
others, and providing help (Godinet, 2003, n.p.),
among others.
Intelligent and humanoid robots are being
designed to deliver unsolicited help in various
contexts to improve human performance but
without offending them: “Help recipients may
feel vulnerable—that their self-esteem and their
control over the task have been threatened” (Tor-
rey, 2008, p. 2653). Prior research on human
recipients of help from other people have raised
concerns: feelings of losing credit for a successful
outcome, fear of others’ perceptions that they’re
incompetent and dependent on others, feelings of
indebtedness to a help giver, and a sense of threat
to “face” (Torrey, 2008, p. 2654).
The following is a scripted public health case
study that includes imagery, story-telling, self-
assessments (with feedback) at various intervals, a
mystery, a flashcard activity with glossary terms,
and then a factual scientific debriefing at the end.
Figure 3, “Mystery in a Feedlot,” shows one screen
in this mystery case.
More complex forms of this foundational type
of learning involves “branching logic,” and the
creation of original learning plans based on con-
tinuous monitoring of learner actions, the learner
profile, prior learners’ preferences, and other types
of relevant data. While scripted, these types of
learning offer a broader range of adaptive pos-
sibilities. Another type would be “parameterized
question” templates (Brusilovsky & Sosnovsky,
565
 Self-Assessments in Contemporary Adult E-Learning
Figure 3. Mystery in a Feedlot
2006, p. 2) that may involve a large-to-infinite
number of potential factors—such as mathemat-
ical or physics or chemical formulas. These are
more complex to build because of the specialized
calculations that must be scripted on the back-end.
Level 5. Mirror Reflections
The next strata “5. Mirror Reflections” indicates
feedback to learners that are a direct replica of what
learners have created and posted, what comments
they have made, and how they’ve participated in
an online site. This feedback loop promotes learner
self-awareness of his / her output. Such a direct
feedback loop involves inherent encouragement
of the learner and is its own reward, a kind of
self-affirmation. Some virtual community sites
may even add analytics that enhance a partici-
pant’s self-awareness, such as by giving him or
her feedback about learning habits, the statistics
on his / her contributions via the site, and even
popularity counts and reputation system indicators,
which may offer a kind of longitudinal awareness
(Adcock, Watson, Morrison, & Belfore, 2008).
In shared remote work sites (and joint-venture
games), there may be computerized reputation
566
systems that indicate a person’s habits, interests,
and contributions. The power of mirror reflections
may be enhanced by comparison of a person’s
works with others’ works, as through e-portfolios
or digital gallery shows. Helping people to be seen,
known, and recognized may eliminate some of the
negative effects of anonymity in a large hybrid
course situation (Guerreiro & Georgouli, 2006).
Some types of exploratory learning, described
as non-expert learning in an unfamiliar realm,
may be enhanced by low-risk feedback through
mirror reflections.
Such mirror reflections may offer multiple
representations of information; for example, an
individual’s contributions to a socio-technical site
may be represented as a listing of text and images,
a statistical chart comparing that individual’s con-
tributions compared to others, or a list of back-end
log-in times and lengths of use of the site.
Level 4. Artificial Intelligence-
Defined Responses
The next level up refers to “4. Artificial Intelli-
gence-Defined Responses”. Artificial intelligence
(AI) appears in numerous places where adult
Self-Assessments in Contemporary Adult E-Learning
e-learners may not think to look. Search engines
may be adapted with a kind of awareness of user’s
search criteria based on past searches using unob-
trusive monitoring. Post-query relevance feedback
helps to improve the system’s performance (White,
Jose, & Ruthven, 2003). Natural language inter-
faces are being used by search engines vs. just
keyword searches (Roussinov & Robles, 2004), to
help learners with their information seeking. Many
of these innovations have been integrated into
larger and more complex datasets—of scientific
data, sensor data, geographical information sys-
tems (GIS)-information sets—and mixed data sets
for new conceptualizations and learning (Abite-
boui, et al., 2005). The authors note: “A semantic
heterogeneity solution capable of deployment at
Web scale remains elusive. Our community must
seriously focus on this issue, or cross-enterprise
information integration will remain a pipe dream”
(Abiteboui, et al., 2005, p. 114).
Recommender systems may be employed to
suggest particular sites or services of interest to a
particular individual based on his / her self-defined
profile, but more importantly, on his / her behav-
iors online (preferences which may be invisible to
the conscious self). 3D immersive virtual worlds
may use AI robots to provide natural language
interactions—through text or through speech.
Some forms of questions and answers (known
as “Q&As”) have become interactive and intel-
ligent, with users and systems taking turns asking
and providing answers, with more sophisticated
information-seeking (Chai, Baldwin & Zhang,
2006). Open-ended modeling may be achieved in
simulation games and virtual spaces (Merrick &
Maher, 2007). Automated assessments of learner
programs may provide feedback to learners about
the efficacy of their designs (Guerreiro & Geor-
gouli, 2006). Such automated self-assessments
offer classroom efficiencies: “Automatic systems
have also been investigated to address the chal-
lenge of improving the consistency, accuracy
and efficiency of marking assessment items in
large…courses” (Blumenstein, Green, Nguyen,
& Muthu, 2004, p. 67).
Intelligent tutor agents may offer AI-inspired
counsel to learners as they make their way through
a new curriculum. Humanoid avatars may use
natural language to communicate by text or orally
with human-embodied avatars. Plenty of research
has gone into the building of embodied conversa-
tional agents and how to design them to be more
persuasive to learners (such as building them to
look more like the actual human interactor) (Li,
Forlizzi, Dey, & Kiesler, 2007). The design of
interface agents does matter in terms of impres-
sions (Baylor, Rosenberg-Kima, & Plant, 2006),
and “coolness” enhances attitudes towards the
message (p. 526). Virtual peers have been designed
to spark human learner motivation based on the
research that human-peer models can be positive
influences (Kim, Hamilton, Zheng, & Baylor,
2006). Here, animated virtual peers worked to
“scaffold college students’ motivation towards
lesson-planning tasks” (Kim, Hamilton, Zheng,
& Baylor, 2006, p. 335).
Level 3. Direct Human Feedback
The next level up refers to “3. Direct Human Feed-
back”. Human-to-human feedback may range from
personalized between-friends interchanges to be-
tween-strangers ones on ad hoc human networks.
They may be frivolous, or they may be profound.
Virtual teaming and collaborations—whether on
tabletop collaborative spaces, augmented reality
workspaces or studios, web conferencing, wikis,
or specially designed collaboration sites (such as
for book editing, open-source software develop-
ment, photo sharing, video sharing, or digital audio
sharing)—require human interactions. People
may interact and provide feedback regarding each
other’s work or performance. Professional good
will and professional standards may encourage
the sharing of expertise with those working in
open-source endeavors (Zhao & Deek, 2006).
Instructors may provide human feedback during
567
 Self-Assessments in Contemporary Adult E-Learning
office hours, during live critiques, or even dur-
ing a learner’s presentation. Peer assessments
involve feedback and critique skills that inform the
learner’s self-assessment. Matrices are often used
to collect insights from others—whether peers or
subject matter experts (SMEs). Discovery learning
often involves the need to connect with others with
desired expertise, sometimes achieved through the
expertise locator systems on the Web or networks
(Ehrlich & Shami, 2008). Often, people conduct
social comparisons with others in a community
to self-assess (Cerulo, 1990).
Level 2. Mixed-Stream Feedback
“2. Mixed-Stream Feedback” involves the com-
bining of multiple channels of information. For
example, a live interaction may involve multiple
information streams onto a desktop computer—a
live Webcam feed along with sensor indicators,
satellite imagery, and datamining. This coalescing
of information streams has become more typical
as the need for more complex live information
has come to the fore.
Level 1. E-Learner Self-Assessment
(with Collective Efficacy)
At the pinnacle of the triangle is “1. E-Learner
Self-Assessment (with Collective Efficacy),”
and the concept is that this is arrived at through
a range of machine and social learning feedback
in various learning contexts. The adult learner
is the only one with a full memory of all past
learning, feedbacks from the digital environ-
ment, inputs from other people (both informal
and formal), and feedback from his or her own
self-messaging. Only the learner can apply his /
her personal sensibilities and value systems to
the understandings of what’s important for his /
her own personal, professional, and other goals.
A number of software helps learners brainstorm
ideas, form self-knowledge (through heuristics
and other tested instruments), and then offered
568
documentation devices (such as bubble diagrams
and digital notebooks) to capture their ideas. It is
hoped that with the support of others that creative
and emancipator education may be achievable,
even through less formal channels. If the low-
est level of the triangle deals with convergent,
pre-specified or “closed” assessments, then this
top level of learner self-assessment may be seen
to deal with “divergent assessments” with more
open-ended tasks (Torrance & Pryor, 1998, 2001,
as cited in Yorke, 2003, p. 480). The more knowl-
edge-intensive types of learning are addressed
here. For formative assessments to be effective,
the feedback quality must be high (Yorke, 2003).
Human self-assessment has high consequen-
tial validity in the long term because this affects
lifelong decisions and career choices, including
aspirational ones.
Without informative feedback on what they do,
students will have relatively little by which to
chart their development. This implicitly hints at
the criterion of ‘consequential validity’ (Boud
1995). Boud’s point is that, whilst feedback may
have some effect in the short term, sight should
not be lost of the potential impact in the longer
term. When there is a positive deferred effect on
learning, consequential validity is high - but if
the feedback encourages learning counter to that
desired (perhaps ‘surface’learning) then the con-
sequential validity is low (Yorke, 2003, p. 483).
DISCUSSION
The formulation of rich feedback for adult learn-
ers is magnified by the communicative strengths
of the WWW and Internet. This dynamic is ex-
plained in Figure 4, “Types of Electronic Learning,
E-Learning Technologies, and Feedback Types
for Self-Assessments in the Adult E-Learning
Environment.” The column “Types of Electronic
Learning” enumerate various types of learning
that is achieved online. The “E-Learning Tech-
Self-Assessments in Contemporary Adult E-Learning
Figure 4. Types of Electronic Learning, E-Learning Technologies, and Feedback Types for Self-Assessments
in the Adult E-Learning Environment
nologies” column describes some of the technolo-
gies used to achieve those types of learning. The
“Feedback Types for Learner Self-Assessment”
describes some feedback types used in those e-
learning contexts.
Initial Self-Assessment Design
Considerations
Self-assessments, while often built around learning
objectives, tend to be built in an ad hoc way rather
than on the basis of learning theory (Yorke, 2003).
The research literature and practice suggest that
there are some best practices: prompt (Heaney
& Daly, 2004) or immediate feedback (Isbister,
Höök, Sharp, & Laaksolahti, 2006); personalized
learner support (Dolog & Sintek, 2004), and engag-
ing to learners (Chanel, Rebetez, Bétrancourt, &
Pun, 2008). Those who would development assess-
ments need to follow through with the development
process (McGuire, 1995). Learners themselves
have to be receptive to feedback (Yorke, 2003,
p. 488) for effective self-assessments. How they
cope with “disconfirming evidence” or negative
feedback may affect adult learners’ long-term
learning. “Learned dependence” on instructors
(or even socio-technical structures) may result
in adult learners not achieving their full potential
(Yorke, 2003, p. 489).
Considering the following design questions,
in Table 1, may be helpful in the design of an
adult e-learner self-assessment. Self-assessments
offer opt-in and opt-out possibilities, so ensuring
that they are engaging and beneficial to learners
is important.
The above considerations—defined main
purpose, informational value, assessment valida-
tion, user privacy, engaging, self-assessment
versioning, accessibility, technology, legality, and
general security—are fundamental ones, and the
differing learning contexts will likely add other
elements for consideration.
Future Self-Assessments
for E-Learning
The area of self-assessments in adult e-learning is
a broad one. How these may be constructed and
569
 Self-Assessments in Contemporary Adult E-Learning

Table 1. Potential Self-Assessment Design Questions

Potential Design Questions Potential Design Responses

Defined Main Purpose: What is the main purpose of the self- €€€€€• Feedback about knowledge
assessment? (Does this clearly relate to the stated learning objectives €€€€€• Feedback about skills
of the addressed subject matter?) €€€€€• A gaps analysis for defined learning (Gerhardt, 2007)
€€€€€• Learner encouragement
€€€€€• Entertainment
€€€€€• Branched logic for next steps in the learning process
€€€€€• Increase of learner self-knowledge
€€€€€• Increase of learner self-management and discipline
€€€€€• Increase of learner self-agency in future decision-making
€€€€€• Leading to deep insights
€€€€€• Leading to creativity and innovations
Informational Value: Is the self-assessment accurate to the particular €€€€€• Accurate information
learning domain (and to interdisciplinary domains)? Is the assessment €€€€€• Timely information
information timely? Is the self-assessment clear and understandable? €€€€€• Clear and simple language
Assessment Validation: Has the self-assessment been tested for €€€€€• Item analysis (no multicollinearity, no biased phrasing)
validity? Has the self-assessment been user-tested? Does the self- €€€€€• Reliability testing
assessment have to be aligned with a traditional assessment? €€€€€• Construct validity
€€€€€• Avoidance of bias
€€€€€• Correct scales
User Privacy: Does the adult learner have control over the information €€€€€• Adult learner control over the results
from the self-assessment? If any part of the responses are used for €€€€€• No personally identifiable information
research, are adult learners fully informed and giving of consent, and €€€€€• Informed consent for research
can they opt out? Is any information collected personally identifiable
or collected in the aggregate?
Engaging: Is the self-assessment motivating for adult e-learners to €€€€€• Engaging for adult e-learners
use it? Is it designed to be aesthetic and attractive? €€€€€• Eye-catching
Self-Assessment Versioning: Is the self-assessment appropriate to €€€€€• Developmental level
the developmental level, language, culture, and other aspects of those €€€€€• Language
taking the self-assessment? Are there variations to accommodate the €€€€€• Cultural sensitivity
varying needs of potential adult learners? €€€€€• Variations
€€€€€• Personalization to learners
Accessibility: Is the self-assessment fully accessible based on €€€€€• Accessibility standards
current standards? Do users have full control of the pacing of the €€€€€• User pacing
self-assessment?
Technology: Was the appropriate technology used for the creation of €€€€€• Technology appropriate to the assessment
the assessment and the deployment? Is the assessment portable? Does €€€€€• Portable
it interact well within technological systems and with other learning €€€€€• Smooth interactions
objects? Is the self-assessment easy to update? €€€€€• Easily updatable
€€€€€• Easily versionable for different contextual uses (Steichen,
Lawless, O’Connor, & Wade, 2009, p. 119)
Legality: Is the self-assessment necessary? Are there clearly defined €€€€€• Self-assessment value
limits of the self-assessment (such as through disclaimers)? €€€€€• Disclaimer
General Security: Is there data integrity? Is the data secure? Is €€€€€• Data integrity
the system secure? Are users properly authenticated (if necessary)? €€€€€• Data security
€€€€€• Secure system
€€€€€• Identity authentication

applied in various learning domains would be
important to explore. Researchers have mentioned
self-assessment “environments,” which seem to
be promising, too (Mochizuki, Kato, Nishimori,
Hisamatsu, Yaegashi, & Ozawa, 2005).
The move towards more self-assessments
is part of assessment reform, which is focusing
more on creative ways to assess cumulative and
longitudinal work. “Assessment reform is not con-
nected to compliance with mandates but is rooted

570
Self-Assessments in Contemporary Adult E-Learning
in the constructivist view that learning depends
on self-monitoring and reflection” (Hargreaves,
Earl, & Schmidt, 2002, p. 84). This movement
has been part of the endeavor to promote student-
centeredness in the learning.
The emphasis on ubiquity in e-learning taps into
the wireless fidelity (wifi) capabilities of many lo-
cales around the world. Mobile-deliverable simple
assessments may be delivered, responded to, and
then recorded into online learning management
systems. Short message service (SMS) messages
are used to give quizzes to learners in Pakistan
and to offer learners real-time feedback and then
linked references for further learning (Wains &
Mahmood, 2008). Some large-size online courses
in developing countries involve the random se-
lection of a number of student works for critique
as “models,” and the other learners use those as
exemplars for their own self-assessment of their
work. Real-time micro-blogging has also been
used to provide human feedback to remote learn-
ing teams in the field in foreign language learning
(Ullrich, Borau, Luo, Tan, Shen, & Shen, 2008).
The move to augmented realities and ambi-
ent-intelligence-spaces will likely mean more
insightful designs of feedback for adult learner
self-assessment which benefit from locations
and physical spaces. Location-sensitive self-
assessments is an as-yet untapped field.
CONCLUSION
Adult e-learner self-assessments are a critical part
of open and discovery learning. These also play
an important role in more formal settings such as
work places and higher education classrooms. The
design of self-assessments (a kind of instructive
feedback) and learner feedback will be critical
for quality e-learning in its many forms. There is
so much more of an expectation of deep learn-
ing through automated and self-directed learning
than there has been in the past. The research in
this area as applied in contemporary e-learning is
a nascent one. Regarding Sun Tzu’s quote from
antiquity, self-assessments help adult learners
know themselves; knowing their enemies, well,
will require something more.
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
Thanks to R. Max.
REFERENCES
Abiteboui, S. (2005). The Lowell database research
self-assessment. Communications of the ACM,
48(5), 111–118. doi:10.1145/1060710.1060718
Adcock, A. B., Watson, G. S., Morrison, G. R., &
Belfore, L. A. (2008). The design of an electronic
self-regulation skill notebook for the development
of meta-cognitive strategies and self-assessment
in digital game-based learning environments. In
Proceedings of the 2008 SpringSim: The spring
simulation multiconference (pp. 797-801). Ot-
tawa, Canada.
Andrade, H. (2008). Self-assessment through
rubrics. Educational Leadership, 65(4), 60–63.
Angelo, T. A., & Cross, K. P. (1993). Classroom
assessment techniques: A handbook for college
teachers (2nd ed.). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Argyris, C. (1993). Knowledge for action: A guide
to overcoming barriers to organizational change.
San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Assiter, K. (2008). Attention and learning in the
connected classroom. Journal of Computing Sci-
ences in Colleges, 24(1), 219–226.
Bartholomé, T., Stahl, E., & Bromme, R. (2004).
Help-seeking in interactive learning environ-
ments: Effectiveness of help and learner-related
factors in a dyadic setting. In Proceedings of the
International Conference on Learning Sciences
(pp. 81-88). Santa Monica, California: ACM.
571
 Self-Assessments in Contemporary Adult E-Learning
Becerra-Fernandez, I. (2006). Searching for
experts on the Web: A review of contempo-
rary expertise locator systems. ACM Transac-
tions on Internet Technology, 6(4), 333–355.
doi:10.1145/1183463.1183464
Blumenstein, M., Green, S., Nguyen, A., &
Muthukkumarasamy, V. (2004). An experimental
analysis of GAME: A generic automated marking
environment. In Proceedings of the ITiCSE ’04:
The 9th Annual Conference on Innovation and
Technology in Computer Science Education (pp.
67-71). Leeds, United Kingdom: ACM.
Bromham, L., & Oprandi, P. (2006). Evolution
online: Using a virtual learning environment to
develop active learning in undergraduates. Journal
of Biological Education, 41(1), 21–25.
Brookhart, S. M., Andolina, M., Zuza, M., &
Furman, R. (2004). Minute math: An action
research study of student self-assessment. Edu-
cational Studies in Mathematics, 57(2), 213–227.
doi:10.1023/B:EDUC.0000049293.55249.d4
Brusilovsky, P., & Sosnovsky, S. (2006). Individu-
alized exercises for self-assessment of program-
ming knowledge: An evaluation of QuizPACK.
ACM Journal of Educational Resources in Com-
puting, 5(3), 1–22. doi:10.1145/1163405.1163406
Carroll, J. M., Rosson, M. B., & Zhou, J. (2005).
Collective efficacy as a measure of community.
In Proceedings of the CHI 2005: Conference on
Human Factors in Computing Systems (pp. 1-10).
Portland, Oregon: ACM.
Castronova, E. (2007). Exodus to the virtual world:
How online fun is changing reality. New York:
Palgrave MacMillan.
Cerulo, K. A. (1990). To err is social: Network
prominence and its effects on self-estimation.
Sociological Forum, 5(4), 619–634. doi:10.1007/
BF01115394
572
Chai, J. Y., Baldwin, T., & Zhang, C. (2006).
Automated performance assessment in interactive
QA. In Proceedings of the SIGIR ’06: 29th Annual
International ACM Conference on Research and
Development in Information Retrieval (pp. 631-
632). Seattle, Washington: ACM.
Chanel, G., Rebetez, C., Bétrancourt, M., & Pun,
T. (2008). Boredom, engagement and anxiety as
indicators for adaptation to difficulty in games.
In [Tampere, Finland: ACM.]. Proceedings of the
MindTrek, 08, 13–17.
Chang, C.-C., & Tseng, K.-H. (2009). Use and
performances of Web-based portfolio assessment.
British Journal of Educational Technology, 40(2),
358–370. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8535.2008.00885.x
Crabtree, A., O’Neill, J., Tolmie, P., Castellani, S.,
Colombino, T., & Grasso, A. (2006). The practical
indispensability of articulation work to immediate
and remote help-giving. In Proceedings of the
CSCW ’06: Computer Supported Cooperative
Work (pp. 219-228). Banff, Alberta, Canada: ACM.
Creighton, O., & Singer, M. (2008). Who leads
our future leaders? On the rising relevance of
social competence in software development. In
Proceedings of the LMSA: The First International
Workshop on Leadership and Management in
Software Architecture (pp. 23-25). Leipzig, Ger-
many: ACM.
Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1991). Flow: The psychol-
ogy of optimal experience. New York: Harper
Collins.
Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1996). Creativity: Flow
and the psychology of discovery and invention.
New York: Harper Collins.
Demo, D. H. (1992). The self-concept over time:
Research issues and directions. Annual Review
of Sociology, 18, 303–326. doi:10.1146/annurev.
so.18.080192.001511
Self-Assessments in Contemporary Adult E-Learning
Dolog, P., & Sintek, M. (2004). Personalization in
distributed e-learning environments. In Proceed-
ings of the WWW 2004: World Wide Web (pp.
170-179). New York, New York, USA: ACM.
Ehrlich, K., & Shami, N. S. (2008). Searching for
expertise. In CHI 2008 Proceedings: Conference
on Human Factors in Computer Systems (pp.
1093-1096). Florence, Italy: ACM.
Faber, B. D. (2002). Educational models and open
source: Resisting the proprietary university. In
Proceedings of the SIGDOC ’02: Special Interest
Group on Design of Communication (pp. 31-38).
Toronto, Ontario, Canada: ACM.
Gajadhar, B. J., de Kort, Y. A. W., & Ijsselsteijn,
W. A. (2008). Influence of social setting on player
experience of digital games. In Proceedings of
the CHI 2008: ACM Special Interest Group on
Computer Human Interaction (pp. 3099-3104).
Florence, Italy: ACM.
Gattis, L. F. (2002). Planning and information
foraging theories and their value to the novice
technical communicator. In Proceedings of the
SIGDOC ’02: Special Interest Group on Design
of Communication (pp. 39-43). Toronto, Ontario,
Canada: ACM.
Geeslin, K. L. (2003). Student self-assessment
in the foreign language classroom: The place of
authentic assessment instruments in the Spanish
language classroom. Hispania, 86(4), 857–868.
doi:10.2307/20062958
Gerhardt, M. (2007). Teaching self-management:
The design and implementation of self-manage-
ment tutorials. Journal of Education for Business,
83(1), 11–17. doi:10.3200/JOEB.83.1.11-18
Godbole-Chaudhuri, P., Winters, F. I., Azevedo,
R., & Hofman, N. (2006). Help-seeking behavior
and learning with hypermedia. In Proceedings
of the ICLS 2006: The 9th Annual International
Conference of the Learning Sciences (pp. 928-
929). Bloomington, Indiana, USA.
Godinet, H. (n.p.). (2003). Distant actors on
a digital campus, or sharing and crumbling
pedagogical responsibility. Australian Computer
Society: ACM.
Guerreiro, P., & Georgouli, K. (2006). Combat-
ing anonymousness in populous CS1 and CS2
courses. In Proceedings of the ITiCSE ’06: The 11th
Annual Conference on Innovation and Technol-
ogy in Computer Science Education (pp. 8-12).
Bologna, Italy: ACM.
Gupta, S., & Bostrom, R. P. (2006). End-user
training methods: What we know, need to know.
In Proceedings of the SIGMIS – CPR ’06: Spe-
cial Interest Group on Management Information
Systems – Computer Personnel Research (pp.
172-182). Claremont, California, USA: ACM.
Hamada, M. (2007). Web-based tools for active
learning in information theory. In Proceedings of
the SIGCSE ’07: Special Interest Group on Com-
puter Science Education (pp. 60-64). Covington,
Kentucky: ACM.
Hanson, J. H., & Williams, J. M. (2008). Using
writing assignments to improve self-assessment
and communication skills in an engineering stat-
ics course. Journal of Engineering Education,
97, 515–529.
Hargreaves, A., Earl, L., & Schmidt, M. (2002).
Perspectives on alternate assessment reform.
American Educational Research Journal, 39(1),
69–95. doi:10.3102/00028312039001069
Hauer, A., & Daniels, M. (2008). A learning theory
perspective on running open ended group projects
(OEGPs). In Proceedings of the Tenth Australasian
Computing Education Conference (pp. 85-91).
Wollongong, Australia: Conferences in Research
and Practice in Information Technology.
Hollocks, B. (2005). Assessing simulation learning
in higher education. In Proceedings of the 2005
Winter Simulation Conference (pp. 2297-2503).
Orlando, Florida.
573
 Self-Assessments in Contemporary Adult E-Learning
Isbister, K., Höök, K., Sharp, M., & Laaksolahti, J.
(2006). The sensual evaluation instrument: Devel-
oping an affective evaluation tool. In Proceedings
of the CHI 2006: Conference on Human Factors
in Computer Systems (pp. 1163-1172). Montréal,
Québec, Canada: ACM.
Ishaya, T., & Wood, D. (2005). Enhancing ef-
fective ePortfolios through agents. In Proceed-
ings of the ICALT ’05: Fifth IEEE International
Conference on Advanced Learning Technologies
(pp. 1 -5). IEEE.
Kay, J., Li, L., & Fekete, A. (2007). Learner
reflection in student self-assessment. Australian
Computer Society, Inc. In Proceedings of the 9th
Austalasian Conference on Computing Educa-
tion, 66 (pp. 89-95). Ballarat, Victoria, Australia.
Ketchel, J. S., & Douglass, J. R. (1981). Self-
assessment as a precursor to professional de-
velopment. In Proceedings of the Association
of Computing Machinery ’81 Conference (pp.
184-187). New York: ACM.
Kim, Y., Hamilton, E. R., Zheng, J., & Baylor,
A. L. (2006). Scaffolding learner motivation
through a virtual peer. In Proceedings of the ICLS
2006: International Conference of the Learning
Sciences (pp. 335-341). Bloomington, Indiana,
USA: Indiana University.
Kissinger, C., Burnett, M., Stumpf, S., Subrah-
maniyan, N., Beckwith, L., Yang, S., & Rosson,
M. B. (2006). Supporting end-user debugging:
What do users want to know? In Proceedings
of the AVI ’06: Advanced Visual Interfaces (pp.
135-142). Venezia, Italy: ACM.
Lacroix, J., Saini, P., & Goris, A. (2009). Under-
standing user cognitions to guide the tailoring of
persuasive technology-based physical activity
interventions. In [Claremont, California, USA.].
Proceedings of the Persuasive, 09, 1–8.
574
Li, I., Forlizzi, J., Dey, A., & Kiesler, S. (2007).
My agent as myself or another: Effects on cred-
ibility and listening to advice. In Proceedings of the
Designing Pleasurable Products and Interfaces
(pp. 194-208). Helsinki, Finland.
McGuire, E. G. (1995). Software development
teams: The challenges of meeting global complex-
ity with self assessment and process control. In
Proceedings of the’95 Engineering Management
Conference: Emerging Trends in the Asia Pacific
(pp. 190-195). Singapore: IEEE.
McMillan, J. H., & Hearn, J. (2009). Student
self-assessment: The key to stronger student
motivation and higher achievement. Education
Digest, 74(8), 39–44.
Merriam, S. B., & Caffarella, R. S. (1999). Learn-
ing in adulthood: A comprehensive guide (2nd
ed.). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Merrick, K. (2008). Modeling motivation for adap-
tive nonplayer characters in dynamic computer
game worlds. ACM Computers in Entertainment,
5(4), 5:1-5:32.
Merrick, K., & Maher, M. L. (2007). Motivated
reinforcement learning for adaptive characters
in open-ended simulation games. In Proceedings
of the ACE ’07: Advances in Computer Enter-
tainment Technology (pp. 127-134). Salzburg,
Austria: ACM.
Mochizuki, T., Kato, H., Nishimori, T., Hisamatsu,
S., Yaegashi, K., & Ozawa, S. (2005). A design
of self-assessment environment in project-based
learning: Monitoring and reorganizing tasks and
division of labor. In Proceedings of the ITHET
6th Annual International Conference: Information
Technology Based Higher Education and Training
(pp. F2D-1 to F2D-6). Juan Dolio, Dominican
Republic. IEEE.
Self-Assessments in Contemporary Adult E-Learning

Murphy, L., & Tenenberg, J. (2005). Do com- Schaefer, R. (2009). Software maturity: Design as
puter science students know what they know?: dark art. SIGSOFT Software Engineering Notes,
A calibration study of data structure knowledge. 34(1), 1–36. doi:10.1145/1457516.1457528
In Proceedings of the ITiCSE ’05: The 10th An-
Segall, A. (1990). A Community Survey of Self-
nual Conference on Innovation and Technology
Medication Activities. Medical Care, 28(4), 301-
in Computer Science Education (pp. 148-152).
310. Retrieved August 29, 2009, from http://www.
Monte de Caparica, Portugal: ACM.
jstor.org/stable/3765694
Neris, V. P. A., Anacleto, J. C., Mascarenhas, S., &
Seitinger, S. (2009). Designing for spatial com-
Neto, A. T. (2005). Hyper documents with quality
petence. In Proceedings of the IDC 2009: Inter-
for distance learning: Cognitive strategies to help
national Conference on Interaction Design and
teachers in the navigational project and content
Children (pp. 123-130). Como, Italy: ACM.
organization. In Proceedings of the 11th Brazilian
Symposium on Multimedia and the Web (pp. 1- 7). Shen, L., Wang, M., & Shen, R. (2009). Affective
Pocos de Caldas, Minas Gerais, Brazil: ACM. e-learning: Using ‘emotional’ data to improve
learning in pervasive learning environment.
Owens, T. J., Mortimer, J. T., & Finch, M. D.
Journal of Educational Technology & Society,
(1996). Self-determination as a source of self-
12(2), 176–189.
esteem in adolescence. Social Forces, 74(4),
1377–1404. doi:10.2307/2580355 Simŏes, A. R. M., & Papanastasiou, E. C. (2002).
Evaluating the usefulness and properties of a
Price, K. J., & Sears, A. (2009). The development
subjective assessment of Brazilian Portuguese.
and evaluation of performance-based functional
Hispania, 85(3), 618–628. doi:10.2307/4141151
assessment: A methodology for the measurement
of physical capabilities. ACM Transactions on Starr, C. W., Manaris, B., & Stalvey, R. H.
Accessible Computing, 2(2), 10:1-10:31. (2008). Bloom’s Taxonomy revisited: Speci-
fying assessable learning objectives in com-
Qu, Y., & Furnas, G. W. (2005). Sources of struc-
puter science. In [Portland, Oregon: ACM.].
ture in sensemaking. In Proceedings of the CHI
Proceedings of the SIGCSE, 08, 261–265.
2005: Conference on Human Factors in Computer
doi:10.1145/1352322.1352227
Systems. Portland, Oregon, USA, ACM.
Steichen, B., Lawless, S., O’Connor, A., & Wade,
Ross, M., & Wilson, A. E. (2003). Autobiographi-
V. (2009). Dynamic hypertext generation for reus-
cal memory and conceptions of self: Getting better
ing open corpus content. In [Torino, Italy: ACM.].
all the time. Current Directions in Psychologi-
Proceedings of the HT, 09, 119–128.
cal Science, 12(2), 66–69. doi:10.1111/1467-
8721.01228 Teixeira, J., Vinhas, V., Oliveira, E., & Reis, L. P.
(2008). A new approach to emotion assessment
Roussinov, D., & Robles, J. (2004). Learning
based on biometric data. In Proceedings of the 2008
patterns to answer open domain questions on the
IEEE / WIC / ACM International Conference on
Web. In [Sheffield, South Yorkshire, UK: ACM.].
Web Intelligence and Intelligent Agent Technology
Proceedings of the SIGIR, 04, 500–501.
(pp. 505-511). Sydney, Australia: IEEE.
Saini, P., & Lacroix, J. (2009). Self-setting of
physical activity goals and effects on perceived
difficulty, importance ad competence. In Per-
suasive ’09. Claremont, California, USA: ACM.

575
 Self-Assessments in Contemporary Adult E-Learning
Torrey, C. (2008). Social and psychological reac-
tions to receiving help from a robot. In Proceedings
of the CHI 2008: Conference on Human Factors
in Computer Systems (pp. 2653-2656). Florence,
Italy: ACM.
Ullrich, C., Borau, K., Luo, H., Tan, X., Shen, L.,
& Shen, R. (2008). Why Web 2.0 is good for learn-
ing and for research: Principles and prototypes. In
Proceedings of the WWW 2008: Social Networks
& Web 2.0 – Applications & Infrastructures for
Web 2.0 (pp. 705-714). Beijing, China: ACM.
Wains, S. I., & Mahmood, W. (2008). Integrat-
ing m-learning with e-learning. In [Cincinnati,
Ohio, USA: ACM.]. Proceedings of the SIGITE,
08, 31–37.
Walsted, W. B. (2001). Improving assessment in
university economics. The Journal of Economic
Education, 32(3), 281–294.
Watterson, P. (2007). Self-assessment helps
classroom focus on learning and understanding.
Science Scope, 61–62.
White, R. W., Jose, J. M., & Ruthven, I. (2003).
An approach for implicitly detecting information
needs. In [New Orleans, Louisiana, USA: ACM.].
Proceedings of the CIKM, 03, 504–507.
Willis, M. (2006). Building effective help systems:
Modelling (sic) human help seeking behaviour
(sic). In [Sydney, Australia: ACM.]. Proceedings
of the OZCHI, 2006, 433–436.
Yi, J. S., Kang, Y., Stasko, J. T., & Jacko, J. A.
(2008). Understanding and characterizing insights:
How do people gain insights using information
visualization? In Proceedings of the BELIV ’08
(pp. 1-6). Florence, Italy: ACM.
Yorke, M. (2003). Formative assessment in higher
education: Moves towards theory and the enhance-
ment of pedagogic practice. Higher Education,
45(4), 477–501. doi:10.1023/A:1023967026413
576
Yu, J., Jiang, Z., & Chan, H. C. (2007). Knowledge
contribution in problem solving virtual communi-
ties: the mediating role of individual motivations.
In Proceedings of the SIGMIS – CPR ’07: Spe-
cial Interest Group on Management Information
Systems – Computer Personnel Research (pp.
144-152). St. Louis, Missouri, USA: ACM.
Zhao, L., & Deek, F. P. (2006). Exploratory
inspection—A learning model for improving
open source software usability. In Proceedings
of the CHI 2006: Conference on Human Factors
in Computer Systems (pp. 1589-1594). Montréal,
Québec, Canada: ACM.
KEY TERMS AND DEFINITIONS
Artificial Intelligence (AI) Tutor: A robot
that provides tutor support to a learner based on
artificial intelligence designs.
Andragogy: Instructional strategies for teach-
ing adults.
Artificial Intelligence (AI): The emulation of
human intelligence (in terms of assessment and
decision-making) by machine intelligence or a
software program.
Autonomous: Independent, self-governing,
self-deciding.
Branching Logic: A type of customization that
changes the course of learning based on learner
performance.
Discovery Learning: Learner-driven pursuit
of knowledge and skills, often through designed
online learning spaces.
Forage: To seek provisions (of information).
Formative: Contributing to development (as
in an assessment that contributes to the learning
rather than assessing attained knowledge or skill
levels only).
Help-Seeking: The act of looking for assis-
tance or support—from technological systems,
socio-technical systems, experts, and others.
Self-Assessments in Contemporary Adult E-Learning
Individualized: Customized, unique or spe-
cific to the individual.
Learned Dependence: The subjective per-
ception of a learner’s reliance on the instructor
to define a task, which restricts the learner’s full
capabilities.
Monitoring: Surveillance.
Problem Solving Virtual Communities (PS-
VCs): Virtual communities built around shared
problem-solving and related learning, trouble-
shooting, and creativity.
Self Assessment: To evaluate oneself and
one’s abilities based on evaluative feedback and
other information.
577
578

Chapter 34
Effects of Basic Computer
Training on the Self-Efficacy
of Adult Learner’s Utilization
of Online Learning
Gregory C. Petty
University of Tennessee, Knoxville, USA

Iryna P. Loboda
University of Tennessee, Knoxville, USA

ABSTRACT
As more studies investigate the effectiveness of online instruction for adult learners it is important not
to overlook the effects of computer self-efficacy of students. Online learning requires a certain level
of computer skill for the student to be successful. This chapter explores the value and efficacy of basic
computer training to improve the effectiveness of instruction in an online learning environment. Included
is a review of self-efficacy related to online learning and the results of a quasi experimental study that
reinforces the value of basic computer training for improving the adult learners’ self-efficacy.

INTRODUCTION manner to attain certain goals (Ormrod, 2006).

The purpose of this chapter is to develop a
theoretical framework for studying the effects of
computer self-efficacy and applying these results
to online learning. There is evidence to suggest
that computer training can be a significant factor in
improved computer self-efficacy (Loboda, 2002;
Karsten & Roth, 1998; Smith, 1994; Torkzadeh
& Koufteros, 1994). Self-efficacy is the belief
that one is capable of performing in a certain
DOI: 10.4018/978-1-61692-906-0.ch034
Psychologist Albert Bandura proposed the theory
of self-efficacy to help explain how we approach
goals, tasks, and challenges (Bandura, 1977). In
other words, Bandura says that if you have high
self-efficacy toward a task you are more likely to
make more of an effort, and persist longer than
those of a low self-efficacy (Bandura, 2001). Im-
proving computer self-efficacy could help students
perform better in online coursework.
As instructors strive to improve their efficiency
and effectiveness, a possible instructional link
Effects of Basic Computer Training on the Self-Efficacy of Adult Learner’s Utilization of Online Learning
has important implications for course design and
the instructional development of basic computer
training (Loboda, 2002). She further suggested that
many adult learning programs require that students
take a basic computer course that includes online
instruction as a prerequisite to their program of
studies. These courses are intended to provide
learners with basic computer competencies nec-
essary for their academic and professional work
(Petty, 1999). At issue is whether these prerequisite
courses have value in improving adult learners
online course performance (Loboda, 2002).
Bandura (2001) introduced the theory of self-
efficacy that the social changes or the agentic
perspective from individuals’ self-development,
adaptation, and self-renewal was a core feature
of metacognitive ability of self-efficacy. He
argued that rapid informational and technologi-
cal advances in education place a premium on
personal efficacy for academic achievements
(Bandura, 2001). He further added that with the
rapid technological changes we are experiencing
in education, much of the knowledge we gain
and technical skills we develop become quickly
obsolete. Today information communication
technologies provide innumerable educational
opportunities. Unfortunately with these wonder-
ful technologies are the dangers of failures and
students need to be confident in their capabilities
to control their own learning (Petty, Lim, & Zu-
lauf, 2007). Persistent and self-confident learners
are more likely to succeed in the academic life
(Loboda, 2002).
As has been pointed out by many scholars
the utilization of online instruction is becoming
a common instructional method in adult educa-
tion (Barnard, 1997; De-Verneil & Berge, 2000;
Driscoll, 1999; Hill, 2000; Khan, 1997; Kirschner
& Paas, 2001; Loboda, 2002; Molenda & Sul-
livan, 2000; Owston, 1997; Petty, 1999; Petty,
Lim, & Zulauf, 2007; Worley, 2000). There has
been a similar growth in the use of online in busi-
ness and industry as well (Petty, Lim, & Zulauf,
2007). Many corporations, government agencies,
and training organizations increasingly introduce
online courses in their instruction delivery systems
(McCarthy, 2002).
Improving one’s self-efficacy via introductory,
prerequisite computer courses in program cur-
ricula may improve the overall performance of
students in online learning courses. The simple task
of requiring an introductory information systems
course as an early prerequisite of an undergraduate
program could markedly improve performance in
an adult learning program based on information
communication technologies (Karsten & Roth,
1998; Loboda, 2002; Smith, 1994; Teo, 2009;
Torkzadeh & Koufteros, 1994).
BACKGROUND
Self-Efficacy
Bandura (1986) proposed the concept of self-
efficacy as a central component of social cognitive
theory. Self-efficacy refers to judgments people
make about their abilities to do a specific task
or act in a specific situation. According to social
cognitive theory and research (Bandura, 1986,
1997; Hackett, 1995; Pajares, 1997; Pervin &
John, 2001; Pintrich & Schunk, 1995; Zimmer-
man, 1995) self-efficacy judgments influence
the choice of activities, degree of effort, period
of persistence, coping with situations, emotion,
and eventually, performance.
Earlier studies found evidence that computer
training and experience significantly improved
computer self-efficacy (Karsten & Roth, 1998;
Smith, 1994; Torkzadeh & Koufteros, 1994). One
might expect that computer training affect online
instruction self-efficacy as well. When applying
the concept of self-efficacy to online instruction,
an individual who has a strong sense of capability
in dealing with computers and online instruction
can be expected to be more successful in online
learning. Consequently, students’ beliefs in their
ability to perform successfully in online environ-
579
 Effects of Basic Computer Training on the Self-Efficacy of Adult Learner’s Utilization of Online Learning
ment may directly affect their academic achieve-
ments and performance (Kitsantas & Chow, 2007;
Loboda, 2002; Reinhart, 1999).
Rossett and Sheldon (2001) included en-
hanced student’s confidence as a component of
an effective online program design. They offered
design and development guidelines for online
instruction and suggested a number of strategies
to boost confidence in online learning, such as
relating the subject to students’ prior experience
and knowledge, ensuring early success with
the material, avoiding discouraging pre-tests,
and offering coaching. Geer (2000) suggested
that adequate training in computer technologies
should enhance collaborative interactivity during
offering the online course. She identified student
confidence with computer technology and prior
computer knowledge as a driver of collaborative
interactivity in an online course.
It was argued by Relan (1992) that computer-
based instruction must serve to improve learners’
expectations of success and enhance feelings of
self-efficacy. According to the author, computer-
based instruction should emphasize peer model-
ing in improving self-efficacy via cooperative
learning. She offered interventions designed to
improve self-efficacy including feedback based
on past successes due to efforts, ability feedback,
proximal goal setting, and peer modeling. Another
suggestion she offered was that proximal goal-
setting and ability feedback based on past suc-
cesses could be powerful mediators in improving
self-efficacy, leading to increased persistence in
computer-related performance.
FOUR SOURCES OF SELF-
EFFICACY DEVELOPMENT
According to Pajares (2002), individuals develop
and acquire information about their self-efficacy
beliefs using four sources. The four sources are: (a)
performance or mastery experiences, (b) vicarious
experiences, (c) verbal or social persuasion and
580
(d) physiological states (Bandura, 1986, 1997;
Maddux, 1995; Schunk, 1991).
Mastery Experiences
Performance attainments are based on mastery
experiences and are considered as the most
influential sources of self-efficacy informa-
tion, “because they provide the most authentic
evidence of whether one can muster whatever
it takes to succeed” (Bandura, 1997, p. 80). The
successful performance of a given task increases
an individual’s efficacy expectation or outcome,
while tasks interpreted as failures decreases an
individual’s efficacy expectation. Strong efficacy
outcomes are gained by successfully repeating
the task. For example, students who perform
successfully on online instruction activities are
likely to develop a high self-efficacy belief to-
wards online and web-enhanced instruction and
subsequently will enroll in more online courses
and increase their efforts when confronted with
difficulties. Conversely, students who perform
poorly on online instruction activities are likely to
develop a low self-efficacy belief towards online
instruction and will avoid future online courses.
Methods used to develop and enhance mastery
experiences include repetition and performance
exposure to a specific task.
The most influential source of self-efficacy
information is from mastery experience also called
performance attainment. This importance is for
two reasons: 1) it is based on direct, personal ex-
perience and; 2) it is attributed to a person’s own
effort and skills (Pajares, 1996). Pajares says that
to increase students’ achievements, educational
efforts should focus on altering students’ beliefs
of their self-worth or competence. Educational in-
terventions, according to social cognitive theorists,
should be designed with the focus on increasing
confidence primarily through authentic mastery
experiences. An example would be that to improve
confidence in performing computer-related tasks,
instructors should increase the computer com-
Effects of Basic Computer Training on the Self-Efficacy of Adult Learner’s Utilization of Online Learning
petence of students. This increase in confidence
would lead to increased achievements by students
in the areas requiring computer use.
Vicarious Experiences
The second source of self-efficacy information
is known as vicarious learning experiences.
Generally, less influence on self-efficacy beliefs
tend to be exerted through vicarious experiences
than direct mastery experiences (Bandura, 1997).
Vicarious experiences can be developed through
direct experience, as well as the observation of
others successfully performing the task. Learning
through the observation of others such as teachers
and parents, allows an individual to develop ideas
regarding the formation of new behaviors without
having to perform the actual behavior (Bandura,
1977, 1986, 1989). Observational learning also
enables individuals to develop and explore new
behavioral patterns quickly that might not have
been previously attainable due to time constraints
and limited resources.
Other sources for vicarious learning such as
the television and other visual media, has vastly
expanded the range of models in which an in-
dividual is exposed to on a daily basis, thereby
transcending the boundaries of their social envi-
ronment (Bandura, 1997). Vicarious experiences
not only occur through observation of models,
but also include social comparisons made with
others such as peer groups or siblings. Students,
who observe similar peer groups perform a task,
are likely to feel more efficacious since they be-
lieve they are also capable of achieving the task
(Schunk, 1991, 1998). As a result, the acquisition
of new behaviors, knowledge and skills through
vicarious learning experiences is important in
helping individuals avoid costly mistakes.
Verbal Persuasion
The third source of self-efficacy information is
verbal persuasion. According to Zeldin and Pajares
(2000) we receive verbal persuasion from social
or verbal information received from others. In
comparison to mastery experiences, vicarious
experiences exert less influence on self-efficacy.
The positive influence on self-efficacy may be
in the form of encouragement from a teacher or
parent. This influence can be essential in enhanc-
ing one’s self-efficacy development. Negative
verbal persuasions such as indicating that one is
“not suitable for online learning” may weaken
self-efficacy beliefs and have adverse effect on
one’s confidence especially if she or he is not
resilient to endure such statements. As a result,
positive verbal persuasions may allow individuals
to experience an initial increase in self-efficacy
beliefs (Bandura, 1997; Ertmer, Evenbeck, Cen-
namo, & Lehman, 1994).
Physiological States
The fourth source of information for developing
self-efficacy beliefs is physiological states. Situa-
tion and arousal can hinder or increase the level of
one’s self-efficacy performance depending on the.
physiological states. Included are situations such
as anxiety, stress, and fatigue that can affect self-
efficacy development and are dominant in health
related behaviors as well as athletic and physical
activities. According to Bandura (1997) personal
competency might be affected by physiological
situations that are perceived as stressful or tax-
ing because of emotional arousal. For example,
phobias such as fear of public speaking or flying
can result in lower self-efficacy beliefs due to the
high level of fear. As a result, decreasing the level
of anxiety or fear associated with the particular
phobia through continuous practice or personal
mastery experiences increases the individual’s
belief that he or she possesses the necessary skills
to effectively manage any given situation.
581
 Effects of Basic Computer Training on the Self-Efficacy of Adult Learner’s Utilization of Online Learning
Definition of Terms
1. Causal attribution: Attributing failures or
success to different factors, such as insuf-
ficient efforts, adverse situational conditions,
or low ability (Bandura, 1995).
2. Computer self-efficacy: Individuals’ belief
of their capability to perform a specific
computer task (Karsten & Roth, 1998).
3. Computer training: Instruction provided
for the purpose of enhancing an individual’s
ability to use computers for learning and
functioning (Decker, 1996).
4. Distance education: Learning and teaching
activities which occur when learners and
instructors are separated at a distance.
5. Forethought: Setting goals and anticipat-
ing the likely consequences of prospective
actions (Bandura, 2001).
6. Intentionality: Proactive commitment to
bring about a future course of action to be
performed (Bandura, 2001).
7. Online instruction: Instruction delivered
completely through the Internet or Intranet
(Duchastel, 2001).
8. Online instruction self-efficacy: Self-
appraisal of one’s capabilities to participate
in online instruction, that is to perform
instructional tasks that involve collabora-
tive and individual learning activities over
the Internet and World Wide Web (Randall,
2001).
9. Outcome expectancy: A belief that a given
course of behavior will produce certain
outcome (Bandura, 1995).
10. Self-efficacy: People’s judgments of their
capabilities to organize and execute courses
of action required to attain designated types
of performances (Bandura, 1986).
11. Self-regulation: Behavior motivated and
regulated by internal standards and self-
evaluative reactions to people’s own actions
(Bandura, 1986)
582
12. Self-reactiveness: Ability to give shape to
appropriate courses of action and to motivate
and regulate their execution (Bandura, 2001)
13. Social cognitive theory: Theory that ex-
plains human functioning through the model
of mutual interactivity of behavior, personal
factors, and environmental events (Bandura,
1986)
14. Web-based instruction: A hypermedia-
based instructional program which utilizes
the attributes and resources of the World
Wide Web to create a meaningful learning
environment (Khan, 1997)
15. Wiki: A wiki is a website that uses wiki
software, allowing the easy creation and
editing of any number of interlinked Web
pages, using a simplified markup language.
Wikis are often used to create collaborative
websites, to power community websites, for
personal note taking, in corporate intranets,
and in knowledge management systems.
SOCIAL COGNITIVE THEORY
The social cognitive theory emphasizes social
origins of behavior and the importance of cog-
nitive thought processes in aspects of human
functioning including motivation, emotion, and
action. Purveyors of this theory suggest that hu-
man functioning can be explained with “a model
of triadic reciprocality in which behavior, cogni-
tive and other personal factors, and environmental
events all operate as interacting determinants
of each other” (Bandura, 1986, p. 18). Because
personality is socially rooted and operates within
socio-cultural influences, individuals are viewed
both as products and producers of their own envi-
ronments and of their social systems. Pervin and
John (2001) summarized distinguishing features
of social cognitive theory as follows:
1. Emphasis on people as active agents.
2. Emphasis on social origins of behavior.
Effects of Basic Computer Training on the Self-Efficacy of Adult Learner’s Utilization of Online Learning
Figure 1. Model of triadic reciprocality (Adapted
from Bandura, 1986)
3. Emphasis on cognitive processes.
4. Emphasis on behavior as situation-specific.
5. Emphasis on systematic research.
6. Emphasis on the learning of complex pat-
terns of behavior in the absence of rewards.
(p. 439).
Personal factors in the form of cognition, af-
fect, and biological events, as well as behavior
and environmental influences create interactions
(Bandura, 1986) see Figure 1.
The emphasis of social cognitive theory on
generative and reflective nature of human mind
has significant implications for education and
training. Bandura (1997) says that people who
believe in their capabilities to do a particular task
choose more challenging goals, apply more efforts,
cope better with difficulties, and perform better
in a particular task. Empirical research provided
evidence that computer self-efficacy was related
to computer use, computer anxiety, and students’
performance in computer classes (Coffin & Ma-
cIntyre, 1999; Gelberg, 1990; Hill et al., 1987).
Prior computer training was found to have a
positive effect on computer self-efficacy in a
number of research studies (Karsten & Roth, 1998;
Loboda, 2002; Smith, 1994; Torkzadeh & Koufte-
ros, 1994).
Self-Efficacy Theory
and Computer Use
An individual’s belief in his or her ability to use a
computer is considered to be an important predictor
in their willingness to continue learning and using
a computer in the future. Hill, Smith, and Mann,
(1987) investigated the relationship between the
computer self-efficacy beliefs of students and
their readiness towards using computers. They
surveyed 204 undergraduate students enrolled
in an introductory psychology course and found
the computer self-efficacy of students as having
a significant impact in learning about computers.
Additionally, the behavioral intentions of students
significantly predicted their actual decisions
to use a computer, independent of their beliefs
about the value of learning and using computer
technology. Bandara (1997) says that “one’s ef-
ficacy to master computers predicts enrollment in
computer courses independently of beliefs about
the instrumental benefits of knowing how to use
them” (p. 435).
To improve online instruction self-efficacy
some researchers suggested instructors let students
select problems on their own. Hacker and Nieder-
hauser (2000) argued that encouraging students to
independently construct knowledge while using
various communication tools in online instruc-
tion would help students build their self-efficacy.
Collaborative problem solving that would allow
students to view their problems in comparison
with others and feedback should be designed to
promote self-efficacy. Avoiding direct negative
feedback was recommended by the authors and
judicious use of praise for success was encouraged.
Computer self-efficacy can exist at the specific
computer application level as well as general
computing level, according to Marakas, Yi and
Johnson (1998) who also suggested that computer
self-efficacy not only influences one’s belief re-
garding his or her ability to perform a computer
task but also his or her intentions towards future
computer use. Other factors to influence computer
583
 Effects of Basic Computer Training on the Self-Efficacy of Adult Learner’s Utilization of Online Learning
self-efficacy are internal and external factors such
as organizational culture (Sheng, Pearson, &
Crosby, 2003). Self-efficacy provides a framework
for understanding the behavior of individuals
with regard to computer usage and acceptance or
rejection of technology (Olivier & Shapiro, 1993;
Schunk, 1991) and is not just concerned with
past performances but with judgments of what
could be done in the future (Compeau & Hig-
gins, 1995). Gist and Mitchell (1992), considered
computer self-efficacy to be a dynamic judgment
that changes with the information acquired
A study that investigated the effect of computer
self-efficacy on academic performance in com-
puter classes found that as perceived self-efficacy
strengthened, academic performance improved
(Coffin & MacIntyre, 1999). The results showed
that students who had high perceptions of task
value in learning to use computers were more
likely to have an intrinsic goal orientation and
consequently reduced computer-related anxiety
and increased computer-related self-efficacy. The
net result was higher grades in computer classes.
At the University of Tennessee, Decker (1996)
examined computer self-efficacy as a transfer of
computer training factor. Among predictors of
computer self-efficacy, she found evidence for
previous classroom computer training, computer
use required on the job, frequency of computer
use, and job type. She also concluded that com-
puter self-efficacy and self-efficacy of computer
technologies sustained over the 2.5-year period
of computer training.
One of the earlier studies of computer anxiety
and self-efficacy in which variables of vocational/
personality type, gender, previous experience,
computer self-efficacy, and math anxiety were
independent measures found a negative correla-
tion between computer self-efficacy and computer
anxiety Gelberg (1990). The analysis allowed the
researcher to conclude that self-efficacy, vocation-
al interests, and math anxiety were significantly
correlated with computer anxiety, with computer
584
self-efficacy being the most significant predictor
of computer anxiety.
Of the four sources of information for computer
self-efficacy specified by Bandura (1986), Karsten
and Roth (1998) identified basic computer train-
ing of mastery experiences and vicarious learning
as most influential on computer self-efficacy.
Students’ computer competence increases along
regular learning activities. Overcoming difficulties
that students come across during the training pro-
vides them with cues of their improved capability
to perform a computer-related task. A traditional
computer introductory course also offers oppor-
tunities to observe successes and failures of other
students who came to the class with a similar level
of skills. Additionally, an instructor serves as a
model of successful computer-related behavior
(Karsten & Roth, 1998).
Research established the significant effect
of computer training on computer self-efficacy.
Smith (1994) explored the effect of a standard
classroom instruction in an introductory computer
science course on task-specific and generalized
self-efficacy using a sample of university students.
One of the groups received additional treatment
of verbal persuasion. The researcher used pre and
post-test research design with a control group.
Significant increases in task-specific self-efficacy
were found. Other studies found similar results
(Milbrath & Kinzie, 2000).
The effect of computer training on computer
self-efficacy was also examined by Torkzadeh and
Koufteros (1994). In their study, 224 students were
administered a computer self-efficacy survey at
the beginning and at the end of an introductory
computer course that employed both lectures
and laboratory instruction. Pre and post-test data
revealed significant increases in student computer
self-efficacy for all four factors of beginning com-
puter skills, mainframe skills, advanced computer
skills, and file and software skills. For pre-training,
gender difference in mean scores was significant
for one factor, computer file and software man-
agement. For post-training, no significant gender
Effects of Basic Computer Training on the Self-Efficacy of Adult Learner’s Utilization of Online Learning
difference was found for any of the factors. For
each factor, the results indicated a significant in-
crease in self-efficacy scores for both males and
females (Torkzadeh & Koufteros, 1994).
A survey conducted prior to computer training
and on the last day of the course in an introduc-
tory computer course typical for a business school
(Karsten & Roth, 1998), revealed that students’
perceptions of their computer capabilities of
computer experience, computer self-efficacy, and
performance were improved during the course. In
another study, Larson and Smith (1994) evaluated
computer competency of 444 freshmen college
students and examined factors affecting attitudes
toward computers. Nearly 61 percent of high com-
puter-experience users avoided courses requiring
computer use. Level of computer use confidence
decreased as computer experience increased. The
researchers suggested that mandatory introductory
computer courses for incoming college students
could help them improve computer competence
and build confidence in computer use in college.
They also suggested that course designers address
computer anxiety issues.
Other studies have investigated workers using
computer technology in their jobs. In a study of
140 workers, a set of self-report questionnaires
that measured frequency of computer usage and
computer training, computer self-efficacy, and
burnout were administered. Multiple regression
analysis found that frequency of computer usage
and computer training was positively associated
with computer self-efficacy when controlled
for age. Additionally, the findings showed an
interaction effect between computer training
and computer self-efficacy on levels of burnout.
Workers with low computer self-efficacy had
an increased level of burnout when computer
training was high. Thus, the study showed that
computer self-efficacy acted as a stress buffer
when possible burnout resulted from computer
training (Paraskeva, Bouta, & Papagianni, 2008;
Salanova, Grou, Cifre, & Llorens, 2000).
Two training methods on computer self-
efficacy that were considered by Chou, (2001)
were instruction-based and behavior-modeling.
An instruction-based class was taught primarily by
lectures and followed a deductive way of learning.
The behavior-based method involved observing
a model and extending the model’s behavior in
practice and experimentation. The results of the
study indicated that behavior-modeling training
method yielded consistently higher computer self-
efficacy compared to instruction-based training
approach.
A significant relationship between computer
self-efficacy and satisfaction in a web-based
course was found by Lim (2000) in his study of
college students. The learning factors of computer
training, participation in a workshop to prepare
for a web-based course, intent to participate in
such workshop, gender, frequency of computer
use, age, Internet experience in class, number of
courses using the Internet, and years of computer
use were found to be significantly related to com-
puter self-efficacy (Lim, 2000).
In summary the findings on computer self-
efficacy have indicated that individuals with
a high self-efficacy regarding computers were
more confident and appear to perform better in
using computer technology than those with a low
computer self-efficacy (Compeau & Higgins,
1995; Faseyitan, Libii, & Hirschbuhl, 1996; Hill,
Smith, & Mann, 1987; Oliver & Shapiro, 1993;
Zhang, Fei, Duan, & Wu, 2001). As a result, an
inference can be made in that students with high
computer self-efficacy are more likely to excel
at new technologies utilized in online and web-
enhanced online instruction.
SELF-EFFICACY ASSESSMENT
Bandura (1986) argued that self-efficacy beliefs
assessment should follow the guidelines of do-
main specificity and correspondence. That is,
self-efficacy scale items should correspond to the
585
 Effects of Basic Computer Training on the Self-Efficacy of Adult Learner’s Utilization of Online Learning
criteria task and the domain of functioning. Thus,
precise judgments of capabilities matched to a
specific situation afford the greatest prediction
and offer the best explanations of behavioral or
cognitive processes. A meta-analysis of studies on
self-efficacy and academic performance revealed
that the strongest correlation was found when
researchers followed the guidelines of specificity
and correspondence in assessing self-efficacy, and
the instrument closely matched the performance
task (Multon, Brown, & Lent, 1991).
A micro analytic research strategy in assessing
self-efficacy beliefs was emphasized by Bandura
(1986). He wrote, “A special merit of the micro
analytic approach is that particularized indices
of self-efficacy provide refined predictions of
human actions and affective reactivity” (p. 422).
Social cognitive theory suggests that people’s
self-conceptions and self-processes are task and
situation-specific (Bandura, 1986; Pintrich &
Schunk, 1995). Beliefs concerning individuals’
abilities to handle tasks and challenges presented
by particular kinds of situations involve cognitive
processes such as categorization of situations, an-
ticipation of the future, and self-reflection (Pervin
& John, 2001; Stephens, 2006).
Miltiadou and Yu (2000) developed and vali-
dated the Online Technologies Self-efficacy Scale,
an instrument that measured online students’ self-
efficacy beliefs with communication technolo-
gies in an online class, such as email, Internet,
and computer conferencing. About 330 college
students enrolled in online courses participated
in the study. Miltiadou and Yu investigated the
relationship of motivational constructs and aca-
demic success of students enrolled in an online
course. Self-efficacy with online technologies
was found a significant predictor of students’
achievement in the online course. Self-efficacy
also was a significant predictor of whether students
completed or dropped the course.
The literature review revealed that studies on
self-efficacy related to online instruction used
different measuring instruments. Ren’s study
586
(2000) used an instrument to measure confidence
in performing tasks relating to the use of library
electronic sources. Hargis (2001) used the Mo-
tivated Strategies for Learning Questionnaire to
measure learners’ self-regulation and self-efficacy
in online learning. To measure learners’ self-
efficacy of distance learning, Zhang, Fei, Duan,
and Wu, (2001) designed an 8-item 6-point Likert
scale that was examined on the construct validity
by a review committee. Other instruments found
were The Online Technologies Self-Efficacy Scale
(Miltiadou & Yu, 2000) and Internet Self-Efficacy
Scale (Torkzadeh & Van Dyke, 2001).
However, none of these instruments provided
a valid measuring scale meeting the purpose of
this research to measure online instruction self-
efficacy. Most of the above instruments measure
self-efficacy perceptions related only to the In-
ternet or computer technology behaviors. How-
ever, the literature review suggested that online
instruction self-efficacy includes also factors of
collaborative behavior and individual behavior
(Randall, 2001).
In his dissertation study at the University of
Tennessee, Randall (2001) developed a theoreti-
cal model of the online instruction self-efficacy.
Based on the model, he and his advisor Gregory
Petty developed the Tennessee Online Instruction
Scale© (TOIS) designed to measure online instruc-
tion self-efficacy. The instrument was tested with
a sample of 762 electrician instructors attending
the National Training Institute of the National
Joint Apprenticeship Training Committee that
represented all 50 states and Canada.
Randall identified three factors of online
instruction self-efficacy: Internet/technology
behaviors, collaborative behaviors, and individual
behaviors. He also examined the relationship
between demographic variables and self-efficacy
beliefs. The level of computer experience was
found to be significantly related to online instruc-
tion self-efficacy for Internet/technology behav-
iors and individual behaviors. Online instruction
learning experience was significantly related to
Effects of Basic Computer Training on the Self-Efficacy of Adult Learner’s Utilization of Online Learning
self-efficacy beliefs on collaborative behaviors.
Finally, Internet experience showed to be signifi-
cantly related to online instruction self-efficacy for
Internet/technology and collaborative behaviors.
CONCLUSION
Clearly prior computer training or exposure to
computers and the internet can improve self-
efficacy toward online learning. Studies by Ren
(2000) and Nahl (1996) revealed, as expected
greater online use with increased exposure in
related online instruction. Cauble and Thurston’s
study (2000) investigated interactive multimedia
training for social work students and found an
increase of confidence in their ability to use online
skills and applied knowledge. The use of inter-
active programs such as WIKI can also increase
self-efficacy (Heafner & Friedman, 2008).
A study in Taiwan (Lin, 1999) compared stu-
dents’ commitment, achievement, self-efficacy,
and task value with and without a training work-
shop designed to increase students’ achievement
and commitment. With this small group of 30
subjects the higher self-efficacy the students held,
the easier the task was perceived in an online course
and a training workshop had a positive impact their
perceived self-efficacy. In a study of 122 college
students enrolled in web-based psychology course
Wang and Newlin (2002) investigated students’
personal choices and performance in a web-based
course. They found higher self-efficacy and that
these higher self-efficacy beliefs were predictive
of their final exam scores in the course.
Finally, in a study by Loboda (2002) a signifi-
cant positive correlation was revealed between
posttest online instruction self-efficacy and the
level of formal computer training. This sample
of 92 undergraduate students was surveyed for
self-efficacy by the TOIS© which had a reliability
Cronbach alpha of.97 and was determined to be a
reliable measure of online instruction self-efficacy.
Her finding is consistent with the conclusions of
studies about a significant role of formal computer
training in computer-related self-efficacy (Karsten
& Roth, 1998; Salanova et al., 2000; Smith, 1994,
Smith-Weber, 1999; Torkzadeh & Koufteros,
1994; Yeh, 2006; York, 2008).
Self-efficacy theory may provide explana-
tion for Loboda’s (2002) finding. According to
Bandura (1997), self-efficacy may generalize
to other situations when similarity of skills for
different tasks is required. Internet experience
might be a primary source for self-efficacy for
Internet use. However, a different range of skills
required for Internet use and online learning may
have prevented relating Internet self-efficacy to
online instruction self-efficacy.
FUTURE TRENDS
Online program designers should consider the
computer instruction self-efficacy of adult learners
in designing new courses. These studies clearly
show a positive and significant relationship be-
tween prior computer training and positive self-
efficacy of adult learners. Bandura’s (1977, 1986,
1995, 1997) theory suggests that a high level of
self-efficacy improves the learners effectiveness
in an instructional environment. This association
suggests more attention should be given to adult
learners’ utilization of information communica-
tion technologies as well as methodology that
incorporates cooperative learning (El-Tigi &
Branch, 1997; Heafner & Friedman, 2008; Hodges,
Stackpole-Hodges, & Cox, 2008; Iverson, Colky,
& Cyboran, 2005; Lagana, 2008).
As instructional programs for adult learners
enter into an era of increased utilization of online
instructional techniques, the importance for learn-
ing of self-efficacy and the personal beliefs and
experiences of the learner must not be overlooked.
To be fair to our students we should endeavor to
secure for them the greatest opportunity possible
for success in our courses based with information
communication technologies. This chapter lends
587
 Effects of Basic Computer Training on the Self-Efficacy of Adult Learner’s Utilization of Online Learning
some evidence to the necessity for continued
research and vigilance for instructional improve-
ment.
REFERENCES
Ayala, G. (2006). An experimental evaluation of
a group- versus computer-based intervention to
improve food portion size estimation skills. [from
Education Full Text database.]. Health Education
Research, 21(1), 133–145. Retrieved September
21, 2009. doi:10.1093/her/cyh049
Bandura, A. (1977). Self-efficacy: Toward a
unifying theory of behavioral change. Psychologi-
cal Review, 84(2), 191–215. doi:10.1037/0033-
295X.84.2.191
Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought
and action: A social cognitive theory. Englewood
Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Bandura, A. (1995). Exercise of personal and col-
lective efficacy in changing societies. In Bandura,
A. (Ed.), Self-efficacy in changing societies (pp.
1–45). New York: Cambridge University Press.
doi:10.1017/CBO9780511527692.003
Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise
of control. New York: Freeman.
Bandura, A. (1999). Social cognitive theory of
personality. In Pervin, L. A., & John, O. P. (Eds.),
Handbook of personality: Theory and research
(pp. 154–196). New York: Guilford.
Bandura, A. (2001). Social cognitive theory: An
agentic perspective. Annual Review of Psychol-
ogy, 52, 1–26. doi:10.1146/annurev.psych.52.1.1
Barnard, J. (1997). The World Wide Web and
higher education: The promise of virtual universi-
ties and online libraries. Educational Technology,
37(3), 30–35.
588
Bartholomew, L., Sockrider, M., & Abramson,
S. (2006). Partners in school asthma manage-
ment: Evaluation of a self-management program
for children with asthma. [from Education Full
Text database.]. The Journal of School Health,
76(6), 283–290. Retrieved September 21, 2009.
doi:10.1111/j.1746-1561.2006.00113.x
Campbell, D. J., & Lee, C. (1988). Self-appraisal
in performance evaluation: Development versus
evaluation. Academy of Management Review,
13(2), 302–314. doi:10.2307/258579
Cassidy, S., & Eachus, P. (2002). Developing
the computer user self-efficacy (CUSE) scale:
Investigating the relationship between computer
self-efficacy, gender and experience with com-
puters. [from Education Full Text database.].
Journal of Educational Computing Research,
26(2), 133–153. Retrieved September 21, 2009.
doi:10.2190/JGJR-0KVL-HRF7-GCNV
Cauble, A. E., & Thurston, L. P. (2000). Effects
of interactive multimedia training on knowledge,
attitudes, and self-efficacy of social work students.
Research on Social Work Practice, 10(4), 428–437.
Chisholm, I., Carey, J., & Hernandez, A. (2002).
Information technology skills for a pluralistic
society: Is the playing field level? [from Educa-
tion Full Text database.]. Journal of Research on
Technology in Education, 35(1), 58–79. Retrieved
September 21, 2009.
Chou, H. (2001). Influences of cognitive style
and training method on training effectiveness.
[from Education Full Text database.]. Computers
& Education, 37(1), 11–25. Retrieved September
21, 2009. doi:10.1016/S0360-1315(01)00028-8
Chou, H. W. (2001). Effects of training method
and computer anxiety on learning perfor-
mance and self-efficacy. Computers in Human
Behavior, 17(1), 51–69. doi:10.1016/S0747-
5632(00)00035-2
Effects of Basic Computer Training on the Self-Efficacy of Adult Learner’s Utilization of Online Learning
Coffin, R. J., & MacIntyre, P. D. (1999). Moti-
vational influences on computer-related affective
states. Computers in Human Behavior, 15(5),
549–569. doi:10.1016/S0747-5632(99)00036-9
Compeau, D. R., & Higgins, C. A. (1995). Com-
puter self-efficacy: Development of a measure
and initial test. Management Information Systems
Quarterly, 19(2), 189–211. doi:10.2307/249688
De-Verneil, M., & Berge, Z. L. (2000). Going
online: Guidelines for faculty in higher education.
International Journal of Educational Telecom-
munications, 6(3), 227–242.
Decker, C. (1996). Organizational effectiveness
through work situation and transfer of training
influences on employee computer self-efficacy.
Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of
Tennessee, Knoxville.
Driscoll, M. (1999). Web-based training in the
workplace. Adult Learning, 10(4), 21–25.
Duchastel, P. (1997). A motivational framework
for web-based instruction. In Khan, B. H. (Ed.),
Web-based instruction (pp. 179–184). Englewood
Cliffs, NJ: Educational Technology Publications.
Duchastel, P. (2001). The ideal online course.
Library Trends, 50(1), 145–158.
El-Tigi, M., & Branch, R. M. (1997). Designing
for interaction, learner control, and feedback dur-
ing web-based learning. Educational Technology,
37(3), 23–29.
Ertmer, P. A., Evenbeck, E., Cennamo, K. S., &
Lehman, J. D. (1994). Enhancing self-efficacy
for computer technologies through the use of
positive classroom experiences. Educational
Technology Research and Development, 42(3),
45–62. doi:10.1007/BF02298094
Faseyitan, S., Libii, J. N., & Hirschbuhl, J.
(1996). An in service model for enhancing
faculty computer self-efficacy. British Journal
of Educational Technology, 27(3), 214–226.
doi:10.1111/j.1467-8535.1996.tb00688.x
Geer, R. (2000). Drivers for successful student
learning through collaborative interactivity in
Internet based courses. (ERIC Document Repro-
duction Service No. ED 444 589).
Gelberg, S. O. (1990). Relationships among
vocational interest, gender, previous experience
with computers, computer self-efficacy, and
math anxiety in predicting computer anxiety
(Doctoral dissertation, University of Illinois at
Urbana-Champaign, 1990). Dissertation Abstracts
International, 51, 793.
Gist, M. E., & Mitchell, T. R. (1992). Self-efficacy:
A theoretical analysis of its determinants and
malleability. Academy of Management Review,
17(2), 183–211. doi:10.2307/258770
Hacker, J. D., & Niederhauser, D. S. (2000).
Promoting deep and durable learning in the on-
line classroom. New Directions for Teaching and
Learning, 84(1), 53–63. doi:10.1002/tl.848
Hackett, G. (1995). Self-efficacy in career choice
and development. In Bandura, A. (Ed.), Self-
efficacy in changing societies (pp. 232–258). New
York: Cambridge University Press. doi:10.1017/
CBO9780511527692.010
Hargis, J. (2001). Can students learn science using
the Internet? Journal of Research on Computing
in Education, 33(4), 475–487.
Heafner, T., & Friedman, A. (2008). Wikis and
Constructivism in Secondary Social Studies:
Fostering a Deeper Understanding. Computers
in the Schools, 25, 288-302. (ERIC Document
Reproduction Service No. EJ835768) Retrieved
September 19, 2009, from ERIC database.
589
 Effects of Basic Computer Training on the Self-Efficacy of Adult Learner’s Utilization of Online Learning
Heafner, T., & Friedman, A. (2008). Wikis and
constructivism in secondary social studies: Fos-
tering a deeper understanding. Computers in the
Schools, 25, 288-302. (ERIC Document Reproduc-
tion Service No. EJ835768) Retrieved September
19, 2009, from ERIC database.
Hill, J. R. (2000). Web-based instruction. Prospects
and challenges. In Branch, R. M., & Fitzgerald,
M. A. (Eds.), Educational media and technology
yearbook (pp. 141–155). Englewood, CO: Librar-
ies Unlimited.
Hill, J. R., & Hannafin, M. J. (1997). Cognitive
strategies and learning from the World Wide Web.
Educational Technology Research and Develop-
ment, 45(4), 37–64. doi:10.1007/BF02299682
Hill, T., Smith, N. D., & Mann, M. F. (1987).
Role of efficacy expectations in predicting the
decision to use advanced technologies: The case
of computers. The Journal of Applied Psychology,
72, 307–313. doi:10.1037/0021-9010.72.2.307
Hodges, C. (2008). Self-efficacy in the context
of online learning environments: A review of
the literature and directions for research. [from
Education Full Text database.]. Performance
Improvement Quarterly, 20(3/4), 7–25. Retrieved
September 21, 2009. doi:10.1002/piq.20001
Hodges, C., Stackpole-Hodges, C., & Cox, K.
(2008). Self-efficacy, self-regulation, and cog-
nitive style as predictors of achievement with
podcast instruction. [from Education Full Text
database.]. Journal of Educational Computing
Research, 38(2), 139–153. Retrieved September
21, 2009. doi:10.2190/EC.38.2.b
Iverson, K. M., Colky, D. L., & Cyboran, V.
(2005). E-learning takes the lead: An empirical
investigation of learner differences in online and
classroom delivery. Performance Improvement
Quarterly, 18(4), 5–18.
590
Karsten, R., & Roth, R. M. (1998). The relationship
of computer experience and computer self-efficacy
to performance in introductory computer literacy
courses. Journal of Research on Computing in
Education, 31(1), 14–24.
Khan, B. H. (1997). Web-based instruction (WBI).
What is it and why is it? In Khan, B. H. (Ed.),
Web-based instruction (pp. 41–45). Englewood
Cliffs, NJ: Educational Technology Publications.
Kirschner, P., & Paas, F. (2001). Web-enhanced
higher education: A tower of Babel. Computers in
Human Behavior, 17(4), 347–353. doi:10.1016/
S0747-5632(01)00009-7
Kitsantas, A., & Chow, A. (2007). College
students’ perceived threat and preference for
seeking help in traditional, distributed, and dis-
tance learning environments. [from Education
Full Text database.]. Computers & Education,
48(3), 383–395. Retrieved September 21, 2009.
doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2005.01.008
Lagana, L. (2008). Enhancing the Attitudes and
Self-efficacy of Older Adults toward Computers
and the Internet: Results of a Pilot Study. [from
Education Full Text database.]. Educational Ger-
ontology, 34(9), 831–843. Retrieved September
21, 2009. doi:10.1080/03601270802243713
Larson, J., & Smith, M. A. (1994). An assessment
of the computer literacy and computer attitudes
of incoming first-year students at the University
of Wisconsin-Eau Claire. (ERIC Document Re-
production Service No. ED 373728).
Lei, S. (2008). Factors changing attitudes of
graduate school students toward an introductory
research methodology course. [from Education
Full Text database.]. Education (Chula Vista,
Calif.), 128(4), 667–685. Retrieved September
21, 2009.
Effects of Basic Computer Training on the Self-Efficacy of Adult Learner’s Utilization of Online Learning
Lent, R. L., Lopez, F. G., & Bieschke, K. J.
(1991). Mathematics self-efficacy: Sources and
relation to science-based career choice. Journal
of Counseling Psychology, 38(3), 424–430.
doi:10.1037/0022-0167.38.4.424
Lent, R. W., Brown, S. D., & Hackett, G. (1994).
Toward a unifying social cognitive theory of career
and academic interest, choice, and performance.
Journal of Vocational Behavior, 45(1), 79–122.
doi:10.1006/jvbe.1994.1027
Lim, C. K. (2000). Computer self-efficacy, aca-
demic self-concept and other factors as predictors
of satisfaction and future participation of adult
learners in Web-based distance education. Un-
published doctoral dissertation, Florida Atlantic
University.
Lin, C.-J. (1999). The effects of self-efficacy and
task values on students’commitment and achieve-
ment in web-based instruction for Taiwan higher
education (motivation). Unpublished doctoral
dissertation, University of Southern California.
Litchfield, R., Oakland, M., & Anderson, J. (2002).
Relationships between intern characteristics, com-
puter attitudes, and use of online instruction in a
dietetic training program. [from Education Full
Text database.]. American Journal of Distance
Education, 16(1), 23–36. Retrieved September
21, 2009. doi:10.1207/S15389286AJDE1601_3
Loboda, I. P. (2002). The effect of an introduc-
tory course on online instruction self-efficacy of
undergraduate students. Unpublished master’s
thesis, University of Tennessee.
Maddux, J. E. (1995). Self-efficacy, adaptation,
and adjustment: Theory, research, and applica-
tion. New York: Plenum.
Maddux, J. E., & Stanley, M. A. (Eds.). (1986).
Self-efficacy theory in contemporary psychology.
Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 4(3),
249–255.
Marakas, G. M., Yi, M. Y., & Johnson, R. (1998).
The multilevel and multifaceted character of
computer self-efficacy: Toward a clarification of
the construct and an integrative framework for
research. Information Systems Research, 9(2),
126–163. doi:10.1287/isre.9.2.126
McCarthy, E. (2002, February 12). Online Educa-
tion Becomes Tech Success Story for D.C. Area.
The Washington Post, E05.
Milbrath, Y., & Kinzie, M. (2000). Computer
technology training for prospective teachers:
computer attitudes and perceived self-efficacy.
[from Education Full Text database.]. Journal
of Technology and Teacher Education, 8(4),
373–396. Retrieved September 21, 2009.
Miltiadou, M., & Yu, C. H. (2000). Validation of
the online technology self-efficacy scale. (ERIC
Document Reproduction Service No. ED 445 672).
Molenda, M., & Sullivan, M. (2000). Issues and
trends in instructional technology. In Branch, R.
M., & Fitzgerald, M. A. (Eds.), Educational media
and technology yearbook (pp. 3–13). Englewood,
CO: Libraries Unlimited.
Multon, K. D., Brown, S. D., & Lent, R. W.
(1991). Relation of self-efficacy beliefs to aca-
demic outcomes: A meta-analytic investigation.
Journal of Counseling Psychology, 38, 30–38.
doi:10.1037/0022-0167.38.1.30
Nahl, D. (1996). Affective monitoring of Internet
learners: Perceived self-efficacy and success.
Journal of the American Society for Information
Science American Society for Information Sci-
ence, 33, 100–109.
Olivier, T., & Shapiro, F. (1993). Self-efficacy and
computers. Journal of Computer-Based Instruc-
tion, 20(3), 81–85.
Ormrod, J. E. (2006). Educational Psychology:
Developing Learners (5th ed.). N.J., Merrill: Up-
per Saddle River.
591
 Effects of Basic Computer Training on the Self-Efficacy of Adult Learner’s Utilization of Online Learning

Owston, R. (1997). The World Wide Web: A Randall, F. A. (2001). Factor analysis of online
technology to enhance teaching and learning? instruction self-efficacy using the Tennessee
Educational Researcher, 26(2), 27–33. Online Instruction Survey. Ph.D. dissertation,
The University of Tennessee, United States --
Pajares, F. (1996). Self-efficacy beliefs in aca-
Tennessee. Retrieved September 19, 2009, from
demic settings. Review of Educational Research,
Dissertations & Theses @ University of Tennes-
66, 543–578.
see - Knoxville. (Publication No. AAT 3039978).
Pajares, F. (1997). Current directions in self-
Reinhart, J. M. (1999). Student motivation, self-
efficacy research. In M. L. Maehr & P. R Pintrich
efficacy and task difficulty in web-based instruc-
(Eds.), Advances in motivation and achievement
tion. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Indiana
(pp. 1-49). Greenwich, CN: JAI Press.
University.
Pajares, F. (2002). Overview of social cognitive
Relan, A. (1992). Motivational strategies in
theory and of self-efficacy. Retrieved October 10,
computer-based instruction: Some lessons from
2003, from http://www.emory.edu/EDUCATION/
theories and models of motivation. (ERIC Docu-
mfp/eff.html.
ment Reproduction Service No. ED 348 017)
Paraskeva, F., Bouta, H., & Papagianni, A. (2008).
Ren, W. (1999). Self-efficacy and the search
Individual characteristics and computer self-effi-
for government information: A study of small-
cacy in secondary education teachers to integrate
business executives. Reference and User Services
technology in educational practice. [from Educa-
Quarterly, 38, 283–291.
tion Full Text database.]. Computers & Education,
50(3), 1084–1091. Retrieved September 21, 2009. Ren, W. (2000). Library instruction and college stu-
doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2006.10.006 dent self-efficacy in electronic information search-
ing. Journal of Academic Librarianship, 26(5),
Pervin, L., & John, O. (2001). Personality: Theory
323–328. doi:10.1016/S0099-1333(00)00138-5
and research (8th ed.). New York: John Wiley
& Sons. Rossett, A., & Sheldon, K. (2001). Beyond the
podium: Delivering training and performance to a
Petty, G., Lim, D. H., & Zulauf, J. (2007). Training
digital world. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass/Pfeiffer.
performance transfer between CD-ROM based
instruction and traditional classroom instruction. Salanova, M., Grau, R. M., Cifre, E., & Llorens,
The Journal of Technology Studies, 33(1), 48–56. S. (2000). Computer training, frequency of usage
and burnout: the moderating role of computer self-
Petty, G. C. (1999). Preparing vocational teacher
efficacy. Computers in Human Behavior, 16(6),
via e-learning: A solution to the impending teacher
575–590. doi:10.1016/S0747-5632(00)00028-5
shortage. International Journal of Vocational
Education and Training, 7(1), 23–30. Schunk, D. H. (1991). Self-efficacy and aca-
demic motivation. Educational Psychologist, 26,
Petty, G. C. (2002). Developing a theoretical
207–231. doi:10.1207/s15326985ep2603&4_2
framework. In Farmer, E. I., & Rojewski, J. W.
(Eds.), Research pathways (pp. 175–199). Lan- Schunk, D. H. (2000). Social cognitive theory.
ham, MD: University Press of America, Inc. In Davis, K. M. (Ed.), Learning theories: An
educational perspective (3rd ed., p. 118). Upper
Pintrich, P. R., & Schunk, D. H. (1995). Motivation
Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
in education: Theory, research, and applications.
Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.

592
Effects of Basic Computer Training on the Self-Efficacy of Adult Learner’s Utilization of Online Learning
Schunk, D. H., & Ertmer, P. A. (1998). Self-
evaluation and self-regulated computer learning.
(ERIC Document Reproduction service No. ED
422 275)
Sheng, Y. P., Pearson, J. M., & Crosby, L. (2003).
Organizational culture and employees’ computer
self-efficacy: An empirical study. Information
Resources Management Journal, 16(3), 42–58.
Smith, J. M. (1994). The effects of education
on computer self-efficacy. Journal of Industrial
Teacher Education, 31(3), 51–65.
Smith-Weber, S. M. (1999). Latent sources of
computer self-efficacy. Proceedings of Delta Pi
Epsilon National Conference, Little Rock, AZ,
87-89. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service
No. ED 451 405)
Stephens, P. (2006). Validation of the business
computer self-efficacy scale: Assessment of the
computer literacy of incoming business students.
[from Education Full Text database.]. Journal of
Educational Computing Research, 34(1), 29–46.
Retrieved September 21, 2009. doi:10.2190/
CFHJ-MJXN-8LWA-P3QC
Teo, T. (2009). Modelling technology acceptance
in education: A study of pre-service teachers. [from
Education Full Text database.]. Computers &
Education, 52(2), 302–312. Retrieved September
21, 2009. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2008.08.006
Torkzadeh, G., & Koufteros, X. (1994). Factorial
validity of a computer self-efficacy scale and
impact of computer training. Educational and
Psychological Measurement, 54(3), 813–821.
doi:10.1177/0013164494054003028
Torkzadeh, G., & Koufteros, X. (1994). Factorial
validity of a computer self-efficacy scale and the
impact of computer training. [from Education Full
Text database.]. Educational and Psychological
Measurement, 54(4), 813–821. Retrieved Septem-
ber 21, 2009. doi:10.1177/0013164494054003028
Torkzadeh, G., & Van Dyke, T. (2001). Develop-
ment and validation of an Internet self-efficacy
scale. Behaviour & Information Technology, 20(4),
275–280. doi:10.1080/01449290110050293
Wang, A. Y., & Newlin, M. H. (2002). Predictors
of web-student performance: The role of self-
efficacy and reasons for taking an online class.
Computers in Human Behavior, 18(2), 151–163.
doi:10.1016/S0747-5632(01)00042-5
Worley, R. B. (2000). The medium is not the mes-
sage. Business Communication Quarterly, 63(3),
93–103. doi:10.1177/108056990006300311
Yeh, Y. (2006). The interactive effects of personal
traits and guided practices on preservice teach-
ers’ changes in personal teaching efficacy. [from
Education Full Text database.]. British Journal
of Educational Technology, 37(4), 513–526. Re-
trieved September 21, 2009. doi:10.1111/j.1467-
8535.2006.00550.x
York, R. (2008). Comparing Three Modes of
Instruction in a Graduate Social Work Program.
[from Education Full Text database.]. Journal
of Social Work Education, 44(2), 157–172.
Retrieved September 21, 2009. doi:10.5175/
JSWE.2008.200700031
Zeldin, A., & Pajares, F. (2000). Against the odds:
self-efficacy beliefs of women in mathematical,
scientific, and technological careers. American
Educational Research Journal, 37(1), 215–246.
Zhang, J., Fei, L., Duan, C., & Wu, G. (2001).
Research on self-efficacy of distance learning and
its influence to learners’ attainments. Educational
Technology Communication, 10(4). Retrieved
April 8, 2002, from http://atc.elec.bnu.edu.cn/
articledigest10/Research-on.htm
Zimmerman, B. J. (1995). Self-efficacy and edu-
cational development. In Bandura, A. (Ed.), Self-
efficacy in changing societies (pp. 202–231). New
York: Cambridge University Press. doi:10.1017/
CBO9780511527692.009
593
 Effects of Basic Computer Training on the Self-Efficacy of Adult Learner’s Utilization of Online Learning
KEY TERMS AND DEFINITIONS
Computer Self-Efficacy: Individuals’ belief
of their capability to perform a specific computer
task.
Computer Training: Instruction provided for
the purpose of enhancing an individual’s ability
to use computers for learning and functioning.
Intentionality: Proactive commitment to bring
about a future course of action to be performed.
Online Instruction Self-Efficacy: Self-ap-
praisal of one’s capabilities to participate in online
instruction, that is to perform instructional tasks
that involve collaborative and individual learning
activities over the Internet and World Wide Web.
Outcome Expectancy: A belief that a given
course of behavior will produce certain outcome.
Self-Efficacy: People’s judgments of their
capabilities to organize and execute courses
of action required to attain designated types of
performances.
594
Self-Regulation: Behavior motivated and
regulated by internal standards and self-evaluative
reactions to people’s own actions.
Social Cognitive Theory: Theory that explains
human functioning through the model of mutual
interactivity of behavior, personal factors, and
environmental events.
Web-Based Instruction: A hypermedia-based
instructional program which utilizes the attributes
and resources of the World Wide Web to create a
meaningful learning environment.
Wiki: A wiki is a website that uses wiki
software, allowing the easy creation and editing
of any number of interlinked Web pages, using
a simplified markup language. Wikis are often
used to create collaborative websites, to power
community websites, for personal note taking, in
corporate intranets, and in knowledge manage-
ment systems.
 595

Chapter 35
Digital Media:
Opportunities for Voice and
Empowerment in Adult Learning
Kathleen P. King
University of South Florida, USA

ABSTRACT
Digital media, podcasting, digital video, and blogging all provide great opportunities for adult learners
to become actively involved in expressing their knowledge and skills through project based learning.
While this deep learning experience involves research, critical thinking and 21st Century learning skills,
it also provides substantial opportunities for the cultivation of much needed affective benefits. Soft skills
have long been recognized as a valid and valued realm within career and technical education (CTE),
continuing education and adult education. This chapter reveals how to use digital media in instructional
settings to cultivate voice and empowerment among adult learners. The author includes details of out-
comes and practical strategies and processes.

INTRODUCTION access on the web: podcasts, blogs, and vodcasts

Digital media is comprised of several Web 2.0
technologies, all of which provide free tools for
users to create rich media (audio, video, text)
content housed on the web and available publicly.
When discussing digital media, people are usu-
ally referring to digital audio and video as well
as digital dialogue. Today these technologies are
referred to by the names of what we create and
DOI: 10.4018/978-1-61692-906-0.ch035
or video podcasts.
These digital media have been found to be an
excellent fit with educational settings because
they can be easily and inexpensively (including
free) created and integrated to become substantial
interdisciplinary learning experiences. Moreover,
students of all ages become deeply invested in
the digital media projects and demonstrate own-
ership, more time on task, and are motivated to
do their very best work because they are aware
and excited about its public display. Rather than
isolating learning in classroom only activities,

digital media truly situates learning within a global
context that is reached from our classrooms (or
desks) and connects to a global audience.
This chapter is organized in the following way.
The background section will describe the differ-
ent digital media. The next section describes how
digital media can be used to create opportunities
for cultivating voice and empowerment among
adult learners. Model for Practice is a discussion
of how such learning experience may be created,
and finally, the chapter describes the future trends
in this area and the conclusions drawn from this
material.
BACKGROUND
In order to provide sufficient background for the
discussion of this chapter, this section provides
an overview of each of the primary digital media
types to be discussed: Podcasting, video podcast-
ing, blogs, and wikis. The first section, podcasting,
will be discussed in greater depth and will set
the stage and context of the other Web 2.0 media
discussions. Together, the types of digital media
have provided tools to launch a transformation
of communication via free, easy to use, highly
participatory technologies.
Overview Podcasting and
Web 2.0 Technologies
Podcasting debuted in September 2004 as “audio-
blogging.” However, since those isolated begin-
nings, the technology has evolved into a main-
stream technology with wide societal adoption
(Geoghegan & Klass, 2005; Herrington, 2005).
The public awareness of podcasting was probably
accelerated more by the integration of podcasting
into Apple’s iTunes than anything else. During the
early 2000s, the downloading of music became the
new web-based entertainment and in June 2005,
Apple’s music platform iTunes added podcasts to
the menu of selections (Lafferty & Walch, 2006).
596
Digital Media
Still, it was not until 2006-2007 that widespread
popular adoption among non technical users
became noticeably prevalent (Li, 2007). At this
point in time the iPod® portable media device
was a prominent fueling device for podcasts. But
soon, a host of less expensive generic MP3 players
and handheld digital recorders began to flood the
market and the era of customized playlists, portable
talk radio and everyday disc jockeys had arrived.
Podcasts are digital audio files which are
posted on servers connected to Internet. They are
connected to sites like iTunes with a specialized
code- a scripting language - which enables the
automated delivery of the new episodes to users.
Podcasts are usually produced in a series so that
there are multiple episodes that are all related.
And the scripting language, XML (Extensible
Markup Language) and RSS (Really Simple
Syndication), enables updates of the series to be
sent to the listener’s computer or wireless device
automatically (King & Gura, 2007).
Podcasting provides a powerful means to bring
a long desired reality of learning – just in time
learning - to a broad base of users. Podcasting may,
in fact, be viewed as another vital development
within the constellation of distance learning op-
tions. Indeed, it is not until the last twelve years
that distance learning has become a powerful and
sometimes demanded alternative among college
students and workplace professionals (King &
Griggs, 2006).
The impetus and roots of the podcasting move-
ment were originally dubbed “Democratization of
the Media.” Podcasting emerged in the technol-
ogy field in 2004 three years after Dave Winer
and Adam Curry discussed using the Web, XML
and RSS formats to deliver audio and video in
2001 (Lafferty & Walch, 2006). Although Winer
created the technology, it was actually Andrew
Curry who popularized the podcasting format in
2004 with the release of his tremendously popular
podcast The Daily Source Code and the first pod-
cast listening software (Lafferty & Walch, 2006).
Previous to this, Adam Curry had been known in
Digital Media
the popular media as a MTV (Music Television)
host (Newitz, 2005). No doubt Curry’s popularity
helped drive podcasting’s exposure and maybe
even its early direction. This trend is identified
because the early audio podcasting movement
was dominated by music.
Truthfully, podcasting is much more than a
traditional broadcasted “radio show.” Podcasts are
substantially different because they are web-based,
delivered via RSS feeds, and inherently capable
of being mobile. However, there was a pivotal
point in the history of the spread and adoption of
podcasting which sets it apart from prior digital
media on the web.
The turning point was when both the audience
and budding podcasters identified with the reality
of having their own radio show. As educators, re-
searches in the field of digital media and authors,
we describe this trend now in the familiar language
of Web 2.0 technologies. Moreover, it is increas-
ingly recognized that the difference between early
web-based efforts and Web 2.0 technologies that
users have shifted to the role of being “creators
of content” and not solely consumers of content
(King & Gura, 2007; Li, 2007).
Vodcasts / Video Podcasts
Vodcasts or video podcasts are nearly identical to
audio podcasts in terms of the technology which
distributes and “powers” them for automated
delivery to viewers. Obviously, the major differ-
ence is that while podcasts are audio in content
format, vodcasts are videos. However there is
still variety in the formats for video podcasts as
far as instructional application, because what you
create that video from can vary dramatically. For
instance, an educator can create powerful tutorials
and instructional support materials while learners
can create group projects, original demonstrations,
or interpretations of projects solutions with the
following familiar elements
• PowerPoint slides or complete
presentations
• Photographs
• Hand drawn images, paintings, prints, etc
• Student projects
• Computer generated graphics
• Web pages
• Video clips, and more
In addition, many people write their own script
and either perform role playing or demonstrate
products, projects or techniques through their
original video clips. What is needed for equip-
ment? A digital video recorder might be right in
your pocket. From cell phones to smart phones,
FLIP, digital cameras, camcorders to webcams,
any of these devices might serve as the means to
capture original digital video that becomes the
basis of a new vodcast.
Of course, once the content is created, se-
quenced, narrated (and, if necessary, edited and
formatted), then it is a matter of connecting the
individual video/episode to the entire series with
the same XML and RSS scripting used for audio
podcasts.
Blogs
Blogs are easy to build and easy to edit websites
which encourage dialogue. Many people are now
realizing that they might be the easiest way to
create and maintain an active and informative
website. Bloggers use ready-made site templates
(called themes) and can have an entire new blog
site simply established in 30-60 seconds. Because
of these templates and predesigned features, the
simplified setup does not require much time. With
this free and easy technology bloggers are free
to focus on the content and the audience. (See
Blogger.com and Wordpress.com.)
The beauty of using a blog for educational
purposes is that an instructor or student can cre-
ate a site based on a topic or course and invite
others to post comments and possible additional
597

material. Blogs predate podcasts: as we stated
earlier podcasts were named audio-blogs at first
(Herrington, 2005). The connection is seen in that
Blogs connect each entry (post) to the site on a
feed which is created in RSS coding. Followers
of the site can sign up (subscribe) to the blog in
order to find our when a new post is available.
Sound familiar? Yes, the new wave of podcasting
emerged when Winer figured out how to identify
a new post as an audio post. Now, when one does
coding for the RSS feed (or rather most of the time
your podcast host automatically does it for you) to
add a new episode you have to identify whether
the enclosure is audio, text or video.
Blogging as an innovative technology changed
the face and future of traditional media and im-
pacted also political and economic trends. Most
television, and radio stations, newspapers and
magazines now have blogs for many different
sections. Print and commercial media cannot
keep up with the speed of delivery of news,
information and opinion through blogs. Think,
type, click – within, 15 seconds your opinion
and information is global. In 2009, it is not un-
usual for television broadcasts to cite on the air
that they have retrieved information form blogs
first. We have experienced the transformation of
media, communication and consumer expecta-
tions for instantaneous global information and
constant personal and professional contributions.
The democratization of the media is taking us in
directions which could not have been anticipated
in 2001 and 2004. Our educational systems have
to respond by building on this culture of written
communication, participation and voice.
Wikis
Wikis are websites which easily encourage and
mange collaboration. The two most popular
definitions of wikis illustrate this perspective: “a
webpage that can be easily changed by anyone”
and “a collaborative website” (Cunningham &
Leuf, 2001; Tappscott & Williams, 2006). Wikis
598
Digital Media
are supported by a web-based interface which
features the ability to create custom menus, upload
files and track edits made by each person.
Unlike blogs, a wiki is not focused on one
person as the author and other people commenting.
Instead they are designed to be a community space,
where many users can post and edit documents
of all sorts. The power of wikis is seen especially
in users being able to sign in and see what edits
other users have made to a document. This task is
accomplished by clicking a button to see the back
side (or Review Edits) of the shared documents.
Many teachers and students use wikis to create
class projects and websites with multiple pages
and many contributors. (See www.pbwiki.com
and www.wetpaint.com) In fact, certain functions
of Google Docs (http://docs.google.com), where
you can store files and share them with colleagues
for collaboration, could be considered a wiki like
environment.
Building upon this basic technical introduc-
tion to digital media and some of the instructional
applications which have merged with their use,
the next section begins to reveal the core focus of
our chapter. Digital media are fueled by Web 2.0
technologies which encourage users as content
creators. This fact provides substantial oppor-
tunities for cultivating voice and empowerment
among adult learners.
OPPORTUNITIES TO CULTIVATE
VOICE, EMPOWERMENT
Based on the historical and philosophical roots of
many branches of adult education, the greatest op-
portunities for growth and learning are recognized
as cultivating active learning and engagement
(Elias & Merriam, 2004). Yet even in the rich,
interactive settings, many adult educators and
trainers create, learners still retreat from partici-
pation because of complex and varied reasons.
This reticence is often coupled with issues of
marginalization that could be related to any of
Digital Media
the following: gender, class, race, sexual orienta-
tion, national origin, language proficiency, social
comfort level, social phobias, or lack of trust.
However, these barriers can be overcome because
our understanding of adult learners tells us learning
must reach the needs, values, and beliefs of people
in order for them to fully engage in reflection,
critical thinking, and consideration of different
world views (Cranton, 1994; Wlodkowski, 2003).
Furthermore, digital media has been revealed as
a powerful means to bridge isolation and create
community with adult basic education learners
and marginalized groups in our society (King,
2009a, 2009b)
While technology has often been accused of
destroying social interaction and creating greater
distance among people, one only need look at the
volume of activity at social networking sites to
realize those assumptions are out of touch with
current realities. More than twenty-six and a half
million people per month visited Facebook.com in
2007 and spent over 3 hours per visit (Richards,
2007). In a strange turn of events, technology,
especially digital media, can be use to create
opportunities to facilitate and develop authentic
voices, which empower experiences for under-
represented groups (including adult learners).
The trend to use these technologies for com-
munication, collaboration and socialization is not
isolated to the younger (net) generation. Instead
recent data indicate that Twitter and Facebook are
dominated by middle-aged adults, and podcast
listening is likely dominated by these as well
with the millions of listeners to streaming and on
demand audio for National Public Radio (NPR)
and most national radio stations. The trend of on-
line engagement is being further metamorphosed.
Educators have an opportunity for even greater
advantage as users desire to not only engage in
online discussions, postings and chat, but also to
create online/virtual representations.
These virtual communities are seen across
the web in varied specialty and entertainment
areas (2nd Life, Penguin Club), but also in the
form avatars on blogs, collaborative gaming in
Facebook and role playing games sites as well
as stand alone devices such as the Wii® where
users can create their avatar (Mii®) on their own
Wii® device at home, save it to their console or
remote, bring it to a friend’s house, or upload it
to the web. People of all ages, including adults,
create virtual representations of themselves to
engage with others around the globe. In interesting
caveats these virtual beings may be close to their
real image and person, hypothetical, wishful, or
perceived versions of themselves. The result is that
people use these creations to engage in dialogue,
online games or virtual environments, discover or
express their opinions, views, and inner selves. In
several applications, we see current and would-be
professionals engage in simulations and explore
their professional roles, image, and work through
their virtual being.
No longer is technology a means to solely
retrieve content and information. Instead, users
expect to create new knowledge, their representa-
tions and understanding, express their opinions
and engage with one another. These purposes
and actions are significant shifts from traditional
applications technology in instructional settings.
The ability to transform adult learning experiences
through digital media and Web 2.0 technologies
is profound. Podcasting, blogging, vlogging,
and virtual communities provide the ability for
under-represented groups to develop new scales
of global citizenship, empowerment, and voice
in formal and informal education. (King, 2009a).
Our educators need strategies to incorporate
digital media and its opportunities for critical
thinking, analysis, voice, and presentation as
learners explore, experience, and process global
participation. Moreover, digital media used in
learning experiences provide situated learning for
cultivating lifelong learning information literacy,
confidence, presentation skills, and research skills.
All of these skills are invaluable for success across
the personal and professional lifespan. However,
previously there has been little discussion in our
599

adult learning literature as to the potential and
means for using new media in this manner. The
next section of the chapter provides a model and
strategies for guiding instructors in implement-
ing digital media in their adult learning settings.
MODEL FOR PRACTICE WITH
ADULT LEARNING STRATEGIES
Learning Formats,
Delivery, and Scope
New and alternate choices in instructional meth-
ods, delivery, and scope are some of the outstand-
ing characteristics of podcasting for teaching
and learning. Even briefly examining traditional
education, there is a dramatic difference in the
adoption of podcasting in K-12 vs. adult and higher
education. Podcasting in K-12 settings has been
used as a platform for collaborative student proj-
ects and creativity. However, in higher education,
the practice of instructional related podcasting has
been dominated by “course casting” (Gura, 2006;
King, 2005). Course casting began in the early
stages of podcasting in colleges and universities.
It can be viewed as similar to when professors first
duplicated their lecture notes and posted them
online in the early days of online learning. The
parallel is that it is the most obvious application
of the technology to existing educational practice.
However, this does not mean it is best practice
and certainly defies innovation, reflective practice
and learner-centered instruction.
Course Casts
Podcasting’s course casting reputation that has
promulgated in higher education has sadly spread
to adult education. And with these course casts,
it is not unusual to hear the shuffle of feet, lose
audio as the professor moves from the microphone
or students ask questions. The pattern was that
professors and universities wired classrooms,
600
Digital Media
or delivered digital recorders to record lectures
without technical assistance, and posted them on
the web that same day or a week later. However,
so many opportunities were missed as the audio
remained unchanged, unedited, and with no in-
structional value added. Fortunately, we now see
indicators that podcasting can be used to transform
teaching and learning into new dimensions and
forms and more schools are moving away from
course casting (King, 2005, 2006a; Lafferty &
Walch, 2006).
Greater Opportunities
Even though we will demonstrate other applica-
tions of podcasting to instructional settings, one
can already consider different ways to effectively
use “course casting” in adult education settings.
Rather than posting an entire unmodified class ses-
sion online, instructors should consider chunking
the content into shorter units which serve specific
purposes. Consider a major assignment that you
explain during each semester or class. Why not
record the explanation and question and answer
session and post that online for the students?
They can then listen to it again when they have
questions closer to the due date, or late at night
when instructors are not available. By providing
instructional materials on demand we are also
providing greater opportunity for learners to be
more responsible for their learning.
Another excellent application of course casts
is for students who are attending classes that are
being conducted in a language other than their
native language. Having a digital recording of
the session is a great benefit because the learner
can rewind a section of the recording to replay
it if they find it difficult to understand. On some
digital players, users may even slow the speed
of the play back. If instructors intend to use their
presentation recordings for this purpose, having
a quality digital recording device and a wireless
or portable microphone that will record all class-
room interaction is advised. Please note that in
Digital Media
some cases, in some places the recordings might
not be clear enough to hear; if they are beyond
repair, delete them.
Audience
Audience is a key element in thinking about
podcasting. People around the world can find
publicly available podcasts and download them
immediately, or months or even years after they
have been posted. For example, educators now
consider that when they record content from
classes, they might use it in future classes as an
additional activity outside of the classroom and
be able to focus on more advanced activities and
greater dialogue in the classroom. Therefore, edu-
cators need to consider if the podcast is only going
to be used for the immediate group of learners, or
repurposed for a global audience now and in the
future? Based on the answer, different formats and
ancillary materials will greatly benefit the audio
before it is released.
Mobility
Flexibility and mobility for teaching and learning
are also key aspects of podcasting, which offer
immense new possibilities when educators under-
stand the instructional implications of this new
medium (King, 2006b). If educators consider that
their students can carry audio and video podcasts
on small, mobile devices with them at different
times (time-shifting) and to different locations,
it broadens the possibility of how learning can
be engaged. Consider that these adult learners
could consume, create, and interact with the class
content and one another at any time and any place
convenient to them. Considering the complexity
and many demands in our lives in the 21st century,
this potential learning framework can radically
alter the way teaching and learning is designed
and occurs. Distance learning has created a signifi-
cant paradigm shift across all levels of education
compared to thinking about traditional education.
Another dramatic change has been brought under
way by using mobile and flexible content provided
by handheld devices to eliminate the barriers of
time and space (King & Gura, 2007).
Format
Considering podcast format, the length of podcast
episodes is an often discussed characteristic. For
audio, the consensus in late 2009 is that 25-30
minutes is the ideal length of a podcast. Part of the
choice of this timeframe is that it is the average
work commute time span and many people listen
to podcasts during that part of their day. However,
for video podcasts, the recommended length is
much shorter- up to a maximum of 10 minutes
due to shorter attention span for video content
and also the expense and time involved in video
editing (Felix & Stolarz, 2006). Certainly these
recommended time limitations help illustrate,
that for instructional purposes, content may need
to be reformatted to fit chunks or modules. And
instructional design decisions made based on
learner and content needs.
Powerful Collaboration
through Digital Media
Many people have the misconception that audio
and video podcasting are one-way formats of
communication. However, this is not true. In fact,
both of them have powerful instructional purposes
based on the fact that they are both hosted on
Web 2.0 technology, and have means for dialogue
and exchange integrated into them. Indeed, the
dialogue and community features are the very
foundation for some aggressive advancements
among podcasters and technology innovators.
From the beginning, podcasters focused on gain-
ing responses and feedback from listeners in order
to increase listeners and develop dynamic shows.
Therefore, they worked quickly to develop easy to
manage and use platforms and tools to facilitate
communities (Palloff & Pratt, 2004, 2007). In this
601

way, podcasting technology is consistent with the
instructional technology findings of best practice
in distance and online learning. Cultivating com-
munities of learners provides a basis of social
dialogue, learning and construction of knowledge
(Vygotsky, 1978).
Perhaps some of the earliest efforts among
podcasters to connect with their audiences were to
create email correspondence, open source bulletin
boards (e.g., phpBBd), and free telephone call in
numbers which generated digital files (e.g.,www.
k7.net). The website infrastructure of choice for a
podcaster was a blog and this provided a built-in
platform for comments by listeners.
Another dimension of community is found in
community-based podcast directories; not only
posting a podcast series’ listing, but also build-
ing networks of “friends,” enabling comments
within this collective site, ranking podcasts and
much more. Examples of such active, robust and
community focused directories include Podcast-
pickle.com, Podbean.com, and Blubrry.com.
Additionally, the wider adoption of wikis has
begun to infiltrate the podcasting community. For
example, newer generations of listener interaction
have been seen in Web-based audio feedback,
and live talk-show podcast recording platforms
(e.g., Talkshoe.com, Blogtalkradio.com). Educa-
tors might compare these as being along similar
paradigms to interactive webinar systems. While
not the same, they are similar in that you have a
platform which allows text, sharing, and audio,
all in one place where participants can interact.
This comparison demonstrates the vast differences
to traditional websites where users just retrieve
information. Podcasts are also easily added to
most learning management systems, including
Blackboard (www.blackboard.com) and Moodle
(www.moodle.com). Depending on the online
learning environment, they may be added to the
curriculum as RSS feeds, podcasts, individual
readings/listenings, or file attachments.
The podcasting focuses on collaboration and
voice have been organically expressed in other
602
Digital Media
ways as well. It is interesting to observe that this
technology had such a dedicated following that
it cultivated a grassroots series of face-to-face
conferences called Podcamps (www.podcamp.
org). Chris Penn and Chris Brogan created events
called “podcamps” which are self-described as
“unconferences,” and since 2005 have spread
around the globe through their popularity of par-
ticipatory leadership and creation. Held in cities
around the world, the conference style events are
convened around the broad topic of podcasting.
These podcamps are publicized, organized and
managed through a central wiki, and the presenters,
like the topics, are generated entirely as a grass-
roots movement. In a most democratic system,
anyone can propose a topic and see if likeminded
people aggregate to discuss it. Registration for a
podcamp is free and at the time of the event people
usually gather at the site, perhaps in an assigned,
or approximated, location, and self-generate the
actual topic of the moment. It is a true grounded
theory phenomenon that the collaboration technol-
ogy that permeates podcasting has generated this
collaborative in-person experience.
Collaboration Applied
Building upon these rich technology capabilities
and traditions of practice within the podcasting
field, many valuable opportunities immediately
emerge for adult education application. Consider,
for example, how a classroom or distance educa-
tion instructor might be able to incorporate any
or several of the following technologies, formats
and strategies with their adult or vocational edu-
cation class:
• Blog responses and comments about class
podcasts or guest interviews;
• Peer dialogue about student podcast contri-
butions- public or password protected;
• In- person small group and large group dis-
cussions of audio content;
Digital Media
• Online small group activities to discuss
and respond to audio content;
• Email response – which goes to the pod-
caster (teacher or learner);
• Phone-in/ audio response line- which posts
the students’ phone comments right to the
site.
Making the related learning activity simple is
important. Best practice in instructional technol-
ogy recommends that learners and teachers gradu-
ally ramp up the complexity of their technology
use for their classes. Therefore instructors might
first start with having students listen to a podcast
online and then just click on REPLY and respond-
ing via private comments to the podcast. The next
lesson might involve phoning in a response to the
free dedicated phone line for the class series. In
both cases, text and audio posts could be set up
either to automatically post on the website, or be
moderated first by the instructor.
However the richness of using these simple
technologies and approaches are several. Con-
sider how these activities could be designed to
incorporate
• Literacy skills;
• Soft skills: interpersonal and cross cultural
communication and adeptness;
• Information technology skills;
• 21st Century skills;
• Peer dialogue;
• Individual expression to the group without
immediate social fear (for shy ELL, or ver-
bally disabled students for instance);
• Greater time for critical reflection and re-
sponse time;
• Sharing and validating of prior experience.
Providing opportunities for adult learners to
take center stage in the learning process is a pow-
erful shift in our traditional teaching paradigms.
In this case, simple technologies are used to scaf-
fold learning in many important areas, while also
cultivating collaborative community and skills.
Empowerment
Closely tied to the collaborative basis of podcasting
are the dimensions of voice and empowerment.
Student created podcasts provide a powerful op-
portunity for such experiences. Working through
such a project, instructors do not need to have
computers available for the students until they
are ready to record or edit (if they use a portable
digital recorder). Recommendations for student
created podcasts which cultivate empowerment
and voice include
• Encouraging students to work in twos or
threes for their first project;
• Instructors overseeing the development of
a script, including editing and rewriting;
• Learners practicing the reading of the
script prior to the recording session;
• Having several inexpensive ($30) digital
recorders available for loan to students;
• Posting the recordings privately (class
only) or publicly preferred;
• Celebrating and discussing the posting of
the podcasts in order for learners to discuss
the experience and its meaning for them;
• Facilitating small group discussions about
the podcasts either in person or in online
postings-
◦⊦ The first few times it may be best to
focus on building on the ideas repre-
sented and asking questions
◦⊦ Public critique of learners work
should be carefully pursued with
oversight and ample ground rules
• Encouraging the learners to share the site
and podcasts with colleagues, and family;
• Debriefing with the students about the en-
tire preparation and production experience
in order to learn how to coordinate and fa-
cilitate the activity better each time.
603

Librivox.org is an outstanding example of
an already existing global network that offers
the opportunity to cultivate adult learner voice.
Librivox.org is a website maintained by volun-
teers who record and provide free audio books
via podcast to everyone. The books are all in the
public domain and most have been part of the web
based Gutenberg Project which distributes public
domain books in online text. Adult educators can
invite their learners to become part of this learning
opportunity by selecting a chapter, poem or book
for a class project. To emulate the collaboration,
voice and empowerment which are the focuses
of this chapter, educators might ask the learners
to select among several chapters or books. Once
a group decision is made, the students can study,
research and discuss the text in preparation for
creating their recording. Once they record the
chapter/s they would upload it to the Librivox.
org site; it will then be reviewed by the editor
and posted. Very soon their recording will be
globally presented as the voice of the work. This
activity demonstrates how authentic learning can
incorporate literacy skills, presentation skills,
collaboration, historical research and literary
critique, all while building empowerment, voice
and global awareness.
Data Driven Decision Making
Podcasting’s dedicated focus on community may
have facilitated the tradition of general podcasters
(non education related) gathering podcast-user
statistics. Indeed, podcast statistics are more con-
venient to gather and more accurate than many
distance learning related usage data. Many of the
earliest and consistent podcasting hosting services
provide robust statistical data (for example Libsyn.
com, and Podcastpickle.com). In addition, pod-
casters can easily create a special feed system that
collects additional data and provides extra ways
to easily promote the podcast. (See Feedburner
which is now owned by Google and found at
http://feedburner.google.com/.)
604
Digital Media
This built-in platform of data gathering pro-
vides a robust system for adult educators to be
able to make data driven decisions about what
learners are responding to and instructional choices
in design, content, and format. However, this is
where the opportunity falls short. Apparently, few
educators are using the opportunity to collect data
and inform their design and instruction. Based on
discussions with educators and review of books
on educational podcasting, it appears that most
educators are unfamiliar with this feature of the
podcasting technology. Because authors consider
most teachers are podcasting only to their classes,
they seem to omit information about gathering,
analyzing, and using the data.
The recommended practice instead is that
educators use a public host for their podcast
files, and also create a Feedburner feed (http://
feedburner.google.com/) for their series. With a
few clicks of the mouse, they will then be able to
see which episodes learners are accessing, when
they are listening, and if people around the globe
are also accessing the material. This information
guides instructional discussions with students
about responsibility, learning, and technology. For
instance, teachers might discover students who do
not understand how to access the material with a
non-institutional computer. In other aspects, the
frequency they access and even share the content
with other listeners also indicates what is resonat-
ing with their needs. By examining the data with
the content listenings, educators can develop a
better understanding of student learning needs
and have more in-depth discussions about how
to serve those needs.
FUTURE TRENDS
Examining the future of podcasting related to adult
education, three areas emerge: greater adoption
across people of all sectors, greater diversity of
voices, and additional integration of collaborative
tools. The first two trends are intertwined based
Digital Media
on continuing research that shows that the wave
of podcasting has moved from the domain of the
technophile to the more general population (Li,
2007). As podcasting is more widely adopted for
many reasons including specific broadcasting
choices, grassroots initiatives, pinpoint interests,
and community endeavors, the audience for pod-
casting is crossing boundaries that are consistent
with our global society. Our world is comprised
of a rich diversity of cultures, generations, races,
genders, socioeconomic statuses, classes and
persuasions. By the same token, we are experienc-
ing the podcasting audience crossing all lines of
variation and differences. In part, this is because
podcasts are for the most part absolutely free and
in 2009 they can now be accessed not only from
MP3 players and iPods, but also cell phones, smart
phones, televisions, computers, computer game
stations and iPhones.
In much the same way, podcasters are emerging
from all walks of life, nations, and cultures. As
indicated previously, podcasting appropriated the
name “democratization of the media,” and con-
tinuing trends demonstrate the growing diversity
of people creating podcasts. Likely one of the
equalizing characteristics of new media podcast-
ing is that it is inexpensive and easy to make and
host. Students, teachers, businesses, journalists,
politicians and religious followers alike (to name
a few) wanting to create and distribute a podcast
need not invest much money to do so.
In one inexpensive approach, an instructor
who wants to podcast could use a institutionally
or publicly available/shared computer, an inexpen-
sive microphone, free digital recording and editing
software (e.g., Audacity, http://audacity.source-
forge.net/) and a free podcast hosting account
(e.g., www.podomatic.com). The total startup costs
could be as little as $10 for a microphone and $0
for the hosting services. Moreover, there are free
technologies which make it possible to host a live
podcast using a telephone as the recording device
(e.g., BlogTalk Radio www.blogtalkradio.com). In
another free strategy, some podcasters record their
series with the free software and service SKYPE
(www.skype.com), a Voice over Internet Proto-
col (VOIP) provider and platform. Podcasting is
the opposite of most technology adoption of the
past. The trend and technology have developed
rapidly to eliminate the hurdles of expensive and
complicated equipment and services.
Another emerging trend for podcasting is
revealed almost daily through new innovations.
The integration of collaborative tools into podcast-
ing platforms is a goal of podcasters and podcast
hosting services alike (Lafferty & Walch, 2006).
Open-source and commercial developers continue
to work eagerly and quickly to create free and
inexpensive platforms and supplementary Web-
based tools, plug-ins, add-ons and widgets. Every
month we see scores of new forms of such tools,
and sometimes new generations of innovation
burst onto the scene. This article has mentioned
many of these tools; others include VOIP record-
ing systems and conference call networks, Web
browser plug-ins, podcast communities, and
many more.
Social media is most currently making a large
impact on business, media and entertainment (Gil-
lan, 2007; Tapscott & Williams, 2006). Web-based
collaboration has already had substantial impact
across varied sectors including human relations,
national and global economics, workplace dy-
namics and processes, organizational structures,
and politics (Tapscott &Williams, 2006). It is not
surprising to see that this innovative movement of
podcasting has integrated the rise of collaborative
tools into its primary path of development. The
same intertwining development is happening with
social media as Twitter and Facebook connect with
podcasting efforts. It will be exciting to see how
the world of podcasting continues to provide a
preview of the collaboration that will later reach
the more traditional workplace, economic and
political structures. It will be thrilling to see how
we can continue to adopt and appropriate these
tools to scaffold voice and empowerment for
adult learners.
605

CONCLUSION
Podcasting offers a new dimension to the assort-
ment of free and inexpensive instructional technol-
ogy tools and strategies which have been available
for adult learning. However, by its very nature
and format, it is capable of moving the teaching
and learning environment to a new dimension of
collaboration and learner centeredness. Audio
and video podcasting provide the opportunity
for learners to demonstrate their understanding,
express opinions and engage in peer learning in
authentic ways while cultivating voice and em-
powerment. Moreover, the much needed skills of
information literacy, collaborative skills, lifelong
learning skills, 21st century skills, and literacy skills
can easily be integrated into content focused and
interdisciplinary podcasting projects.
This chapter has provided an in-depth overview
of the nature of podcasting and digital media from
the perspective of the strategies of how they can be
used in adult learning contexts. In a highly complex
and mobile society, educators cannot overlook the
desire of adult learners to invest in learning, create
content, and be in control of time and space for
learning. Indeed, turning the demands and needs
of students around, adult educators can see them
as opportunities to increase students’ responsi-
bility and habits of lifelong learning. Instead of
being restrained and constrained to a desktop or
conference room, professional learning truly can
be “anytime, anywhere.” Even more powerful,
rather than being solely content consumers, we
are cultivating content creators who will be more
confident and ready for the demands of the work-
place. From literacy, to research, critical thinking
to collaboration, voice and empowerment are
foundational characteristics for success.
REFERENCES
Cranton, P. (1994). Understanding and promoting
transformative learning. San Francisco: Jossey-
Bass.
606
Digital Media
Cunningham, W., & Leuf, B. (2001). The wiki way.
Quick collaboration on the web. Upper Saddle
River, NJ: Addison-Wesley.
Elias, J., & Merriam, S. (2004). Philosophical
foundations of adult education (3rd ed.). Malabar,
FL: Krieger.
Enriquez, J. (2001). As the future catches you:
How genomics and other forces are changing
your life, work, health and work. New York: Three
Rivers Press.
Felix, L., & Stolarz, D. (2006). Hands-on guide
to video blogging and podcasting. New York:
Elsevier.
Geoghegan, M. W., & Klass, D. (2005). Podcast
solutions: The complete guide to podcasting. New
York: Friends of Fred.
Gillan, P. (2007). The new influencers: A mar-
keter’s guide to social media. Sanger, CA: Quill
Driver Books.
Gura, M. (2006). Moving instructional podcast-
ing beyond coursecasting. Perspectives: The New
York Journal of Adult Learning, 4 (2), 31-33.
Retrieved August 20, 2006, from http://www.
podcastforteachers.org/elibrary/Gura_4.2.pdf
Herrington, M. (2005). Podcasting hacks: Tips
& tools for blogging out loud. Cambridge, UK:
O’Reilly.
King, K. P. (2005, Nov.). Podcasting article cover-
age. Chronicle of Higher Education, 11. Retrieved
November 10, 2009, from http://chronicle.com/
article/Podcasting-LecturesMore/11242/
King, K. P. (2006a). Learning on demand: Portable,
personal and powerful. Leveraging your podcast
with learning. Podcasting Central Magazine.
Retrieved August 20, 2009, from http://www.pod-
castingcentral.com/PodcasterCentral_001_0406.
pdf
Digital Media
King, K. P. (2006b). Live from the Great State of
New York. Perspectives: The New York Journal
of Adult Learning, 4(2), 34-37. Retrieved August
20, 2009, from http://www.podcastforteachers.
org/elibrary/King_4.2.pdf
King, K. P. (2009a). Empowerment and voice:
Digital media. In Miller, M., & King, K. P. (Eds.),
Empowering women through literacy. Series:
Adult education special topics: Theory, research
and practice in lifelong learning (pp. 271–280).
Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing.
King, K. P. (2009b, Summer). From the sidelines
to center stage: Opportunities to discover voice
and empowerment through web 2.0 and new media
for LGBTQ adult learners. In T. Bettinger (Ed.),
Special Issue New Horizons in Adult Education
and HRD, 23(3), 55-64.
King, K. P., & Griggs, J. K. (Eds.). (2006).
Harnessing innovative technologies in higher
education: Access, equity, policy and instruction.
Madison, WI: Atwood Publishing.
King, K. P., & Gura, M. (2007). Podcasting for
teaching (1st ed.). Charlotte, NC: Information
Age Publishing.
King, K. P., & Gura, M. (2009). Podcasting for
teaching (2nd ed.). Charlotte, NC: Information
Age Publishing.
Lafferty, M., & Walch, R. (2006). Tricks of the
podcasting masters. New York: Que.
Li, C. (2007, April 22). Forrester’s new social
technographics report. Retrieved October 28,
2009 from http://blogs.forrester.com/charlene-
li/2007/04/index.html
Newitz, A. (2005, March). Adam Curry wants to
make you an iPod radio star. Wired, 13(3). Re-
trieved October 20, 2009, from http://www.wired.
com/wired/archive/13.03/curry.html
O’Neill, D. (2006). What is ID3v2? ID3: The
audience is informed. RetrievedOctober20, 2009,
fromhttp://www.id3.org/ID3v2Easy
Palloff, R., & Pratt, K. (2004). Collaborating
online: Learning together in community. San
Francisco: Jossey Bass.
Palloff, R., & Pratt, K. (2007). Building online
learning communities. San Francisco: Jossey Bass.
Richards, J. (2007, July 6). Facebook grows by
89 percent. Retrieved November 1, 2009, from
http://technology.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/
tech_and_web/the_web/article2036442.ece
Simonson, M., Smaldino, S. E., Albright, M.,
& Zvacek, S. (2008). Teaching and learning at
a distance: Foundations of distance education
(4th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Tapscott, D., & Williams, A. D. (2006). Wikinom-
ics: How mass collaboration changes everything.
New York: Portfolio.
Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society. Cam-
bridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Wlodkowski, R. (2003). Fostering motivation in
professional development programs. In S. Imel &
J. M. Ross-Gordon (Series Eds.), and K. P. King &
P. A. Lawler (Vol. Eds.), New directions in adult
and continuing education: Vol. 98. New perspec-
tives on designing and implementing professional
development for teachers of adults (pp. 39-48).
San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
KEY TERMS AND DEFINITIONS
Democratization of the Media: This term
refers to the philosophical emphasis of new media.
Based on the fact that “big corporations” do not
own the podcasting “air waves” (the Internet), the
phrase represents freedom of access, voice, and
opinion. In podcasting, inexpensive hardware,
software and Internet space can allow anybody to
607

be a “broadcaster.” The major constraints in audio
and video podcast production are only having suf-
ficient time to create, record, and edit podcasts.
Enclosure: An enclosure is a specific section
of code always designated in an XML feed file to
refer to an attachments file’s name, size, location
and media type. For instance, enclosures may refer
to audio or video attachments in the case of audio
and video podcasts.
ID3 Tags: ID3 Tags are additional (metadata)
file information included with a file which fol-
lows specific specifications and conventions to be
recognized by media players. The information is
integrated into a file’s properties and transparent
and much of the information will be invisible to
the average user (O’Neill, 2006). ID3 Tags are
most frequently found among MP3, audio files
and video files to enable information such as the
title, artist, album, copyright, etc. to be stored in
the file itself. Such practice enables the file to be
identified by users more easily and slightly reduces
plagiarism, piracy, and intellectual property theft.
Synch- Synchronization: This term stands for
the ability and process of automatically correlating
or matching data from two different sources or
locations. In the case of mobile devices such as cell
phones and smart phones, synchronization refers
to updating and combining designated information
on the computer with a mobile device. Usually
a small program is installed on both devices to
facilitate this data management process. The means
of connectivity may be varied including cables,
network, wireless LAN, Bluetooth®, infrared
and more.
Social Media: Young people and adults alike
are conducting their social and work- or school-
related conversations through social media and
other technologies (Enriquez, 2001). Examples
include Twitter.com, MySpace.com, Facebook.
com, LinkedIn.com, online gaming systems such
as DSNintendo® group play and Wiis, to texting
608
Digital Media
and instant messaging. Information is shared with
one person or up to thousands at a time. Social
media focuses on and can be used to facilitate
global collaboration, personal interests and ex-
pertise. The connections to educational activities
are being explored in the classroom and literature
more every day.
Timeshifting: A phrase to describe how users
can watch or listen to an audio or video episode/
program at a different time than when it was
produced or broadcasted.
Web 2.0: This term describes the development
of the Web to include more Internet-based pro-
grams. Previously such technology applications
were termed “hosted services” and with greater
proliferation have launched more collaborative
and easier content creation (King, 2009; Simonson
et al., 2008). Examples of Web 2.0 technologies
include the collection of Google® applications,
like Gmail, Google Docs and Google Voice which
work over the Internet rather than needing to be
installed on a stand alone computer; social media
and networking sites (described above); and con-
tent creation technologies such as blogs, wikis, and
podcasts. There is controversy regarding the term
because the original purpose of the Web included
many of these same abilities in more basic forms,
although they were not widely adopted at the time.
In part, Web 2.0 has also become synonymous with
simple, content creating, web-based applications.
XML Scripting Language: The XML speci-
fication defines a standard way to add markup
structure (formatting and additional instructions)
to documents. XML Script allows for the creation,
storage and manipulation of variables and data
during processing. XML is a markup language
for documents containing both content (words,
pictures, etc.) and some indication of what role
that content plays (for example, whether it is in
a section heading or a footnote, etc.).
 609

Chapter 36
Integrating Digital Photography
into Adult Education
Laura D. Hoffman
Saddleback Valley Unified School District Adult Education, USA

ABSTRACT
As colleges and universities around the country face increasing budget challenges, pressure mounts for
a more retail-based approach to education, where the needs of students and the ability of institutions
to fulfill them are clearly defined. This article presents a case study of a successful digital photography
curriculum for adult learners at a large school district in Southern California. The curriculum represents
a retail-based approach to education grounded in meeting the needs of students, expanding their zest for
learning and providing new educational opportunities. This approach rests on proven concepts of retail
marketing woven into the fabric of the learning experience: Give people what they want and they will keep
coming back; expand their universe of wants and you will have a customer for life. The article concludes
that even with shrinking budgets, rising costs and a dwindling traditional student population, course
curricula can be designed for student enrichment, program growth and ongoing institutional success.

INTRODUCTION audience. Potential students are hungry to discover

Today, just about everyone has a digital camera.
These handy outlets for creative expression,
however, have become increasingly complex,
integrating with computer software and hardware,
as well as the Internet. This universality, coupled
with often baffling complexity, creates a perfect
opportunity for adult education to tap into a mass
DOI: 10.4018/978-1-61692-906-0.ch036
not only how to decipher technologically complex
digital camera equipment but to expand their
unique creative vision (Rand & Zakia, 2006). This
article explores how effective integration of digital
photography curriculum blossomed to meet the
fast-paced needs of a growing adult population
in a highly visual society (Palmquist, 2008). By
building curriculum based on the unique attributes
of adult learners, continued growth and success
was assured for the adult-education digital pho-
 Integrating Digital Photography into Adult Education
tography program, expanding from two classes
per semester to twelve classes per semester in
just four years. This expansion incorporated a
retail-based approach to education, where stu-
dents acted collaboratively with the instructor to
develop classes meeting their growing need for
exponential learning.
BACKGROUND
Ultimately, a successful digital photography pro-
gram within the context of adult education relies
on three factors:
1. Understanding the characteristics of adult
learners (Wang, 2007).
2. Understanding how instructors can effec-
tively facilitate adult learning (Penn, n.d.).
3. Fostering an appropriate educational setting
(Finch & Crunkilton, 1999).
Characteristics of Adult Learners
To facilitate any successful adult education pro-
gram, it is critical for educators to understand what
drives and motivates the adult learner (Penn, n.d.).
According to Malcolm Knowles (1970), a pioneer
in the field of adult education who popularized
the term andragogy in the U.S., the adult learner
generally fits within the following assumptions:
a. Self-concept of learner: The adult learner
is usually autonomous and self- directed,
having lived as capable and independent
people (Merriam, 2001). Adult learners
usually accept responsibility for their own
learning and take an active role in the learn-
ing process (Wang, 2007).
b. Prior life-experience of learner: The adult
learner may have lived a number of years
and gathered many prior life experiences,
“accumulating a reservoir of life experi-
ences that is a rich resource for learning”
610
(Merriam, 2001). Previous life experiences
can present possible barriers to learning
that must be overcome; on the other hand,
a students’ knowledge base can enrich the
classroom experience, bringing new and
useful information helping other students
to feel connected (Penn, n.d.)
c. Goal-oriented with a readiness to learn:
The adult learner comes to class ready to
learn, especially if they must add knowl-
edge to cope with real-life situations. Many
students have a clear goal of staying current
with the latest technology and others wish
to improve their eye and artistic vision. Any
information presented has to be relevant
and meaningful to the learner’s unique life
perspective (Penn, n.d.).
d. Motivation to learn: Adult learners are
generally highly motivated to learn and have
a keen sense of progress towards their goals
(Wang, 2007), responding best to internal
versus external motivators (Merriam, 2001).
Many adults are motivated internally by
the desire for an improved quality of life,
increased recognition, a greater sense of self-
confidence and increased job satisfaction.
A great number of motivated adult learners
believe “learning is a means to an end, not
an end itself” (Penn, n.d.). These are students
who are motivated enough to take time out
of their busy schedules, which may already
be filled with the demands of family, jobs
and running a household. They choose to
come to class instead.
e. Need to know: The adult learner has a need
to know why, what and how the material will
apply to life. Information presented has to
be relevant, practical and have meaning to
where the learner is in life. Adult learners
feel a strong desire to learn (Wang, 2007).
f. Orientation to learning: Adult learners,
having lived awhile, are life-centered rela-
tive to learning. In other words, adult stu-
dents generally respond well to information
Integrating Digital Photography into Adult Education
organized around real-life situations and
acquiring coping skills that apply to real
life (Penn, n.d). These are students who are
problem-centered, interested in the imme-
diate application of knowledge (Merriam,
2001).
Facilitating Adult Learning
While adult students come to classes possessing
common characteristics, it lies with the instructor
to meet the students’ needs. The instructor must
assume the role as a learning facilitator (Wang,
2007). This works best when the adult educator
has motivated adult learners who are willing to
assume responsibility for learning and self-devel-
opment. Ultimately, the educator and the students
can share in the learning experience together and
learn from each other, which can become a joyful
and meaningful experience.
Adult educators can use specific strategies
to enhance the learning experience, while keep-
ing in mind many of the characteristics unique
to adult learners (Penn, n.d.). For example, an
adult educator may be mindful that learners are
goal-oriented (Wang, 2007), caring whether the
information presented will have relevance to them.
Many adults learn best when they have the op-
portunity to solve real-life problems (Chapman,
2006). Scenarios, case studies, hands-on-projects
and field trips are highly effective methods to
facilitate adult learning (Penn, n.d.).
Photography instructors who use an experien-
tial learning approach expose students to real-life
situations, such as field trips and facilitating the
operation of one’s camera, as well as operating
lighting equipment in a studio setting. Students
test theory from in-class lectures and presenta-
tions by carrying out actual case studies and by
experimenting with theoretical photographic
concepts for themselves. For example, during a
lecture, a photography instructor may tell the class
that higher ISO ratings create digital noise and
grain, which can degrade a photograph (Miotke,
2005). The statement will take on more meaning
if students have the opportunity to test the claim
and find out how this is really true. Case studies
can reveal and make real any of the instructor’s
statements if the student experiences that particular
condition directly (Chapman, 2008).
To understand and meet the learner’s needs,
an educator takes into consideration how students
learn (Bott, 1996). Learning styles represent
different approaches or ways people learn. For
example, visual learners learn by using their eyes
to see (Penn, n.d.). These types of students think
visually and learn best from viewing displays,
which include illustrations, projected images,
overhead transparencies, handouts and diagrams.
Visual learners often prefer to take detailed notes
in class to better absorb information. They also
tend to sit in the front of the class to get the best
view. Auditory learners learn best through listen-
ing, preferring to take in information through
spoken lectures, discussions, talking things out
and listening carefully to what other students have
to say. Kinesthetic /tactile individuals learn better
through motion, preferring a hands-on approach,
“actively exploring the physical world around
them” (Learning Styles Explained, n.d., p. 1).
In 1984, David Kolb, along with Roger Fry,
created his illustrious experiential learning styles
model, acknowledging the previous work of other
education leaders in the field, including Rogers,
Piaget, and Jung. Today, Kolb’s learning-styles
model and experiential learning theory are rec-
ognized by academics, trainers, teachers, and
managers “as truly seminal works; fundamental
concepts towards our understanding and explain-
ing human learning behavior, and towards helping
others to learn” (Chapman, 2006, p. 1).
Understanding human learning behavior,
particularly among adult learners, is critical to
creating a successful adult-education program.
Meeting the needs of students is really retail-
therapy: Give people what they want and they
will keep coming back; expand their universe of
611
 Integrating Digital Photography into Adult Education
wants and you will have a customer for life (25
Ways to Keep Customers for Life, 2006).
Kolb’s learning theory presents four clear-cut
learning styles, established from a four-stage
learning cycle. This model “is particularly elegant,
since it offers both a way to understand individual
people’s different learning styles, and also an
explanation of a cycle of experiential learning
that applies to us all” (Chapman, 2006, p. 1). As
a key principle of his experiential learning theory,
Kolb includes a learning cycle (Smith, 2001)
where ‘immediate concrete experiences’ provide
a basis for ‘reflections and observations.’ Like
stair-steps, these ‘reflections and observations’ are
incorporated and distilled into ‘abstract concepts,’
which produce new implications for acts that can
be ‘actively tested’ which in turn, result in creating
completely new experiences. Ideally, “this process
represents a learning cycle or spiral where the
learner can touch all the bases” (Chapman, 2006,
p. 1) through experience, reflection, thought and
action. Concrete or immediate experiences lead
the student to reflections and observations. These
reflections would then be “absorbed and trans-
lated into abstract concepts” (Chapman, 2006 p.
1) that lead to action, with which the individual
can experiment. These chains of events enable
the creation of new experiences, and the learning
builds. More importantly, the desire for learning
increases as well as the potential for expanded
curriculum.
To tap into the interests, abilities and needs of
the adult-education student, the successful digital
photography curriculum takes into account all of
Kolb’s (1984) experiential learning cycles:
1. Concrete experience (CE): Learner actively
experiences an activity such as a field trip
or lab work. A photography student might
be on an organized field trip or in a “real
world” studio setting, photographing mod-
els or product with a team of other students
during class time.
612
2. Reflective observation (RO): Learner
consciously reflects back on the field trip
or photography studio experience. For ex-
ample, the lighting changed rapidly during
the field trip to the beach at sunset and the
clouds were full of color until the light faded.
3. Abstract conceptualization (AC): Learner
thinks and conceptualizes a theory about
what is observed during the experience. For
example, a student may recall the lighting
was better at the beach during the field trip
after the sun had set, therefore this may
be the best time to take photographs, yet a
photographer must work fast, as the lighting
conditions change rapidly after sundown and
the sky quickly loses its color.
4. Active experimentation (AE): Learner is
actively planning and doing, testing a model
or theory and may want to return to the field
or the studio to try out new concepts and
ideas. For example, the student returns to the
site of the beach field trip during sunset and
practices changing exposures as the lighting
changes and comes up with exciting results
(Chapman, 2006).
Next it is necessary to understand Kolb’s four
learning styles that correspond to the experiential
learning cycle stages (Experiential Learning,
Kolb):
1. Accommodators: Those who learn best
when presented with hands-on experiences,
relying on intuition rather than logic. They
like to work in teams to complete tasks. These
people thrive on field trips and are eager to
jump in, but will never take the time to read
a camera’s operational manual.
2. Assimilators: These people learn better
when provided with strong logical theories
for consideration. They prefer materials
to read, lectures, and time to think things
through. For example, they will bring ex-
posure “look up tables” (LUT), class notes
Integrating Digital Photography into Adult Education
and camera manuals with them to field trips
and prefer to take their time studying a scene
before making a photograph. They will study
lighting, camera and computer equipment in
a studio thoroughly before feeling confident
about taking pictures.
3. Convergers: These are students who learn
better when given practical and useful ap-
plications of concepts and theories. They
have the ability to make decisions and solve
problems by finding practical solutions to
problems and questions. They will be quick
to find scenes that work for them and may
create their own ‘do it yourself’ (DIY)
camera accessories to help them create a
photograph with a desired effect.
4. Divergers: These are individuals who learn
better when given the opportunity to collect
and observe a wide range of input and in-
formation. They have the ability to examine
things from many different perspectives.
These learners thrive on ideas but may watch
other students photograph in the field or
studio but may be slow to pick up a camera
and tripod (Chapman, 2006).
Each adult education class is filled with accom-
modators, assimilators, convergers and divergers.
Learning to spot the learning styles and knowing
how to accommodate them is key for a successful
instructor. Success is achieved not only by the
grade the student receives at the end of the class
but by the desire of the student to keep learning,
particularly with the same instructor. Fostering
student loyalty and curiosity naturally leads to
the building of class curriculum.
In 1979, John E. Jones and J. William Pfeiffer,
vice president and president of University Asso-
ciates of La Jolla, California, created a five-step
experiential learning model, based on a cyclical
learning process consisting of five separate but
connecting procedures. According to Jones &
Pfeiffer, along with Cris Hagen, who worked
for Jones & Pfeiffer in the 1980’s as a trainer for
educators and industry leaders, experiential learn-
ing is an approach where participants take part in
an activity, such as using a camera and lighting
equipment in a studio field trip. The individu-
als can then critically reflect on the experience,
gaining useful insight they can use and build on.
This model emphasizes the direct experiences of
the participant or learner, as opposed to vicarious
experiences absorbed through more passive and
didactic approaches.
This model lends itself elegantly to digital
photography. Students are eager to get their hands
wet by using their cameras in real-life settings.
For example, Saddleback Valley Unified School
District’s (SVUSD) Adult Education digital
photography students were so enthusiastic about
visiting historic Mission San Juan Capistrano as a
class field trip that many students referred friends
for more digital photography courses. Several
students then re-enrolled in additional SVUSD
classes, eager for more active group-learning
experiences in the field. Their interest filled new
classes and allowed the photography program to
expand, confirming to administrators that adult
students respond well to personalized curriculum.
One of the most powerful methods available
to teachers for evaluating student photographs is
through the classroom critique (Cline, 1999). The
classroom critique provides important learning and
teaching opportunities as student work is presented
in a dynamic classroom setting for review and
commentary (Rand & Zakia, 2006). Feedback is
a means toward the goal of understanding, appre-
ciating and learning from displayed photographs
created to fulfill specific assignments.
Students receive assignments in class in order
to apply a number of skills developed during the
course (Bott, 1996). The class has the opportunity
to evaluate if a student has met the objective of the
assignment and determine if the student’s work
shows application of technical and compositional
design skills, and if the photograph effectively
communicates an idea. The method used in a
critique will vary depending on the level of the
613
 Integrating Digital Photography into Adult Education
learner and the purpose of the critique. A more
structured and sequential approach is recom-
mended for beginning students (Rand & Zakia,
2006) to allow for teaching points. The instructor
can point out how the student applied newfound
techniques and solved problems or how the student
could improve on the image. In this approach, the
teacher does most of the talking, as students are
still beginners and must assimilate a lot of new in-
formation (Cline, 1999). Beginner or intermediate
groups will have additional technical challenges to
overcome and are growing in artistic expression
as they work to expand their visual vocabularies.
As learners advance, due to their previous lessons
and experience with critiques, other students
can join the discussion and describe how to best
make a picture work (Rand & Zakia, 2006). The
instructor starts the dialogue with an observation
and then elicits opinions from the students, cre-
ating a progressive learning atmosphere of give
and take between teacher and students (Wang,
2007). This type of exchange can be exciting and
informative, involving all students in the critique
process (Cline, 1999).
Handling the classroom critique with adult
learners is tricky, since many adults are uncomfort-
able with the idea of being criticized in a group
setting. For critiques to be handled successfully,
the instructor would facilitate a constructive and
collaborative critique in an atmosphere of respect
and encouragement, using the opportunity to draw
excitement to promote students’ creative vision
and mastery of photographic techniques. Ulti-
mately, the goal of critique is to inspire students
to do more and create even better photographic
work and grow as artists.
The Educational Setting
A digital photography curriculum will be short-
lived and destined to fail unless the educational
setting is adequate. To assure long-term success,
adult education digital photography classrooms
should come equipped with computers for each
614
student with state-of-the-art image editing soft-
ware such as Adobe PhotoShop, as well as a high
quality projector to view and evaluate student
work. The projector would be connected to a main
teaching computer. A good data projector can show
a large clear image that is visible from all angles
in a classroom (Lightbody, 2007).
In ideal scenarios, digital photography class-
rooms would also come equipped with studio
lighting equipment (both strobe and continuous
light), high ceilings, adequate ventilation, and
high quality photographic printers (Rand &
Zakia, 2006). In the old days of film photogra-
phy, most classrooms provided costly chemical
based darkrooms and labs to develop negatives,
transparencies and create prints on photo paper.
Today, the photographic “lab” is a computer lab,
requiring state of the art computer equipment and
updated software.
Digital Photography as
an Avenue of Entry
Just about everyone has a digital camera–or is
thinking about buying one. Visual content is om-
nipresent in society, from popular tiny handheld
MP3 players to massive billboards flashing over
Times Square (Palmquist, 2008). Visual Literacy,
the ability to know how images affect and influence
people in their buying decisions or how they affect
what individuals like and dislike (Cline, 1999), is
essential in a society inundated with advertising
and entertainment images. Digital photography
courses can be designed with flexibility in mind,
responding to the changing needs of students
(Palmquist, 2008) as technology transforms and
broadens the possible ways photographs can be
shared. For example, preserving photographs
in books, blogs, on-line photography galleries,
social networking sites or digital scrapbooking
sites “are a reflection of the very human need to
tell our stories, to create a record of our lives”
(Clyde, 2005).
Integrating Digital Photography into Adult Education
PRESENT PERSPECTIVES
Adult education must appeal to a mass audience.
Digital photography is a winning curriculum for
those buying increasingly complex cameras and
image editing software, hungry to find out how
to not only decipher technologically challenging
digital camera equipment, but to also expand their
unique creative vision (Rand & Zakia, 2006).
While today’s educators are expanding classroom
instruction with technology based activities, such
as how to use computer applications or how to get
the most use of the Internet, digital photography
is emerging as a valuable and desirable tool for
developing technological, creative and academic
skills (Zahra, 2008).
The immediacy, flexibility and cost savings
of digital photography has made this outlet of
creative expression increasingly popular. Camera
manufacturers are fiercely competing for sales by
constantly adding improvements and innovative
technologies in enhanced image resolution, im-
age quality, features and controls, all designed to
offer the consumer “the best bang for the buck”
(Steve’s Digicams, n.d.). Many students new to
digital photography are wondering what camera
to buy; Saddleback Valley Unified School District
Adult Education addressed this need by design-
ing a three-hour workshop devoted entirely to
shopping for a digital camera. This introductory
course served as a point of entry for even the most
casual adult learner.
Once the student made the personal choice
of what camera and accessories to purchase, the
next question follows: “How on earth do I use
this thing?” This step is the beginning point of
inquiry that can transform a passing interest in
photography into a growing passion. Many new
students, after mastering basic controls of a digital
camera, continue on to develop pleasing image
compositions that turn throwaway snapshots into
memorable, innovative photographs. They devel-
op competency in image editors, which helps keep
adult learners current and confident with multiple
computer applications. Many digital photography
students end up taking Adobe PhotoShop courses
or other image editing classes, digital scrapbooking
and may ultimately begin careers in photography
(Palmquist, 2008).
Adult educators have the challenge of adjusting
teaching methods and philosophies to appropri-
ately meet the needs and demands of adult learners,
to better facilitate the learning experience (Penn,
n.d.) and keep students engaged and coming back
for more. To assure a transformative process, an
adult educator must first understand the complex
interaction of different students’ varying charac-
teristics, which could include deeply held personal
philosophical perspectives, as well as their own
unique learning style and life experiences. The
effective adult educator is no longer just a source
of wisdom, but rather a learning facilitator and a
partner in transformative learning (Wang, 2007).
People learn best by experiencing, where
individuals can apply all the senses in a shared
activity. Typically, people generally remember
only 20% of what they hear and 30% of what
they see (Pastore, 2003) through conventional
teaching methods, such as lecture. However, if a
teacher engages the full body, mind, emotions and
spirit, the students will own the experience and
retain what they have learned (C. Hagen, personal
communication, October 30, 2009).
The old adage says that experience is the best
teacher. So it has been with the growing digital
photography curriculum. Students with satisfy-
ing experiences want more and different types
of them. By starting on an elemental level and
building confidence, students discovered they
“got it” and were eager for more. Experiences
can include activities that facilitate participation
of the class in the following scenarios:
(1) Use class time to practice using one’s own
camera, identifying and using each feature
and control. Students can locate and manipu-
late the camera’s light meter, ISO, aperture
and shutter speed to arrive at appropriate
615
 Integrating Digital Photography into Adult Education
exposures (Rand & Zakia, 2006). The digital
photography instructor can facilitate and
guide students through practical exercises,
such as breaking the class into teams of two,
where each student can photograph each
other in existing lighting conditions, arriving
at a properly exposed image. Students can
also try out various focal lengths of lenses,
from very wide-angle lenses to telephoto
lenses while photographing each other. One
exercise involves the student composing an
image filling the frame of the picture with
the head and shoulders of another classmate,
on the widest possible angle (the photogra-
pher would be very close to the subject),
and on the most magnified telephoto setting
(the photographer and subject will be far
away from each other). This activity, while
enjoyable and thought provoking, will also
demonstrate how different focal lengths can
distort or compliment the subject’s face and
the background of an image. As opposed to
chalk-and talk lecture, the student has the
opportunity to find this out firsthand.
(2) Apply technical skills in a classroom setting.
To get the most out of digital photography,
people have to handle memory cards, discs,
work with a number of common computer
applications and manage image files (Zahra,
2008). A digital photography instructor can
guide students through the process, from
making a proper exposure to creating the
end product in class. This exercise will en-
able the beginning digital photographer who
formerly relied on other people, kiosks or
stores to process images and take part in the
entire process of image management.
(3) Schedule field trips to scenic locations, such
as lakes, historic landmarks, beaches or
parks. Students would create photographs
on location, using various lenses and tripods,
especially if the light is changing as the sun
goes down and night falls. The instructor
would plan ahead, by scouting each location
616
prior to scheduling the event to in order to
make sure plenty of parking and facilities
are available to participants.
For example, SVUSD Adult Education’s inter-
mediate photography class includes a popular field
trip to Laguna Beach’s Heisler Park (Laguna pages,
2009), a picturesque two-mile path that runs along
the craggy bluffs of the coastline. The field trip is
scheduled shortly before sunset and continues into
the early evening, to challenge students to cope
with creating properly exposed images in changing
lighting conditions. Students learn how to use a
tripod, create long time exposures and ultimately
create stunning night photography. Students are
literally composing images, with cameras aimed
into the night sky, joyful in the discovery of
what the camera can see, if used appropriately.
Students report back that this experience is often
challenging yet highly pleasurable. The goal of
the field trip is to build confidence and challenge
students to put to test what has been discussed and
demonstrated in class.
(4) Provide hands-on experiences in studio set-
tings. An intermediate to advanced digital
photography course could include opportu-
nities for adult students to tour commercial
photography studios and network with
working professional photographers. These
chances strongly appeal to students who
aspire to take turn a passion for photography
into a career. If a school does not have a studio
lab, then an instructor can rent a commercial
or home studio, enabling students to have
a chance to work with lighting equipment,
backgrounds and professional models.
SVUSD Adult Education’s advanced digi-
tal photography program includes several
guided studio field trips. Students take turns
directing and lighting live models, as they
work in teams as photographer and assis-
tant. This experience has inspired a number
of students to pursue fashion and portrait
Integrating Digital Photography into Adult Education
photography as a second or third career. The
class will also have the task of bringing in a
product of choice, and lighting the chosen
item using continuous and strobe lighting
methods. The instructor facilitates and as-
sists each student as they build confidence
in a real-world studio setting. Students have
left enthusiastic rave reviews on evaluation
forms, with comments as, “I learned so much
from working in a real studio. I will be back
for more, I have never learned so much in a
photography course.”
These learning techniques create added value
with adult learners, many of whom are accustomed
to hands-on learning in their jobs and home lives,
compared with secondary education students,
whose learning experiences in school are more
passive. Many adult learners take classes at night,
when circadian rhythms demand a more engaged
learning environment or students can lapse into
fatigue and distraction at the end of a long day.
This active approach to learning, with an under-
standing of students’ unique and varying learning
styles, will help educators develop knowledge,
skills and emotions through actual experience,
transforming a passing interest into a passion, or
better yet, preparing a student for a successful
and satisfying vocation in the field of photogra-
phy (Rand & Zakia, 2006). The critique of the
end-product is a valuable way for students to get
feedback on presented work from the instructor
and fellow students.
Improvement in image making is deeply
influenced by reactions from others after they
review and consider the end product presented.
This is where the instructor’s guidance is critical.
Few could survive in the art world if they lived
in a critical vacuum but students essentially are
amateurs and most are not accustomed to having
their efforts critiqued. Students gain important
objectivity in relation to their work after being
encouraged to listen dispassionately to what others
have to say about it (Cline, 1999). Photography
critique involves the application of critical think-
ing methods to understanding art (Cline, 1999).
Viewing images is essential to a successful
critique. Projecting the images on a large screen
in a darkened room is a recommended strategy.
Another method would be group evaluation from
finished prints to better evaluate print quality. Stu-
dents would place finished prints on a board, ready
for viewing before the class begins. However,
viewing student work via on-line photography
galleries provides a powerful and cost effective
means of displaying images for in-class critiques.
It also provides a one-step-removed process that
softens the immediacy of criticism.
For example, photography students at SVUSD
Adult Education upload assignments to Smugmug.
com after establishing a unique account on the site.
Smugmug is a premium photo sharing web site,
used by professional photographers and casual
amateurs. With an attractive and user-friendly
interface (Pash, 2008) Smugmug also serves as a
teaching tool, which provides valuable metadata
which describes how and when every image was
created, which lists ISO setting, aperture, date
photographed, shutter speed, and more properties
associated with every image. Adult photography
programs can establish unique communities on
Smugmug.com that link students’ work together,
allowing for a sense of kinship and excitement, as
students can view each others’work in class or from
the comfort of home. For instance, SVUSD Adult
Education’s photography courses are members of
this community: http://www.smugmug.com/com-
munity/Saddleback. Students not only can share
images through this powerful dynamic medium,
but also end up having a unique web site for storing,
publishing and distributing personal photographs
on-line. Students appreciate the online gallery’s
convenience and immediacy, and no longer have
to share images as prints, attachments in e-mail,
or need to write images to a disk or flash drive.
The greatest potential for learning in photo-
graphic and art education is in the critique of stu-
dent work. The concept of the critique is based on
617
 Integrating Digital Photography into Adult Education
the efforts of the students. The students’ personal
visions, training, skills, and artistic abilities are all
included in their reviews. Because students have a
vested interest in validating their efforts, critiques
open up opportunities to give insight and new
learning. Within an atmosphere of constructive
assessment, a wide range of related topics can be
visited. For example, if the assignment for critique
is a self-portrait, then other concepts beyond the
execution of the self-portrait can be brought up
and reviewed. Factors such as exposure, lighting
and composition can be evaluated toward how to
make the image more successful. This provides
natural “jumping-off” points for advancing more
in-depth concepts exhibited in the photographs.
While the concept of a critique is to discuss an
existing image, the ultimate value of critique is
aimed at ideas and techniques that can be used in
the future (Rand & Zakia, 2006).
At its best, a critique provides a unique oppor-
tunity for a class to focus on a student’s photograph
and give constructive feedback in a controlled
setting. Students have the chance to make greater
improvements in their work based on reactions
from others (Cline, 1999). New photographers
may also gain confidence when the class reacts
positively to an image or gain understanding
of weaknesses that need to be improved when
receiving negative feedback. A critique is also
an occasion to celebrate students’ efforts in the
process of making images that apply new levels
of learning (Rand & Zakia, 2006).
The importance of the critique could not be
overstated. The critique must be handled with
sensitivity and respect or people will leave; a
constructive critique can become the framework
for exciting teachable moments, reinforcing best
practices in composition, lighting, concept and
exposure. A failed critique experience is a class
killer and will assure students do not want to come
back. If an adult student feels under attack during
a critique, this student (who is a valued customer)
may feel angry and humiliated and could drop
out. A failed experience could sour a student on
618
taking any additional adult education courses or
even extinguish their interest in photography alto-
gether. The school loses not only the student, but
also potential referrals from the learner’s family,
friends and colleagues.
Instead, the instructor should use student work
to reinforce learning objectives and encourage
the student to explore new ideas, reflect on the
photographic experience, share techniques and
ultimately push the student to do even better work.
For example, while viewing a student’s work, an
instructor can ask the student to reflect on the
idea, lighting and challenges of a photography
shoot, ask what the student could do differently,
and point out positive aspects of the image and
how the work possibly meets the challenges and
demands of a particular assignment. Many times,
the adult student will grasp what may have gone
wrong, or how they could improve on work,
feeling motivated to jump in and create an even
better image for the next time. An instructor can
offer students the chance to take suggestions for
image improvement and resubmit a more refined
result for a given assignment; ultimately building
a more appealing body of work.
Student evaluations from SVUSD Adult
Education’s digital photography courses affirm
that the classroom critiques are invaluable. For
instance, one student wrote in an anonymous
class evaluation for SVUSD’s most recent digital
photography courses, “The most valuable aspect
of this course is the feedback from the instructor
and other students in regards to our own photo
shoot. Sounds scary, but it is very helpful.” Another
student wrote, “The critiques of our photography
give us a wonderfully concrete idea of where we
went right or wrong with our work. I will prob-
ably repeat the class so I can have a second crack
at the work,” while another student wrote, “I
love our time of critique, the instructor and class
encourages me to push my work to the next level
in a safe setting.”
A strong positive or negative reaction to a
photograph can be critically valuable to decipher
Integrating Digital Photography into Adult Education
the reasons for those reactions, challenge opinions,
and begin to put forward criteria for specific quali-
ties in a photograph (Barrett, 1990). The critique is
also a grading and comparison activity that often
provokes feelings of anxiety in students as they
present their efforts in class. However, properly
framed for students, the critique can be seen as a
vital point in the learning process that provides
opportunities for evaluation (Bott, 1996). More
importantly, the critique offers the chance to push
the photography end product further, becoming a
much more powerful tool for stimulating, inspiring
and instructing students of photography (Rand &
Zakia, 2006).
Ultimately, the photographic work students
compile for critiques become a body of work,
known as a portfolio. Because of the feedback
received in critique, students have the chance to
make improvements and refine work, thereby
creating a stronger portfolio (Bott, 1996). Ulti-
mately, a new photographer would be judged on
the strength of the improved portfolio of finished
images in the fiercely competitive world of com-
mercial photography (Wisker & Barker, 2008).
Adult education must ultimately serve the
needs of a growing population of adult learners
who are going back to school for a number of
reasons, which include the following:
• The world economy has shifted from in-
dustry and manufacturing to a world of
information and technology. Adults are
forced to update skills to stay relevant and
employable (Wang & King, 2008).
• Mounting unemployment is driving many
Americans to consider going back to
school to train for new careers. Growing
interest and the accessibility of digital pho-
tography motivates many adults to turn
what was once a hobby to a possible source
of income (Morgan, 2008).
• Currently the increasing number of retir-
ing baby boomers could present a signifi-
cant economic cost to society (Macdonald,
2009). Reeducating this growing popula-
tion of older adults is one answer to help
mitigate these costs. With new skills many
baby boomers could rejoin the workforce,
enjoy new careers, find purpose in new-
found artistic expression and eventually
become additive to the country’s tax base.
• Many students are young parents who want
to reconnect with other adults while their
spouse watches the children in the evening.
Digital photography becomes a newfound
joy for these growing families, as they be-
gin to pick up cameras to record milestone
events, such as documenting baby’s first
steps. Many of these students, sparked by
a newfound love for photography, wish to
develop a passion for photography into
something more meaningful and lasting.
• Adult students form powerful networking
alliances as they go through classes to-
gether. For example, follow up has proven
that many students who graduated from
SVUSD Adult Education’s digital photog-
raphy program have teamed up and opened
commercial photography studios, earning
a second income doing something they tru-
ly enjoy. Other past students have joined
and formed local photo clubs to continue
networking and growing their passion for
photography.
• As budgets for traditional higher education
are slashed, college students face abrupt
tuition hikes that make an option for go-
ing back to traditional universities diffi-
cult. Further, colleges have had to cut back
on overhead, reducing course availability.
These students not only must pay more for
classes, but they must also endure over-
crowded conditions (Tarrant, 2009) even if
they are admitted into a university. Instead,
adult education programs are immediately
accessible – anyone can enroll and attend
classes. Even fee-based adult education
courses are a bargain, compared to the tu-
619
 Integrating Digital Photography into Adult Education
ition and fees charged in public and private
colleges.
• Adult education courses are available in
small segments; students can sign up for a
short three-hour one time workshop, or a
class that only takes up a few weeks out of
a busy schedule and do not have to commit
to sixteen weeks at a university.
Adult education ultimately offers students
more value for the dollar, where adult students
can continue learning in an accessible educational
environment, networking in a setting that caters
to them, costs less money and takes up less time.
Successful adult education digital photography
course curriculum centers on need-to-know
practical concerns, including opportunities for
hands-on experiential learning and feedback on
the end product – the digital photograph.
RECOMMENDATIONS
As colleges and universities around the country
face increasing budget constraints, pressure is
building for a more accessible, retail-based ap-
proach to education. Adult education programs
must become financially self-sufficient, fill-
ing seats to bring in much needed revenue and
providing curriculum that adult students want.
To survive the drastic changes and budget cuts,
adult schools are adopting business models where
they keep overhead low and deliver educational
products that are meaningful, cost effective, and
full of value for the students. As with all other
businesses, adult schools are working hard to
become “customer friendly,” providing services
and products not only in the most economical way
but also in the most convenient way possible (L.
Albers, personal communication, November 13,
2009). Only classes in which there are sufficient
fees paid will continue; free adult education course
offerings may no longer exist. Adult education
courses must have enough students to cover the
620
costs of the instructor, support staff, electricity and
materials such as computer equipment, software
updates and handouts (Finch & Crunkilton, 1999).
To maintain quality customer service and
continued business, give the people what they
want and need, and “you will have a customer for
life” (25 Ways to Keep Customers for Life, 2006).
Adult education must appeal to a mass audience
who, in the case of digital photography, is buy-
ing more and more cameras and image editing
software, and is hungry to know how to use it
while discovering and expanding upon their own
creative vision (Rand & Zakia, 2006).
Adult educators must give students a real
learning experience that has relevance to them. To
ensure the long-term success for digital photogra-
phy programs in adult education, close attention
must be paid to the unique needs and learning
styles of adult learners. Experiential learning
theory (ELT) maintains that learning is “achieved
through personally determined experience and
involvement” (Chapman, 2008, p. 1) rather than
through passively received teaching. Students
get the chance to acquire and apply information,
feelings and skills “in an immediate and relevant
setting” (Smith, 2001, p. 1). Experiential learn-
ing involves directly encountering what is being
studied, as opposed to simply thinking about or
talking about the encounter (Smith, 2001).
Instructors can engage students by asking,
“What brings you here?” or “What do you want
out of this class?” Depending on responses, the
instructor may need to maintain some flexibility
and even change or adapt the lesson plan on the
spot to meet students’ needs. An adult educator
must also be prepared to address underlying
questions students may have at the beginning of
class, such as, “What’s in this for me?” or “Why
should I care?” Adult students need to know how
they can use what they are learning, right away.
The instructor must be ready to explain how they
can use what they are learning and how this new
material can apply to real life (Penn, n.d.).
Integrating Digital Photography into Adult Education
As the curriculum for a digital photography
program builds over time, repeat students ideally
inspire ideas for new and expanded classes, thereby
building the enrollment and course offerings for
the school. For example, in 2005, the only course
offered at Saddleback Valley Unified School
District (SVUSD) Adult Education was a 3-hour
workshop, called Introduction to Photography to
help adults decipher mysterious and complicated
new digital cameras followed up by a four-session
Digital Photography I class.
Soon, adult students wanted more. By spring
semester of 2006, the school added Digital Pho-
tography II to serve the needs of adult students
who wanted to continue learning. By fall semester
that year, many of these students referred friends
and family, who began enrolling for the begin-
ning courses, while many continued on to more
intermediate level course offerings. Digital Photo
II grew from a four-session 12-hour course to a
six-session 18-hour course. By spring 2007, many
original digital photography students formed net-
works and deep friendships, and asked for more
course offerings. A new studio-based course, filled
with field trips and case studies inspired by expe-
riential learning theory, called Digital Photo III
launched with swelling enrollment and continues
to be among the most popular course on campus.
Since fall 2007, intermediate and advanced
students have asked for – and received – more spe-
cialized course offerings, such as a digital black and
white photography course that explores techniques
inspired by such leading historical photographers
such as Ansel Adams and Arnold Newman. The
black and white digital photography course also
delves into innovative image editing techniques in
Adobe PhotoShop designed to maximize the tonal
range one can achieve for a successful outcome.
Due to popular demand, SVUSD Adult Education
is currently adding Digital Portrait Photography
to the digital photography course lineup, giving
adult students the opportunity to photograph pro-
fessional models in a real-world studio setting as
well as on location.
Within a few years, fueled by student loyalty
and enthusiasm, referrals and attention to learners’
needs, the school’s digital photography curricu-
lum has expanded from 15 hours of instruction
for unique classes to 93 hours of unique instruc-
tion. In addition, the school offers these courses
several times each semester, serving the needs of
hundreds of adult students per term. This translates
to additional revenue for the school district from
enrollment of new and repeat students.
FUTURE TRENDS
The future of adult education lies ultimately in
economics; the goal is to keep the customer - the
adult learner - happy and coming back for more.
Satisfied “customers” will refer other potential
students, ensuring robust enrollment, thus pour-
ing money into a school district’s adult education
program. Saddleback Valley Unified School
District’s Adult Education’s policy is to allow
students to take and re-take courses as many times
as they like, as long as they enroll and pay course
fees. Even if a student repeats a course, each of
their experiences will be unique and valuable as
they continue their journey as lifelong learners
(Wang, 2007).
In 2009, California slashed education funding
that included budgets set aside for adult education
programs. School districts were allowed to decide
what to do with the remaining available money,
leaving many districts to only fund K-12 classes,
thus cutting funds for adult education programs
entirely (Zarnow, 2009). According to Dr. Linda
Albers, dean of Saddleback Valley Unified School
District (SVUSD) Adult Education, SVUSD
Adult Education currently offers many classes
where fees already sustain the classes. Some other
classes are partially subsidized from the school’s
smaller budget. Most likely, all classes ultimately
will need to sustain themselves by student fees.
Irvine Adult School and SVUSD Adult Education
are examples of school districts that are taking
621
 Integrating Digital Photography into Adult Education
the gamble to see if students are willing to pay
for courses that were once offered free of charge
(Zarnow, 2009).
SVUSD Adult Education is currently working
on a fee-funding model where class time is sub-
stantially shorter and that each semester is divided
into parts. Offering courses in smaller segments
allows the school to charge less tuition, making
the courses more affordable. It also minimizes the
immediate financial impact on students as they
can pay tuition throughout a semester rather than
having to pay all at once at the beginning of a se-
mester. Further, many adult education students, as
opposed to traditional students, have time conflicts
due to the time demands of spouse, children and
work (Kottler & Chen, 2008). These nontraditional
students are unable to commit valuable time to a
full sixteen week semester program as offered at
universities; instead they are attracted to shorter
course offerings. For example, SVUSD Adult
Education’s photography curriculum offers a
single session three-hour camera workshop. Next,
the Digital Photo I class is available for students
who choose to commit to four short weeks. If
a student wishes to continue, a Digital Photo II
course is available expands on this foundation,
running for six more weeks. Students who wish
to continue learning can enroll for a six-session
Digital Photography III course, and so on. These
short segments are not only affordable, but are
also accessible, designed to fit into adult learners’
busy schedules.
Many more questions for research will emerge
as adult education transforms from a free to a fee-
based model. For instance, it remains to be seen
if enrollment for adult educational programs will
continue and which curriculum will draw the most
interest. For this reason, it is critical that educators
pay close attention to helping students discover
what additional classes they want and keep them
coming back for more. Integrating a robust digital
photography program into adult education is a
natural choice to fulfill an almost universal need
for people who enjoy taking pictures. Many stu-
622
dents are willing to pay for something of value,
even stating, “If everything is free, it seems easy.
You don’t pay attention. When you pay, you
pay attention. I was very surprised school was
free – a gift of the government, it was too free.”
(Zarnow, 2009).
CONCLUSION
Given the bleak economic situation around the
country, more adult learners are returning to
campuses to retool knowledge, stay relevant
and update skills to better compete in a tough
economic climate. Institutions have a historic
opportunity to expand and offer adult education
programs in order to generate long-term gains.
Just about everybody has a digital camera. Digital
photography adult education programs offer wide
appeal to emerging student populations who want
to get more out of life and enjoy a newfound love
for photography, or are looking to begin a new
career. Thanks to the information age, anyone can
publish photographs instantly worldwide; many
people just want to do a better job and fan the
flames of creativity – digital photography provides
the perfect outlet and opportunity to do just that.
Many digital photography students feel the need
for second incomes or to develop new careers, and
are directed toward the educational opportunities
adult education programs can provide. Integrating
digital photography programs into adult education
is key to fulfilling that growing need in today’s
richly visual society (Palmquist, 2008).
In this environment, students expect that
continuing education will open doors to a better
financial future and emancipation (Wang, 2007).
Adult education promotes critical thinking (Tar-
rant, 2009), as well as the chance to increase pos-
sibilities for personal and social transformation
(Wang, 2007). These broad benefits increasingly
are threatened by dwindling institutional budgets,
particularly as scarce resources are diverted to
K-12 education. Reducing the options for adult
Integrating Digital Photography into Adult Education
learners may save money in the short-term, while
bankrupting long-term societal potential. “To
reduce these prospects, along with funding for
higher education, merits serious concern about
the foundations and the future of our democracy”
(Tarrant, 2009). Building curriculum based on
the unique attributes of adult learners fosters an
expanding student base willing and eager to pay
for the privilege of learning. Successful instruc-
tors are able to add to their classes instead of
shuttering them. Institutions in turn generate more
revenue to meet the educational needs of students.
Adult education is properly treated as a valuable
commodity, benefiting from consumer testing
and marketing. Success is achieved by students,
instructors and institutions, and ultimately society.
REFERENCES
Barrett, T. (1990). Criticizing photographs: And
introduction to understanding images. Mountain
View, CA: Mayfield Publishing Company.
Bott, T. (1996). Testing and assessment in oc-
cupational and technical education. Needham
Heights, MA: Allyn and Bacon.
Chapman, A. (2006). Kolb learning styles. Re-
trieved November 7, 2009, from Businessballs
Web site: http://www.businessballs.com/kol-
blearningstyles.htm
Chapman, A. (2008). Experiential learning. Re-
trieved November 10, 2009 from Businessballs
Web site: http://www.businessballs.com/experi-
ential_learning.htm
Cline, B. (1999, October). Evaluating student
work. Retrieved November 12, 2008, from In-
ternational Design Forum Web site: http://www.
awdsgn.com/HTML/EduClineCrit.html
Clyde, L. (2005). Digital scrapbooking. [Retrieved
from Academic Search Complete database.].
Teacher Librarian, 33(2), 53–55.
Finch, C., & Crunkilton, J. (1999). Curriculum
development in vocational and technical educa-
tion. Needham Heights, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
http://www.ldpride.net/learningstyles.
MI.htm#What%20are
Jones, J., & Pfeiffer, J. (1979). Small group training
theory and practice (Rev. ed.). San Diego, CA:
University Associates.
Knowles, M. S. (1970). The modern practice of
adult education: Andragogy versus pedagogy.
New York: Association Press.
Kottler, J., & Chen, D. (2008). Stress manage-
ment and prevention. Belmont, CA: Thomson
Wadsworth.
Laguna Pages. (2009). Heisler park/picnic beach.
Retrieved November 18, 2009, from http://www.
ldpride.net/learningstyles.MI.htm#What%20are
Learning Styles Explained. (n.d.). Learning styles
explained. Retrieved April 26, 2009, from
Lightbody, K. (2007). Data projectors in schools.
Retrieved November 17, 2009 from Technologies
in Education Web site: http://www.zardec.net.au/
keith/project.htm
Macdonald, A. (2009). National economy threat-
ened by baby boomer retirement boom. Retrieved
November 23, 2009 from Ithaca College Office
of Media Relations: http://www.ithaca.edu/news/
release.php?id=2829
Merriam, S. (2001). Andragogy and self-directed
learning: Pillars of adult learning theory. New
Directions for Adult & Continuing Education,
89(3). Retrieved from Academic Search Complete
database.
Miotke, J. (2006). The BetterPhoto guide to digital
photography. New York: Amphoto Books.
623
 Integrating Digital Photography into Adult Education

Morgan, M. (2008). Double exposures: Photog-
raphy as a second Career. Retrieved December
1, 2009, from PhotoMedia online: http://photo-
mediamagazineonline.com/?p=363
Palmquist, N. (2008). Creating images to under-
stand visual literacy. [Retrieved from Academic
Search Complete database.]. Knowledge Quest,
36(3), 20–23.
Pash, A. (2008). Five best photo sharing web
sites. Retrieved November 18, 2009, from http://
lifehacker.com/395900/five-best-photo-sharing-
web-sites
Pastore, R. (2003). Dale’s cone of experience.
Retrieved November 18, 2009, from http://teach-
erworld.com/potdale.html
Penn, A. (n.d.). Teaching advocacy: Understand-
ing adult learners. Retrieved November 12, 2009,
from http://srpln.msstate.edu/seal/09curriculum/
docs/2-2-le.pdf.
Rand, G., & Zakia, R. (2006). Teaching photogra-
phy: Tools for the imaging educator. Burlington,
MA: Focal Press.
Smith, M. K. (2001). David A. Kolb on experi-
ential learning. Retrieved April 21, 2009, from
the Encyclopedia of Informal Education. http://
www.infed.org/biblio/b-explrn.htm
Steves’s Digicams. (n.d.). The consumer’s best
source of digital camera information and news.
Retrieved November 18, 2009, from http://www.
steves-digicams.com/best-cameras.html
Tarrant, S. (2009). With budget cuts to higher
education, lower-income students struggle. Re-
trieved November 20, 2009, from the Women’s
Media Center. http://www.womensmediacenter.
com/ex/100909.html
Wang, V. C. X. (2007). How contextually adapted
philosophies and the situational role of adult
educators affect learners’ transformation and
emancipation . In King, K. P., & Wang, V. C. X.
(Eds.), Comparative adult education around the
globe (pp. 139–150). Hangzhou, China: Zhejiang
University Press.
Wang, V. C. X., & King, K. (2008). Innovations
in career and technical education. Charlotte, NC:
Information Age Publishing.
25Ways to Keep Customers for Life. (2006). 25
ways to keep customers for life. Retrieved No-
vember 16, 2009, from American Management
Association Web site: http://www.amanet.org/
training/articles/25-Ways-to-Keep-Customers-
for-Life.aspx
Wisker, G., & Barker, P. (2008, February). Edito-
rial. Innovations in Education and Teaching In-
ternational, 45(1), 1–2. Retrieved November 12,
2008. .doi:10.1080/14703290701757328
Zahra, A. (2008). Limitless images: Digital
photography in the classroom. [Retrieved from
Academic Search Complete database.]. Delta
Kappa Gamma Bulletin, 75(1), 7–17.
Zarnow, T. (2009). Irvine adult school switches
from free to fee. Retrieved November 16, 2009,
from the OC Register. http://www.ocregister.com/
articles/school-219330-irvine-students.html
KEY TERMS AND DEFINITIONS
Andragogy: Learning strategies that are fo-
cused on adults.
Aperture: Lens opening or f-stop that controls
the amount of light falling on camera’s sensor.
Blog: Personal on-line journal maintained by
individuals.

624
Integrating Digital Photography into Adult Education
Experiential Learning: Emphasizes the direct
experiences of the participant or learner, as op-
posed to vicarious experiences absorbed through
more passive and didactic approaches.
Exponential Learning: The process of ener-
gized learning that leads to a desire to learn even
more about a given subject.
ISO Rating: Digital camera sensitivity is ex-
pressed in ISO settings, analogous to film speeds;
stands for International Standards Organization.
Metadata: Information that characterizes
other information, such as when a document or
image was created, who created it and other in-
formation unique to the creation and existence of
that data set; metadata in computer data is often
embedded “behind” the original data and can be
retrieved when needed.
MP3 Player: Small, hand held consumer
electronics devices capable of storing and play-
ing music; some can store and display data files.
Retail-Based Approach to Education: Treat-
ing education as a specialized commodity to be
offered to consumers using proven retail methods
of consumer feedback, new-product development
and marketing.
Social Networking Sites: Personalized web
sites for individuals for the purpose of staying
connected with other people.
Transformative Learning: Learning that
results in a change in thought and approach.
Visual Literacy: The ability to know how
images affect and influence society or how they
affect what an individual likes and dislikes.
625
626

Chapter 37
Facilitation of Online
Teaching and Learning
Geraint Lang
Anglia Ruskin University, UK

ABSTRACT
Twenty First Century Education is undergoing change not only to keep in step with the emerging tech-
nological innovations, but also to address the needs and meet the high expectations of a technically
sophisticated student body. Physical manifestations of these changes may be seen in new institutional
building work. Technologically, the Facebook Generation of students in our universities expect online
access across the campus, not only to all manner of information and social networks, but to their course
work. A growing body of the student population now remain in full time employment, enrolled via online
courses. Their virtual access to teaching and learning requires a different form of tuition to that gener-
ally experienced in face to face lectures. Online teaching and learning is a facilitated process, which
this chapter seeks to explain. The role of the facilitator is explained, along with the process of online
learning, with reference to an established online degree course, Ultraversity.

INTRODUCTION
Technology that enables a wider access to learning
is increasingly pervading our daily lives. All day
news television channels provide almost instant
information from virtually all points of the globe,
and within developed countries particularly, our
ability to access the Internet continues to improve.
Away from our home or workplace computers, we
DOI: 10.4018/978-1-61692-906-0.ch037
can link to the World Wide Web via Wifi hotspots,
or through our 3G phone’s network provider, pro-
viding added opportunities to regularly engage in
distance online learning.
Knowles predicted that by the beginning of
the 21st Century, technology would play a grow-
ing role in enhancing the learning experience of
students engaged in higher education (Knowles et
al., 2005, p. 236). That technology enhanced learn-
ing process, particularly in an online environment
cannot be fulfilled without the virtual presence
Facilitation of Online Teaching and Learning
and contribution of a facilitator. This chapter will
attempt to clarify the process of facilitating online
teaching and learning. It will also show that the
process of interaction between the participants
in online learning and their facilitators is not a
trouble free process, and that further research is
required into the dynamics of this subject, for it to
be better understood, both by future learners and
teachers, in order to make full use of technology
for learning.
Educational institutions are regularly faced
with the challenges of ensuring that opportunities
for learning are fully optimised for both students
and staff, and that every reasonable means of
achieving this aim are exploited. Increasingly
institutions need to fully incorporate the use of
technology to provide learning opportunities that
are in step with our constantly evolving digital
lifestyles, and seemingly insatiable desire for
obtaining online information. This can range
from seeking out the latest weather forecast to
sourcing a recipe for a curry, checking our friends’
latest exploits on Facebook and Twitter, before
even embarking upon the task of retrieving the
latest research to assist in the completion of that
assignment due for submission in a week’s time.
Making that technology engaging, serving a
primary role in the learning and teaching process,
providing a medium for the student to undertake
research for learning on the one hand, and on
the other the means to engage in a collaborative
learning journey with the other students online,
is one of the fundamental tenets underpinning
the facilitation of online learning and teaching.
The role of the lecturer within a virtual learning
environment (VLE) is evolving and developing
into one that facilitates that learning process.
Traditional methods of teaching that were once
familiar to our parents and grandparents are not
always appropriate in an age of instant iPhone
generated information. Often the student has ac-
cessed more recent information on a particular
subject than their teacher, therefore changing the
learning dynamics in the classroom from a model
of top down, teacher to many students, to a sce-
nario of a student introducing learning to the rest
of the class and the teacher, is at the core of online
teaching and learning. This requires a facilitated
approach. This chapter will make reference to the
facilitation role within the Ultraversity programme
at Anglia Ruskin University.
BACKGROUND
Defining Online Learning
Before proceeding with this chapter, it is neces-
sary to clarify what is meant by online learning.
Online learning occurs formally and informally,
both requiring access to the Internet. A formal
online learning situation, usually involves a
student who has enrolled upon an online course
using email to communicate with a facilitator (tu-
tor) or other students, a web browser to access a
web search engine, or more often a VLE (virtual
learning environment) in order to retrieve course
information and to participate in collaborative,
asynchronous discussions with other students
and facilitators. Such discussions relate to shar-
ing particular knowledge about their coursework
and research, and significantly clarifying their
understanding of a particular stage of the overall
learning journey. The online learning process often
involves the sharing of document, image, anima-
tion and video files. Based upon the Ultraversity
experience (Lang, in press), the online learning
process also involves accessing course resources
(usually from within the VLE), engaging regularly
in collaborative, formative peer assessment, and
the online submission of completed assignments
for summative assessment, as well as anonymous
student course feedback once students have sub-
mitted their work for summative assessment and
grading.
According to Blackboard (the course manage-
ment software used by many universities):
627

Online education can be defined as an approach
to teaching and learning that utilizes Internet
technologies to communicate and collaborate in
an educational context. This includes technology
that supplements traditional classroom train-
ing with web-based components and learning
environments where the educational process is
experienced online (Blackboard 1998).
The advent of ‘always on’ broadband has
reduced the need to compose considered and
reflective ‘offline’ responses to topics initially
read within online discussion fora, whereby in the
days of dial-up Internet access, online learners and
facilitators would usually create their answers and
questions prior to connecting to the Internet so as
to save incurring unnecessary phone charges. The
increase in the speed by which computer generated
files can be uploaded and downloaded by the ma-
jority of the population in the United Kingdom for
example has extended the opportunities for adult
learners, irrespective of time zone differences or
geographical location, enabling more to engage
in online distance learning.
The use of distance learning technologies, and
more specifically, online distance learning, have
both grown out of and enhanced the changes now
occurring in the delivery of education. (Paloff &
Pratt 2001, p. 3)
Paloff and Pratt point out that there was initial
reluctance and hesitancy amongst faculties in col-
leges and universities to embrace online learning.
That caution was spawned from accounts of ill-
planned online courses, where quality teaching was
sacrificed for revenue derived from enrolling large
numbers of online students, where little thought
had been given to adequately meeting the learning
needs of those students in an online environment.
Eight years on from their publication, online learn-
ing, like the constantly evolving technology that
makes it possible-is growing in both its influence
and its presence within faculty courses.
628
Facilitation of Online Teaching and Learning
Notwithstanding the fast Internet connections
and increasing power and sophistication of present
day computers, netbooks and smart phones, all
making mobile access to the Internet and therefore
online anywhere, anytime learning more possible
than ever, the role of the facilitator in this process
is often misunderstood and understated, therefore
this role requires clarification, as it is the conten-
tion of this author, based upon the experience of
both developing and delivering online learning
courses, that the learning facilitator is key to the
success of the online learning process.
Facilitation Defined
In clarifying what is facilitation, and then attempt-
ing to arrive at a broad understanding of the role
of the facilitator, particularly in a higher educa-
tional setting, it is useful to first look at the role
of a traditional meeting facilitator. Mann (2007)
defines facilitation as a process (Mann 2007, p.
xi). There are similarities in an online learning
process and a meeting process, in that both types
of facilitation require a facilitator to ensure that
a clearly understood and articulated process is
undertaken by the meeting participants in the one
scenario, and on the other hand, the learners in the
online community, so that both groups produce a
finished product. There are however differences
in both facilitation roles, aside from the fact that
one can be predominantly face to face, and limited
to the duration of that meeting. Online facilitation
however usually occurs throughout a semester,
and is mainly the province of a teacher/lecturer/
professor.
Salmon (2000) argues that a face to face fa-
cilitator may share some of the same skills as that
of an online e-moderator (facilitator), but that the
latter must have a broader skill set. (Salmon, 2000
p. 35). Salmon (ibid) acknowledges that Internet
technology enables students to both access online
learning resources, and to communicate with
their fellow students, but ‘students still need the
Facilitation of Online Teaching and Learning
champions who make the learning come alive-the
e-moderators.’ (Salmon, 2000, p. 11).
Professor Stephen Heppell, the founder of Ul-
tralab and the main exponent of Ultraversity, the
research programme that introduced the wholly
online undergraduate degree for adult learners
in the workplace (Lang [in press]), stressed the
key role that the facilitation process would play
in guiding students during their learning journey.
He likened the facilitator to the host at a party.
THE WORK OF THE FACILITATOR
The person guiding the online facilitation of the
teaching and learning process is often known by
several titles. Salmon (2000) suggests an interest-
ing list of roles and titles that may be accorded
to that person, aligning them to various possible
stages that occur during an online learning process,
particularly during the delivery of a module at
university level. Salmon (2000) laid joint claim
to popularising the term ‘e-moderator’ applied to
the person facilitating the online learning process.
(Salmon, 2000, p. 169).
White (2004) states: “The core of facilitation
and hosting is to serve the group and assist it in
reaching its goals or purpose. Some describe this
role as a gardener, a conductor, the distributed
leadership of jazz improvisers, a teacher, or an
innkeeper” Hootstein metaphorically observes
the facilitator wearing four types of shoes when
attending to specific roles within the online learn-
ing process-‘acting as instructor, social director,
program manager and technical support’ (Hoot-
stein, 2002)
In 2000, when Ultralab launched ‘Talking
Heads’ for the United Kingdom Government’s
Department for Children, Schools and Families,
the pilot online community for newly appointed
head teachers in England, the title applied to each
member of the project facilitation team charged
with establishing, developing and nurturing that
future online community of practice was ‘facilita-
tor’. (Lang, in press). That project was extended
to provide access to all head teachers in England,
and the Talking Heads community was migrated
to the online facility of the National College for
Leadership of Schools and Children’s Services
(the ‘College’). By the end of 2004, Ultralab’s task
in embedding Talking Heads within the overall
online remit of the College concluded, and the
College’s own team took on the responsibility
for the facilitation of that online community. The
professional development ethos of the College
required a rethink of the nomenclature associated
with the role of their new facilitation team, and
each member of that team became known as an
‘e-Learning Facilitator’.
Their work with the College completed,
the Ultralab facilitation team’s skills were then
utilised within the Ultraversity online degree
project (Lang, ibid). The facilitation team’s new
role now became more focused on teaching and
learning online. A natural modification to their
nomenclature thus occurred, reflecting that new
role, and they were subsequently identified from
that time onwards as ‘Learning Facilitators’, or
‘LFs’ by their students.
Working with the Online Students
Induction
Drawing upon the practices within the Ultraversity
programme, the first bold online steps taken by
new students to that degree course, run by Anglia
Ruskin University in the United Kingdom, leads
them to a password-accessed induction forum.
Information relating to the online induction course
is provided via a formal paper-based welcome
pack from the university. Within the induction
forum they are ‘greeted’ in text form by their
learning facilitators, introduced to the concept
of learning styles, and discover whether they are
predominantly kinaesthetic, auditory or visual
learners. They receive other online learning tasks
which begin to orientate them in readiness for their
629

introduction to the virtual learning environment
(VLE). The induction week is seen as an essential
orientation phase in the first stage of the course,
and is designed to quickly familiarise new students
to the online learning environment.
The Welcome Email
Prior to the students’ first visit to the VLE, which
occurs after the induction week, the facilitator
responsible for the new cohort initiates the first
online contact with each student via their personal
email. This is known as the welcome email, and as
amicably as possible it sets out important contact
details for their personal facilitator (tutor), student
support, the university’s digital library, instruc-
tions for activating their university student email
account, and access details to the virtual learning
environment (VLE). The welcome email also
contains guidance in the use of the VLE software
and the university intranet, and a facilitated FAQ-
online student help forum. Importantly, student
participation guidelines are set out in the welcome
email, clarifying what is expected of students in
terms of responding to posts within the discussion
areas, as well as contributing their own research
relating to topics within the module being studied.
Later these contributions can be cited, if deemed
appropriate, by each student in their assignments.
Palloff and Pratt (2001) describe this as ‘buy-in’.
The advice suggested by Hiemstra in 1994 may be
dated, but still applies; online facilitators need to
ensure that they provide support to their students
in the use of the technology, and ensure that the
course work is clear and unambiguous. This is
also endorsed by Hunnicutt (2002, p.4).
As each student ‘announces’ their online arrival
within the social area of the VLE, by submitting
their first text post, a learning facilitator responds
to their post with a greeting message. Each student
is then encouraged to provide a brief introduction
about themselves, and their workplace. This is
seen by all members of the community, and is
comparable to an ‘ice-breaking’ session often
630
Facilitation of Online Teaching and Learning
employed by facilitators at the start of face to face
meetings. Students are then directed to the first
module and its accompanying resources. Both
during the induction week, and afterwards in the
subsequent first two weeks of the course, some
students invariably encounter technical difficul-
ties, and it is vital that facilitators address these
problems quickly, so as to minimise any disrup-
tion to the student’s learning opportunities. The
advent of free software such as Jing (http://www.
jingproject.com/) has added a visual tool that per-
mits short animated screen captures to be used to
quickly introduce new software and provide guides
to using the course VLE to students.
Instilling an Online Learning Mindset
The following section will draw upon the author’s
own experience of working with online students
from all over the world, who had specifically
enrolled on a wholly online course, due in the
main to their workplace and family commitments
which precluded full-time, face to face study. It
has been observed from the commencement of
each online course that presenting clear course
guidelines and expectations of students in terms
of the frequency of their participation, has elicited
positive end of course feedback from students:
I would like to thank you for all your support,
guidance and help. Goodbye, Good Luck and
God Bless.↜Please can you convey my thanks to
the other LFs (learning facilitators).(National
Health Service Nurse, St Albans, Hertfordshire.
Ultraversity (First Class (Hons) graduate 2006)
You have given me so much help and guidance
and it is without a doubt that without you and the
other facilitators I would not be where I am now.
Its through this course that I have just been given
a promotion. It was based upon what I have learnt
about structure, and small changes I had made
to my working practices, and the understanding
of those changes. My employers believe that I
Facilitation of Online Teaching and Learning
could perform similar changes in other areas of
my workplace.
(Classroom Assistant, Leicester. Ultraversity
Honours graduate 2007)
I am ever in your debt as this degree will look
amazing on my CV. (School Librarian, Birming-
ham, 2.1 honours graduate 2007)
Once again, thank you so much for everything
that you have done for me, and although I know
I have been hard work, you have persisted and
got me through these three years.
(Psychiatric nurse, Colchester, 2.2 honours
graduate 2007)
You helped me realise my potential and I will be
eternally grateful to you. (Senior university admin-
istrator, Cambridge, 2.1 honours graduate, 2007)
The development in the quality of online col-
laboration and discussion throughout the period
of the Ultraversity three year course amongst the
students contributing their thanks above, sent to
the author of this chapter leads to the conclusion
that an atmosphere of trust, togetherness, mutual
respect and support had been established amongst
the students and facilitators. This is contrary to
the findings of Kim et al, who deduced from their
research that a greater sense of community needed
to be engendered amongst students engaging in
online discussions. Their research revealed that
more technological and pedagogical support was
required in order to improve the quality of online
learning (Kim et al., 2004).
The invaluable experience and knowledge
relating to instigating and maintaining online
participation gleaned by the Ultraversity learning
facilitation team, when they first engaged many
first time online participants in 2000 during the
Talking Heads project (Lang, ibid) ensured they
had the experience to address a number of the
challenges that confront students new to online
learning, and particularly those returning to formal
learning after a considerable break in time. Mason
and Rennie recommend that in selecting the most
appropriate course software to host a course VLE,
primary consideration should be given to its ease
of use and navigation, particularly its ability to
support the more technically hesitant students,
and conversely the software’s adaptability to ac-
commodate the individualised learning needs of
the more confident users of the software (Mason
& Rennie, 2008, p. 37).
Utilising Salmon’s Five Step Model
as a Checklist for Identifying
Participation Stages
The structure for facilitating the Talking Heads
project at Ultralab drew on Gilly Salmon’s model
for online teaching and learning. Her model
comprises of five stages: First, the access stage,
which requires each student to have access to, and
then the ability to use the VLE; the second stage
requires the student to establish an online pres-
ence, and seek out and make contact with others
having similar backgrounds to themselves-in the
case of the Ultraversity program, this would mean
students from similar workplaces communicating
with one another. Discussions relating to the start
of the course, instigated by the facilitation team,
occur at stage three. Up to and including the third
stage, relationships and trust are built up between
students, and the facilitation team. This stage, from
the Ultraversity experience, requires consider-
able facilitator input, encouraging and reassuring
students in their increasing online interactions.
Discussions become deeper and more involved
by stage four, with fewer facilitator contributions,
although their interventions are usually quite de-
tailed and seek to offer clarification about course
outcomes. The final fifth stage is characterised by
deep, reflective discussion, and full use is made of
the VLE and the associated learning technology
631

to enhance the presentation of the student’s work.
(Salmon, 2000, p. 25)
Drawing upon the author’s experience of fa-
cilitating the teaching and learning process within
the Ultraversity programme, a sixth stage could
be attained by some students, who were able to
clearly share their learning, and coherently defend
their assertions within the discussion fora.
Research conducted by Maltby and Mackie
(2009) initially sought to investigate whether
VLEs help or create a barrier to online engage-
ment amongst students engaged in higher educa-
tion courses; in particular they were concerned
with the level of online student disengagement.
Their work identified four learner types: model
students, traditionalists, geek and disengaged.
(Maltby & Mackie, 2009, p. 49). The stimulus
for this research originated in a UK government
report which revealed that over a fifth of students
in England failed to complete their courses at their
first higher education establishment. (House of
Commons Committee of Public Accounts, 2007).
Their findings revealed that online learning en-
vironment was popular amongst model students,
particularly the flexibility afforded by asynchro-
nous learning. However, their research indicated
that possibly online learning further exacerbated
the disengagement from the learning process
demonstrated by less self-motivated students.
They attributed this to the lack of the ‘here and
now’ factor associated with asynchronous online
learning, but stated that further research was nec-
essary, as the disengaged group were difficult to
contact. (Maltby & Mackie, 2009, p. 61). Their
research did not however explore retention rates
for online learners.
According to Palloff and Pratt (ibid), a growing
number of US students are older than the eighteen
to twenty-two year old age group who were tradi-
tionally associated with making up the majority of
university student populations. These more mature
students, often needing to remain in employment,
required the flexibility afforded by asynchronous
online learning. Prior to enrolment on the Ultra-
632
Facilitation of Online Teaching and Learning
versity degree pathway, would-be students are
regularly reminded during their interview about
the complete absence of face-to face teaching and
learning associated with the course, and coupled
with the lack of synchronous scheduled lectures,
and that as a consequence they would therefore
be required to set aside fixed, regular times for
study and reflection.
Maintaining Participation Levels
amongst the Students
Ensuring regular online participation, developing
skills of critical analysis and reflection amongst
the students so as to enrich and enliven the teach-
ing and learning process, is a key function of
facilitation. During the first year of the course,
the learning facilitator regularly models the online
behaviour that is expected from all members of
the online community. At that stage, facilitator
input is usually high, often characterised by their
regular postings within the discussion forum, but
as the course progresses, the frequency of their
input lessens, although some facilitator postings
can become lengthy, particularly when clarifying
students’ understanding of a particular topic.
One inquiry and feedback framework utilised
amongst learning facilitators engaged within the
Ultraversity degree programme comprises of a
three stage process, applied when responding to a
student’s formative work. The following extract is
from an introductory post by the author to a first
year online undergraduate cohort, within one of
the discussion fora using the Moodle VLE (which
is described as ‘course management software’ by
the designers):
Most of you by now are familiar with providing
general feedback to each other’s work. We now
want to develop this confidence, and would ask you
to be more specific in how you provide feedback.
For example, please adapt/use the following 3
question format:
Facilitation of Online Teaching and Learning
1) State one thing you liked about the work;
2) Ask about one thing that requires further
clarification.
3) Pose a question as to what could be different?
It might not be possible to adhere to this format
each time you feedback-but see whether you can
apply this structure in future.
At the outset of the online course, students
are regularly reminded to make any feedback on
other students’ work as constructive and as posi-
tive as possible. They are also asked to be tolerant
of each other-in the absence of non verbal cues,
sometimes text-only postings can appear harsh.
Despite regular reminders from the facilitators,
misunderstandings invariably occur, usually re-
sulting from a particularly harsh posting by one
student. Inevitable ill-feeling is generated by such
postings, followed by the absence of the offended
party from the successive discussions. Experience
within the Ultraversity programme has shown
that emotions and feelings become heightened
within two weeks of the assignment submission
date. A relationship of trust established early on in
the life of the online course, regularly reinforced
by supportive contributions from the facilitation
team, thus deliberately and genuinely nurturing
a collaborative and supportive culture within the
online community, can be an invaluable foundation
for effectively dealing with those occasions when
‘flaming’ (a thoughtless, emotionally charged
outburst posted within the online community) can
occur. Online discord must be dealt with promptly
and sensitively by the facilitation team. Good me-
diation skills are called for in such circumstances.
At the commencement of a course, students are
asked to assume good intent when confronted with
an apparently blunt posting. Accompanying this
advice is the suggestion to delay an immediate
response, and instead draft an offline response,
which should then be re-read some hours later,
prior to posting, after which time emotions may
have died down.
Ultraversity students are reminded that to
post in haste can invariably lead to repenting at
leisure. Very much like face to face colleagues,
it is incumbent upon the online learning facilita-
tor to get to know his/her students, as often an
unforeseen domestic problem will affect an in-
dividual student’s concentration, demeanour and
participation levels. Some prior knowledge of
students’ backgrounds on the part of the facilita-
tor, particularly concerning the student’s domestic
circumstances can greatly assist in such situations.
It goes without saying that possession of such
information is privileged and should be treated
sensitively and in total confidence.
Facilitators also need to ensure that discus-
sions largely remain on course (no pun intended).
Inattentiveness to this on the facilitator’s part can
lead to discussions being side-tracked and even
hijacked by the more dominant students. Often
the availability of alternative ‘back channel’ (also
referred to as ‘sidebar’) forms of communication,
such as the instant messaging feature within First
Class, used as one of the online communication and
information management tools by the Ultraversity
programme, can quickly and privately enable a
facilitator to contact the dominant student, po-
litely requesting that he/she steers the discussion
back to the main topic that was originally on the
agenda. On returning to the main community
discussion forum, the facilitator is likely to thank
the dominant student publically for introducing
the unplanned discussion item, and for returning
to the task so promptly.
McLure (1998) states that conflict in such
situations can be healthy. The author’s experience
within the Ultraversity programme is that conflict
within a discussion forum can often result in a
positive outcome, bringing about a clarification
of meaning (in relation to addressing specific
learning outcomes) and subsequently promoting
understanding. However the facilitator must be
sensitive to students’ feelings and maintain calm
633

within the online environment. The following
extracts arranged in the order they were posted
demonstrates facilitator sensitivity, where ‘X’ is
the student, and ‘K’ is the facilitator:
Hello X, (Student)↜ 尨Comments attached. In gen-
eral you have produced 2 Critical Incidents and
reflected upon them within a recognised model
- good! There are however several bits of text
which need to be re-written and you need to start
using an apostrophe!↜
K (facilitator)
The following response was made by the
student:
Hi K,↜ 尨Thanks for the feed-back. I’ll amend tomor-
row. I’m still rubbish when it comes to apostrophes!
Please don’t tell the Apostrophe Protection Society
otherwise they’ll lynch me! I’m attaching a link
to a website-http://www.apostrophe.fsnet.co.uk/
Thank you!
X (student)
The facilitator responds:
↜Hello again X,
↜Nice web link! Useful information on there that
many could do with reading. The most common
(and your usual) is No.3....Don’t use for plurals.
☺↜K
[Facilitators deliberately model the use of
emoticons to substitute the absence of nonverbal
cues that would normally be apparent if the above
conversation had occurred face to face.]
Monitoring and tracking students’ participa-
tion levels is another vital facilitation task. A
fortnightly monitoring exercise when a facilitator
looks at the frequency of each individual student’s
634
Facilitation of Online Teaching and Learning
postings within the community, measured against
the recommended three postings per week within
the Ultraversity programme provides an indica-
tion of each student’s rate of engagement and
participation. Unexplained absences from the
online community can then be investigated by the
facilitators. Emails sent to absent students form
an audit trail which can then be used for histori-
cal purposes when reviewing individual student
contact with the course and module facilitators.
Empowering the students to actively engage
in the learning process with one another, as part
of the trust and relationship building process, also
ensures that an invaluable process of formative
evaluation occurs, through peer feedback and sup-
port. The sense of community that is engendered
amongst both students and facilitators alike also
binds these relationships and fosters a learning
interdependency. Within Ultraversity, in addition
to posting continuous feedback on the module
resources and course design from facilitators to
students within the discussions fora, anonymous
feedback is also sought from the students by the
module leaders in order to improve future course
design. Such an anonymous feature is set up within
the VLE at the culmination of the module, where
students are requested to add their feedback.
Skinner (2009) investigated community de-
velopment theory in order to improve student
engagement in online discussions relating to a
management course. Her research revealed that
despite the employment of a particular activity de-
signed to draw out individual students’ managerial
experiences, potentially drawing upon personal
knowledge, the exercise proved to be uninspiring
for the students. Instead Skinner found out that
students preferred to discuss aspects of manage-
ment that interested them. A more sustained
facilitation approach, where course expectations
for participation levels were clarified from the
commencement with that particular group, could
have resulted in a more successful outcome, a
point alluded to by Skinner (ibid).
Facilitation of Online Teaching and Learning
Within Ultraversity, as student familiarity
with the online learning environment develops,
and their ability to provide critical and construc-
tive feedback improves as part of the formative
learning process, the depth of reflection expected
and received from the students increases. Con-
sequently the volume of postings also increases,
and in order to make the feedback and discussion
process more manageable, students are grouped by
their facilitators into smaller, more personalised
learning sets. Learning sets are usually restricted
to their members, and the facilitators, and are es-
sentially sub-discussion fora. Within Ultraversity,
these have been successfully employed within the
First Class and Moodle environments. Facilitators
usually summarise the discussion outcomes from
the learning sets and post these in the main module
discussion forum for all cohort members to see.
The specific criteria for selecting particular
students to work in these learning sets are decided
by the cohort facilitators, and typical choices are
based upon pairing those students from similar
workplace backgrounds together. Over the course
of the three year online degree, relationships
and good practice in community collaboration
develop, whereby expectations that postings will
be responded to by all community members are
usually met, as students don’t want to disappoint
their peers, or put established relationships at
risk. Facilitators have observed an increase in
the quality of online discourse particularly by the
mid way point in the course, when students must
evidence the part played by peer review in the
formative assessment process of their work. This
involves students providing critical feedback on
the preliminary research findings of their fellow
online community members, a process that is
gradually honed over the lifetime of the degree.
In the majority of cases, the increased level and
quality of student interaction continues for the
remainder of the course-a factor of significant
importance as peer review must be sustained in
order to prepare students for the defence of their
final dissertation. It is most gratifying to observe
the increase in the quality of online discussion,
particularly from students who were initially
less communicative during the early stages of
the course. In many instances, facilitators have
observed that one or two students within each of
the learning sets assume a mentoring role, often
motivating and supporting their fellow set mem-
bers in their collective endeavours to complete
the final course modules. Palloff and Pratt refer
to this phenomenon as ‘process management’
(Palloff & Pratt, 2001, p. 116).
By the time that the Ultraversity programme
was launched in 2003, established research was
confirming the pivotal role facilitation plays in
the development of constructive dialogue between
students, including their facilitators, in actively
establishing and promoting the construction of
knowledge, along with a deeper understanding of
how to instigate workplace improvement. Online
dialogue within the discussion fora reduces iso-
lation, develops skills of analysis and criticality,
and hones research skills. (Palloff & Pratt, 2001,
p.114). In addition to communicating via the
discussion for a, students often utilise instance
messaging, SMS and Skype to augment the online
dialogue. A recent student review of a distance
online course, conducted via a telephone confer-
ence call hosted by Anglia Ruskin University in
the UK highlighted the effectiveness of Adobe
Connect Pro in facilitating both synchronous and
asynchronous tutorials. Students were unanimous
in stating that they felt less isolated through the
introduction of this technology by the university.
Research by Chang (2001), which looked at
what types of online facilitation were required
by students did not rank online discussion as the
first priority. That research identified five types of
online facilitation, associated with online learning
and teaching, in the following order of priority:
1. Requests for information and guidance relat-
ing to assignments and grades.
2. Inquiries relating to network access.
3. Online discussion.
635

4. Group work.
5. Questions relating to course materials.
(Chang 2001, p.499)
Palloff and Pratt’s work (ibid), also published
during the same year as Chang’s, regularly rein-
forces the need for online learners to interact, and
they maintain that this interaction must take pre-
cedence over course content. An interim research
report by Shea et al. Into online ‘teaching presence’
concluded: ‘social presence, including building
environments of trust, is critically important for
success’ (Shea et al., 2003).
By 2005, research was further emphasising
the importance of nurturing ‘student to student’
interaction. (Yang & Cornelious, 2005). Experi-
ence of facilitating students within the Ultraversity
programme confirms these findings.
Absence from the Online Community
Experience drawn from working with students
and education professionals since 2000 has
shown that some students may on occasions
during a semester be limited in the time they are
able to devote to online participation and study,
due to their varying workplace demands; under
such circumstances the majority of students have
tended to devote intensive bursts of time in order
to ‘catch up’ with unread postings within the
online discussion forums. However the increas-
ing ubiquitous availability of Internet access has
meant that ‘Martini Learning’ opportunities have
reduced the need to do this.
Unavoidable and prolonged student absences
from online courses do occur, just as they do in
face to face courses. Such absences can happen
for a variety of reasons, but in most cases students
keep their facilitators apprised of these absences,
and are often able to negotiate extensions to the
published submission dates. However, some
absences caused by a student assuming greater
responsibilities in the workplace, re-location or
illness can result in lengthy periods away from
636
Facilitation of Online Teaching and Learning
the course, to the detriment of their studies, and
may require the student to intermit and re-join
at a later date with another cohort. A good audit
trail of email contact with a student faced with
such challenges, supported by securely held in-
formation by the university relating to the courses
successfully completed by them, along with their
accompanying grades, will greatly assist the re-
introduction of the student at a later date.
Teaching Online
Two key elements that are taught and developed
within the Ultraversity online undergraduate
course, delivered by Anglia Ruskin University
through its B A(Hons) Learning Through Technol-
ogy degree (previously referred to as ‘Learning
Technology Research,) are reflection in the work
setting and action inquiry. These concepts equip
the students with the knowledge and methods -
the ‘tools’ - to confidently propose changes in
working practices, ultimately to the benefit of
both the individual student and the workplace.
It has often been observed by facilitators at the
completion of an Ultraversity programme that
successful graduates will have demonstrated the
efficacy of employing these approaches within
their respective work settings, in addition to
the accompanying dialogue that such changes
stimulate amongst work place colleagues. These
developments have been positively acknowledged
by the management teams of those workplaces.
The concepts of reflection and action inquiry
are not immediately addressed at the start of the
course, instead students are asked to introduce
their workplaces, along with their roles within
those workplaces. However, the learning outcomes
that must be addressed during that first module do
require some reflection. The facilitators support
student learning and the initial direction of their
studies by posing specific questions relating to
their studies within the online discussion fora,
which require responses from the students. As
the module develops, students are asked to source
Facilitation of Online Teaching and Learning
information beyond that which has been presented
within the VLE’s module resource area. They
share a concise version of their findings within
the discussion forum, and their fellow students
and facilitators provide feedback. Facilitators
remind students to use the feedback framework
posted earlier in this chapter.
Another key element of the Ultraversity pro-
gramme is the student’s self-assessment of their
learning journey through each module. This is
evidenced in the concluding section of a student’s
assignment, and is based upon Winter’s ‘Patch-
work Text’ approach. In essence this approach
combines the essay format with a portfolio of
work, and requires the student to reflect upon
their assignment which has been built up during
the course of addressing the module’s learning
outcomes and completing their assignment.
(Winter, 2006). In the concluding section of
their work, the student reflects upon the gradual
development of their knowledge and understand-
ing, demonstrating synthesis with the available
literature and generating future learning targets to
pursue. Winter’s (ibid) patchwork approach seeks
to provide a deeper form of learning, as opposed
to what he sees as a more commonly occurring
form of learning-namely surface learning, which
he associates with a lack of reflection.
One student entering the second year of the
Ultraversity degree programme compared the
approach of the online facilitator in seeding
discussions and maintaining their vibrancy with
that of Socratic dialogue, realising that learning
occurring within the cohort’s discussion fora was
not comparable to the face to face lecture of old,
where students listened to the lecturer; instead
current practice saw questions proposed by stu-
dents, and findings derived from their research
shared, and often facilitators would clarify any
misunderstandings, and seek re-examination of
those findings.
That student’s realisation was also a learning
point for the facilitation team, who as a result
regularly reminded future students that much
of the responsibility for learning was dependent
upon their regular participation and collaboration
within their online community.
As mentioned earlier in this chapter, the
main principles upon which online learning and
teaching within the Ultraversity programme are
founded in both situated learning (constructivist,
social learning, derived through the collaborative,
participative interactions within the VLE’s discus-
sion fora) and cognitive learning (whereby the
shared, online forum-based learning brings about
deeper learning that can be applied to workplace
practices). The content of an online course is
but one of five elements of flexibility in online
course design that Collis and Moonen propose:
The other four elements are time, entry require-
ments, delivery and logistics, and institutional ap-
proaches and logistics (Collis & Moonen, 2004). A
more simplified, facilitator-orientated framework
for course design is proposed by Normand and
Littlejohn. This is based upon the central founda-
tion of the technology, and includes the process
factors (these include the roles and skills of those
involved in the design and delivery, and include the
management process), which in turn are derived
from the contextual factors, which include the
overall strategy for delivering the course, within
the overall organisational structure (Normand &
Littlejohn, 2006, p. 4).
Research published by Russell based upon her
work in an Australian university indicates that
the adoption of new learning technologies has
been slower than anticipated. Her work revealed
that the inclusion of online learning had in part
been left to individual lecturers. Her study also
showed that there was a lack of support available
for lecturers in both the adoption and development
of online learning (Russell, 2009). She proposes
that focusing the proposed adoption of the new
learning technologies at an individual lecturer
level is not enough, and proposes a three level,
complementary model, at individual, institutional
and national levels. The present economic climate,
particularly as it is currently limiting expenditure
637

in UK universities, with additional cuts projected
for university budgets in 2010, may mean further
delays in any planned developments in the overall
adoption and implementation of online learning.
Such delays may come on top of the reported
lack of support for individual lecturers and facul-
ties in their utilisation of learning technologies,
further arresting the progress of the adoption of
online learning. The move by some UK universities
to use Microsoft’s Sharepoint VLE has mirrored
the experience of some US universities-that of a
lack of software support. Purchase discounts that
were initially provided by Microsoft, or where
existing licensing agreements with that global
software provider included Sharepoint amongst
its ‘campus suite’ software package, meant that
these institutions discovered that technical sup-
port was in short supply. In order to address this,
some universities have formed self-help groups.
Support for Sharepoint in the UK seems to be
evenly divided by individuals and groups within
universities that recognise its potential, and those
that have already condemned the software (Lap-
pin, 2009).
Lappin (ibid) suggests that in order to facili-
tate progress towards an institution-wide buy-in
for Sharepoint, all departments within that in-
stitution concerned with its implementation and
development as the institutional VLE, such as
faculties, administration, learning technologists
and institutional information systems manag-
ers should be in regular communication about
its introduction. Lappin’s findings revealed that
often only the learning technologists were fully
debating its implementation. Brian Fitzpatrick,
Director of Learning and Information Services
at the University of Chester in the UK stressed
in a recent communication with the author that
any institutional introduction of a VLE must have
a clearly articulated implementation policy. The
author would add, based upon past experience of
introducing VLEs that all those aforementioned
departments must also have a stake holding in
formulating that implementation policy. When this
638
Facilitation of Online Teaching and Learning
is agreed, movement can begin towards institution-
wide adoption of online learning and teaching.
The who, what and where of designing an
online course.
Based upon the author’s experience gained
from working with online groups of education and
medical professionals as well as undergraduates
since 2000, educational institutions seeking to
facilitate the development of online teaching and
learning programmes need to ensure that at the
outset there is a clear policy of implementation,
which has been produced collectively by both
academic and technical support staff, with the full
backing of the institution’s senior management
team. Ideally an in-house course that develops
competencies in online teaching and facilitation
and accredits faculty teaching staff upon its sat-
isfactory completion should be one of the first
developments in implementing such a policy. A
major element of implementing any policy for
the development of online teaching and learning
within any institution must address overall staff
capability in being able to satisfactorily use the in-
house VLE. Decisions as to what courses, or parts
of courses that could be delivered online should
also be included in the implementation policy,
following full consultation with academic staff.
Early adopters who have already embraced
aspects of online teaching and learning should
be supported in consolidating the development of
their courses. They in turn should be provided with
the resource of time to mentor other colleagues in
facilitating online learning and teaching.
Facilitation: A Model
Ultraversity facilitation team members often
attribute their ability to engage in teaching and
learning online to having ‘lived’ the virtual experi-
ence since 2000. Initial familiarity with Tuckman’s
‘forming, storming, norming and performing’
model, along with the ‘adjourning’ fifth stage he
later added (Tuckman, 1965), provided the team
with a framework of understanding, relating to
Facilitation of Online Teaching and Learning
their own stages of development during the forma-
tive process of developing the virtual spaces for
the Talking Heads project. (Lang, in press). The
initial first stage of this model remains relevant
for the current learning facilitation team, when
introducing a new cohort to the online course.
It is in the opinion of the author that Tuckman’s
model provides a basic conceptual framework,
and requires more detail so as to accommodate
the gradual and evolving familiarity brought about
by working in a collaborative virtual learning
environment, as observed within Ultraversity
learning groups, particularly as they complete
one module and begin another. The following
four stage model is proposed:
1. Formative stage (applicable only to the
very first module of the Ultraversity online
degree course)
This includes the induction week, and students’
first engagement with the VLE and online re-
sources, following their responses to the ‘welcome
email’. Online introductions occur, accompanied
by first software orientation exercises. Once this
stage is achieved, the cohort move to the next stage.
2. Task Identification and clarification stage
Students are required to complete a personal
learning plan, including a projected timeline,
which is shared with the facilitation team. Learn-
ing outcomes are clarified.
3. Process and conflict Stage
This is where the bulk of the task is addressed.
Essentially it is a linear process, but the core skills
of reflection and critical analysis that are utilised
to foster ‘deep learning’ (Winter, ibid) require stu-
dents to return to the original task, and to reflect
upon the whole learning process. Much facilitated
discussion occurs here, with between one to three
hundred postings per week generated during the
first few weeks of the module. This is also the
stage when facilitators can expect ‘storming’ to
occur. Once the facilitation process has identified
and addressed the varying needs of the students,
the frenetic pace of prolific posting is reduced.
4. Product Stage
When this final stage is reached, students are
reminded to ensure that they have addressed all the
module’s learning outcomes, and to compare their
work against the assessment criteria. Facilitators
ensure that online submission arrangements are
in place, and remain highly visible during this
stage to reassure students that their work has been
successfully uploaded for assessment.
The facilitation role during the life cycle of a
module encompasses several functions: During
Stages 1 and 2, this includes directing, enabling
and modelling online behaviour; by Stage 3, this
has evolved to an encouraging, mentoring, and sup-
porting role. Throughout the module, the facilitator
must oversee the well being of the students, and
be prepared to offer support and encouragement
to all members of that online community.
CONCLUSION
Research for this chapter has revealed that the
key role of the learning facilitator in ensuring the
quality of online teaching and learning is at best
misunderstood, and the place of facilitation in that
process understated. Recent research (Russell,
2009) has also shown that in the case of Australian
universities, the utilisation of new technologies to
facilitate learning has been slow. The commercial
clout of global software providers is in the opinion
of the author leaving little choice for universities
other than to assimilate such propriety learning
platforms and their accompanying tier of technol-
ogy yet to be mastered. Against this background,
universities face the challenge of meeting the high
expectations of a Facebook Generation of students
639

already familiar with anytime, anywhere, anyplace
online shopping and social interaction. With the
ever increasing costs associated with full-time,
face to face higher education, a graduate education
may only be attainable for some in the future via
online access, studying outside working hours. If
this is to be successful, universities will require
experienced online lecturers, conversant with VLE
technology, and possessing the necessary skills
and expertise in online teaching and learning.
Universities already successfully engaging in the
online delivery of their courses must be prepared
to share their collective expertise, for the future
economic benefit of their nations.
REFERENCES
Blackboard (1998). Educational benefits of online
learning. Retrieved October 26, 2009, from http://
jeffline.jefferson.edu/Education/Pulse/info.html
Chang, S. L. (2001). What types of online facili-
tation do students need? In Annual Proceedings
of Selected Research and Development [and]
Practice Papers Presented at the National
Convention of the Association for Educational
Communications and Technology (24th, Atlanta,
GA, November 8-12 2001 (pp. 494-502). Re-
trieved November 6, 2009, from http://www.
eric.ed.gov:80/ERICDocs/data/ericdocs2sql/
content_storage_01/0000019b/80/1a/87/e1.pdf
Collins, M., & Berg, Z. L. (2006). Resources for
moderators and facilitators of online discussion.
Retrieved October 26, 2009, from http://www.
emoderators.com/moderators.shtml#mod
Collis, B., & Moonen, J. (2004). Flexible learning
in a digital world. London: Kogan Page.
Dawan, J., Todd, D., & Turner, M. (2008). Se-
crets for working with online groups. Retrieved
November 11, 2009, from http://www.cedu.niu.
edu/cahe/news/newsDocuments/AALA08_Web/
AALA08_Papers/DawanToddTurner.htm
640
Facilitation of Online Teaching and Learning
Hiemstra, R. (1994). Computerized distance
education: The role for facilitators. In The
MPAEA Journal of Adult Education, 22(2), 11-23.
Retrieved October 9, 2009, from http://www-
distance.syr.edu/mpaea.html
Hootstein, E. (2002). Wearing four pairs of shoes:
The roles of E-Learning facilitators. Retrieved
October 29, 2009, from http://www.astd.org/
LC/2002/1002_hootstein.htm.
House of Commons Committee of Public Ac-
counts. (2007). Staying the course: The retention
of students on higher education course. United
Kingdom Parliament. Retrieved October 30, 2009,
from http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/
cm200708/cmselect/cmpubacc/322/322.pdf
Hunnicutt, T. (2000). Elements of quality: Syn-
thesis of the August 2002 seminar. In C. Janet
(Ed.), The sloan consortium (pp. 1-30). Retrieved
October 29, 2009, from http://www.sloan-c.org/
publications/books/SloanAugust2002_Seminar.
pdf
Kim, K., Lu, X., Lee, S., Bonk, C., Magjuka,
R., Liu, S., et al. (2004). Online facilitation and
motivation in online MBA courses. Retrieved
October 30, 2009, from http://www.eric.ed.gov/
ERICWebPortal/custom/portlets/recordDetails/
detailmini.jsp?_nfpb=true&_&ERICExtSearch_
SearchValue_0=ED485054&ERICExtSear
ch_SearchType_0=no&accno=ED485054
Knowles, M., Holton, E. F. III, & Swanson, R.
A. (2005). The adult learner (6th ed.). London:
Elsevier Butterworth Heinemann.
Lang, G. (in Press). Ultraversity-integrating tech-
nology in adult education. In Wang, V. C. X. (Ed.),
Cultural issues in adult education in relation to
the use of technology. Hershey, PA: Information
Science Reference.
Lappin, J. (2009). Presentation on sharepoint in
higher education. Retrieved November 8, 2009,
from http://thinkingrecords.co.uk/2009/10/17/
presentation-on-sharepoint-in-higher-education.
Facilitation of Online Teaching and Learning
Maltby, A., & Mackie, S. (2009). Virtual learning
environments-help or hinderance for the ‘disen-
gaged’ student? Research in Learning Technology,
17(1), 49–62.
Mann, T. (2007). Facilitation-an art, science, skill
or all tree?Bradford, UK: Resource Publications.
Mason, R., & Rennie, F. (2008). E-Learning and
social networking handbook. New York, London:
Routledge.
McClure, B. (1998). Putting a new spin on groups.
Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Normand, C., & Littlejohn, A. (2006). A model
for analysis and implementation of flexible
programme delivery. Quality Assurance Agency
for Higher Education. Retrieved November 11,
2009, from http://www.enhancementthemes.
ac.uk/documents/flexibleDelivery/flexible_de-
livery_QAA_124.pdf
Palloff, R. M., & Pratt, K. (2001). Lessons from
the Cyberspace Classroom: The realities of online
teaching. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Russell, C. (2009). A systematic framework for
managing e-learning adoption in campus universi-
ties: Individual strategies in context. Research in
Learning Technology, 17(1), 3–19.
Salmon, G. (2000). E-moderating: The key to
teaching and learning online. London: Kogan
Page.
Shea, P. J., Fredericksen, E. E., Pickett, A. M., &
Pelz, W. E. (2003). A preliminary investigation
of “teaching presence” in the SUNY learning
network: Elements of quality online education
practice and direction. In J. Bourne & C. M. Janet
(Eds.), The sloan consortium. Retrieved October
12, 2009, from http://www.sloan-c.org/publica-
tions/books/eqoe4summary.pdf
Skinner, E. (2009). Using community develop-
ment theory to improve student engagement
in online discussion: A case study. Research in
Learning Technology, 17(2), 89–100.
Tuckman, B. (1965). ‘Forming-storming-norm-
ing-performing’ concept. Retrieved November 11,
2009, from http://www.businessballs.com/tuck-
manformingstormingnormingperforming.htm
White, N. (2004). Facilitating and hosting a
virtual community. Retrieved October 12, 2009,
from http://www.fullcirc.com/community/com-
munityfacilitation.htm
Winter, R. (2006). “Deep learning” and academic
writing: A rationale for the patchwork text. Re-
trieved November 8, 2009, from http://www.
health.heacademy.ac.uk/scevents/pastevents/
ws/usingpatchworktextinhighereducation/patch-
worktextinhighereducation
Yang, Y., & Cornelious, L. F. (2005). Preparing
instructors for quality online instruction. Online
Journal of Distance Learning Administration,
VIII(I). Retrieved November 6, 2009, from
http://www.westga.edu/~distance/ojdla/spring81/
yang81.htm.
KEY TERMS AND DEFINITIONS
Back Channel: A private, one to one alter-
native means of communicating between online
community members, additional to the main
community forum, often a synchronous text chat
facility.
Collaboration: The sharing and support of
learning in an online community of practice.
Community Of Practice: A homogenous
group of learners, who meet online to share learn-
ing and social interactions.
641

Learning Facilitator (LF): An online lecturer
possessing good technological and andragogical
skills.
Talking Heads: The online community of
Practice for headteachers in England, now facili-
tated by the National College for Leadership of
Schools and Children’s Services.
Ultralab: The learning technology research
department founded by Professor Stephen Hep-
642
Facilitation of Online Teaching and Learning
pell, based at Anglia Ruskin University until the
department was closed in 2006.
Ultraversity: The online undergraduate
programme at Anglia Ruskin University in the
UK, graduates of which receive a BA (Hons) in
Learning through Technology.
 643

Chapter 38
Community Service Learning:
Preparing Female Students in the United
Arab Emirates for the Workplace
Sandra Poirier
Middle Tennessee State University, USA

Deborah G. Wooldridge
Bowling Green State University, USA

Gloysis Mayers
Zayed University, UAE

Nancy Sonleitner
University of Tennessee at Martin, USA

Chris Coughlin
Chico State University, USA

ABSTRACT
A learning community where students develop the knowledge, skills and abilities needed for meaning-
ful and successful 21st century work and life is the vision for higher education programs in the Middle
East. A successful learning community of faculty members, students, and site supervisors in a variety
of community programs are working together to achieve this objective, and are jointly engaged in the
pursuit of excellence and the development of human potential. It is Zayed University’s goal to assure
that students develop the higher-order intellectual capacities and technological skills they will need to
succeed in a rapidly changing and increasingly complex world. This chapter describes the model used
to meet the challenges faced by first generation female college graduates in the United Arab Emirates,
a model that emphasizes community service learning placements and undergraduate research projects.
These first generation graduates are also those who are expected to transition into a very conservative
work environment. For the majority, community placements provided through this model is the first
opportunity through which they are able to have any level of workplace experience. In this chapter we
will report on this innovative community service program model experienced by students and will ad-

DOI: 10.4018/978-1-61692-906-0.ch038
 Community Service Learning

dress challenges and successes of this program model which utilizes undergraduate student research,
community involvement and the integration of female graduates into the workforce. We will share how
this model provided insights into the work experience, as reported in students’ journal reflections. An
effective service learning program and undergraduate research involvement allowed these graduates to
put theory into practice, develop habits of self analysis and reflective thinking, and contribute towards
a greater understanding of organizational structures.

INTRODUCTION well as understand the world of work. Therefore to

United Arab Emirates is located on the northeast
coast of the Arabian Peninsula. It is bordered by
Saudi Arabia to the west and south, and by Oman to
the East. UAE is made up of a federation of seven
independent states and is governed by a central
council. Abu Dhabi, the capital of the nation is
centrally located on the coast. Dubai is the largest
city of the UAE, and is the center of commerce
and tourism. The population is estimated at 2.58
million, of which less than 19% are citizens of the
UAE, with a per capita income of US$ 17,400.
With an expatriate population of over 80%, there
is great diversity with 20% being other Arab or
Iranian, 50% Asian and 8% East Asian or Western.
The population is 96% Muslim and more than
90% of those living in the UAE live in the cities
(United Nations Statistics Division, 2002).
Zayed University, a government- sponsored
institution in the United Arab Emirates, was
founded in 1998 to prepare women leaders who
will identify the possibilities and capture the op-
portunities that will create the future of the United
Arab Emirates. It currently also serves male
students on segregated campuses. Although it is
a young nation, less than 30 years old, the UAE
is destined to command a significant position in
the Middle East because of its strategic location,
the forward thinking and far-sighted vision of the
leaders, and quality of its modern infrastructure.
It is Zayed University’s goal to assure that
students develop the intellectual capacities and
technological skills they will need to succeed in a
rapidly changing, increasingly complex world, as
achieve this goal, all academic programs provide
experiences for students through field experiences
in the form of practicum and internships. Work-
place issues emerged as more women graduated
from Zayed University and began searching for
employment positions. There were concerns and
questions about appropriate female workplace
environments and the entire career development
process for graduates.
In this chapter, we describe the model used to
meet the challenges initially faced by first genera-
tion female college graduates in the United Arab
Emirates as they move toward employment. We
discuss the challenges and successes of a commu-
nity service program, provide selected comments
from student reflections on these experiences,
and demonstrate how student research into local
needs provided for them an introduction to the
world of work.
BACKGROUND
Service learning has been around for many
years, however it was not until the mid 1980’s
that the term “service learning” established its
roots (Stanton, Giles, & Cruz, 1999). To label
a learning activity service learning, it must be
associated with a learning goal or objective that
pertains to the curriculum. This type of educa-
tional activity incorporates an interdisciplinary,
student-centered, collaborative focus, and is
integrated with real-world issues and practices
(Bradford, 2005). Service learning is closely

644
Community Service Learning
associated with experiential learning, hands-on
learning, or active learning (Dewey, 1938; Kolb,
1984). Students collaborate with others through
a process of applying what they are learning to
community problems while, at the same time,
reflecting upon their experience as they seek to
achieve real objectives for the community and
deeper understanding and skills for themselves
(Eyler & Giles, 1999). Service learning research
in the last decades has demonstrated the effec-
tiveness of this pedagogical tool for enhanced
academic learning as well as civic responsibility
(Rockquemore & Schaffer, 2000).
Dwight Glass, Ellen Porter Honnet and Sally
Migloire (1991) offer a comprehensive service-
learning definition in Research Agenda for Com-
bining Service and Learning in the 1990’s:
“Service-learning is both a program type and a
philosophy of education. As a program type, ser-
vice-learning includes myriad ways that students
can perform meaningful service to their communi-
ties and to society while engaging in some form
of reflection of study that is related to the service.
As a philosophy of education, service-learning
reflects the belief that education must be linked
to social responsibility and that the most effective
learning is active and connected to experience in
some meaningful way.” (p. 7)
Bringle and Hatcher (1996) incorporated the
function of service learning by defining it as:
“ a credit-bearing educational experience in
which students participate in an organized service
activity that meets identified community needs,
and reflect on the service activity in such as
way as to gain further understanding of course
content, a broader appreciation of the discipline,
and an enhanced sense of civic responsibility.”
(Zlotkowski, 1998)
At the end of the decade, Zlotkowski (1998)
focused on the definition and illustrated the nu-
merous dimensions and applications of service
learning. He emphasized the importance of imple-
menting service learning, or experiential learning,
in a way that does not end up one sided for either
the university or the community partner. He has
defined service learning as:
“a course-based experience in which students (1)
participate in an organized service activity that
meets indemnified community needs, while (2)
reflecting on that service activity in such a way
as to gain further understanding of the course,
a broader appreciation of the discipline, and an
enhanced sense of civic responsibility.” (p.xiv)
A decade later, the National Youth Leadership
Council in their G2G: Growing to Greatness 2008-
The State of Service-Learning (2008) presented
the history of the development of standards for
service learning and shared promising research-
based practices to improve student outcomes and
defined service learning as:
“A philosophy, pedagogy, and model for commu-
nity development that is used as an instructional
strategy to meet learning goals and/or content
standards.”
Service learning is an increasingly significant
component of academic programs on many col-
lege campuses, ranging from the major research
university to the small liberal arts college to the
community college (Smith-Paríolá & Góké-
Paríolá, 2006). As colleges seek to link community
service learning to their educational mission, the
local, national, and institutional cultural contexts
need to be considered. This planning process must
include community aspects such as the history of
the area, demographics, geography, norms, and
values of the local community so that a recipro-
cal relationship between the institution, faculty,
students and the community can develop. Berman
(1999) found that successful higher education
community service learning programs entails a
645

clear articulation of mission, consistency with
organizational goals, faculty driven plans for pro-
gram implementation, creative means to integrate
service with study, long term goals and plans, and
open communication systems.
Community service learning supports the
ability of students to process concepts, develop
positive attitudes toward life long learning and
problem solving (Godfrey & Grasso, 2000). Also,
students are involved in an interactive process,
which enhances learning. Stevens (1999) suggests
that community service learning projects must
provide students with opportunities to apply and
practice new skills, allow them to problem solve,
provide a needed service within the community,
develop a holistic understanding of the community
and develop workplace skills such as cooperation,
responsibility, dependability and the like. What is
important to note is that service learning provides
a bridge that links theory to practice. Community
service learning links academic learning to civic
engagement and allows students to actively ad-
dress real community issues.
During the early 1990’s, the pedagogy of join-
ing the experience of volunteer service to formal
learning was undergoing a noticeable change
(Berry & Chisholm, 1999), because at many
colleges and universities in many regions of the
world community service learning was springing
up spontaneously and independently. Nations
labeled this form of learning a variety of things,
including “expansion education” (India), “study
service” (United Kingdom), “practical education”
(Uganda), “social service course” (Korea), “work-
study” (Jamaica), and “programs of education for
the community” (Mexico).
Educators around the world cite various rea-
sons, or a combination of reasons, for developing
and supporting programs of service-learning, such
as reforming education, providing solutions for
community issues, developing human values,
leadership and citizenship; and enhancing cross
cultural communication. First as pedagogy, service
learning speaks to the core of educational reform,
646
Community Service Learning
responding to the new developments in cogni-
tive science as to how the mind works and how
learning actually takes place. It brings teaching
and learning, faculty and students, disciplines and
content, into new relationships and understanding.
Despite the vast differences in educational
systems internationally, there is a universal
concern for the world and its people according
to Tonkin (2004) that can be addressed by the
union of community service learning and higher
education. Tonkin supports incorporating service
learning activities into the college classroom to
understand difference, and to manage it. He states,
“In the process, we must soften the extremes that
lead to conflict and develop willingness on the
part of all people to step out of themselves and
see things from other people’s point of view”. The
award winning Nigerian novelist, Chinua Achebe
(1995) states at a United Nations presentation, “
by connecting higher education to communities,
nations, and the world is very important because
at this level students realize that problems are
global in character, and their solutions require
understanding, appreciating and respecting ra-
cial, ethnic, cultural and religious differences”.
Moreover,” higher education exposes one to all
of the theories about a new world order, but it
is connecting the various facets of society and
providing the environment for positive interac-
tion that makes a positive difference” according
to Professor Chinua.
FOCUS ON EDUCATION IN THE
UNITED ARAB EMIRATES
The United Arab Emirates is a fairly young
country with leadership that strongly supports
education for all citizens. The education system
in the UAE has been impacted both positively
and negatively by economic, political, social, and
demographic trends. Such forces have influenced
the diverse population characteristics related to
a high expatriate workforce, the influx of multi-
Community Service Learning
national companies, changes in consumer habits
and challenges to traditional values.
Goals developed for the educational system in
the UAE recognize the importance that increased
education levels for Emirati national youth will
play toward contributing to economic growth
and towards sustaining human development.
Graduates in the 21st century must have skills to
address the challenges brought about by increasing
globalization and modernization and the impact
that these two forces can have on the traditional
cultural ethos (United Nations Development
Program [UNDP], 2003a). Of particular interest
is the role of women towards contributing to the
economic, social, and political development in
the UAE.
Education of Women in the
United Arab Emirates
The UNDP reports (2003a; 2003b; 2002a) suggest
that Arab countries will not witness productivity
and development unless women are granted equal
rights and opportunities to work in their fields of
interest. The role of women in contributing to the
economic, social, and political development of
a country is acknowledged in the literature and
of particular interest is the level of opportunities
available for women in Middle Eastern countries
(Academy for Educational Development, 2002;
United Nations Statistics Division, 2002). A theme
running through the Arab Human Development
Reports (UNDP, 2003a; 2003b; 2002a) has been
that the Arab regions’ existing human capacity
potential, represents an inadequately tapped as-
set. Strengthening and using these capacities is
seen as essential as these countries move forward.
This report further states that many Arab women
remain underutilized in all arenas, and even in
cases where women are part of the economic
employment structure they suffer from a variety
of opportunity deficits in the workplace. At the
2004 Arab Women’s Conference in Abu Dhabi, it
was asserted that there was a need to investigate
restrictive practices that inhibit women’s entry
into the job market (Gulf News, 2004).
An emphasis on educational opportunities
has provided Emirati national women with op-
tions to participate in the development of their
society alongside men. Female expatriates in the
UAE comprise 41.6% of workers in the field of
education, 34.2% in the health sector, and 19.7%
in social affairs (UAE Ministry of Information
and Culture, 2005). UAE national women are
publicly encouraged to join the work force and
are employed primarily in education, health care,
and as government workers (U.S. Department of
State, 2005). However, a local report pointed out
that studies on the employment of women reveal
disadvantages including the difficulty in attract-
ing Emirati national women into the labor market
due to current work place practices (Ministry of
Information and Culture, 2005; Benoliel,2003;
Sayed, 2001).
According to Halloran (1999), UAE leaders
have long recognized that the future prosperity of
the country could not be achieved with only half
of its citizens; it need both men and women to be
educated to enter the work force and contribute
directly to social and economic development. Ac-
cording to the Ministry of Information and Culture
(2005), the contribution of UAE national women to
economic activity has increased significantly from
5.4 percent in 1995 to 16 percent in 2004. From
the onset, the UAE constitution was formulated
to safeguard the rights of women by providing
them equal opportunities. Women therefore have
the same legal status, claim to property, access to
education, and the right to practice any profession.
The 2020 vision for education in the UAE
recognizes the need to link education to productive
work (UAE Ministry of Education, 2000). This
cannot be achieved if barriers to the successful
integration of women into the workforce are not
recognized. Awareness of myths and misconcep-
tions about the workplace, enable women more
objectively to assess individual work settings and
to proactively respond to workplace situations.
647

Thus, higher education institutions must develop
ways to introduce the workplace environment
to the youth in the country; especially to young
women. Community service learning is one such
strategy that has proven to be successful and was
integrated into the Family Sciences curriculum at
Zayed University
Education at Zayed University
At the post-secondary level, there are three
government-supported Universities: The United
Arab Emirates University at Al-Ain established
in 1977, the Higher Colleges of Technology es-
tablished in 1988 and Zayed University, a tech-
nology university established in 1998 (Ministry
of Information and Culture, 2002). Of all UAE
nationals pursuing higher education, more than 90
percent are enrolled in one of these three govern-
ment institutions. Higher education up through
the Baccalaureate is free for all Emirati citizens
(Ministry of Information and Culture, 2002).
The mission of Zayed University is to prepare
graduates for meaningful and successful 21st
century life by contributing to socio-economic
development, and by promoting the advance-
ment of excellence and leadership of women in
the UAE (Jarchow & Wooldridge, 2005; Zayed
University, 2005). Zayed University was created
using United States higher education model with
the objective to provide an educational experience
facilitating the development of life long learning
skills (Zayed University 2006). It offers a com-
prehensive educational program With English as
the language of instruction
The University’s vision is enhanced by a focus
on a learning outcomes model that guides cur-
riculum development in all academic programs.
The learning assessment process help students
recognize their own potential as leaders and
team members and then are able to apply their
critical thinking and reflection skills towards
finding solutions to critical issues. To achieve
these goals, academic programs and university
648
Community Service Learning
infrastructures have been developed to support
the work of students and faculty. In the area of
information technology competencies, students
and faculty members are each provided with a
laptop computer with all the necessary software
required for specific technology courses as well
as for on-line and desktop related activities. The
university model guides student and faculty in-
teraction as they work towards the development
of knowledge, skills, and abilities needed for suc-
cessful adjustment to life and work in this century.
Questions arose as meaningful learning ex-
periences were being developed for these female
students at ZU. One such question focused on
how we could assist students in making the suc-
cessful transition from school to work, taking
into consideration their first generation status
and the conservative nature of the work environ-
ment? Many adults see the need for meaningful
engagement of youth in organizational policy
and decision-making and students in general
clearly want and need significant involvement
in community building endeavors. We found that
this process was often a difficult one for female
students at Zayed University.
Curriculum Design
Cultural and social elements specific to the Emi-
rati nationals make community service unique
and challenging. Undoubtedly one of the greatest
challenges was that over 90% of students were
first generation graduates and many were from
families with mothers who do not work outside
of the home. Looking specifically at the graduates
from Zayed University, approximately 72% of
them expressed interest and/or intentions to enter
the work force (Office of Institutional Research
and Planning Support, 2003). Also, the community
service internship experience was the first real
work situation of many of the students, and most
had no prior experiences related to the context
of either a job search or the work environment.
Such a cultural background presents challenges
Community Service Learning
for successful transitions to worksites where the
prevalent cultural view was that a woman’s place
is in the home and therefore would have few skills
to offer the workplace. To overcome such myths
the community service internship program was
organized based on a year long process of visits
and collaborative dialogs with work site supervi-
sors. Guidelines were collaboratively developed
between agency and university supervisors to
support student successful transition to the specific
agency placement site where students were placed
under the supervision of an agreed upon agency
supervisor. Family support has been vital espe-
cially in the early advancement of this initiative
as students in many cases had to be transported
by family members to their placement sites as
many did not have unsupervised transportation
privileges.
RECOMMENDATIONS
Community service learning was considered an
efficient and effective method of developing work-
related skills and behaviors to assist ZU female
students in transitioning from school to the work
place. It provided a vehicle to tie theory to practice,
to provide real life work experiences for young
Figure 1. Work place transition model for community service learning, internship and undergraduate
research
Emirati women with limited or no experience with
work. Such a learning approach also provided op-
portunities for students to address pressing societal
issues through research. Courses were designed
to integrate community service learning into the
curriculum through undergraduate research linked
to the community issues and involvement in ex-
periences located in K-12 schools, social service
agencies, and government ministries. This model
succeeded in involving students in the community,
developing community partnerships for produc-
tive placements and providing opportunities for
students to practice what they had learned. The
family studies program was designed to focus on
professional knowledge and skills, community
research and community service learning through
a placement connected to a community based
research assignment; the senior capstone project
(see figure 1).
This program model developed to assist stu-
dents in making the transition from school to work
consisted of students’ involvement in commu-
nity service learning internships and job place-
ments. An integral and unique aspect of the
program was the integration of undergraduate
research fused with community service learning.
Undergraduate research not only bridges the gap
between knowledge and experiences, but has the
649

benefit of laying the groundwork for career ex-
ploration and professional development.
Phase I
The first phase of the program was providing stu-
dents with a background in research methods and
developing research projects that would support
community service learning placement experi-
ences. Students were required to take two-three
credit courses in research methods during their
third and fourth years of study. Research issues
focused on community problems and concerns
and made connections with community service
sites. Partnerships were formed and commitments
for research data collection between the sites, the
university faculty and students were agreed upon
during pre-placement consulting. Research top-
ics addressed by four cohorts from 2002-2004,
consisting of 180 students, focused on work they
completed in community service placements
related to working with k-12 children, teachers,
counselors, juvenile courts and parents. The topics
were categorized into issues including:
• Health and nutrition issues for young
children
• Issues related to special needs children and
their families
• Parenting practices and family
communication
• Effects of divorce on children
• Extended family and older adult issues
Phase II
The second phase of the program was placing
students into community service learning sites to
complete their practicum experiences and conduct
the agreed upon research project. The 180 students
were placed in a variety of sites in order to gain
work experience and to conduct their community
based research projects (Wooldridge & Mayers,
2004). Placement sites included: the Ministry
650
Community Service Learning
of Education and Youth, Ministry of Labor and
Social Affairs, Department of Health, Juvenile
Courts, Police Departments, Ajman Department
for the Handicapped, Sharjah Humanitarian Ser-
vices, Sharjah Ministry of Educational Affairs,
Sharjah Royal Family Supreme Council, Dubai
Municipality, Women’s Union, Bait Al Khair So-
cial Services Office and many other community
based social and educational programs serving
children and families.
Effective community service learning sites
provided students with opportunities to put theory
into practice and develop habits of self-analysis
and reflective thinking. Student presentations and
reflections revealed their reinforced dedication
towards empowering and strengthening families
in the UAE as professionals in the workforce.
Responses from students were generally insight-
ful and themes that emerged from these students’
comments revealed their abilities to be reflective
and self-analytical. “Solving problems” was fre-
quently mentioned by the students as a challenge.
For interns, organizational settings are complex
and multi-faceted and comprised of relation-
ships between clients, staff, and organizational
supervisors. Learning how to interact effectively
in professional settings was a frequent challenge
for these pre-professionals due to their limited
experiences in the workplace.
Students wrote reflections on their community
service experiences each week during their ten
week assignment. At the end of the service learning
placement, they wrote comprehensive reflections
on the entire experience. Students wrote about
their self-perceptions regarding communication
skill including: “I learned how to gain the trust
and respect of others,” “I learned how to listen
to others and understand their problems,” and “I
learned how to express my opinion at an appropri-
ate time.” Students reported on their interactions
with parents and the opportunities and challenges
in helping the parents understand issues of child
growth and development and assisting these
parents better apply effective strategies with
Community Service Learning
their children. Students expressed concerns for
ethical behaviors in professional settings and the
conflicts they felt when ethical behaviors were not
modeled at the community service sites. Students
also cited that their self-concept was further de-
veloped through the community service learning
experience. Students stated that they acquired a
better understanding of the routines, roles and
responsibilities of organizational settings, learned
how to approach new tasks, and improved on their
time management.
Phase III
The third phase of the program was the analysis
and presentation of the studies students had con-
ducted at the community site. As a requirement for
graduating seniors, these projects served as their
graduation capstone research projects. Capstone
projects presented an opportunity for students to
experience the research process, address commu-
nity issues and engage in academic scholarship
(Khelifa, Sonleitner, Wooldridge, & Mayers,
2004). These projects helped enlarge the current
knowledge about issues facing Emirati families
and their communities and raised awareness re-
garding potential solutions to social issues. The
findings were presented to the campus community,
community partners and community leaders, at a
Research Symposium at the end of each semester
following the completion of the work site experi-
ence. The final step of the process was a student
research publication, in which the findings were
presented in English and Arabic and distributed
to the community (Khelifa, 2002a, 2002b, 2003a,
2003b, 2004).
FUTURE TRENDS
Practitioners in higher education have known
that service learning has the potential to be a
strong catalyst for change. Increasingly, research
confirms that high quality service-learning experi-
ences strengthen people, schools, and a community
(Billig, 2004). This powerful pedagogy will have
a transforming effect on higher education around
the world by creating citizens and individuals who
are responsive to the needs of others, civically
engaged, and prepare for a peaceful future based
on globalization of compassion, tolerance, and
understanding. As an added benefit, many of the
abilities that students acquire using a technology-
integrated, project-based service learning activ-
ity are 21st century interpersonal skills. These
include teamwork and problem solving skills, as
well as effective oral and written communications
skills, which are desirable professional skills in
the workplace.
To help with the global appeal of service learn-
ing, The National Youth Leadership Council has
plans to expand its work through relationships
with policy leaders in international organiza-
tions including the World Bank, Youth Service
America’s Global Youth Service Day, the Inter-
national Association of National Youth Service,
Ibero-American Service-Learning Alliance, and
innovations in civic participation.
CONCLUSION
Community service learning experiences provide
students opportunities to effectively apply their
knowledge in meaningful contexts beyond the
classroom environment. Effective placements
allow students to put theory into practice, develop
habits of self-analysis and reflective thinking, and
acquire greater understanding of organizational
structures. The opportunity for undergraduates to
conduct community based research and present
the findings to the community is an added value
to the overall experience and to the process of
self-discovery for both the community and self.
Students reported that they were able to give back
to the community through the findings of their
research projects.
651

Learning how to interact effectively in a
professional setting was a frequent challenge
for Zayed University novice professionals. They
however were enlightened about professional
ethics, workplace culture and relationships and
the application of theory to practice. They were
also excited about significant contributions they
were able to make at their placement sites. Based
on our first experience in a variety of these agen-
cies, we are now able to target specific individuals
with whom we can develop long term mentoring
relationships for our outgoing and future students
as well as understand the research needs of these
organizations.
Experience continues to be one of the key
attributes any entry-level professional can offer
a prospective employer, and service learning pro-
vides one of the best ways for the student to obtain
it. A community service learning placement is a
bridge from the classroom to the workplace. It is
an opportunity for students to test their “school
learned” skills, interests and career choices in a
real work situation, while acquiring new skills
(Mayers, Noori, & Wooldridge, 2001).
At present the UAE’s education system is
linked in general ways to the world of work.
Findings from a study commissioned by President
Zayed’s Office, found that institutions of higher
education could better prepare students for work
through developing special courses, which would
link higher education and the world of work. These
courses should focus on work-related attitudes
and behavior, and on enabling students to acquire
relevant work experience. This service learning
curriculum initiative could provide a transition
from higher education to work. It would be based
on the development of work-related skills and
behaviors as well as supervised work experience.
Employers believed that academic knowledge is
important, but basic core competencies directly
relevant to work are very necessary if women were
going to be successful in their jobs (Wooldridge,
Russell, Mayers, Onwujuba, Cocks, & Jendli,
2003). Community service learning provides
652
Community Service Learning
the link between academic learning and career
placement.
Beyond the direct benefit to students, faculty
and the academic institution also benefit from
community service placements. Faculty gain new
information regarding issues of community orga-
nizations. This information is critical for building
relevant university programs. The partnerships
established are also beneficial in providing
community support, visibility and collaborative
research opportunities (Tovey, 2001). Enlarging
human choices is critically linked to two issues;
capabilities and functioning on the one hand and
opportunities on the other. As educators, we have
a responsibility to our graduates to assist them in
breaking down barriers and being successful in
their career goals. Of the 180 graduates complet-
ing the community service learning experience
and capstone project, 16% were not interested in
working after graduation. Of those interested in
employment, 80% were employed and 20% were
actively seeking employment. Barriers are begin-
ning to be overcome for these young women and
they are able to begin their careers. Their service
learning experiences prepared them for a success-
ful transition from school to work. In addition,
they were presented with opportunities to handle
situations of the work environment, that before
the internship they would not have been able to
navigate. For these Zayed University students,
community service learning provided a valuable
link between higher education and the workplace.
REFERENCES
Academy for Educational Development.
(2002). Education in the Muslim world: What’s
next?Washington, DC: AED.
Achebe, C. (1995). Encountering other cultures
through service learning. The Partnership for
Service Learning Action Reflection Newsletter.
Retrieved December 15, 2009, from http://www.
ipsl.org/pdfs/ARWinter1995.pdf
Community Service Learning

Benoliel, S. (2003). Strengthening education in Halloran, F. W. (1999). Zayed University: A new

the Muslim world: Summary of the desk study. model for higher education in the United Arab
Washington, DC: USAID. Emirates. In Emirates Center for Strategic Studies
and Research (Eds.), Education in the Arab world:
Berman, G. L. (1999). Antecedents and strategies
Challenges for the new millennium (pp.323-330).
for the successful implementation of service learn-
Abu Dhabi: Emirates Center for Strategic Studies
ing programs in higher education. Unpublished
and Research.
Dissertation, University of Massachusetts, Boston.
Jarchow, E., & Wooldridge, D. G. (2005). Quality
Berry, H. A., & Chisholm, L. A. (1999). Service
pre-service teacher internships in the United Arab
learning in higher education around the world:
Emirates: Development, implementation, and
An initial look. New York: The International Part-
assessment. Journal of the International Society
nership for Service Learning. (ERIC Document
for Teacher Education, 9(2), 15–22.
Reproduction Service No. ED439654).
Khelifa, M. (2002a). Student research: Projects
Bilig, S. H. (2004). Heads, hearts, and hands: The
and findings (Volume 1). Dubai, UAE: Center
Research on K-12 Service Learning. Growing to
for Family and Community Research and De-
Greatness 2004. St. Paul, MN: National Youth
velopment.
Leadership Council.
Khelifa, M. (2002b). Student research: Projects
Bradford, M. (2005). Motivating students through
and findings (Volume 2). Dubai, UAE: Center
project-based service learning. The Journal. Re-
for Family and Community Research and De-
trieved October 31, 2009, from http://thejournal.
velopment.
com/articles/2005/01/01/motivating-students-
through-projectbased-service-learning.aspx Khelifa, M. (2003a). Student research: Projects
and findings (Volume 3). Dubai, UAE: Center
Bringle, R. G., & Hatcher, J. A. (1996). Imple-
for Family and Community Research and De-
menting Service Learning in Higher Education.
velopment.
The Journal of Higher Education, 67(2), 221–239.
doi:10.2307/2943981 Khelifa, M. (2003b). Student research: Projects
and findings (Volume 4). Dubai, UAE: Center
Dewey, J. (1938). Experience and education. New
for Family and Community Research and De-
York: Macmillan.
velopment.
Eyler, J., & Giles, D. (1999). Where’s the Learning
Khelifa, M. (2004). Student research: Projects and
in Service-Learning? San Francisco: Jossey: Bass.
findings (Volume 5). Dubai, UAE: Center for Fam-
Godfrey, C. P., & Grasso, E. T. (2000). Working ily and Community Research and Development.
for the common good: Concepts and models for
Khelifa, M., Sonleitner, N., Wooldridge, D. G., &
service learning management [Monograph No.
Mayers, G. (2004). Integrating research into an
15]. Washington, D.C.: American Association for
undergraduate family sciences program. Journal
Higher Education.
of Family and Consumer Sciences, 96(2), 70–71.
Gulf News. (2004, February 20). Women’s confer-
Kolb, D. A. (1984). Experiential learning: Expe-
ence seeks changes in Gulf job laws. Retrieved
rience as a source of learning and development.
October 23, 2004, from http://archive.gulfnews.
Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
com/articles/04/02/20/111499.html

653

Mayers, G., Noori, K., & Wooldridge, D. (2003).
A first generation woman graduates: Introduction
to the world of work. Delta Kappa Gamma Bul-
letin, 69, 31–36.
Office of Institutional Research and Planning
Support. (2003). Graduating senior survey 2002:
Summary report. Dubai: Zayed University.
Rockquemore, K. A., & Schaffer, R. H. (2000).
Toward a theory of engagement: A cognitive map-
ping of service-learning experiences. Michigan
Journal of Community Service Learning, 7, 14–25.
Sayed, S. (2001). Women, politics and development
in the United Arab Emirates. Retrieved October 2,
2006, from http://www.zu.ac.ae/unesco/eng_pur-
pose/eng_study/ eng_study.html
Smith-Paríolá, J., & Góké- Paríolá, A. (2006). Ex-
panding the parameters of service learning: A case
study. Journal of Studies in International Educa-
tion, 10, 71–86. doi:10.1177/1028315305283307
Stanton, T. K., Giles, D. W., Jr., & Cruz. N., I.
(1999). Service-learning: A movement’s pioneers
reflect on its origins, practice, and future. San
Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Stevens, L. S. (1995). The complete guide to
learning through community service. Needham
Heights, MA: Allyn and Bacon.
Tonkin, H. (Ed.). (2004). Service-learning across
cultures: Promise and achievement. New York:
International Partnership for Service Learning
and Leadership.
Tovey, J. (2001). Building connections between
industry and university: Implementing an intern-
ship program at a regional university. Technical
Communication Quarterly, 10(2), 225–239.
doi:10.1207/s15427625tcq1002_7
United Arab Emirates Ministry of Education.
(2000). Vision 2020: Executive summary. Abu
Dhabi: Author.
654
Community Service Learning
United Arab Emirates Ministry of Information and
Culture. (2005). United Arab Emirates Yearbook.
London: Trident Press.
United Nations Development Program. (2002a).
Arab human development report 2002: Creating
opportunities for future generations. New York:
Author.
United Nations Development Program. (2002b).
Program on governance in the Arab region:
Women in public life. New York: Author.
United Nations Development Program. (2003a).
Arab human development: Building a knowledge
society. New York: Author.
United Nations Development Program. (2003b).
The millennium development goals in Arab coun-
tries: Towards 2015 achievements and aspirations.
New York: Author.
United Nations Statistics Division. (2002). De-
mographic Yearbook 2002. New York: Author.
U.S. Department of State. (2009). The state of
political and religious freedom in the Middle East
Retrieved December 15, 2009, from http:// http://
www.state.gov/g/drl/rls/rm/2009/132167.htm
U.S. Labor Department. 1991. “What work re-
quires of schools: A SCANS report for America
“2000”June. Washington, D.C.: Secretary’s Com-
mission on Achieving Necessary Skills SCANS).
Retrieved October 31, 2009, from http://wdr.
doleta.gov/SCANS/whatwork/whatwork.pdf
Wooldridge, D. G., & Mayers, G. (2004). Work
place status of graduates from the college of family
sciences. Unpublished Raw Data.
Wooldridge, D. G., Russell, A., Mayers, G., On-
wujuba, C., Cocks, E., & Jendli, A. (2003). Study
of employment localization in the private sector
in the Emirate of Abu Dhabi: Trends of internal
press—Arabic and English—in their employment
ads. Abu Dhabi: Office of His Highness the Presi-
dent Sheikh Zayed.
Community Service Learning

Zayed University. (2005). Zayed University Cata- throughout the United States, and enables over
log 2004-2005. Dubai, UAE: Author. one million students to contribute to their com-
munity while building their academic and civic
Zayed University. (2006). Zayed University Cata-
skills. By engaging our nation’s young people in
log 2006-2007. Dubai, UAE: Author.
service-learning, Learn and Serve America instills
Zayed University. (2006). Zayed University Cata- an ethic of lifelong community service.
log 2007-2008. Dubai, UAE: Author. Learning Community: Individuals working
together to expand learning and personal growth.
Zlotkowdki, E. (1998). Preface. In Bringle, R.
National Service-Learning Partnership: A
G., & Hatcher, J. A. (Eds.), Successful service-
national network of members dedicated to ad-
Learning programs: New models of excellence in
vancing service-learning as a core part of every
higher education (pp. xiv–xvii). Boston: Anchor.
young person’s education. Service-learning is a
Zlotkowski, E., Nicholas, V., & Williams, J. R. teaching method that engages young people in
(2006). Students as Colleagues: Expanding the solving problems within their schools and com-
circle of service-learning leadership. Carrboro, munities as part of their academic studies or other
NC: Campus Compact. type of intentional learning activity. The Partner-
ship concentrates on strengthening the impact of
service-learning on young people’s learning and
development, especially their academic and civic
KEY TERMS AND DEFINITIONS
preparation.
Reflection: The process of looking back on the
Community Service Learning: A teaching
implications of actions taken - good and bad - de-
and learning pedagogy which fosters civic respon-
termining what has been gained, lost, or achieved,
sibility and applies classroom learning through
and connecting these conclusions to future actions
meaningful service to the community.
and larger societal contexts. Through this process
Experiential Education: A philosophy of
there is examination and interpretation which
education that focuses on the interactive process
promotes cognitive learning.
between teacher and student involved in direct
The Jimmy and Rosalynn Carter Partner-
learning experience with the environment and
ship Foundation: Fosters academic service-learn-
content.
ing in higher education with awards and grants to
Internship: One who works in a temporary
students/faculty and their 501(c) (3) community
position with an emphasis on on-the-job training
partners who demonstrate best practices or in-
rather than merely employment, making it similar
novative approaches in the field. These programs
to an apprenticeship.
can be found at The Carter Academic Service
Learn and Serve America’s National Ser-
Entrepreneur grant program seeks to motivate
vice-Learning Clearinghouse (NSLC): Provides
students to develop innovative service-learning
the world’s largest database of Service-Learning
projects by providing $1,000 grants to the com-
materials, electronic resources, and job listings. It
munity organization partner of the student with
supports and encourages service-learning through-
the most innovative proposal in a state-wide or
out the United States, and enables over one million
school-wide competition. Service Book sponsored
students to contribute to their community while
and maintained by JRCPF, is the online community
building their academic and civic skills. This or-
for academic service learning. JRCPF programs
ganization instills an ethic of lifelong community
have been held in 16 U.S. states, India and the
service; supports and encourages service-learning
United Kingdom.

655
656

Chapter 39
Social Presence in an Online
Learning Environment
Susan J. Crim
University of Tennessee, USA

Thomas G. Reio, Jr.

Florida International University, USA

ABSTRACT
Limited studies on social presence in online learning do not lend themselves to understanding its effects
on student learning. Research indicates a heightened need for examining the relationship between social
presence and perceived learning and satisfaction as well as retention in online courses. Incorporating
social presence into online courses might promote better learning. Further research on learning in an
online environment is necessary to guide educators in delivering the best educational environment.

INTRODUCTION presence refers to an individual’s perception of the

Social Presence in an Online
Learning Environment
As learning is a social and human activity (Vy-
gotsky, 1986), the ability of individuals to com-
municate and work together in groups is a vital
interest of online educators. Social presence has
emerged as an important factor in the field of
distance education as online learning is sometimes
considered as a medium for social isolation and
thus a detriment to group interaction (Gunawar-
dena & Zittle, 1997; Wheeler, 2005, 2009). Social
DOI: 10.4018/978-1-61692-906-0.ch039
quantity and quality of interpersonal communica-
tion in an online learning environment. Perceptions
of low social presence are linked to feelings of
disconnectedness and poorer group interactions;
on the other hand, high social presence enhances
group engagement and learning (Wheeler, 2005).
Individual perceptions then are an important
consideration for designers and instructors when
making decisions about the selection of technolo-
gies and pedagogies employed in course design.
Two-way communication is crucial for a suc-
cessful educational transaction to occur (Garrison,
1996). The ability to express and share ideas
among learners and with the instructor promotes
collaboration and deepens the learning experi-
Social Presence in an Online Learning Environment
ence. Ostensibly, deep and meaningful learning
is the central goal of higher education and in the
corporate learning context. More specifically, it
is important to understand how social presence
can make the nature of online learning more in-
teractive, appealing, engaging, and intrinsically
rewarding leading to an increase in academic
and social integration that results in increased
persistence and course completion.
Providing online educational environments
that best meet the needs of learners is a critical
concern for educators. As technology in and of
itself does not promote or ensure a successful
learning experience, it is important for educa-
tors to know how to develop and plan learning
opportunities and strategies in online courses that
would be most effective in meeting the learner’s
needs. If sustaining interactions in which collab-
orative construction of meaning among learners
is an objective, then it is essential that a learning
environment be most adept at meeting the learners’
needs regarding not only cognitive development,
but also social presence and collaborative learning
at a distance. The objective of this chapter will
be to explore the links between online learning
and social presence.
BACKGROUND
The Importance of Social
Presence Online: Issues,
Controversies, and Problems
Throughout this section, we discuss the issues,
controversies, and problems related to social
presence online. We present first a brief overview
of online learning, followed by social presence
theory, interaction, immediacy, and intimacy as
components of social presence, learner retention/
persistence, and recommendations.
Online Learning
Online learning is a form of distance learning that
has been defined as any class where at least part of
the curriculum is presented online via the internet,
affording connections between instructors and
students regardless of time and place (Harasim,
Hiltz, Teles, & Turoff, 1995). This internet-based
instruction is known as a media-rich, online
environment that allows people to interact with
others in collaborative environments to gain ac-
cess to remote multimedia databases through the
internet for active and resource-based learning
and to manage self-paced individual learning in
a flexible way. Greater numbers of students than
ever before are enrolled in distance education
through enhanced college courses, collaborations
with other universities and colleges, and in some
cases through completely virtual universities (Lee
& Bush, 2005).
Online learning has been promoted as being
more cost-effective and convenient than tradi-
tional education environments as well as provid-
ing opportunities for more learners to continue
their education in various settings (Oliver, 1999;
Wheeler, 2005). Because of these features, the
use of synchronous—communication that occurs
between two or more people in real-time—and
asynchronous—a time-delayed interaction that
does not require participants be online simul-
taneously—online learning and the internet has
significantly changed the way learning is delivered
and facilitated by allowing for the conversion
of traditional courses into web-based courses
(Jiang & Ting, 2000). Although the combination
of the computer and various communication
technologies facilitate the learning and interac-
tion processes between the instructor and the
learners at a distance, it is the time-delayed and
place-independent asynchronous online learning
mode that is of interest in this chapter.
The attributes of time-independence, text-
based communication is a double-edged sword
for the learner. It may facilitate participation and
657
 Social Presence in an Online Learning Environment
allow the participants the ability to be reflective
and to compose thoughtful rather than spontaneous
responses, as well as have a democratizing effect
that prevents discussions from being dominated
by a few articulate or verbose speakers (Saye,
1997). Although in one study (Cravner & Michael,
1998) it was discovered that in classes which
met both face-to-face and online, students who
occupy face-to-face discussion also dominated
the computer-mediated discussion. Another ad-
vantage of online communication is that it gives
increased opportunities for participant input
thereby enhancing the quality of decision-making.
On the negative side, however, there is also
a sense that the inherent delays in asynchronous
communication may operate against the develop-
ment of a dynamic and interactive online discus-
sion. Therefore, it may leave students feeling re-
mote, detached, and isolated and discourage them
from participating. The pace of the coursework
and the time commitment required of an online
course demands motivation, self-reliance and
time management skills as well (Wheeler, 2009).
One attribute of computer-mediated communi-
cation is the random access to a permanent record
of conference discussions (Edelson, 1998). This
feature may be viewed positively as enhancing
participation by allowing students to read selec-
tively and reread and review when necessary.
Conversely, it may serve to discourage more ac-
tive participation because students feel they are
able to access all the information by reading other
students’ contributions. This is known as “lurking”
or “vicarious interaction”; this is a familiar concept
in computer-mediated communication as one who
only watches, choosing not to actively participate
in the discussion (Althaus, 1997). Another negative
manifestation of the permanent record experienced
by some students is information overload. As the
course progresses, the record gets longer and the
ability to deal with it becomes more of a problem
for students, particularly those who do not have
the self-discipline or time to participate regularly
(Edelson, 1998).
658
As noted, online communication has several
educational benefits. It has the potential to increase
the students’ access to educational opportunities
due to the convenience of anytime, anywhere
accessibility, as well as increase their responsibil-
ity, initiative, participation, discussion, and peer
interaction, providing greater learning (Wheeler,
2005). In short, it prepares more independent learn-
ers. However, it is not without its disadvantages in
challenging learners to effectively communicate
and collaborate in primarily a text-based medium.
In summary, online learning may not be better or
worse than in a face-to-face classroom, it is simply
different. One is not necessarily a higher quality
of interaction and instruction, but both have their
strengths and shortcomings. To better understand
the nature of learning in online environments, we
present social presence theory as a useful lens
to interpret student perceptions of technologies
as alternatives to face-to-face learning and how
the perceptions of social presence are related to
learning outcomes.
Social Presence Theory
The construct which has come to be known as
“social presence” is rooted in the work of Mehra-
bian (1969) on what he has termed “immediacy”
which he defined as “those communication be-
haviors that enhance closeness to the nonverbal
interaction with another” (p. 203). His work was
followed up by a number of communication
theorists including Short, Williams, and Christie
(1976), who postulated that the inability of some
communication media to project non-verbal com-
munication would negatively affect interpersonal
communication carried via such media.
Short et al. (1976) were the first to introduce
the concept of social presence. They based this
concept on previous research that addressed in-
terpersonal communication between dyads-one-
to-one communications. These authors defined
social presence as the “degree of salience of the
other person in the interaction and the consequent
Social Presence in an Online Learning Environment
salience of the interpersonal relationships…”
(Short et al., 1976, p. 65). Social presence, by
this definition was initially hypothesized to be
an attitude of the medium itself, and was called
technological presence.
Other researchers (Gunawardena & Zittle,
1997; Lombard & Ditton, 1997) concur with Short
et al. (1976) in that the qualities of the medium may
have an effect on the degree of social presence,
but have implied this to mean the degree to which
individuals perceived each other as “real” within
the context of their mediated communication.
This perception varied among users and should
be viewed as a subjective quality, depending on
the objective quality of the medium (Walther,
1992). This suggests that social presence should
be viewed as the users’ subjective perceptions that
depend on the objective quality of the medium.
As social presence is deemed to be a dynamic
variable, people discern different amounts of social
presence in various types of media. This implies
that the degree of social presence can be measured
in a particular situation (Walther, 1992).
Short et al. (1976) maintained that the measure-
ment of social presence is subjective and involves
an attitudinal dimension of the user towards the
medium. The method of measuring was through a
semantic differential technique questionnaire and
used a series of bipolar scales: sociable/unsociable,
personal/impersonal, sensitive/insensitive, and
warm/cold (Short et al., 1976). It was based on
Osgood and colleague’s (1957) semantic differ-
ential technique. The findings from comparison
studies on the types of media conducted by Short
et al. (1976) claimed that the capability of the
medium to transmit verbal and nonverbal cues
or behaviors contributes to the degree of social
presence of the medium. Nonverbal visual cues
include communication other than speech that is
conveyed through gestures, facial expressions,
gaze, posture, and other interpersonal behaviors.
Nonverbal communication can play a significant
role in facilitating interaction. Facial expressions,
gaze, and body language can reflect an indi-
vidual’s culture, personality, and mood and have
a significant effect on heightening the quality of
interaction.
Face-to-face communication was the most pre-
ferred mode of communication due to the number
of social cues such as dress, gaze, posture, and eye
contact that this media is capable of transmitting.
Media perceived to have a higher degree of social
presence were described as warm, personal, sensi-
tive, and sociable. Conversely, media perceived
to have a lower degree of social presence were
described as cold, impersonal, insensitive, and
unsociable.
In addition, the degree of social presence
includes how well the media is able to conduct
interpersonal interactions. Two types of interac-
tions identified by Short et al. (1976) are task and
social. Task-driven interaction is directed toward
the completion of assigned tasks while social-
interaction is directed toward relationships among
learners. Task-driven interaction is under the direct
control of the instructor and often takes the form of
responses to instructor-generated discussion topics
and peer assessments. As mediated communica-
tion becomes more task-oriented the interaction
moves from informal to formal, decreasing the
degree of social presence (Argyle & Dean, 1965;
Wiener & Mehrabian, 1968).
In contrast, a social-driven interaction is
largely self-generated. Socializing can take on
many characteristics, from exchanging empathetic
messages to self-disclosure. Self-disclosure is
personal information about an individual that is
voluntarily revealed to another and is information
that cannot be obtained from any other source
(Adams, 2004). Self-disclosure plays a key role
in the development and maintenance of trust
and open relationships and, in turn, can provide
the foundation for information sharing and the
building of learning communities. As a result, a
socially-oriented interaction supposedly increases
the degree of social presence. Thus, the type of
interpersonal interaction affects an individual’s
perception of the mediated communication and the
659
 Social Presence in an Online Learning Environment
attitude towards the medium. For example, in one
study a business letter was identified as having the
lowest degree of social presence in comparison to
face-to-face, telephone, closed-circuit television,
and audio due to the inability to convey non-verbal
and verbal cues and its preference for tasks low
in interpersonal involvement (Argyle & Dean,
1965; Wiener & Mehrabian, 1968).
Tu (2002) redefined social presence in com-
puter mediated communication as “the degree of
feeling, perception, and reaction to another intel-
lectual entity in the CMC environment” (p. 40). He
identified three dimensions of social presence that
included social context (individual personalities,
attitudes, motivations, and perceptions), online
communication (attributes and applications of the
language used online), and interactivity (activities
in which the users engaged and communications
styles they used). In this sense, social presence
is interpreted as the consequent appreciation of
an interpersonal relationship which is shaped
by social context, online communication and
interactivity.
Nonverbal communication has its most direct
instructional impact on the affective domain of
learning, which is concerned with student attitudes,
values, beliefs, appreciations, and interests. Factor-
analytic studies indicated that positive affect is
communicated through a cluster of nonverbal
behaviors, labeled immediacy behaviors (Ander-
son, 1979). Immediacy behaviors increase sensory
closeness, communicate feelings of warmth and
support, and engender feelings of interpersonal
attraction (Anderson, 1979).
It is the nonverbal cues to communication
that many feel are lost with computer-mediated
communications. The early research on social
presence on computer-mediated communication
(Walther & Burgoon, 1992) concluded that this
medium was unable to provide social context cues
and was, therefore, considered to possess limited
social presence because it was perceived as being
an impersonal medium. Tuckey (1993) reinforced
the notion that the use of computers for commu-
660
nication also means that the social context cues
associated with communication such as nonverbal
cues may take some of the emotion and social
aspects out of the communication process thus
leaving the “exchange cold and unsociable” (p. 64).
In practice, however, participants may well
be able to compensate for this lack of nonverbal
communications. For example, Walther and
Burgoon (1992) in their research on relational
communication in computer conferencing found
that the differences in communication between
computer-mediated communication and face-to-
face learners tends to be eliminated over time if
interaction time is not constrained and learners
become more familiar with one another. “Although
initial interactions among unacquainted others
in CMC may be relatively low in immediacy/af-
fection, interactants may increase this dimension
over time” (p. 58).
Likewise, Gunawardena (1995) found that
although the computer conference medium is low
in nonverbal cues, “students create social presence
through the computer conferencing medium by
projecting themselves online” (p. 9). Gunawardena
(1995) suggested that by successfully “inculturat-
ing” themselves within computer-mediated com-
munication, learners promote their level of social
presence and allow themselves an opportunity for
greater participation.
Danchak, Walther, and Swan (2001) suggest
that social presence in mediated environments
is a function of both the affective channels of
communication, such as paralanguage, and the
immediacy behavior of the participants. This is
the ability of participants to project themselves
socially and affectively through responses that
contain personal expressions of emotion, feelings,
humor, self-disclosure beliefs, and values. They
argue that these behaviors will evoke a kind of
equilibrium of social presence with which the
participants are comfortable. That is, students’
perceptions of social presence will reflect on their
communication behaviors.
Social Presence in an Online Learning Environment
Swan’s (2001) content analysis of discussions
in an online graduate course supports the equilib-
rium theory of social presence. In this analysis, a
total of 1,336 in 235 postings or an average of 6
verbal immediacy indicators per response were
found throughout the entire discussion postings.
The results provide evidence that participants in
this course compensated for the lack of nonverbal
cues by employing more immediacy behaviors in
the written form (Danchak et al., 2001). Overall,
the findings imply the need for designing com-
puter-mediated environments where attention is
paid to techniques that enhance social presence
(Gunawardena & Zittle, 1997).
Social Presence and Online Learning
As online learning is conducted with individu-
als independent of place and time, this altered
learning environment does not preclude the need
to establish learning relationships with online
learners and instructors. Social, interactive, and
affective dimensions of the learning experience
remain powerful determinants of successful learn-
ing because they can enhance communication,
improve teaching, increase learner curiosity and
interest in content matter, and serve as a way to
construct knowledge and negotiate meaning (Wulf,
Hanor, & Bulik, 2000). Techniques to enhance
social presence online must be understood in the
context of the learners’ attributes and degree of
comfort being self-directed.
Online learner demographics. Studies have
shown that distance learners are characterized
by particular attributes (Hardy & Boaz, 1997).
The majority of distance learning students is
adults between the ages of twenty-five and fifty;
married; employed full-time, and have family
responsibilities. Moreover, females comprise
60% of this population (Crim, 2006). Learners
opt for online courses over traditional face-to-
face courses for a variety of reasons, including
physical distance from the institution, scheduling
conflicts, and preference for distance education
modes (Harasim, 1996). Crim (2006) found that
college students took online courses because
of convenience (73.9%), (2) fulfilling a major
requirement (33.9%), (3) enjoyment related to
online interaction (9.3%), and (4) curiosity about
the subject (8.7%). Curiosity is considered to be
an important motivator of adult learning and it is
thought to contribute to success in the develop-
ment of lifelong learning (Candy, 1991; Reio &
Callahan, 2004).
Learner self-direction. Distance learners are
also characterized as being autonomous and self-
directed (Reio & Davis, 2005). Knowles’s (1980)
concept of andragogy (i.e., the art and science of
helping adults learn) included the assertion that
as adults mature they become more independent
and self-directing. In general, self-directedness
refers to taking the responsibility for and control
over one’s learning.
Reio and Davis (2005) extended Knowles’
(1980) idea that learner self-direction is devel-
opmental in nature. In other words, it may not
be reasonable to expect an online learner to be
self-directed if they lacked a wide array of posi-
tive learning experiences where he or she took the
responsibility for and control of their own learning
in conjunction with their level of maturation. The
researchers linked self-directedness to metacogni-
tion, reflection, effective memory strategy use,
self-regulation, attention, and motivation, each
of which has developmental underpinnings. In
online contexts, then, even if one were ready to
engage in self-directed learning, expression of
self-directed learning might be dampened situ-
ationally by environmental constraints such as lack
of experience online or in the subject area, learner
anxiety (Candy, 1991), motivation (Garrison,
1997), and cognitive learning style preferences.
Candy (1991) constructed a conceptual frame-
work for understanding self-directed learning as
both a goal and a process which embraces four
distinct phenomena: personal autonomy, self-
management, learner control, and autodidaxy- an
approach to learning that takes place outside of
661
 Social Presence in an Online Learning Environment
institutions such as online learning. However,
Imel (1988) adds that the learning experiences
for most students have only been in structured
and teacher-centered learning environments. As
a result, these types of students may need guid-
ance and assistance in accepting responsibilities
for their own learning.
Time and place-independence may become
unmanageable responsibilities rather than features
for the self-disciplined and self-directed learning
that is generally required in an online learning
environment (McIsaac & Gunawardena, 1996).
Students may underestimate the amount of time
required to succeed in online courses. Students
who are not self-directed may not be able to create
an effective timetable for interaction with online
course elements to complete a course in the ex-
pected time. Some students may perceive online
courses to be less rigorous, perhaps assuming that
the amount of content and the demands on their
time is small relative to traditional, face-to-face
courses (Smith & Winking-Diaz, 2004).
In addition, learning-style preferences and per-
sonality may result in a greater degree of comfort
in the online environment almost immediately,
whereas others struggle with and in some cases
never accept it (Tu & Corry, 2001). The text-based
communication may create a sense of detachment
and a feeling of anonymity brought about by the
lack of visual and auditory cues and the reliance
on textual communication. As a result, students
may feel no connection with their peers and thus
feel no compulsion to go beyond the minimum
participation required in the online course.
Because distance learners’ characteristics,
needs, and learning preferences differ, it is impor-
tant for those designing and teaching at a distance to
consider the appropriate instructional methods that
may impact learning in this unique environment
(Moore & Kearsley, 1996). One assumption of self-
directed learning is that learning is independent of
a facilitator or some outside resource. However,
Garrison (1997) views self-directed learning
from a collaborative constructivist perspective,
662
where students are motivated to assume personal
responsibility and collaborate to construct their
own meaning through critical thinking. This does
not mean students are independent and isolated
learners. Facilitators should provide the standards,
support and direction necessary for a successful
educational outcome. Candy (1991) noted, too, that
knowledge is socially constructed and that learn-
ing is a social process. “Educators should not, in
advocating self-direction in learning, lose sight of
the fact that contact with other people is essential
to most forms of learning. “Self-direction does
not necessarily imply solitary learning” (Candy,
1991, p. 367). Thus, while firmly supporting learn-
ing self-direction, Candy readily acknowledges
the importance of learners interacting with peers
and instructors for optimal learning. The notion
of quality learner interactions seems especially
salient in online learning contexts.
Interaction
In online learning, interaction between learners
and instructors is generally mediated through
discussion tools such as email, bulletin boards,
threaded-discussion forums, wikis, blogs, and
computer conferencing allowing for time-and
place-independent interactions (Wheeler, 2009).
The functionality and ease of use of these tools
facilitates interaction or makes it more difficult,
depending on one’s experience with these tools.
Critics of online education have raised concerns
about the level and quality of student interaction
in classes offered over the internet. It has been
noted that interaction is missing in many online
courses (Wheeler, 2005), possibly caused in part
by instructors’ inexperience with the medium, the
lack of instructional design, or unclear definitions
of what interaction is and is not. Merrill (2002)
notes that courses which are primarily post, tell,
and ask in nature are more informational than
instructional and provide little value to learning.
Interaction among learners is critical in foster-
ing learning and cognitive development (Gorham,
Social Presence in an Online Learning Environment
1988; Knowles, 1996; Sharan, 1980; Slavin, 1983;
Vygotsky, 1978). There is a belief that high levels
of interaction, particularly those which promote
social engagement, can have positive effects on
the learning experience. It is known from research
on learning processes in a traditional face-to-face
learning environment that development of social
climate is important to make learners feel like
they are a part of the learning community, thus
contributing to learners’ motivation, involvement,
learning outcomes, and contentment (Wegerif,
1998). The literature strongly indicates both learn-
ers’ and instructors’ desire for contact (Rezabeck,
Meyers, & Edwin, 1992).
To increase the level of online interaction, the
degree of social presence also must be increased.
Tu (2000), for example, conducted a study on the
dimensions of social presence in the online learn-
ing environment through surveys and observations
to understand social presence in an online learning
environment from a learner’s point of view. Based
on the author’s findings, a high level of social
presence was necessary to enhance, foster and
increase interaction. Interaction can be fostered
by communication styles that may impact social
presence (relaxed, friendly, attentive, encourag-
ing), by the learners’ perceptions of the online
environment, and by the activities or tasks (written
assignments, group projects, online presentations)
in which the learners engage.
Interaction is a key component of a successful
instructional program. Whether learners are inter-
acting face-to-face or at a distance, their success
may be a result of well-designed instructional
strategies that take into consideration the factors
that will promote interaction and enhance users’
perceptions of learning and their satisfaction with
their learning environment. Both Hillman (1999)
and Moore (1989) recommend designing activi-
ties that allow learners an opportunity to interact
productively that could contribute to frequency
of interaction and formation of a learning com-
munity. For example, Wagner (1997) suggests
considering the course goals and objectives to
effectively design an interactive learning com-
munity. Wagner proposed several strategies for
design consideration that include such course
activities as group work, discussion forums, and
problem-solving. Aside from applying these strate-
gies, Wagner suggests maintaining the learners’
involvement, encouraging student collaboration,
providing timely feedback, and implementing
various instructional strategies in consideration
of different learner styles.
Interaction alone, however, is insufficient to
create a positive social dynamic in the online
learning environment. It is possible for a learner
to post a message online while not necessarily
feeling that she or he is part of a group. The abil-
ity to work effectively in groups is at the heart
of social presence theory and of interest to those
involved in creating a more social online learning
environment and communities of learners (Stein &
Wanstreet, 2003). Research has shown that social
presence is the most important perception that
occurs in social context and is an important key
to understanding communication and interaction
in the field of distance learning (Gunawardena
& Zittle, 1997; Rourke, Anderson, Garrison,
& Archer, 2001). Gunawardena (1995) argues
that social presence is necessary to enhance and
improve effective instruction in both traditional
and technology-based learning environments. A
lack of social presence may lead to higher levels
of frustration, a more critical attitude toward the
instructor’s effectiveness, and a lower level of
perceived effective learning (Wheeler, 2009). If
the degree of social presence affects the level of
interaction and participation (Tu, 2000), then it is
important to examine the strategies that promote
interaction among learners and those that enhance
perceptions of a user’s social presence.
Immediacy and Intimacy
Past studies on human interpersonal communica-
tion identified “intimacy” and “immediacy” as
attributes that enhance social presence (Argyle &
663
 Social Presence in an Online Learning Environment
Dean, 1965; Wiener & Mehrabian, 1968). More
recent research in the field of distance education
and learning and communication has begun now to
focus on the use of asynchronous communication,
contending that these two attributes along with
“interactivity” play an important role in forming
interpersonal relationships in the communication
process. This relationship addresses successful
learning experiences in terms of intimacy—sense
of close connection one feels in a relationship
(Argyle & Dean, 1965), immediacy—psycho-
logical distance between a communicator and the
recipient of the communication (Wiener & Meh-
rabian, 1968), and interactivity—the activities in
which users engage and the communication styles
they use in computer-mediated communication
(Gunawardena, 1995; Norton, 1986; Tu, 2000).
Together these form a more refined definition and
understanding of the social presence construct
(Short et al., 1976).
Examination of the Short et al. (1976) defini-
tion indicates that although social presence may
be a property of the medium, this characteristic
is derived from the affect of the medium on the
perceptions of the participants, and on their inter-
personal interactions. Therefore, it must also be
related to a property of that perception or inter-
action. For instance, Biocca et al. (2001) defines
social presence as pertaining to the user, but also
relates it to the interaction and the medium in that
it is a temporary judgment of interaction that is
limited or augmented by the medium.
Gunawardena (1995) argues that immediacy
enhances social presence. Thus, the degree of
social presence is not simply an attribute of the
medium. Increasing the intensity of immediacy can
enhance social presence. For example, Gunawar-
dena’s (1995) study of computer conferencing
suggested that it is the skilled use of the instruc-
tor’s interaction techniques by initiating online
conversations with introductions and salutations
that will impact the students’ perceptions of social
presence (reduces psychological distance). Social
interaction augments the relationship between
664
learner-instructor and learner-learner in the learn-
ing environment. Consequently, instructors should
develop interaction skills that create a sense of
social presence.
Lombard and Ditton (1997) claimed that it is
possible to achieve immediacy within mediated
interactions and conversation. Lombard and Dit-
ton further suggested that communication media
has the potential for conveying immediacy in
written form. Immediacy, as it relates to written
form (text), has relevancy in distance learning
environments due to the use of text-based transac-
tions in mediated communication. In a mediated
learning context, the use of immediacy strate-
gies such as calling students by name, praising
students for work well done, showing concern,
providing immediate feedback, and referring to
the learning community as “we” (Gorham, 1988;
Wiener & Mehrabian, 1968) may positively
affect the learner’s perception of the presence
of others and foster a sense of feeling included
in the learning community. Others have agreed
that this is essential to minimizing psychological
distance and to improving the sense of a learning
community (Gunawardena, Lowe, & Anderson,
1997; Sherry, 1996).
These immediacy studies suggest that social
presence is a critical factor that impacts interac-
tions in online learning environments. They also
suggest that greater perceptions of social presence
tend to be linked with greater perceived learn-
ing, course satisfaction, and satisfaction with the
instructor (Gorham, 1988; Gunawardena, 1995;
Gunawardena & Zittle, 1997; Picciano, 2002;
Richardson & Swan, 2003; Walther, 1992). Be-
cause researchers suggest that a sense of presence
provokes meaningful interactions that contribute
to collaboration and construction of knowledge
or a community of learning (Rovai, 2002), it may
be that a students’ sense of presence actually im-
proves their perception of learning and motivates
their learning. What is not clear from the current
research is how social presence influences learn-
ing and retention in an online course.
Social Presence in an Online Learning Environment
The overall goal for creating social presence
in any learning environment, whether it is online
or face-to-face, is to create a level of comfort in
which people feel at ease around the instructor
and the other participants. Without this goal be-
ing achieved, “the learning environment can turn
to one that is not fulfilling or successful for the
instructors and the learners” (Aragon, 2003, p. 60).
Research suggests that there is a lack of dialogue
among distance learning students, which impact
“the quality and integrity of the educational pro-
cess” (Sherry, 1996, p. 5). When the environment
is lacking social presence, the participants may
see it as impersonal and, in turn, the amount of
information shared with others decreases (Leh,
2001). As a result, the lack of social presence
could lead to more frustration, dissatisfaction and
less participation in learning.
Retention/Persistence
in Online Courses
Closely associated with learner satisfaction is
retention with distance delivered courses (Lim,
2001). The geographic and physical separation
of students in programs offered at a distance may
also contribute to higher dropout rates than in tra-
ditional face-to-face programs. Carr (2000) noted
that dropout rates are often 10 to 20 percentage
points higher in distance education courses than
in traditional courses. While online learning has
been widely used for training purposes, there is
concern related to its effectiveness as student attri-
tion from these courses is often cited as more than
50% (Bonk, 2004). It is presumable that learners’
adoption or participation in online courses de-
pends heavily on their perceived expectations of
what they can achieve via this learning approach
(Hodges, 2004).
Physical separation has a tendency to reduce
the sense of community, giving rise to feelings
of disconnection (Kerka, 1996), isolation, dis-
traction, and lack of personal attention (Besser
& Donahue, 1996; Hardy & Boaz, 1997; Twigg,
1997; Wheeler, 2005). Tinto (1993) emphasized
the importance of community in reducing the
dropout rate when he theorized that learners will
increase their levels of satisfaction and the likeli-
hood of persisting in a college course or program
if they feel involved and develop relationships
with other members of the learning community.
Raising social presence in online environ-
ments may help to create perceptions of quality
related to the experience on the part of the learner
(Newberry, 2001). High levels of social presence
create a learning environment that can support
cognitive (critical thinking, problem-solving, scaf-
folding, reflection) and affective (collaboration,
feedback/reinforcement, exchanging resources
and information) learning objectives by making
group interactions that are perceived as warm,
collegial, engaging, and intrinsically rewarding
(Rourke et al., 2001). The literature on quality
issues in distance learning (Swan, Shea, Freder-
ickson, Pickett, Pelz, & Maher, 2000) suggests
that data on measures of interaction and presence
should be used in studying learner performance.
Performance data can be in the form of tests,
course grades, written assignments, projects and
satisfaction surveys. Northrup (2001) suggests that
learner perceptions of the efficacy of interaction
and social presence can have significant effects on
learning outcomes as it may affect learner perfor-
mance, such as increased interest, participation,
collaboration, and active learning.
Recommendations for Fostering Online
Learning through Improving Learner
Perception of Social Presence
The use of online instruction as an educational de-
livery method continues to expand across various
settings. The environment in which learning takes
place—whether online or in person—involves a
complex array of factors that influence learner sat-
isfaction and achievement. The physical space and
psychological climate in which learning occurs,
as well as social aspects of instructional activi-
665
 Social Presence in an Online Learning Environment
ties, play an important role in successful learning
(Vygotsky, 1986). The cognitive/social psychol-
ogy and distance education literature identifies
interaction among students as critical in learning
and cognitive development (Gorham, 1988; Kelly
& Gorham, 1988; Sharan, 1980; Slavin, 1983;
Wheeler, 2009). There is a belief that high levels
of interaction, particularly those which promote
social engagement, can have positive effects on
the learning experience. With online learning,
students can communicate in different temporal
modes, either asynchronous or synchronous.
Teaching and learning functions are inherently
social endeavors (Candy, 1991; Vygotsky, 1986).
The use of online learning has illuminated the ef-
fects of geographic, temporal, and psychological
distance between students and instructors, there-
fore, it is beneficial to understand the various ef-
fects these have on teaching and learning between
instructors and students. The lens through which
these distances are examined is through the lens
of social presence (Gunawardena & Zittle, 1997).
The online learner needs a physical as well as
a social context in an online discussion forum.
Online discussions and interaction afford an op-
portunity to the student to bridge distance and time
constraints in a social medium. However, Johnson
and Huff (2000) noted that computer-mediated
communication does not automatically impact
learning. What then are some of the features of
social presence that can impact learning?
Ultimately, social relationships contribute to
group dynamics that are essential to developing
a learning community (Rovai, 2002). The ability
to participate in active collaborative learning is
at the heart of social presence and of interest to
those involved in creating communities of learn-
ers. Interactions among students seem clearly to
matter in online discussion. Rourke et al. (2001)
identifies the development of social presence as
one of the cornerstones for the development of
online learning communities.
A learners’ sense of online community is in-
tegral to the concept of social presence (Palloff
666
& Pratt, 1999; Wenger, 1998; Wheeler, 2005).
Research shows that strong sense of community
not only increases the persistence of students in
online programs, but also enhances information
flow, learning support, group commitment, col-
laboration, and learning satisfaction (Dede, 1996;
Garrison, Anderson, & Archer, 2003; Hornik &
Johnson, 2003; Wellman, 1999).
Social presence involves the ability of people
to be perceived as real, despite not communicating
face-to-face (Garrison et al., 2000; Gunawardena,
1995; Short et al., 1976; Tu & McIsaac, 2002),
and its development is strongly encouraged. The
greater the perception that social presence exists,
the better the ability to substitute telecommunica-
tions media for face-to-face encounters and still
achieve the desired collaborative outcomes. When
the degree of social presence is high, interaction
most likely will be high. Interpersonal communica-
tion through reflection, exchange, and transaction
is fundamental to individual and social presence in
learning (Wulf et al., 2000). This serves as a way
to construct knowledge and negotiate meaning
through active learning (Palloff & Pratt, 1999).
There are valuable aspects of social pres-
ence that include communication (dialogue and
conversation), collaboration, interaction, and
interpersonal skills. Wegerif (1998) asserts the
importance of social factors in learning, course
design, the role of instructors as facilitators, the
interaction styles of course participants, and fea-
tures of the technological medium used. Studies
conducted on social presence, for the most part,
have been in traditional classrooms. Results from
these studies indicated that social presence is a
significant factor in instructional effectiveness,
positively affecting learning, student satisfaction,
achievement, and motivation (Blocher, 1997;
Christophel & Gorham, 1995; Gunawardena &
Zittle, 1997; Hackman & Walker, 1990; Rourke
et al., 2001). However, very few studies have
examined social presence in computer-mediated
communications.
Social Presence in an Online Learning Environment
The limited numbers of studies that do exam-
ine social presence in the context of computer-
mediated communication do not cover the scope
of how distance learning students perceive that
social presence contributes to their learning
satisfaction, learning experience, motivation to
participate, or likelihood to enroll in future online
courses. Because learner-centered instruction is a
desired teaching strategy, a better understanding
of students’ perceptions of the extent that social
presence contributes to their learning experience
online may provide insights of student engage-
ment in the learning process. Likewise, this may
address the effects mediated communication has
on group dynamics and the establishment of a
sense of learning community.
However, there is no widely accepted mea-
sure of social presence. Short et al.(1976) used
semantics differential scales to assess the social
and emotional capabilities of the medium. Gu-
nawardena and Zittle (1997) developed a scale that
consisted of 14 Likert items addressing the social
presence of a computer-mediated conferencing
environment, particularly the concept of imme-
diacy. They found that social presence is a strong
predictor of overall course satisfaction. Garrison
et al. (2000) developed a template for analyzing
and coding transcripts from a computer confer-
ence in terms of cognitive, social, and teaching
presence. This template provides categories that
indicate elements of social presence. Richardson
and Swan (2003) and Swan et al. (2000) used a
survey to explore perceptions of social presence
in online courses and found that perceptions of
social presence and satisfaction with instructors
were highly correlated. Tu (2002) developed a
scale that consisted of 17 Likert items addressing
social presence and 13 privacy items and asserts
that social presence is a complicated construct and
involves privacy, social relationships, communica-
tion styles, and the nature of the task, feedback,
and immediacy among other items
What the above studies indicate is that dis-
tance education is a complex, dynamic system
of teaching and learning. As in many complex
environments, each element of the conceptual
frameworks listed above illuminates a different
facet of the way in which learners interacted with
the instructor and one another during the course.
Given the different measures of social presence, it
might be best to combine some of these validated
instruments to extend our understanding of social
presence in online learning.
The literature in the field of communication
and social psychology recommends considering
the interrelationship between the communication
concepts of intimacy, immediacy, and interactivity
(interaction). Together these concepts form the
construct of social presence. Given the lack of
social presence research in distance education,
McIsaac and Gunawardena (1996) voiced the need
for additional studies on the dimensions of social
presence comprised of intimacy, immediacy, and
interactivity.
The factors determining interaction, intimacy,
and immediacy that represent the construct of
social presence are as twisted and interwoven as
a thick braid. The model of delivery and quality of
instruction represent only one axiom along which
online dynamics can be understood. Another less
controllable, less predictable, and perhaps more
dynamic set of factors resides in the lives and
hearts of the learners themselves. These factors
are brought to the learning experience in the form
of social presence that is manifested in levels of
community, collaboration, and participation.
FUTURE TRENDS
Meeting the Needs of the Future
through Additional Research
The strong demand for online delivery of edu-
cational endeavors will continue for the foresee-
able future, as will the demand for delivering it
effectively to promote optimal learner satisfaction
and quality learning. Notwithstanding, we need
667
 Social Presence in an Online Learning Environment
more research to refine our knowledge of the
nature of social presence online and how to foster
it best. The lack of empirical research on whether
the absence of social presence in online learning
contributes to course attrition supports the need
for further investigation in the area of social pres-
ence as well. Understanding how the perception of
social presence may influence student satisfaction
and quality of learning in course activities may
provide course designers with important informa-
tion on how to positively influence retention in
online courses. Thus, the results of this literature
review suggest that more empirical information
about the effects of social presence on a web-
based computer-mediated communication might
increase our understanding of how learners’ needs,
experiences, and perspectives influence optimal
educational environments and opportunities for
learning in online contexts.
CONCLUSION
Designers and instructors of online courses must
address the requirements of effective educational
environments that are of high quality, are effective,
and that best meet the needs of the learner. The
ability to express and share ideas among learners
and with the instructor promotes collaboration
and deepens the learning experience (Garrison,
1996). It is important to design online courses so
they provide a satisfying and effective learning
environment, as high levels of perceived social
presence have a direct influence on both satis-
faction with and perceived quality of learning in
online courses (Wheeler, 2009).
By fostering an environment that will make
the nature of online learning more interactive,
appealing, engaging, and intrinsically reward-
ing through the creation of social presence, the
levels of satisfaction and perceived quality of
learning students derive from an online course,
and ultimately, their motivation to persist with
enrollment will be improved. The facilitation of
668
student motivation and commitment will likely
positively influence learning outcomes by improv-
ing students’ involvement in the learning process,
thus, contributing to more student interest in the
content matter and enhancing collaboration dur-
ing learning activities to construct knowledge
and negotiate meaning through critical thinking.
REFERENCES
Adams, S. (2004). The relationships among adult
attachment, general self-disclosure, and perceived
organizational trust. Unpublished doctoral dis-
sertation, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State
University, Blacksburg, Virginia.
Althaus, S. (1997). Computer-mediated communi-
cation in the university classroom: An experiment
with online discussions.Communication Education,
46, 158–174. doi:10.1080/03634529709379088
Anderson, J. (1979). Teacher immediacy as a
predictor of teaching effectiveness. In Nimmo, D.
(Ed.), Communication Yearbook, 3 (pp. 543–559).
New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Books.
Aragon, S. R. (2003). Creating social presence in
online environments. New Directions for Adult and
Continuing Education, 100, 57–68. doi:10.1002/
ace.119
Argyle, M., & Dean, J. (1965). Eye contact and
distance affiliation. Sociometry, 28, 289–304.
doi:10.2307/2786027
Besser, H., & Donahue, S. (1996). Introduction
and overview: Perspective on distance indepen-
dent education. Journal of the American Society
for Information Science American Society for
Information Science, 47, 801–804. doi:10.1002/
(SICI)1097-4571(199611)47:11<801::AID-
ASI1>3.0.CO;2-6
Social Presence in an Online Learning Environment
Biocca, F., Harms, C., & Burgoon, J. (2001).
Criteria and scope conditions for a theory and
measure of social presence. [th Annual International
Workshop, Philadelphia.]. Presence (Cambridge,
Mass.), 2001, 4.
Blocher, J. M. (1997). Self-regulation of strategies
and motivation to enhance interaction and social
presence in computer-mediated communication
(Doctoral dissertation, Arizona State University).
Dissertation Abstracts International, 03A.
Bullen, M. (1998). Participation and critical
thinking in online university distance education.
Journal of Distance Education, 9, 19–43.
Candy, P. (1991). Self-direction for lifelong learn-
ing. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Carr, A. (2000). As distance education comes of
age, the challenge is keeping the students. The
Chronicle of Higher Education, 46, A39–A42.
Christophel, D. M., & Gorham, J. (1995).
A test-retest analysis of student motivation,
teacher immediacy, and perceived sources of
motivation and demotivation in college classes.
Communication Education, 44, 292–306.
doi:10.1080/03634529509379020
Cravner, P. A., & Michael, W. B. (1998). Students’
use of adjunctive CMC. Paper presented at the 5th
Annual Distance Education Conference, Texas A
& M University.
Crim, S. (2006). An examination of social presence
in an online learning environment. Unpublished
doctoral dissertation, University of Louisville,
Louisville.
Danchak, M. M., Walther, J. B., & Swan, K. (2001).
Presence in mediated instruction: Bandwidth,
behavior, and expectancy violations, 7th Sloan-C
International Conference on Online Learning.
Orlando, FL.
Dede, C. (1996). The evolution of distance edu-
cation: Emerging technologies and distributed
learning. American Journal of Distance Educa-
tion, 10, 4–36. doi:10.1080/08923649609526919
Edelson, P. J. (1998). The organization of courses
via the Internet, academic aspects, interaction,
evaluation, and accreditation. Paper presented
at the National Autonomous University of New
Mexico. (Mexico City, Mexico, February 17,
1998).
Garrison, D., Anderson, T., & Archer, W. (2000).
Critical inquiry in a text-based environment:
Computer conferencing in higher education. The
Internet and Higher Education, 2, 1–19.
Garrison, D., Anderson, T., & Archer, W. (2003).
A theory of critical inquiry in online distance
education. In Moore, M., & Anderson, W. (Eds.),
Handbook of Distance Education (pp. 113–127).
Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Assoc., Inc.
Garrison, D. R. (1996). Computer conferencing:
The post-industrial age of distance education.
Manuscript submitted for publication.
Garrison, D. R. (1997). Self-directed learning:
Toward a comprehensive model. Adult Education
Quarterly, 41, 125–149.
Gorham, J. (1988). The relationship between
verbal teacher immediacy behaviors and student
learning. Communication Education, 37, 40–53.
doi:10.1080/03634528809378702
Gunawardena, C. N. (1995). Social presence
theory and implications for interaction and col-
laborative learning in computer conferences.
International Journal of Educational Telecom-
munications, 1, 147–166.
Gunawardena, C. N., Lowe, C. A., & Anderson,
T. (1997). Analysis of global online debate and
the development of an interaction analysis model
for examining social construction of knowledge
in computer conferencing. Journal of Educational
Computing Research, 17, 397–431.
669
 Social Presence in an Online Learning Environment
Gunawardena, C. N., & Zittle, F. J. (1997). Social
presence as a predictor of satisfaction within a
computer-mediated conferencing environment.
American Journal of Distance Education, 11,
8–26. doi:10.1080/08923649709526970
Harasim, L. M. (1996). Online education: In
T.M. Harrison & T. Stephens (Eds.), Computer
networking and scholarly communication in the
twenty-first-century university, 203-214. Albany,
NY: State University of New York Press.
Harasim, L. M., Hiltz, S. R., Teles, K., & Turoff,
M. (1995). Learning networks: A field guide to
teaching and learning online. Cambridge, MA:
MIT Press.
Hardy, D. W., & Boaz, M. H. (1997). Learner
development: Beyond the technology. In Cyrs, T.
(Ed.), New directions for teaching and learning,
71 (pp. 41–48). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Hillman, D. (1999). A new method for ana-
lyzing patterns of interaction. American
Journal of Distance Education, 13, 37–47.
doi:10.1080/08923649909527023
Hodges, C. B. (2004). Designing to motivate: Mo-
tivational techniques to incorporate in e-learning
experiences. The Journal of Interactive Online
Learning, 2. [Online]. Retrieved December 18,
2009, from from http://www.nclor.org.
Hornik, S., & Johnson, R. (2003). Hello, hello,
is there anybody in there? The role of perceived
social presence in technology-mediated learning
environments. (Working paper).
Imel, S. (1988). Guidelines for working with adult
learners. ERIC Digest No. 77. (ERIC Document
Reproduction Service No. ED299458).
Jiang, M., & Ting, E. (2000). A study of factors
influencing students’ perceived learning in a Web-
based course environment. International Journal
of Telecommunication, 6, 317–338.
670
Johnson, M. M., & Huff, M. T. (2000). Students’
use of computer-mediated communication in a
distance education course. Research on Social
Work Practice, 10, 519–532.
Kelley, D. H., & Gorham, J. (1988). Ef-
fects of immediacy on recall of information.
Communication Education, 37, 198–207.
doi:10.1080/03634528809378719
Kerka, S. (1996). Distance learning, the Internet,
and the World Wide Web. ERIC Digest. (ERIC
Document Reproduction Service No. ED 395-
214).
Knowles, M. (1980). The modern practice of adult
education: From pedagogy to andragogy (2nd
ed.). New York: Cambridge Books.
Knowles, M. S. (1996). Adult learning. In Craig,
R. L. (Ed.), The ASTD training and development
handbook (4th ed., pp. 253–265). New York:
McGraw-Hill.
Lee, J. A., & Bush, P. E. (2005). Factors related to
instructors’ willingness to participate in distance
education. The Journal of Educational Research,
99, 109–115. doi:10.3200/JOER.99.2.109-115
Leh, A. S. (2001). Computer-mediated communi-
cation and social presence in a distance learning
environment. International Journal of Telecom-
munications, 7, 109–128.
Lim, C. K. (2001). Computer self-efficacy, aca-
demic self-concept, and other predictors of satis-
faction and future participation of adult distance
learners. American Journal of Distance Education,
15, 41–51. doi:10.1080/08923640109527083
Lombard, M., & Ditton, T. (1997). At the heart
of it all: The concept of presence. Journal of
Computer-Mediated Communication, 3, 301–321.
McIsaac, M. S., & Gunawardena, C. N. (1996).
Distance education. In Jonassen, D. (Ed.), Hand-
book for educational communications and technol-
ogy (pp. 403–437). New York: Scholastic Press.
Social Presence in an Online Learning Environment
Mehrabian, A. (1969). Some referents and mea-
sure of nonverbal behavior. Behavior Research
Methods and Instrumentation, 1, 205–207.
Merrill, M. D. (2002). First principles of instruc-
tion. Educational Technology Research and De-
velopment, 50, 43–59. doi:10.1007/BF02505024
Moore, M. (1989). Three types of interaction.
American Journal of Distance Education, 3, 1–6.
doi:10.1080/08923648909526659
Moore, M., & Kearsley, G. (1996). Distance edu-
cation: A systems view. New York: Wadsworth.
Newberry, B. (2001). Raising student social pres-
ence in online classes. In WebNet 2001. Proceed-
ings of the World conference on the WWW and
Internet. AACE, 2001. Norfolk, VA.
Northrup, P. (2001). A framework for designing
interactivity in Web-based instruction. Educa-
tional Technology, 4, 31–39.
Norton, R. W. (1986). Communicator style in
teaching: Giving good form to content. In Civikly,
J. M. (Ed.), Communicating in college classrooms
(pp. 33–40). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Oliver, R. (1999). Exploring strategies for online
teaching and learning. Distance Education, 20,
240–254. doi:10.1080/0158791990200205
Osgood, C. E., Suci, G. J., & Tannenbaum, P. H.
(1957). The measurement of meaning. Urbana,
IL: University of Illinois Press.
Palloff, R. M., & Pratt, K. (1999). Building learn-
ing communities in cyberspace: Effective strate-
gies for the online classroom. San Francisco, CA:
Jossey-Bass.
Picciano, A. G. (2002). Beyond student percep-
tions: Issues of interaction, presence, and perfor-
mance in an online course. Journal of Asynchro-
nous Learning Networks, 6, 2–19.
Reio, T. G. Jr, & Callahan, J. (2004). Affect,
curiosity, and socialization-related learning: A
path analysis of antecedents to job performance.
Journal of Business and Psychology, 19, 3–22.
doi:10.1023/B:JOBU.0000040269.72795.ce
Reio, T. G. Jr, & Davis, W. (2005). Age and gender
differences in self-directed learning readiness: A
developmental perspective. [from http://sdlglobal.
com]. International Journal of Self-Directed
Learning, 2(1), 40–49. Retrieved January 12, 2006.
Rezabeck, L. L., Meyers, D. C., Reiser, R. A.,
& Edwin, E. O. (1992). Distance education:
Perspectives from all sides of the desk. Paper
presented at Annual Meeting of the Association
for Educational Communications and Technology:
Washington, D.C.
Richardson, J., & Swan, K. (2003). An examination
of social presence in online learning: Students’
perceived learning and satisfaction. Paper pre-
sented at the Annual meeting of the American
Educational Research Association. Seattle, WA.
Rourke, L., Anderson, T., Garrison, D. R., &
Archer, W. (1999). Assessing social presence in
asynchronous, text-based computer conferencing.
Journal of Distance Education, 14, 51–70.
Rourke, L., Anderson, T., Garrison, R. D., & Ar-
cher, W. (2001). Assessing social presence in an
asynchronous text-based computer conferencing.
Journal of Distance Education, 14, 51–70.
Rovai, A. P. (2002). Building a sense of community
at a distance. International Review of Research in
Open and Distance Learning, 3, 1–11.
Saye, J. (1997). Technology and educational
empowerment: Students’ perspectives. ETRD,
45, 23–26. doi:10.1007/BF02299522
Sharon, S. (1980). Cooperative learning in small
groups: Recent methods and effects on achieve-
ment, attitudes, and ethnic relations. Review of
Educational Research, 50, 241–271.
671
 Social Presence in an Online Learning Environment

Sherry, L. (1996). Issues in distance learning.
Instructional Journal of Educational Telecom-
munications, 1, 337–365.
Short, J. A., Williams, E., & Christie, B. (1976).
The social psychology of telecommunications.
London: John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
Slavin, R. (1983). Cooperative learning. New
York: Longman.
Smith, M. C., & Winking-Diaz, A. (2004). Increas-
ing students’ interactivity in an online course.
The Journal of Interactive Online Learning, 2.
Retrieved December 18, 2009, from http://www.
ncolr.org
Stein, D. S., & Wanstreet, C. E. (2003). Role of
social presence, choice of online or face-to-face
group format, and satisfaction with perceived
knowledge gained in a distance learning environ-
ment. Paper presented at the Midwest Research
to Practice Conference in Adult, Continuing, and
Community Education. Columbus, OH.
Swan, K. (2001). Immediacy, social presence, and
asynchronous discussions. In J. Bourne & Moore
(Eds.), Elements for quality online education (pp.
3). Online and Babson Colleges: Sloan Center for
Online Education, 2002.
Swan, K., Shea, P., Fredericksen, E., Pickett, A.,
Pelz, W., & Maher, G. (2000). Building knowledge
building communities: Consistencies, contact and
communication in the virtual classroom. Journal
of Educational Computing Research, 23, 359–383.
Tinto, V. (1993). Leaving college: Rethinking the
causes and cures of college attrition (2nd ed.).
Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
Tu, C. H. (2000). From social learning theory to
social presence in an online environment. Journal
of Network and Computer Interactions, 23, 39–58.
doi:10.1006/jnca.1999.0100
Tu, C. H. (2002). The measurement of social
presence in an online learning environment.
International Journal on E-Learning, 1, 34–35.
Tu, C. H., & Corry, M. (2001). Distance educa-
tion: Research and practice. Washington, D.C.:
Technology Advisory Committee at Graduate
School of Education & Human Development.
Tu, C. H., & McIsaac, M. (2002). The relationship
of social presence and interaction in online classes.
American Journal of Distance Education, 16,
131–150. doi:10.1207/S15389286AJDE1603_2
Tuckey, C. J. (1993). Computer conferencing
and the electronic whiteboard in the United
Kingdom: A comparative analysis. American
Journal of Distance Education, 7, 58–72.
doi:10.1080/08923649309526823
Twigg, C. A. (1997/March, April). Is technology
a silver bullet? Educom Review, 28-29.
Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The
development of higher psychological processes.
Cambridge, MA: Harvard University.
Vygotsky, L. S. (1986). Thought and language.
Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Wagner, E. D. (1997). Interactivity: From agents to
outcomes. In Cyrs, T. (Ed.), Teaching and learning
at a distance: What it takes to effectively design,
deliver, and evaluate programs, 71 (pp. 19–32).
San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Walther, J. B. (1992). Interpersonal effects in
computer-mediated interaction: A relational per-
spective. Communication Research, 21, 52–90.
doi:10.1177/009365092019001003
Walther, J. B., & Burgoon, J. K. (1992). Relational
communication in computer-mediated interaction.
Human Communication Research, 19, 50–88.
doi:10.1111/j.1468-2958.1992.tb00295.x

672
Social Presence in an Online Learning Environment
Wegerif, R. (1998). The social dimension of
asynchronous learning networks. Journal of
Asynchronous Learning Networks, 2. Retrieved
December 18, 2009, from http://www.aln.org/
publications/jaln/v2n1/v2n1_wegerif.asp.
Wellman, B. (1999). The network community: An
introduction to networks in the global village. In
Wellman, B. (Ed.), Networks in the Global Village
(pp. 1–48). Boulder, CO: Westview Press.
Wenger, E. (1998). Communities of practice:
Learning, meaning and identity. New York:
Cambridge University.
Wheeler, S. (2005, November). Creating social
presence in digital learning environments: A
presence of mind? Paper presented at the TAFE
Conference, Queensland, Australia.
Wheeler, S. (2009). Learning space mashups:
Combining Web 2.0 tools to create collaborative
and reflective learning spaces. Future Internet, 1,
3–13. doi:10.3390/fi1010003
Wiener, M., & Mehrabian, A. (1968). Language
within language: Immediacy, a channel in verbal
communication. New York: Appleton-Century-
Crofts.
Wulf, S., Hanor, J., & Bulik, R. J. (2000). The
roles and interrelationships of presence, reflec-
tion, and self-directed learning in effective World
Wide Web-based pedagogy. In Cole, R. A. (Ed.),
Issues in Web-based pedagogy: A critical primer
(pp. 143–160). Westport, CT: Greenwood Press.
KEY TERMS AND DEFINITIONS
Asynchronous: A communication method
that does not require that the sender and receiver
be present simultaneously at their computers for
communication, such as email and discussion
board. This is a time- and place-independent
communication method.
Distance Education: In general, distance
education is defined as teaching and learning
activities that occur with technology when the
learners and the instructors are separated at a
distance. It is an educational environment where
(a) the instructor and student are separated during
the main mode of instructional delivery so there
is limited regular contact between instructor and
students; (b) various media (print, audio, video,
or computer) can be used to transmit content; (c)
there is some provision for two-way communica-
tion in the educational-instructional process; (d)
people tend to receive instruction individually or
in small groups.
Immediacy: The extent to which selected
communicative behaviors enhances physical or
psychological closeness in interpersonal commu-
nication. Such immediacy-producing behaviors
include both verbal and nonverbal communication.
Interaction: The communication that occurs
between the learner and content, the learner and
instructor, and the learner and learner.
Intimacy: The sense of close connection one
feels in a relationship.
Learning Community: The term is often
applied to online courses in which the instructor
attempts to encourage class participation, discus-
sion, and a high level of learner-learner interaction.
Online Learning: The use of computer
technology in delivering instruction primarily
through the World Wide Web (WWW). Online
courses typically use Web-based courseware or
a combination of Web and email communication.
It is also referred to as computer-mediated com-
munication/instruction. Interaction between the
instructors and learners and among the learners
in this study is asynchronous.
Social Presence: A sense of intimacy and im-
mediacy or the salience of the other in a mediated
communication leading to increased enjoyment,
involvement, task performance, and socio-
emotional interaction. In other words, a student’s
sense of belonging in a course or group and the
ability to interact with others, although physical
contact is not available.
673
674

Chapter 40
Principles of Student
Assessment in Adult Education
James B. Martin
Army’s Command and General Staff College at Ft. Leavenworth, USA

ABSTRACT
Any discussion of the topic of assessment of student learning is bound to be marked by strong opinions,
marked differences, or total apathy. This topic, critical anywhere in higher education, is even more im-
portant in adult learning than anywhere else. With the greater potential for non-traditional programs in
adult education, the ability to show the quality of student learning is critical. This chapter examines five
principles of assessment of adult learning and provides insight into viable programmatic assessment.
By applying the principles, the assessment strategies provided take into account the characteristics of
adult learners and design a program that is suited for assessing adult learners. While some application
of classroom assessment techniques for adult learners is included, the emphasis of the chapter is on
programmatic assessment.

INTRODUCTION system concerning whether or not the use of learn-

Few issues in Adult Education create a wider
spectrum of reaction, from the very negative to the
fanatically positive, than that of assessment. The
literature on this topic is diverse, from the widely
accepted work of Thomas Angelo and Patricia
Cross (1993), which presents a myriad of ways
to assess student work in the classroom, to the
ongoing arguments within the British educational
DOI: 10.4018/978-1-61692-906-0.ch040
ing outcomes is an inherent good or a terrible evil
(Ecclestone, 1999). With these diverse views in
mind, this chapter lays out a variety of assessment
principles, at the classroom and program levels,
that are critical to the long term success of adult
education programs. As will be obvious by the
end, it is the author’s view that student assessment
at all levels is necessary and important for adult
education programs, particularly in light of the
growing use of information technology to affect
educational offerings.
Principles of Student Assessment in Adult Education
BACKGROUND
“Outcome-based education” - this term, denot-
ing the idea of basing curriculum and teaching
methods on desired educational or behavioral
outcomes, brings out a variety of reactions. An
article in a British journal examined at length an
ongoing and heated debate in their higher educa-
tion community about the worth and ethical nature
of outcomes-based education and the assessment
program that comes with it (Ecclestone, 1999). The
article swung back and forth between the individu-
als who believed that the creation of outcomes
provided the noose with which to strangle the
liberal tradition of education in British colleges
and those who believed that an increased level
of accountability was necessary from the higher
education community.
This British argument is now ten years old,
but it continues to this day in the U.S. Many a
faculty member in this country would agree with
those British academics who argue against set-
ting outcomes for courses or programs because
of the possibility of their intellectual freedom in
the classroom being restricted due to the require-
ment to assess student learning. They choose to
fight against what makes them uncomfortable
and challenges their beliefs as to what is neces-
sary to educate a student in their discipline. This
portrayal of their stance may ring true with many
administrators, but one article on the topic of as-
sessment expressed the opinion that the problem
lies elsewhere. Kurz and Banta (2004) identify
the fact that faculty members are experts in their
chosen field and unless that field is assessment
they have little background in the creation or use of
high quality assessment instruments. This lack of
experience and comfort with assessment produces
a reticence to use it and potentially even mistrust
of it. Others, including most accrediting bodies,
see a need to measure effectiveness of education
through a more structured system. One of the most
accepted ways to measure such effectiveness is to
set identifiable and measurable learning outcomes
at the course and program level and plan for the use
of assessment instruments to provide evidence of
student learning. Largely because of this growing
need to provide some level of accountability the
idea of outcomes-based education has become
widely accepted in the American educational
culture. This is particularly true in adult education
programs, which are much more likely to use ac-
celerated learning models to compress the time it
takes working adults to complete degree programs.
If these programs can demonstrate that their stu-
dents can master the same learning outcomes as
students in similar traditional programs, but in an
accelerated schedule, then they can argue that the
educations are equivalent.
One type of assessment, which has become
popular in the last 15 years, is using classroom
assessment as formative measures to assist faculty
members to improve their teaching to better meet
students’ needs. The dominant book on the topic
is Classroom Assessment Techniques by Thomas
Angelo and Patricia Cross. This book has produced
some of the best-known techniques for checking
on student learning in quick, efficient ways that
allow faculty to correct problems and ensure that
students get the salient points from the class or
course. If you have just covered an important
component of the course and wonder how well
the students understood it; a one-minute paper
can produce the data for you to examine and see
if you were on the mark. While you might have
thought you did a masterful job, if the students
did not understand the material then how effec-
tive was the instruction (Angelo & Cross, 1993)?
Cross (1998), in a later journal article, goes
on to explain that such techniques are particularly
valuable because they can involve students in the
assessment, not just as subjects but as partners. She
cites two reasons that this student involvement is
critical. She indicates that “First, we can’t improve
student learning without the active and intelligent
participation of students themselves. But second,
and equally important, students as lifelong learners
675
 Principles of Student Assessment in Adult Education
are going to have to assume more responsibility
for their own learning” (p. 6). This approach,
focused on the responsibilities of the student as
a lifelong learner, meshes well with the work of
Kasworm and Marienau (1997) who write about
the uniqueness of adult learners and how they are
best assessed. While the words “lifelong learner”
are not reserved for adult students, it is obvious
that anyone who becomes a lifelong learner will
do most of that learning while they are an adult;
either as formal students or in their own informal
program of learning.
Other authors provide aids to teachers on the
thorny problem of grading and how it ties to as-
sessment. This is a complex topic, as grades can
often work as a mask to true assessment of learn-
ing outcomes. The work of Barbara Walvoord and
Virginia Johnson Anderson (2010) helps faculty
members grade effectively and use the grading
process as a valuable assessment tool for their
courses and programs. This book is a second edi-
tion and its change and growth help to chart the
change in assessment in the past decade. Originally
published in 1998, the authors note that since that
time “new emphasis has focused on learning as
the goal of teaching” and “how people learn has
more fully infused the teaching process” (p. ix).
The ever present issue of accreditation is also
mentioned as a component that has not gone away
but “become stronger and more insistent” (p. ix).
Many high quality books on the assessment of
student learning have been published in the last
five years that provide great insight into using
assessment in a variety of educational settings.
While the books by Maki (2004), Suskie (2009),
and Walvoord (2004) are not specifically focused
on assessing adult learning, they all provide useful
guidance and information on the importance of
assessment and the techniques for using it. These
books focus on providing educators, both faculty
and administrators, with guides that they can
use to improve the assessment program at their
institution and therefore improve the learning that
students are experiencing.
676
Assessment of Student Learning
Issues, Controversies, Problems
Required by accrediting bodies, reviled by many
senior faculty members, and seen as a necessity by
administrators in credit and non-credit programs
alike, the methods used to determine whether adult
students have achieved the desired outcomes or the
results of a program or course warrant discussion
in almost every education forum. The literature
concerning this topic continues to grow, as do the
issues and controversies over its use or validity.
In the field of adult education, these issues seem
to be particularly important.
Adult students are some of the most exciting to
teach in the world. They bring experiences to the
classroom that expand their ability to participate
in class discussions and understand new ideas.
These adults, who return to the educational world
for a variety of reasons, are motivated differently
than traditional students and learn differently also.
The differences between traditional and adult
students also drive differences in the importance
of assessment in their educational environment
and the methods that are effective (Kasworm &
Marienau, 1997).
Adult education programs have existed for
many decades in venues around the world. They
often take non-traditional forms, such as non-credit
continuing education programs or accelerated edu-
cation programs offered by a myriad of different
institutions of higher education. Our traditional
education forms are built around a system well
accepted by those who control higher education
in America. The semester and quarter formats,
with their reliance on Carnegie hour solutions, are
seen by many to be the standard to which all other
educational forms are compared. Due to this focus
adult programs, which are often non-traditional,
must prove themselves to maintain their viability
or create an environment of respectability for their
products. One way this is done is through quality
assessment of student learning, demonstrating that
Principles of Student Assessment in Adult Education
the students are achieving the outcomes set by the
faculty members of the program.
Assessment of adult students and its use to
evaluate adult educational programs brings with
it an inherent need for the faculty who teach
these students to buy-in to the idea. Faculty in
institutions of higher education carry a great deal
of political power and can stand in the way of
proper assessment of adult programs, because of
their concerns over being forced to assess to the
same level in traditional programs. Because of
the long-term acceptance of the more traditional
forms of higher education, less pressure exists on
these programs to show student success through
quality assessment. While they still must perform
adequate assessment of student learning to satisfy
their accrediting bodies, they do not come under
the same scrutiny in this area that adult programs
face. The non-traditional nature of adult program-
ming brings with it a need to prove worth, a task
for which classroom and programmatic assessment
are well suited.
A further issue revolves around the types of
assessments most effective with adult students and
whether they can effectively be assessed using the
same types of instruments commonly employed
with traditional age students. Adult education lit-
erature has demonstrated the uniqueness of adult
learners (Kasworm & Marienau, 1997; Merriam,
Caffarella, & Baumgartner, 2007; Wlodkowski &
Kasworm, 2003). Does that demand differences
in assessment tools? Is the only way to accurately
assess the progress of adult learners to incorpo-
rate their uniqueness into the assessment tools or
can an argument be made for the occasional use
of common assessment tools to compare adult
students and traditional students?
Solutions and Recommendations
Kasworm and Marienau (1997) present an argu-
ment that adult students require an assessment
process that is different from that historically
used by colleges and universities for “young adult
learners” because adult students learn differently.
Because of these differences, adult students must
be assessed on multiple levels and from multiple
perspectives. They define the levels as “perception,
action, and critical reflection” and the perspectives
as “those of the learner, the instructional program,
and the various contexts of adult life” (p. 6). The
reference to critical reflection amongst the levels
jumps out as this is a component of learning that is
often difficult for traditional students, and though
not easy for anyone is more uniquely suited to
the adult learner who has much more experience
on which to base such internal reflection. The
“contexts of adult life” found in the perspectives
is particularly striking as understanding context
is what allows us to make sense of things around
us. The earlier discussion about the uniqueness of
adult students because of their varied experience
brings us back to this issue of context. Critical
thought and the ability to make meaning of a
wide variety of ideas is profoundly affected by
the capacity to understand the context in which
things happen. The life experience that adults
bring to the classroom provides an ability to grasp
concepts and think through complex questions in
part because of their increased contextual base.
Kasworm and Marienau (1997) offer five key
principles which they believe should guide adult-
oriented assessment practices. These are:
1. Learning is derived from multiple sources.
2. Learning engages the whole person and
contributes to that person’s development.
3. Learning and the capacity for self-direction
are promoted by feedback.
4. Learning occurs in context; its significance
relates in part to its impact on those contexts.
5. Learning from experiences is a unique
meaning-making event that creates diversity
among adult learners (p. 7).
These principles do not constitute a how-to
book about assessment for adult learners, but
provide a basis from which to begin considering
677
 Principles of Student Assessment in Adult Education
how to construct a program whether it be in the
classroom as a teacher or for a program as an in-
structional designer. The idea that adult learning
comes from multiple sources indicates a need to
create an assessment program that is not focused
solely on what occurs in the classroom. If adult
learning comes from both formal and informal
sources, as this principle dictates, then there
must be consideration of this in the assessment
instruments. Rather than simply giving a multiple
choice exam, which does not allow the student to
introduce that part of their learning that comes from
informal sources, oral or critical written assess-
ments provide adult students that opportunity to
embrace the totality of their learning on a subject
and bring it to bear as evidence of their meeting
stated outcomes. This is extended to other com-
munities in which adults live and work by the
fourth principle, which deals with the impact of
the broader world on the adult learners. This is
closely tied to principle number five in that this
informal learning (experiences) which is unique
to each student interacts with their formal learning
to create the diversity of meaning-making about
which Kasworm and Marienau (1997) write. In a
class on Islamic religion everyone hears the same
discussion amongst the teacher and the students,
but their experiences with this religion will affect
their meaning-making on the topic. If they have
lived their whole life in a small Midwestern town
with no contact with Islam except the headlines on
CNN or in their local newspaper, they may well
approach the information much as a young adult
learner would. On the other hand, if they have
worked among members of the Islamic faith and
have had positive or negative experiences from
such interaction, that informal learning will cre-
ate a different context for their meaning-making
on the subject. A multiple choice examination in
this setting would potentially produce the same
answers from each student, as they only have the
opportunity to provide information from the mate-
rial the teacher selects, rather than being able to
678
broaden that opportunity to allow for the multiple
sources of learning their experience provides.
The second principle focuses on how adult
learners learn. It is widely accepted that adults
learn best when they are not just in the cognitive
domain of learning, but also allowed to work in
the conative and affective domains (Merriam,
Caffarella, & Baumgartner, 2007). The tendency
in traditional higher education has been to focus
on the cognitive domain, with students being
required to consume and retain large amounts of
information to be returned to the teacher during
assessments. Many theories in adult education,
such as transformational learning, experiential
learning, whole person learning, embodied
learning and spirituality, focus on the emotional
dimensions of learning (Dirkx, 2008). Research
in adult education has shown that students learn
better when they are able to connect other domains
with their learning.
The third principle, which discusses the issue
of self-direction in adult learners and the impor-
tance of feedback, is closely aligned with the work
of Cross (1998) mentioned earlier. This idea is
particularly important when a teacher is examin-
ing the needs of their students as they impact on
formative assessment. For the purposes of this
chapter, we will define formative assessment as
the assessment that is “used to create change or
improvement in whatever process was evaluated”
(Martin & Collins, 2009, pg. 155). The educa-
tional community has historically told students
how they did on exams or papers in the form of
grades. These often occur at the end of segments
of learning and are of relatively little importance
in helping students become more effective learn-
ers. This idea of feedback and the self-direction
of most adult learners points us towards a need to
devise formative devices that allow teachers to aid
students in becoming better learners, because if
that can be successfully accomplished the teacher
will have aided the student long after they leave the
classroom. As most of our learning in life occurs
somewhere outside of formal educational settings,
Principles of Student Assessment in Adult Education
the opportunity to improve one’s ability to learn is
the gift that truly keeps on giving. We will discuss
how some researchers have approached this in a
discussion of classroom assessment techniques.
The importance of these principles is based
in the fact that they can be the guideposts for the
creation of adult education assessment programs
at any level. The same principles hold true whether
you are approaching classroom assessment or
programmatic assessment. It may be difficult to
incorporate all of these principles overtly into an
assessment program, but it is important that the
creator of the assessment program keep them in
mind as the program takes shape. This will serve
to keep the differences in the way adult students
learn at the forefront of the program creator’s
thought processes, which will in turn lead to a
program that is more inclusive of the ideas behind
Kasworm and Marienau’s (1997) principles for
assessment of adult learning.
Assessment is a valuable tool for measuring the
effectiveness of any type of education program,
but it is particularly powerful for adult education
programs. Many of these programs are more struc-
tured than your average traditional program and
the year to year comparisons are made simpler.
This type of repetitive data allows the comparison
of a large number of students over a long period
of time, generally resulting in data that can help
institutions improve their educational product.
While the discussion of Kasworm and Marienau’s
(1997) and Angelo and Cross’ (1993) work was
focused on improving the learning of individual
students, the discussion of programmatic assess-
ment is focused on the improvement of curriculum
and teaching in an effort to improve the program’s
offerings for future students. In this respect, these
assessments are summative in nature. For our
purposes in this chapter, the term summative as-
sessment will identify that assessment that is used
“for the broader purpose of examining the entire
program and determining its relative merits and
future” (Martin & Collins, 2009, p. 155).
If you were to browse the shelf of the local
college bookstore searching for volumes on pro-
gram planning you would probably find quite a
few titles that could provide you with assistance.
Invariably, these books would have a section on
evaluation and/or assessment because among the
key goals in program planning are the ability to
1) show the value of the program in relation to
meeting its stated goals and 2) identify how well
the learning outcomes were met and analyze the
assessment data to see what can improved. Both
of these goals are important as they relate to the
important issues of accountability and program
improvement. There has always been a need for
accountability in education, but what was once a
murmur has become a loud roar over the last 15
to 20 years. Rosemary Caffarella (2002), in one
of the more useful program planning books you
would find on that college bookshelf, indicates
that “external pressure for program accountability
is on the rise, from such sources as the corporate
sector, government, regulatory agencies, and pro-
fessional organizations” (p. 226). This statement,
written in 2002, has to be considered accurate with
the current atmosphere in the accreditation world.
Government agencies are growing ever stricter in
the way they view accreditation of for-profit adult
programs, as evidenced by recent actions taken
by the Department of Education (Investors In
Education Stocks Stricken, n.d.). The ability for
these for-profit adult programs to show the merit
of their educational offerings is greatly improved if
they have been undergoing a long-term and com-
prehensive program of student assessment. Data
collected over a number of years assessing student
learning of valid outcomes can go a long ways
towards proving to reasonable accreditors that
the institution can provide equivalent education
through non-traditional means. Not all programs
should be accredited, as the adult learning world
does include institutions which lack sufficient
rigor and substance, but a solid program assess-
ment mentality provides a foundation on which
to support the argument about quality. Account-
679
 Principles of Student Assessment in Adult Education
ability might not be about accreditation, but as
simple as demonstrating to the foundation that
provided a grant for the educational program that
their money was well spent. If you were the group
or individual who provided money in support of
certain educational outcomes, wouldn’t you want
to know if the money you spent was effective in
getting students to those outcomes? After all, if
the outcomes weren’t important to you why would
you have given money?
Most program planning models include evalu-
ation or assessment as steps or components of the
mental models that they provide to aid planners
in organizing successful programs. While this is
obviously tied to the accountability discussion
above, it is also to get at the issue of program
improvement. Reliable data, gathered over time,
can provide information necessary to make deci-
sions about curriculum and teaching methods in
adult programs. While it is true that there are many
challenges in designing assessment instruments
that accurately and predictably measure student
performance against learning outcomes, it does
not have to be all about standardized tests that are
multiple choice. While this is the norm in most
secondary schools in the United States, because
of the uniqueness described above by Kasworm
and Marienau (1997) assessing adult students must
incorporate innovative ways to determine how well
they mastered the specified learning outcomes.
These two issues, accountability and program
improvement, are the drivers behind most high
quality assessment programs. Unfortunately, for
the same reasons they are particularly beneficial
in program assessment (transparency, quality
control, continuous improvement processes, data
collection) they are frightening to many educators.
Assessment programs which are well done result
in “judging the value or worth of education and
training programs” (Caffarella, 2002, p. 227). Very
few of us are comfortable having our value judged
by someone other than ourselves, so it takes a great
deal of work and time to create a good assessment
program that the majority of faculty and admin-
680
istrators are comfortable implementing. Faculty
have to be part of the building of the program, so
that they can feel ownership of it. After all, they
are the ones who produce the learning outcomes
upon which students will be assessed. Who bet-
ter to work on how to assess those outcomes?
As noted before, historians aren’t taught how to
assess history in graduate school, so expertise in
these methods will have to be built into faculty
development programs available to faculty in all
disciplines. Assessment is not just for education
teachers or administrators. This experience is one
that is valuable for higher education professionals
from all disciplines.
Experience has demonstrated to this author
that the most effective programs generally have
some form of “layering” of assessments to provide
a wider variety of data. The term “layering” is
intended to convey the picture of different forms
of assessment being gathered along the same
timeline. Some of the data is gained through
what is often called direct assessment because
it directly assesses a student’s ability to perform
specific tasks or relate material in an acceptable
manner compared to learning outcomes. Other
data is gathered through indirect assessments
which do not directly measure a student’s ability
to perform, but gather data from other sources to
determine how well the outcomes were achieved.
Examples of such indirect assessment tools would
be student end-of-course surveys where students
are asked their opinion on how well they mastered
the skills; faculty surveys where their opinions
on the same topic are sought; and even graduate
surveys where students are asked about the ef-
ficacy of the program and its learning outcomes
some specified period after their completion of
the program. The use of these two types of as-
sessments, direct and indirect, can be layered
together to provide a broader picture of student
learning that does not rely on a single instrument
or variable. This system is far from perfect, but
it has been used throughout the adult education
world with a great deal of success.
Principles of Student Assessment in Adult Education
Specific direct assessment instruments and
measures are not universally beneficial for all
types of programs. Lower division undergraduate
programs might well find that the most effec-
tive methods of assessing student learning are
knowledge-based exams which require students
to return to the teacher the information that was
deemed critical during the class. This environment
might allow for the use of multiple choice exams
if the level of learning identified for the class
supported a more quantitative type test question
approach. More often in adult programs other
methods of direct assessment are more success-
ful in measuring a student’s learning against an
outcome. Think for the moment of the differences
between a multiple choice examination and an
oral examination measuring the same topic; the
difference between a more quantitative result
versus a qualitative result. A written multiple
choice examination allows the student no room
for critical thought or reflection. There is one or
more answer that is available and you may just
have to guess at what you think is the closest.
Remembering the principles of assessment for
adults above (Kasworm & Marienau, 2002) this
does not seem to parallel the ideas of context and
experience that are important to adult learners.
If these things help adults learn or shape their
learning, doesn’t it make sense to allow the adult
the ability to bring these important ideas into the
assessment of that learning? Oral examinations
on the same topics found on the multiple choice
examination mentioned above would provide an
entirely different assessment experience for the
learner and more accurately measure their mastery
of the learning outcome. In the same way, written
papers provide adult students the ability to bring
their experiences and the context of their life
into the assessment instrument and thus provide
opportunities for them to demonstrate higher
levels of learning. Too often in adult education,
educators restrict the level of learning that can be
measured by creating assessment instruments that
are designed with our grading timelines in mind
rather than the characteristics of our adult learn-
ers. This is a critical mistake and a shortcoming
for many in our profession. While both of these
direct assessments, papers and oral examina-
tions, are traditional in nature they can be used
in non-traditional settings to provide meaningful
assessments for adult students. They can be used
to assess student performance against course-level
outcomes which are often discipline specific or
against programmatic outcomes which are broader
in nature and attempt to look at the student’s edu-
cational experience as a whole. An example of
such an outcome would be an institution’s desire
to measure whether their students displayed better
habits of mind as critical thinkers at the end of the
program. This type of an outcome would require
assessments at the beginning of the program and
the end, if the desire was to see how the program
affected critical thinking.
An additional direct assessment instrument that
can be particularly effective with adult populations
is the use of portfolios. Portfolios, be they digital or
hard copy, provide the ability to collect artifacts of
student learning over an extended period of time.
This period may be for one course or it may be
for the entire span of the program, encompassing
multiple courses over a year or more. This type of
assessment program is particularly effective for
looking at programmatic learning outcomes versus
course outcomes. The need mentioned above to
have assessments at the beginning and end of a
program to measure growth lends itself well to
using the portfolio method. Faculty members can
identify specific artifacts that each student must
collect and maintain throughout the course of
the program. A critical analysis paper written for
Course A in the early part of the degree program
could be kept and later compared to another critical
analysis paper written for Course Z much later in
the program. While the initial course may have
been about public policy and thus have different
discipline-specific information than the one writ-
ten on economics, they can be compared against
an accepted rubric for critical thinking skills
681
 Principles of Student Assessment in Adult Education
to determine if there has been a demonstration
of growth. Portfolios are also a means to allow
learners to reflect on their own experiences and
learning, which adds a deeper dimension to the
assessment.
A different form of direct assessment that
works well with adult students involves the use
of case studies. Case studies are varied and can
be built for nearly any discipline. They involve
the creation of a context within which pertinent
facts are provided and problems must be exam-
ined and solved. These are commonly used in
the world of business education because the real
world applications of business courseware deal
with events and pressures that exist and can be
reproduced in case form. The same concept can
be used to work in specific fields of practice in
order to get at outcomes at the course level, such
as is often done by using the very popular Harvard
Case Study series, or they can be used to assess
that programmatic outcome concerning critical
thinking that was discussed above. Students are
put in a situation, with a given context, and must
use their knowledge and background to bring it
to the best resolution. Using case studies for the
assessment of adult learners is consistent with the
principles of adult assessment detailed earlier in
this chapter (Kasworm & Marienau, 1997).
High quality direct assessments require a
great deal of planning and much creative thought
on the part of the instructional designer and/or
faculty member. The questions of how to best
assess the learning outcomes identified for the
course or program will drive the type of assess-
ment instrument selected. What to measure, and
against what standards, may drive the creation of
rubrics that can provide common data between
course iterations or between instructors within
structured education programs. The bottom line
in the creation of useful direct assessment instru-
ments is (1) they must assess the correct thing,
(2) they must have a standard to assess against,
(3) they must be organized to avoid bias, (4) they
682
must be reproducible, and (5) they must be usable
by the faculty who teach the course or program.
As mentioned earlier, indirect assessment tech-
niques are intended to measure student learning
through means other than direct demonstration
of skills or capabilities (Suskie, 2009; Walvoord,
2004). The most common of these techniques is
some variation of the end-of-course survey used by
most higher education institutions in this country.
Many of these instruments are more focused on
questions which don’t deal with learning, such
as how well did the instructor do in the class or
were your books available in timely manner. If
the correct questions are asked, the data derived
from such surveys can provide trend data that
may produce usable information about the student
learning in the program. Obviously, this is not
about grades as these surveys are normally set
up to be anonymous. Occasionally students will
include their names, but experience indicates that
the data you receive will be more usable if they do
not. This type of assessment instrument is only of
real use if it can be aggregated across a wide group
of adult learners. Some students will believe they
mastered everything from a course, while others
will be less convinced, but the aggregated data
can provide statistical information from which
faculty or administrators can discern trends for
program accountability or improvement.
The same process can be used with faculty
members, though with much smaller numbers it is
often more productive to ask open-ended questions
on which they can provide more detail as to what
they saw in their students’ performance. Another
approach with this group is an after-action review
where they get together and discuss what they saw
and try to come to consensus on what went well
and what did not in reference to student mastery
of the learning outcomes. It is important that the
focus of such groups be on student learning and
not on how well the faculty enjoyed the course or
program. Assessment is about measuring the most
important product of education – student learning.
Principles of Student Assessment in Adult Education
Another way of using survey data to look at
program accountability and improvement is to
survey graduates of a program at specific intervals
after their graduation. The opinion of students well
after the end of a course or program can provide
you with valuable information to improve your
educational efforts. This type of survey can be
used for program improvement, but is particularly
valuable for the accountability side of the equa-
tion. One of the topics that is gaining interest in
adult education is transfer of learning. Caffarella
(2002) defines transfer of learning as “the effec-
tive application by program participants of what
they learned as a result of attending an education
or training program” (p.204). Another way to
approach this definition is to assess whether a
student can take knowledge or skills gained in one
context (the classroom) and apply it in a different
context later. If that can be successfully accom-
plished, then the student will have transferred the
learning into practice in a new environment. This
is critical because it is this type of learning that
stays with lifelong learners. It does not just reflect
the return of critical knowledge to the teacher on
a direct assessment, but demonstrates how that
knowledge can be translated into a part of the adult
learners’ experience in their life context. There a
variety of methods that can be used to gather such
transfer of learning data, but two that are com-
monly used are graduate surveys and employer
surveys. Well written survey questions, focusing
on the programmatic outcomes identified by the
faculty, can provide information on transfer of
learning through two different lenses. The gradu-
ates’ view of how well they can accomplish the
program outcomes and whether those outcomes
have been able to translate into productivity in
a new context aids in the understanding of how
effective the program is perceived to have been.
If the same type of survey, with questions obvi-
ously modified for the difference in perspective,
can be used with employers of program graduates
then additional data can be gathered that speaks
once again to the perceived effectiveness of the
program but through a different lens.
There are many more examples that could be
used to illustrate the types of direct and indirect as-
sessment methods that can be used to examine how
well students master program outcomes. Beyond
these current examples are new, innovative ways
to accomplish the same basic ideas introduced in
the preceding paragraphs. Each program, with its
unique context and content, will lend itself to the
assessment of learning outcomes in a different
way. The challenge for the instructional designer
or faculty member or program planner is to match
the best methods with the program for which they
have responsibility. There is no magic formula
that can be provided that you just plug into the
program and you are successful. It often requires
trial and error or industrious research, but given
the time and the determination educators can find
the right combination of assessment methods to
satisfy their needs in both issue areas: account-
ability and program improvement.
FUTURE TRENDS
In the preceding paragraphs a variety of methods
and techniques were identified that are useful in
assessing adult learning. The focus of the direct
assessment portion was on finding the right in-
struments that allow the students to be assessed
by taking into account the unique ways in which
adults make meaning. This focus will remain
important for the foreseeable future, but events
and changing contexts will require educators to
be agile in continuing to meet the adult students
where they are or where they are going. One
future trend, which is actually in the early stages
of being upon us now, is the potential that exists
in the new technologies commonly referred to
as Web 2.0 (Vossen & Hagemann, 2007). Adult
students tweet and blog and text and some even
create wikis, so if this is the context in which they
now live or they soon will, how do we use it to
683
 Principles of Student Assessment in Adult Education
our advantage in adult assessment? Much work
is being done on these questions now, but one
example is the use of wikis in adult classrooms. An
obvious example presents itself from our earlier
discussion. The use of case studies in classroom
settings can be an individual or a collaborative
effort. If, for example, an instructor uses a case
study in the latter context then a wiki can provide
a rich environment in which the students can work.
Wiki is just a word, taken loosely from the native
Hawaiian language, which means quick (Richard-
son, 2009). It is a digital space in which students
can work together without having to utilize point
to point technology such as email. One student can
provide information to the wiki and within minutes
another can edit it, all the while they are on their
computers two hundred miles apart because one
of our adult learners is travelling on business. This
tool allows learners to collaborate on case studies
whether they are in the same classroom or many
miles apart. The use of such an assessment method,
using a rubric to identify the key components of
the instrument, proved to be much more effective
for the students in a program planning course at a
major university than the same case study done a
semester earlier without this Web 2.0 technology.
The products turned out to be more indepth, more
creative, and produced a more collaborative effort
from the students involved. How to use Twitter
to positively affect assessment efforts may prove
to be more difficult, but we must continue to be
open to such possibilities. If adult students use the
technology in their daily lives, it is part of that
context and experiential base upon which they
learn. To ignore it is to potentially miss effective
ways to assess adult learning.
Web 2.0 tools can be used just as effectively
in an online course as they can in a course con-
ducted in a brick and mortar classroom. Their use
online is readily apparent as they are already in
the digital domain and the ability to create col-
laborative products without the students having
to be connected in time and space provides a
broader spectrum of assessment methods to the
684
educator. Some instructors are choosing to use an
open platform such as Wikispaces or PBWorks
for the course content rather than a closed system
such as Blackboard or Moodle. This approach
to an open forum for the course in a media rich
environment, with embedded videos and pictures,
will change some of the old assessment strategies.
Prior to incorporating these tools into courses,
instructors will need to become comfortable using
them. When assessing learning, instructors need
to make sure they do not just assess the Web 2.0
tools, but the academic activity. Individual as-
sessment and learning outcomes have been the
hallmark of education. With the new Web 2.0
tools, instructors and programs must define how
they will assess collaborative work, while not
losing the individual’s contributions.
A final future trend that will require extensive
research is one that is always with us. We have
become more aware of generational differences
over the past few decades. It is possible we have
always seen the differences and we have just
recently begun to describe them out loud and
define generations by their differences. The Gen
Xers and Millenials will one day be the adult
learners that the education community is trying
to aid in their meaning-making. How will their
generational differences change what we now
believe to be true about adult learners? How will
it change the methods by which we assess their
mastery of learning outcomes and their ability to
transfer learning to new and unique contexts. If
we are accurate as to the importance of context
and experience in adult learning, the professional
will have to remain cognizant of how that context
and experience change as new generations become
the dominant species of adult learners.
CONCLUSION
As mentioned earlier, assessment of adult student
learning is an important and controversial part of
the adult education field. Significant research has
Principles of Student Assessment in Adult Education
been done in this area and much more is to come
as the adult education community strives to find
the best way to use the positives of assessment and
mute the negatives. While many in the teaching
community see assessment as an infringement on
their academic freedom, many others see it as a
way to improve the educational product that they
have to offer to students. Very few educators are
against improving their programs and if they can
be shown how the assessment of adult learning can
be used to accomplish that end, they will become
converts. It is this part of assessment that is the
easiest to sell in the traditional and non-traditional
environments of adult education. The harder sell,
though equally as important in adult education,
is the need to assess for accountability. A much
greater percentage of adult programs contain
some non-traditional elements such as accelerated
programs or intensive schedules or asynchronous
online learning. All of these elements have detrac-
tors in the traditional educational world that holds
so much sway with the accrediting bodies in the
U.S. High quality program assessment, utilizing
an appropriate mix of well planned and executed
direct and indirect assessments, is the best way
to meet the accountability standards of those
detractors (Walvoord, 2003). If adult programs
can show that their students meet the identified
learning outcomes at levels equivalent to students
in traditional programs, then they will have shown
that their methodology for adult learning meets
the standards set. We owe it to our students to
embark on a program of assessment that will aid
them in the improvement of their learning, aid us
in the improvement of our programs, and provide
the evidence necessary to meet the accountability
demanded by those bodies identified by Caffarella
(2002).
REFERENCES
Angelo, T. A., & Cross, K. P. (1993). Classroom
assessment techniques: A handbook for college
teachers (2nd ed.). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Caffarella, R. S. (2002). Planning programs for
adult learners (2nd ed.). San Francisco, CA: John
Wiley & Sons.
Cross, K. P. (1998) Classroom research: Imple-
menting the scholarship of teaching. In T. Angelo
(Ed.), Classroom assessment and research: An
update on uses, approaches, and research find-
ings (pp. 5-12). New Directions for Teaching and
Learning, 75. San Francisco: Jossey Bass.
Dirkx, J. M. (Ed.). (2008). Adult learning and
the emotional self. New Directions for Adult
and Continuing Education, 120. San Francisco:
Jossey Bass.
Ecclestone, K. (1999). Empowering or ensnaring?
The implications of outcome-based assessment
in higher learning. Higher Education Quarterly,
53(1), 29–48. doi:10.1111/1468-2273.00111
Investors in education stocks stricken with fear
after major accrediting body comes under attack
(CECO, APOL, DV, BPI). (n.d.). Retrieved 19
December 2009, from http://www.streetinsider.
com/Insiders+Blog/Investors+In+Education+St
ocks+Stricken+With+Fear+After+Major+Accre
diting+Body+Comes+Under+Attack+(CECO,+
APOL,+DV,+BPI)/5196076.html.
Kasworm, C. E., & Marienau, C. A. (1997) Prin-
ciples for assessment of adult learning. In A. Rose
& M. Leahy (Eds), Assessing adult Learning in
diverse settings (pp. 5-16). New Directions for
Adult and Continuing Education, 75. San Fran-
cisco: Jossey Bass.
Kurz, L., & Banta, T. W. (2004). Decoding the
assessment of student learning. In D. Pace & J.
Middendorf (Eds.), Decoding the disciplines:
Helping students learn disciplinary ways of think-
ing (pp. 85-94). New Directions for Teaching and
Learning, 98. San Francisco: Jossey Bass.
Maki, P. L. (2004). Assessing for Learning: Build-
ing a sustainable commitment across the institu-
tion. Sterling, VA: Stylus Publishing.
685
 Principles of Student Assessment in Adult Education
Martin, J. B., & Collins, R. A. (2009). Formative
and summative evaluation in the assessment of
adult learning . In Wang, V. (Ed.), Assessing and
evaluating adult learning in career and technical
education (pp. 153–171). Hangzhou, China &
Hershey, PA: ZUP and IGI Global.
Merriam, S., Caffarella, R., & Baumgartner, L.
(2007). Learning in adulthood (3rd ed.). San
Francisco: Jossey Bass.
Richardson, W. (2009). Blogs, wikis, podcasts,
and other powerful web tools for classrooms (2nd
ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
Suskie, L. (2009). Assessing student learning: A
common sense guide. San Francisco: Jossey Bass.
Vossen, G., & Hagemann, S. (2007). Unleashing
Web 2.0 from concepts to creativity. Burlington,
MA: Morgan Kaufmann Publishers.
Walvoord, B. E. (2003). Assessment in acceler-
ated learning programs: A practical guide. In
R.Wlodkowski & C. Kasworm (Eds.), Accelerated
learning for adults: The promise and practice of
intensive educational formats (pp. 39-50). New
Directions for Adult and Continuing Education,
97. San Francisco: Jossey Bass.
Walvoord, B. E. (2004). Assessment clear and
simple: A practical guide for institutions, depart-
ments, and general education. San Francisco:
Jossey Bass.
Walvoord, B. E., & Anderson, V. A. (2010). Effec-
tive grading: A tool for learning and assessment
in college (2nd ed.). San Francisco: Jossey Bass.
686
Wlodkowski, R. J., & Kasworm, C. E. (Eds.).
(2003). Accelerated learning for adults: The
promise and practice of intensive educational
formats. New Directions for Adult and Continu-
ing Education, 97. San Francisco: Jossey Bass.
KEY TERMS AND DEFINITIONS
Direct Assessment: An assessment of a stu-
dent’s demonstrated ability to perform specific
tasks or relate material in an acceptable manner
compared to learning outcomes.
Formative Assessment: An assessment that is
used to create change or improvement in whatever
process was evaluated.
Indirect Assessment: An assessment which
does not directly measure a student’s ability to
perform, but gathers data from other sources to
determine how well the outcomes of a course or
program were achieved.
Learning Outcome: A statement of what a
learner can be expected to know, understand and/
or do as a result of a learning experience.
Outcomes-Based Education: The idea of bas-
ing curriculum and teaching methods on desired
educational or behavioral outcomes.
Programmatic Assessment: An assessment
that is focused on learning outcomes which are
identified for an entire program, not merely a
course or module.
Summative Assessment: An assessment that
is used for the broader purpose of examining the
entire program and determining its relative merits
and future.
 687

Chapter 41
Gaming in Adult Education
Lesley S. J. Farmer
California State University, Long Beach, USA

ABSTRACT
Egames have drawn attention in adult education, particularly as the majority of adults play egames.
Adult education is increasingly incorporating serious games, mainly simulation games, but other forms
such as RPGs are being considered. In addition, adult education is also incorporating game design into
curricula. In terms of learning theory, gaming as a learning mechanism is usually associated with activ-
ity theory. Many commercial off-the-shelf (COTS) game combine solid content and concept along with
good game play that engages adult learners. The gaming industry has increased focus on developing
games for mobile instruments, mainly smart phones. Specific applications of egames for engineering
education are discussed. Recreational aspects of gaming impact educational us of egames. Future trends
of adult education use of egames are noted: platform, workplace gaming, and industry development.

INTRODUCTION olson, 2007). Not every institution is jumping on

Gaming in adult education? Be it board games or
computer games, such activities have drawn atten-
tion in the professional field. Where educational
settings used to ban any games on the Internet
and eschewed collecting game guidebooks, edu-
cators are now reconsidering their policies, and
locating core gaming collection lists to help them
purchase viable titles and even equipment (Nich-
DOI: 10.4018/978-1-61692-906-0.ch041
the band wagon, but the adult education world is
certainly talking about gaming.
Of particular interest now are egames: video,
console, and computer games. For this reason,
the term “egaming” will be used to differentiate
these electronic forms of games from their more
traditional print counterparts. While egames
technically predated Web 2.0, the convergence
of Internet interactivity and increasingly popular
MMORPGs (Massively Multiplayer Online Role
Playing Games) has led to an almost inevitable

consideration by adult educators. Rather than
fight the technological flood, educators are trying
to figure out ways to embrace the phenomenon.
Specifically, education is increasingly incorpo-
rating serious games; that is, games that are not
developed with the sole intent of entertainment,
but also have educational or other communica-
tion objectives. Most adult education effort has
been made in the area of simulation games, but
other forms such as RPGs (which in themselves
can assume a simulation model) are also being
considered. In addition, adult education is also
incorporating game design into curricula.
BACKGROUND
As noted above, egaming includes a variety of
digital formats: video, console, portable game
devices, cell phone, and computer-based. Ad-
ditionally, several genres of games exist. In their
study of teen gaming, Pew Internet & American
Life Project (2008) classified fourteen genres that
teens play in order of preference: racing, puzzle,
sports, action, adventure, rhythm, strategy, simula-
tion, fighting, first-person shooting, role-playing,
survival horror, MMOG (massively multiplayer
online game), and virtual worlds.
GAMER CHARACTERISTICS
At this point, egames have substantially penetrated
U. S. households. For console games alone, 71
percent of households with boys or girls owned
video consoles, and 80 percent of households
with teenagers owned consoles (Neilsen, 2007).
The majority of adults play video and computer
games, and about a fifth of them play daily, usu-
ally on computers, according to a 2008 study
(Lenhart, Jones, & Macgill, 2008). The researchers
also found that gaming decreases with age (the
average age of the RPG player is 26 years old),
but senior citizen gamers play the most often
688
Gaming in Adult Education
because they have more free time. About 55
percent of gamers are male, and the percentage
of urban players slightly outnumbers suburban
and rural players. Gamers generally have more
education and are more likely to be parents, but
no significant difference was found for ethnicity
or socio-economic status.
Today’s college student is likely to have played
computer and video games, and increasingly
role-playing games (RPG). According to the Pew
Internet and American Life Project survey (Jones,
2003), these games have become an integral part
of college daily life. One-fifth of those surveyed
stated that gaming helped students make and
keep friends, and that it comprises part of a larger
multitasking environment. These students see
gaming as a break from studying, another form
of entertainment. These students are also seeking
college majors in gaming so they can get paid
for what they like to do recreationally (Farmer,
2005). Increasingly, universities are offering such
programs, particularly in light of industry demand
for such trained employees.
In educational settings where games are in-
tegrated, males may have an unfair advantage
in since they are more likely to have practiced
with them outside of school, thus feeling more
comfortable with the technical requirements of
the game. In a 2003 study, the National School
Boards Foundation found that boys tend to use
computers mainly for entertainment, while girls
tend to use computers more for education and
communication. In addition, girls tend to dislike
RPGs because of the violence that often occurs
in them. Also, girls prefer open-ended computer
venues, such as instant messaging (IM) and au-
thoring tools (American Association of University
Women. 2000). These trends in youth usage lay the
groundwork for adult gaming behavior, so adult
educators need to consider these realities as they
design learning activities that incorporate gaming.
Gaming in Adult Education
BENEFITS OF EGAMING
Certainly, egames attract and engage learners,
sometimes even to the detriment of academics.
On the other hand, egames reflect 21st century
literacy skills: information literacy, multimedia
manipulation, creative problem solving, collabora-
tion, and effective communication (Armstrong &
Warlick, 2004; Gee 2007). Even though egames
may be considered a male’s bastion, the learning
principles behind egaming speak to females’ ways
of learning: interactivity, contextualized meaning,
incorporation of relationships, emotional engage-
ment, and communication (Miller, 1976).
In terms of learning theory, gaming as a learn-
ing mechanism is usually associated with activity
theory. The basis of activity theory posits a relation-
ship between a subject (person) and an object, with
mediational means. Tools also mediate between
the individual and the larger culture. Vygotsky
and Luria (1994) focused on analyzing tasks that
required the use of a goal-directed, mediated/cul-
tural process. Leontev (1978) viewed activity on
three levels: the activity itself, the level of actions,
and operations (which tended to be “automatic” or
fluent). Engestrom (1987) expanded this model to
acknowledge the collective nature of human activ-
ity. Good game designers follow Vygotsky’s zone
of proximal development: providing a challenge
(not just routine operations) that can feasibly be
met (this is., the outcome is doable); designers of
games that build on community set up the condi-
tions such that the player needs to work with the
community effectively in order for the outcome
to be achieved. With its emphasis on persistence
and community interactivity, the activity theory
aspects of gaming align well with female ways
of learning (Miller, 1976).
Other learning theories that apply to gaming
follow:
•
Social constructivist philosophy posits that
environments that stimulate the senses (e.g., at-
tractive visuals, unexpected features), encourage
interaction (e.g., common spaces), and provide
opportunities for practice (e.g., group raids) im-
prove learning (Piaget, 1977).
•
Situated learning theory asserts that learning oc-
curs in a community of practice, and that learning
space can refer to both physical places and the
learner’s mental constructs of their experiences
within the social environment (Lave & Wenger,
1991).
•
Kolb’s related experiential learning theory (2005)
contends that learners navigates through – and
interacts with -- a learning space, based on their
position within the learning cycle (i.e., experienc-
ing, reflecting, thinking, acting). Kolb also asserts
that different academic fields interact with the
environment differently (e.g., science labs ver-
sus philosophical discourse), which matches the
learning style preferences of different individuals.
Therefore, to improve learning, teachers should
examine the learning space in order to optimize
learners’ interaction with that space: in terms of
the affective, perceptual, cognitive and behav-
ioral aspects of learning.In sum, games offer a
rich learning environment in which to explore
and achieve specific goals (Myers, 2008). The
following activity theory-based characteristics of
gaming inform teaching and learning:
•
use of fixed, equitable rules
•
clear roles and expectations
•
internally-consistent environment where
everything is possible
•
clear goals within a rich context that gives
goals personal meaning and relevance
•
opportunities to explore identities
•
cognitive and affective engagement
•
(usually) multiple ways to achieve them
through constructivist strategies
•
specific, timely feedback
•
sense of control and personal investment
•
situated learning
•
sense of reward for effort, including trial
and error
689

•
structured interaction between players, and
between players and the game
•
blend of cooperation and competition
(DeKanter, 2005; Deubel, 2006; Gee, 2007;
Lee & Young, 2008; Simpson, 2005; Squire,
2006)
EGAMES AND ADULT INSTRUCTION
As with other tools, egames in themselves will
not guarantee effective learning. Egaming, specifi-
cally game simulations, incorporate gaming design
into the knowledge building process rather than
simply providing a way to organize information
(Halverson, 2005). While this kind of structural
interactivity can resonate for adult learning, gam-
ing may be intimidating to teachers who must over-
come a “certain fear factor” in order to embrace
video games in the classroom (DeKanter, 2005).
Squire (2006) showed that many students find
games more difficult than school; contemporary
pedagogical practice creates “learned helpless-
ness” by providing students with short, solvable
problems with all information laid out, although
this approach reflects andragogy principles. Game-
based learning begins with failure; students must
build skills and knowledge over time by accessing
new information, evaluating circumstances, and
through practice (Gee, 2007; Squire, 2006).
However, when educators incorporate egames
effectively into the curriculum, the academic re-
sults can be significant. Charsky and Mims (2008)
encourage educators to integrate commercial
off-the-shelf (COTS) games into teaching and
learning, but caution that intentional planning is
required. Educators need to try a few egames in or-
der to understand some of the underlying principles
of egaming techniques, which largely embody
activity theory (Engestrom, 1987; Leontev, 78;
Vygotzky & Luria, 1994). As a result, instruction
can incorporate some of these principles, even
without using egames themselves:
690
Gaming in Adult Education
• providing student choice (which topic to
study)
• offering opportunities for low-pressure
situations
• emphasizing the importance of memorizing
and mastering basics of a concept before
applying the knowledge
• collaborative work
• providing extra help for struggling students
• providing extension activities for students
who excel
• evaluate effort rather than product
• using alternative and authentic assessments
– designing demo games, tests based on
mastery levels (not everyone takes the same
tests) (Shaffer, 2006)
Egames require the use of learning tools, col-
laboration, and trial and error (Simpson, 2005;
Squire & Jenkins, 2003; Gee, 2007) as well as
promoting constructivist learning environments
(DeKanter, 2005). Egames provide contexts for
peer-to-peer teaching and emergence of learning
communities (Squire & Jenkins, 2003); students
consult peers and guides (print and non-print) to
help them be successful in their gaming efforts.
Nicholson (2008) noted that games promote
critical thinking skills, logic, and planning. Gee
points out that players start to overtly realize that
their choices in their gaming reflect their behav-
iors in real life, and they begin reflecting on and
questioning those real life choices (Gee, 2007).
Several academic “pay offs” result from incor-
porating egames into the curriculum. As early as
1982, meta-analyses of studies have demonstrated
the effectiveness of games in learning, not only
because of the game content, but also because of
the individuals’ actions while playing the game
(Hays, 2005; Randel, Morris, Wetzel, & Whithill,
1992; Szczurek, 1982; Van Eck, 2006). In terms
of academic success, egames can introduce stu-
dents to technology through motivating activities,
a practice that could significantly help females
overcome their anxiety about technology (Bros-
Gaming in Adult Education
nan, 1998). Foster (2008) asserted that gaming can
develop individual interest in science as players
experience the relevance of scientific concepts and
applications More specifically, one predictor of
success in computer science was computer gam-
ing because of its relationship with programming
(Wilson, 2002). In a University of Central Florida
study, using immersive education video games for
mathematics improved students understand and
rose scores significantly in district mathemat-
ics benchmark exams (Kebritchi, 2008). Expert
panelists at a webinar on gaming in education as-
serted that egames keep youth actively engaged in
learning, and provide an outlet for self-expression,
decision-making and experience in social interac-
tion (Consortium for School Networking, 2008).
Social gaming leads to positive identity assets:
self-esteem, self-employment, personal sense of
purpose, and personal positive future orientation
(Helmrich & Neiberger, 2007).
Instruction can intersect with egaming in a
couple of ways: 1) linking personal egaming
interest and skill to academics; 2) incorporating
egames in learning activities; and 3) using egam-
ing elements in instruction. When serious games
are incorporated into the curriculum, the teacher
needs to consider gaming elements throughout
the instructional design process:
• evaluating, selecting and testing appropri-
ate games to meet specific student learning
outcomes
• addressing technical issues associated
with the game (e.g., installation, licensing,
networking)
• determining and addressing pre-requisite
skills students need to use the game
successfully
• determining when and where students will
play the game
• developing learning activities that link with
the game (e.g., assuming roles, journaling
game play, researching the game content
context)
• assessing student learning in consort with
gaming (Van Eck, 2008)
CHOOSING GAMES
Nicholson (2008) notes that educators may need
guidance (and perhaps the guidance of students) to
select games that will lead to a successful learning
activity. Some games are for enjoyment alone,
which is fine, but educators are more likely to
invest time and money in serious games to support
curriculum. Fortunately, many commercial off-
the-shelf (COTS) game satisfy that requirement;
these games usually have better game play so they
will motivate students to try them. As mentioned
already, how the game is incorporated into the
curriculum impacts the student as much as the
game itself. Nevertheless, the learning experience
has to start with a high-quality and interactive fun
game, so selection is of paramount importance.
Particularly for females, the egaming protocols
need to be easy and intuitive so that the focus is
on the content rather than on navigation through
a virtual space. Several good bibliographies serve
as starting points for selecting games, although
few lists focus on adult education:
•
http://gaming.ala.org/resources/index.
php?title=Main_Page
•
http://www.socialimpactgames.com
•
http://www.supersmartgames.com/
•
http://www.mediafamily.org/re-
search/2008_video_game_report_card.pdf
•
http://edugamesblog.word-
press.com/2007/12/15/
the-top-10-free-educational-video-games/
•
http://seriousgames.ning.com/
The following egames tend to be gender-
neutral and gender-inclusive. Several games ad-
dress science concepts, and the National Science
Foundation continues to support development in
this area; representative games include Power Up
(TryScience), Nanoquest (Forfas), and Logicity
691

(Logicom). A couple of recent educational multi-
user virtual learning environments, River City
Project (http://muve.gse.harvard.edu/riversity-
project/) and Dimension M (http://tabuladigita.
com), offer ways for students to investigate au-
thentic problems and learn academic concepts
constructively. Simulation games such as Quest
Atlantis (Activeworlds), Cool School (Curriki),
and SimCity (Electronic Arts) help students prac-
tice decision-making skills.
Simulations are very popular in adult educa-
tion because they offer realistic yet safe situated
learning. Learners can explore alternative actions
safely, and learn key concepts and skills along the
way. Basically, a simulation models a process,
hopefully keeping the critical features. Simula-
tions enable learners to practice skills without
dealing with the real-life consequences that
would ensue if dealing with the actual situation,
such as simulations of piloting or surgery. While
simulations do not require technology, such as
role-playing a business interaction, technology
facilitates interaction with a model’s functions,
such as dissecting a frog. Simulations and egames
overlap significantly although simulations do
not have to be games. However, simulations
such as SimCity are games in that they include
goals, rules, consequences (including rewards),
internal consistency, and some manner of luck.
Many COTS games have a simulation format, and
can be integrated in adult education curriculum:
flight simulators, economic situations, and medi-
cal simulations (such as Atlus’s Trauma Center).
Teachers usually do not have the luxury of
spending several periods over a week or more on
an extensive game. However, casual games such
as word games or reference-related games might
be successfully incorporated into a learning activ-
ity. Moreover, the elements of gaming—such as
exploratory activity, collaborating with peers, and
situated learning—can contribute to instruction.
Casual games constitute a special subdivision of
egames, which has attracted great attention and use
by females, according to the International Game
692
Gaming in Adult Education
Development Association (2008). This niche in-
dustry has grown from $25 million in 2002 to a
$2.25 billion in 2008, particularly with advances
in cell phone technology. The gaming industry has
increased focus on developing games for mobile
instruments, mainly smart phones. The phone
platform has dictated the egame characteristics:
constrained and low-resolution graphics, minimal
text, easy to learn and basic controls, little set-up,
and consumable in a short time period. Because of
these limitations, the games themselves have to be
interesting enough to foster repeat play; gameplay
(repeatability of the experience) has regained
dominance. Casual games are used to relax, social-
ize, or achieve goals or challenges, and are seldom
violent. The industry categorizes casual games into
these genres: hidden object games (HOG), time
management (e.g., Playfirst’s Diner Dash), and
adventure. In general, industry has targeted these
mobile games to casual gamers, a much greater
population than serious gamers, and a genre in
which females make up three-quarters of the user
population (Pinckard, 2007). Regardless of game
choice, when students are exposed to a variety
of games in coed settings, they can broaden their
gaming preferences and improve their attitudes
toward technology as a whole. Fortunately, the
gaming gender gap is closing; instead, educators
can focus on gender-specific aspects of egames,
either selecting games that either appeal to both
sexes, or provide choices of games that speak to
individual interests and needs.
Educators might also consider acquiring game-
creation application software in order to foster
critical thinking. When students create their own
egames, they ramp up their own skill set, draw-
ing upon their knowledge of egaming protocols
and applying them to new settings. Particularly
since girls tend to like to work collaboratively
on a concrete project, egame construction can
be a productive and fulfilling activity. With the
expansion of mobile gaming, apps for creating
even more m-games are starting to appear.
Gaming in Adult Education
ENGINEERING EDUCATION:
EXEMPLIFYING THE
INCORPORATION OF EGAMING
While face-to-face instruction remains as an
effective way to learn, providing other learning
environments offers meaningful supplemental op-
portunities. One trend in mechanical engineering
education is to use simulation and visualization in
gaming formats to enhance the students’ under-
standing of fundamental topics such as dynamics
(Vikas, Romanello, & Gramoll, 2000), robotics
(Robinette & Manseur 2001), machine design
(Dennis & Jensen, 2003), and control (Rodriguez,
Metzger, Cifdaloz, & Dhirasakdanon, 2005). The
improvements in hardware and software today
make it possible to do extremely realistic simula-
tions of engineering phenomena.
In investigating effective and engaging ways
to teach engineering concepts and enable students
to practice engineering skills, a literature review
of pertinent research and best practice reveals
factors that support the use of visual simula-
tion games and offer ways to optimize their use
through co-constructed meaning and application.
When educators incorporate visual simulations of
real-life scenarios into their classroom activities,
students participate more and have a more satisfy-
ing learning experience (Duran, Gallardo, Toral,
Martínez-Torres, & Barrero, 2007). Old Dominion
undergraduate engineering students who used
visual simulations performed better in tests and
lab experiments than did their control counterparts
(Ndahi, Charturvedi, Akan, & Pickering, 2008).
Several student populations gain benefit from
using visual learning objects, such as simulations:
Millennial students, visual learners, kinesthetic
learners, self-paced learners, and learners with
other responsibilities that threaten their class
attendance. For instance, students can repeat
experiments independently until they under-
stand the concepts. Providing learning resources
online creates an environment that facilitates a
learner-centered approach, with the learner as an
active participant in the process (Anwar, Rolle,
& Memon, 2005). Similarly, studies have shown
that today’s students are more attuned to computer
and video technologies and are likely to learn
better if they are provided with computer-based
modules (Kurtis, 2003).
Interactive Aspects of
Visual EGames
Interactive gaming elements of visual aids offer
an additional dimension for learning. Interactive
engagement enables students to test dynamic
parametric-driven calculations. Mathematical
Markup Language (MathML) permits equations
in the learning materials to be incorporated into
mathematical software tools for algebraic ma-
nipulation or numerical computation. Mississippi
State University engineering students who used
such interactive tools were more motivated and
performed better than those who did not use them
(Humar, Sinigoj, Bešter, & Hagler, 2005). Interac-
tive tools can also facilitate team collaboration and
connections with professional experts (Kecojevic,
Bise, & Haight, 2005). For example, in studying the
electric machine, a three-dimensional, animated
model can help the student visualize its inner work-
ings, while the ability to interactively assemble
and disassemble the machine can help in the
understanding of the function of each component
and how they work together to form the complete
apparatus (Ma, Liu, Chen, Zhang, & Luo, 2001).
For areas that are mathematically intensive, such
as signal processing and communication, egam-
ing simulations can be used to make learning of
the concepts easier, enabling students to explore
interactively and help them visualize immediately
the results of the mathematical manipulations.
The field of construction engineering lends
itself naturally to interactive 2D and 3D modeling.
Li and Love (1998) developed a virtual reality tool
that simulates tower crane and slipform operations;
upon evaluating the impact of the developed tool
on the performance of students, a noticeable im-
693

provement was observed. Particularly in schools
that do not have certain specialized equipment
or facilities where specific types of experiments
cannot be done safely, visual simulations allow stu-
dents to experience these instruments. Virtual and
remote-accessed labs allow students to perform
experiments while the concepts are still fresh in
their minds, without leaving the classroom. While
these tools enhance the visualization capability
of students, they require extensive computer
knowledge to operate. A user-friendly interface
that does not assume prior computer knowledge
of students not only attracts more users, but also
assists in simulating various scenarios easily.
Visual Learning Aids Features
To accommodate different learning styles, visual
models need to have both intuitive and interac-
tive features. Models should enable the user to
interact with the model in a sequential manner,
and also provide a context for the model (Graf &
Lin, 2008). A good example of a visual simula-
tion that incorporates these features is job shop
scheduling; students can manipulate the various
jobs and machines given in the problem to help
them evaluate the performance of the system
(for example, average waiting time of jobs and
average idle time for each machine) (Tavakkoli-
Moghaddam & Daneshmand-Mehr, 2005).
Simulation games can vary in the amount of
flexibility and customizability. Some programs
have hard-wired structures; students can still make
decisions, which will alter the sequence of their
interaction with the program, but all the branched
consequences have been pre-scripted. On the other
hand, stimulant mode programs with animated
building blocks offer more open-ended learning
environments. The down side to this approach
is that feedback is largely phenomenon-based;
few formal summations can be incorporated so
that students may have to depend on their own
inductive logic to make valid generalizations.
At the least, dynamic simulation games should
694
Gaming in Adult Education
include data gathering/display/save options so
students can act least record the results of their
virtual experiments for subsequent analysis (Ro-
driguez, Metzger, Cifdaloz, Dhirasakdanon, &
Welfert, 2005).
Other critical features of effective interactive
games include authentic contexts, supporting col-
laborative knowledge construction, thinking made
visible with dynamic visualization, quick access
to content resources via information and com-
munication technologies, and flexible support by
tele-tutoring (Fischer, Troendle, & Mandl, 2003).
Interactive 3D environments are particularly
effective for investigating time-varying feature
modifications and coupling between multiple
modes of movement (Hutchinson, Kuester, Hsieh,
& Chadwick, 2005). Nevertheless, immersive en-
vironments are not required for spatial memories
and their transformation; visual environments are
sufficient. It should be noted that females may
have a more difficult time with spatial orientation
than males, but that provisions can be made in
visual simulations to help them orient themselves
(Richardson, 2005).
With federal standards relative to the Ameri-
cans with Disabilities Act (ADA), simulations
need to be designed for inclusive work. Fortunate-
ly, universal design principles are being applied
to these interactive applications, including educa-
tion games (Savidis, Grammenos, & Stephanidis,
2006). Digital simulations also address equity
issues for distance learners (Michau, Genti, &
Barrault, 2001).
Scaffolding Learning
Egames can provide rich learning environments,
particularly when they are designed to scaffold
and support learning based on the users’ perfor-
mance. Diagnostic-based feedback is particularly
useful. Specifically, when a student’s response to
a prompt activates a diagnostic feedback, be it a
“clue” to the right answer or an additional module
to do, then more clinically-based learning can
Gaming in Adult Education
occur (Jia-sheng, Jyh-cheng, Shao-chun, Li, &
Maiga, 2008). At beginning stages, simulations
of complex operations can simplify the informa-
tion or omit possibly distracting data so that the
learner can concentrate on the critical features of
the procedure; this approach prevents cognitive
overload. In an experiment using a low-fidelity
flight simulation task, students who mastered the
simulation were able to recall needed data during
an actual flight than did their peers who did not
use the simulation (Waldron, Patrick, Morgan,
& King, 2007).
At different stages in the students’ learning,
different types of visual tools should be con-
sidered. For example, at the instructional stage,
simulations can be more structured in order to
check for understanding throughout the module.
When students progress to the analysis and ap-
plication stage, they welcome more unstructured
environments where they can script their own
engineering experiments, and control their own
learning more (Uran & Jezernik, 2008). Addition-
ally, visual simulations offer opportunities for
quick prototyping and data checking (Alemzadeh
& Burgess, 2005). Indeed, the use of interactive
visual simulations help students experience open-
ended situations with multiple solutions; in using
online interactive laboratory software, engineering
students at Arizona State University were more
motivated to use scientific inquiry methods and
sought additional information beyond coursework
(Spanias & Atti, 2005).
Developing Egames
One of the limitations of gaming software is its
proprietary or limited portability. The development
of the interface protocol on top of the content
development not only demands more time but
makes if harder for students to use a variety of
simulation games. Additionally, females are less
likely to persist in figuring out control or navi-
gation tools; if the manipulation effort does not
result in significant content learning, females are
apt to walk away from the simulation. Therefore,
such tools need to be simple and intuitive, and not
distract the user from the content to be learned
(Cassell & Jenkins, 1999). Fortunately, the federal
government has supported the development of
an open source gaming engine, Delta3D, which
can be used with a variety of existing commer-
cial applications and content matter to offer a
consistent, workable interface. This software
will include data collection features that can
measure student progress (Macedonia, Darken,
McDowell, & Johnson, 2005). Moreover, gaming
engines can facilitate students’ efforts to create
engineering-based games, which can showcase
their knowledge and be used in the community.
Particularly as students work with faculty and
community experts to learn core engineering
concepts through visual simulation games, test
those concepts in the real world, and then apply
their academic and field experience to develop
their own engineering games, students can learn
deeply and contextually.
RECREATIONAL EGAMING IMPACT
Egames in education continues to incite contro-
versy, even in adult education. Most workplaces
ban games (Perkins, 2009), and adult gamers tend
to play to escape the everyday world rather than
to learn formally. Role-playing games, a popular
pastime among adults, exemplifies this issue.
Males have also dominated the egaming world,
provoking distaste or avoidance by females. In
the best case scenario of gender-neutral serious
games, females may be disadvantaged because
of less prior gaming experience. Examining
these issues enables adult educators to consider
people’s attitudes about gaming when selecting
and incorporating such tools into the curriculum.
695

RPGs
As video gaming, particularly role-playing game
(RPG), have gained notice in the educational
arena, the issue of developing and integrating
video games into the curriculum has gained cred-
ibility. This medium actively engages students,
it provides both textual and visual cues, it often
requires collaboration in order to accomplish a
task, it often demands clear communication, it
can facilitates problem-solving skills, it provides
immediate feedback, and it fosters attention to
detail (Gros, 2003). On the other hand, existing
games seldom support the curriculum and content
standards, and many involve violence.
A Brief Background on
Role-Playing Gaming
Certainly, war games and role-playing reenact-
ments predate the 20th century phenomenon of
gaming. However, it was about thirty years ago
that fantasy role-playing games became popular.
Remember Dungeons and Dragons? This seminal
role-playing game was a paper-and-pencil fantasy
game developed in the 1970s that used print pam-
phlets to guide the actions. It sparked a plethora
of print-based RPGs; Lord of the Rings and Star
Wars helped mainstream this gaming world. In
the 1990s, card-based role-playing games, such
as Magic, took over much of the action.
Concurrently, in 1979, the game Adventure was
developed for FORTRAN enthusiasts. Almost at
the same time, MUDs (multi-user domains) were
created, which enabled players to interact with
existing objects and locations in a closed envi-
ronment. MOOs (MUD object-oriented), on the
other hand, allowed players to create their own
worlds – and interact across computer platforms.
At the start, MUDs and MOOs existed in textual
contexts, like their print counterparts, but when
graphic interfaces were created in web-based
environments, these RPGs approximated three-
dimensional landscapes. As more players have
696
Gaming in Adult Education
gained access to broadband width, the combina-
tion of sophisticated graphics and storage space
has led to MMORPGs (Massively Multiplayer
Online Role-Playing Games) such as EverQuest
and WarCraft, which can support 100,000 gam-
ers simultaneously (Haynes & Holmevik, 2001).
RPGs attract players for several reasons: they
allow players to try out different personas, each
of which has clear rules and powers; they provide
opportunities for players to stand out based on their
use of their assigned abilities; they foster social
interaction, collaboration and competition; they
reward persistence, and they enable players to take
risks – including doing socially unacceptable ac-
tions such as violence -- without serious real-life
consequences (Simpson, 2005; TappedIn, 2005).
Gamer Attitudes about
Educational RPGs
Do today’s Millennaiel gamers know about these
options? Yes. Are they ready to embrace educa-
tional role-playing games? Not necessarily. To
get a reality check on young adult perspectives
on RPGs, particularly males, Farmer (2005) inter-
viewed a group of college freshmen who regularly
spend twenty hours weekly playing RPGs, and
conducted a national online discussion with male
and female college students and recent graduates.
All of these gamers began playing these types of
games in middle school, and some were majoring
in computer science, graphics design, and mul-
timedia; a couple are focusing on K-12 teaching
careers. Additionally, they had all experienced
U. S. K-12 education at the same time that they
had played RPGs.
What was their main opinion on both RPGs
and education? They appreciated the control
they experienced in RPGs and college, which
they found limited in K-12 education and educa-
tional software that purported to be role-playing
in nature. They also preferred interaction with
other players, which they seldom experienced in
typical educational software. While they thought
Gaming in Adult Education
that RPGs inherently included educational aspects
such as communication, collaboration, critical
thinking, problem-solving, and technical skills,
they did not perceive the outcome of the RPG to
be educational per se.
When asked about playing a RPG based on his-
tory, some thought they would feel constrained by
the reality-bound constraints of any characters or
roles featured in such types of RPGs. The majority,
however, thought that historically-based environ-
ments, particularly the middle ages because it most
resembled fantasy worlds, could be engaging if the
setting were complex and if they could assume the
role of generic characters rather than one specific
personage (e.g., Charlesmange) so that they could
attempt to excel. The manipulation of the objects
was a challenging and satisfying experience. In
general, they preferred a game environment that
felt open-ended and provided for opportunities
for cooperation, competition, and mastery (which
factors are advocated by several educators for
powerful learning experiences; i.e., Kafai and
Resnick, 1996; Jones, 1998; Gros, 2003).
Interestingly, the group assumed that RPGs
would be played on their own time as homework in
K-12 educational settings. They also asserted that
they would probably “goof off” while playing such
games at home because of their pre-established
attitude towards RPGs. Thus, to take such games
seriously, the gamers implied that the teacher
would need to supervise such play. However, they
also thought that the time needed to play a complex
game in school would take away time from “seri-
ous instruction.” In fact, one gamer felt that the
“educational canon” was being sacrificed in favor
of more project-based, constructivist approaches.
It was obvious that they either did not think that
the teacher would debrief students adequately to
check for understanding, or they thought that the
RPG task would not be as an efficient way to learn
in comparison to discussing readings.
In short, the active gamers preferred keep-
ing their RPG gamer “identities” separate from
their educational student “identities.” While the
interviewees did not object to the possibility of
classroom teachers giving credit for learning based
on leisure-time RPG experiences, they seemed
to feel uncomfortable about teachers usurping
the control of RPG experiences for educational
purposes, apparently needing to feel in control of
their gaming experience and gaming goal. Gam-
ers tended to see RPGs as a break from education
rather than an integral part of education, which
was also found to be the case in the Pew Internet
study (Jones, 2003).
Educational Experiences
with Role-Playing Games
Relatively few RPGs have been created specifi-
cally for schools. Real-time strategy games may
have the “look” of historical role-playing. Ages of
Empire and Civilizations, for example, enable the
player to command troops and otherwise direct
the course of history within the parameters set
forth by the software developer. Thus, one can
shape Caesar’s conquest of the ancient Western
world, contrary to what history textbooks say.
Emphasizing the role-playing aspect of RPGs is
the classic Oregon Trail, where students assume
a role in a westward bound wagon train, and
have to deal with adventures and setbacks along
the way. Tom Snyder’s titles often include role-
playing features. Other commercial software titles
with similar intents include Wrath of the Gods
and film-inspired Lord of the Rings, which stay
within literary frameworks. Leveraging student
interest in fantasy environments, Kadakia (2005)
had her students interact in Bethesda Softworks’
RPG program Morrowind to analyze moral
decision-making.
Mainstream RPGs usually exemplify Schaf-
fer’s framework of epistemic games (2005) in that
the players share deep knowledge in a specific
content or skill arena of mutual interest through
joint practice. Increasingly, educators have taken
a greater interest in RPGs as a means to provide
an interactive learning environment that encour-
697

ages collaborative constructions of knowledge.
Some of the programs used are listed in Education
Arcade (http://www. educationarcade.org) and
Birkbeck University of London (http://www.bbk.
ac.uk/ccs/elearn/Computer_games_list.htm). The
world’s first RGP-based online course, created in
2000, is found at http://www.bbk.ac.uk/ccs/elearn/
Computer_games_list.htm.
Still another approach to RPGs is the student
design of virtual worlds (Kafai, 1995). Hollywood
High typifies software that enables students to
choose settings, characters, actions, and captions.
The online programs Digital Films (http://www.
digitalfilms.com) and MOOSE Crossing offer a
free, if limited, version of this kind of open-ended
role-play constructivist learning. Neverwinter
Nights is an example of a commercial fantasy
world construction tool used by secondary school
students at Edinburgh City Council’s summer
holiday program (Robertson and Good, 2005) to
improve their narrative skills.
Gendered Egaming Practices
Gender differences in technology attitude and
behavior as a whole tend to emerge at puberty;
prior to that age, children of both sexes exhibit
similar play behaviors (Hackbarth, 2001). In her
synthesis of gender issues in gaming behaviors,
Agosto (2004) asserted that as girls enter adoles-
cence their egaming activity drops in frequency.
More specifically, Agosto found that teens start to
explore their sexual identity, and egaming connotes
masculinity, even in light of women gamers. The
culture of technology remains male-dominated
and mechanical (Graner Ray, 2004), so girls
try to distance themselves from that stereotype,
particularly since peer perception is so important
to them. According to Fromme (2003), another
reason that girls play egames less is because they
choose to spend their time in other ways, such as
reading. In addition, Fromme asserted that girls
tended to have more household responsibilities
than boys, and so had less time to play egames.
698
Gaming in Adult Education
In their study of teen gaming behaviors, Coo-
per and Weaver (2003) claimed that males and
females tended to master egames differently. The
researchers found that males were more likely
to ask peers for help and consult cheat sheets
and guides. In contrast, females tended to work
out problems independently or to ask a male for
help; rather than consult a manual, females will
reset the level or start the game over. Cooper and
Weaver (2003) also noted that in coed settings,
males outperformed females in playing egames,
but when physically separated, females did
equally well or better than females, particularly
if the game gave personalized textual feedback
(males, on the other hand, prefer icon-based help).
Interestingly, Hargittai and Shafer (2006) found
that females’ online skills equaled males, but that
the former under-estimated their expertise. Part
of the issue is based on attrition theory, according
to Cooper and Weaver (2003). The researchers
asserted that when females are successful with
computers, they tend to attribute that success to
the machine; when they are not successful, females
tend to blame themselves. In contrast, Cooper and
Weaver (2003) stated that males tended to praise
their own prowess when they are technologically
successful, and they blamed the computer when
unsuccessful.
Wang, Wu and Wang (2009) investigated the
factors leading to the acceptance of mobile learn-
ing by Taiwanese students. The strongest predictor
was performance expectancy, with males being
more self-confident. Interestingly, when females
thought they could self-manage their play, they
were more likely to use mobile applications; males
were more influenced by their peers in that if
the mobile application was not considered male-
appropriate, then they were less likely to use it.
In terms of the physical experience, males enjoy
mastering complex hand-eye coordination itself,
while females prefer to focus on concrete goals.
If the navigation protocols are difficult to figure
out or distract from achieving the goal, females
Gaming in Adult Education
are likely to walk away from the egame (Cooper
& Weaver, 2003).
Carr (2005) claimed that gendered behaviors
and attitudes about egames tend to be expressed
most strongly by non-users. Specifically, Carr
(2005) found that female would assert that egames
are a waste of time. When they first see an egame,
females may confuse the look of the game (the
quality of its graphics, for instance) and its play-
ability. Because they tend to take fewer risks than
males, females are more likely to give up on a
complicated game than their male counterparts;
furthermore, males are more likely to socially
value game play than females do (Carr, 2005).
On the other hand, Forssell (2008) observed that
when females find satisfaction accomplishing a
gaming goal, they will continue to game, just as
males do; however, if females have negative first
experiences, they are less likely to become success-
ful long-term gamers. Interestingly, Beavis and
Charles (2007) discovered that seasoned female
gamers find that they tend to particularize their
gaming behaviors as they find their place in the
male-dominant culture; binary descriptions (i.e.,
male/female) do not adequately capture the variety
of their experiences. As a result, a gaming minority
becomes even more splintered so loses valuable
solidarity, according to Beavis and Charles (2007).
As gamers become more experienced, gen-
dered differences tend to fade, according to several
studies, indicating that with exposure to gaming
(e.g., in structured settings like school libraries),
females and males may benefit equally from gam-
ing activities. MMOGs are a good case in point.
Particularly in RPGs, players’ first avatar tends to
reflect the person’s gender and age, although ex-
perienced players like to experiment with various
identities, and assume that little correlation exists
between the avatar and the player (Kirriemuir &
McFarlane, 2004; Lee & Hoadley, 2007). Accord-
ing to Taylor (2003), both sexes enjoy the sense
of community and socialization, like to compete
against themselves or to meet a goal, and like
to explore virtual environments. Nevertheless,
gender continues to impact behaviors in these
role-playing games, as Yee (2006) found when
surveying 30,000 MMORPG players. Yee revealed
a five-factor model of user motivation: achieve-
ment, relationship, immersion, escapism, and
manipulation. Males were significantly more mo-
tivated by achievement and manipulation factors,
and females were significantly more motivated by
relationships, immersion, and escapism. Males
tended to work with others in order to achieve a
goal while females to relate to other players. In
examining gendered game play, Ray (2003) as-
serted that females tend to spend more time pol-
ishing their avatars, and feel frustrated that fewer
options are available for female characters than
male characters. In analyzing gender differences
in digital play behavior, Bertozzi (2008) stated
the need to recognize the difficulty in challenging
existing gendered norms. Players tend to avoid
crossing traditional gender game play role, such
as status of civility and sanctioned “sex talk.” In
investigating Final Fantasy forums, Jansz, Van
Zoonen and Vosmeer (2006) reported that play-
ers based their beginning actions on everyday
social contexts of gender, and then gained insights
about gendered performance that led to less on-
line sexism, more equitable treatment, and more
positive gendered identifies in their daily lives.
As modeled in Lee and Hoadley’s 2007 research,
educators can use RPGs as an engaging way to
explore gender expectations and norms. Based on
these studies, a case may be made that explicitly
addressing gender issues in virtual or “artificial”
environments, such as a gendered egame space,
can significantly change perceptions, stereotypes,
and enjoyment of egames. Without such interven-
tions, females and males may continue to use tech
and game differentially, with females being more
disadvantaged as a result.
As noted above, gendered egaming practices
tend to disappear with successful practice. Mobile
devices seem to be more inviting and less threat-
ening for females, and females play egames on
these smaller devices eagerly, as seen in a study
699

by Schaumburg (2001) on gender use of mobile
laptops. The researcher found that females’ ability
and self-confidence increased more than males
did because females had time to practice regularly
in school with this equipment. In explaining this
phenomenon, Schaumburg (2001) claimed that
two features of mobile devices resonate specifi-
cally for females: portability and communication.
Females like being able to carry these devices in
their purses or pockets. Their small size seems to
make the technology less threatening. Secondly,
Schaumburg (2001) asserted that these com-
munication and storage devices facilitate human
interaction and connectivity; with Internet con-
nectivity, mobile devices could be used to construct
knowledge collectively. Hooper, Fitzpatrick and
Weal (2007) asserted that females were more
likely than males to initiate discussion and shar-
ing of information, the features of mobile devices
assist multiple perspectives and relationship-rich
learning. Increasingly, mobile devices include
concrete and practical applications, which reso-
nate for females (Cassell & Jenkins, 1998). These
studies point to the benefits of providing mobile
devices in school settings, such as the library, in
order to offer a non-threatening way to experience
egames, thus reducing females’technology anxiety
and facilitating all youngsters’ opportunities for
positive practice.
FUTURE TRENDS
The field of egaming continues to change signifi-
cantly, particularly in three directions: platform,
workplace learning, and development. These
trends are poised to significantly expand audiences
and facilitate lifelong learning.
Platforms
As noted above, mobile platforms have attracted
attention for casual gamers as well as educators.
Although K12 educators are beginning to use
700
Gaming in Adult Education
m-learning, adult educators are slower in picking
up that option. Nevertheless, since older adults
are increasingly using “smart” phone apps, edu-
cators would do well to take advantage of such
practices by incorporating applications that link
to the curriculum, such as currency converters or
flashcard apps. Mobile devices will continue to
converge applications, and are cheap enough that
adult educators can soon feel comfortable about
asking students to use such portable devices in
the classroom.
Virtual worlds constitute another sort of class-
room that can incorporate gaming. Universities
are building virtual campuses in Second Life,
where students use avatars as their course interface
personas. In a way, these micro worlds serve as
the ultimate role-playing game.
Three-dimensional immersive learning envi-
ronments can also take place in physical space.
Using web 3D technologies, teachers can simulate
an environment that students can physically roam
around in, usually with 3D headgear. Whether
looking at the body from the inside out, or experi-
encing a war field, students can viscerally interact
with their surroundings. At the University of
Southern Queensland, researchers are developing
3D elearning tools building on gaming technology.
Their project, Advances Learning and Immersive
Virtual Environment (ALIVE), enables educators
to use ready-made or customized embedded 3D
applications (de Byl, 2009).
Workplace Gaming
The first video game, Pong, was invented as a
workplace training exercise (Kent, 2001). Many an
office has a Solitaire game on a computer window.
However, many businesses are concerned about
the distractions that games cause or the security
breaches that might be opened because of work-
ers playing online games. On the other hand, the
military uses war games to train soldiers, and
surgeons who played video games extensively
Gaming in Adult Education
in their youth were faster and more accurate than
their non-gaming peers (Perkins, 2009).
The underlying gaming principles of challeng-
ing tasks, persistence, clear communication, and
frequent feedback, can be applied to the workplace
and in-service training. Perkins (2009) asserts
that gaming can provide a sense of community
for geographically dispersed workers, and can
promote healthy competition. The Health Games
Research program supports the development of
interactive games that increase physical activity
and well-being, games that could be provided in
the workplace. Technology-based training in the
form of business simulation RPGs can provide
professional development opportunities for global
middle management. The door is just opening to
a rich variety of adult education offerings.
Development
Another issue is the production of educational
gaming. In general, the gaming industry has not
pursued educational egaming development for
a couple of reasons: it is not cost-effective, and
connections between the industry and educa-
tion are difficult to establish. The U. S. Army
has bucked that trend by developing egames, in
collaboration with educational specialists, as a
viable recruitment strategy. Another solution is
to develop “templates” so students can develop
their own egames. A couple of rudimentary tools
have been created or adapted, such as Virtools,
GameBrix, or even PowerPoint, but the window
of opportunity is open for more robust and easy-
to-navigate programs to be developed that can
enable students to create their own egames. In line
with the prior discussions is the need to examine
gendered issues relative to egaming production
and the teachers’ design of learning activities.
CONCLUSION
As teachers select egames into adult education
curriculum, they need to look at the underlying
concepts being addressed, the educational value of
the tools, and the pedagogical “fit” of the sequence
of tasks. More systemically, teachers, students and
game designers need to communicate with each
other as egames are to be incorporated effectively
in adult education, a finding that was confirmed
by the NESTA Future Labs conference (Owen
et al., 2005). Educators and developers need to
collaborate when creating games to ensure that
source material (i.e., Activity Theory objects and
tools) will be accurate and appropriate, and that
standards (i.e., Activity Theory outcomes) will be
addressed within the games. Gaming company
employers need to listen to their younger gam-
ing employees to reconsider the skills needed
to develop engaging programs (Prensky, 2004).
Games will need to be complex enough to enable
students to choose different roles (i.e., Activity
Theory division of labor) and feel as if they are
in control of their virtual environment rather than
being controlled by it (Jones, 1998). Still, the
game needs to be played in a short enough time
period to get at the underlying concepts quickly,
and teachers need to work with the games closely
enough to be able to debrief students about those
concepts (Gros, 2003; Robertson & Good, 2005).
For their part, students need to broaden their
concepts of education to consider constructivist
gaming engagement as a serious endeavor and
an opportunity to gain more control over their
learning (Kafai & Resnick, 1996).
REFERENCES
Alemzadeh, K., & Burgess, S. (2005). A team-
based CAD project utilising the latest CAD tech-
nique and web-based technologies. International
Journal of Mechanical Engineering Education,
33(4), 294–318.
701

American Association of University Women.
(2000). Tech-savvy: Educating girls in the new
computer age. Washington, DC: AAUW.
Anwar, S., Rolle, J., & Memon, A. (2005). Use
of web-based portfolio to assess the technical
competencies of engineering technology students:
A case study. In Proceedings of the American So-
ciety for Engineering Education Conference and
Exposition. Portland, OR. Retrieved December 9,
2009, from http://soa.asee.org/paper/conference/
paper-view.cfm?id=21852.
Armstrong, S., & Warlick, D. (2004). The new
literacy. TechLearning, 25(2), 24–31.
Brosnan, M. (1998). The impact of psychologi-
cal gender, gender-related perceptions, signifi-
cant others, and the introduction of technology
upon computer anxiety in students. Journal of
Educational Computing Research, 18, 63–78.
doi:10.2190/LVHH-EPGB-AE7J-WEV8
Cassell, J., & Jenkins, H. (1998). From Barbie to
Mortal Kombat: Gender and computer games.
Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Charsky, D., & Mims, C. (2008). Integrating
commercial office-the-shelf video games into
school curriculums. TechTrends, 52(5), 38–44.
doi:10.1007/s11528-008-0195-0
Cooper, J., & Weaver, K. (2003). Gender and
computers: Understanding the digital divide.
Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
De Byl, P. (2009). Making Web3D less scary:
Toward easy-to-use Web 3D e-learning content
development tools for educators. Innovate: Jour-
nal of Online Education, 5(5), 1–6.
DeKanter, N. (2005). Gaming redefines inter-
activity for learning. TechTrends, 49(3), 26–31.
doi:10.1007/BF02763644
702
Gaming in Adult Education
Dennis, S., & Jensen, D. (2003). Planetary gear
set and automatic transmission simulation for
machine design courses. Computer Applica-
tions in Engineering Education, 11(3), 144–155.
doi:10.1002/cae.10045
Deubel, P. (2006, Jan.). Game on. T.H.E. Journal,
30–41.
Durán, M., Gallardo, S., Toral, S., Martínez-Torres,
R., & Barrero, F. (2007). A learning methodol-
ogy using Matlab/Simulink for undergraduate
electrical engineering courses attending to learner
satisfaction outcomes. International Journal of
Technology and Design Education, 17(1), 55–73.
doi:10.1007/s10798-006-9007-z
Engeström, Y. (1987). Learning by expanding: An
activity-theoretical approach to developmental
research. Helsinki: Orienta-Konsultit Oy.
Farmer, L. (2005). Targeting librarians – Got
game? Tapped In (November, 15). Retrieved
January 3, 2009, from http://www.tappedin.org/
transcripts
Fischer, F., Troendle, P., & Mandl, H. (2003).
Using the internet to improve university educa-
tion: problem-oriented web-based learning with
MUNICS. Interactive Learning Environments,
11(3), 193–214. doi:10.1076/ilee.11.3.193.16546
Foster, A. (2008). Games and motivation to learn
science: Personal identity, applicability, relevance
and meaningfulness. Journal of Interactive Learn-
ing Research, 19(4), 597–614.
Gee, J. (2007). What video games have to teach us
about learning and literacy (2nd ed.). Palgrave,
England: Macmillan.
Graf, S., & Lin, T. (2008). The relationship be-
tween learning styles and cognitive traits--Getting
additional information for improving student
modelling. Computers in Human Behavior, 24(2),
122–137. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2007.01.004
Gaming in Adult Education

Gramoll, K. (2007). A web-based electronic book International Game Development Association.

(ebook) for solid mechanics. 2007 American Soci- (2008). 2008-2009 casual games white paper.
ety for Engineering Education Annual Conference, Mt. Royal, NJ: International Game Develop-
Honolulu, HI, June 25-27, 2007. ment Association. Retrieved December 3, 2009,
from http://www.igda.org/casual/IGDA_Ca-
Gros, B. (2003). The impact of digital games in
sual_Games_White_Paper_2008.pdf.
education. First Monday, 8(7). Retrieved Novem-
ber 18, 2009, from http://firstmonday.org/issues/ Jia-sheng, H., Jyh-cheng, C., Shao-chun, L., &
issue8_7/gros/index.html. Maiga, C. (2008, Feb.). Providing students hints
and detecting mistakes made by students in a
Halverson, R. (2005). What can K-12 school
virtual experiment environment. IEEE Transac-
leaders learn from video games and gaming? In-
tions on Education, 51(1), 61–68. doi:10.1109/
novate, 1(6). Retrieved December 1, 2009, from
TE.2007.901977
http://www.innovateonline.info
Jones, M. (1998). Creating engagement in com-
Haynes, C., & Holmevik, J. R. (Eds.). (2001).
puter-based learning environments. Instructional
High Wired: On the design, use, and theory of
Technology Forum. Retrieved December 1, 2009,
educational MOOs. Ann Arbor, MI: The Univer-
from http://itech1.coe.uga.edu/itforum/paper30/
sity of Michigan Press.
paper30.html.
Hays, R. T. (2005). The effectiveness of instruc-
Jones, S. (2003). Let the games begin: Gaming
tional games: A literature review and discussion.
technology and entertainment among college
Naval Air Warfare Center Training Systems Divi-
students. Washington, DC: Pew Internet and
sion (No 2005-004). Retrieved December 1, 2009,
American Life Project.
from http://stnet.dtie.mil/oai/
Kadakia, M. (2005). Increased student engage-
Helmrich, E., & Neiburger, E. (2007). Video
ment by using Morrowind to analyze choices
games as a service: Three years later. VOYA,
and consequences. TechTrends, 49(5), 29–32.
30(2), 113–115.
doi:10.1007/BF02763687
Humar, I., Sinigoj, A., Bešter, J., & Hagler, M.
Kafai, Y. (1996). Video game design by girls and
(2005). Integrated component web-based inter-
boys: Variability and consistency of gender differ-
active learning systems for engineering. IEEE
ences . In Cassell, J., & Henkins, H. (Eds.), From
Transactions on Education, 48(4), 664–675.
Barbie to Mortal Kombat: Gender and computer
doi:10.1109/TE.2005.858396
games (pp. 90–114). Cambridge, MA: MIT.
Hutchinson, T., Kuester, F., Hsieh, T., & Chadwick,
Kafai, Y., & Resnick, M. (1996) (Eds.), Con-
R. (2005, May). A hybrid reality environment and
structionism in practice: Designing, thinking, and
its application to the study of earthquake engineer-
learning in a digital world. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
ing. Virtual Reality (Waltham Cross), 9(1), 17–33.
doi:10.1007/s10055-005-0001-7 Kebritchi, M. (2008). Effects of a computer game
on mathematics achievement and class motivation:
An experimental study. Doctoral dissertation, Uni-
versity of Central Florida, Orlando. AAT 3319249

703

Kecojevic, V., Bise, C., & Haight, J. (2005.).
The effective use of professional software in an
undergraduate mining engineering curriculum.
Interactive Learning Environments, 13(½), 1-13.
Kent, S. (2001). Ultimate history of video games.
New York: Three Rivers Press.
Kurtis, P. (2003). Student perceptions of internet-
based learning tools in environmental engineering
education. Journal of Engineering Education,
88(3), 295–299.
Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning.
Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Lee, J., & Young, C. (2008). Middle level educators
and online social gaming . In McFerrin, K. (Eds.),
Proceedings of society for information technology
and teacher education international conference
2008 (pp. 1726–1732). Chesapeake, VA: American
Association of Computer Education.
Lenhart, A., Jones, S., & Macgill, A. (2008). Adults
and video games. Washington, DC: Pew Internet
& American Life Project.
Leont’ev, A. (1978). Activity, consciousness, and
personality (Hall, M. J., Trans.). Englewood Cliffs,
NJ: Prentice Hall.
Li, H., & Love, P. (1999). Computer applications
in engineering education. New York: John Wiley
and Sons.
Ma, B., Liu, X., Chen, X., Zhang, J., & Luo, Y.
(2001). Computer modeling of rotating magnetic
fields for teaching purpose. In Proceedings of
the Fifth International Conference on Electrical
Machines and Systems, Shenyang, China, August
(pp. 475-477).
Macedonia, M., Darken, R., McDowell, P., &
Johnson, E. (2005, May/June). The Delta3D open
source game engine. IEEE Computer Graphics
and Applications, 25(3), 10–12. doi:10.1109/
MCG.2005.67
704
Gaming in Adult Education
Michau, F., Genti, S., & Barrault, M. (2001).
Expected benefits of web-based learning for
engineering education: Examples in control
engineering. European Journal of Engineering
Education, 26(2), 151-168.
Miller, J. (1976). Toward a new psychology of
women. Boston: Beacon Press.
National School Boards Foundation. (2003). Safe
& smart. Alexandria, VA: National School Boards
Foundation.
Ndahi, H., Charturvedi, S., Akan, A., & Pickering,
J. (2007). Engineering education: Web-based in-
teractive learning resources. Technology Teacher,
67(3), 9–14.
Neilsen Company. (2007). The state of the console.
Chicago: Neilsen.
Nicholson, S. (2007). The role of gaming in li-
braries: Taking the pulse. Retrieved November
18, 2009, from http://boardgameswithscott.com/
pulse2007.pdf
Owen, M. (2005). Building collaboration between
designers and researchers. Bristol, England:
NestaLabs.
Perkins, B. (2009). World of Warcraft in the
workplace. Computerworld (November 2), 30.
Piaget, J. (1977). The essential Piaget. New York:
Basic Books.
Pinckard, J. (October 31, 2007). Casual games
worth $2.25B — But where are they going?
Gigaom. Retrieved December 3, 2009, from http://
gigaom.com/2007/10/31/casual-games-worth-
225b-but-where-are-they-going/.
Prensky, M. (2004, June 30). Capturing the
value of “Generation Tech” employees. EN-
ews. Retrieved December 1, 2009, from http://
www.strategy-business.com/press/enewsarticle/
enews063004?pg=0.
Gaming in Adult Education
Randel, J., Morris, B., Wetzel, C., & White-
hill, B. (1992). The effectiveness of games for
educational purposes: a review of recent re-
search. Simulation & Gaming, 23(3), 261–276.
doi:10.1177/1046878192233001
Richardson, A. (2005). Spatial representations
and transformations: The influence of vision and
body-based information. Dissertation Abstracts
International: Section B: The Sciences and En-
gineering, 65(9-B), 4863.
Robertson, J., & Good, J. (2005). Story creation in
virtual game worlds. Communications of the ACM,
48(1), 61–65. doi:10.1145/1039539.1039571
Robinette, M., & Manseur, R. (2001, Feb.).
Robot-draw, an internet-based visualization tool
for robotics education. IEEE Transactions on
Education, 44(1), 29–34. doi:10.1109/13.912707
Rodriguez, A., Metzger, P., Cifdaloz, O., & Dhi-
rasakdanon, T. (2005). Description of a modeling,
simulation, animation, and real-time control (mo-
sart) environment for a class of electromechanical
systems. IEEE Transactions on Education, 48(3),
359–374. doi:10.1109/TE.2004.842915
Savidis, A., Grammenos, D., & Stephanidis, C.
(2006). Developing inclusive e-learning systems.
Universal Access in the Information Society, 5(1),
51–72. doi:10.1007/s10209-006-0024-1
Shaffer, D. W. (2005). Epistemic games. In-
novate, 1(6). Retrieved December 1, 2009,
from http://www.innovateonline.info/index.
php?view=article&id=79
Simpson, E. (2005). Evolution in the class-
room: What teachers need to know about the
video game generation. TechTrends, 49(5), 17–22.
doi:10.1007/BF02763685
Spanias, A., & Atti, V. (2005, Nov.). Interactive
online undergraduate laboratories using J-DSP.
IEEE Transactions on Education, 48(4), 735–749.
doi:10.1109/TE.2005.854569
Squire, K. (2006). From content to con-
text: Videogames as designed experience.
Educational Researcher, 35(8), 19–29.
doi:10.3102/0013189X035008019
Squire, K., & Jenkins, H. (2003). Harnessing the
power of games in education. Insight (American
Society of Ophthalmic Registered Nurses), 3, 5–33.
Szczurek, M. (1982). Meta-analysis of simula-
tion games effectiveness for cognitive learning.
Doctoral dissertation, Indiana University. AAT
8220735
Tavakkoli-Moghaddam, R., & Daneshmand-
Mehr, M. (2005). A computer simulation model
for job shop scheduling problems minimizing
makespan. Computers & Industrial Engineering,
48(4), 811–823. doi:10.1016/j.cie.2004.12.010
Uran, S., & Jezernik, K. (2008, Feb.). Virtual
laboratory for creative control design experiments.
IEEE Transactions on Education, 51(1), 69–75.
doi:10.1109/TE.2007.906599
Van Eck, R. (2006). Using games to promote girls’
positive attitudes toward technology. Innovate,
2(3). Retrieved November 18, 2009, from http://
innovateonline.info/index.php?view=article&id
=209&action=article.
Vikas, Y., Romanello, T., & Gramoll, K. (2000).
Teaching dynamics online with only electronic
media on laptop computers. American Society
of Engineering Education Conference, St. Louis,
MO., June 18-21.
Vygotsky, L., & Luria, A. (1994). Tool and sym-
bol in child development . In van der Veer, R.,
& Valsiner, J. (Eds.), The Vygotsky reader (pp.
99–174). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
Waldron, S., Patrick, J., Morgan, P., & King, S.
(2007). Influencing cognitive strategy by manipu-
lating information access. The Computer Journal,
50(6), 694. doi:10.1093/comjnl/bxm064
705

Wilson, B. (2002). A study of factors promoting
success in computer science including gender
differences. Computer Science Education, 12,
141–164. doi:10.1076/csed.12.1.141.8211
KEY TERMS AND DEFINITIONS
Activity Theory: A theory that posits a rela-
tionship between a subject (person) and an object,
with mediational means.
Casual Games: Video or online games that
are targeted to mass audiences.
Egames: Electronic games (video, computer,
console).
Gamer: Devoted player of electronic games.
706
Gaming in Adult Education
Immersive Education: Education that in-
volves all the senses within a total submersion
within the learning environment.
Mobile Learning (M-Learning): Learning
that incorporates mobile devices such as cell
phones and personal digital assistants.
Role-Playing Games (RPG): Games in which
the participants assume the roles of characters.
Serious Games: Games designed for a primary
purpose other than entertainment.
Simulations: Representation of the operation
or features of one process or system through the
use of another.
Virtual Worlds: Computer-based simulated
environments where users interact via avatars.
 707

Chapter 42
Gender and Collaborative
Knowledge Building in an
Online Community of Inquiry
Constance E. Wanstreet
The Ohio State University, USA

David S. Stein
The Ohio State University, USA

ABSTRACT
This chapter addresses the implications of gender on participation, collaboration, and ultimately shared
understanding and proposes a framework in which to examine collaborative knowledge building.
Collaborative knowledge building depends more on the learning context and group member role than on
gender exclusively. The collaborative knowledge-building process begins when group members become
ready to participate by creating a welcoming climate, feeling emotionally and cognitively comfortable,
and formulating initial thoughts on the discussion topic, among other activities. Connecting with one
another to collaborate includes brainstorming, challenging perceptions, ensuring equality of voices,
stretching their individual perspectives, and sharing experiences over time. Members achieve shared
understanding by creating a new, joint perspective that emerges from their collective contributions.

INTRODUCTION Learner-moderated chats that have clearly defined

The promise of online group learning is that
computer-mediated communication offers more
opportunities for members to participate equally
(Zafeiriou, Nunes, & Ford, 2001) and interdepen-
dently (Curtis, 2004). Text-based chats are one
way instructors can provide a space for learners to
share their experiences and build connections as
they explore complex issues in an informal way.
DOI: 10.4018/978-1-61692-906-0.ch042
goals can build shared understanding (Stein et al.,
2007). However, a group posting that purports to
reflect a shared perspective may hide inequali-
ties in participation and collaboration. Selwyn,
Gorard, and Furlong (2006) suggest that online
learning, by its very nature, creates inequalities
for women. This chapter addresses the implica-
tions of gender on participation, collaboration, and
ultimately shared understanding and proposes a
framework with which to examine collaborative
knowledge building.
 Gender and Collaborative Knowledge Building in an Online Community of Inquiry
Despite Ryan and David’s (2003) contention
that knowing is not intrinsically related to gender,
a number of researchers have built on the work
of Belenky, Clinchy, Goldberger, and Tarule
(1986) to suggest that women have a preference
for learning through connectedness (Burge, 1993;
Guiller & Durndell, 2006). Connected knowing
is rooted in the experience of relationships and
is characterized by empathy, equality, genuine
caring, and withholding judgment (Belenky et
al., 1986), as shown in this chat exchange from
the course under study:
Gabi1: Honestly, I have a hard time with this
chat because I want to talk strictly about what I
read and not what the reading applys [sic] to in
today’s world.
Fran: I can understand, Gabi.
Gabi: I have a hard time with that.
Steve: No worries, this is our chance to learn.
Fran is empathetic and caring when Gabi
discloses her difficulty building on the readings
to answer the course discussion questions. Steve
withholds judgment of Gabi’s inability to focus.
But four weeks later, Steve entered the chat as the
moderator and dominated the discussion to such an
extent that he was responsible for producing nearly
half of the conversation. “Our chance to learn”
became predominately his chance to learn. What
conditions brought about that inequality? This
case study examined the extent to which gender
might influence collaborative knowledge build-
ing in an online discussion group and explored
the process of achieving shared understanding in
that environment.
708
BACKGROUND
Constructivist educators generally agree that
communities of inquiry create knowledge and
contribute to higher-order thinking (Garrison,
Anderson, & Archer, 2000; Lindsey & Berger,
2009; Lipman, 2003). Unlike approaches to dis-
tance education that value autonomy and separate
knowing (Hannifin, Land, & Oliver, 1983; Moore,
1972), the Community of Inquiry (CoI) model
used as the basis of this study values collaborative
learning through discussion. The CoI framework
assumes that learning occurs through the inter-
action of three overlapping elements: teaching
presence, social presence, and cognitive presence
(Anderson, Rourke, Archer, & Garrison, 2001;
Garrison et al., 2000). According to Garrison et
al., teaching presence involves course design and
administration, discourse facilitation, and direct
instruction in text-based computer conferencing
environments. Social presence is the ability of
learners to “identify with the community (e.g.,
course of study), communicate purposefully in a
trusting environment, and develop interpersonal
relationships by way of projecting their individual
personalities” (Arbaugh et al., 2008, p. 134).
Cognitive presence involves meaning-making
through sustained communication (Garrison et
al.). Arbaugh et al. (2008) and Rourke and Kanuka
(2009) call for more quantitative measures to as-
sess the impact of the CoI framework on learning.
This study suggests an approach for examining the
process of collaborative knowledge building as
influenced by gender. To enhance the understand-
ing of what occurs in a discussion as it relates to
gender, this chapter combines the Community of
Inquiry framework with other ways of knowing
(Belenky et al., 1986).
Of particular interest to this study is the dia-
logue that signals (a) readiness to participate in a
discussion and (b) connecting to other learners to
collaborate in knowledge building. Lock (2002)
has proposed that participation and collaboration
are among the cornerstones for the development
Gender and Collaborative Knowledge Building in an Online Community of Inquiry
Figure 1. Elements of the collaborative knowledge-building process
and maintenance of online learning communi-
ties. This chapter proposes that becoming ready
to participate and connecting to collaborate are
latent variables that provide the foundation for
shared understanding. Portions of the Commu-
nity of Inquiry framework help operationalize
the latent variables. In CoI terms, the variable
becoming ready to participate is composed of the
social presence categories of affective, cohesive,
and interactive communication. In terms of other
ways of knowing, the variable becoming ready
to participate includes establishing relationships
by showing genuine interest, demonstrating ac-
ceptance and empathy, and formulating initial
thoughts on the discussion topic (see Figure 1).
It is also proposed that the variable connecting
to collaborate is composed of the CoI teaching
presence category of facilitating dialogue and the
cognitive presence category of exploration. In
terms of other ways of knowing, the variable is
composed of equality of voices (Brookfield &
Preskill, 2005; Taylor Gibson, 2009), withholding
judgment, sharing experiences over time, and
stretching individual perspectives (Belenky et al.,
1986).
The variable shared understanding reflects the
dynamic interaction between a learner’s personal
meaning and the group’s collaboration (Schrire,
2004). High levels of participation lead to more
engaged collaborative knowing, which supports
shared understanding (see Figure 2).
Group members become ready to participate
by creating a welcoming climate, feeling emotion-
ally and cognitively comfortable, and formulating
initial thoughts on the discussion topic, among
other activities. Becoming ready to participate is
fundamental to engaged collaborative knowing.
Some of the ways group members connect with
one another to collaborate include brainstorming,
challenging perceptions, ensuring equality of
voices, stretching their individual perspectives,
and sharing experiences over time. Members
achieve shared understanding by creating a new,
joint perspective that emerges from their collective
contributions.
The next section addresses the three main
variables, which were readiness to participate,
connecting to collaborate, and achieving shared
understanding.
Readiness to Participate
Participation means becoming engaged with oth-
ers and generating the situations to be discussed.
Brookfield and Preskill (2005) suggest that for a
productive discussion, learners must come with a
predisposition for democratic discourse. Mindful-
ness, meaning being ready to listen respectfully
709
 Gender and Collaborative Knowledge Building in an Online Community of Inquiry
Figure 2. Conceptual model of the collaborative knowledge-building process.
and with attention to the whole conversation, is
a primary attribute of readiness to participate.
Other attributes include the notion of efficacy
and the thought that one’s contribution matters
and that one’s input can and will contribute to
the understanding of the group. Participation
means honoring the contributions of those who
attend the discussion, being involved in defining
and resolving issues, taking account of and en-
couraging diverse viewpoints and interests, and
believing that through discourse the group can
come together for collective action (Goodman et
al., 1998). Readiness to participate suggests that
learners are willing to create their own meaning
and take actions based on data they generate.
A commitment to frequent participation and
communication that is open to all members is
critical to learning in online environments (Lock,
2002) and, in addition to collaboration, can result
in greater perceptions of learning (Benbunnan-
Fich & Roxanne-Hiltz, 2003). Because effective
communication is pivotal in generating online
interaction and participation in group discus-
sions, the extent to which discourse behavior and
linguistic forms are related to gender has come
710
under recent scrutiny (Bonito & Lambert, 2005;
Fahy, 2002; Sanchez-Casal & Macdonald, 2002).
In a study of gender and participation in group
discussions, Bonito and Lambert (2005) found
that participation was affected by the interaction
of the gender of group members and information
similarity; i.e., the set of information participants
have in common. When group members did not
have much information in common, participation
by men decreased when the number of women in
the group increased. When information similarity
was high, men tended to speak more frequently
as the number of women increased.
Of seven studies reviewed by Hiltz and Shea
(2005), approximately half suggested that partici-
pation in electronic discussions did not differ by
gender. However, upon reviewing several studies
of the effects of gender on online communication
patterns, Kramarae (2007) suggested that a gender
effect is present. Gender influenced the number of
messages and the type of interactions. All-female
groups tended to post more messages than all-male
groups. However, men in mixed groups tended
to write more messages than females in mixed
groups. Females acting as moderators posted more
messages on civility and inclusion.
Gender and Collaborative Knowledge Building in an Online Community of Inquiry
Fahy (2002) noted a linguistic pattern in online
discussion transcripts associated with use of the
word perhaps and other epistolary expressions,
such as it seems to me. Women produced 65% of
the epistolary expressions, which are designed to
avoid confrontation and emphasize commonali-
ties. Men produced 61% of all intensifiers, such as
the word very, that signal an assertive, expository
linguistic style (Fahy, 2002). Graddy (2006), how-
ever, found no support for differences in linguistic
style by gender. Nevertheless, Fahy (2002) cau-
tions that members who use the epistolary style
may be treated unfairly by other group members
because they may seem to be less task-oriented.
As defined in this study, being ready to par-
ticipate in collaborative knowledge building
means creating a welcoming climate, establish-
ing relationships by showing genuine interest,
relating to others, demonstrating acceptance and
empathy, feeling emotionally and cognitively
comfortable about participating in a discussion,
and formulating initial thoughts on the discussion
topic. Readiness to participate means that learners
are prepared to engage in the dialogue and cre-
ate an understanding that addresses the issue in
novel ways (Cosier & Glennie, 1994). In doing
so, learners engage in a process of becoming part
of a greater whole (Sfard, 1998). Becoming ready
to participate shifts knowledge building from
an individual acquisition to a group creation of
knowledge products (Sfard, 1998).
Reason (1994) asserts that true participation
is essential for local knowledge generation and
ownership. True participation occurs when the
learners take responsibility for the search for
knowledge and create their own meaning based
on their interactions with text, local experience,
and shared experiences. Participation creates a
sense of ownership in the project and its outcomes.
The participation concept is powerful and
practical in bringing about collaborative knowing.
Without participation—that is, active involvement
and ownership of the learning—action on that
learning would not happen. Participation is the
precursor to a collaborative knowledge-building
framework.
Although the influence of gender itself on
participation is unclear, participation seems to be
related to how individuals engage with one another
through talk. Collaboration refers to what is done
with that talk to address a variety of perspectives
and support shared understanding. Group members
may need to learn how to participate and interact
with one another online to foster collaboration
(Macdonald, 2003).
Connecting to Collaborate
Participation that reflects engagement can lead to
a collaborative environment (Holliman & Scanlon,
2006). Establishing a collaborative environment
that leads to shared understanding requires ample
dialogue that helps group members explore and
understand various perspectives deeply (Stein et
al., 2007). If members are silenced and unable or
unwilling to share their input as a result, the per-
spectives of the dominant culture will prevail (Sujo
de Montes, Oran, & Willis, 2002). Hiltz and Shea
(2005) suggest that the electronic classroom, due
to the lack of queues favoring male domination,
may be more favorable to a cooperative inquiry
supporting equality of voices and favoring equi-
table discourse among male and female learners.
Despite an assertion by Holliman and Scanlon
(2006) that those who do not post contributions
to online discussions may be showing tacit agree-
ment, Guiller and Durndell (2006) posit that
language is a powerful means of maintaining
gendered power differentials. Not being recog-
nized in the discussion can translate to not being
heard, which is detrimental to collaboration and
to learners at the margins of the dominant culture
(Sujo de Montes et al., 2002).
In such cases where social dynamics may be
delicate, group members may need coaching in
getting organized, getting acquainted, building
trust, and establishing communication to support
effective collaboration (Hasler-Waters & Napier,
711
 Gender and Collaborative Knowledge Building in an Online Community of Inquiry
2002). The literature suggests that an environment
in which group members can explore perspectives
deeply and have their voices heard equally sup-
ports collaborative learning, which is necessary for
shared understanding to develop (Taylor Gibson,
2009; Brookfield & Preskill, 2005). Connecting
to collaborate in a knowledge-building effort
includes brainstorming, exploring all points of
view, challenging perceptions, ensuring equality of
voices, drawing in participants, demonstrating the
ability to withhold judgment, stretching individual
perspectives to embrace others’ perspectives, and
sharing experiences over time.
Achieving Shared Understanding
In general, communities provide a setting for par-
ticipation and presence in the discussion (Vonder-
well & Zackariah, 2005) where learners share
experiences and perspectives and negotiate what
they mean (Bober & Dennen, 2001; Puntambekar,
2006). Achieving shared understanding involves
responding to and synthesizing peer messages
as well as thoroughly exploring difficult issues
(Hewitt, 2003; Vonderwell & Zackariah, 2005).
To achieve shared understanding, group members
will have integrated knowledge that was important
to them individually with knowledge they have
learned from others (Belenky et al., 1986). In this
chapter, learners achieved shared understanding
by exchanging their individual knowing for group
knowing, thus changing from individual perspec-
tives to a joint perspective that emerges from the
learners’ collective contributions. The resulting
shared understanding is a new creation.
Taken together, the participation, collaboration,
and shared understanding variables represent a
collaborative knowledge-building process. Even
though the findings related to knowledge building
and gender are inconsistent, Hiltz and Shea (2005)
suggest that distance learning courses should at
least account for different communication styles.
They call for more studies that analyze the content
of discussion transcripts to connect interaction pat-
712
terns to course outcomes, or knowledge building,
for men and women.
COLLABORATIVE
KNOWLEDGE BUILDING
This study used content analysis of the com-
munication generated by group members as they
created meaning because it was a rich source of
previously untapped data. Analyzing transcripts
provided additional insight into the process of
collaborative knowledge building and the de-
velopment of dialogue. Chat transcripts from an
inquiry-based course on social and philosophical
perspectives of adult education in the United States
were used. Transcripts from weeks four and seven
were analyzed because they represented the earli-
est and latest available transcripts.
The course had 26 learners in six groups, all but
one of which met online. The results here focus
primarily on one randomly selected group of four
learners that met via chat. Two men, Steve and
Jess, and two women, Gabi and Fran, comprised
the online group. Both men were graduate students.
Fran was an international graduate student. Gabi
was an undergraduate student. At time two, Gabi
was absent from the discussion.
Content from the chat transcripts was analyzed
according to coding templates from the research-
ers who developed the Community of Inquiry
framework. Portions of the CoI framework are
helpful in operationalizing the participation
and collaboration variables. Although the CoI
framework does not account for all aspects of
participation and collaboration as defined in this
study, it offers empirically tested guidance as a
way to begin analyzing the latent variables. For
example, the social presence categories of affec-
tive, interactive, and cohesive dialogue support
readiness to participate in discussion. The teaching
presence category of facilitating discourse and the
cognitive presence category of exploration support
connecting to collaborate (see Table 1). Analysis
Gender and Collaborative Knowledge Building in an Online Community of Inquiry
Table 1. Community of inquiry categories and selected indicators used in this study
Element Categories
Teaching Presence Facilitating discourse
Social Presence Affective
Interactive
Cohesive
Cognitive Presence Exploration
Sources: Teaching presence facilitating discourse from Anderson, Rourke, Archer, & Garrison, 2001; cognitive presence exploration from
Garrison, Anderson, & Archer, 2001; social presence from Rourke, Anderson, Garrison, & Archer, 2001, and Garrison & Arbaugh, 2007.
involved first segmenting the content into units
that convey meaning and can be categorized,
including statements, greetings, direct address,
closures, and paralanguage. Coders then assigned
each unit to an indicator category and provided
tallies for each meaning unit.
This study used two coders working indepen-
dently. Reliability testing was conducted using
Krippendorff’s (2004) alpha (α) because this
chance-corrected measure accommodates ratio
data. The coefficients for interrater reliability (α
= .91 for the transcript at time one and α = .82 at
time two) surpassed the minimum theoretical
standard of 80% (Riffe, Lacy, & Fico, 2005).
Becoming Ready to Participate
With all four members participating in the first
chat, the group generated 263 meaning units (state-
ments and paralanguage). At time two with one
member absent, the group engaged in a shorter
chat and generated 149 meaning units. The social
presence category of the Community of Inquiry
framework accounted for nearly half of the online
conversation in both chats. Following are the
results of the content analysis for each dialogic
indicator that leads to participation: interactive,
affective, and cohesive dialogue.
Selected Indicators
Identifying areas of agreement/ disagreement
Drawing in participants, prompting discussion
Expression of emotions
Self-disclosure
Continuing a thread
Complimenting, expressing appreciation
Expressing agreement
Vocatives, phatics, salutations
Inclusive pronouns
Divergence within group
Information exchange
Brainstorming
Interactive Dialogue. Most of the social
presence talk was interactive, meaning that it
continued a discussion thread or represented
agreement. Gabi, Fran, and Steve engaged in
similar levels of interactive dialogue (average of
16 units) compared to Jess’ average of six units
(see interactive, affective, and cohesive dialogue
in Table 2). While Gabi’s absence from chat two
seemed to influence the amount of affective dia-
logue Fran used, the absence did not affect Fran’s
use of interactive dialogue, represented by the
following statements:
• Good point
• I agree
• me too. agree
• I think so.
Affective Dialogue. “Cool!” “WHOA,”and
☺ are examples of affective dialogue, which
represented the second highest category of social
presence in both chats. Steve generated more
affective dialogue than other group members.
Fran was second, followed by Gabi and Jess.
With Gabi absent from chat two, Fran’s affective
dialogue declined sharply. The men experienced
no appreciable decline in affective dialogue
without Gabi at time two. In Jess’ case, this may
713
 Gender and Collaborative Knowledge Building in an Online Community of Inquiry

Table 2. Frequency of types of dialogue by group member

Readiness to Participate Connecting to Collaborate

Affective Interactive Cohesive Facilitative Exploration
Dialogue Dialogue Dialogue Dialogue

Time 1
Women
Gabi 12 20 14 9 21
Fran 10 15 12 0 15
Subtotal 22 35 26 9 36

Men
Jess 4 6 6 3 21
Steve 13 15 6 2 32
Subtotal 17 21 12 5 53
Time 2
Women
Fran 4 14 8 0 8
Subtotal 4 14 8 0 8

Men
Jess 2 5 3 2 20
Steve 11 16 5 2 22
Subtotal 13 21 8 4 42
Total times 1 and 2 56 91 54 18 139

be because he did not engage in much affective
talk to begin with. In Steve’s case, he used more
affective talk than Gabi anyway, so neither her
presence nor absence was likely to influence the
rate of his affective dialogue.
Cohesive Dialogue. Another aspect of social
presence is cohesive dialogue. The women used
more cohesive dialogue than the men during the
first chat, mostly through the use of members’
names; e.g., “Hi Steve,” or “Thanks Fran.” Al-
though Gabi was absent from the second chat,
Fran managed to use as much cohesive dialogue
as both men combined. In addition, there was a
statistically significant difference in the frequency
of cohesive dialogue between the online group
and the group that met face to face (t = 4.28, p
= .004). The members of the online group used
more cohesive dialogue than the group of women
who met face to face, perhaps to compensate for
the lack of gestures and other nonverbal com-
munication that identifies with eye contact or a
nod to the person to whom a response is directed.
Regarding the dialogic indicators that lead to
participation, the results show that most partici-
pation (91 total meaning units) centered around
interactive dialogue that continued discussion
threads or expressed agreement (see Table 2).
Although affective dialogue was not employed
exclusively by the women, it did decline for
Fran during chat two when Gabi was absent. In
the absence of other females, perhaps Fran was
less inclined to show emotion or disclose vulner-

714
Gender and Collaborative Knowledge Building in an Online Community of Inquiry
abilities (Kramarae, 2007). In addition, cohesive
dialogue was particularly favored by the women,
possibly to compensate for the lack of nonverbal
communication.
Connecting to Collaborate
Facilitating Discourse. A category of teaching
presence that supports connecting to collaborate
is facilitating discourse. Table 2 identifies Gabi,
serving as moderator at time one, as generating
more conversation designed to facilitate discourse
than other group members. Steve moderated the
chat at time two and paid scant attention to facili-
tating discourse. The difference in the way Gabi
and Steve approached their moderator roles was
striking. In a pattern noted in previous research
(Stein et al., 2007), Gabi began her chat as mod-
erator with cohesive social presence dialogue, a
sign of readiness to participate, before connecting
to collaborate by facilitating the discussion:
GABI enters chat
FRAN enters chat
FRAN: Hi Gabi!
GABI: Hey, How are you tonight?
FRAN: goooood!
FRAN: How are you?
GABI: I am Okay. Midterm week and all is well.
Do you have any tests?
JESS enters chat
JESS: Hi Gabi and Fran
GABI: Hello Jess
FRAN: yes. but next week.
FRAN: Hello! Jess
GABI: Good luck on them.
FRAN: You too.
GABI: So shall we begin?
In contrast, after a nod to becoming ready to
participate through cohesive dialogue (“Hi All”),
Steve began by presenting the question for dis-
cussion before any other group member joined
the chat. In an attempt to signal collaboration, he
moved immediately to exploration of the topic
before Fran had a chance to say hello:
STEVE enters chat
STEVE: Hi All: First question: Based on your
readings and understanding of historical forces
in adult education, to what extent should educa-
tion of adults for the workplace be a private or
publicly funded enterprise?
FRAN enters chat
STEVE: I think there needs to be a mix of fund-
ing solutions but I tend to think that the more
publicly funded options there, the better since it
should promote more adult learning. However, I
do place a fair amount of responsiblity [sic] on
the individual to contribute to funding.
FRAN: Hi Steve.
As moderator, Steve allocated two statements
to facilitating discourse while Gabi allocated nine
statements to facilitating discourse while she
moderated the discussion. As a check to deter-
mine whether facilitating discourse was related
to gender, these results were compared to those
of the face-to-face group of all women. Most of
the face-to-face group’s teaching presence was
allocated to direct instruction (80 statements),
followed by discourse facilitation (33 statements).
This suggests that facilitating discourse may not
have been the primary strategy for women in the
face-to-face group or men in the online group
to use in supporting participation in discussions
they moderated. Facilitating discourse may not
be related to gender as a way of connecting to
collaborate in a knowledge-building effort.
Exploration. With the exception of Fran at
time two, all members of the online group spent
more time exchanging information, exploring
ideas, and offering suggestions for consideration
than they did in affective, interactive, cohesive,
or facilitative dialogue. Table 2 shows 139 total
meaning units devoted to exploration. In a dis-
cussion that involves sharing experiences and
perspectives in depth to come to shared under-
715
 Gender and Collaborative Knowledge Building in an Online Community of Inquiry
Table 3. Equality of voices: Percentage of conversation
Time 1
Women 33
Gabi
Fran 22
Subtotal 55
Men 20
Jess
Steve 25
Subtotal 45
standing, it is to be expected that exploration of
those perspectives would dominate. Again, with
the exception of Fran at time two, exploring ideas
to aid collaboration does not appear to be related
to gender. While Gabi’s absence at time two did
not affect the ability or willingness of the men to
brainstorm ideas, it did affect Fran’s engagement
in exploration. Perhaps because of the decrease in
Fran’s social presence at time two, which signals
less readiness to participate, she felt less secure in
the group and less willing to make suggestions,
contradict ideas, or offer her opinion.
Equality of Voices. To determine whether
any group member dominated the discussion,
the percentage of conversation (total meaning
units) for each participant was calculated. Table
3 shows that participation in the conversation was
approximately equal with two exceptions. Gabi,
who moderated the chat at time one, spoke more
than other members during that chat; and Steve,
who moderated the chat at time two, spoke nearly
twice as much as other group members and ac-
counted for about half of the conversation himself.
The moderator role may carry with it a sense of
responsibility to participate at a high level, which
may result in overtaking the conversation.
FUTURE TRENDS
Learning in the future will be an active, engaged
inquiry centering on the experiences and collec-
716
Time 2
0
26
26
25
49
74
tive issues of groups rather than a recitation of
content and individual attainment (Fullen & Scott,
2009). Learning environments in the future will
feature artificial agents and social practices that
will help learners manage interactions to promote
collaborative knowledge building. Collaborative
knowledge building adds to the communal way
of seeing the world, while learning adds only to
an individual’s repertoire of perspectives (Lip-
ponen, 2000).
Computer-based, intelligent instructional
agents that reside in the learning environment will
work on behalf of both instructors and learners
(Atkinson, 2002). Artificial agents will be able to
examine assignments (Li, 2007), such as assessing
the percentage of conversation for each participant
in a chat, thus alerting the instructor to the need
for a process intervention. Artificial agents will
be able to help learners develop skills (Li, 2007),
such as providing feedback that the learner is
dominating the discussion or that the learner is
reticent and should contribute to the discussion.
Social practices regulate actions and interac-
tions within a learning environment. The further
development of collaborative tools and the ability
of learners and intelligent agents to configure tools
will hide characteristics that may marginalize
individuals in discussions. Instructors will need
to understand how learners interact with their
computers and one another and offer guidance
on how to express themselves online through text
and paralanguage.
Gender and Collaborative Knowledge Building in an Online Community of Inquiry
CONCLUSION
Gender
As Steve aptly stated, the course under study was
designed to provide a “chance to learn.” The data
initially suggested that differences in the group
members’ chances to learn might be due to gender.
However, as Sanchez-Casal and Macdonald (2002)
pointed out, that is a simplistic notion. They reject
the idea that our ability to know is anchored in
our gender because that does not account for our
experience and prior involvement in collective
production of knowledge. Learners bring their
experience—or lack thereof—in small groups
with them. They bring to online communities the
behaviors they learned in face-to-face groups. As
Hasler-Waters and Napier report (2002), students
do not become collaborators simply by being put
into groups, and the skills to be learned are espe-
cially important in online environments that lack
nonverbal communication. Those skills revolve
around readiness to participate and connecting
to collaborate.
Developing Participation Skills
Instructors are encouraged to examine chat
transcripts initially for evidence of participa-
tion. Are the learners engaged in the discussion
through their use of interactive, affective, and
cohesive dialogue? Do they express emotions
appropriately? Do they build on one another’s
thoughts or gloss over them? Do they welcome
one another to the chat or ignore a late-coming
member? Cohesive dialogue in particular may
be important to participation and collaboration.
In chat one, Gabi and Fran engaged in more than
twice as much cohesive dialogue than the men (by
referring to group members by name, addressing
the group as “we,” “our,” etc., and by using purely
social communication). Perhaps they felt the lack
of physical presence more keenly than the men
and compensated for it through their language.
As instructors, we can look for cohesive language
as a sign of participation and as a precursor to
collaboration.
While creating a welcoming environment is
one aspect of participation, becoming engaged
is another. Members who are not engaged are
denying the group the chance to deal with an
additional perspective and improve their own
ways of thinking. This will diminish the qual-
ity of the group’s collaboration and knowledge
building because all points of view will not be
reflected in the discussion. Instructors can see
from the transcripts who is engaged and who is
in the chat in name only. Instructors can model
affective dialogue through the use of humor or
self-disclosure, for example, and can demonstrate
interactive dialogue by responding to comments
and illustrate cohesive dialogue through the use
of members’ names.
Developing Collaboration Skills
Participation appears to be a precursor to collabo-
ration. Lock (2002) indicated that collaboration
is participatory and not passive. Ideally, group
members participate equally so their voices are
heard. In the class, conversation was distributed
approximately the same among all members of the
group, except for those members serving as mod-
erators. Even though the moderators spoke more
than other group members, it is notable that when
Steve moderated chat two, he contributed 49%
of the conversation. Adrianson and Hjelmquist
(1999) define communication dominance as
comprising more than 40% of all words or mes-
sages. By that measure, Steve clearly dominated
the discussion. However, Steve’s dialogue in chat
one, moderated by Gabi, was in line with that of
other members of the group. This suggests that
equality of voices may be more a function of
group role than of gender.
Facilitation of discourse is evidence of con-
necting to collaborate. In both chats, the group
member responsible for moderating the discus-
717
 Gender and Collaborative Knowledge Building in an Online Community of Inquiry
sion attempted to draw in participants to a greater
extent than other group members did. However,
when Gabi moderated chat one she used more
than four times as much language to facilitate
discourse than Steve, who moderated chat two.
This use of facilitative language may be partially
responsible for the higher level of exploration in
the first chat than in the second chat. Again, this
may be more a function of skill at moderation
than an effect of gender.
Instructors can watch how group members
facilitate dialogue and provide coaching if needed.
For example, in chat two when Fran seemed re-
luctant to share her thoughts, Steve could have
followed up on one of her many statements of
simple agreement (“yes I agree with you, Steve”)
with something like, “Thank you for that comment.
Would you please expand upon that?” Instead, he
did not acknowledge Fran’s comment, and Jess
picked up the conversation.
There are power dynamics in the modera-
tor role. Who uses those dynamics and in what
ways are questions that were not explored in
depth. However, instructors are encouraged to
look at how power is reflected in the transcripts
to see whether the moderator is bringing other
viewpoints into the discussion or shutting them
out. Measuring equality of voices as determined
by percentage of total conversation is one way to
assess power. Instructors can provide coaching to
help moderators develop facilitation skills and to
be more sensitive to giving all members an op-
portunity to be heard. Instructors also can alert
learners to ways in which interaction can promote
inequalities. Turpin (2007) suggests that rather
than providing opportunities for multiple voices,
virtual learning spaces can become authoritarian
and oppressive spaces. She encourages instructors
to design virtual spaces as safe places for thinking
and power sharing.
Exchanging information, making suggestions,
and brainstorming are necessary for collaboration
and knowledge building to occur. In both chats the
male group members engaged in a high degree of
718
exploratory talk, as did the women in chat one.
However, Gabi was absent for the second chat,
and Fran may have felt her absence since her
suggestions and brainstorming were halved in
chat two and her cohesive dialogue was cut by
one-third. This did not occur with Steve and Jess,
suggesting that the loss of cohesive dialogue did
not affect their ability to explore perspectives in
depth and continue their discussion. Instructors
who review chats throughout the course will be
aware of changing dynamics that affect the level
of collaboration and can encourage group mem-
bers to reflect on how effectively they build and
maintain a space for collaboration.
Gender and Shared Understanding
Based on the findings related to participation
and collaboration, it is not clear whether gender
exclusively influences shared understanding
and collaborative knowledge building. Fran’s
decrease in the use of cohesive dialogue when
Gabi was absent from chat two may be related
to gender; however, the study was too small to
report conclusively on her readiness to participate
and collaborative involvement.
Regarding gender and shared understanding,
it was concluded that collaborative knowledge
building in a course depended more on the learning
context and group member role than on gender
exclusively. This supports the finding that the
educational context plays a role in ways of know-
ing (Ryan & David, 2003). Ways of knowing may
also be related to prior group experience, culture,
socioeconomic class, and a host of variables not
explored here. A moderator’s role is not neutral and
can diminish collaborative knowledge building
through dominance of the discussion. Instructors
should be aware of this risk and intervene to as-
sist the group in developing a more collaborative
learning environment. Depending on the situation,
more male voices can be encouraged to be heard
in the classroom setting.
Gender and Collaborative Knowledge Building in an Online Community of Inquiry
Collaborative Knowledge Building
Collaborative knowledge building is the group
voice that results from shared understanding (see
Figure 2). Shared understanding is influenced by
two factors: readiness to participate and connect-
ing to collaborate. To fully participate, learners
engage in dialogue that is affective, interactive, and
cohesive. However, as a process to build knowl-
edge, achieving shared understanding requires
more than simply participating in discussion.
Rather, participants must engage in connected,
collaborative activities that involve honoring the
equality of all voices in the group and exploring
all perspectives. Through participation and col-
laboration, then, group members exchange their
individual perspectives for a group perspective.
In that way, they come to a shared understanding
of the issue under discussion.
Instructors should not expect learners who
engage in chat rooms to be aware immediately of
how their presence is going to affect the group’s
learning effort. In the absence of training, habitual
ways of responding come to the fore. For example,
where it appears that Steve did not invite Fran to
express her views, a possible explanation is that
he did not know how to encourage her participa-
tion. Moderating is skill-based, not necessarily
gender-based. Therefore, it is suggested that be-
fore beginning chat activities, instructors orient
learners to some of the nuances associated with
moderating and participating in chats. In this study,
the group arrived at a resolution to the discus-
sion topic in both chats. However, the moderator
who was more skilled in facilitating dialogue
and in building cohesion through dialogue was
able to engage all participants in the chat in a
way that provided for all voices to be heard, all
perspectives to be explored, and all members to
achieve shared understanding in a collaborative
knowledge-building process.
AUTHOR NOTE
The authors thank Mona R. Simons for her as-
sistance with coding transcripts.
REFERENCES
Adrianson, L., & Hjelmquist, E. (1999). Group
processes in solving two problems: Face-to-face
and computer-mediated communication. Behav-
iour & Information Technology, 18(3), 179–198.
doi:10.1080/014492999119075
Anderson, T., Rourke, L., Archer, W., & Gar-
rison, R. (2001). Assessing teaching presence in
computer conferencing transcripts. The Journal of
Asynchronous Learning Networks, 5(2). Retrieved
December 12, 2005, from http://www.aln.org/
publications/jaln/v5n2/ v5n2_anderson
Arbaugh, J. B., Cleveland-Innes, M., Diaz, S. R.,
Garrison, D. R., Ice, P., Richardson, J. E., & Swan,
K. P. (2008). Developing a community of inquiry
instrument: Testing a measure of the Community
of Inquiry framework using a multi-institutional
sample. The Internet and Higher Education, 11,
133–136. doi:10.1016/j.iheduc.2008.06.003
Atkinson, R. K. (2002). Optimizing learning from
examples using animated pedagogical agents.
Journal of Educational Psychology, 94, 416–427.
doi:10.1037/0022-0663.94.2.416
Belenky, M. F., Clinchy, B. M., Goldberger, N. R.,
& Tarule, J. M. (1986). Women’s ways of knowing:
The development of self, voice, and mind. New
York: Basic Books.
Benbunnan-Fich, R., & Roxanne-Hiltz, S.
(2003). Mediators of the effectiveness of online
courses. IEEE Transactions on Professional
Communication, 46(4), 298–312. doi:10.1109/
TPC.2003.819639
719
 Gender and Collaborative Knowledge Building in an Online Community of Inquiry
Bober, M. J., & Dennen, V. P. (2001). In-
tersubjectivity: Facilitating knowledge con-
struction in online environments. Educa-
tional Media International, 38(4), 241–250.
doi:10.1080/09523980110105150
Bonito, J. A., & Lambert, B. L. (2005). Information
similarity as a moderator of the effect of gender
on participation in small groups: A multilevel
analysis. Small Group Research, 36(2), 139–165.
doi:10.1177/1046496404266164
Brookfield, S., & Preskill, S. (2005). Discussion as
a way of teaching: Tools and techniques for demo-
cratic classrooms. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Burge, E. J. (1993, June). Connectiveness and
responsiveness. Paper presented at the Feminist
Pedagogy and Women-Friendly Perspectives in
Distance Education International Working Con-
ference, Umea, Sweden.
Cosier, J., & Glennie, S. (1994). Supervising the
child protection process: A multidisciplinary in-
quiry . In Reason, P. (Ed.), Participation in human
inquiry (pp. 99–119). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Curtis, R. (2004). Analyzing students’ conver-
sations in chat room discussion groups. Col-
lege Teaching, 52(4), 143–148. doi:10.3200/
CTCH.52.4.143-149
Fahy, P. J. (2002). Use of linguistic qualifiers and
intensifiers in a computer conference. American
Journal of Distance Education, 16(1), 5–22.
doi:10.1207/S15389286AJDE1601_2
Fullen, M., & Scott, G. (2009). Turnaround
leadership for higher education. San Francisco:
Jossey-Bass.
Garrison, D. R., Anderson, T., & Archer, W. (2000).
Critical inquiry in a text-based environment:
Computer conferencing in higher education. The
Internet and Higher Education, 2(2-3), 87–105.
doi:10.1016/S1096-7516(00)00016-6
720
Garrison, D. R., Anderson, T., & Archer, W. (2001).
Critical thinking and computer conferencing:
A model and tool to assess cognitive presence.
American Journal of Distance Education, 15(1),
7–23. doi:10.1080/08923640109527071
Garrison, D. R., & Arbaugh, J. B. (2007). Re-
searching the community of inquiry framework:
Review, issues, and future directions. The
Internet and Higher Education, 10, 157–172.
doi:10.1016/j.iheduc.2007.04.001
Goodman, R. M., Speers, M. A., McIleroy, K.,
Fawcett, S., Kegler, M., & Parker, E. (1998).
Identifying and defining the dimensions of com-
munity capacity to provide a basis for measure-
ment. Health Education & Behavior, 25, 258–278.
doi:10.1177/109019819802500303
Graddy, D. B. (2006). Gender salience and the
use of linguistic qualifiers and intensifiers in
online course discussions. American Journal of
Distance Education, 20(4), 211–229. doi:10.1207/
s15389286ajde2004_3
Guiller, J., & Durndell, A. (2006). ‘I totally agree
with you’: Gender interactions in educational
online discussion groups. Journal of Computer As-
sisted Learning, 22, 368–381. doi:10.1111/j.1365-
2729.2006.00184.x
Hannifin, M., Land, S., & Oliver, K. (1983). Open
learning environments: Foundations, methods, and
models . In Reigeluth, C. M. (Ed.), Instructional
Design Theories and Models (Vol. 2, pp. 115–140).
Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Hasler-Waters, L., & Napier, W. (2002). Building
and supporting student team collaboration in the
virtual classroom. Quarterly Review of Distance
Education, 3(3), 345–352.
Hewitt, J. (2003). How habitual online practices
affect the development of asynchronous discus-
sion threads. Journal of Educational Computing
Research, 28(1), 31–45. doi:10.2190/PMG8-
A05J-CUH1-DK14
Gender and Collaborative Knowledge Building in an Online Community of Inquiry

Hiltz, S. R., & Shea, P. (2005). The student in the
online classroom . In Hiltz, S., & Goldman-Segall,
R. (Eds.), Learning Together Online: Research on
Asynchronous Learning Networks (pp. 145–168).
Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Holliman, R., & Scanlon, E. (2006). Investigating
cooperation and collaboration in near synchro-
nous computer mediated conferences. Comput-
ers & Education, 46, 322–335. doi:10.1016/j.
compedu.2005.11.002
Kramarae, C. (2007). Gender matters in online
learning . In Moore, M. G. (Ed.), Handbook
of Distance Education (2nd ed., pp. 169–180).
Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Krippendorff, K. (2004). Content analysis: An
introduction to its methodology (2nd ed.). Beverly
Hills, CA: Sage.
Li, X. (2007). Intelligent agent-supported online
education. Decision Sciences Journal of Innova-
tive Education, 5, 311–331. doi:10.1111/j.1540-
4609.2007.00143.x
Lindsey, L., & Berger, N. (2009). Experiential
approach to instruction. In C. M. Reigeluth & A.
A. Carr-Chellman (Eds.), Instructional-design
theories and models volume III: Building a com-
mon knowledge base (pp. 117-142). New York:
Taylor & Francis.
Lipman, M. (2003). Thinking in education (2nd
ed.). New York: Cambridge University Press.
Lipponen, L. (2000). Towards knowledge
building: From facts to explanations in pri-
mary students’ computer-mediated discourse.
Learning Environments Research, 3, 179–199.
doi:10.1023/A:1026516728338
Lock, J. V. (2002). Laying the groundwork for
the development of learning communities within
online courses. Quarterly Review of Distance
Education, 3(4), 395–408.
Macdonald, J. (2003). Assessing online collabora-
tive learning: Process and product. Computers
& Education, 40, 377–391. doi:10.1016/S0360-
1315(02)00168-9
Moore, M. G. (1972, Fall). Learner autonomy:
The second dimension of independent learning.
Convergence, 5(2), 76–88.
Puntambekar, S. (2006). Analyzing collaborative
interactions: Divergence, shared understanding
and construction of knowledge. Computers &
Education, 47, 332–351. doi:10.1016/j.compe-
du.2004.10.012
Reason, P. (1994). Participation in human inquiry.
Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Riffe, D., Lacy, S., & Fico, F. G. (2005). Analyz-
ing media messages: Using quantitative content
analysis in research (2nd ed.). Mahwah, NJ:
Lawrence Erlbaum.
Rourke, L., Anderson, T., Garrison, R., & Archer,
W. (2001). Assessing social presence in asynchro-
nous text-based computer conferencing. Journal
of Distance Education, 14(3), 51–70.
Rourke, L., & Kanuka, H. (2009). Learning in
Communities of Inquiry: A review of the literature.
Journal of Distance Education, 23(1), 19–48.
Ryan, M., & David, B. (2003). Gender differences
in ways of knowing: The context dependence of
the attitudes toward thinking and learning survey.
Sex Roles, 49(11/12), 693–699. doi:10.1023/
B:SERS.0000003342.16137.32
Sanchez-Casal, S., & Macdonald, A. A. (2002).
Feminist reflections on the pedagogical relevance
of identity . In Macdonald, A. A., & Sanchez-
Casal, S. (Eds.), Twenty-first-century feminist
classrooms: Pedagogies of identity and difference
(pp. 1–28). New York: Palgrave Macmillan.

721
 Gender and Collaborative Knowledge Building in an Online Community of Inquiry
Schrire, S. (2004). Interaction and cognition in
asynchronous computer conferencing. Instruc-
tional Science, 32, 475–502. doi:10.1007/s11251-
004-2518-7
Selwyn, N., Gorard, S., & Furlong, J. (2006). Adult
learning in the digital age: Information technology
and the learning society. New York: Routledge.
Sfard, A. (1998). On two metaphors for learning
and the dangers of choosing just one. Educational
Researcher, 27(2), 4–13.
Stein, D. S., Wanstreet, C. E., Glazer, H. R.,
Engle, C. L., Harris, R. A., & Johnston, S. M.
(2007). Creating shared understanding through
chats in a community of inquiry. The Internet and
Higher Education, 10(2), 103–115. doi:10.1016/j.
iheduc.2007.02.002
Sujo de Montes, L. E., Oran, S. M., & Willis, E. M.
(2002). Power, language, and identity: Voices from
an online course. Computers and Composition, 19,
251–271. doi:10.1016/S8755-4615(02)00127-5
Taylor Gibson, J. (2009). Discussion approach
to instruction. In C. M. Reigeluth & A. A. Carr-
Chellman (Eds.), Instructional-design theories
and models volume III: Building a common
knowledge base (pp. 99-116). New York: Taylor
& Francis.
Turpin, C. A. (2007). Feminist praxis, online
teaching and the urban campus. Feminist Teacher,
18(1), 9–27. doi:10.1353/ftr.2008.0017
Vonderwell, S., & Zackariah, S. (2005). Factors
that influence participation in online learning.
Journal of Research on Technology in Education,
38(2), 213–230.
Zafeiriou, G., Nunes, J. M. B., & Ford, N. (2001).
Using students’ perceptions of participation in
collaborative learning activities in the design
of online learning environments. Education for
Information, 19, 83–106.
722
KEY TERMS AND DEFINITIONS
Collaboration: Dialogue that addresses a
variety of perspectives and supports shared un-
derstanding.
Collaborative Knowledge Building: Dia-
logue that involves brainstorming, exploring all
points of view, challenging perceptions, ensur-
ing equality of voices, drawing in participants,
demonstrating the ability to withhold judgment,
stretching individual perspectives to embrace
others’ perspectives, and sharing experiences
over time.
Connected Knowing: A way of knowing that
is rooted in the experience of relationships and
characterized by empathy, equality, genuine car-
ing, and withholding judgment.
Community of Inquiry: A model that values
collaborative learning through discussion and
involves the interaction of three overlapping el-
ements: teaching presence, social presence, and
cognitive presence.
Participation: Becoming engaged with oth-
ers and generating the situations to be discussed.
Readiness to Participate in a Discussion:
Creating a welcoming climate, establishing re-
lationships by showing genuine interest, relating
to others, demonstrating acceptance and empathy,
feeling emotionally and cognitively comfortable
about participating in a discussion, and formulating
initial thoughts on the discussion topic.
Shared Understanding: A new knowledge
creation influenced by participation and col-
laboration and achieved by exchanging individual
knowing for group knowing, thus changing from
individual perspectives to a joint perspective that
emerges from collective contributions.
ENDNOTE
1
Pseudonyms are used to protect privacy.
 723

Chapter 43
Participatory and Appreciative
Action and Reflection
in Adult Learning:
Transformation as Appreciative Reflection
Simona Marchi
University of Rome, Italy

ABSTRACT
Participatory and Appreciative Action and Reflection (PAAR) is a specific approach to learning, reflec-
tion and change. In this chapter we are going to identify the characteristics of PAAR approach within the
adult learning context. Starting from the relationship between types of learning and types of reflection,
we will analyze in particular the differences between critical and appreciative reflection and transfor-
mative and generative learning. Then we will explain some theoretical and methodological origins of
PAAR approach: Appreciative Inquiry (AI) and Participatory Action Research (PAR) highlighting, in
particular, four important shifts that characterize this approach: from deficit-based to strengths based
discourses; from self-learning to collective learning; from a one way of knowing to a more pluralistic
one; from cycles and spirals of reflection to reflective learning framework with specific intentions of
learning, action and change. Finally, we will consider a possible coexistence of critical and appreciative
reflection, generally considered antithetical, or difficult to put in practice, in PAAR approach.

INTRODUCTION ally fade away, where connectivity is increasing,

When we consider adults in a learning situation,
we must consider processes regarding people who
are part of a society, within organizations, and
within formal and informal groups. In situations
where interdependencies expand, where boundar-
ies of organizations and professional roles gradu-
DOI: 10.4018/978-1-61692-906-0.ch043
the learning processes are strictly connected to
personal and professional identity construction.
Learning processes are in turn mediated, co-
created by a network of human or non-human
agents, in a context where new technologies take
on a fundamental role (Latour, 2005). It means
that learning, change and identity creation of
individuals and organizations are simultaneous
processes influencing each other.
 Participatory and Appreciative Action and Reflection in Adult Learning
The Participatory and Appreciative Action and
Reflection (PAAR) approach in adult learning is
the meeting point of a group of theoretical and
methodological perspectives where learning and
change processes (at individual, collective and
organizational level) are to be considered as a
whole. This is possible because PAAR bases its
methodological approach on the following shifts:
• from the critical to the appreciative
perspective;
• from the paradigm of stability to the para-
digm of change, innovation;
• from the retrospective attention to the fu-
ture attention;
• from “blame culture” to positive
appreciation
These shifts are full of theoretical and meth-
odological implications.
Taking these shifts into account allows us:
• to conceive the perspectives of learn-
ing and of knowing, together, at the same
time. The knowing perspective refers to a
knowledge-centered point of view, where
knowledge is enacted through the action,
negotiated and mediated by its acquisition
and/or co-creation processes within groups
and organizations. The learning perspec-
tive considers learning as a social activity
strictly connected with social and econom-
ic conditions, gender, ethnic and linguistic
differences, individuals and contexts’ de-
mographic characteristics. Learning is al-
ways based on experiences, grounded on
the peculiarities of different contexts and
is related to reflective processes.
How to combine, in practice, learning
(experience-centered) and knowing (knowledge-
centered) perspectives?
724
• understanding that learning and knowing
processes are always related to change dy-
namics. This dynamics refers to the way
of acting, thinking, relating, shaped by
individuals within different groups or or-
ganizational contexts. Focusing on this is
important because understanding learning
processes allows us to understand change
processes and vice versa. How to valorize
the transformative and generative dimen-
sions of learning?
• pointing out the value of the tacit dimen-
sions of change processes (Lester & Piore,
2004), not immediately recognizable,
describable, and for this reason not eas-
ily understood, diffused and adopted. The
tacit aspects of change processes can be
revealed and managed through a reflec-
tive learning process in which problem
solving and creative thinking activities are
grounded into the individual and collective
experiences and are related to the expecta-
tion concerning future scenarios. If reflec-
tion assumes a central role in learning and
changing processes, what kind of reflection
might help us to bring out the tacit aspects
of changing processes?
In this chapter we will focus on the theoretical
and methodological perspectives of PAAR ap-
proach: the action methodologies, in particular par-
ticipatory action research (PAR), and appreciative
inquiry (AI). Before doing this we will analyze the
relationship between kinds of learning and kinds
of reflection. We will consider the relationship
between critical reflection and transformative
learning and the relationship between appreciative
reflection and expansive learning. Then we will
investigate some elements of PAAR approach,
its basic principles and some of its main aspects,
exploring the possible co-existence of critical and
appreciative reflection.
Participatory and Appreciative Action and Reflection in Adult Learning
BACKGROUND
The distinction between adaptive and generative
learning (Senge, 1990) is one of the most treated
topics in the framework of scientific literature
concerning the organizational learning concept
(OL), which, in recent years, has increased thanks
to a set of contributions (Banpuji & Crossan,
2004; Miner & Mezias, 1996; Shipton, 2006).
Generative learning refers to a change of the mental
model, paradigm or the knowledge through which
individuals interpret reality, in order to develop a
systems thinking process through a higher inter-
relationship between organization and individuals’
aspects. Adaptive learning, instead, involves any
improvement or development of the explicate
order through a process of self-organization and
problem-solving. Many authors attach importance
to considering the adaptive and the generative
learning perspectives together (e.g., Chiva, Gran-
dio & Alegre, 2009; Fiol and Lyles, 1985; Miner
& Mezias, 1996; Pemberton & Stonehouse, 2000).
Senge (1990) considers professionals as agents
able to change structures and systems where they
live by means of five disciplines which allow to
“shift from seeing parts to seeing wholes, from
seeing people as helpless reactors to seeing them
as active participants in shaping their reality, from
reacting to the present to creating the future” (p.
69). How does it happens? What conditions and
what kinds of activities might generate the trans-
formation of individuals into active participants
in order to create a better future?
In order to comprehend the meaning of this
sort of challenge it is necessary to refer to the
theoretical roots regarding the generative learn-
ing concept and realize which reflection mode or
modes could be the basis of this shift.
Critical Reflection and
Transformative Learning
Senge’s (1990) conception of mental models as
“deeply ingrained assumptions, generalizations,
or even pictures and images that influence the
way in which we comprehend the world and the
way in which we act” (p. 8) refers to cognitive
schemes by which individuals and organizations
think and act. Mental models very often are not
conscious and have effects on the individual’s
behaviors. This concept has already been treated
in Schön (1983) and in Argyris and Schön’s
(1974, 1978) theorization through the concept of
theories-in-use. According to Argyris and Schön’s
(1974) idea, the actions performed by individuals
are influenced by mental maps or mental models
which take place in certain situations. These kinds
of models consist in implicit values and theories,
and they are stronger than the theories that indi-
viduals put forward when asked why they act in
a certain way. Theories-in-use are:
Necessary means for obtaining what we want. They
identify strategies to resolve conflicts, making a
living, closing a deal, organising a neighbourhood
– indeed, for every kind of intended consequence.
Theories-in-use are also means for maintaining
certain kinds of constancy, they specify which
variables we are interested in, and thereby set
boundaries to our actions. (Argyris & Schön,
2003, p. 231).
Schön (1983) distinguished between reflection-
on-action, which essentially is a retrospective
and cognitive activity that enables professionals
to spend time exploring why they acted as they
did, and what was happening, by developing
sets of questions and ideas about our activities
and practice, and reflection-in-action, which is
considered as the interactive process that man-
ages activity and situations. This bond between
reflection and action led to the development of
models for reflective processes known as single-
loop learning (Korthagen, 1985) and double-loop
learning (Argyris & Schön, 2003) reflective
cycles. According to Schön’s work, actions are
an integral part of reflection.
Some reflective cycles stop at the single loop
learning and challenge the effectiveness of the
725
 Participatory and Appreciative Action and Reflection in Adult Learning
system. The system defines what we are able to
see and, consequentially, it steers our actions into
results achieved within the framework. The double
loop learning is a learning typology which calls
into question mental values and models underly-
ing our actions. The action typology forms the
basis for the awareness construction about mental
models or theories-in-use and is a reflection tied
to the practice, in particular contexts or situations,
allowing individuals to:
Turn the mirror inward; learning to unearth one’s
own internal pictures of the world, to bring them
to the surface and hold them rigorously to scrutiny.
It also includes the ability to carry on ‘learningful’
conversations that balance inquiry and advocacy,
where people expose their own thinking effectively
and make that thinking open to be influenced by
others. (Senge 1990, p. 9).
Within these processes, reflection is generally
based on critical or unexpected events. Mezirow
(1991) took Schön’s idea of reflective practice a
step further by putting the emphasis on critical
reflection as a deeper form of reflective practice.
Mezirow (1991) started from the idea of meaning
perspectives or habits of expectation which serve
as perceptual and cognitive codes to structure
the way we perceive, think, feel, and act on our
experience. He made a distinction between: instru-
mental learning which is aimed at controlling and
manipulating one’s environment; communicative
learning, aimed at understanding the meaning of
what is being communicated; and emancipatory or
reflective learning which is aimed at understand-
ing oneself and one’s meaning perspectives or
premises. It is from this last kind of learning that
critical reflection may emerge: by questioning
one’s meaning perspectives.
The essence of critical reflection was not new.
Dewey (1910) and Argyris and Schön (1978)
initiated this idea. Dewey (1910) wrote:
A person in pursuing a consecutive train of
thoughts takes some system of ideas for granted
726
(which accordingly he leaves unexpressed, un-
conscious) as surely as he does in conversing
with others. Some contexts, some situations, some
controlling purpose dominates his explicit ideas so
thoroughly that it does not need to be consciously
formulated and expounded. Explicit thinking
goes on within the limits of what is implied or
understood. Yet the fact that reflection originates
in a problem makes it necessary at some points
consciously to inspect and examine this familiar
background. We have to turn upon some uncon-
scious assumption and make it explicit. (p. 215).
Argyris and Schön (1996) had given onsets
toward critical reflection by their work on double-
loop learning. Double-loop learning assumes:
• becoming aware of a conflict of values or
of an unexpected event;
• realizing that improving what one already
does is not sufficient to solve a difficult
situation;
• realizing which values are in conflict with
each other;
• restructuring norms and values and very
likely restructuring strategies and assump-
tions associated with those norms.
Dewey (1910) considered the awareness of a
problematic situation as the pre-reflective stage
of critical inquiry. Mezirow (1991) elaborated on
this concept and identified the importance in a
person’s development as well as its achievability.
Mezirow’s transformation theory identifies the ap-
plication of reflection as the pre-reflective stage,
premise reflection, in which the inquirer conducts
a fault finding review of presuppositions of prior
learning and their consequences. This process
is central to meaning and value realisation. The
term critical reflection often has been used as a
synonym for reflection on premises.
Critical reflection refers to the core of profes-
sional practices and habitus: it involves values,
beliefs and routines. It is also a reflection typology
Participatory and Appreciative Action and Reflection in Adult Learning
which helps professionals shift towards a new level
of thinking and acting. Transformative learning,
because of its deep reach and personal nature,
has a deep impact on a person’s development.
Premise reflection involves one’s sense of self.
It goes deep into who we are and how we think
and the reason why we are who we are and why
we think in a certain way. Therefore “perspective
transformation often involves profound changes
in self, changes with cognitive, emotional, so-
matic, and unconscious dimensions” (Mezirow,
1991, p. 177).
Referring to the impact of transformative
learning Mezirow (1991) states:
Transformative learning involves an enhanced
level of awareness of the context of one’s beliefs
and feelings, a critique of their assumptions and
particularly premises, an assessment of alterna-
tive perspectives, a decision to negate an old
perspective in favour of a new one or to make a
synthesis of old and new, an ability or take action
based upon the new perspective, and a desire to
fit the new perspective into the broader context
of one’s life. (p. 161).
Transformative learning involves an empow-
ering sense of self, grounded into a deeper and
critical comprehension of the way in which so-
cial relationships and culture have shaped one’s
beliefs and feelings, and finally, more strategies
and resources for taking action (Mezirow, 1991).
Like Schön (1983), Mezirow considers taking
action as an integral dimension of transformative
learning. It is the kind of reflection which involves
our becoming aware of why we perceive, think,
feel, or act as we do and of the reasons for and
consequences of our possible habits of hasty
judgement, conceptual inadequacy, or error in
the process of judging. “It is premise reflection
that opens the possibility for perspective trans-
formation or transformative learning” (Mezirow,
1991, p. 110).
In the wake of Argyris & Schon (1978, 1996)
and Mezirow’s (1991) works, unexpected events,
critical incidents, uncertain and risky situations
and break down routines are often at the basis of
critical reflection Starting from unexpected events
provides critical evidence to individuals, teams and
organizations on their schemes of action. Critical
evidences help individuals and professionals to see
the existing problems through other lens, through
other viewpoints and to find more creative solu-
tions to perceived problems.
However, critical events are not just facts
or things which exist independently from an
individual. As Tripp (1993) wrote: “like all data,
critical incidents are created. Incidents happen,
but critical incidents are created by the way we
look at a situation: a critical incident is an inter-
pretation of the significance of an event” (p. 8).
If something is considered as a critical incident
by an individual or a group, that means that an
individual or a group is giving it value judgement,
based on the significance they assign to the mean-
ing of the incident.
While the critical incidents are turning points
that may be exceptional events, a large number of
critical incidents are not dramatic at all: they are
related to events that occur in break down routines
in professional practices “which are critical in the
rather different sense that they are indicative of
underlying trends, motives and structures. These
incidents seem to be typical rather than critical at
first sight, but they are rendered critical through
analysis” (Tripp, 1993, p. 24).
Appreciative Reflection and
Expansive Learning
The appreciative term, in the Organizational
Learning (OL) literature, takes on at least three
meanings. The first meaning refers to Vickers’
(1968)appreciative systems which are a culture’s
systems of values, beliefs, and expectations that
guide the perception and the action. The apprecia-
tive systems are settled in the readiness to value
727
 Participatory and Appreciative Action and Reflection in Adult Learning
and respond to a certain situation in a certain way.
Interpreting the appreciative term refers to valu-
ation processes and to self-reinforcing systems
(Barrett, 1995).
The second meaning refers to Schön’ (1983)
appreciative systems. In their reflection-in-action
practitioners bring certain constants which provide
the necessary boundaries for most effective and
reflective practice. Appreciative systems are one
of these constants and bring reflective conversa-
tion and problem setting. These constants are:
• media, languages and repertoires they use
to describe reality;
• appreciative systems they bring to problem
setting, to the evaluation of inquiry and to
reflective conversation;
• the overarching theories by which they
make sense of phenomena;
• and the role frames within which they set
their tasks and through which they bound
their institutional settings. (Schön, 1983)
In this case appreciative systems are a necessary
condition for reflection in the course of action:
constancy of appreciative system is an essential
condition for reflection-in-action. It is what makes
possible the initial framing of the problematic
situation, and it is also what permits the inquirer
to re-appreciate the situation in the light of its
back-talk, and it allows the inquirer to tell when
he is finished (Schön, 1983, p. 272).
Schön’s perspective is more situational, and
is connected to the concept of ethic of inquiry: a
problem-based dialogue with specific situations in
work practices. This kind of inquiry could enrich
professional practices and organizational cultures.
This happens when a subject acts in changing
situations, in organizational contexts characterized
by a prevalent theory in use, by an appreciative
system and by a specific attitude of reflection in
action. The appreciative system allows connecting
728
subjective to objective knowledge and it joins the
learning and knowing perspectives. Appreciative
systems may vary depending on the professional
and organizational context, but at the same time
they are a point of reference for decision-making
processes and action . During reflective processes,
the stability of appreciative systems helps profes-
sionals bring into question theories and mental
structures they use in the professional practice.
The third meaning is related to the word appre-
ciate: the act of stating past and present strengths,
successes and potentials of individuals, groups
and organizations allows to increase value, to
give value to positive experiences. In this case,
the word appreciate refers to the system’s capacity
to size and value the positive potential. It refers to
the ability to look beyond obstacles, problems and
limitations and to provide hope for human capacity
to achieve potential. (Barrett, 1995). This requires
the development of an appreciative intelligence
(Thatchenkery, 2005; Thatchenkery & Chowdhry,
2007; Thatchenkery & Metzker 2006), which is
composed of three elements: the ability to appreci-
ate the positive, to reframe it and to realize how the
future unfolds through the analysis of the present
positive aspects. About appreciative intelligence
development, Thatchenkery & Metzker (2006),
wrote that people:
could reframe, appreciate the positive and realize
how the future could unfold from the present, they
could see how their aim and goal was possible to
accomplish. Thus, they were willing to persist and
to believe that their own actions and abilities would
take them to a successful conclusion. Because they
could envision the way a positive future could
unfold from the present, they could deal with the
uncertainty that often accompanies a new venture
or a crisis. They exhibited irrepressible resilience,
the ability to bounce back from a difficult situa-
tion, as the result of reframing, seeing what was
positive in the situation, and understanding that
a better future could come about despite a crisis
or a setback (p. 15).
Participatory and Appreciative Action and Reflection in Adult Learning
The appreciative reflection has often been
considered as opposite with regard to critical
reflection, the first one associated with a more
positive, creative and generative thinking, and the
latter often misunderstood as problem-centered,
deficit-based perspective and, therefore, directed
to the problem solving, associated with a critical
thinking. The appreciative reflection actually
requires the development of an appreciative eye
(Ghaye, 2008) and starts with the assumption that
something in the organization works. For this
reason the appreciative reflection process starts
with the highlighting of the characteristics and
dynamics of the organization or system when it
works. As Barrett (1995) wrote:
the art of appreciation is the art of discovering
and valuing those factors that give life to the
organization, of identifying what is best in the
current organization. Appreciation involves the
investment of emotional and cognitive energy to
create positive image of the desired future. (p. 40).
Senge (1990) considered that the failure to
understand system dynamics can lead us into
“cycles of blaming and self-defense: the enemy is
always out there, and problems are always caused
by someone else” (p. 231). A problem-oriented
reflection risks generating a problem-oriented
framework and a problem-oriented language.
The attention inevitably shifts to critical and
unexpected events and consequentially both or-
ganizations and professionals become unable to
develop a positive reflection about strengths and
individual potential and of the system as a whole.
This generates a defense mechanism that does not
allow the building of trusting relationships and
blocks the learning processes.
According to Barrett (1995) the apprecia-
tive approach represents the basis of generative
learning. “Appreciative learning cultures nurture
innovative thinking by fostering an affirmative
focus, an expansive thinking, a generative sense of
meaning, and by creating collaborative systems”
(p. 42). This is based on the creation of the needed
conditions for the development of specific skills:
• The ability to focus on what was positive
in the organization and for individuals pre-
viously and on what is positive in the pres-
ent time (affirmative competence)
• The ability to expand the meaning of what
is possible, to identify problems in non
familiar settings, to redefine the boundar-
ies of one’s experiences and move beyond
them. Engëstrom (1987) defines this pro-
cess as expansive learning which refers to
processes started by subjects in situations
that seem to be highly contradictory, new or
unknown. In this case, participants can free
themselves from the limits of the setting in
which they are acting and in which new
criteria for choice and action can be con-
structed. This is a way of learning some-
thing that is not yet there in a place where
the participant is learning while building a
new identity (expansive competence)
• The ability to conceive a feedback system
by which it is possible: to valorize the con-
tribution of each participant; to give the
sense of the progress in which each par-
ticipant can acknowledge his own impor-
tant contribution. It is important to create
integrative systems that allow participants
to recognize that their actions, their ef-
forts, make the difference. Feedback strat-
egy plays a central role. This increases the
sense of hope and empowerment (genera-
tive competence).
• The ability to establish a collaborative dia-
logue among participants in order to trans-
form systems, to look for a positive space
for meeting and inquiry, for exchanges, for
a reciprocal help, an open-minded space
where to find different voices and perspec-
tives. Spaces, forums for thinking together
in a creative way, in order to generate fu-
ture visions (collaborative competence) .
729
 Participatory and Appreciative Action and Reflection in Adult Learning

Table 1. Continuum between critical and appreciative reflection

Reflection Critical ←—→ Appreciative

Focus of reflection Incidents or negative events, dilemmas Positive events, strengths, successful
episodes
Culture Blame culture Trust culture
Deficit-based narrative and culture Strengths-based narrative and culture
Objective Making explicit individual meaning per- Fostering innovation and action, building
spectives, individual awareness, conscious- shared vision of future starting from the
ness-raising positive present
Time Retrospective and present Retrospective, present and future
Methodological perspective Cognitive, holistic, developmental perspec- Emotional, cognitive, relational
tive
Theoretical perspective Constructivism Social Constructionism
Epistemic subject Relational realities
Main focus Outcome of learning Collective and appreciative reframing
Learning Transformative Generative and Expansive

Critical and/or Appreciative strands, which help us understand their meaning

Reflection?
Looking at the context of practices in which critical
and/or appreciative reflection approach are used,
this may be represented by a ‘continuum’, whose
poles are critical reflection and appreciative reflec-
tion, within which a multitude of contributions,
ideas and practices, open different perspectives
according to the following elements as shown in
Table 1.
Some have tried to develop a unified perspec-
tive in which the appreciative reflection becomes
the basis of the transformative learning and the
generative learning (Davis & College 2005;
Davis-Manigaulte, Yorks & Kasi, 2006; Donovan,
Meyer &Fitzgerald, 2007; Gunnlaugson, 2006;
Sessa, 2007). Hurson (2007) developed a theory
which takes into account both critical and ap-
preciative thinking, which is called a productive
thinking model.
This assumption allows further steps forward.
Dirkx (1998) asserts that “what transformative
learning means and how it is best fostered within
formal learning settings varies considerably, de-
pending on one’s theoretical perspective” (p. 1).
Dirkx identified four theoretical perspectives, or
and the implications of transformative learning.
These strands are: Transformation as conscious-
ness-raising, mainly related to Paulo Freire’s
conceptualization; Transformation as critical
reflection, mainly related to Jack Mezirow’s
conceptualization; Transformation as develop-
ment, mainly related to Larry Daloz’s work; and
Transformation as individuation, mainly related
to Robert Boyd’s work. (See Table 2)
In our opinion, another strand, which is Trans-
formation as Appreciative Reflection, could be
added.
TRANSFORMATION AS
APPRECIATIVE REFLECTION:
TOWARDS THE POSSIBLE CO-
EXISTENCE OF CRITICAL AND
APPRECIATIVE REFLECTION.
THE CONTRIBUTION OF
PAAR APPROACH
The Participatory and Appreciative Action and
Reflection (PAAR) is a new concept (Ghaye,
2008), that represents the combination of theoreti-
cal and practical traditions which refer to: Action

730
Participatory and Appreciative Action and Reflection in Adult Learning
Table 2. Dirkx’ strands in transformative learning
Strands What
Transformation as Fostering critical
consciousness-raising consciousness in which
Main author Paulo participants develop the
Freire ability to analyze, pose
questions, and take action
in the social, political,
cultural and economic
contexts that influence and
shape their life.
Transformation as criti- Making meaning from
cal reflection one’s own experiences.
Main author Making explicit individual
Jack Mezirow meaning perspectives.
Transformation as Making sense of individu-
development al experiences is related to
Main author the developmental move-
Larry Daloz ment of individual life.
The shifts in the transfor-
mative process is about the
way in which individuals
know and make meaning
Transformation as Making the unconscious
Individuation conscious, making
Main author individuals become aware
Robert Boyd of aspects of themselves
of which they are not
conscious.
Research (AR) methodologies, Participatory
Action research (PAR) and Appreciative Inquiry
(AI). This particular approach consists of four
Approach
Individuals as epistemic
subjects.
Structural perspective:
awareness of social, political,
economical structures that
shape the way of thinking.
Constructivist view of knowl-
edge and learning.
Rational and critical reflection
on beliefs and assumptions.
Cognitive and developmental
perspective.
Constructivist view of knowl-
edge and learning.
Holistic and developmental
perspective.
Holistic and intuitive pro-
cesses.
Constructivist view of knowl-
edge and learning.
Holistic and developmental
perspective.
Constructivist view of knowl-
edge and learning
processes which are: developing an apprecia-
tive gaze; reframing lived experience; building
Kind of reflection
Praxis: action and reflection in transactional or
dialectical relationship with each other.
Reflection on the world in order to change it,
giving voice, naming the world and construct-
ing meaning.
Transformative learning as an emancipatory
process, both individual and social.
Critical reflection, self-reflection:
to identify, assess, reformulate key assumption
of one’s own meaning perspectives;
to be more inclusive in the individual percep-
tion of the world, to be able to differentiate its
various aspects, open to other points of view,
to be able to integrate differing dimensions of
individual experiences into meaningful and
holistic relationships.
Critical reflection, tough issues and dilemmas.
The importance of the “in between” phases of
development, in order to construct new mean-
ingful structures starting from the old phase,
that helps individuals to perceive and make
sense of the world.
More oriented to personal change and less to
the social structure, oppression.
Importance of the human development as
interactive process with the environment.
The importance of appreciating the capacity
to identify one’s own sense of self, with the
well-being of all life that undergirds the term
of social responsibility.
Commitment to the common good is seen as
a way of openness to necessary and ongoing
dialogue with those who might be different.
Importance of expressive and emotional-
spiritual dimensions of learning. Integrating
holistically and consciuosly this dimension
with daily experiences of life.
Self-knowledge is mediated more by symbols
rater than directly through language.
Symbols as powerful images that represent
at the unconscious level important issues and
concerns that might be evoked through the
study of content or subject matter.
Meaning-making as relationship, dialogue,
process of recognizing, naming, elaborat-
ing, with conscious awareness these images
(story, metaphor, myths, poetry, music, dance,
dreams, fantasy).
731
 Participatory and Appreciative Action and Reflection in Adult Learning
practical wisdom; demonstrating achievement
and moving forward.
Ghaye (2008) describes PAAR as the devel-
opment from more conventional forms of Action
Research (AR) and Participatory Action Research
(PAR) to a more explicitly appreciative form of
action and reflection. PAAR is described as a
synthesis of the best practices of Action Research
(AR) and Participatory Action Research (PAR),
with a third and new dimension called appreciative
intelligence (Thatchenkery, 2005; Thatchenkery
& Chowdhry, 2007; Thatchenkery & Metzker
2006). PAAR is a systematic and rigorous style
of democratic research and learning, concerned
with developing practical knowing in the pursuit
of worthwhile human purposes.
PAAR brings together action and reflection, with
the participation of a range of stakeholders, in
order to identify and amplify current achieve-
ments and to produce practical solutions in mis-
alignments between values and actions. It is not
simply about change. It is more about improvement
and sustaining success. PAAR may be regarded as
a kind of 3rd generation action research (Ghaye,
2008, p. 3).
As in Action Research (AR), PAAR celebrates
the power of individuals to change their practice,
in fact it focuses on the experiences and efforts
of the subjective and living “I” (Peshkin, 1988,
2001), but includes a participatory conception of
action research (PAR) in which the living “I” is
re-positioned within the “We” (Whitehead, 2000).
“Whereas the origin and ownership of the focus
for AR resides within the individual practitioner,
for PAR its locus is within the collective ‘we’. One
aim of PAR is to make transparent the nature and
influence of these different ‘we’s” (Ghaye, 2008,
p. 3). Considering both AR and its participatory
dimension P, PAR emphasizes the collective
process of knowledge creation. It is based on the
development of ethical relationships within pro-
fessional groups, organizations and institutions. It
732
focuses on listening and relationships which are
the main elements for bringing out the different
perspectives and points of view, and allowing
the creation of a relational way of thinking. The
participation is based on the common development
of the project and analysis, and therefore, it is also
based on ethical and trustful relationships among
all participants. To be successful, PAR depends
on the authentic participation of those involved
(Reason & Bradbury, 2007). An important char-
acteristic of PAR is that it seeks to establish self-
critical communities of people participating and
collaborating in a change process. Communities
committed to enlightening themselves about the
relationship between the current situation, where
they are, the action to improve it and the conse-
quences of such actions. Additionally PAR has an
emancipating intention. One where participants
liberate themselves from the institutional and
personal constraints which limit their power to
live by their legitimate and freely chosen social
values. Nevertheless, it is often difficult to start
a PAR process far from the power relationships
and dynamics that characterize action contexts.
PAR is also a political process because it involves
people making changes that will affect others.
For this reason it sometimes creates resistance to
change, both for participants themselves and for
others (Hughes & Seymour-Rolls, 2000). Learn-
ing through group actions is a key characteristic
of PAR.
PAR maintains critical reflection as a way of
learning and sense making. The action research
process usually starts with a professional reflect-
ing on an aspect in their work that is not working
well and looking for areas where changes might be
made. The focus of reflection and action is often
framed as a problem or a concern. “This conception
of action research is therefore about reducing per-
plexity and discomfort, and with a change process
as fixing and getting rid of problems. Because of
this, some forms of action research can be associ-
ated with deficit-based discourses” (Ghaye, 2008,
p. 5). But, at the same time, it doesn’t consider
Participatory and Appreciative Action and Reflection in Adult Learning
it the sole reflection method for action choices.
It is placed within an appreciative approach with
tends to call attention to a positive way, also in
order to look at problems “within a creative and
appreciative frame and with a critical spirit”
(Ghaye, Melander-Wikman, Kisare, Chambers,
Bergmark, Kostenius, & Lillyman, 2008, p. 362).
PAAR is also based on the Appreciative Inquiry
(AI) (Coopperrider & Srivastra, 1987; Coopper-
rider & Whitney, 2005) and in particular on the
co-evolutionary search for the best in people, in
organizations and in the world. The focus is on
the discovery of what gives life to an organized
system (person, organization, society) when it is
more essential, more effective, more constructive
and powerful in economic, ecologic and human
terms. The AI involves the ability and the prac-
tice in the formulation of questions that inform
the abilities of people, groups and organizations
to understand, to anticipate and to develop their
own positive potential. This involves a mobiliza-
tion towards searching (positive questions) and
reflecting. In the AI the “intervention” strictness
gives way to quick imagination, to creativity and
to innovation: rather than dwelling upon negotia-
tion and criticism, reflection spirals and cycles,
diagnosis of problems, it focuses on discovery,
dreams, wishes and on action planning (Cooper-
rider & Whitney, 2005).
This kind of integration is important from the
aims and learning methodologies point of view.
Schön (1983) underlined the value of the construc-
tion of a safe environment to experiment with new
ideas, behaviors and learning. A safe and protected
environment allows: the development of trust
among participants, the creation of a more open
way of communication and exchange of ideas, sto-
ries, and experiences, a more free way of building
relationships in learning activities, away from the
pressure of power relations related to professional
roles. Co-constructing a safe environment, starting
from a deficit-based approach, that begins with
highlighting problems, is very difficult; therefore,
there is an elevated risk of developing a “blame
culture”. Blame culture obstructs the develop-
ment of trustful relationships and, often, blocks
the chance of change and learning.
At the same time the appreciative approach
risks promoting the creation of an individual or
a collective missing dimension which increases
when emotions and cognition are censored,
because they are considered unjustified within
the group’s culture and rules framework. When
critical reflection is absent within AI processes,
the interpretations, which are focused exclusively
on positive facts, may cause censorship and a
corresponding disquiet, uneasiness and negative
behaviors as a result of what has already been
expressed. In this way PAAR may offer a positive
opportunity to consider both the aspects because
it doesn’t imply an indifference to problems but:
this means that achieving and moving forward
does not have to be only about getting rid of what
we don’t want, namely problems. Conversations
and actions do not have to be only about ‘fixing’
things that are going less well, less than we had
hoped for or expected. PAAR does not perpetuate
the belief that weaknesses can, indeed, simply be
fixed. PAAR requires a major shift in our mindset,
away from reflective practices being only about
problem finding, problem solving and about get-
ting rid of ‘unwanted’ aspects of current practice,
away from confessional tales and towards con-
versations about success, about understanding
why particular aspects of our work are indeed
successful, and how these joyful and celebratory
aspects of practice can be further amplified and
made more consistent. First and foremost it is
about identifying and playing to our strengths
(Ghaye, Melander-Wikman, Kisare, Chambers,
Bergmark, Kostenius, & Lillyman, 2008, p. 362).
PAAR’s strengths are described by means of
four shifts:
1. Away from a preoccupation with changing
behaviors in order to solve problems, with
733
 Participatory and Appreciative Action and Reflection in Adult Learning
‘fixing’ things and an engagement in deficit-
based discourses, towards the development
of appreciative insight, understanding the
root which causes the success and sustain-
ing strengths-based discourses in order to
amplify those things that will help to build
a better future from the positive present.
2. Away from self-learning (individualism and
isolation) and towards collective learning
through interconnectedness, appreciative
knowledge sharing and the use of new forms
of communications technology which en-
able simultaneous action in dispersed geo-
political spaces.
3. Away from one way of knowing and one
perspective on truth, to an acceptance of
more pluralistic view of ways of knowing,
of understanding human experience and
putting this knowing to good use.
4. Away from reflective cycles and spirals
and towards the use of a reflective learning
(R-Learning) framework with four inten-
tions. They are those of developing appre-
ciative insight, of re-framing experience, of
building collective wisdom, of achieving
and moving forward. (Ghaye, Melander-
Wikman, Kisare, Chambers, Bergmark,
Kostenius, & Lillyman, 2008)
PAAR refers to the third meaning of “ap-
preciative” proposed in the previous paragraph:
the positive, transformative and generative one.
The appreciative reflection involves the attempt
to create a positive frame, useful for the daily
professional practice (and not only for this). This
is a way of (re)grounding relationships (Chaffee,
2005) through the development of a different
point of view towards the others and the work, in
a participative way. Nevertheless it keeps a bond
with the second and the first meaning. This bond
starts from the reframing concept (Ghaye, 2008).
If an appreciative system (Schön, 1983) constitutes
a necessary frame for professional actions within
organizations, the re-framing process, based on
734
the development of an appreciative way of seeing
(Ghaye, 2008), represents a necessary condition
in order to produce change, innovation, to con-
struct new meanings, new ways of interpreting
experiences.
Reframing means trying to see in an appre-
ciative way what we usually are accustomed
to seeing in accordance with the “critical” and
“problem oriented” logics. This also means choos-
ing differently: choosing to see and to valorize
some positive aspects, successes, individual and
collective strengths . Finally, this means moving
forward (of the positive present) towards action:
“Many people have the ability to reframe and the
capacity to appreciate the positive. Yet, if they
don’t see the concrete ways that the possibilities
of the present moment could be channeled, they
have not developed appreciative intelligence”
(Thatchenkery & Metzker 2006, p. 7).
PAAR seems to be a useful designation for
the conceptualization of several approaches that,
even though coming from different theoretical
traditions, have common principles:
• Participation: to create the basis for an
effective and authentic participation. First
of all it means “inclusion”, appreciating
the differences, listening, giving/having
voice, activating contexts, co-generating
experiences.
• Valorization, appreciation: to reflect
about one’s own and others’ professional
experiences, to identify their meaningful
aspects, to re-contextualize and to reframe
experiences, to create new meanings, new
future scenarios. This aspect is very signif-
icant because it has to do with the mecha-
nisms of values creation within a group.
• Empowerment: building new levels of
autonomy and new levels of action for in-
dividuals and for groups in the organiza-
tions, to generate self-confidence starting
from the awareness about own abilities,
Participatory and Appreciative Action and Reflection in Adult Learning
to create new learning opportunities, and
viceversa.
• Interconnection: active listening, to com-
municate with others, to develop positive
and generative relationships, to create net-
works which go beyond organizational
boundaries.
• Space: co-creating new micro-systems of
rules, new ways of communication, posi-
tive and safe environments, in which re-
lationships among participants manage to
break and go beyond routines, and over-
come a problem-solving centered point of
view in order to invent newer relational
forms which are more free, more creative
and more generative, in which individual
experiences and learning could be refor-
mulated in a collective way.
• Relational ethics: conceived as situational
ethics, and not as absolute or universal eth-
ics. Situational ethics involves actions. It
is closed to professional practices and to
the real conditions where practices take
place. Developing an appreciative gaze
requires an understanding of the different
ethical dilemmas, experienced each day,
in organizations and in work contexts.
Dilemmas for example concerning rights-
to-autonomy, confidentiality, privacy and
dignity, vulnerability, openness, scarce
resource distribution, professional com-
petence, inter-personal conflicts, injustice,
fairness, conflicting loyalties, discipline
and encroachments on personal liberty.
Relational ethics also allows to build the
conditions necessary to give dignity and
legitimacy to choices and decisions made
in situations of uncertainty, ambiguity and
risk.
• Action: the approach’s focus is placed on
the action of professionals, individuals and
groups in specific organizational contexts.
Professional practices is considered as the
real drive of the innovation process, be-
cause it is more free and more pertinent in
certain contexts and situations than formal
and professional roles. Professional prac-
tices benefit of a situated legitimacy and
derive significance and value from the con-
texts where they take place and where, at
the same time, they achieve results, chang-
es and continuous learning.
What is remaining and what has been high-
lighted by some (Burr, 1995; Glasersfeld, 1995;
van der Haar & Hosking, 2004; Palincsar, 1998;
Wilson, 1996) is the epistemological perspective:
is it constructivism or constructionism? This
debate is in progress and it can’t be resolved at
this time. This depends on the way in which the
stability-change dynamics is considered; on the
way in which relationships with others are con-
ceptualized; and on the way in which reflection
and learning are developed.
FUTURE TRENDS
We believe that a possible development of PAAR
approaches may take place by means of the Actor-
Network Theory (Callon, 1986; Callon & Law,
1995, 1997; Latour, 2005). The Actor-Network
Theory (ANT) contribution allows to assume a
perspective which excludes the primacy of some
actors on others actors, in particular the primacy
of humans on non-human actors, or the primacy of
some forms of knowledge on other ones, recover-
ing a symmetry in relationships among heteroge-
neous actancts. Therefore, through the ANT it is
possible to extend the concept of participants in
learning and change processes. The shift from par-
ticipant to actanct in ANT is particularly important
because it allows the consideration of technology
as an actanct . Human and non-human actancts
are conceived as learning partners and not only
as subjects or as technological tools. This concep-
tion of participants (human and non-human) as
actancts involves actions and relationships. This
735
 Participatory and Appreciative Action and Reflection in Adult Learning
allows rebuilding settings starting from a multi-
faceted point of view.
Another important shift is from network meta-
phor to networking metaphor. The networking’s
lens allows to stress on the actions and on the
processual elements of actions and helps con-
sidering the network as a complex set of effects
of actancts in action, and as opened results. The
networking metaphor allows “discovering the way
in which connections among knots are traced out
or cancelled, and most of all, what really happens
among the trajectories joining several network’s
points” (Bruni, 2008, p. 153).
What we suggest is to consider the networking
metaphor within the development of appreciative
lens, in order to include different kinds of actancts
and relationships in the reframing process of lived
experiences.
CONCLUSION
PAAR (Participatory and Appreciative Action
and Reflection) is a new designation that allows
to group approaches already existent. Besides
the above mentioned principles, what joins these
approaches is the development of a concrete
transformation of specific situations by means
of reflection and action processes that are both
individual and collective. Reflection arises from
an inquiry process focused on practices, on indi-
vidual and collective experiences (both positive
and negative) and its purpose consists in promoting
the reframing process development. The inquiry
and co-construction methods can be different
and characterized by several methodological
paths. The aim of PAAR is a transformation. This
transformation is not placed on problem solving or
setting, but it is mainly placed on the appreciative
reframing process and on positive change. This
peculiarity of PAAR approach, according with the
reflections developed in this chapter, allows us to
add another strand to Dirkx’s analysis: Transfor-
mation as appreciative reflection.
736
REFERENCES
Argyris, C., & Schön, D. (1974). Theory in prac-
tice: Increasing professional effectiveness. San
Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Argyris, C., & Schön, D. (1978). Organizational
learning: A theory of action perspective. Reading,
MA: Addison-Wesley.
Argyris, C., & Schön, D. (1996). Organizational
learning II. Theory, method and practice. Read-
ing, MA: Adisson Wesley.
Argyris, C., & Schön, D. (2003). Theories of
action . In Jarvis, P., & Griffin, C. (Eds.), Adult
and continuing education (Vol. III, pp. 222–242).
London: Routledge.
Bampuij, H., & Crossan, M. (2004). From raising
questions to providing answers: Reviewing organi-
zational learning research. Management Learning,
35(4), 397–417. doi:10.1177/1350507604048270
Barrett, F. J. (1995). Creating appreciative learning
cultures. Organizational Dynamics, 24(2), 36–49.
doi:10.1016/0090-2616(95)90070-5
Bruni, A. (2008). Attivare e stabilizzare un network
nel settore delle biotecnologie: caso Tek-Tek. In
Gherardi, S. (Ed.), Apprendimento tecnologico e
tecnologie di apprendimento. Bologna: il Mulino.
Burr, V. (1995). An Introduction to So-
cial Constructionism. London: Routledge.
doi:10.4324/9780203299968
Callon, M. (1986). Some elements of a sociology
of translation: Domestication of the scallops and
the fishermen of St-Brieuc Bay. Sociological
Review. Mongraph, 32, 196–233.
Callon, M., & Law, J. (1995). Agency and the
hybrid collectif. The South Atlantic Quarterly,
94(2), 481–507.
Participatory and Appreciative Action and Reflection in Adult Learning
Callon, M., & Law, J. (1997). After the individual
in society: Lessons on collectivity from science,
technology and society. Canadian Journal of
Sociology-Cahiers Canadiens De Sociologie,
22(2), 165–182. doi:10.2307/3341747
Chaffee, P. (2005). Claiming the light: Appre-
ciative inquiry and corporate transformation.
Herndon, VA: Alban Books.
Chiva, R., Grandio, A., & Alegre, J. (2009).
Adaptive and generative learning: Implications
from complexity theories. International Journal
of Management Reviews, 4, 87–100.
Cooperrider, D., & Srivasta, S. (1987). Apprecia-
tive inquiry in organizational life. Research in
Organizational Change and Development (Vol.
1, pp. 129-169). Retrieved September 20, 2009
from http://www.stipes.com/aichap3.htm
Cooperrider, D., & Whitney, D. (2005). Apprecia-
tive inquiry: A positive revolution in change. San
Francisco: Berrett-Koehler.
Davis, C., & College, B. (2005, October). Ap-
preciative inquiry: A tool for transformational
learning. Paper presented at the Sixth International
Transformative Learning Conference, Michigan
State University.
Davis-Manigaulte, J., Yorks, L., & Kasli, E.
(2006). Expressive ways of knowing and trans-
formative learning. New Directions for Adult and
Continuing Education, 109, 27–35. doi:10.1002/
ace.205
Dewey, J. (1910). How we think. Lexington, MA:
DC Heath. doi:10.1037/10903-000
Dirkx, J. M. (1998). Transformative learning
theory in the practice of adult education: An
overview. PAACE Journal of Lifelong Learning,
7, 1–14.
Donovan, L. L., Meyer, S. R., & Fitzgerald, S.
P. (2007, August). Transformative learning and
appreciative inquiry: A more perfect union for
deep organizational change. Paper presented
at the meeting of the Academy of Management
Proceedings, Philadelphia.
Engeström, Y. (1987). Learning by expanding. An
activity-theoretical approach to developmental
research. Helsinki: Orienta-Konsultit.
Fiol, C. M., & Lyles, M. A. (1985). Organizational
learning. Academy of Management Review, 10,
803–813. doi:10.2307/258048
Ghaye, T. (2008). An Introduction to participa-
tory and appreciative action research (PAAR).
Gloucester, England: New Vista Publications.
Ghaye, T., Melander-Wikman, A., Kisare, M.,
Chambers, P., Bergmark, U., Kostenius, C., &
Lillyman, S. (2008). Participatory and apprecia-
tive action and reflection (PAAR) – democratiz-
ing reflective practices. Reflective Practice, 9(4),
361–397. doi:10.1080/14623940802475827
Glasersfeld, E. (1995). Radical Constructivism:
A Way of Knowing and Learning. London: Rout-
ledge. doi:10.4324/9780203454220
Gunnlaugson, O. (2006). Generative dialogue as
a transformative learning practice in adult and
higher education settings. Journal of Adult and
Continuing Education, 12(1), 2–19.
Hughes, I., & Seymour-Rolls, K. (2000). Participa-
tory action research: Getting the job done. Action
Research E-Reports, 4. Retrieved September 20,
2009, from http://www.fhs.usyd.edu.au/arow/
arer/004.htm
Hurson, T. (2007). Think better: Your company’s
future depends on it…and so does yours. N.Y.:
McGraw Hill.
737
 Participatory and Appreciative Action and Reflection in Adult Learning

Korthagen, F. A. (1985). Reflective teaching and
pre-service teacher education in the Netherlands.
Journal of Teacher Education, 36(2), 11–15.
doi:10.1177/002248718503600502
Latour, B. (2005). Reassembling the social: An
introduction to actor-network-theory. Oxford:
Oxford University Press.
Lester, R. K., & Piore, M. J. (2004). Innovation:
The missing dimension. Cambridge, MA: Harvard
University Press.
Mezirow, J. (1991). Transformative dimensions
of adult learning. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Miner, A., & Mezias, S. (1996). Ugly duckling no
more: Pasts and futures of organizational learn-
ing research. Organization Science, 7(1), 88–99.
doi:10.1287/orsc.7.1.88
O’Brien, R. (2001). An overview of the meth-
odological approach of action research. In R.
Richardson (Ed.), Theory and Practice of Action
Research. Retrieved September 20, 2009, from
http://www.web.ca/~robrien/papers/arfinal.html.
Palincsar, A. S. (1998). Social constructivist
perspectives on teaching and learning. Annual
Review of Psychology, 49, 345–375. doi:10.1146/
annurev.psych.49.1.345
Pemberton, J. D., & Stonehouse, G. H. (2000).
Organisational learning and knowledge assets – an
essential partnership. The Learning Organization,
7(4), 184–194. doi:10.1108/09696470010342351
Peshkin, A. (1988). In search of subjectivity –
one’s own. Educational Researcher, 17(7), 17–21.
Peshkin, A. (2001). Angles of vision: Perception
in qualitative research. Qualitative Inquiry, 7(2),
238–253. doi:10.1177/107780040100700206
Reason, P., & Bradbury, H. (2007). The SAGE
Handbook of Action Research: Participative
Inquiry and Practice (2nd ed.). London: Sage.
Schön, D. (1983). The reflective practitioner.
How professionals think in action. New York:
Basic Books.
Senge, P. M. (1990). The fifth discipline: The art
and practice of the learning organization. New
York: Doubleday Currency.
Sessa, V. I. (2007). The development of group
interaction patterns: How groups become adaptive,
generative and transformative learners. Human
Resource Development Review, 6(4), 353–376.
doi:10.1177/1534484307307549
Shipton, H. (2006). Cohesion or confusion?
Towards a typology for organizational learning
research. International Journal of Management
Reviews, 8(4), 233–252. doi:10.1111/j.1468-
2370.2006.00129.x
Thatchenkery, T. (2005). Appreciative sharing of
knowledge: Leveraging knowledge management
for strategic change. Chagrin Falls, OH: Taos
Institute Publication.
Thatchenkery, T., & Chowdhry, D. (2007). Ap-
preciative inquiry and knowledge management:
A social constructionist perspective. Cheltenham,
U.K.: Edward Elgar Pub.
Thatchenkery, T., & Metzker, C. (2006). Apprecia-
tive intelligence: Seeing the mighty in the acorn.
San Francisco: Berrett-Koehler.
Tripp, D. (1993). Critical incidents in teaching:
Developing professional judgment. London:
Routledge.
Van der Haar, D., & Hosking, D. M. (2004).
Evaluating appreciative inquiry: a relational con-
structionist perspective. Human Relations, 57(8),
1017–1036. doi:10.1177/0018726704045839
Vickers, G. (1968). Values, systems and social
processes. England: Penguin Books.

738
Participatory and Appreciative Action and Reflection in Adult Learning
Whitehead, J. (2000). How do I improve my prac-
tice? Creating and legitimating an epistemology
of practice. Reflective Practice, 1(1), 91–104.
doi:10.1080/713693129
Wilson, B. G. (1996). Constructivist learning
environments: case studies in instructional de-
sign. New Jersey, USA: Universal Technology
Publications.
KEY TERMS AND DEFINITIONS
Actor-Network Theory (ANT): An approach
to social theory and research that refers to material
and semiotic actants together within the same net-
works which are performed by a constant making
and remaking of relations.
Appreciative Culture: It is a culture based on
the appreciation of strengths, of what individuals
and organizations achieved, and the things that
individuals and organizations might have suc-
ceeded in changing.
Appreciative Reflection: It is a kind of re-
flection that involves identifying, understanding
and amplifying: (a) personal gifts and talents and
those of others; (b) the way by which individuals
positively value and respect themselves and oth-
ers’; (c) ways of improving work and workplace.
It is about focusing on success and achievement,
not just on problems and failures.
Blame Culture: It is culture based on the
identification of a culprit when unexpected and
adverse events occur.
Creative Thinking: It is the process by which
new ideas or concepts emerge and are developed.
Critical Incident: It is an unexpected event
that generates an interruption of routines.
Critical Reflection: It is the process of analyz-
ing, questioning and reframing experiences within
a broad context of issues (e.g., issues related to
social justice, curriculum development, learning
theories, politics, culture, or use of technology).
This kind of reflection is often based on critical
or unexpected events, or break down routines in
professional practice.
Participatory Appreciative Action and Re-
flection (PAAR): It is a new approach to reflecting,
learning and acting which requires to use one’s
appreciative intelligence to focus on the best of
what is currently experienced, to seek out the root
causes of this, then design and implement actions
that amplify and sustain this success.
Reframing: It is the process by which one
modifies his/her way of seeing things, interpreting
situations and acting.
Safe Space: It is a protected environment cre-
ated by relationships based on trust.
739
740

Chapter 44
Integrating Technology for
Effective Adult Education
Victor C. X. Wang
California State University, Long Beach, USA

ABSTRACT
Teaching and learning anytime anyplace involves integrating technology into teaching and learning.
Effective adult education would not occur without integrating technology into teaching and learning.
Technological integration involves not only course instructors, adult learners, but also institutions.
In addition, this chapter covers the evolution of technology, ranging from correspondence education
to Web 2.0 technologies. By reading this chapter, readers will get to know under what circumstances
integration of technology is possible and how to integrate technology into teaching and learning. More
importantly, readers will change their mentality about integration into teaching and learning in the new
century. They will come to the realization that integration of technology into teaching and learning will
facilitate learning, not inhibit learning.

INTRODUCTION that these topics revolve around adult learners,

In any books about information communication
technologies and adult education, we have suc-
cessfully addressed such pertinent topics such
as Online Education and Adult Learners, Con-
ventional Online Teaching Versus Andragogical
Teaching, and Effective Teaching with Technol-
ogy in Adult Education. If we take a closer look
at these topics, we can come to the conclusion
DOI: 10.4018/978-1-61692-906-0.ch044
principles of adult learning, and effective use of
technology in the 21st Century. While these topics
are indispensable, in this chapter, we should delve
into integrating technology for effective adult
education. Adult education would be meaningless
in this information age if we don’t know how to
integrate technology into teaching and learning
when learners, young and old, engage in learn-
ing, using technology, for the sake of obtaining
a college degree, enhancing their professional
development, or just for the sheer joy of learning.
Integrating Technology for Effective Adult Education
Properly used, technology will enhance learning,
and it will not replace instructors. Both instructors
and learners need to learn how to maximize the use
of technology effectively for the sake of improving
their teaching and learning experience wherever
it occurs and whenever it occurs in cyberspace. If
used negatively, technology may inhibit learning.
When this happens, both instructors and learn-
ers want to stay away from using technology to
enhance teaching and learning.
However, integrating technology for effective
adult education requires not just instructors and
learners, but also institutions. If instructors, learn-
ers or institutions have prejudice against teaching
and learning with technology, effective integration
of technology would not happen. As the country
is experiencing this unprecedented financial crisis
(budget cuts and furloughs), it has become obvious
that both instructors and institutions are expected
to do more with less (as budgets are continually
shorn while student numbers are expected to grow)
(Brookfield, 2006). Given the larger bleak picture
looming before everyone, I would imagine that
every instructor, learner and every institution will
be required to integrate some kind of technology
into teaching and learning in this new century. It
is not a matter of whether instructors, learners, or
institutions like integrating technology into teach-
ing and learning; it has become a matter of how
instructors, learners or institutions can integrate
technology for effective adult education. No longer
is the University of Phoenix the only university
that has been using technology to reach hundreds
of learners worldwide, numerous other universities
have joined in this tide of teaching and learning
with technology. Wang (2008) predicts that it is
not surprising that one third of all universities
and colleges in the United States have put their
traditional courses onto the computer screen. And
this figure of one third of university and college
courses may well become two thirds in the near
future given the current budget crisis at all levels.
We may just forget about the nationwide finan-
cial crisis. The sheer flexibility and convenience
technology has brought to learners, instructors
and institutions are the number one reasons why
technology should be integrated into teaching and
learning. If adult learners have not used WebCT
or Blackboard programs, they cannot be labeled
as modern lifelong learners. Course registration,
submitting paperless assignments, receiving im-
mediate feedbacks, and grade posting have been
easier with the upgraded features of WebCT or
Blackboard programs currently used by numer-
ous universities and colleges in the United States
and worldwide.
To avoid isolation on the part of learners,
institutions and instructors can always schedule
teaching in a hybrid manner. Think about the fol-
lowing benefits that King (2006, p. 16) describes
in her edited volume on Harnessing Technology
in Higher Education: Access, Equity, Policy, &
Instruction. What King describes is not just a
definition of distance education. Rather, King
lists the compelling benefits that only technology
can bring to not just higher education, but also to
adult education:
• The working mother in rural Nebraska
completing her bachelor’s degree online
through her local state university while her
children sleep at night.
• The single young man in New York City
studying for the GED exam via public tele-
vision and telephone tutoring.
• The mid-career business woman executive
pursuing her doctorate in education via a
hybrid online and residency program in or-
der to change careers.
• The retired bus driver engaged in a col-
laborative webinar for his class through a
University of Beijing class on the Eastern
perspective of global issues.
Without integrating technology, the above
benefits could not be enjoyed by adult learners.
The above benefits would not be possible 150
years ago when correspondence education was
741
 Integrating Technology for Effective Adult Education
the norm. Indeed, technology has come a long
way. If we don’t use integrate technology into
teaching and learning, we will definitely fail to
serve the learning needs of our learners.
As King (2006, p. 17) indicated that learners
in the past were similar to today’s adult learners:
working adults seeking additional credentialing
for career advancement, who sought part-time and
independent learning opportunities, who could
not come to campus, and who needed flexible
offering (as cited in Cantelon, 1995; Holmberg,
1986). Given such learning needs presented by
current adult learners, it would be unwise for any
instructors, learners, or institutions not to integrate
technology into teaching and learning. The days
are gone when instructors, learners or institutions
could say, “philosophically, I am against teaching
and learning with the use of technology.” The
dire reality has become whether we can integrate
technology into teaching and learning for effective
adult education. Unless effective adult education
occurs, this will continue to give those antiqued
instructors, learners, or institutions power to aban-
don the use of technology. As I mentioned at the
beginning of this chapter, it takes multiple factors
to integrate technology into teaching and learning
for effective adult education. These factors range
from learners, instructors, principles of adult
learning, methods of pedagogy, nature of learn-
ing, epistemological orientations to institutions.
More importantly, knowledge of how technology
has evolved into the present day form will assist
us in successfully integrating technology into
teaching and learning. In the next section, we will
address how technology has evolved into Web 2.0
technologies. Then, we will come to other issues
revolving around learners, instructors and institu-
tions. The historical background of technology
BACKGROUND
Teaching and learning with technology started
150 years ago when correspondence education
742
became the norm in the United States (Gibson,
2006). The chief challenge with correspondence
education was that learners could not listen to their
instructors’ verbal instruction. All instructional
materials were text-based. Being able to access
printed materials started more than 150 years ago
as printing was invented by the Chinese over 2000
years ago. As the Chinese proverb goes, “I hear,
I forget; I see, I remember; I do, I understand.”
The proverb makes sense to both educators and
learners. It is true the more senses we involve in
learning, the better we learn. As learners demanded
to be able to listen to their instructors as well as
see their instructors, technology has enabled us
to respond in new ways to the old challenges
(Gibson, 2006). Then technologies in the form
of radio, television, audiocassettes, and videos
emerged in response to learners’ learning needs.
King (2006) indicated that even today, many of
these technologies are still the major forms of
distance learning in many parts of the world. Even
though Internet technologies were used to reach
learners in the cities in China on a small scale at
the beginning of the 21st century, the vast number
of learners in the countryside in China still relies
on radio, television, audiocassettes and videos for
their training and education. Worthy of note is the
fact that radio, television and audiocassettes are
the major technologies used in some developing
countries. When I was a high school student in
China in the early 1980s, it was through radio
and television that I learned to master the English
language. Although online technologies are be-
ing used in China by some major universities on
a small scale, radio and television are still used
to reach millions of learners, especially in the
countryside. Indeed, mass education would be
possible without the use of radio and television in
China given its large number of student popula-
tion. Radio, television and audiocassettes were in
use for several decades before videoconferencing
occurred in the 1980s and 1990s.
With the widespread adoption and availability
of Internet technologies, online learning (web-
Integrating Technology for Effective Adult Education
based) became popular in the 2000s. Compared
with other forms of technologies such as radio,
television or even video, Internet technologies can
offer more benefits to learners that other technolo-
gies cannot offer. For instance, when taking a class
with radio or television, if students miss a class,
there is no way that they can make up for the lost
live session of that class. Internet technologies
have the capability of reaching learners anytime,
anywhere due to the asynchronous nature of online
teaching and learning. This is the so-termed 24/7
teaching and learning in cyberspace. To cater to
the needs for career advancement, independent
learning opportunities, and flexible offerings,
Internet technologies make other technologies
pale in comparison. Just like the University of
Phoenix, universities and colleges cannot afford
to lose a major body of student population, that
is, adult students who have already made up 47%
of the student body on any campus (Knowles,
1975, 1989; Bash, 2005). Adult enrollment in
university courses has been on the increase. Dur-
ing this time of budget cuts and furloughs, more
and more adult students are returning to schools
to retool their skills, knowledge, and attitudes
in order to regain employment to contribute to
society. This helps all universities and colleges
create many opportunities for providing online
teaching and learning.
No need to say that these learners cannot
come to campus to attend face to face classes in
the daytime regardless of how much they love
these live sessions. As these students are required
to work many hours including weekends, many
cannot come to campus to attend classes even on
the weekend. Some have to work two or three
jobs in order to make ends meet during this na-
tionwide financial crisis. Integrating technology
to reach this student population has become a
must in the 21st Century. Web 2.0 technologies
have enabled everyday users to become active
participants in instantaneous information access,
global communication, and content creation both
collaborative and personal (Jonassen, Howland,
Moore, & Marra, 2003; Prensky, 2008). As defined
by King (2009), Web 2.0 means development of
the World Wide Web to include more Web-based
programs, otherwise known as hosted services,
collaborative, and easier content creation tech-
nologies (Simonson et al., 2008). Further, King
indicates that examples of Web 2.0 technologies
include Google ® applications which are run over
the Internet rather than needing to be downloaded;
social networking sites, such as Linked-In and
MySpace; and content creation technologies
such as blogs, wikis, and podcasts. Controversy
regarding the term exists as the original vision and
capabilities of the Web included some of these
abilities in fundamental ways although they were
not widely adopted at the time. Looking at the Web
2.0 technologies, we cannot help but conclude that
Internet technologies are in a position to empower
the minds of adult learners. Further, adult learners
are capable of self-direction in learning according
to adult education literature. As long as instructors
can provide a helping relationship in the virtual
classrooms, as long as learning resources are pro-
vided online and as long as ground rules are set
regarding learning online, adult learners are willing
to embark on any learning journeys specified by
certain universities in order to obtain their much
needed degrees. However, Web 2.0 technologies
alone cannot empower the mind of learners. They
must be integrated into teaching and learning by
learners, instructors and even institutions. This is
why adult educators are needed this time to serve
as helpers, guides on the side, linking adult students
to learning resources in the virtual classrooms.
Self-direction does not mean that learners don’t
need help from the course instructors or Web 2.0
technologies. Because of self-direction in learn-
ing, learners still need minimal help from course
instructors if learners are more experienced with
a subject matter given their prior experience and
former schooling.
Without integrating Web 2.0 technologies
properly, spending time on the Internet does not
equal learning on the part of learners. When we say
743
 Integrating Technology for Effective Adult Education
that learners have learned, we probably mean that
learners have created knowledge through the use
of technology and via the help of their instructors
and institutions. To create knowledge, it involves
how learners, instructors, and institutions integrate
technology, especially web 2.0 technologies into
teaching and learning. A negative attitude towards
integrating technology may not result in knowl-
edge creation. Instantaneous information access,
global communication via the use of technology
should lead to knowledge creation. Based on
the principles of adult learning covered in other
chapters in this book, adult learners engage in
learning with the use of technology because they
want to solve a real problem related to their work
or life; they want to construct knowledge based
on their existing knowledge. This learning with
technology must lead to career advancement, and
learning opportunities. Integration of technology
must lead to effective learning on the part of
learners. Towards this end, Web 2.0 technologies
have been enhanced by other technology such as
Elluminate.com. As this book will be published
by IGI Global sometime in 2010, California State
University, Long Beach will have used this ser-
vice called Elluminate Live for over three years.
What this service can do is provide learners and
instructors the ability to see and hear each other
as long as their camcorders are connected to their
computers. Recently, the university purchased
Podcast to enhance Elluminate Live services. Of
course, other universities use similar technologies
to do the same to invite more interaction between
instructors and learners and vice versa. With
this adequate knowledge of how technology has
evolved into the present day form, it is time to
address of the main issues related to adult learners,
course instructors, and institutions. Integration of
technology into teaching and learning would not
be a reality without in in-depth understanding of
pertinent issues related to learners, instructors
and institutions.
744
COURSE INSTRUCTORS
Course instructors play a major role in integrating
technology into teaching and learning in this new
century. They are the ones that are responsible for
putting their traditional courses onto the computer
screen by using state of the art technology avail-
able today. First and foremost, instructors should
get rid of old school mentality. That is, if they do
not lecture in a face to face classroom, students
will not learn anything. This is not true. Think of
how students learn in this information age. The
new adult learners are called generation Y. Ac-
cording to Barker, Sullivan, and Emery (2006),
Generation Y (born after 1981) are just entering the
workforce. This group is culturally diverse. Their
parents were heavily involved in their lives, and
they participated in many activities from soccer
to music. From this, they have a strong sense of
self-confidence and are technologically savvy but
crave structure. They are motivated by service to
others and, like the Xers, can be disillusioned if
they do not see the organization being consistent
with its mission and vision. Let’s take a look at
the characteristics of Generation Xers (born 1965-
1980) related to the use of technology about: They
are technologically sophisticated and desire to be
active and vocal members of the team. They want
to commit to the mission of the organization and
become cynical if they believe the organization is
not fulfilling its mission ethically or completely.
Given the fact that these two groups of adult
learners are good at using technology. Technology
seems to be a strong access point to knowledge
to these two groups of adult learners. Even baby
boomers and pre baby boomers use some form
of technology to learn although some of them are
technologically challenged. When our adult stu-
dents are ready to learn via the use of technology,
courses instructors are required to help learners
learn via the use of technology.
How can we meet their learning needs without
giving up our old mentality? It is time that we ac-
cepted the fact that students do learn via the use
Integrating Technology for Effective Adult Education
of technology. Technology serves only as a tool.
Remember programmed instruction was popu-
larized in the 1960s when behaviorism (Watson,
1960-1961; Skinner, 1968) was incorporated into
teaching and learning. The Web 2.0 technologies
allow our students to access information, com-
municate information with each other and above
to create knowledge through accessing informa-
tion and sharing information. Therefore, first of
all, instructors need to overcome their old school
mentality. If you do not have adequate computer
skills, all universities and colleges offer training
classes on effectively using computers. As univer-
sities and colleges move one third of their classes
onto computer screen, they want their instructors
to be well versed in using technologies to reach
students. This is compatible with their “expect-
ing more with less” policy. Indeed, teaching with
technology helps save money. Instead of schedul-
ing face to face meetings, instructors can teach
anywhere, any time, using Web 2.0 technologies
coupled with Elluminate Live or Podcast. Instead
of driving to face to face classroom, instructors
can teach at their homes, using cutting edge
technologies. And students can save money on
gas if they are not required to drive to a physical
campus to take a class. When given more time to
interact with other students online with the use of
technology, students can provide serious thought
to their assigned work, whether it is a discussion
topic on the discussion board, or it is a research
paper. Students can use their online library usually
available via WebCT, Blackboard, or other pro-
grams. Searching for a needed article in the field
is just a mouse click away or a few more clicks.
Everything will be at the students’ finger tips. All
kinds of Websites or links can be posted inside
Blackboard or WebCT programs. I prefer using
the saying, “change your thought and you change
your world.” Once instructors embrace teaching
and learning with the use of technology, a whole
different vista lies ahead of us. In the process of
helping students learn via the use of technology,
we keep learning new features of Web 2.0 tech-
nologies. Plus, whenever we experience technical
difficulty, we can always fall back upon our student
technicians or our designated technologists hired
by the universities and colleges.
When course instructors can save time by in-
tegrating technology into teaching and learning,
they can devote more time to research and service
if they are still probationary faculty members.
“Publish or perish” syndrome has not disap-
peared from the university settings. As more and
more teaching institutions turn themselves into
research institutions, research has become more
important. Suppose a faculty member teaches
four to five classes face to face per week, more
than likely this faculty will conduct research on
the weekend or even during holidays. Why not
integrate technology into teaching and learning
and save more time for research in order to survive
at a university setting? Even if you are tenured,
research should be ongoing as it is research that
informs practice. Students do not want you to teach
from yellowed notes on a semester basis. Think
about the fact that even some tenured professors
are driven away by their demanding students who
want more knowledge from these tenured profes-
sors who fail to provide what is needed.
Integrating technology into teaching and learn-
ing can provide more time for faculty to serve on
university and community committees. Providing
service takes time. And if you can teach online in
the evening, why not provide service in the day
time when your time is needed by other univer-
sity administrators? Also, please do not forget,
integrating technology into teaching and learn-
ing mirrors the behaviorist teaching philosophy.
Course instructors can provide stimuli online
and students can provide their response. If their
response is correct, students should be rewarded.
If their response is incorrect, their behavior can be
penalized. This can be done by deducting points
from their course assignments. Knowles (1975)
predicted in the 1970s that education in the 21st
Century would be delivered electronically. His
prediction came true as instructors are required to
745
 Integrating Technology for Effective Adult Education
integrate technology into teaching and learning.
Come to any job advertisement in the Chronicle
of Higher Education; we may come across the
requirement regarding teaching with technology.
Preferences are given to those faculty members
who are savvy with technology, especially WebCT
or Blackboard. Now the 21st Century challenge is
here: It is not a matter of whether we like online
teaching or learning; it has become a matter that
we must learn to integrate technology into teaching
and learning so that our learners’ learning needs
can be met. The fundamental question that can be
asked is if our students are technology savvy, are
we qualified to be their instructors if we refuse to
integrate technology into teaching and learning?
If not, then we must be educated and trained first
before we proceed to help learners learn in the
virtual classrooms.
ADULT LEARNERS
Mention of adult learners, we immediately think of
people over 18 years of age. It is true people over
16 years of age can be considered adults because
by law they can get a driver’s license, get married
without consent from their parents. According to
Knowles and his associates (Knowles, Holton, &
Swanson, 1998, 2005), people who are over 25
years of age are considered bone fide adults be-
cause these people are able to make independent
decisions regarding what to learn, how to learn,
when to learn, and if anything has been learned.
Above all these people are responsible for their
own learning. When it comes to integrating tech-
nology into teaching and learning, we are not that
concerned with Generation Xers or Generation
Y because these learners are technology savvy
anyway. They simply enjoy learning with com-
puters. Using computers to learn gives them a
sense of excitement, and a sense of discovery. It
is no exaggeration that these learners may have
more computer skills than their course instructors.
However, the adult population encompasses other
746
age groups. The oldest group has been called many
names including the Matures, Veterans, Silent
Generation, and Pre Boomers (Barker, Sullivan,
& Emery, 2006). We all know that Pre Boomers
were born between 1925 and 1942 and grew up
during the Depression and World War II. They tend
to be conservative and are not risk takers. Because
they grew up in bureaucratic organizations they
are respectful of authority, the chain of command,
believe in hard work, and paying dues, and tend
to be loyal to one employer. These individuals
are primarily motivated by money, recognition,
security, and stability. When it comes to learning
with technology, they are technically challenged,
having been introduced to technology at middle
age. On the other hand, Baby Boomers were born
between 1943 and 1964, following World War II,
during a time of great economic growth. Because
of the size of this generation, Baby Boomers are
used to being catered to in the marketplace and
their values predominate. Society encouraged
Boomers to think individually and be creative.
They tend to define themselves by their job, are
willing to contribute to and be involved in their
job, and are loyal to their organization. They are
motivated by money and recognition. Historically,
they have been willing to work long hours, but
they are entering their senior years and may not
be able to perform physically challenging tasks
over long work hours. Like the Pre Boomers they
are technologically challenged (Barker, Sullivan,
& Emery, 2006).
When instructors take into consideration Pre
Boomers and Baby Boomers in their classes, a
legitimate concern immediately arises, that is,
how can we accommodate the learning needs
of these learners given the fact that they are not
technology savvy? Not only are they techno-
logically challenged, but also they fear the use of
technology. Having been away from educational
settings for so long a time, they even fear learn-
ing in general. Although they have a lot of prior
experience, they may feel disadvantaged when
placed in a classroom setting with younger adult
Integrating Technology for Effective Adult Education
learners. They may feel that their reaction time
to learning of any kind, especially technology, is
longer than their younger counterparts. Although
excited about learning new skills, knowledge, or
attitudes on campus or via E-learning, they may
feel that they lack in learning techniques. Since
these learners have come of age, their real incen-
tive for learning can be to search for meaning in
life (Lamdin & Fugate, 1997). Common senses
tells us that these learners have gone through a
lot in life, and most of them have accomplished
a lot in their careers. Many of them are near re-
tirement age. Motivating these learners to learn
by using technology would be most challenging.
These adult learners respond to the sixth principle
of adult learning advanced and popularized by
Knowles (1975, 1989, 1995), that is, adult learn-
ers are more responsive to internal motivators
to learning. Intrinsic value of learning is more
important than extrinsic value of learning. They
seek learning not for the sake of pleasing their
course instructors or employers, but for the sake
of adding meaning to life or just for the sheer joy
of learning (Lamdin & Fugate, 1997).
To motivate this particular group of adult
learners, it is best for course instructors to draw
some meaningful connections between learning
with technology and adding meaning to life.
Once these learners see relevancy in learning
with technology, they may be willing to cooperate
with course instructors in a classroom setting or
in cyberspace. Course instructors should use more
internal motivators to encourage these learners to
engage in learning with technology. In addition,
course instructors’ attitude towards integrating
technology into teaching and learning plays in
a major role in alleviating fear from these older
adults. Course instructors should create the most
non-threatening learning atmosphere. Language
used to address traditional syllabi for traditional
age students should be avoided. Allowing these
older adults more time to learn with technology is
essential as their reaction time tends to be much
longer than that of younger adults. Whenever pos-
sible, demonstrate the use of technology as many
times as possible as these older learners consider
repetition a great learning technique. Repetition
not only helps them review past learning skills,
but also helps them reflect on what it is being
taught. Mix younger adults with older adults so
that older adults can learn from younger adults.
Younger adults enjoy helping older adults when
it comes to learning with technology. Older adults
enjoy sharing their life/work experience with
younger adults. From the course instructor’s point
of view, we just mentioned a few of the techniques
that we can use to help adult learners, especially
older adults learn with technology. Integrating
technology into teaching and learning largely
depends on institutions although learners and
course instructors are the beneficiaries of learning
and teaching with technology. In the next section,
we will address institutions.
INSTITUTIONS
It goes without saying that institutions provide
the “infrastructure” for teaching and learning
with technology. Without providing the Web 2.0
technologies, especially WebCT or Blackboard
programs, integrating technology into teaching
and learning would not be a reality. Regardless
of how advanced computers course instructors
or adult learners own, integrating technology
into teaching and learning largely depends on the
“infrastructure” that institutions can provide. The
University of Phoenix has pioneered online teach-
ing and learning and so many other universities
have followed suit. Previously in the book, we
indicated that all universities have adopted the
syndrome, “expect more with less.” Perhaps, it
is incorrect to put it this way. When we think of
the characteristics of adults learners, we come to
the conclusion that many of them cannot come to
a physical classroom for a face to face meeting
with their course instructors or fellow students.
Unlike traditional age students whose full time
747
 Integrating Technology for Effective Adult Education
job is being a full time student, adult learners
have multiple family/work responsibilities (Wang,
2008). Given the harsh reality of financial crisis at
all levels coupled with high gas prices, driving to
a physical classroom to take a college class during
week days or on the weekend has become less
realistic. Only those institutions that can afford
the “infrastructure” of technology can attract this
group of student population, hence accommodat-
ing the learning needs of these learners. The way
Brookfield (2006) sees integrating technology into
teaching and learning gives people the impression
that teaching and learning with technology offers
free choices to both instructors and learners. It is
like learners can choose what to learn whatever
they want to learn as buyers can choose whatever
they wish to buy in a department store. Instruc-
tors can offer different kinds of commodities in a
department store. Here is what Brookfield stated,
Politically, online education seemed to com-
modify learning, to turn it into an external object
marketed for a hefty price to save cash-strapped
programs trying to stay afloat. To me it appeared
to embody some of the typical excess of capitalism
by turning a dynamic, fluid, and unpredictable
phenomenon—the process of learning and teach-
ing—into an objectified product, something to
be bought and sold on the open market. (p. 192)
I disagree with this line of thinking about
integrating technology into teaching and learn-
ing. Many institutions pay more attention to
how course instructors can design their online
teaching and learning according to principles
of learning in order to create more interaction
between course instructors and learners, between
course content and learners and between learners
and learners. Towards this end, institutions hire
student technicians and technologists to assist
faculty in successfully putting their course onto
the computer screen. Course instructors’ syllabi
are constantly examined by committees to find
out whether they emphasize problem-based learn-
748
ing, constructivism, or learner-centered learning
(Brown, 2006; Palloff & Pratt, 1999, 2003). All
these moves indicate that institutions integrat-
ing technology into teaching and learning is a
predictable phenomenon. Institutions want their
course instructors to successfully measure learn-
ing so that learning objectives can be achieved
in a particular class. In addition, all institutions
care about accreditation. Institutions spend a
lot of money in order to maintain accreditation.
Since the advent of online teaching and learn-
ing, learning with technology has been assessed
by different accreditation bodies. If learning has
been commodified in Brookfield’s terms, I would
say institutions want to ensure that learners buy
quality commodities from department stores that
are universities and colleges in this sense.
However, the picture about institutions some-
times is not that rosy. Some institutions still have
the “cash cow” syndrome (Bash, 2003) by treating
adult learners as second class citizens. Once their
tuition is taken, different institutional barriers are
created, ranging from changing admission stan-
dards, assigning courses to unqualified part time
instructors, to creating a cold learning atmosphere.
Adult students are not flexible as traditional age
students because of their special characteristics.
Bash was right in stating, “the unvarnished fact of
the matter is that, unfortunately, the academy has
too often treated adult learners primarily as a lu-
crative source of income. Because these programs
typically require less overhead and diminished
services, there are abundant examples of colleges
and universities that opt for adult programs merely
to satisfy financial rather than philosophical needs”
(2003, pp. 6-7). When it comes to requesting in-
stitutions to adhere to their originally scheduled
classes, some institutions may not do it due to po-
litical bureaucracy. This political bureaucracy may
stem from administrators’ not knowing anything
about the nature of adult learning, characteristics
of adult learners, or their special learning needs.
To paint the picture bleaker, some administrators
refuse to learn about this particular group of learn-
Integrating Technology for Effective Adult Education
ers. When a university determines that it will rely
on adult learners to supplement its income but
then does not provide the philosophical, histori-
cal, and andragogical foundations for its faculty
and support staff, problems will almost certainly
follow and continue unless these issues are ad-
dressed. The lack of institutional support comes
directly from the “cash cow” syndrome. Having
said this, I would say these institutions that have
the “cash cow” syndrome belong to the minority.
Most institutions accommodate the needs of adult
students as 47% of our student population has
turned “gray” in American institutions. As most
scholars argue that online teaching has taken the
personal dimension out of teaching, removing the
relational element between instructors and learn-
ers, recent research has proved that the opposite
is true (Wang, 2005). Wang indicated that even
online teaching and learning still encompasses
either a directing relationship between learners
and instructors or a helping relationship between
instructors and learners. The online teaching and
learning environment is not a vacuum. It is full
of human relationships. To enhance the personal
dimension, institutions have started to purchase El-
luminate Live to provide students a chance to “see,
and hear” their instructors and fellow students.
Back to the institutional barriers, given the
distinction between traditional age students and
adult learners, institutions should do more to in-
tegrate technology into teaching and learning to
accommodate the learning needs of adults. Most
universities and colleges allocate lottery money
to encourage faculty to purchase cutting edge
technological equipment to integrate technology
into teaching and learning. I would advocate that
more lottery money should be provided to course
instructors who teach adult students. Tradition-
ally more lottery money has been allocated to
faculty who teach traditional age students. My
primary reason for saying so is that traditional
age students can always take their classes in a
physical classroom setting. When adult students
miss a traditional face to face meeting, it seems
only technology can help them make up for a lost
lesson. It is reasonable for institutions to spend
more money on technology for adult students.
FUTURE TRENDS
With the advent of Web 2.0 technologies, learn-
ing anytime any place in the information age has
become a reality for learners, young and old.
The best way to integrate technology in teaching
and learning is by addressing course instructors,
learners, and institutions. While course instructors
and learners are supposed to teach and learn with
technology, institutions’ primary responsibility is
to provide technological infrastructure that will
ensure that integration of technology is possible.
Future trends about integration of technology into
teaching and learning will still revolve around the
importance of the following identified by Gibson
(2006, p. 148):
• Support for the technological infrastructure;
• Inclusive instructional designs that are not
only culturally appropriate, but also ac-
cessible for differently-abled or those for
whom English is not their first language;
• Learner support including preparatory
educational experiences for help learners
learn at a distance, learn with technology,
and learn in adulthood;
• Technology support to ensure both facul-
ty and learners are able to function in the
environment and have ready help when
needed;
• Faculty support for teaching with technol-
ogy and the design of instruction.
Further, philosophical differences between
traditional age students and adult students will be
addressed in the future. Even in the 21st century,
there are numerous schools where the dichotomy
between advocates for adult learners and those
who support the notion that the academy exists
749
 Integrating Technology for Effective Adult Education
primarily for traditional age students has created
a notable level of tension (Bash, 2003). This ten-
sion will continue to be addressed. Not everyone
is a fan of the father of adult education, Malcolm
Knowles. Some school administrators refuse to
learn about the principles of andragogy that serve
well the learning needs of adult students. Another
trend will be how institutions can work together
to raise the low status of adult learning programs.
As more administrators from a background of
liberal arts education frown upon adult learning
programs, adult learning professionals repre-
senting adult learning programs will continue to
fight to improve the low status of adult learning
programs. Unless these adult learning profes-
sionals are given power, to win the battle against
those administrators with a liberal arts education
background would not be possible. The pendu-
lum has swung past the midpoint where more
administrators who are advocates for a liberal
education for traditional age students are given
power at university settings. Adult centered learn-
ing programs on many campuses may be looked
upon with suspicion or disdain among faculty
members and administrators who have a liberal arts
education background. According to Bash (2003),
these faculty members and administrators often
assume that the objective of adult programs is to
dilute the curriculum or reduce the credibility of
the institution. Yet, they never realize that these
adult learners are the backbone of our workforce
in the nation. It is these people who are knowledge
creators, hence contributors to society rather than
takers from society. Finally, rethinking all aspects
of the entire educational process related to Web
2.0 technologies can be a trend in the new century.
Such topics should include:
1. Teaching versus learning,
2. Governance and infrastructure,
3. Partnerships in and out of the academy,
4. Research, and
5. Curriculum.
750
CONCLUSION
Integration of technology into teaching and learn-
ing started with correspondence education 150
years ago. As learners demanded to learn by in-
volving more senses, new technologies developed.
It took many years before Web 2.0 technologies
were put to use. While some countries in North
American and West Europe are more advanced
in terms of using Web 2.0 technologies, other
countries have lagged behind, still confined to
the use of radio and television to reach its vast
number of students in the rural areas. Course
instructors, adult learners and institutions have
never stopped experimenting with teaching and
learning with technology. People learned from
radio and television for several decades. In some
developing countries, radio and television are still
the major medium used to deliver education to
reach the mass audiences. And this medium has
proved to be effective to eradicate illiteracy in
some countries. With the advent of Web 2.0 tech-
nologies, universities and college began to deliver
education via WebCT or Blackboard programs. As
technology is integrated into teaching and learn-
ing, some philosophical and practical concerns
have arisen. These concerns center around face to
face instruction and cyberspace instruction. This
chapter has addressed such pertinent issues such as
low status facing adult learning programs, lack of
institutional support for adult learning programs,
the “cash cow” syndrome facing certain institu-
tions, lack of faculty investment, and philosophical
differences between traditional age students and
adult students. The chapter also addressed the
basic principles of andragy (the art and science
of helping adults learn) in relation to integrating
technologies into adult learning. The character-
istics of adult learners (different groups) were
touched upon to show the faculty how they need
to be prepared in terms of teaching and learning
via technologies. It has been demonstrated in this
chapter that integration of technology into teaching
and learning involves efforts from not only course
Integrating Technology for Effective Adult Education
instructors, adult learners, but also institutions that
need to provide technological infrastructure. To
show institutional support, administrators must
be well versed in adult learning theories. Only by
becoming well-versed in adult learning theories
can they get rid of their “cash cow” syndrome.
Providing technological instructors is only one di-
mension of support. Philosophical support of adult
learning programs is more important. Institutions
need to seriously consider in whom they should
invest power: faculty with a liberal arts education
background or faculty with a strong background
in adult learning theories? This is because sooner
or later, the student body on any campus will be
comprised of primarily adult learners instead of
traditional age students. A well designed course
by the effective integration of technology will
not only facilitate teaching and learning on the
part of course instructors and learners, but also
bring credit to institutions. In this information
age, integration of technology into teaching and
learning seems to have become a new trend. Since
it is no longer a matter of whether you like it or
not, why not embrace it with wide open arms?
REFERENCES
Barker, A. M., Sullivan, D. T., & Emery, M. J.
(2006). Leadership competencies for clinical
managers: The renaissance of transformational
leadership. Sudbury, MA: Jones and Bartlett
Publishers.
Bash, L. (2003). Adult learners in the academy.
Bolton, MA: Anker Publishing Company, INC.
Bash, L. (Ed.). (2005). Best practices in adult
learning. Bolton, MA: Anker Publishing Com-
pany.
Brookfield, S. D. (2006). The skillful teacher:
On technique, trust, and responsiveness in the
classroom. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Brown, G. (2006). New perspectives on instruc-
tional effectiveness through distance education .
In King, K. P., & Griggs, J. K. (Eds.), Harnessing
innovative technology in higher education: Ac-
cess, equity, policy, & instruction (pp. 97–109).
Madison, WI: Atwood.
Cantelon, J. E. (1995). The evolution and advan-
tages of distance education . In Rossman, M. H.,
& Rossman, M. E. (Eds.), Facilitating distance
education. New Directions for Higher Education
(Vol. 67). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Gibson, C. C. (2006). Increasing equity: Seeking
mainstream advantages for all . In King, K. P.,
& Griggs, J. K. (Eds.), Harnessing innovative
technology in higher education: Access, policy, &
instruction (pp. 133–150). Madison, WI: Atwood
Publishing.
Holmberg, B. (1986). Growth and structure of
distance education. Wolfeboro, NH: Croom Helm.
Jonassen, D. H., Howland, J., Moore, J., & Marra,
R. M. (2003). Learning to solve problems with
technology (2nd ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ:
Merrill Prentice Hall.
King, K. P. (2006). Introduction . In King, K. P.,
& Griggs, J. K. (Eds.), Harnessing innovative
technology in higher education: Access, policy,
& instruction (pp. 15–28). Madison, WI: Atwood
Publishing.
King, K. P. (2009). Teachers of adults in the global
community. In V. C. X. Wang (Ed.), Strategic
approaches towards curriculum development for
adult learners in the global community (91-119).
Malabar, FL: Krieger.
Knowles, M. S. (1975). Self-directed learning:
A guide for learners and teachers. New York:
Association Press.
Knowles, M. S. (1989). The making of an adult
educator. An autobiographical journey. San
Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
751
 Integrating Technology for Effective Adult Education
Knowles, M. S. (1995). Designs for adult learning.
Alexandria, VA: American Society for Training
and Development.
Knowles, M. S., Holton, E., & Swanson, A. (1998).
The adult learner. Houston, TX: Gulf Publishing
Company.
Knowles, M. S., Holton, E., & Swanson, A. (2005).
The adult learner (6th ed.). Boston, MA: Elsevier
Butterworth Heinemann.
Palloff, R. M., & Pratt, K. (1999). Building learn-
ing communities in cyberspace. San Francisco:
Jossey-Bass.
Palloff, R. M., & Pratt, K. (2003). The virtual
student: A profile and guide to working with online
learners. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Prensky, M. (2008, June). Young minds, fast
times; The 21st century digital learner. Edutopia.
Retrieved from http://www.edutopia.org/ikid-
digital-learner-technology-2008
Simonson, M., Smaldino, S. E., Albright, M.,
& Zvacek, S. (2008). Teaching and learning at
a distance: Foundations of distance education
(4th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Skinner, B. F. (1968). The technology of teaching.
New York: Appletton-Century-Crofts.
Wang, V. (2005). Perceptions of Teaching Prefer-
ences of Online Instructors. Journal on Excellence
in College Teaching, 16(3), 33–54.
Wang, V. (2008). Facilitating adult learning: A
comprehensive guide for effective instruction.
Boston, MA: Pearson Education.
Wang, V. (2008). Distance learning essentials .
In Tomei, L. (Ed.), Encyclopedia of information
technology curriculum integration (pp. 248–253).
Hershey, PA: IGI Global.
752
Watson, G. (1960-1961). What do we know about
learning? Teachers College Record, 253–257.
KEY TERMS AND DEFINITIONS
Cash Cow: It refers to any business venture,
operation, or product that is a dependable source
of income or profit.
Correspondence Education: It refers to the
method of providing education for nonresident
students, primarily adults, who receive lessons and
exercises through the mail or some other device
and, upon completion, return them for analysis,
criticism, and grading. It is extensively used by
business and industry in training programs, by
men and women in the armed forces, and by the
governments of many nations as part of their edu-
cational program. It supplements other forms of
education and makes independent study programs
readily available.
GED: It refers to general equivalency diploma.
Hybrid Manner: Anything derived from
heterogeneous sources, or composed of elements
of different or incongruous kinds. Here in this
chapter, it refers to classes using a combination
of face to face meetings and online format.
Infrastructure: It refers to the basic, un-
derlying framework or features of a system or
organization.
Integration: It means an act or instance of
combining into an integral whole.
Webinar: A webinar is a neologism to describe
a specific type of web conference. It is typically
one-way, from the speaker to the audience with
limited audience interaction, such as in a webcast.
A webinar can be collaborative and include polling
and question & answer sessions to allow full par-
ticipation between the audience and the presenter.
FILE NOT FOUND (CFIIV)
 753

Chapter 45
Self-Efficacy Beliefs of Adult
Learners Utilizing Information
Communication Technologies
Gregory C. Petty
University of Tennessee, Knoxville, USA

Carol A. Carter
University of Tennessee, Knoxville, USA

ABSTRACT
The theory of self-efficacy has been shown to be a contributing factor to the success of adult learners’ in
educational programs that utilize information communication technologies, specifically online learning.
The determination of online learning self-efficacy is measured with the Tennessee Online Instruction Scale
that measures self-efficacy beliefs using three factors of (1) internet; (2) collaborative/online learning,
and (3) personal beliefs. It is the purpose of this chapter to help readers understand and use these find-
ings that can contribute to the overall success of adult learners in an online environment. Included are
summary results from Carol Carter’s 2004 dissertation on self-efficacy beliefs among college students.

INTRODUCTION to academic performance in Mathematics (Lopez

The primary focus of this chapter is self-efficacy
and learning motivation of online adult learners.
Self-efficacy has been identified as a significant
predictor of student motivation (Bandura, 1986,
1997). In traditional face-to-face classrooms,
previous studies have determined that self-
efficacy is predictive of academic performance
and course satisfaction (Bandura, 1997; Pajares,
1996, 2002; Zimmerman, 1995). Other studies
have shown that same relationship of self-efficacy
DOI: 10.4018/978-1-61692-906-0.ch045
& Lent, 1992; Nielsen & Moore, 2003; Schunk,
1990). Finally, an individual’s motivation in using
online instruction and online courses is affected
by a strong propensity for self-efficacy results
(Miltiadou, 2000).
The self-efficacy construct is an important
mediating link between human cognition and
behavior. According to Bandura (1986, 1997) and
Zimmerman, 1995), social cognitive theory and
self-efficacy research indicate that self-efficacy
decisions can influence performance. Conse-
quently, the learners’ beliefs in their abilities to
successfully perform in an online environment
 Self-Efficacy Beliefs of Adult Learners Utilizing Information Communication Technologies
may directly affect their scholastic achievements
and performances. The online environment is a
component of Information Communication Tech-
nologies (ICT) (Mansell & Silverstone, 2001).
Adult learners are utilizing ICT to augment
their classroom experience. This cyber environ-
ment is rich with media and new technologies
(Carter, 2004). It is well and good that information
communication technologies have augmented our
old stale classroom instruction techniques. Today’s
adult learner will succeed only by using his or her
technical skills as well as knowledge of computer
and instructional technologies. These tools are the
new standard for business and even experienced
workers are embracing these new technologies.
The purpose of this chapter is to investigate the
background, development, and application of the
Tennessee Online Instructional Scale© (TOIS)
that is designed to help measure the adult learners’
online instructional self-efficacy.
BACKGROUND
This chapter is based primarily on social cognitive
and self-efficacy theories. Bandura proposed that
social cognitive theory (SCT) is characterized by
three interacting factors: (a) behavior, (b) personal
factors, and (c) environmental factors. The deter-
mining interaction of these factors, according to
Bandura (1997), the triadic reciprocality model.
Bandura argued that assumptions could be made
that environmental factors might affect the cogni-
tive perceptions (behavior) of adult learners. In
other words information communication tech-
nologies such as online learning and web based
instruction could affect could be affected by one’s
self-efficacy Bandura (1977, 1986, 1997).
Influences of Self-Efficacy
Several studies have found that adult learners
with high self-efficacy beliefs shared similar high
motivation characteristics such as, participating
754
more readily, working harder, persisting longer,
and demonstrating fewer adverse emotional
reactions when they encounter difficulties than
those who doubt their capabilities (Bandura 1997;
Multon, Brown, & Lent, 1991). The self-efficacy
construct is also reported as having strong and
positive influences on computer learning (Decker,
1996; Delcourt & Kinzie, 1993), online instruction
(Loboda, 2002; Randall, 2001) and multimedia
learning systems (Cheung, Li, & Yee, 2003).
In these austere economic times, both edu-
cational programs and businesses are relying on
learning and instruction via the Internet to reduce
costs and provide updated technology training
for employees and students (Greengard, 2009).
Consequently, online instruction has permeated
the training curriculum of corporations and they
have incorporated online technologies in their
traditional courses. This trend, recognized in the
business world, is also transforming higher educa-
tion as institutions gain interest in investigating
how online instruction might be used to enhance
teaching and learning. As Khan (1997) noted in
his book titled Web-Based Instruction, web-based
instruction is increasingly becoming the new wave
of instruction found in higher education.
The proliferation of online and web-enhanced
instruction demands a new paradigm for learning,
one that is less devoted to rote memorization
of facts to one more dedicated to a process of
inquiry and control of one’s own learning (Petty,
Lim, & Zulauf, 2007). Students’ use of new and
innovative online instructional technologies will
become a continuing process due to the expected
rapid advances in computer technology. These
online instructional methods will become essen-
tial catalysts within the lifelong learning process,
facilitating the need to access information and
thus provide an academic environment supporting
inquiry, self-directed learning, self-efficacy and
creativity (Petty, 1999). An assumption has been
made (Carter, 2004) that computer experience
might enhance students’ beliefs in their abilities
to accept online and web-enhanced instruction.
Self-Efficacy Beliefs of Adult Learners Utilizing Information Communication Technologies
The emergence and use of online instruction
necessitates that adult learners become more
confident in their learning abilities to perform
successfully in the 21st century classroom. Online
and web-enhanced instructional technologies such
as Blackboard require students to direct some of
their own learning. When learners view learning
as helping them to be effective at something they
value, these learners are much more likely to be
intrinsically and positively motivated (Wlod-
kowski, 1985). Inherent in this underlying theme
of intrinsic motivation derived from psychological
theorists such as Bandura who embrace com-
petence as a central assumption, psychologists
support the idea that human beings actively strive
for understanding and mastery (Bandura, 1977).
As a result, the effort to strive for understanding
and mastery lends itself to learners becoming
intrinsically motivated to assume responsibility
when they have some control of their learning
process (Petty, 2002).
FOUNDATION OF SELF-EFFICACY
To understand the importance of self-efficacy for
online learning one must first explore the foun-
dation and evolution of social cognitive theory
(SCT). This theory of social learning and imita-
tion originated in the 1940s and was originally
proposed by Miller and Dollard (1941). They re-
jected behaviorists philosophy of associationism in
favor of drive reduction principles. Unfortunately,
according to Pajares (2002, 2003), the theory
proposed by Miller and Dollard failed to include
the creation of novel responses or processes of
delayed and nonreinforced imitations. Conse-
quently, Bandura and Walters (1963) offered the
inclusion of observational learning and vicarious
reinforcement principles to further expand the
theory of social learning.
Bandura was becoming aware that an important
element was missing from the learning theories
of that period including his own social learning
theory. In 1977 he published his framework, en-
titled, Self-efficacy: Toward a Unifying Theory
of Behavioral Change. This treatise identified the
important missing element, self-beliefs (Pajares,
2002). A few years later, Bandura renamed his
social learning theory to social cognitive theory
due to his growing belief that his previous theo-
ries had expanded beyond the scope of the social
learning perspective and to reject “the behaviorists’
indifference to self-processes” (Pajares, 2003, p.
139). Bandura’s cognitive theory presents a vi-
sion depicting the origination of human thought,
action, and the influential roles of processes that
affect motivation, affect and behavior.
The theory of social learning formed the foun-
dation of Social Cognitive Theory (SCT). SCT
emanated from the theory of social learning. Its
early foundation was formed by behavioral and
social theorists. As described by Bandura, social
cognitive theory describes human behavior as a
model of triadic reciprocality or reciprocal de-
terminism where three determinants, behavior,
environment and personal factors mutually interact
and influence each other bidirectionally (Bandura,
1977, 1986, 1989). The triadic model represents
behavior actions as being influenced by various
interacting factors such as personal control and
choice. In contrast, Bandura says, the environment
determinant of the triadic model involves envi-
ronments that are imposed, created and selected,
while personal factors include cognitive, affective
and biological events (Bandura, 1997).
The influence of social cognitive theory on an
individual’s cognitive process suggests that the
mind is an active force that shapes an individual’s
reality. This shaping is by selectively encoding
information and imposing structure on its own
actions and executing behavior based on values
and expectations (Jones, 1989). An individual’s
reality is shaped through feedback and reciproc-
ity and by interacting with the environment and
his or her cognitive process. The knowledge of
cognitive processes associated with one’s develop-
ment of reality, allows human functioning to be
755
 Self-Efficacy Beliefs of Adult Learners Utilizing Information Communication Technologies
shaped and modified (Bandura, 1989, 1997). The
fundamental premise of SCT is that behavior is
shaped where individuals select environments in
which they exist and those environments influence
behaviors. Behavior within a specific situation is
affected by environmental characteristics, cogni-
tive processes, as well as personal factors which
in turn are affected by behavior. Behavior in turn
affects both factors (Bandura, 1977, 1986, 1989).
The second bidirectional interaction of envi-
ronment to person, takes place between personal
characteristics and environmental influences.
Within this interaction, process human expecta-
tions, beliefs and cognitive competencies are
developed and modified by social influences
occurring in the environment (Bandura, 1989).
These social influences can express information
and activate emotional reactions through such as
factors as modeling, instruction and social persua-
sion (Bandura, 1986).
The third bidirectional interaction of the
reciprocal determinism model involves the in-
teraction between behavior and environment. An
individual’s behavior will change environmental
conditions to which he or she is exposed, and
the behavior is then altered by that environment.
Individuals are both products and producers of
their environment (Bandura, 1989). For example,
an individual’s behavior can affect the nature in
which they experience the environment through
the selection and creation of circumstances. As a
result, based on human preferences and compe-
tencies that are learned, individuals choose whom
they should interact with and which activities to
participate in. Behavior also determines which
of the various potential environmental influences
will be present and what forms they will under-
take. These environmental influences will in turn,
partially determine which forms of behavior are
created and activated (Bandura, 1989).
756
Self-Efficacy Theory
The concept of self-efficacy is central to the social
cognitive theory of human behavior. Bandura
(1986) defines self-efficacy as “People’s judg-
ments of their capabilities to organize and execute
courses of action required to attain designated
types of performances. It is concerned not with
the skills one has but with judgments of what one
can do with whatever skills one possesses” (p.
391). According to Bandura, individuals develop
beliefs that influence behavior and these beliefs
are important to learning. Among these beliefs are:
choice of activities; performance and motivation
to attempt a task; persistence and perseverance
exerted in accomplishing the task especially when
obstacles occur; the level of effort expended on the
task and thought patterns; and emotional reactions
experienced (Bandura 1986, 1997; Pajares, 2003).
As a multidimensional construct, self-efficacy
is characterized as consisting of three distinct
and interrelated dimensions. These dimensions
or constructs are magnitude, strength, and gener-
alizability (Bandura, 1997; Compeau & Higgins,
1995; Ramalingam & Wiedenbeck, 1998). The
first dimension, magnitude, relates to the level
of task difficulty that an individual believes is
attainable. For example, an individual possessing
a high magnitude of self-efficacy will view them-
selves as having the ability to accomplish difficult
tasks, while individuals with a low self-efficacy
magnitude view themselves as having the ability
to only perform simple forms of the behavior.
The second self-efficacy dimension is strength
and it relates to the level of conviction an individual
has about an efficacy judgment (Bandura, 1997).
For example, individuals with weak self-efficacy
beliefs will be frustrated more easily by obstacles
relevant to their performance and will respond
by reducing their perceptions of their capability.
Conversely, individuals with strong self-efficacy
beliefs will not view difficult tasks as deterrents,
but instead will retain their sense of self-efficacy
Self-Efficacy Beliefs of Adult Learners Utilizing Information Communication Technologies
and due to continued persistence are more likely
to overcome obstacles.
The third self-efficacy dimension is generaliz-
ability or generality which refers to the extent to
which self-efficacy beliefs hold across specific
situations. For example, an individual may be-
lieve in his or her capability of performing some
behavior but only under a given set of circum-
stances. While other individuals may believe
they can perform the given behavior under any
circumstance and also perform behaviors that are
somewhat different. Consequently, Torzadeh and
Van Dyke (2001) suggest that the primary purpose
for assessing these self-efficacy dimensions is to
explore various types of questions that will best
explain and predict an individual’s dispositions,
intentions, and actions.
ONLINE, WEB-BASED AND WEB-
ENHANCED INSTRUCTION
Online instruction has been viewed as the um-
brella concept with web-based instruction and
web-enhanced instruction as subcomponents. Ac-
cording to Dabbaugh (2000) web-based instruction
consists of three main online delivery modes: (a)
adjunct mode, also known as web-enhanced in-
struction, which combines web-based instruction
with traditional classroom instruction and offers
students a richer and more self-directed learning
experience; (b) mixed mode where web-based
instruction is fully integrated into the curriculum
and one half of the course is conducted online;
(c) online mode where the entire course and
associated features such as discussions, assign-
ments, and interactions are conducted online. In
addition, Dabbaugh (2000) suggested that various
web-based course management software pack-
ages such as WebCT, and Blackboard have been
developed to augment instruction and learning
and can be used to support all three instructional
delivery modes.
Online Learning System Tools
Online learning or course management system
tools such as Blackboard or WebCT are software
packages that consists of ready-made templates
that provide instructors and students with tools
to facilitate the development and organization of
an online instruction and web-enhanced course.
Many of these applications consist of standard
tools and features such as email, file sharing, col-
laboration, online and discussion areas, student
tracking, grade maintenance and distribution,
privacy access controls, and student and instructor
work areas where assignments or course-related
content can be posted (Verneil & Berge, 2000).
The integration of course or learning manage-
ment system tools has added a new dimension to the
application of online learning by allowing students
to interact in a variety of settings. As a result, the
increased proliferation of these applications will
necessitate the need for effective learning and
the online medium of teaching and learning will
likely continue in the next several years.
Advantages and Disadvantages
Web-based instruction has become increas-
ingly popular among higher education institutions
around the world (Khan, 1997). Researchers have
focused on identifying various characteristics of
web-based instruction with the assumption that
this technology would automatically translate into
effective student learning. McCormack and Jones
(1998) for example, contend that online instruction
is more effective, efficient, and enjoyable than
traditional methods because online instruction
increases participation in education, serves the
diverse needs of students, provides flexibility
for time and space, enhances communication
between instructors and students, and facilitates
learner control.
Corbett (1997) has further outlined some of the
ways in which the Internet can enhance teaching
and learning: (a) access to information that is not
757
 Self-Efficacy Beliefs of Adult Learners Utilizing Information Communication Technologies
readily available to students who use traditional
methods; (b) the excitement generated through
search and discovery by assisting students’ in
learning as well as it encourages confidence and
builds self-esteem; (c) information is exchanged
between students around the world via web pages,
email, and newsgroups; (d) creates equal oppor-
tunities for learning.
Another area where online instruction has
been cited as a major advantage to teaching and
learning is through interaction where students
interact with other students, faculty, and experts.
Through interaction, students exchange ideas
and share information, engage in group projects,
and develop friendships online (Meyer, 2003).
Interaction is also established online through col-
laborative learning where students enhance their
online learning experience through teamwork and
build up knowledge through feedback from peers.
When used as an instructional tool, the Inter-
net has the potential to meet the needs of diverse
students by presenting instructional materials in
various formats, including a traditional linear form
or, with the addition of multimedia components
such as video clips, and sound, in such a way that
allows students to quickly review essential content.
Consequently, students are able to pursue learning
in an interactive and self-directed environment.
Although online instruction, particularly the
use of the Internet, has been cited as an effective
instructional method for enhancing teaching and
learning, critics have argued about the value of
online learning, questions which “remain unre-
solved because of limited amount of scientific
inquiry into the effectiveness of online instruc-
tion” (Bennett & Green, 2001, p. 1). Other areas
of concern pointing to the disadvantage of using
the Internet in online instruction include the use
of text-based communication causing a sense of
isolation and misunderstanding (Herman, Ige,
Duryae, McCraver, & Good, 1999) where new
users or novices may abandon online courses due
to accessibility problems. Students using comput-
ers on campus can often download multimedia
758
material from the Internet very quickly and can
utilize technical expertise to help solve system
malfunctions. However, students using computers
off campus may experience low-speed connec-
tions and the unavailability of technical expertise.
RESEARCH ON ONLINE
INSTRUCTION SELF-EFFICACY
Some studies have suggested that computer and
Internet self-efficacy as well as experience using
the Internet, were important factors in influencing
a student’s success in online instruction (Carter,
2004; Hill & Hannafin, 1997; Randall, 2001;
Tsai & Tsai, 2003). A study conducted by Hill
and Hannafin (1997) investigated the effect of
perceived orientation, perceived self-efficacy,
system knowledge, and prior subject knowledge,
on strategies used in conducting electronic infor-
mation searches. Their findings indicated that
computer self-efficacy would influence adult
learners’ electronic information searches. Spe-
cifically, the findings found learners’ perceived
self-efficacy affected both the number and types
of strategies used in conducing an electronic
information search. Consequently, learners with
high self-efficacy exerted more strategies to their
searches than those with low self-efficacy.
Levine and Donitsa-Schmidt (1998) pursued
the factors that influenced computer self-efficacy
and also found participants who expressed stronger
computer confidence, demonstrated more posi-
tive attitudes towards computers and had higher
levels of computer-related knowledge. In a recent
study Wang and Newlin (2002), investigated adult
learners’ personal choices for taking web-based
courses and whether their self-efficacy would
predict performance in online instruction. Stu-
dents who were curious about web courses were
found to display higher self-efficacy and class
performance than those who enrolled because of
course availability.
Self-Efficacy Beliefs of Adult Learners Utilizing Information Communication Technologies
Internet and Self-Efficacy Behaviors
Self-efficacy beliefs have been shown to influence
and predict behaviors relative to the success and use
of computers. Likewise, beliefs in one’s capabili-
ties to perform and execute Internet-related tasks
such as using a browser, can also be a potentially
important factor in efforts to use online instruction.
Research has confirmed that a high self-efficacy
translates in more confidence in using computers
(Olivier & Shapiro, 1993). This confirmation can
also be applied to Internet self-efficacy behaviors
where individuals with a high Internet self-efficacy
promote a greater understanding and satisfaction
in performing Internet-related tasks. Evidence of
this is explored in a study conducted by Tsai and
Tsai (2003), which examined the influences of
Internet self-efficacy on information searching
strategies of students enrolled in an Information
Education course at a university located in Taiwan.
An instrument was developed to assess students’
Internet experience such as weekly usage and
Internet self-efficacy behaviors and administered
to eight students randomly selected from a pool of
73 college freshmen. Results indicated that those
with a high Internet self-efficacy performed better
at information searching strategies and learned
better than those with low Internet self-efficacy
in a web-based learning task.
Experience Using Online
Instruction and the Internet
Participation in online learning requires use of
online technologies and online learning system
tools. These include systems such as Blackboard,
WebCT, computer conferences, the Internet, and
e-mail. To succeed in web-enhanced instructional
courses, students should be able to use technolo-
gies to access course materials, send and retrieve
e-mail, browse the Internet, and perform searches
to located information.
In a study conducted by Eastin and LaRose
(2000), students with prior Internet experience,
outcome expectancies and Internet use were found
to significantly and positively correlate to Internet
self-efficacy beliefs. In contrast, students with
limited or inadequate computer experiences or
skills were not efficacious to participate in online
learning, which can eventually lead to anxiety or
stress surrounding Internet use. Consequently, the
complexity and knowledge barriers associated
with the Internet and online instruction adoption,
as well as comfort and satisfaction issues faced
by new users may be construed as self-efficacy
deficits (Eastin & Rose, 2000).
Since self-efficacy is the belief “in one’s
capabilities to organize and execute the courses
of action required to produce given attainments”
(Bandura, 1997, p. 3), then individuals who have
little confidence in their ability to use the Internet
and online instruction may be regarded as having
low self-efficacy beliefs. As a result, those with
low self-efficacy beliefs would be less likely to
perform related online instruction behavioral tasks
in the future when compared to those with high
degrees of self-efficacy.
Research related to online instruction self-
efficacy is examined in a study conducted by
Randall (2001), using an exploratory factor
analysis to create the Tennessee Online Instruction
Scale© (TOIS) instrument in which three factors
were identified. These three factors identified
were Internet/technology behaviors, collabora-
tive behaviors, and individual behaviors. Using
a sample of 762 electrician instructors surveyed
during conference training at their National Train-
ing Institute (NTI) in August 2001, Randall found
that online instruction and Internet experience
were positively related to online instruction self-
efficacy beliefs.
In a follow-up study using the TOIS survey,
Loboda (2002) investigated the effect of an in-
troductory computer course on students’ online
instruction self-beliefs. Her study revealed that
although online instruction experience provided
a significant correlation to online instruction
self-efficacy, Internet experience was found not
759
 Self-Efficacy Beliefs of Adult Learners Utilizing Information Communication Technologies
to be related to online instruction self-efficacy.
An explanation for this incongruence found be-
tween Internet experience and online instruction
self-efficacy for this study may be attributed to
the framework of self-efficacy theory where “self-
efficacy may generalize to other situations when
similarity of skills for different tasks is required.
Internet experience might be a primary source for
self-efficacy for Internet use. However, a different
range of skills required for Internet use and online
learning may have prevented related Internet
self-efficacy to online instruction self-efficacy”
(Loboda, 2002, p. 73).
CRITICISMS OF SELF-EFFICACY
THEORY AND ASSESSMENT TOOLS
Carter (2004) reported that issues and criticisms
surrounding self-efficacy theory seem to be cen-
tered on the construct of self-efficacy being a
predictor of behavior versus a cause of behavior.
Hawkins (1992) wrote that self-efficacy was more
a predictor of behavior than a cause. In response
to Hawkins’s criticism, Bandura (1995) raised a
series of counter arguments where he indicated
that Hawkins’s article was an “overzealous ef-
fort to refute self-efficacy theory” (p. 187). In
his rebuttal to Bandura’s arguments, Hawkins
(1995) asserted that self-efficacy is a predictor
of behavior rather than a cause of behavior and
stated that “I would be pleased to support the
theory rather than criticize it, if it were not for
the claim of causation” (p. 236).
Other critics have raised criticisms with regards
to instruments used in assessing self-efficacy
beliefs, especially adherence to specificity, which
is often overlooked within educational research
(Carter, 2004; Pajares, 1996). The specificity of the
content relates to how closely an efficacy measure
relates to the criteria tasks on which performance
is measured. As a result, Bandura (1986) warned
researchers in assessing the academic outcomes
related to students’ self-efficacy beliefs, that it is
760
important to adhere to the theoretical guidelines
regarding the specificity of self-efficacy instru-
ments. Not adhering to self-efficacy guidelines
results in “poorly defined construct, confounded
relationship, ambiguous findings, and uninter-
ruptable results” (Pajares & Miller, 1994, p. 194).
Some instruments used in the literature to
assess computer self-efficacy have also created
problems with some researchers (Carter2004). For
example, a self-efficacy instrument developed by
Compeau and Higgins (1995) measured general
computer use associated with completing a job.
This instrument included a 10-point scale, where
respondents were asked to rate their confidence
in completing a hypothetical job using a new hy-
pothetical software package. Two major concerns
regarded the use of a hypothetical scenario for
scale responses, were identified by Compeau and
Higgins. First, respondents may not be capable of
imagining all that is required of them in an effort
to answer the questions and second, the instrument
primarily measured learning self-efficacy versus
using computers.
Carter (2004) raised another criticism that
is concerned with the validity of self-efficacy
instruments such as the instrument developed by
(Hill, Smith, & Mann, 1987). Their instrument
had only four items. The criticism involved the
validity of the scale used as a measure of com-
puter self-efficacy when the majority of the items
relate only to the general domain of computing.
Similarly, the Computer Technologies Survey
which measured self-efficacy and computer use,
consisted of 46 items with subscales measuring
self-efficacy with regard to specific computer
technologies such as word processing, email and
various print functions. The criticism associated
with this instrument reflected the failure to provide
an overall composite score for self-efficacy but
instead indicated self-efficacy levels for individual
technologies. (Delcourt & Kinzie 1993). Instru-
ment bias has also been reported as a potential
flaw of self-efficacy instruments. For example,
the instrument developed by Murphy, Coover
Self-Efficacy Beliefs of Adult Learners Utilizing Information Communication Technologies
and Owen (1989) may introduce some bias since
all items are positively worded on a five point
Likert scale, and each item is preceded by “I feel
confident”.
SOLUTIONS AND
RECOMMENDATIONS
There are some self-reporting instruments utilized
to study computer and Internet self-efficacy.
For example, there were a number of surveys
developed to measure self-efficacy in the spe-
cific domain of computer use. The literature also
revealed instruments designed to measure related
online instruction self-efficacy. For example,
instruments such as the Online Technologies
Self-Efficacy Scale (Miltiadou, 2000), and the
Internet Self-Efficacy Scale (Torkzadeh & Van
Dyke, 2001) have been developed and used in
measuring a learner’s self-efficacy related online
learning and instruction.
In an attempt to measure students’ online self-
efficacy beliefs, the Tennessee Online Instruc-
tion Scale© (TOIS) was developed by Fredrick
Randall and Gregory Petty at the University of
Tennessee (Randall, 2001). The TOIS was devel-
oped to measure online instruction self-efficacy
beliefs and was administered to a sample of 762
electrician instructors from the National Joint
Apprenticeship Training Committee (NJATC)
attending the annual National Training Institute
(NTI) held in August 2001 (Randall, 2001). The
instrument was validated using a two phased pilot
test. The first phase of pilot testing consisted of a
panel of experts who reviewed the instrument for
face validity and item clarity. The second phase
involved using university students to test for
item clarity and reliability. The TOIS achieved
overall reliability coefficient of .98 for all 40
survey items. As a result, the TOIS instrument
had a highly consistent and “sufficient internal
reliability” (Randall, 2001, p. 82).
The TOIS survey consisted of two sections: (1)
a list of 40 survey items and (2) background infor-
mation. The first section of the TOIS instrument
comprised of 40 statements used for gathering
information about an individual’s belief in par-
ticipating in online courses. The online instruction
self-efficacy statements include for example, “If
participating in an online course, I believe I could
complete a project with other course participants”
or “If participating in an online course, I believe
I could evaluate the quality of information found
on a website”. These statements were categorized
using three main online instruction self-efficacy
behavioral tasks derived after a factor analysis
procedure was conducted: (1) Internet/technology
behaviors (2) collaborative behaviors, and (3)
individual behaviors. The TOIS instrument uses
a 7-point Likert scale ranging from Never (1) to
Always (7), with 1 = Never, 2 = Almost Never, 3
= Seldom, 4 = Sometimes, and 5 = Usually, 6 =
Almost Always, and 7 = Always.
Computer Experience Demographics
Carter’s study (2004) investigated college students
using the TOIS by their demographic characteris-
tics of gender, classification rank, age, academic
major, computer access, computer experience,
online instruction experience, Internet experience,
and the use of an online learning system. She sur-
veyed participants involved in online learning at a
small private college in Tennessee. These students
were involved at different levels in online learning.
From her analysis of data collected she found a
Cronbach’s reliability coefficient alpha of .968.
Since the Cronbach alphas were above .8, she
concluded that the TOIS instrument is reliable.
Carter (2004) also reported that the Spearman’s
rho findings tested at the .05 2-tailed significance
level indicated that online learning instruction
experience positively correlated with all three
behavioral factors: Internet (r=.184, p=.002),
collaborative/online learning (r=.204, p=.001),
and personal (r=.363, p=<.001). As a result, she
761
 Self-Efficacy Beliefs of Adult Learners Utilizing Information Communication Technologies
concluded, as a student’s online learning instruc-
tion experience increases, all three self-efficacy
factors, Internet, collaborative/online learning,
and personal self-efficacy, increase.
CONCLUSION
Generally, students with high online instruction,
Internet, and use of an online learning system score
high on Internet, collaborative/online learning,
and personal behaviors (Carter, 2004). Experience
using the Internet translated to higher self-efficacy
beliefs for the Internet behavioral factor, which
supports self-efficacy theory and the mastery of
experiences (Bandura, 1997). The importance
of mastery of experiences can also be applied
to the relationship between the use of an online
learning system and the three online instruction
self-efficacy factors, Internet, collaborative/online
learning and personal.
Overall experience was a dominant predic-
tor for higher self-efficacy beliefs in Internet,
collaborative/online learning, and personal
behaviors. It was found that for the population
of this study, were primarily females majoring
in social sciences and 21 years old. Results also
revealed a strong relationship of online instruction
self-efficacy beliefs among computer experience,
online instruction experience, Internet experience
Figure 1. TOIS Factors, Items and Eigenvalues
762
and experience using an online learning system.
Overall findings indicated that as a student’s ex-
perience increases when using computers, online
instruction, and an online learning system, the
three online instruction self-efficacy factors (In-
ternet, collaborative/online learning, and personal)
increase (Carter, 2004).
IMPLICATIONS AND
FUTURE TRENDS
Carter’s study (2004) was with a homogeneous
group of college students that were predominantly
female. Of the 276 survey respondents, 192 (70%)
reported as females, compared to 83 (30%) males.
The average age reported by respondents was
21 years. A factor analysis of her study revealed
three salient factors. These factors, the items and
their eigenfactor loadings are shown in Figure 1.
Because of its reliability and the validity estab-
lished by the factor analysis, she recommended the
TOIS for assessing online learner’s self-efficacy
(Carter, 2004).
Future online programs should pay careful
attention and effort should be focused to the online
self-efficacy of adult learners utilizing information
communication technologies. By using the TOIS
and items from the instrument, instructional spe-
cialists can incorporate the important components
Self-Efficacy Beliefs of Adult Learners Utilizing Information Communication Technologies
of self-efficacy needed by learners to be success-
ful in their online courses. These research findings
fully support the careful consideration of the adult
learner’s self-efficacy beliefs when utilizing in-
formation communication technologies. Addi-
tional findings from Carter’s (2004) study suggest
program administrators for online learners that
are on-campus should remove technological ob-
stacles. The effective development of online in-
struction courses may encourage the innovation
and expand the uses of online instructional tech-
nologies, which can result in helping learners
develop behaviors associated with online instruc-
tion self-efficacy.
Many of the TOIS items are currently utilized
in online learning systems such as Blackboard®.
The factors of (1) Internet; (2) Collaborative/online
learning; and (3) Personal are components that can
be employed in a variety of online instructional
methods. This utilization of strategies allows the
adult learner’s self-efficacy to increase while us-
ing an online learning system. As an example, the
factors of Internet and Collaborative behaviors are
enhanced by use of a chat/discussion room or a
WIKI or blog. Personal factors are utilized when
students have to use course materials on their own
and after normal instructional hours.
This chapter has shown that when the adult
learner masters the Internet and other information
communication technologies, she or he will have
higher confidence in online instruction capabili-
ties. Consequently, consideration should be taken
to provide the adult learners and the instructors
with the necessary tools and training toward the
continuous use and development of online com-
munication technologies. In other words, the more
the learner uses online learning the more confident
she or he gets and the better she or he will be.
In the future, more research is needed to de-
termine the usefulness of new technologies such
as Facebook® and Twitter® for the purpose of
instruction. Use of the TOIS should be encouraged
since it incorporates the theories of self-efficacy
and social cognitive theory. The TOIS has also
proven to be an easily administered tool the has
a high reliability and has been used in multiple
studies.
ADDENDUM
TOIS Factors, Items,
And Eigenvalues
Factor 1. Internet
Use an Internet browser .752Find my way (navi-
gate) around websites .672Save a document from
the Internet .665View an attachment from an
incoming email message .658Attach a file to an
email message .647Download and install software
for my Internet browser that is needed for the
course .611Find information on a website that
offered a keyword search feature .610
Use email to communicate effectively with my
instructor .607Follow standard online etiquette
guidelines .516
Factor 2. Collaborative/Online Learning
Participate in a live online discussion in which
course participants discuss a topic at the same
time.769Address disagreements between course
participants online.742Participate in a discussion
group in which the topic is discussed over a period
of time by leaving messages for other participants
.728Take an online test on course subject matter
.665Learn from information presented in an audio
format .651Critique my instructor’s performance
in teaching the subject matter online .647Keep
appointments to meet other course participants
online for scheduled events .617Use email to
communicate effectively with other course par-
ticipants .593Learn from information presented
in a video format.590Organize and lead a course
project involving other participants.563
763
 Self-Efficacy Beliefs of Adult Learners Utilizing Information Communication Technologies
Factor 3. Personal
Keep myself on task .778Plan and manage my
own learning needs .723Prioritize my own course
activity workload .700Give myself enough time to
complete assignments .698Develop a relationship
with another course participant .654Stay involved
with the course without face-to-face interaction
with other course participants .636Stay involved
with the course without face-to-face interac-
tion with the instructor.625Learn from reading
information presented on a computer screen
.606Understand what other people are trying to
convey in their writing .579Assess my progress
in a course .562Understand a concept from re-
viewing materials presented on several different
websites .555Making sense of ambiguous infor-
mation .535Give constructive feedback to other
course participants .533Express my opinion on
controversial subject matters .397
REFERENCES
Bandura, A. (1977). Self-efficacy: Toward a
unifying theory of behavioral change. Psychologi-
cal Review, 84(2), 191–215. doi:10.1037/0033-
295X.84.2.191
Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought
and action: A social cognitive theory. Englewood
Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Bandura, A. (1989). Human agency in social cog-
nitive theory. The American Psychologist, 44(9),
1175–1184. doi:10.1037/0003-066X.44.9.1175
Bandura, A. (1995). Comments on the crusade
against the causal efficacy of human thought.
Journal of Behavior Therapy and Experimental
Psychiatry, 26(3), 179–190. doi:10.1016/0005-
7916(95)00034-W
Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise
of control. New York: Freeman.
764
Bandura, A. (2001). Social cognitive theory: An
agentic perspective. Annual Review of Psychology,
52, 1–26. doi:10.1146/annurev.psych.52.1.1
Bandura, A., & Walters, R. H. (1963). Social
learning and personality development. New York:
Rinehart and Winston.
Bennett, G., & Green, F. (2001). Student learning in
the online environment: no significant difference?
Quest, 53(1), 1–13.
Carter, C. (2004). Online instruction self-efficacy
beliefs among college students who utilized Web-
enhanced instruction. Ph.D. dissertation, The Uni-
versity of Tennessee, United States -- Tennessee.
Retrieved September 19, 2009, from Dissertations
& Theses @ University of Tennessee - Knoxville.
(Publication No. AAT 3130150).
Cheung, W., Li, E. Y., & Yee, L. W. (2003). Multi-
media learning system and its effect on self-efficacy
in database modeling and design: An exploratory
study. Computers & Education, 41, 249–270.
doi:10.1016/S0360-1315(03)00048-4
Compeau, D. R., & Higgins, C.A. (1995). Computer
self-efficacy: Development of a measure and initial
test. Management Information Systems Quarterly,
19(2), 189–211. doi:10.2307/249688
Corbett, A. (1997). Unleashing the power of the
Internet as a classroom learning tool. Computers
& Education, 85, 11–15.
Dabbaugh, N. H. (2000). The challenges of
interfacing between face-to-face and online in-
struction. TechTrends, 44(6), 37–42. doi:10.1007/
BF02763315
Decker, C. A. (1996). Organizational effectiveness
through work situation and transfer of training in-
fluences on employee computer use self-efficacy.
Ph.D. dissertation, The University of Tennessee,
United States -- Tennessee. Retrieved September
19, 2009, from Dissertations & Theses @ Uni-
versity of Tennessee - Knoxville.(Publication No.
AAT 9636524).
Self-Efficacy Beliefs of Adult Learners Utilizing Information Communication Technologies
Delcourt, M. A. B., & Kinzie, M. B. (1993).
Computer technologies in teacher education:
The measurement of attitudes and self-efficacy.
Journal of Research and Development in Educa-
tion, 27(1), 35–41.
Eastin, M. S., & LaRose, R. (2000). Internet self-
efficacy and the psychology of the digital divide.
Journal of Computer Mediated Communication
6(1), 1-20. Retrieved October 20, 2003, from http://
www.ascusc.org/jcmc/vol6/issue1/eastin.html.
Greengard, S. (2009). Flourishing programs: how
to grow in a tough economy. Community College
Journal, 79(6), 20–23.
Hawkins, R. (1992). Self-efficacy: A predictor
but not a cause of behavior. Journal of Behavior
Therapy and Experimental Psychiatry, 23(4),
251–256. doi:10.1016/0005-7916(92)90047-M
Hawkins, R. (1995). Self-efficacy: A cause of de-
bate. Journal of Behavior Therapy and Experimen-
tal Psychiatry, 26(3), 235–240. doi:10.1016/0005-
7916(95)00023-S
Herman, L., Ige, G., Duryae, L., McCraver, P.,
& Good, K. (1999). Difficulties bring wisdom:
Online learners learn how online communities
learn. National Educational Computing Confer-
ence Proceeding, 20th, Atlantic City, NJ. (ERIC
No. ED 423 989)
Hill, J., & Hannafin, M. (1997). Cognitive strate-
gies and learning from the World Wide Web. Edu-
cational Technology Research and Development,
45(4), 37–64. doi:10.1007/BF02299682
Hill, T., Smith, N. D., & Mann, M. F. (1987).
Role of efficacy expectations in predicting the
decision to use advanced technologies: The case
of computers. The Journal of Applied Psychology,
72(2), 307–313. doi:10.1037/0021-9010.72.2.307
Jones, J. (1989). Personality and epistemol-
ogy: Cognitive social learning theory as a
philosophy of science. Zygon, 24(1), 23–38.
doi:10.1111/j.1467-9744.1989.tb00974.x
Khan, B. H. (1997). Web-based instruction (WBI).
What is it and why is it? In B. H. Khan (Ed.),
Web-based instruction, (pp. 41-45). Englewood
Cliffs, NJ: Educational Technology Publications.
Leu, D. J., Kinzer, C. K., Coiro, J. L., & Cammack,
D. W. (2004). Toward a theory of new literacies
emerging from the internet and other information
and communication technologies . In Ruddell, R.
B., & Unrau, N. J. (Eds.), Theoretical models and
processes of reading (pp. 1570–1613). Newark,
DE: International Reading Association.
Levine, T., & Donitsa-Schmidt, S. (1998).
Computer use, confidence, attitudes, and knowl-
edge: A causal analysis. Computers in Human
Behavior, 14(1), 125–146. doi:10.1016/S0747-
5632(97)00036-8
Levine, T., & Donitsa-Schmidt, S. (1998).
Computer use, confidence, attitudes, and knowl-
edge: A causal analysis. Computers in Human
Behavior, 14(1), 125–146. doi:10.1016/S0747-
5632(97)00036-8
Loboda, I. (2002). The effect of an introductory
computer course on online instruction self-efficacy
of undergraduate students. Unpublished master’s
thesis, University of Tennessee, Knoxville.
Lopez, F. G., & Lent, R. W. (1992). Sources of
mathematics self-efficacy in high school students.
The Career Development Quarterly, 41, 3–13.
Mansell, R., & Silverstone, R. (Eds.). (2001).
Communication by design: The politics of infor-
mation and communication technologies. New
York: Oxford University Press.
McCormack, C., & Jones, D. (1998). Web-based
education system. New York: Wiley Computer
Publishing.
765
 Self-Efficacy Beliefs of Adult Learners Utilizing Information Communication Technologies
Meyer, K. A. (2003). The web’s impact on student
learning. T.H.E. Journal, 30(10), 14–24.
Miller, N. E., & Dollard, J. (1941). Social learning
and imitation. New Haven, CT: Yale University
Press.
Miltiadou, M. (2000). Motivational constructs
as predictors of success in the online classroom.
Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Arizona State
University, Tempe.
Multon, K. D., Brown, S. D., & Lent, R. W.
(1991). Relation of self-efficacy beliefs to aca-
demic outcomes: A meta-analytic investigation.
Journal of Counseling Psychology, 18(1), 30–38.
doi:10.1037/0022-0167.38.1.30
Murphy, C. A., Coover, D., & Owen, S. V.
(1989). Development and validation of the
computer self-efficacy scale. Educational and
Psychological Measurement, 49, 893–899.
doi:10.1177/001316448904900412
Nielsen, I. L., & Moore, K. A. (2003). Psycho-
metric data on the mathematics self-efficacy scale.
Educational and Psychological Measurement,
63(1), 128–138. doi:10.1177/0013164402239321
Olivier, T., & Shapiro, F. (1993). Self-efficacy and
computers. Journal of Computer-Based Instruc-
tion, 20(3), 81–85.
Pajares, F. (1996). Self-efficacy beliefs in aca-
demic settings. Review of Educational Research,
66(4), 543–578.
Pajares, F. (2002). Overview of social cognitive
theory and of self-efficacy. Retrieved October 10,
2003, from http://www.emory.edu/EDUCATION/
mfp/eff.html.
Pajares, F. (2003). Self-efficacy beliefs, motiva-
tion, and achievement in writing: A review of
the literature. Reading & Writing Quarterly, 19,
139–158. doi:10.1080/10573560308222
766
Pajares, F., & Miller, M. (1994). Role of self-
efficacy and self-concept beliefs in mathemati-
cal problem solving: A path analysis. Journal
of Educational Psychology, 86(2), 193–203.
doi:10.1037/0022-0663.86.2.193
Petty, G., Lim, D. H., & Zulauf, J. (2007). Training
performance transfer between CD-ROM based
instruction and traditional classroom instruction.
The Journal of Technology Studies, 33(1), 48–56.
Petty, G. C. (1999). Preparing vocational teacher
via e-learning: A solution to the impending teacher
shortage. International Journal of Vocational
Education and Training, 7(1), 23–30.
Petty, G. C. (2002). Developing a theoretical
framework . In Farmer, E. I., & Rojewski, J.
W. (Eds.), Research pathways (pp. 175–199).
Lanham, MD: University Press of America, Inc.
Ramalingam, E., & Wiedenbeck, S. (1998).
Development and validation scores on a com-
puter programming self-efficacy scale and group
analysis of novice programmer self-efficacy.
Journal of Educational Computing Research,
19(4), 367–381.
Randall, F. A. (2001). Factor analysis of online
instruction self-efficacy using the Tennessee
Online Instruction Survey. Ph.D. dissertation,
The University of Tennessee, United States --
Tennessee. Retrieved September 19, 2009, from
Dissertations & Theses @ University of Tennes-
see - Knoxville.(Publication No. AAT 3039978).
Schunk, D. (1990). Motivation and efficacy in
education: Research and new directions. Journal of
Educational Psychology, 82(1), 3–6. doi:10.1037/
h0092681
Torkazdeh, G., Koufteros, X., & Pflughoeft, K.
(2003). Confirmatory analysis of computer self-
efficacy. Structural Equation Modeling, 10(2),
263–275. doi:10.1207/S15328007SEM1002_6
Self-Efficacy Beliefs of Adult Learners Utilizing Information Communication Technologies
Torkzadeh, G., & Koufteros, X. (1994). Factorial
validity of a computer self-efficacy scale and the
impact of computer training. Educational and
Psychological Measurement, 54(3), 813–821.
doi:10.1177/0013164494054003028
Torkzadeh, G., & Van Dyke, T. P. (2001). Devel-
opment and validation of an internet self-efficacy
scale. Behaviour & Information Technology, 20(4),
275–280. doi:10.1080/01449290110050293
Tsai, M., & Tsai, C. (2003). Information searching
strategies in web-based science learning: The role
of internet self-efficacy. Innovations in Educa-
tion and Teaching International, 40(1), 43–50.
doi:10.1080/1355800032000038822
Verneil, M., & Berge, Z. (2000). Going online;
guidelines for faculty in higher education. Educa-
tional Technology Review, 13(32), 13–18.
Wang, A. Y., & Newlin, M. H. (2002). Predictors
of web-student performance: The role of self-
efficacy and reasons for taking an online class.
Computers in Human Behavior, 18(2), 151–163.
doi:10.1016/S0747-5632(01)00042-5
Wlodkowski, R. J. (1985). Enhancing adult
motivation to learn. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Zimmerman, B. J. (1995). Self-efficacy and edu-
cational development . In Bandura, A. (Ed.), Self-
efficacy in changing societies (pp. 202–231). New
York: Cambridge University Press. doi:10.1017/
CBO9780511527692.009
KEY TERMS AND DEFINITIONS
Computer Self-Efficacy: An individual’s
belief in their ability to perform a particular
computer task.
Information Communication Technologies
(ICT): Web logs (blogs), word processors, video
editors, World Wide Web browsers, Web editors,
e-mail, spreadsheets, presentation software,
instant messaging, plug-ins for Web resources,
listservs, bulletin boards, avatars, virtual worlds,
and many others.
Online Instruction: An interactive in-
structional program that uses World Wide Web
resources and attributes to create a meaningful
learning environment.
Online Instruction Self-Efficacy: Self-ap-
praisal of one’s capabilities to participate in online
instruction, that is to perform instructional tasks
that involve collaborative and individual learning
activities over the Internet and World Wide Web.
Self-Efficacy: People’s judgment of their
capabilities to organize and execute courses
of action required to attain designated types of
performances. It is concerned not with the skills
one has but with the judgments of what one can
do with whatever skills one possesses.
Social Cognitive Theory: Theory that de-
scribes human functioning through the model of
mutual interactivity of behavior, personal factors,
and environmental events.
Web-Enhanced Instruction: The use of
course management system tools (i.e., Blackboard,
WebCT) to augment the traditional face-to-face
classroom.
767
768

Chapter 46
Traditional Instructional
Design for Online Learning
vs. Unconventional
Instructional Design
Ernest W. Brewer
University of Tennessee, Knoxville, USA

Stephen D. Stockton
University of Tennessee, Knoxville, USA

ABSTRACT
In the field of online learning, instructors need to move past the limitations that are imposed by a tradi-
tional instructional design mindset and embrace new ways of approaching instruction. Online learning
can remove barriers of space and time and provide a learning experience that is focused on the learner.
Educators need to understand the way technology is reinventing communication and enhancing how
information is processed. Only by accepting the unconventional instructional designs that technology
can bring, can educators be prepared to reach and teach the students of this digital age.

INTRODUCTION for education, such as schools and classrooms,

In just a few decades, the advent of the internet
has opened the door for a whole new world of
instructional methods. From virtual classrooms
and learning communities to virtual high schools,
online learning provides new opportunities for
both the teacher and the student to engage the
learning process. Some educators claim that
online learning may drive traditional conduits
DOI: 10.4018/978-1-61692-906-0.ch046
into extinction.
Although these claims may be extreme, there is
no denying that all levels of the educational system
are increasingly embracing online learning as a
viable method for educating students. In higher
education, researchers have estimated that as of
fall 2007, over 3.9 million students were taking
at least one on-line course, and that the number of
students taking on-line courses increased by 12.3%
from the previous year as compared to the 1.2%
of overall growth of higher education students
Traditional Instructional Design for Online Learning vs. Unconventional Instructional Design
(Allen & Seaman, 2008). The addition of online
learning in the postsecondary system has allowed
many nontraditional students, like adult learners
opportunities to continue their education within
the framework of their needs. Besides postsecond-
ary education, there has also been more growth of
online learning in secondary education. Although
it is more common to see a high school offer a
few online courses as an option for students, in
Florida there is a movement to make an online
high school, to which students throughout the
states can have access (Prabhu, 2009).
According to Driscoll (1998), online learning
has also opened up new methods of the delivery
of instruction in the workplace. As businesses and
employers seek to educate and train employees
and clients, they have found that on-line learning
provides a myriad of benefits, such as lowering
costs from travel, reducing time of training, and
allowing easy, convenient and quick access for
the learner.
With all these new, growing avenues of online
learning, instructional designers are given the
task to transform traditional forms of education
that occurred in a classroom into a virtual envi-
ronment with limitless possibilities. With new
technology come more possibilities to expand the
way teaching and learning takes place. Technol-
ogy and online learning offers synchronous and
asynchronous interactions between teachers and
students. Multimedia, virtual environments, and
Figure 1. The Traditional classroom model
networking provide alternative avenues to engage
learners. Unfortunately, just because technology
is added to the learning process does not mean
that instructors will change their viewpoint on
teaching or their teaching styles (Cuben, Kirkpat-
rick, & Peck, 2001). Instructors and instructional
designers who have traditional styles of teaching
or viewpoints on teaching often produce on-line
instruction with a traditional design framework.
Figure 1 shows a basic example of a traditional
classroom model with a teacher communicating
knowledge, skills, and experiences to the learner.
This model can be found as the predominant mode
of teaching in most schools, universities, and train-
ing programs. There are many characteristics of
the traditional classroom model. Several of these
are listed below:
1. The teacher and the learners meet in a des-
ignated, physical location.
2. The teacher and the learners meet at a des-
ignated time for a predetermined length of
time.
3. A majority of the learning occurs in the
classroom with some expectations on the
learner for self-study and work outside of
the classroom.
4. The content to be learned is typically struc-
tured by the teacher and focused around
preset objectives.
5. The pace of the learning is set by the teacher.
769
 Traditional Instructional Design for Online Learning vs. Unconventional Instructional Design
6. The teacher evaluates the learner on mastery
of the course content through various evalu-
ation tools.
7. Resources are limited to what is brought to
the classroom.
There is nothing inherently wrong with tradi-
tional design and is highly appropriate in some
settings. The problem as mentioned above is
that when technology comes into the equation,
instructors try fit the technology with the context
of the traditional classroom rather than letting the
technology transform the model. The character-
istics of the traditional classroom have certain
limitations, which become even more apparent
when brought to an on-line learning setting. A
traditional instructional design model for on-line
learning does not take advantage of all that tech-
nology has to offer or meet the needs of certain
students, such as adult learners.
Adults who enter the learning environment are
prepared for and expecting to be active partici-
pants. Therefore, instructors and trainers of adult
learners should be aware of these characteristics:
1. Adults bring relevant, real life experience
to the classroom.
2. Adults expect learning to be meaningful
within the context of their ordinary lives.
3. Adults naturally adapt and apply their learn-
ing beyond the classroom.
4. Adults enjoy analysis, synthesis and prob-
lem-solving activities.
5. Adults adapt well to interactive, problem-
centered opportunities.
6. Adults want to plan some of their projects
and other learning activities.
7. Adults vary in their preferred learning styles.
Keeping these qualities in mind, educators,
trainers and facilitators must plan activities that
make use of learners’ prior knowledge and expe-
rience, develop interactive learning experiences,
use a variety of approaches for teaching the same
770
concepts, and adapt to the needs and expectations
of each group. Traditional instructional methods
in online learning may not be adequate to meet
all these needs; therefore, unconventional designs
are preferred.
To get a better understanding of the differ-
ences between traditional instructional methods
and unconventional designs, there must be a good
understanding of how online learning developed,
the characteristics of unconventional design of
on-line learning, and the future trends in on-line
learning.
BACKGROUND TO ONLINE
LEARNING: AN HISTORICAL
PERSPECTIVE
The very earliest form of an extended classroom,
or distance education, was paper-based correspon-
dence. As early as 1840, Issac Pittman was teaching
shorthand in England by correspondence (Curzon,
1977). This form of distance education was just
the beginning of what we are experiencing today.
It was thought of as an educational experience
that, at least part of the time, had the instructor
and students at a distance from each other.
As far back as1928 a Columbia University
doctoral dissertation found no differences intest
scores of college classroom and correspondence
study students enrolled in the same subjects
(Crump, 1928). As technology changed, so did
the methods of transferring information. Video,
radio, and television were added to the mecha-
nisms used for information transfer. All the time,
the transfer was basically from the teacher to the
student, with students providing feedback in the
form of mailed in assignments to the teacher. This
form of distance education can be best described
as a period of autonomy and independence. When
the independence of the learner is valued and
acquisition of knowledge is successful, this form
of distance education has achieved the desired
goal for learning.
Traditional Instructional Design for Online Learning vs. Unconventional Instructional Design
Independent learning was taking place through
television and teleconferencing. By the 1980s,
research found that (1) there is no evidence to
support the idea that face-to-face instruction is
the optimum delivery method; (2) instruction by
teleconferencing can facilitate learning as well
or better than classroom instruction; and (3) the
absence of face-to-face contact is not detrimental
to the learning process (Weingand, 1984).
Creation of the traditional classroom setting
through the available media was achieved. The
expectation was that student independence derived
from successful completion and mastery of the
subject matter presented.
The Formation of Traditional
Instruction for On-line Learning
Establishing an Online Presence
The first attempts of instructors to incorporate
computer experiences into the traditional class-
room were usually in terms of adding enrichment
to the classroom lecture. Educational sites that
fostered the learning experience beyond what
the instructor had prepared were shown in the
classroom or were used as assignments for further
study (Brewer, DeJonge, & Stout, 2001).
The availability of computers, software pro-
grams, and Internet connections often dictated the
way this material could be used. When computers
were scarce, a virtual trip to a computer destina-
tion became almost like bringing to class a guest
lecturer. If computers were available to individual
students in a laboratory, the lab could be used to
reinforce or apply the content of a lecture. Once
this was successfully accomplished, the instruc-
tor usually found opportunities to let the students
explore information on the topics related to the
area of study, and new resources quickly became
available to all.
According to Brewer, DeJonge, and Stout
(2001), as students became more involved in the
use of computers and instructors became more
comfortable with the technology, the next step
was often putting the course syllabus online. This
enabled students to have access anytime and pro-
vided a mechanism for sharing the overview of
the course with prospective students. Reference
lists and URL sites for additional resource material
or exercises could also accompany the syllabus.
Many times the addition of class notes to the site
assisted the students in getting the most out of the
material. It helped students to have access to the
material at times other than regular class time, and
it gave instructors an organized format to answer
routine questions from students who may have
missed class or who needed to check on course
requirements or assignments. All of this is still
supplemental to regular classroom experiences.
Online Lectures
Taking the first big step toward putting a class
online meant turning the first lecture into an online
experience. The instructor transferred the material
that would normally be given to students in the
classroom into an on-line format. First attempts
were usually detailed outlines, Power Point™
slides, or simple HTML pages, while were inter-
jected with visuals, direct quotes, and side trips
to additional online sites. As the instructor’s tech-
nology skills developed, he or she could include
audio or video streaming segments to emphasize
the material. All of this is still used in the tradi-
tional model of a classroom-learning situation
that emphasized the imparting of information to
students. It futhered the goal of student indepen-
dence because of the responsibility placed upon
the student to take action to receive the material,
rather than sitting in a passive classroom.
Has this method been successful? The Carnegie
Foundation, in considering a possible restructuring
of a university of technological change, reviewed
many comparative studies of traditional and online
courses. As has been typical of sound research
findings, the reseacher stated that there were no
significant differences in student learning out-
771
 Traditional Instructional Design for Online Learning vs. Unconventional Instructional Design
comes for courses taught in traditional classrooms
compared to online courses (Bates, 1997).
There have been dramatic changes in delivery
methods for training programs. The American
Society for Training and Development (ASTD)
projections for 1996-2000 stated that the percent-
age of training time using instructor-led methods
will decrease from 80% to 55%. At the same time,
learning technology methods are expected to in-
crease from 10% to 35% (Piskurich & Sanders,
1998). The Internet has changed the way we do
business; education and training are changing as
well. According to Ellis, Wagner, and Longmire
(1999), “Using the Web, training and development
professionals can leverage instructional resources
in ways never before possible” (p. xiii).
The delivery methods for training have been
undergoing dramatic changes. American Society
of Training and Development (ASTD) projections
from 1996 to the year 2000 show the percentage
of training time delivery by instructor led method
to decrease from 80% to 55%. At the same time
the learning technology method is increasing from
10% to 35% (Piskurich & Sanders, 1998).
By the late 1990s, resources had become
available for instructors to go beyond the goal of
independence of the learner in online experiences.
Learning interdependence could be sustained
by collaborative experiences between teachers
and learners and /or among learners with other
learners. Management systems for online courses
now allow various types of interactions and
provide means for tracking involvement. These
techniques for interaction and sharing make the
communication pattern more complex. These
patterns include both synchronous (real time) and
asynchronous(delayed) communication.
As increased involvement and interaction
occurs, learning begins to transcend acquisition
of knowledge and skills to comprehension, ap-
plication, analysis, and even synthesis. Students
are not just accepting information but are dealing
with it in discussion or application form. They
become involved beyond listening and taking
772
in facts. They question and engage in problem
solving in their interactions with the teacher and
other students. The teacher’s role evolves beyond
content “master” and presenter to facilitator of
learning experiences. The teacher directs the
learning experience and observes as students take
charge of their own learning.
In the Journal of Computing in Higher Edu-
cation, Navarro and Shoemaker reported that
cyber learning can be as effective as traditional
classroom learning. In the study they reported
two groups achieved at approximately the same
level as measured by test scores. The findings
of this study appear to provide preliminary evi-
dence that cyber learning can be as effective as
learning in the traditional classroom (Navarro &
Shoemaker, 1999).
It must be noted that for successful learning ex-
periences to occur, someone must first identify the
level or type of learning to take place. Learning can
be successful when the expectations are indepen-
dence of the learner and mastery of information.
Learning experiences can be straight lecture in a
large lecture hall or in an online lecture presen-
tation involving words, audio and visual effects.
However, if the learning expected is required to
go beyond the beginning stage of knowledge ac-
quisition, the experiences must involve the learner
and must allow for opportunities to interact with
the information and with others including other
learners and the teacher. If the later is the goal,
the experiences created by the teacher-facilitator
are possible in a traditional classroom setting or
in an online form of instruction. It is not the place
that becomes important but how to best use the
techniques for learning.
UNCONVENTIONAL DESIGN
TO ONLINE LEARNING
Being such a relatively new mode of learning,
online learning has had difficulties of disregard-
ing the limitations of the traditional classroom
Traditional Instructional Design for Online Learning vs. Unconventional Instructional Design
design. With the nature of traditional classroom
design engrained into the physique of most edu-
cators, it requires a paradigm shift in thinking
to take advantage of the full potential of online
learning. These special characteristics of online
learning provide educators with ways to create
unconventional designs of learning that will be
effective with today’s students.
Beyond Space and Time
One of the first characteristics of online learning
to break down the traditional learning model is the
ability to remove the barriers of time and space.
As observed by Richardson (2009), “Learning is
no longer fixed in time and space; it can happen
anytime and anywhere that we are connected” (p.
28). Technology allows the classroom to expand
beyond the classroom walls and to encompass
anyone who has the access to technology. Stu-
dents do not have to be in the same room with the
instructor or the same city, the same state or even
the same time zone. Online learning can provide
a gateway to connect students with specific needs
to instructors who can meet those needs, even
though they may be on the other side of the world.
Although there may not be a geographical con-
nection with the learning, online learning provides
ways for students to connect and network as never
before. In the last few years, networking sites
such Facebook, MySpace, Linked-in, and many
others soared in popularity and use. Educators
can use these portals as opportunities to connect
with their students and provide other quick tools
to communicate with them. The students also are
given an opportunity to interact with each other
to further enhance their educational experience.
With the barriers of space being made immate-
rial, the issue of time is also easily mastered with
online learning. Online learning can be designed
to occur at one time (synchronous learning) or
varying times (asynchronous) or a combination
of both. As noted by Driscoll (1998) and Beer
(2000), web-learning activities may be planned
for either asynchronous or synchronous participa-
tion [both instructor and learner/s participate at
the same time, although usually not at the same
location.] Synchronous learning activities provide
for real-time interaction among participants who
are at different geographical locations. Thus the
needs and expectations of adults with other real
life demands can be met—including needs for
interaction—without many of the constraints
imposed by travel and scheduling barriers. The
three following points emphasis this:
1. Satellite instruction involves students and
trainers participating synchronously via t.v.
beamed to pre-arranged satellite locations.
This method may involve presentations plus
(a) telephoning in questions and comments
to be shared by the presenter/s, (b) active
learner participation through monitors that
transmit to the various locations, and/or (c)
planned group activities at each location fol-
lowing the presentation. Satellite instruction
can also be video-taped for asynchronous
use in other learning situations.
2. On-line courses and workshops are fre-
quently established through special Web
pages just for that specific audience. Through
this option, educators design a Web page to
link students with course materials (includ-
ing video) and to supplemental sites on
the World-Wide Web to increase learner
interaction with a variety of other informa-
tion sources. Listservs, including response
options similar to chat rooms, offer further
options for synchronous or asynchronous
interactive learning through on-line courses.
3. Traditional classes can also incorporate
Web-based instruction, and this often pro-
vides at least three major advantages. First,
it brings additional knowledge sources
into the classroom. Second, when several
options are presented simultaneously, it
encourages lively exploration in a learner-
directed environment. Finally, this synchro-
773
 Traditional Instructional Design for Online Learning vs. Unconventional Instructional Design
nous option provides an excellent learning
situation for developing learners’ computer
skills. Especially when neophytes are paired
with more experienced learners, classroom
Internet use provides a safe learning environ-
ment for computer literacy training as well as
for the other instructional objectives of the
course (Brewer, DeJonge, & Stout, 2001).
Student-Focused
Another difference of on-line learning design from
traditional design is that the focus switches from
the instructor to the learner. With online learning,
more responsibility falls upon the leaner to take
control of the learning process. The instructor
becomes more of a guide and facilitator of the
knowledge providing a forum for learning to
take place. Technology allows for content to be
personalized for the student so that it matches the
student’s needs or personal learning style.
On-line instruction also allows the learners to
engage the learning at their own pace. Although
the overall scope may be laid out for the instruc-
tor, there should be planned time frames for the
learners to engage the learning on their time frame.
This puts more responsibility on the learners to
regulate themselves to fully participate in the
learning process.
Also, as the learning process becomes more
focused on the learner, educators must realize
that today’s learners are more distracted than ever
before. With televisions, internet, cell phones, and
media players, many students are mutli-tasking
with several pieces of technology at the same time.
While students are working on papers, they may
be listening to music and sending text messages
back and forth with a friend. While educators may
wonder how a student doing this gets anything
done, students are more commonly having their
attention diverted in multiple ways during the
learning process. On the issue of multi-taskers,
Gasser and Palfrey (2009) recommended that “we
have to embrace and master it, while providing
774
limits from time to time to create contemplative
space for young people.” (p. 16). The issue is
becoming a fabric of today’s students; therefore,
instructors must adapt to it and learn to use it to
enhance their teaching.
Unlimited Learning Resources
The amount of information in a traditional
classroom was once limited to what the teacher,
students, and the text brought to it. With online
learning, unlimited information is just a click
away. Information search engines such as Google,
Bing, and Yahoo allow students to quickly find
information regarding almost any topic. Accord-
ing to Knobel and Wilbere (2009), there are other
sites, such as Wikipedia and blogging sites, that
allow students to contribute to the information
available on the internet.
Instructors must realize that this a powerful
tool to enhance learning. The instructor and the
textbook are no longer the sole owners of informa-
tion. Instructors must help students develop the
skills to process the enormous amount of available
information to help prevent frozen by information
overload. Along with processing skills, students
need to learn analytical and critical thinking
skills. With the internet being an open forum for
anyone to create and post a webpage on any topic,
students need to be able analyze the information
that comes across their screen to determine the
validity of the content.
Communications Reinvented
In the traditional classroom model, communication
between the instructor and student was restricted
by the classroom space and time. Although the
dialogue could have occurred in a variety of ways,
when the class was over, the dialogue would end
until the class resumed next time. Online learning
reinvents how communication occurs between
instructor and student and between student and
student.
Traditional Instructional Design for Online Learning vs. Unconventional Instructional Design
Technology, such as e-mail, message boards,
and blogs, allows students a way to communicate
with each other and the instructor which can be
done at a time that is convenient for all. Students
can take the time to write out their own viewpoints,
read the thoughts of others, critique responses,
and post their responses. These asynchronous
interactions can provide depth to a conversation
regarding topics discussed by the class.
Technology, such as instant messaging, tex-
ting, and Twitter, allows for communication that
is more on demand, as well as more synchronous
interactions. With a majority of students owning
some type of cell phone, they are use to instant
communication with other people. These types of
communications are helpful to getting information
out quickly. They are easy to use to provide a way
to dialogue with each other, but they do not allow
the depth of the other methods.
Students rely on numerous ways to com-
municate, and therefore, instructors need to take
advantage of these methods to send information
to their students and promote dialogue with them.
Instructors then need to analyze their roles of
promoters and facilitators of the dialogue and
not the controllers of the dialogue (Collison,
Elbaum, Haavind, & Tinker, 2000). Promoting
dialogue with students is important. Below are
some thoughts regarding promoting dialogue,
including:
1. Instead of being the focal point of the dia-
logue, rather a facilitator of dialogue between
the students.
2. Promote healthy online dialogue in which
students feel safe and comfortable to con-
tribute to the dialogue.
3. Provide a tone for the dialogue that will
promote collegiality.
4. Guide the dialogue so that students are re-
quired to use critical-thinking strategies to
participate.
5. Avoid common pitfalls of a facilitator by
trying to control the dialogue, ask too many
questions, or push the conversation in a di-
rection the students are not really interested
in to make a point.
Information Processing Enhanced
The days of having text as a primary mode of
information processing are fading. Students of
today are used to browsing webpages that are
a conglomeration of text, pictures, hyperlinks,
videos, and audio information. These portals of
information provide ways for the learner not to
just read the information but to engage with it.
In an online format, walls of text are considered
undesirable by most and quickly dismissed
without any engagement by learner. Therefore,
instructors cannot rely on simple, long, drawn
out written information. As Ohler (2009) recom-
mends, instructors need “to be able to construct an
articulate meaningful, navigable media collage”
(p. 10). A media collage refers to a collection
of text, pictures, video, and other media group
together to present information.
Since students are now conditioned by web-
browsing to receive information in these types of
formats, instructors need to embrace this new way
of presenting information to best communicate
with their students. When presenting information
to their students, instructors should remember:
1. Avoid the use of long stretches of text. Utilize
outlines, space, bullets, and boxes to break
up the text.
2. Use boldface, underlining, and colored fonts
to draw attention to specific parts of the text.
Also, do not be afraid to utilize different
fonts as long as it’s not distracting.
3. Utilize hyperlinks at the beginning of the
information and throughout so that students
can easily navigate to the information that
they desire to find within or without of the
text.
4. Insert graphical and video media to enhance
the points made by the text.
775
 Traditional Instructional Design for Online Learning vs. Unconventional Instructional Design
5. Limit the amount of information that is shown
on the computer screen at one time. If there
is too much, students may just glance over
it. Break up long expanses of information
into smaller, more manageable pieces.
The most important thing for instructors to
realize is that way information is presented on a
computer screen is completely different then it is
in presented in a book. Students may be fine with
reading a book, because they come to the book
with the expectation of how the information will
be presented. When approaching a computer, their
expectations for how the information is presented
changes, and if the presentation does not meet
their expectations, the students are less likely to
engage it (Ohler, 2009). Instructors need to learn
to adapt to these new expectations to improve the
learning process.
FUTURE YEARS
Is there a next step in this development that
we can see coming even now? We are learning
more through research about the online learning
experience every day. For this experience to be
successful, we must understand the special needs
of learners in the online environment. The tech-
nology at first is a novelty to some and a barrier
to others. As teachers and facilitators of learn-
ing, we must prepare learners to go beyond the
technology. Technology must become transparent
for the learner to begin the interaction with con-
tent. Studies are now being conducted that will
help us to understand online learners and how
interaction with the technology may affect learn-
ing experiences. Once we know more about the
barriers to learning, the motivation for learning,
and the progression to successful learning online,
we will be able to provide better experiences to
ensure success.
776
Multi-Dimensional
Learning Experiences
One could believe that the next phase of online
learning would be even more learner-driven. The
learner who selects the experiences from materi-
als prepared and organized by instructors may
manage online experiences. Learners would have
branching learning opportunities to take them into
different paths, depending on their knowledge
and personal educational goals. Development
of such materials is now possible. However, the
technical skill needed to develop them is beyond
most classroom instructor’s or trainer’s computer
skills. In the future, however, just as classroom
management tools have made on-line classes
possible, user-friendly products for the develop-
ment of complex learning experiences will be
accessible to all.
The availability of higher-definition comput-
ers and the improved preparation and transfer of
video and audio will make attempts at streaming
video today seem archaic. The ease of synchro-
nous communication (both audio and visual)
will bring students into sight and facilitators into
students’ homes virtually face-to-face. The next
generation of online learning will go far beyond
our imagination or technical ability.
The Microtization of Technology
Comparing the computers on store shelves today
to ones available 15 years ago shows the remark-
able way technology has changed through the
process of microtization. Microtization has been
defined as the trend of computers and other tech-
nology to become even-smaller (ASTD, 2001).
Microtization not only applies to computers but
other technologies such cell phones, laptops, and
media players. Along with this trend of microtiza-
tion, there is a trend of integration in which the
technologies are merged to one device that does
it all. At one time there were cell phones and
there were media players, and now there are cell
Traditional Instructional Design for Online Learning vs. Unconventional Instructional Design
phones that are also media players. These trends
of microtization and integration will create smaller
devices, which can do more providing easier ac-
cessibility for people to utilize technology for the
learning process.
The Virtual Classroom
Another trend for online learning is the creation
of the virtual classroom in a three dimensional,
computer generated environment (Gee & Levine,
2009). Although this technology is still in its
infancy, virtual programs such as Second Life
provide new avenues for teachers and students to
interact behind avatars in a created reality. The
limit of what can be done in these environments
is only set by the imagination and the technology
behind the program. They create new ways to
challenge students’ critical thinking and problem
solving skills. Scenarios and environments can
be created that might not be available in the real
world or may pose too much danger. As virtual
environments become more common and easier
to create, instructors will have whole new worlds
of learning possibilities open up to them.
CONCLUSION
The incentive for online learning may at first
be convenience for the student. However, when
the computer is used to move beyond traditional
classroom walls, opportunities for learning ex-
pand. Education is becoming an experience of
learning and sharing for students and teachers
as they move to a community of learners online.
The sharing can go beyond the teacher—student
alliance to provide significant opportunity for
virtual alliances with organizations and industries
that contribute to the learning experience.
Educators can only begin to predict the changes
in store for us. Our skills and abilities to transform
the cyber classroom into the leaning center of the
future will depend upon our ability to provide
a variety of experiences for the learner and our
desire to continue learning ourselves.
REFERENCES
Allen, I. E., & Seaman, J. (2008). Staying the
course: Online education in the United States.
Needham, MA: Slaon-C Publisher.
American Society of Training and Develop-
ment [ASTD]. (2001). A vision of e-learning for
America’s workforce. Washington, DC: ASTD
Bates, A. W. (1997). Restructuring the university
for technological change. In Proceedings: The
Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of
Teaching What Kind of University? (Conference).
London: England.
Beer, V. (2000). The web learning fieldbook: Using
the world wide web to build workplace learning
environments. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass/
Pfeiffer.
Bloom, B. S. (1976). Human characteristics and
school learning. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Brewer, E. W., DeJonge, J. O., & Stout, V. J.
(2001). Moving to online: Make the transition
from traditional instruction and communication
strategies. Newbury Park, CA: Corwin Press.
Collison, G., Elbaum, B., Haavind, S., & Tinker,
R. (2000). Facilitating online learning: Effective
strategies for moderators. Madison, WI: Atwood
Publishing.
Crump, R. E. (1928). Correspondence and class
extension work in Oklahoma (Unpublished doc-
toral dissertation). Teachers College, Columbia
University.
Cuban, L., Kirkpatrick, H., & Peck, C. (2001). High
access and low use of technologies in high school
classrooms: Explaining an apparent paradox.
American Educational Research Journal, 38(4),
813–834. doi:10.3102/00028312038004813
777
 Traditional Instructional Design for Online Learning vs. Unconventional Instructional Design
Curzon, A. J. (1977). Correspondence education
in England and in the Netherlands. Comparative
Education, 13(3), 249–261.
Driscoll, M. (1998). Web-based training: Using
technology to design adult learning experiences.
San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass/Pfeiffer.
Ellis, A. L., Wagner, E. D., & Longmire, W. R.
(1999). Managing web-based training. Alex-
andria, VA: American Society for Training and
Development.
Gasser, U., & Palfrey, J. (2009). Mastering mul-
titasking. Educational Leadership, 66(6), 15–19.
Gee, P. J., & Levine, M. H. (2009). Welcome
to our virtual world. Educational Leadership,
66(6), 48–52.
Knobel, M., & Wilber, D. (2009). Let’s talk 2.0.
Educational Leadership, 66(6), 20–24.
Navarro, P., & Shoemaker, J. (1999). The power
of cyber learning: An empirical test. Journal of
Computing in Higher Education, 11(1), 29–54.
doi:10.1007/BF02940841
Ohler, J. (2009). Orchestrating the media collage.
Educational Leadership, 66(6), 9–13.
Piskurich, G. M., & Sanders, E. S. (1998). ASTD
models for learning technologies. Alexandria, VA:
American Society for Training and Development.
Prabhu, M. T. (2009, February). Internships help
prepare future online teachers. eSchool News.
Retrieved September 15, 2009, from http://www.
eschoolnews.com/news/top-news/?i=57314
778
Richardson, W. R. (2009). Becoming network-
wise. Educational Leadership, 66(6), 26–31.
Weingand, D. E. (1984). Telecommunications and
the traditional classroom: A study of the delivery of
education. Madison, WI: University of Wisconsin.
KEY TERMS AND DEFINITIONS
Asynchronous: A delayed communication.
For example, electronic mail is asynchronous com-
munication because it does not require the sender
and receiver to be connected at the same time.
Learning Interdependence: This could be
sustained by collaborative experiences between
teachers and learners or among learners with
other learners.
Management Systems: Management sys-
tems for online courses now allow various types
of interactions and provide means for tracking
involvement.
Microtization: Microtization has been defined
as the trend of computers and other technology
to become even-smaller. It not only applies to
computers but other technologies such cell phones,
laptops, and media players.
Synchronous: A real time two-way commu-
nication with virtually no time delay, allowing
participants to respond in real time.
 779

Chapter 47
Helping Faculty Design Online
Courses in Higher Education
Victor M. Hernández-Gantes
University of South Florida, USA

ABSTRACT
The steady growth of online education has created increasing demands for faculty to design and teach
online courses. At issue is the limited pedagogical preparation of higher education faculty hindering
motivation to participate or the quality of their online teaching experiences. To address this issue faculty
development supports are needed to help faculty transition into online teaching. This article provides
an overview of related issues and a sample of emerging faculty development models followed with a
description of a promising model integrating design, pedagogical, use of technology, and assessment
considerations and adult development, learning, and planning principles. Emerging trends stemming
from the review of related issues are also highlighted.

INTRODUCTION access “anytime/anywhere” and the opportunity

Over the past twenty five years, the dramatic
growth of technology applications has catalyzed
a boom in online education. By all accounts, at
the onset of the 21st Century, online education
has become more popular among students who
view the Internet as a viable alternative for the
acquisition of information and education (Allen
& Seaman, 2008). The universal appeal of the
Internet is primarily associated with convenient
DOI: 10.4018/978-1-61692-906-0.ch047
to experience engaging interfaces and media
(Motiwalla & Tello, 2000; National Center for
Education Statistics, 2002). For institutions, the
appeal is even greater in light of rising demands
for flexible instructional formats―especially from
adult learners, increasing cost of instruction, and
institutional competition for students (Havice &
Havice, 2005). To this end, the relatively quick
development and maintenance of web-based re-
sources prompted institutions to enter into online
learning to keep up with the emerging digital world
(Bower, 2001; Kim & Bonk, 2006). The result has
 Helping Faculty Design Online Courses in Higher Education
been a push for institutional participation in online
education to meet the steady increase in student
enrollments (Allen & Seaman, 2008; National
Center for Education Statistics, 1999).
As the popularity of online education increased
over the years, critics have noted the uneven quality
of online courses and questioned the underlying
merits of this delivery mode. The problem is that
some institutions have standardized procedures for
course development treating all courses the same
way regardless of their nature and implicit require-
ments for delivery mode (Hernandez, Kirby, &
McGee, 2004; Kim & Bonk, 2006). Worse yet,
some institutions have simply demanded faculty
to convert their traditional courses into online
format. However, even when training and related
supports are available, quite often the emphasis
is on using development templates and selected
technologies rather than on appropriate online
instructional and assessment strategies (Bower,
2001; Maguire, 2005; Palloff & Pratt, 2001;
Schmidt & Gallegos, 2001). In other cases, the
courses are just a collection of documents includ-
ing lecture notes and presentations with little
teacher-student or student-student interaction and
low intellectual stimulation (Noble, 2002; Partlow
& Gibbs, 2003).
As the growth of online education continues
to rise the calls for quality assurances have be-
come more prominent as institutions compete
for students in the online education market. Part
of the problem is the tendency to emphasize the
use of information technology, while neglecting
appropriate training and supports to help faculty
understand instructional principles for design-
ing and teaching online courses (Bowers, 2001;
Noble, 2002). This trend runs counter to the fact
that higher education faculty, in general, join
academia with limited—if any—formal teaching
training. Thus, many faculty are reluctant to par-
ticipate in online education as it requires learning
new ways of teaching, using new technologies,
and juggling added time demands. To ease the
transition to and participation in online education,
780
university teaching centers have become com-
monplace. Nevertheless, reports on professional
development supports for faculty participating in
online education continue to show the need for
coherent professional development strategies to
help faculty in higher education design and teach
online courses (Barker, 2003; Gardiner, 2000;
Hiser, 2008; Maguire, 2005).
This chapter provides an overview of the
growth of online learning as the backdrop for a
description of issues related to higher education
faculty participation in online education. Next, a
description of emerging professional development
models is introduced, followed by a discussion
of an online model specifically designed to help
faculty design and teach online courses. The
chapter concludes with an outline of implications
for professional development in higher education
and emerging trends on this important contem-
porary issue.
BACKGROUND
Online education is quickly becoming a staple in
higher education and its popularity has brought
about many variations leading to the use of differ-
ent terms, which sometimes are used interchange-
able. Similarly, professional development can
mean many things for different people making
necessary to establish a shared definition of terms.
It is also important to highlight the growth of on-
line education to set the context for the relevance
of needed professional development supports
designed to meet the needs of faculty involved
in online instruction.
Online Education: Need
for Clarification
Distance education, online education, virtual edu-
cation, web-based education, and other variations
are often used interchangeable in the literature
and in practice. To clarify, distance education is
Helping Faculty Design Online Courses in Higher Education
the broader term referring to formal and planned
instruction delivered to students attending at differ-
ent locations either at the same time (synchronous)
or at their individual convenience at different times
(asynchronous) (Hernández-Gantes, 2009; Magu-
ire, 2005; McQuiggan, 2007). Distance learning
encompasses differences in time and location as
well as a number of delivery methods including
different types of media such as interactive TV,
correspondence, teleconferences, use of video-
tapes, and web-based courses (Conceicao, 2006;
King, 2008; Tallent-Runnels et al., 2006). In turn,
virtual education has been formally defined as
asynchronous learning involving minimal or no
face-to-face interactions (Jaffee, 2003). Online
education is a subset of virtual education as online
courses are delivered completely on the Internet
(Conrad, 2004; Tallent-Runnels et al.). Web-based
education is a variation that includes instruction
integrating primarily online learning, while hybrid
or blended education refers to courses involving a
combination of traditional classroom instruction
with online components (Tallent-Runnels et al.).
In general, the delivery of online education is
characterized by the use of a web-based manage-
ment system (e.g., Blackboard, WebCT) to host,
manage, and deliver courses and programs (Ara-
gon, 2003; Conrad, 2008; Paloff & Pratt, 2001).
In this article, online education refers to the
general array of courses involving varying combi-
nations of online technology such as the Internet,
electronic libraries, web-based conferencing,
virtual discussions, and e-mail communication
(Eastmond, 1998; Hernández-Gantes, 2009; Lo-
catis & Weisburg, 1997). Further, online education
is offered in higher education settings typically
associated with universities and colleges offering
undergraduate and graduate programs. To this end,
the term “higher education” actually represents a
broader meaning including community colleges,
which in some states are now credentialed to of-
fer baccalaureate degrees (Aragon, 2003; Clark,
1983). In this article, the use of the term “higher
education” refers to the more narrow definition
connected to universities and colleges.
Growth of Online Education
Thanks to more advanced computers and the In-
ternet, the development of instructional technolo-
gies has been dramatic over the past two decades
fueled by a steady demand for distance learning
during the same period from prospective student
seeking flexible learning opportunities (Allen &
Seaman, 2008; Havice & Havice, 2005; National
Center for Education Statistics, 2000). Given its
reliance on computer technologies and the Internet,
online learning has become more prominent as it
affords students access to instructional resources
anytime, anywhere (Conrad, 2008; Lorenzetti,
2003; National Center for Education Statistics,
2002).
The rising and steady demand for online edu-
cation has been well documented compared to
enrollments in traditional programs. For example,
the number of programs offered by postsecondary
institutions grew as high as 70 percent in a single
year in the 1990s (National Center for Education
Statistics, 2000). More recently, a national survey
of online education reported that about 20 percent
of all higher education students were participating
in at least one online course in the fall of 2006.
Compared to the overall student population in
higher education enrolling in traditional courses,
student enrollment in online education registered
an increase of over 12 percent, while traditional
enrollment recorded only a 1.2 percent increase.
Annual reports on the status of online education
suggest a steady and continuing demand in recent
years (Allen & Seaman, 2008).
ISSUES ON FACULTY
PARTICIPATION AND PREPARATION
As the demand for online education continues to
grow, questions about the overall quality of online
781
 Helping Faculty Design Online Courses in Higher Education
courses and appropriate preparation of higher
education faculty have also been raised (Kim &
Bonk, 2006; Noble, 2002). The concern about
overall quality of online education, compared
to classroom instruction, has been related to the
perceived lack of student-instructor interactions.
This concern was reinforced over the years by
scant data on the effectiveness of online learn-
ing compared to traditional courses (Phipps &
Merisotis, 1999; Ryan, 2000). Recent reports,
however, have eased such concerns with positive
evidence of higher engagement and motivation,
increased collaborative interactions, and access to
a greater number of courses and programs (Allen
& Seaman, 2008; Office of Planning, Evaluation
and Policy Development, 2009). Online student
performance has been also reported as relatively
equivalent compared to traditional classroom
instruction (Johnson & Benson, 2003; Kim &
Bonk, 2006; Phipps & Merisotis, 1999; Ryan,
2000; Zirkle, 2002).
With emerging evidence suggesting relative
equivalency of overall quality of online educa-
tion compared to classroom instruction, concerns
are slowly shifting to the quality of specific
instructional strategies and materials, and on the
implication for design and development issues
(Hernández-Gantes, 2009; Cranton, 2005). To
meet the increasing demand for online education,
institutions may push for the development of
online courses in a short period of time without
regard to the time-consuming nature of online
instructional design and development (Aragon,
2003; Lorenzetti, 2003; Zirkle, 2002). To work
around their limited preparation designing online
courses, faculty often rely on the use of Word
documents and PowerPoint presentations typical
of lecture-driven approaches Others emphasize the
use of sophisticated technologies without regard
to practical and pedagogical implications (Bonk,
2001; Schmidt & Gallegos, 2001). These extreme
cases illustrate the fact that faculty participation
in online learning requires explicit preparation
on design and development strategies appropriate
782
for the medium (Palloff & Pratt, 2001; Partlow
& Gibbs, 2003). However, institutional accounts
of this situation have noted that instructors are
often asked to convert courses online even when
their preparation is limited. In other cases, even
faculty who actually question the merits of online
education have been coerced to participate in re-
lated work. The documented result has been that
of faculty resistance to embrace online education
(Bower, 2001; Lee, 2001; Maguire, 2005).
Although research on faculty and administra-
tive factors is emerging, much of the literature on
distance education continues to emphasize the use
of technology, curriculum features, and student
factors (Lee, 2002; Maguire, 2005). The lack of
appropriate faculty training, however, is fueling
a growing concern about the quality of faculty
development supports signaling the need to focus
research on ways to help faculty design learning
experiences that are appropriate for online delivery
(Aragon, 2003; Bonk, 2001; Hernández-Gantes,
2009; Hirumi, 2002; Lee, 2001).
PROFESSIONAL
DEVELOPMENT SUPPORTS
Professional development is defined as a process
involving activities designed to improve profes-
sional knowledge, skills, and attitudes on a subject
to―in turn―improve student learning. Learning
how to redesign courses is part of professional
development in education (Guskey, 2000). The
problem is that prevalent faculty development
approaches are designed for providing assistance
on isolated tasks or as a sort of crisis instructional
intervention supports. In higher education, faculty
typically engages in individual professional devel-
opment focusing on disciplinary content through
conferences. Recently, faculty development
centers have become commonplace in university
settings, but their focus has remained on isolated
practices rather than on integrated teaching and
learning approaches (King, 2008). Thus, some
Helping Faculty Design Online Courses in Higher Education
authors have argued about the need to integrate
instructional design and development theory and
adult learning principles to approach faculty de-
velopment in higher education (Maguire, 2005;
McQuiggan, 2007). Effective faculty development
should be mindful of student characteristics and
needs, instructional strategies appropriate to such
students, and the process for design and delivery
of online education (Cranton, 2005; Hernández-
Gantes, 2009; Lawler, 2003).
Faculty Development Models
Faculty development models vary greatly de-
pending upon university resources and views
on teaching and learning. In some cases, faculty
may be introduced to online teaching without
prior experience or any professional development
support, while in other cases faculty may seek
different levels of support as they participate in
online education. Today, it is possible for faculty
to participate in blended or fully online profes-
sional development. Such experiences introduce
them to the reality of online education and the
practical implications for delivery (Hinson &
LaPrairie, 2005; King, 2002). However, there
is little evidence suggesting an emphasis on the
integration of design principles and teaching and
learning theory. Typically, the focus of available
professional development is on step-by-step pro-
cedures to learn selected technologies or on how
to use course management system features. Few
development approaches follow a comprehensive
and integrated approach to helping faculty design
and develop online courses bridging teaching
and learning principles in the of higher educa-
tion (Layne et al., 2004). To this end, Villar and
Alegre (2007) argued that the number and quality
of available professional development supports is
not that critical. What they found is that the way
in which professional development supports are
integrated and presented to faculty is what matters.
What follows is a brief description of a sample
of models identified in the literature illustrating
various approaches to faculty supports.
The Professional Development Model for
Online Course Development. This model evolved
from an adaptation of traditional and technology-
mediated supports and features five stages: Plan-
ning, instruction, implementation, refinement, and
evaluation. The model was created out of the need
to support the professional development of com-
munity college faculty as they transitioned from
traditional to online teaching (Hinson & LaPrairie,
2005). The planning stage involves a needs as-
sessment study to determine what the participants
want to accomplish. This information is used to
group participants by content area to ensure in-
teractive feedback on course development. The
instruction stage focuses on basic skills for online
course delivery and to help participants develop
an online lesson plan. In the implementation stage
participants practice modeling, coaching, col-
laborative tasks, and group discussions; and then
are required to share the nature of their learning
experiences at the refinement stage. Finally, in
the evaluation stage, the program effectiveness
is assessed based on the participants’ growth
(Hinson & LaPrairie, 2005). The strength of this
approach lies on the inclusive and systematic na-
ture of the model providing support for an entire
group and allowing for interactive structures to
promote shared learning. Also the opportunities
to share ideas and examples represent a key fac-
tor in helping faculty try new strategies for the
development of online lessons. The experiential
nature of the approach also affords the opportunity
to identify appropriate strategies and technology
for incorporation into online lessons (Hinson &
LaPrairie, 2005).
Adult Learning Model for Faculty Develop-
ment. This model for faculty development pur-
posefully integrates adult learning principles and
adult education program planning considerations.
As such, the model includes four stages: Pre-plan-
ning, planning, delivery, and follow-up (Lawler,
2003). In the pre-planning stage, participants are
783
 Helping Faculty Design Online Courses in Higher Education
introduced to the rationale of the professional
development program and the relevance to both
their work and the institution as a whole. In the
planning state, the specific faculty development
activities are identified to determine the “what,
when, where, and who?” typical to adult education
planning. At the delivery stage, work completed
at that time is reviewed along with a follow up
assessment plan. Upon program completion,
the follow-up stage provides support structures
identified by participants to ensure their contin-
ued professional development (Lawler, 2003).
Participants’ contributions in every stage are at
the core of this model following adult learning
and planning principles. The strength of this
model is on the recognition of the participants’
prior experience and the organizational context
to ensure effective planning, delivery, and follow
up. This approach is in line with recent calls to
integrate adult education and reflective practice
in higher education (Hernández-Gantes, 2009;
Layne, Froyd, Simpson, Caso, & Merton, 2004;
Lawler & King, 2001).
Learning Scenarios Course. This is a fac-
ulty development approach implemented by the
National Institute for Staff and Organizational
Development (Hiser, 2008). The course “teach-
ing for learning” is available for all faculty in a
seven-campus system usually including novice
and experienced faculty representing all ranks and
disciplines. The course is organized and delivered
around a fictional professor who is engaged in all
phases of course design and development. Course
participants read, reflect, and discuss online their
take on the “scenarios” depicting the professor’s
successes and failures. The online format provides
faculty with a convenient resource as well as
specific ideas for course design and development
resulting from readings and discussions with col-
leagues. Reflection and interactivity are central to
this approach to faculty development.
Professional Enhancement Program. This
faculty development approach features live, on-
line faculty development workshops designed to
784
show faculty how to use software packages in the
context of mathematics teaching (Blyth, May, &
Rainbolt, 2006). The program involves a five-day
workshop and faculty can attend asynchronously.
Workshops sessions are designed to demonstrate
and discuss teaching materials, rationale and
motivation underlying the design of materials,
and incorporation of participants’ contributions to
discussions. Participants experience the workshop
fully online through three different windows on
their computer screens; one to view materials,
another to view the lead instructor, and another to
channel contributions (e.g., chats). At the end of
each workshop session, transcripts are archived
and made available to participants. The strength
of this approach lies on the “live” feature of the
workshops and the cost-effectiveness of faculty
development supports with potential to reach
many faculty when the purpose is to emphasize
specific content.
A common component of the sample ap-
proaches to faculty supports is the incorporation
of reflective practices while featuring different
approaches to the organization and delivery of the
professional development program. The sample
of models illustrates the scope and intent to em-
phasize transformative learning as the means to
prepare faculty for online teaching. The sample of
models also suggests differences in the approach
to process and/or practices, as well as the require-
ment for participants to experience and reflect on
their experiences online.
AN ONLINE APPROACH TO
PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT
To be sure, teaching online is a complex and
engaging activity requiring a deep commitment
for reflective practice and to student-centered
strategies mediated by appropriate technology.
Thus, faculty have to design and deliver courses
in different ways requiring new sets of skills
compared to classroom teaching (Jaffee, 2003).
Helping Faculty Design Online Courses in Higher Education
Likewise, faculty development supports have to be
in tune with the different needs of faculty engaged
in online teaching. What follows is a description
of a promising comprehensive and systematic
model that shares important features found in
the literature of faculty supports in addition to
design and development principles drawing from
teaching for understanding and backward design
(Hernandez et al., 2004).
The Competency Assessment in
Distributed Education (CADE) Model
The CADE model is offered by the Jesuit Distance
Education Network (JesuitNET), which was cre-
ated in 1999 as a collaborative effort involving
25 U.S. Jesuit colleges and universities (Jesuit-
NET, 2002). The CADE model features online
workshops designed to help faculty rethink both
on-campus and online courses. CADE’s goal is
to help faculty produce online courses under a
constructivist theoretical framework expecting
faculty to actually design a course featuring a set
of essential competencies and constructivist teach-
ing/learning strategies; and make an instructional
shift from traditional lecturing and content-driven
approaches.
The CADE model promotes the design of
courses based on sets of critical competencies and
deep understandings rather than the typical focus
on content driven by numerous objectives seeking
breadth of coverage (CADE, 2009). The process
underlying the CADE model is the backward
design approach requiring faculty to think about
the assessment of student competencies up front
and design courses moving form a set of critical
competencies to evidence of mastery (McTighe
& Wiggins, 1999).
CADE workshops engage participating faculty
on reflective activities about how they teach in the
classroom, and then to think about how student
learning may translate into online environments.
CADE workshops begin with a review of faculty
teaching and their conceptualization of student
understanding as a means to recognize related
evidence online. Next, participating faculty ex-
perience three phases of design and development
beginning with the identification of important
competencies (e.g., knowledge, skills, attitudes)
expected from students at the end of the course.
The second phase requires the identification of
evidence that students have mastered the expected
competencies, while in the third phase faculty
selects appropriate instructional tasks to facilitate
competency development and mastery. Further, the
CADE model requires the demonstration of design
and development competencies to be documented
by participating faculty through the preparation
of a portfolio consisting of six worksheets. The
worksheets drive portfolio development by re-
quiring faculty to think about: (1) Selection of
competencies including strategic, procedural, and
factual knowledge, (2) identification of evidence
of student mastery of expected competencies in
the course, (3) assessment of student mastery and
scoring guides characterizing different levels of
mastery, (4) development of a detailed course
outline including a description of the syllabus and
a description of each anticipated course module,
(5) instructional strategies featuring cognitive
apprenticeship concepts (i.e., modeling, coach-
ing, scaffolding, fading, reflection, articulation,
and exploration) appropriate for the facilitation
of expected competencies, and (6) design, de-
velopment and implementation considerations
detailing use of appropriate technology, interactive
techniques, and course structure plans (CADE,
2009; Hernandez et al., 2004)
Faculty commitment for participation in four
online workshops and preparation of the required
portfolio—which later becomes a useful resource
in itself as it illustrates expected competencies in
applied fashion, is essential to the model. Another
key characteristic of the model is the requirement
to involve librarians and technical support staff as
a team with participating faculty. The approach
undergirding the model was initially tested with
small groups before it was offered as a formal
785
 Helping Faculty Design Online Courses in Higher Education
online course development for JesuitNET faculty
(Hernández, McGee, & Kirby, 2003a; Hernández,
McGee, & Kirby, 2003b; Scott, 2002; Scott &
McGee, 2002).
Theoretical Underpinnings
In addition to the three-phase process, another
strength of the CADE model lies on its theoretical
foundations drawing from teaching for under-
standing through a backward design and cognitive
apprenticeship. The “backward design” requires
that instructors identify assessment outcomes first,
think about teaching/learning activities second,
and then make instructional decisions on core
objectives (McTighe & Wiggins, 1999). This
design approach elicited the development of the
three-stage CADE model including the articulation
of student competencies, identification of evidence
that demonstrates mastery of competencies, and
design of appropriate instructional activities
(Hernández et al., 2004).
Identifying expected student competencies
up front aligns with principles of adult learning
calling for making learning relevant (Hoare, 2006;
Merriam, 2008). The backward design requires
the identification of “big ideas”, thus forcing
instructors to “chunk” important content into a
few identifiable expectations driving a course.
Then, the design strategy works backward to
develop instructional activities and the content
needed to meet course competencies. Cognitive
apprenticeship also stems from related research
in how memory works and applying the concept
of “chunking” to explaining how people with
different levels of mastery process information
(Collins et al., 1989). In this context, “chunking”
represents a cognitive system comprised of a few
“chunks” or “big-picture understandings”, each
carrying a number of related informational items
for easier retrieval (Conlon, 2002; Gobet et al.,
2001). The notion of chunking drives information
mapping approaches to help instructors design
and organize large amounts of information into
786
a reduced number of modules or units (Ferry,
Hedberg, & Harper, 1998; Hirumi, 2002; Janicki
& Liegle, 2001).
The concept of cognitive apprenticeship is
also based on the notion that novice learners build
expertise facilitated by a series of interconnected
instructional strategies: modeling, coaching and
scaffolding, articulating, reflecting, exploring,
and fading. The principles supporting this ap-
proach come from research on situated cognition
and cognitive apprenticeship (Brown, Collins, &
Duguid, 1989; Collins et al., 1989), knowledge
construction process (Hogan & Pressley, 1997;
Kang & Byun, 2001), and teaching for understand-
ing (McTighe & Wiggins, 1999; Perkins, 1993).
The premise of the hands-on CADE workshops is
that participating faculty participating will develop
expertise on the instructional design strategies,
use of technology, and assessment by uncovering
strategic knowledge often invisible for novice
instructors in online education (CADE, 2009).
Implications for Designing
Faculty Development Supports
Based on the review of the CADE model, promis-
ing implications for the design of faculty develop-
ment supports were identified stemming from the
use of backward design strategies and cognitive
apprenticeship principles that align with adult
education principles. Based on what we know
about prevalent faculty development supports in
higher education and lessons learned from the
implementation of the CADE model, what can
institutions do to ensure productive participation
in faculty development programs? What processes
should be emphasized to facilitate the promotion
of expertise and understanding in a given domain
such as designing online courses?
First, it is important to design professional
development initiatives based on learning prin-
ciples that clearly support the facilitation of target
competencies. In this regard, the CADE model
represents a promising application of educational
Helping Faculty Design Online Courses in Higher Education
theory to designing and implementing professional
development for higher education faculty inter-
ested in developing online courses. The backward
design process facilitates the understanding of
instructional connections tying assessment, goals,
content, and teaching strategies (McTighe &
Wiggins, 1999). Also based on notions of cogni-
tive apprenticeship for teaching and learning, the
model views faculty as novice learners who can
build progressive expertise through structured
workshops (Bransford, Brown, & Cocking, 1999;
Brown et al., 1989), supporting strategies (Collins
et al., 1989; Hogan & Pressley, 1997; Kang &
Byun, 2001); and through a reflective process to
help participants think about on teaching practices
and student understanding and assessment in an
online course (Hacker, & Niederhauser, 2000;
McTighe & Wiggins, 1999; Perkins, 1993).
Second, it is also important to recognize there
is no such thing as a “one-size-fits-all” model.
The sample of models outlined above, along
with the description of the CADE model suggest
a strong connection to institutional context and
need to build faculty development that make
sense locally and for the target purpose. This
can only happen through a systematic approach
to design and development. In this regard, the
CADE model followed a dynamic process for
continuous improvement of workshop design and
delivery. The documentation of design changes
during both developmental and operational offer-
ings of the workshop supported this assessment.
Feedback from participants, evaluation results,
and instructors’ notes was thoroughly assessed
and incorporated in each of the developmental
and operational workshops. As a result, the du-
ration of the workshops, structure and nature of
workshop phases, explicit treatment of educational
concepts, and supporting instructional materials
and interface features were continuously refined
to meet local needs (Scott, 2002; Hernandez et
al., 2003a; Hernandez et al., 2003b).
Third, it is equally important to recognize
and incorporate adult development, learning,
and planning principles to ensure productive par-
ticipation in faculty development programs. The
development of the CADE model accounted for
such factors in a variety of ways. For example,
recognizing that faculty were underestimating the
time and level of effort required for participation
in the workshops, the expectations for participa-
tion were clearly communicated through a written
“contract.” Further, to enhance relevance and
motivation for participation, discussion forums
were enhanced with guiding questions and specific
guidelines for contributions. Portfolio worksheets
were also incorporated to help participants “see”
the results of their work. Opportunities to provide
feedback directly to staff or through discussion
forums embedded in the workshops translated
into design changes rooted in the participants’
evaluative perspectives and—in turn, resulted into
high overall levels of participants’ satisfaction
(Hernandez et al., 2004).
Fourth, faculty development models need to
clearly specify target competencies clearly aligned
with all aspects of teaching online including,
design, assessment, and instructional strategies
as well as use of technology appropriate to target
competencies. As Villar and Alegre (2007) noted
that what matters is not the quantity or sophisti-
cation of available resources. What matters, they
found, is what faculty can do with what they learn.
The CADE model meets this idea by emphasizing
a set of competencies for participating faculty
and providing structures (i.e., worksheets) to
document their mastery and understanding. In
some cases, because “competencies,” “evidence
of student mastery,” analysis of evidence,” and
“storyboard” concepts are hard to grasp, the CADE
model constantly reinforces them throughout the
workshops (Hernandez et al., 2004). This is critical
to faculty with no formal pedagogical training as
they are introduced to new ideas.
Finally, a commitment to continuous improve-
ment through design changes based on ongoing
evaluation strategies should be integral to pro-
fessional development initiatives. For example,
787
 Helping Faculty Design Online Courses in Higher Education
there are issues that need constant attention and
structural changes such as the electronic interface
and instructional strategies (e.g., how to present
key concepts). Given the constant advancements
in instructional technology, it is important to
recognize shifts in uses and approaches to online
teaching. Issues of that nature require continuous
revision and enhancements. Concurrently, as
faculty development initiatives mature, they may
have to be adjusted to differences in institutional
supports and nature of faculty participation. The
CADE model documented this approach and
clearly addressed issues that could be concretely
adjusted. However, it should be recognized there
are other issues that are harder to address requiring
changes in policies and attitudes about the value
of faculty development and online teaching. In
this case, issues related to release time for course
development and rewarding participation online
teaching in the tenure process have remained
at the forefront of the literature on barriers for
participation in online education (Bower, 2001;
Hernandez, et al., 2004; Maguire, 2005).
EMERGING TRENDS
Based on the review of emerging faculty develop-
ment supports in higher education designed to help
instructors teach online, some emerging trends
have been identified. First, there is renewed call
to recognize the fact that faculty in higher educa-
tion join academia with little or no pedagogical
training. This fact is an important consideration for
designing faculty development initiatives, espe-
cially for those transitioning into online teaching.
Some authors are pointing out the lack of formal
teaching training other than serving as graduate
teaching assistants. In the traditional lecture-driven
format, this fact is perhaps irrelevant as students
come to expect an emphasis on content exper-
tise. In an online environment, however, content
knowledge needs to be presented in different ways
requiring both pedagogical competencies as well
788
as instructional technology skills (Conrad, 2004;
Jaffee, 2003; Layne et al., 2004). This may explain
the resistance to participate in online learning
found in the literature (Parker, 2003). Faculty may
feel unprepared and, when participating in faculty
development programs, may require much more
than a tutorial on using certain technologies. Thus,
it is important that faculty development initiatives
recognize what the typical pedagogical limitations
of faculty members and plan supports addressing
needs in holistic ways. That is, providing faculty
with opportunities to develop “big-picture” un-
derstandings of pedagogical strategies for online
course development along with technology tools
(Barker, 2003; Kang & Byun, 2001; King, 2004;
Torrisi & Davis, 2000). Of course, there is diversity
in instructional background and faculty develop-
ment opportunities focusing on specific practices
or skills can co-exist with holistic approaches.
Another trend is the increasing push to par-
ticipate in online teaching as part of the regular
teaching load in higher education. As online educa-
tion continues its steady growth, institutions have
come to expect increased faculty participation in
online teaching. This, of course, represents a big
shift in instructional views and capacity to teach
online. As noted above, faculty in higher educa-
tion may have limited or no pedagogical training.
Those who have related training, their preparation
may consist of teacher-centered strategies rooted
in traditional classroom instruction and tend to
reproduce what they know (Gallant, 2000; Layne et
al., 2004). In this context, it is important to provide
faculty with opportunities to experience online
learning in the role of learners. Even for faculty
who have taught online, participating in the role
of students can be an eye-opener on practical and
pedagogical considerations required for effective
online teaching. Faculty development programs
presenting information through sit-down strategies
at a computer lab may not be as effective as models
requiring faculty to enroll in an online workshop
or course. Extended participation as online learn-
ers appears to be emerging as a critical feature of
Helping Faculty Design Online Courses in Higher Education
related faculty development efforts (Gallant, 2000;
King, 2002; Torrisi & Davis, 2000).
As noted in the literature, and experienced by
faculty who have transitioned into online teach-
ing, the shift requires an evaluation of teaching
practices and the implementation of new ways
of teaching (King, 2002; Tallent-Runnels et al.,
2006). What is largely omitted in the literature,
however, is the new set of skills required for online
teaching: course design and development. The shift
to online teaching has been viewed primarily as
moving from teacher-centered to student-centered
strategies mediated with technology (Conrad,
2004; Pedersen & Liu, 2003). However, the role
of instructional designer and developer has been
much less emphasized. This role requires think-
ing about planning and production strategies that
may push faculty capacity even further, prevent-
ing many from participating in online teaching
(Ali et al., 2005; Morris, Xu, & Finnegan, 2005).
To help faculty in this new role, the trend is to
design faculty development programs addressing
related sets of skills (e.g., CADE model) and/
or approach faculty development as a team ap-
proach. The team approach requires involvement
of technical partners and librarians in all aspects
of course development and implementation. This
approach also requires a proactive vision, added
resources, and commitment to support faculty as
they transition into online teaching.
The recognition of adult development, learn-
ing, and planning principles is also emerging in
the literature as an important component of faculty
development efforts (Conrad, 2004; Hernandez-
Gantes, 2009; King, 2002; Lawler, 2003). The
call is to consider the needs and characteristics
of faculty as adult learners and factor in their
limitations associated with pedagogical prepa-
ration, time constraints, and other institutional
pressures. Providing opportunities for reflective
practice and incorporating faculty feedback into
the design of faculty development initiatives have
been identified as important considerations for ef-
fective faculty development. Other adult learning
principles identified in the literature as important
factors in faculty development initiatives include
emphasizing a climate of respect, creating struc-
tures for active participation, building on prior
teaching experience, promoting collaboration
and inquiry, facilitating active learning, and al-
lowing for self-regulated learning. Integrating
adult learning principles is essential for effective
planning and implementation of faculty develop-
ment supports and for enhancing the motivation
to participate (Ali et al., 2005; Lawler & King,
2001; Gallant, 2000).
Lastly, a trend that is gaining momentum is
the call to take into consideration institutional
incentives to boost participation in online educa-
tion and related faculty development programs.
A revised system of faculty rewards is needed to
account for the unique requirements and chal-
lenges posed by participation in online education
(Bower, 2001; Gardiner, 2000). Evaluation of
faculty performance, for instance, has to account
for the time-consuming nature of participation in
online education and the added requirements for
related professional development. Rethinking the
criteria underlying online teaching for promotion
and tenure purposes in higher education is needed
given the unique demands and preparation that
online education requires of participating faculty
(Bower, 2001; Hernandez, et al., 2004; Morris,
Xu, & Finnegan, 2005).
CONCLUSION
The steady growth of online education has brought
about increased demands for higher education
faculty to participate in related teaching. This push
has required faculty to make a shift from classroom
instruction to an online environment where student-
centered instructional strategies are emphasized.
For faculty, who typically join academia with little
or no pedagogical training, the need for faculty de-
velopment supports is overwhelming. Transitioning
into online education calls for new roles and sets
789
 Helping Faculty Design Online Courses in Higher Education
of skills including design and development strate-
gies, use of technology, assessment considerations,
and pedagogical knowledge. Although a variety of
professional development models are attempting
to address the unique needs of faculty engaged in
online education, it is evident more can be done
to improve current designs.
Based on emerging trends, it is evident holistic
approaches to faculty development are needed to
emphasize all aspects of online course development
and delivery. An emphasis on understanding peda-
gogical and assessment practices and appropriate
uses of technology to facilitate them appears to
be a critical theme for faculty development. Con-
currently, the need to bridge adult development,
learning, and planning principles into the design
of faculty development initiatives is a requirement
for the promotion of transformative professional
learning. Models that include opportunities to en-
roll as an online learner, reflective practices, and
expectations to apply what is learned represent
promising developments. The Competency As-
sessment of Distribute Education (CADE) model is
an example of models that are beginning to bridge
design and learning theory with adult development
and learning principles to meet the unique needs of
faculty in higher education interested in designing
online courses.
It is also recognized that high-quality faculty
development programs will not be enough to ensure
increase faculty participation in online education.
The criteria for the evaluation of faculty perfor-
mance have to be revised as well along with the
reward system for promotion and tenure to account
for the unique challenges posed by participation in
online education.
REFERENCES
Ali, N., Hodson-Carlton, K., Ryan, M., Flowers, J.,
Rose, M., & Wayda, V. (2005). Online education:
Needs assessment for faculty development. Journal
of Continuing Education in Nursing, 36(1), 32–38.
790
Allen, I. E., & Seaman, J. (2008). Staying the
course: Online education in the United States,
2008. Needham, MA: The Sloan Consortium.
Aragon, S. (Ed.). (2003). Facilitating learning in
online environments: New directions for adult and
continuing education (Vol. 100). San Francisco:
Jossey-Bass.
Barker, A. (2003). Faculty development for teach-
ing online: Educational and technological issues.
Journal of Continuing Education in Nursing,
34(6), 273–278.
Blyth, R. D., May, M. K., & Rainbolt, J. G.
(2006). Effective live online faculty development
workshops: One model. EDUCASE Quarterly,
29(4), 33–40.
Bonk, C. J. (2001). Online teaching in an online
world. Retrieved July 17, 2009, from http://www.
courseshare.com/reports.php
Bower, B. L. (2001). Distance education: Facing
the faculty challenge. Retrieved June 22, 2009,
from http://www.westga.edu/~distance/ojdla/
summer42/bower42.html
Bransford, J. D., Brown, A. L., & Cocking, R. R.
(Eds.). (1999). How experts differ from novices.
How people learn: Brain, mind, experience, and
school. Committee on Developments in the Sci-
ence of Learning, National Research Council.
Brown, J. S., Collins, A., & Duguid, P. (1989).
Situated cognition and the culture of learning.
Educational Researcher, 18(1), 32–41.
Clark, B. (1983). The higher education system.
Berkeley: University of California Press.
Collins, A., Brown, J. S., & Newman, S. E. (1989).
Cognitive apprenticeship: Teaching the crafts of
reading, writing, and mathematics . In Resnick,
L. B. (Ed.), Knowing, learning, and instruction:
Essays in honor of Robert Glaser (pp. 453–494).
Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Helping Faculty Design Online Courses in Higher Education
Competency Assessment in Distributed Educa-
tion. (2009). CADE course design workshop.
Retrieved October 25, 2009, from http://www.
ajcunet.edu/CADE-Workshop
Conceicao, S. (2006). Faculty lived experiences in
the online classroom. Adult Education Quarterly,
57(1), 26–45. doi:10.1177/1059601106292247
Conlon, T. (2002). Information mapping as support
for learning and teaching. Computers & Educa-
tion, 106, 2–12.
Conrad, D. (2004). University instructors’ reflec-
tions on their first online teaching experiences.
Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks,
8(2), 31–44.
Conrad, D. (2008). Online learning . In English,
L. M. (Ed.), International encyclopedia of adult
education (pp. 442–447). New York: Palgrave
Macmillan.
Cranton, P. (2005). Understanding and promoting
transformative learning. San Francisco: Jossey-
Bass.
Eastmond, D. V. (1998). Adult learners and
internet-based distance education. New Directions
for Adult and Continuing Education, 78, 33–41.
doi:10.1002/ace.7804
Ferry, B., Hedberg, J., & Harper, B. (1998).
How do preservice teachers use concept maps to
organise their curriculum knowledge? Journal
of Interactive Learning Research, 9(1), 83–104.
Gallant, G. (2000, Winter). Professional devel-
opment for Web-based teaching: Overcoming
innocence and resistance . In Burge, E. J. (Ed.),
New directions for adult and continuing education
(pp. 69–78). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Gardiner, L. F. (2000). Faculty development in
higher education. The National Academy for
Academic Leadership. Retrieved October 9,
2009, from http://www.thenationalacademy.org/
readings/facdev.html
Gobet, F., Lane, P. C. R., Croker, S., Cheng, P.
C.-H., Jones, G., Oliver, I., & Pine, J. M. (2001).
Chunking mechanisms in human learning. Trends
in Cognitive Sciences, 5, 236–243. doi:10.1016/
S1364-6613(00)01662-4
Guskey, T. R. (2000). Evaluating professional
development. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
Hacker, D. J., & Niederhauser, D. S. (2000). Pro-
moting deep and durable learning in the online
classroom. Principles of Effective Teaching in the
Online Classroom, 84, 53–61.
Havice, W. L., & Havice, P. A. (Eds.). (2005).
Distance and distributed learning environments:
Perspectives and strategies: 54th yearbook of the
Council on Technology Teacher Education. New
York. Glencoe: McGraw-Hill.
Hernandez, V., Kirby, J., & McGee, S. (2004).
Competency assessment in distributed education.
Washington, DC: Association of Jesuit Colleges
and Universities.
Hernandez, V., McGee, S., Kirby, J., & Reese, D.
(2004). Helping faculty design online courses:
Quality and impact of an online professional
development workshop. Wheeling, WV: Center
for Educational Technologies, Wheeling Jesuit
University.
Hernandez, V. M., McGee, S., & Kirby, J. (2003a).
Jesuit Distance Education Network (JesuitNET):
Evaluation report of fall 2002 workshop. Wheel-
ing, WV: Center for Educational Technologies,
Wheeling Jesuit University.
Hernandez, V. M., McGee, S., & Kirby, J. (2003b).
Jesuit Distance Education Network (JesuitNET):
Evaluation report of spring 2003 workshop. Wheel-
ing, WV: Center for Educational Technologies,
Wheeling Jesuit University.
Hernández-Gantes, V. M. (2009). Teaching adult
learners in online career and technical education.
International Journal of Web-Based Learning and
Teaching Technologies, 4(4), 32–49.
791
 Helping Faculty Design Online Courses in Higher Education
Hinson, J. M., & LaPrairie, K. N. (2005). Learn-
ing to teach online: Promoting success through
professional development. Community College
Journal of Research and Practice, 29, 483–493.
doi:10.1080/10668920590934198
Hirumi, A. (2002). A framework for analyzing,
designing, and sequencing planned e-learning
interactions. The Quarterly Review of Distance
Education, 3(2), 141–160.
Hiser, K. (2008). Taking faculty development
online. Diverse Issues in Higher Education,
25(14), 29–29.
Hoare, C. (Ed.). (2006). Handbook of adult devel-
opment and learning. New York: Oxford.
Hogan, K., & Pressley, M. (Eds.). (1997). Scaf-
folding student learning: Instructional approaches
and issues. Cambridge, MA: Brookline Books.
Jaffee, D. (2003). Virtual transformation: Web-
based technology and pedagogical change. Teaching
Sociology, 31(2), 227–236. doi:10.2307/3211312
Janicki, T., & Liegle, J. O. (2001). Develop-
ment and evaluation of a framework for creating
Web-based learning modules: A pedagogical and
systems perspective. Journal of Asynchronous
Learning Networks, 5(1), 58–87.
Jesuit, N. E. T. (2002). CADE: Competency
assessment in distance education: Overview of
workshop organization. Washington, DC: Author.
Johnson, S. D., & Benson, A. D. (2003). Distance
learning in postsecondary career and technical
education. St. Paul, MN: National Research Center
for Career and Technical Education.
Kang, M., & Byun, H. P. (2001). A conceptual
framework for a web-based knowledge construc-
tion support system. Educational Technology,
41(4), 48–53.
792
Kim, K., & Bonk, C. J. (2006). The future of online
teaching in higher education: The survey says… .
EDUCAUSE Quarterly, 29(4), 22–30.
King, K. P. (2002). Educational technology profes-
sional development as transformative learning op-
portunities. Computers & Education, 39, 283–297.
doi:10.1016/S0360-1315(02)00073-8
King, K. P. (2004). Both sides now: Examining
transformative learning and professional develop-
ment. Innovative Higher Education, 29(2), 155–
174. doi:10.1023/B:IHIE.0000048796.60390.5f
King, K. P. (2008). Professional development . In
English, L. M. (Ed.), International encyclopedia
of adult education (pp. 521–524). New York: Pal-
grave McMillan.
Lawler, P. A. (2003, Summer). Teachers as adult
learners: A new perspective. In K. P. King & P.
A. Lawler (Eds.), New Directions for Adult and
Continuing Education (pp. 15–22). San Francisco:
Jossey-Bass.
Lawler, P. A., & King, K. P. (2001). Refocusing fac-
ulty development: The view from an adult learning
perspective. Paper presented at the Pennsylvania
Adult and Continuing Education Research Confer-
ence, Indiana, PA.
Layne, J., Froyd, J., Simpson, N., Caso, R., &
Merton, P. (2004). Understanding and improv-
ing faculty professional development in teaching.
Paper presented at the 34th ASEE/IEEE Frontiers
in Education Conference (pp. 1C 15-20), October
20-23, 2004. Savannah, GA.
Lee, J. (2001). Instructional support for distance
education and faculty motivation, commitment,
satisfaction. British Journal of Educational
Technology, 32(2), 153–160. doi:10.1111/1467-
8535.00186
Lee, J. (2002). Faculty and administrator percep-
tions of instructional support for distance education.
International Journal of Instructional Media,
29(1), 27–45.
Helping Faculty Design Online Courses in Higher Education
Locatis, C., & Weisburg, M. (1997). Distributed
learning and the internet. Contemporary Educa-
tion, 68(2), 100–103.
Lorenzetti, J. P. (2003). Thirty-two distance educa-
tion trends. Distance Education Report, 7(21), 1–6.
Maguire, L. L. (2005). Faculty participation in
online distance education: Barriers and motivators.
Online Journal of Distance Learning Administra-
tion, 8(1). Retrieved September 17, 2009, from
http://www.westga.edu/~distance/ojdla/spring81/
maguire81.htm
McQuiggan, C. A. (2007). The role of faculty
development in online teaching’s potential to
question teaching beliefs and assumptions. Online
Journal of Distance Learning Administration,
10(3). Retrieved July 25, 2009, from http://www.
westga.edu/~distance/ojdla/fall103/mcquig-
gan103.htm.
McTighe, J., & Wiggins, G. (1999). The under-
standing by design. Association for Supervision
& Curriculum Development.
Merriam, S. B. (Ed.). (2008). Third update on
adult learning theory: New directions for adult
and continuing education (Vol. 119). San Fran-
cisco: Jossey-Bass.
Morris, L., Xu, H., & Finnegan, C. (2005). Roles
of faculty in teaching asynchronous undergradu-
ate courses. Journal of Asynchronous Learning
Networks, 9(1), 65–82.
Motiwalla, L., & Tello, S. (2000). Distance learn-
ing on the Internet: An exploratory study. The
Internet and Higher Education, 2(4), 253–264.
doi:10.1016/S1096-7516(00)00026-9
National Center for Education Statistics. (1999).
Distance education at postsecondary education
institutions: 1997-98, (NCES 2000-013). Re-
trieved May 15, 2009, from http://nces.ed.gov/
pubs2000/2000013.pdf
National Center for Education Statistics. (2000).
Distance education at postsecondary education
institutions: 1997-1998 (NCES Publication No.
2003-013). Washington, DC: U.S. Government
Printing Office.
National Center for Education Statistics. (2002).
A profile of participation in distance education:
1999-2000 (NCES Publication No. 2003-154).
Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing
Office.
Noble, D. (2002). Digital diploma mills: The au-
tomation of higher education. Washington, DC:
Education Resource Information Center (ERIC#
ED462921).
Office of Planning, Evaluation, and Policy De-
velopment. (2009). Evaluation of evidence-based
practices in online learning: A meta-analysis and
review of online learning studies. Washington,
DC: U.S. Department of Education.
Pallof, R., & Pratt, K. (2001). Lessons from the
cyberspace classroom. Chapter 2: The realities
of online teaching. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Parker, A. (2003). Motivation and incentives for
distance faculty. Retrieved November 14, 2009,
from www.westga.edu/~distance/ojdla/fall63/
parker63.htm
Partlow, K. M., & Gibbs, W. J. (2003). Indicators of
constructivist principles in Internet-based courses.
Journal of Computing in Higher Education, 14(2),
68–97. doi:10.1007/BF02940939
Pedersen, S., & Liu, M. (2003). Teachers’ beliefs
about issues in the implementation of a student-
centered learning environment. Educational
Technology Research and Development, 51(2),
57–76. doi:10.1007/BF02504526
Perkins, D. (1993). Teaching for understanding.
American Educator, 17(3), 8, 28–35.
793
 Helping Faculty Design Online Courses in Higher Education
Phipps, R., & Merisotis, J. (1999). What’s the
difference? A review of contemporary research
on the effectiveness of distance learning in higher
education. Washington, DC: The Institute for
Higher Education Policy.
Ryan, R. C. (2000). Student assessment compari-
son of lecture and online construction equipment
and methods classes. T.H.E. Journal, 27(6), 76–83.
Schmidt, E. K., & Gallegos, A. (2001). Distance
learning: Issues and concerns of distance learners.
Journal of Industrial Technology, 17(3). Retrieved
February 22, 2009 from http://nait.org/jit/Articles/
schmidt041801.pdf
Scott, L. (2002). A model for competency-based
distance assessment: JesuitNET Learning Anytime
Anywhere Partnership: Formative evaluation,
spring 2002. Wheeling, WV: Center for Educa-
tional Technologies, Wheeling Jesuit University.
Scott, L., & McGee, S. (2002). A model for
competency-based distance assessment: Jesuit-
NET Learning Anytime Anywhere Partnership:
Formative evaluation, fall 2001. Wheeling, WV:
Center for Educational Technologies, Wheeling
Jesuit University.
Tallent-Runnels, M. K., Thomas, J. A., Lan, W.
Y., Cooper, S., Ahern, T. C., Shaw, S. M., & Liu,
X. (2006). Teaching courses online: A review of
the research. Review of Educational Research,
76(1), 93–135. doi:10.3102/00346543076001093
Torrisi, G., & Davis, G. (2000). Online learning
as a catalyst for reshaping practice – The expe-
riences of some academics developing online
learning materials. The International Journal
for Academic Development, 5(2), 166–176.
doi:10.1080/13601440050200770
Villar, L. M., & Alegre, O. M. (2007). The online
faculty development and assessment system.
ALT-J . Research in Learning Technology, 15(3),
217–230.
794
Zirkle, C. (2002). Identification of distance edu-
cation barriers for trade and industrial teacher
education. Journal of Industrial Education, 40(1),
20–44.
KEY TERMS AND DEFINITIONS
Asynchronous Learning: Refers to the use
of online education resources to facilitate the
learning of students who are participating and
accessing instructional resources at different times
and locations at their convenience.
Distance Education: A broad term referring
to formal and planned instruction delivered to
students attending at different locations at the
same time or at their individual convenience at
different times.
Online Education: Refers to asynchronous
learning facilitated by the use of computer net-
works and the Internet
Online Professional Development: Refers to
professional development workshops, courses and
programs that are primarily delivered online fol-
lowing asynchronous or synchronous approaches
depending on the nature of topics and goals.
Professional Development: Refers to a
process involving activities designed to improve
professional knowledge, skills, and attitudes on
topics of interest with the goal of improving pro-
fessional practice and student learning.
Synchronous Learning: Refers to students
learning as a group at the same time in the same
location traditionally associated with classroom
instruction.
Web-Based Education: Refers to instruc-
tion integrating primarily online learning using
resources made available through the Internet.
 795

Chapter 48
Blended Learning:
The Best of Both Worlds
Karen Weller Swanson
Mercer University, USA

Mary Kayler
George Mason University, USA

ABSTRACT
As institutions look for ways to increase enrollment and students seek greater flexibility in their learning
environments, blended learning is emerging as the best of both worlds. This chapter will discuss why both
students and instructors choose blended learning (BL) and the benefits of BL pedagogically. The layers
of software required to support BL will be briefly described for the purpose of supporting a discussion
of the tools used to design online learning. The role of assessment and the need to create communities
of practice within a BL environment will be illustrated. With a changing emphasis from software and
function to one of learning outcomes, this chapter will present Learning Activities Management Systems
(LAMS) and the International Society for Technology in Education (ISTE) standards which focus on the
advancement of instructional design. ISTE will be introduced as a framework for students and instruc-
tors to gauge their teaching and learning goals.

INTRODUCTION hours” (p. 2). The reduction of seat hours is the

The use of blended or hybrid learning in voca-
tional and higher education creates multiple op-
portunities that are not available in the traditional
classroom setting. Dzuiban, Hartman and Moskal
(2004) define blended learning as “courses that
combine face to face (F2F) classroom instruction
with online learning and reduce classroom contact
DOI: 10.4018/978-1-61692-906-0.ch048
key to this definition because any course could
enhance its pedagogical delivery and not reduce
time in a traditional F2F format. These authors
suggest that blended learning is much less about
geography (where the student is sitting) and more
about a rich learning experience that combines the
best of both worlds.
Young (2002) suggests that currently up to 80-
90% of courses contain an online component. The
United States Department of Education reports the

results of a meta-analysis comparing traditional
F2F and online learning in k-12 settings:
Online learning has become popular because of
its potential for providing more flexible access
to content and instruction at any time, from any
place. Frequently, the focus entails (a) increasing
the availability of learning experiences for learn-
ers who cannot or choose not to attend traditional
face-to-face offerings, (b) assembling and dissemi-
nating instructional content more cost-efficiently,
or (c) enabling instructors to handle more students
while maintaining learning outcome quality that
is equivalent to that of comparable face-to-face
instruction (USDOE, 2009, p. 1).
However, the process of planning instruc-
tional learning opportunities for students can be
daunting and haphazard if not approached using
a framework to guide course development. For the
purpose of this paper we will use the definition
of blended learning (BL) as one that combines
any degree of online and face-to-face instruction
(Graham, 2004). The authors will also incorporate
the work of one organization that has approached
blended learning from both and teaching and
learning perspective. The International Society of
Technology in Education is a premier association
for educators that are concerned with advancing
the effective use of technology in PK-12 schools
and in higher education.
The best of both worlds is achievable when
blended learning shifts the paradigm from teacher
centered to learner centered. A well-designed
blended learning environment increases inter-
actions between student and teacher, student-
to-student, and students to resources. Blended
learning also increases the ability to assess stu-
dent progress as well as their products in a more
easily articulated manner (Dzuiban, Hartman, &
Moskal, 2004).
796
Blended Learning
BACKGROUND
Gen-Xers and Millennials Students
At the turn of the century there was no doubt that
the way many instructors were educated was not
reflected in the experiences of their students.
Oblinger (2003) reports the average age of uni-
versity faculty member is greater than fifty years
old. These individuals were in college in the 1970s
and had vastly different experiences than those
anticipated by students in the 21st century. She
cites the National Center for Education Statis-
tics (NCES, 1996) reporting that three-quarters
of all undergraduates are non-traditional; this is
defined as enrolled part-time, working full-time,
has dependent children, are single parents and
may not have graduated from high school. More
current data from the 2009 NCES report states
that undergraduate enrollment rose 19% from
2000-2007; increases in enrollment were found
for females (over male), full-time (over part-time)
and private institutions (over public). Statistical
analysis found that 64% of college students were
White, 13% were Black, 11% were Hispanic, 7%
were Asian/Pacific Islander, 1% Native American
and 3% were nonresident alien students. The
top 4 granted bachelor’s degree were in 21% in
business, 11% in social science and history, 7%
in education and 7% in the health professions.
The statistical information has implications for
the blended learning conversation and the ques-
tion becomes how to increase learning outcomes
for these specific majors, and ethnic groups in an
increasing undergraduate population.
The labels attached to students such as Gen-
Xers and Millennials signal a change in the ex-
pectations of learners. Wendover (2005) defines
“the age group in their mid-twenties through
late thirties is commonly known as Generation
X. This is a population that came of age in the
midst of social chaos, layoffs, divorce, recession,
gas lines, the Watergate scandal, and the advent
of latch-key kids. Due to these experiences,
Blended Learning
they are skeptical of institutions, suspicious of
marketing, wary of their parents’ teachings, and
remarkably resourceful.” These are students who
seek a balanced life and are not afraid to ask for
what they want. Wendover defines Millennials as
those students who “have grown up in a world of
technology, prosperity and convenience. With the
proliferation of computers, they have become a
menu-driven culture that wants to point and click
to every answer. They are entering your shop hav-
ing grown up in the midst of cell phones, Palm
Pilots, personal-entertainment systems and big
screen plasma TVs. The natural impatience that
all of this has created makes them restless.” Thus
blended learning may be more of a learning curve
for the instructor than for the student. It is impera-
tive for faculty to know about students and their
expectations for engagement. Their anticipation
of a learning environment that provides respect,
support, autonomy, guidance and rigor can be a
challenge to design.
Definition of Blended Learning
It is useful to also define what is not blended
learning, the USDOE (2009) wrote a meta-analysis
and defined online learning as “learning that takes
place partially or entirely over the Internet. This
[Their] definition excludes purely print-based
correspondence education, broadcast television
or radio, videoconferencing, videocassettes, and
stand-alone educational software programs that do
not have a significant Internet-based instructional
component” (p. 9). This definition is useful in
determining if a course’s outcomes are intended
to optimize a technology approach to learning that
is interactive and student centered. Rovai (2004)
stated as an outcome of his study on graduate stu-
dents in blended learning courses that three areas
of change must occur for success: less time spent
in delivering instruction, an increase in producing
learning through communication with students and
creating a strong sense of community.
Communities of Practice
One conceptual framework to consider when
designing blended learning would be developing
smaller communities of practice within a larger
class. Communities of practice (CoP) are special-
ized learning communities defined by the knowl-
edge, not the task. Members determine what is
worth sharing, how to present their ideas and which
activities to pursue, and can include complex and
long-standing issues that require sustained learn-
ing (Wenger, McDermott, & Snyder, 2002). Thus
online components can include communities built
around book choices, problem-based learning or
possibly application simulations; point being that
not all students in the class must participate in the
same online experience.
Communities of practice (CoP) are organically
created around a common interest or problem.
Wenger, McDermott and Snyder (2002) define a
community of practice as “groups of people who
share a concern, a set of problems, or a passion
about a topic, and who deepen their knowledge and
expertise by interacting on an ongoing basis” (p.
4). The goal of a CoP is to expand range of skills
that can be developed with instructional guidance
or peer collaboration. It is believed that learning
in a community of practice exceeds what can be
attained alone (Kayler & Weller, 2004).
Communities of Practice can be designed in
online formats or F2F formats. It is important to
allow for student choice in topic because if the
content is one they are not interested in a CoP
becomes an assignment. It is also important that
students choose the group they want to participate
in for the conversation. It is a challenge to allow
students the time and space to tackle curriculum
without instructional assistance. However, de-
signed well, the outcomes can be far richer than
those constrained by faculty influence. A blended
learning example of a CoP is the use of student-
lead online discussion groups which augment the
F2F content for a class. For example, while F2F
class time discussion one text, students may be
797

giving the choice of 2-5 other texts in which to
choose. The instructor would create discussion
groups based in which book choice was selected.
It is important that CoPs are internally rather than
externally motivating to a student; thus the use
of choice. Each discussion group creates their
own dialogue, questions and context for their
understanding of the text of choice (Swanson &
Kayler, 2008).
The crux is that CoPs hold information that
can best be ascertained through dialogue. Students
have a defined vocabulary, ways of being together
and an internalized motivation to participate.
Blended learning can be configured with a simi-
lar essence and goal. The content provides the
vocabulary challenge, the instructor and students
create a way of being, both F2F and online. It is
the internal motivation to participate that requires
both instructor and students to view course con-
struction in new ways (Kayler & Swanson, 2008).
Wenger (1998) suggests that communities of
practice fulfill a number of functions in the cre-
ation, accumulation and diffusion of knowledge
and the exchange of interpretation of information.
Students work together and independently to cre-
ate knowledge within an environment that foster
mutual respect and trust. The aspiration of a CoP
is to evolve over time; it is within that context
that students transform (Wenger, 1998). Students
share challenges, interact regularly and learn from
each other. Students developing language enhance
their ability to articulate and address challenges as
they wrestle with theory and content knowledge
(Swanson & Kayler, 2009).Therefore the role of
community and collaboration is a constructive
part of learning.
The Best of Both Worlds
Not all course content is appropriate for an online
or blended learning configuration. It is necessary
to determine if blended learning enhances the
teaching and learning environment or creates a
distraction. The first consideration for determin-
798
Blended Learning
ing whether a course is a fit for either an online
or blended learning format is to consider the fol-
lowing six elements determine the purpose for
choosing blended learning.
1. Pedagogical richness refers to the ways in
which instructors can extend or enhance
use of class time by moving routine items
or reading to an online format leaving room
for more student to student or student to
instructor interaction.
2. Access to knowledge refers to the ability of
instructors to post additional instructional
items for student access. This may include
items such as additional readings, video
uploads, PowerPoint, etc.
3. Social interaction refers to the ability for
students to reflect publically regarding their
understandings, struggles and questions.
4. Personal agency refers to the increased op-
portunities to provide students’ choice.
5. Cost effectiveness refers to the flexibility
for institutions to use a variety of instruc-
tors to teach in a blended setting over using
faculty who tend to teach in the traditional
F2F setting.
6. Ease of revision refers to the ability of in-
structors to more easily add and subtract from
course materials (Osguthorpe & Graham,
2003, p. 231).
Students also have individualized reasons
for choosing a blended learning course over a
traditional setting. Three specific reasons for
students to choose blended learning begin with
an improved pedagogical delivery system. As
mentioned previously, students’ perceptions of the
availability of resources without the requirement
of instructor contact is appealing. The increased
flexibility in the time, choices in learning and the
ability to create smaller more intimate learning
environments subsequent to the larger F2F ses-
sions. Lastly is the cost for students to commute
to campus and reduction of purchasing resources
Blended Learning
that are now online is an immediate benefit to
students (Graham, Allen, & Ure, 2003; Dzuiban,
Hartman, & Moskal, 2004).
Therefore, blended learning can create a rich
pedagogical environment, reduce the cost for
both institutions and students, and increase the
opportunity to create meaningful learning commu-
nities. The next question is what about the quality
of learning? In a recent meta-analysis done by
the US Department of Education (2009) regard-
ing blended learning for k-12 students’ blended
learning was found to have equivalent learning
outcomes for students. The analysis included those
research findings in which blended learning that
composed of a combination of face-to-face and
online learning components. At the collegiate level
it was found that blended learning increased learn-
ing outcomes and decreased attrition (Dzuiban,
Hartman, & Moskal, 2004).
ISSUES, CONTROVERSIES
AND PROBLEMS
I Must Hurry and Catch-Up with
the Others for I am Their Leader
At no other time in higher education did students
know more about a subject than the faculty. Stu-
dents have been required to shift between a time-
honored ways of participating in vocational and
higher education. They word process their papers
but still turn them into the instructors to grade by
hand, they may watch a power point presentation
in a course but are still the recipient of teacher
centered instruction.
In terms of technological assisted or enhanced
learning environments student savvy is well be-
yond the average content expert. This creates a
new dynamic in how faculty and institutions keep
up with the advancement of technology integra-
tion. Traditionally courses were taught a few
days a week for an hour (Tuesday and Thursday
from 10-11 am). Then the wave of totally online
courses emerged where students never stepped
foot on campus and could perform the required
tasks any time of day or night. Next was the in-
clusion of tools such as Eliminate which allowed
for students to converse with instructors through
video conferences abilities.
As students learn more about their learning
needs as they experience multiple formats; they
ask for the best of both worlds. In turn, instructors
begin to experiment with online courses and the
learning and teaching outcomes which emerge
over time. They also ask for the best of both
worlds. It is then that demand which impacts the
institution, where students and instructors can
flex institutions struggle with space availability,
seat hour requirements, enrollment caps and other
bureaucratic limitations which make blended
learning not necessarily the best for them.
Institutional Logistics
One of the logistical institutional challenges
regarded blended learning is the use of space. It
is difficult to schedule rooms when instruction
does not have a regular weekly meeting time. In
that most institutions face space issues, instruc-
tors many be forced to determine their meeting
schedule a semester or two in advance of the class.
This eliminates the flexibility for the instructor to
make changes in the F2F and online class dates.
A second issue is training instructors to create
and execute a successful online experience for both
themselves and their students. Who is responsible
for helping both students and instructors with the
transitions to a new learning platform? To begin,
instructors must change how they view F2F class
time. Time that was previously spent with students
reading and writing can now be used in coopera-
tive learning, discussions and project develop-
ment. Secondly, instructors must consider how
to hold students’ responsible for the expectation
of communicating productively in online com-
munities and how to assess that learning (Kayler
& Swanson, 2004).
799

Table 1.
Virtual learning environment (VLE
• Blackboard -
• FirstClass
• Desire2Learn - Desire2Learn eLearning solutions
• CyberExtension -
• WebTrain -.
Scaffolding the Technical Systems
Online technology is full of acronyms; the pro-
cess of distinguishing these technical terms can
be confusing. In this section I simply provide a
chart that will illustrate examples for three levels
of technology platforms used in BL courses. These
three levels are described from the large course
management system to a narrow instructional
design choice. The first is the Virtual Learning
Environment (VLE) which is the software sys-
tems available to deliver course content and also
contains communication elements. The tools used
in a VLE will be described in the following sec-
tion and how they are used in a blended learning
configuration. A second layer of online learning
systems is the learning management systems. This
is appropriately named in that course manage-
ment tools concentrate on the function of items.
Learning management systems are set up from the
perspective of the student and how to incorporate
successful tools to support instructional design.
The third level is Learning Activities Management
Systems (LAMS) which free software integrates
with VLEs to enhance instructional design and
student interaction (Ellis, 2009). The Table 1
provides the sources most used for both VLE and
LMS to support blended learning formats.
Overview of Tool Purpose
Each company provides learning technical support
and many institutions have designated staff to help
instructors configure their course menus (choice
for students and instructors to choose). The tools
800
Blended Learning
Learning Management Systems (LMS)
• Claroline
• Desire2Learn
• eFront -
• LAMS - the Learning Activity Management System
• TotalLMS
will be discussed as a way to provide examples
to all the many degrees of blendedness that an
instructor has the option of choosing.
For example, a typical course would include
the email option. This allows instructors to send
and receive email from and within a course. The
advantage to using a separate email for each course
is that student correspondences are held neatly
within a course folder. It is also useful if there is a
disagreement regarding communications, to have
all student correspondences centralized by course.
Another tool used is a drop box for assignments.
This is an electronic folder for students to upload
their assignments. The tool allows instructors
to designate a deadline after which the upload
mechanism is closed. The date and time of the
upload are also noted .Connected to this feature
is usually a grading form. The form is similar
to a rubric. When an instructor opens a student
assignment the grading form is available on the
page to allow for electronic assessment and a space
for comments. Once an assignment is graded the
grade is posted in the electronic grade book and
the grading form and comments are returned to
the student under their assignment folder. There is
usually an option to ask students to make changes
and resubmit the work at the instructor’s request.
The next tool that is essential to a blended
learning course is the discussion tool. The authors
will go into greater detail for this tool in that as the
communication tool it is the backbone for quality
blended learning. It provides a format for students
to talk to other students and for instructors to pro-
vide small group instruction. This tool allows the
instructor to create multiple formats for students
Blended Learning
to communicate about course details. The first is
to create discussion threads. These threads can be
designated by groups, in which 4-5 (usually no
more than 5) student are responsible to discuss
content and its application. These discussions are
asynchronous therefore students can participate
at any time that is convenient for them. Another
option is to create a blog within the discussion
tool. Multiple blogs can be created to support
the learning of different books, or chapters of
books. Students then decide where they want to
participate. This is an asynchronous format as well.
The third option for student discussion is a
chat room. The primarily difference between
the chat and the prior to formats is that the chat
room is synchronous. Therefore all participants
of a chat room must agree to be online and ready
to participate at the same time. Another option
to asynchronous is to provide a written chat or
a synchronous option. These dialogues can be
harder to evaluate for content, although there is
new software available for qualitatively coding
chat threads. Research is currently mixed as to
the quality of responses for chat.
Instructors can also create learning modules
in which components which are all related to a
course topic are housed in a folder for students to
access in any order and multiple times if needed.
Research supports the use of simulations and
showed modestly positive results in higher reten-
tion for students (DOE, 2009). Nguyen (2007)
found that addition enhancements such as tutori-
als, alternatives in content delivery incorporating
visual, auditory and text-enhanced had a positive
effect in online learning outcomes.
Blended learning courses also provide an op-
portunity to “go green”. Most of the course ma-
terials, that may normally be printed for students
can now, with copyright permissions, be posted
to the course management site. This includes the
syllabus, examples, readings, etc. Many course
management tools provide a folder in which
instructors can upload pertinent web links, video
clips, podcasts and vodcasts. Another advantage
to posting course materials is the increased re-
quirement for students to be independent. The
instructor no longer must be the gatekeeper for
required materials. If students choose to print the
material they obviously have the option. It also
keeps instructors from reprinting for lost items.
A third advantage is the ability to make changes
without reprinting.
Other items that help the instructor communi-
cate with students are the calendar tool, student
grade book and the instant messenger tool. When
items such as assignments and assessment are
posted with due dates, those item automatically
are posted in a class calendar. Other items such
as on –campus meeting dates and holidays can be
manually added to the calendar. This is convenient
for both instructors and students to see the course
at a glance. The instant messenger tool is one
that shows which students from the course are
currently online. So if a student has a question
and prefers to ask a peer they can simply send
them a message. It also allows students to know
if the instructor is online and can communicate
with them as well. Students can be responsible for
monitoring their grades by using the grade book
tool which shows them their individual scores
and instructor’s comments.
A new research area is developing as software
becomes available to track students’ use of course
management applications. This software can give
instructors information regarding how long stu-
dents took to complete quizzes and assessments.
Another feature is to know how long students
were logged in and which tools they choose to
access. It is likely that the most frequent use of the
applications are at the beginning and end of the
course; followed by regular visits to the discus-
sion, email and content tools. For example, if a
student is doing well an instructor would expect
to see use of modules, course content, time with
the discussion tools, etc.
801

Assessment for Online Participation
How do instructors develop student ability to
self-monitor and engage in online communities
to promote independent learning? The goal of
assessing student’s online learning participating
is important for two reasons: to support student
learning towards an end of increasing engaged
performance on required objectives; and to ad-
vance student understanding of their learning.
One way to design such assessment is to create
an assignment for students to assess themselves.
Self-assessment enhances the transformative
nature of learning theories and skills which can
lead to increased student engagement in their own
and others learning (Swanson & Kayler, 2009).
Traditional assessment determines if the stu-
dent has fulfilled the course requirements. The
purpose of involving students in assessing their
online work and participation is to transfer evalu-
ation for the external to the internal. The goal is
to increase student engagement in the learning
process to enhance their knowledge and for them
to become skilled at reflecting on their work in
order to maximize their learning (Swanson &
Kayler, 2009). Weimer (2002) stated,
“The literature on self-directed learning also
underscores the importance of assessment, only
in this case it is the ability of students to self-
assess accurately. Sophisticated learners know
when they do or do not understand something.
They can review a performance and identify what
needs improvement. They know when their lack
of objectivity necessitates their soliciting external
feedback.” (p. 17)
Assessment promotes students to be self-
reflective regarding their contributions, and the
types of information they share impacts and in-
fluences the development of the online learning
community. Data from student assessment can
illustrate the ways in which student contributions
positively or negatively impacted online commu-
802
Blended Learning
nities. Through reflection students can evaluate
their work and use their online contributions as
evidence to identify patters on participation and
develop an awareness of how their individual
contributions enhanced or diminished the learning
within the larger community. Another result of this
type of work is that students can identify areas for
improvement to enhance the online community
to be more meaningful to all members (Swanson
& Kayler, 2009).
It is important in creating blended learning tasks
in which participants are intrinsically motivated
to participate. While content is covered in class
and through reading texts, the social construction
of that new information is shaped within a group
of their peers. It is the application phase of learn-
ing that changes the students’ understanding and
resituates knowledge through interpersonal dia-
logue. In other words, blended learning provides
an additional venue to discuss what is important
to the learner.
Prior to implementing blended learning it is
important that instructors take the necessary time
to have clear goals for the purpose of participa-
tion and to share that information with students.
Instructors have options to degree in which they
participate in the student online components. One
way to consider instructor participation is to exam-
ine the desired outcomes. For example, research
has found that when instructors participle in online
discussions they often result in the instructor tak-
ing a central role and students wait to be given
the knowledge. A second scenario is where the
instructor participates in a limited fashion; they
enhance the discussion by asking questions, point-
ing to outside sources of information as ways to
can deepen the discussion or redirect the learners
to additional learning opportunities. Lastly, is the
option for instructors to monitor but not participate
in the online components that supported students
to have ownership, a central role in their learning
and opportunities to develop voice within their
learning community. As instructors we choose
to take a hands-off approach related to students’
Blended Learning
discussions however we did have a clear hand
in creating a process that would address student
engagement and contributions that supported
moving students towards self-directed learning
(Swanson & Kayler, 2009).
Instructors should carefully think about the
ways in which to configure online communities.
While groups can be configured to promote al-
ternative perspectives; personalities and experi-
ences could either enhance or diminish members’
participation. Individual students’ strengths and
background experiences should be taken into
consideration as a way to maximize student
engagement. Students need opportunities to get
to know each other to better able to develop ef-
fective communication patterns among diverse
adult learners. Students with high writing ability
or those with writing as a preferred learning style
make participation in blended learning easier and
more enjoyable for some than for others. One
solution we have found is suggesting that students
construct a response in a word document prior to
posting in order to give them an opportunity to
correct grammar and to develop their thoughts
more completely. Asynchronous discussions do
not require an immediate response and this pacing
appears to create a safer experience for students.
Threaded discussions have been found to assist
students who are poor readers or writers. When
faculty or peers provide assistance students writ-
ten abilities have increased through this type of
online communication.
Students who had either positive or negative
experiences with their communities identified
similar issues: lack of participation and the depth
of individual contributions clearly impacted the
learning experiences. Different modalities of dia-
logue were evident based on these four students’
self-assessments. The role of self-monitoring, re-
flection on postings and self evaluation facilitated
students to critically examine their role within the
communities and implications as independent
learners (Kayler & Swanson, 2007).
Brookfield (1995) reported that students’ per-
spectives can provide meaningful information on
their learning experiences; a surprising element
for faculty instructors. Student feedback can either
confirm or challenge instructors intended learning
outcomes. The value of student feedback is that
results should impact teaching and assumptions
about student understanding. Adjustments can
be made to groupings of students, the approach
to the application expectation of discussions or
other interventions necessary to promote a posi-
tive community.
The USDOE (2009) study found that reflec-
tions tools increase student outcomes over any
other online tool. The use of self-reflection, self-
monitoring, self-regulation prompts were found
to have a positive effect on learning outcomes.
Reflection could be described as a vehicle toward
developmental understanding or more simply what
makes learning a personal rather than intellectual
endeavor. This is at the heart of constructivist
teaching and learning. An important pedagogical
practice is tied directly to intentional groupings.
Students who participate in online communities
are required to post questions, discuss texts and
applications in a virtual setting. Dialogue can
supports constructivist pedagogy and increases
student accountability when students are required
to self-assess their postings in connection to the
pre-established expectations for the discussion.
The role of the instructor’s participation in
online discussion groups had mixed findings in
the research. Swanson and Kayler (2009) found
that with adult learners the absences of an au-
thority figure allowed students to play with the
language in a community of learners. Students
were less intimidated and more likely to take
risks. However, in more technical classes Zhang
(2004) found that discussion groups in which the
instructor participated had an increased outcome.
The assessment tool has a broader application
than the name implies. There are many ways and
purposes for assessing students. One way is to use
the quiz mechanism to provide students with quiz-
803

zes that either the program grades or the instructor
grades. However, the use of online quizzes was
found to show no evidence of increase learning
outcomes for students, thus it was found to not be
an effective online strategy (Maag, 2004; Stanley,
2006). The assessment tool also provides instruc-
tors a vehicle to ascertain student perceptions of
how the blendedness of the course is affecting
their learning. The assessment tool allows for
paragraph responses to prompts provided by the
instructor. The data is then available, organized
by prompt for the instructor to analyze and make
any pedagogical changed necessary.
International Society for
Technology in Education
ISTE is a professional development organization
for PK-12 and higher education educators. The
development of standards for students (National
Educational Technology Standards, NETS-S), for
teachers (National Educational Technology Stan-
dards, NETS-T), and for administrators (National
Educational Technology Standards, NETS-A)
provide a transferable framework to design teach-
ing and learning in multiple settings. There are
six student standards:
1. Creativity and innovation to develop prod-
ucts and processes.
2. Communication and collaboration through
the use of digital media to enhance personal
learning and the learning of others.
3. Research and information fluency to gather,
evaluate and use information.
4. Critical thinking, problem solving and
decision-making in the process of doing
research and managing projects.
5. Digital citizenship and technology opera-
tions and concepts as they involve societal
and ethical behavior.
6. Technology operations and concepts as they
relate to systems (www.iste.org, November
24, 2009).
804
Blended Learning
The use of the standards supports curriculum
design for blended learning that promotes aspects
of all six standards to create digital learners. An
instructor could also use the standards to create
rubrics for learning outcomes when they design
online assessments.
Students also have a new responsibility for
managing their learning. This is of course the goal
of learner centered pedagogy. Dzuiban, Hartman
and Moskal (2004) reported that students felt
that blended learning suited their lifestyles and
that they were more technologically empowered
after participating in a blended learning experi-
ence. It is not uncommon for students to find
that previously successful learning strategies in a
F2F setting were not useful or appropriate in the
online setting. The cognitive dissonance created
promoted new learning strategies as a part of the
community of practice. The tempo created between
the F2F and online components generates agency
for students and instructors to think outside the
box about teaching and learning.
ISTE also identifies standards for instructors
that inform the course design and assessment of
course outcomes. It is important for instructors
who teach in a BL setting to consider how to cre-
ate learning opportunities that reach beyond the
course content to consider how they can model
the teaching standards to enhance learning. The
five standards for teachers (instructors) include:
1. Facilitate and inspire students learning and
creativity based on subject matter, teaching
and learning and technology to enhance F2F
and online learning.
2. Design and develop digital-age learning
experiences and assessments using con-
temporary tools and resources to maximize
content learning in context.
3. Model digital-age work and learning in a
global and digital society.
4. Promote and model digital citizenship and
responsibility in a global society and digital
culture to promote ethical participation.
Blended Learning
5. Engage in professional growth and leader-
ship to improve practice within the profes-
sion using digital tools and resources. (www.
iste.org, November 24, 2009).
The goal for both the student and teaching
standards is to make explicit the multiple ways in
which creating; participating and evaluating BL
can be enhanced. BL is in many ways kaleidoscopic
in that, students and instructors all bring different
levels of technical understanding, savvy and con-
tent knowledge into the community. The purpose
of using a common framework gives everyone a
language to negotiate this community of practice.
FUTURE TRENDS
The future for blended learning will certainly
progress as technology forges forward. However,
the quality of blended learning is the key to in-
creased student outcomes. Dalziel (2003) begins
the conversation of how to create sophisticated
through learning design. Learning design in e-
learning is an international topic which integrates
content, context, multiple learners (group rather
than single target), activity-based learning us-
ing the Learning Activity Management Systems
(LAMS). The LAMS Foundation exists to sup-
port the development of learning design through
Macquarie University in Australia.
Another trend that is used in more technical
courses is a 3-D learning environment. 3-D for-
mats provide a large variety of learning design
possibilities, limited to this chapter an immediate
application is the use of avatars to enhance the
chat tools. Rather than chats being based on text,
students can design an avatar which has inflec-
tion, gestures and responses which creates a more
authentic experience where appropriate (Omale
et al., 2009). Research has found that learning
outcomes do not increase with 3-D technologies
because students tend to get off task due to the
visual stimulation. However, it has been found
useful to familiarize students with environments
such as labs with equipment (Dalgarno, 2002:
Lim et al., 2006).
Omale et al. (2009) site three elements of 3-D
technology that has instructional implications for
learning outcomes. The first is using a community
of inquiry framework (Garrison et al., 2000);
learners participate in a process which requires
higher-order thinking skills, reflective and critical
thinking. The second element is a students abil-
ity to project themselves social and emotionally
through an alternative communication medium.
And lastly, is the role of the teacher to create
higher-order learning with facilitated conversa-
tion. They conclude their study with this summary:
it appears that the blended approach did not
minimize the time participants spent in social
conversion. Even though participants had known
each other prior coming online, the excitement of
3-D MUVE attributes kept them preoccupied with
exploring the features and functions embedded
in the attributes. This suggests that participants
perceived the 3-D MUVE as a tool for socializing
and entertaining during their collaborative work.
We think, therefore, that it is important when adopt-
ing 3-D MUVEs for collaboration in a blended
learning approach to not only focus on helping
learners fully comprehend the technology and
its pedagogical purpose during the face-to-face
instruction, but to take into account the entertain-
ing nature of these attributes. (p. 494)
Virtual gaming research has implications for
blended learning as well. The newly released
Worlds in Play: International Perspectives on
Digital Games Research (Castell & Jenson, 2007)
provides a comprehensive review of current
research on digital games and argues that, “we
must learn to understand a tool or technology as
a system of social practice” (p. 3). This approach
to games as tools or technologies compels us to
widen our perspective and regard digital games
as instances of tool-mediated social interaction.
805

Thus far, research has been theoretical in nature
with little data from the gamers’ perspectives.
Virtual gaming plays an important role in
helping individuals enhance their cultural un-
derstandings, develop friendships and support
mutual learning. A recent study conducted by
Kayler, Sprague, and Dede (2009) reported on
gamers experiences in a virtual gaming environ-
ment. Gamers reported on the value of learning
about each other as individuals; enhancing their
own cultural understandings and their appre-
ciation of other people’s experiences. Much like
Wenger’s CoP, the researchers found that com-
mon ground was collectively built over time as
players talked and played alongside individuals
of different backgrounds and beliefs. Specific
features and processes shaped gamers experiences
and positively impacted their participation within
this virtual environment. Opportunities for discus-
sions, multiple opportunities for access to each
other, and creating a climate of acceptance and
a strong sense of community were features that
promoted engagement and can be implemented
into blended learning course design. Instructors
need to be mindful of the importance of these
features to ensure and promote optimal blended
learning. Dysfunctional teams die off quickly in
this type of virtual world, while teams who know
how to work together and divide tasks along the
skills and accomplishments of individual members
are more successful at negotiating the game space
(Humphreys, 2003).
3-D technology may hold a future in blended
learning as instructors find innovative ways to
incorporate problem-based learning modules into
their course content. Research continues to study
current courses using 3-D to determine how to
increase learning outcomes even as engagement
appears to currently been achieved.
806
Blended Learning
CONCLUSION
In conclusion, blended learning creates an in-
structional design challenge. Instructors have an
opportunity to develop a pedagogically richer
learning experience over traditional settings or
fully online courses. Blended learning is the best
of both worlds when teaching envelopes the vast
range of resources, technologies and multiplic-
ity of pedagogical options. As blended learning
becomes more the norm than the exception the
learning curve for instructors increase to meet the
technological savvy student who chooses courses
based on the vast options of learning through
multiple venues in an individual course.
What is also true is that students must alter
their modes of learning to meet the instructional
demands of learning through a highly communica-
tive model. Students, who communicate with their
peers in one manner, must master communicating
effectively in an academic environment which
demand in integration of critical thinking, con-
tent, problem-solving and community building.
Blended learning does not provide the luxury of
anonymity as a fully online course can provide.
Therefore students must understand and embrace
the value of being entwined with the learning of
their peers.
Blended learning also creates a marketplace
for new course management tools to evolve to
meet the growing demands of institutions. The
competition for student academic dollars in these
difficult economic times makes the incentive
for all stakeholders more intense. However the
outcomes are terrific for students and instructors
as consumers of those technological advances.
Blended learning is the future of not only higher
education but k-12 education as well. The global
interface will continue to grow as international
relationships are built from government, business
and relationships. It is unique that in an educational
setting the students are leading the pedagogical
curve and may not even realize it; rarely in the
Blended Learning
past has instructional design been so passionately
driven by and for the student.
REFERENCES
Brookfield, S. (1995). Becoming a critically re-
flective teacher. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Dalgarno, B. (2002). The potential of 3D virtual
learning environments: a constructivist analysis.
Electronic Journal of Instructional Science and
Technology, 5(2), 1-19. Retrieved October 10,
2009, http://www.usq.edu.au/electpub/e-jist/docs/
Vol5_No2/Vol5_No2_full_papers.html
Dalziel, J. (2003). Implementing learning de-
sign: The learning activity management system
(LAMS). In G. Crisp, D. Thiele, I. Scholten, S.
Barker, & J. Baron (Eds.), Interact integrate
impact: Proceedings of the 20th Annual Confer-
ence of the Australasian Society for Computers
in Learning in Tertiary Education (pp. 593-596).
Adelaide, 7-10, December 2003.
Ellis, R. K. (2009). Field guide to learning
management systems. ASTD Learning Circuits.
Retrieved December 13, 2009, from http://
www.astd.org/NR/rdonlyres/12ECDB99-3B91-
403E-9B15-7E597444645D/23395/LMS_field-
guide_20091.pdf
Garrison, D. R., Anderson, T., & Archer, W. (2000).
Critical inquiry in a text-based environment:
Computer conferencing in higher education. The
Internet and Higher Education, 2(2-3), 87–107.
doi:10.1016/S1096-7516(00)00016-6
Graham, C. R. (2004). Blended learning systems:
Definition, current trends, and future directions .
In Bonk, C. J., & Graham, C. R. (Eds.), Handbook
of blended learning. Global Perspectives, local
designs (pp. 3–21). San Francisco, CA: Pfeiffer
Publishing.
Graham, C. R., Allen, S., & Ure, D. (2003).
Blended learning: An emerging trend in education
. In Howard, G., Boettecher, J. V., Justice, L., &
Schenk, K. D. (Eds.), Encyclopedia of distance
learning: Online learning and technologies (Vol.
4, pp. 172–180). Hershey, PA: Idea Group.
Humphreys, S. (2003). Online multiuser games:
Playing for real. Australian Journal of Com-
munication, 30(1), 79-91. Retrieved Decem-
ber 12, 2006, from http://eprints.qut.edu.au/
archive/00000237/01/Humphreys_Online.PDF
International Society for Technology in Educa-
tion (ISTE). Retrieved on October 24, 2009 from
www.iste.org.
Kayler, M., Sprague, D., & Dede, C. (2009).
Online gaming: Building bridges that enhance
cultural understandings in educational technology
and sustainable development in a volume in the
series current perspectives on applied informa-
tion technologies. Charlotte, NC: Information
Age Publishing.
Kayler, M., & Weller, K. (2004, July). Building
dynamic learning communities through the use of
Web-based communication. Learning Technology
Newsletter, 6(3), 8–19.
Kayler, M., & Weller, K. (2007). Pedagogy,
self-assessment and on-line discussion groups.
Journal of Educational Technology & Society,
10(1), 136–147.
Laurillard, D. (2008). The teacher as action
researcher: using technology to capture peda-
gogic form. Studies in Higher Education, 33(2),
139–154. doi:10.1080/03075070801915908
Lim, C. P., Nonis, D., & Hedberg, J. (2006).
Gaming in a 3D multiuser virtual environment:
Engaging students in science lessons. British Jour-
nal of Educational Technology, 37(2), 211–231.
doi:10.1111/j.1467-8535.2006.00531.x
807
 Blended Learning

Maag, M. (2004). The effectiveness of an in- Swanson, K. W., & Kayler, M. (2009). The role
teractive multimedia learning tool on nursing of self-assessment in e-learning communities . In
students’ math knowledge and self-efficacy. Wang, V. C. X. (Ed.), Handbook of research on
Computers, Informatics, Nursing, 22(1), 26–33. E-learning applications for career and technical
doi:10.1097/00024665-200401000-00007 education: Technologies for vocational training
(pp. 431–443). Hershey, PA: Information Science
National Center for Education Statistics. Retrieved
Reference.
on November 13, 2009, from http://nces.ed.gov/
programs/coe/2009/section1/index.asp United States Department of Education. (2009).
Evaluation of evidence-based practices in online
Nguyen, F. (2007). The effect of an electronic
learning: A meta-analysis and review of online
performance support system and training as
learning studies. Retrieved December 13, 2009,
performance interventions. Doctoral Dissertation,
from www.ed.gov/about/offices/list/opepd/ppss/
Arizona State University, Temple.
reports.html. ED-04-CO-0040 Task 0006 with
Oblinger, D. (2003). Boomers, Gen-Xers, and SRI International.
Millennials: Understanding the ‘new students’.
Weimer, M. (2002). Learner-centered teaching:
EDUCAUSE Review, 38(4), 37–47.
Five key changes to practice. San Francisco:
Omale, N., Hung, W., Luetkehans, L., & Cooke- Jossey-Bass.
Plagwitz, J. (2009). Learning in 3-D multiuse
Wendover, R. W. (2005). From Ricky and Lucy
virtual environments: Exploring the use of unique
to Beavis and Butthead: Managing the new work
3-D attributes for online problem-based learning.
force. The Center for Generational Studies. Re-
British Journal of Educational Technology, 40(3),
trieved on October 13, 2009, from http://www.
480–495. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8535.2009.00941.x
allbusiness.com/sales/904082-1.html
Osguthorpe, R. T., & Graham, C. R. (2003).
Wenger, E. (1998). Communities of practice.
Blended learning environments. Definitions and
Learning, meaning and identity. New York:
Directions. The Quarterly Review of Distance
Cambridge Press.
Education, 74(3), 227–233.
Wenger, E., McDermott, R., & Snyder, W. C.
Rovai, A. (2004). Producing learning. The Interna-
(2002). Cultivating communities of practice: A
tional Review of Research in Open and Distance
guide to managing knowledge. Cambridge, USA:
Learning, 5(2). Retrieved October 15, 2009, from
Harvard Business School Press.
http://www.irrodl.org/index.php/irrodl/article/
view/192. Young, R. (2002, March 22). ‘Hybrid’ teaching
seeks to end the divided between traditional
Stanley, O. L. (2006). A comparison of learning
and online instruction. The Chronicle of Higher
outcomes by ‘in-course’ evaluation techniques for
Education, A33.
an online course in a controlled environment. The
Journal of Educators Online, 3(2), 1–16. Zhang, K. (2004). Effects of peer-controlled or
externally structured and moderated online col-
Swanson, K. W., & Kayler, M. (2008). Co-
laboration on group problem solving processes
constructing a learner-centered curriculum in
and related individual attitudes in well-structured
teacher professional development. Journal for the
and ill-structured small group problem solving in
Practical Application of Constructivist Theory in
a hybrid course. Doctoral dissertation. Retrieved
Education, 3(1), 1–26.
from Dissertation Database.

808
Blended Learning
KEY TERMS AND DEFINITIONS
Blendedness: The degree to which course
seat hours are reduced and the degree of online
sessions and technology support learning is in-
corporated into the structural course design. It
can be considered on a continuum between all
face to face to the opposite extreme of complete
online delivery.
Self-Assessment: An act in which one evalu-
ates their performance based on a previously
determined set of objectives. The evaluation is
supported by evidence provided by the individual.
The purpose of self-assessment is to provide a
constructivist approach for an individual to mea-
sure their contribution or performance on a task.
Community of Practice: A group of individu-
als who meet around a common topic which hold
specialized vocabulary and ways of knowing. It
is within this group that one learns the intricacies
of the topic and also helps to build knowledge in
other participants.
Course Management Systems (CMS): Are
software programs which provide instructional
management tools. These tools include commu-
nication tools such as email, blog and discussion
links. CMS also support pedagogical tools such
as podcasts, assessment and assignment options.
Learner-Centered Pedagogy: This refers
to the process of teaching and learning in which
students are at the heart of curriculum design,
classroom interaction and evaluation techniques.
For example, students are provided choice of read-
ings, assignments and assessment tools in a class.
Learning Management System (LMS): Is
“a software application for the administration,
documentation, tracking, and reporting of training
programs, classroom and online events, e-learning
programs, and training content” (Ellis, 2009).
Virtual Learning Environment: Is the soft-
ware systems available to deliver course content
and also contains communication elements.
809
810

Chapter 49
Perceived Neutrality
of Technology and its
Potential Impact:
Recontextualizing Technology
into Adult Learning Settings Using
a Cultural Studies Approach
Jim I. Berger
Western Kentucky University, USA

ABSTRACT
This chapter seeks to define technology, explore various views of technology, including feminist and
afro-centric perspectives, and to identify the cultural dimensions of technology and their impact on
adults as learners. I explore the viewpoints of several philosophers and researchers in the field of sci-
ence and technology studies and use these to show how technology is embedded with cultural values.
I propose using a cultural studies model to define various ways to study technology and its impact on
adult learners and draw from these to propose ways of examining technology and users, and a means
of researching the many “moments of intersection” between technology, adult learners and facilitators.

INTRODUCTION technology has been shown to be an artifact of

Today’s technology is often seen as a neutral,
value-free artifact used as a means of enhanc-
ing learning with adults (Bowers, 1988). In fact,
McClintock, quoted by Bowers (1988) says that
“computers are artifacts, designed and manufac-
tured tools, whereas education is a preeminently
cultural phenomenon, something that takes place
through and for people” (p. 28). However,
DOI: 10.4018/978-1-61692-906-0.ch049
culture, and therefore contains the values of that
culture. In today’s society, technology represents
the values of the dominant culture and supports
the goals and ambitions of the hegemony while
suppressing marginalized groups and individu-
als. Although much of the literature on the use
of technology promotes it as a positive tool that
enhances learning and provides an attractive and
meaningful way for adult learners to engage with
the material being learned, the preponderance of
Perceived Neutrality of Technology and its Potential Impact
the literature fails to describe ways in which tech-
nology impacts adult learners and asks its users
to conform to its values and adopt its method of
production. The purpose of this chapter is to take
a critical view of the development of technology
as a cultural artifact that is deeply imbedded in
the mainstream and serves the needs of the hege-
mony. This chapter examines the various views
of technology and delineates its potential impact
on adult learners. Finally, this chapter concludes
with a description of means to study technology
in adult education settings and suggests various
points of interaction to be studied.
DEFINITIONS OF TECHNOLOGY
The word “technology” comes from the Greek
word “Techne” which refers to the process of
“bringing forth into presencing, a mode of reveal-
ing” (Heidegger, 1977, p. xxv). This was a common
view of technology adopted by craftspeople who
used tools to bring out the qualities of the material
they were shaping. Similarly, today’s technology
is used to bring out the hidden qualities of mate-
rial or information. Microscopes reveal what is
hidden in the minutia of life, and telescopes bring
closer the details of heavenly objects millions of
miles away. The development of modern sciences
arose as a result of the need to order nature and
classify every part of it to reveal and release every
power within. Technology assists in that process
by helping reveal and control nature and bring it
under man’s power.
Heidegger (1977) believes that science and
technology are dependent on each other and treat
all before them with objectivity. He posits two
definitions of technology: first, technology is a
means to an end; second, technology is a human
activity. He sees technology not as just a tool, but
as a way of bringing forth the hidden qualities of
an object. An example is a craftsperson, using
technological tools, bringing out particular quali-
ties of an object. The craftsperson can be seen as
“revealing” the objects qualities.
Ray Thomas (1995) claims that technology is
“about how society uses science” (p. 11). He goes
on to explain that technology is a social activity
and that social processes necessarily shape the
development of such technologies as information
technologies. Misa (2003) argues that technology
is a result of “human desires and ambitions, as
solutions to complex problems, and as interacting
networks and systems” (p. 3). He elaborates that
technologies intermingle with society and culture
to influence each other, thus eliciting a variety of
emotions ranging from resistance to enthusiasm.
I see technology as another expression of a
culture, much like art, architecture, music, and
literature, of the society developing it. If you con-
sider each of the above examples, you will see that
each culture defines and shapes its expressions to
broadcast specific messages and values esteemed
within society. Technology carries similar mes-
sages by virtue of its design and incorporation into
our society. Instead of examining technology by
what it does and how it is used, I would like to
explore the various views of technology and its
relationship to culture and politics.
VIEWS OF TECHNOLOGY
Views of technology can typically be divided
into four categories (Feenberg, 1991). In the
first, Instrumental Theory, technology is viewed
as a means to an end; technology is neutral. In
the instrumental view, neutrality of technology
implies four points. First, technology is indif-
ferent to the ends it can be used to attain. How
can it be otherwise? It is only an artifact or a
combination of materials that make up a tool.
Technology is not concerned with the politics of
societies of capitalist or socialist cultures; it only
exists to serve the user and her/his purpose. Third,
the rational nature of technology is the cause of
technology’s neutrality and the universal truth it
811
 Perceived Neutrality of Technology and its Potential Impact
symbolizes. Being rational, or “coherent, logical,
and compatible with experience” (Barker, 2004,
p. 171), allows people to believe that because a
technology works in one culture, it will work in
all cultures (Feenberg, 1991). Therefore, because
technology is neutral and it is used as a means to
an end, the only rational stance is to employ it to
solve all problems, regardless of the cost to the
environment, culture, or human beings.
Opposite Instrumental Theory, substantive
theory of technology (Feenberg, 1991) sees tech-
nology as being developed by a cultural system
and works to restructure society to fit its needs
rather then allowing society to reformulate the
technology. While the use of technology is a hu-
man activity and the shape is of human design,
we cannot control technology because we can
only respond to the forces that developed the
technology as it was meant to be used, to control
nature. Heidegger explains that we are mere cogs
in a much larger machine that works to keep the
system moving. He goes on to explain (Brey, 2003)
that such tools are designed to carry out specific
tasks, tasks which are undertaken to achieve pur-
poses which enable the performer of that task to
have specific identities, such as being a carpenter
(Spinosa et al., 1997 as cited in Brey, 2003). A
similar example of this is the current technology
of fast food which views eating only as the act
of ingesting food and not as a tradition imbedded
with cultural norms and traditions. Missing from
this view is the traditional act of preparing food
together, engaging in conversation about daily
activities, bonding with family members, etc. By
treating the act of eating as one of ingesting food
rapidly, use of fast food has abandoned the cultural
and familial impact food preparation has had on the
development of family and communities. Feenberg
(1991) concludes that “technology is not a means
but has become an environment and a way of life.
This is its ‘substantive’ impact” (p. 8).
Irrationalism, a third view put forth by Marcuse
(Feenberg, 1991), sees science as a political act
and posits that technology is ideological because is
812
not possible to remove technology from the act for
which it is used. One is directly connected to the
other. For example, consider a chisel used to shape
wood. Its design is specific to the act and cannot
be separated from it. You would not use a chisel
to write and you would be hard pressed to carve
wood without a chisel. The two are intertwined
and cannot be separated. In each of the previous
arguments, the end result is determinism which
claims that we are on a direct path of control or
destruction as a result of the development and
use of technology.
In an effort to break from the determinist view
that technology, Feenberg (1991) offers a fourth
view of technology, the critical view. The critical
view of technology (Feenberg, 1991) seeks to
deconstruct technology and attempts to develop
a means of influencing the development and
implementation of technology to enhance its use
rather than perpetuate the hegemonic structures
present in today’s society. In the critical view of
technology, there are three predominantly feminist
(Grint & Gill, 1995) perspectives of technology:
Eco-feminism, liberal feminism, and technology
as masculine. The first, Eco-feminism, views tech-
nology as a means of control over women and the
environment. Eco-feminism (Grint & Gill, 1995)
values women’s biology and supports women’s
ways of knowing (see Belenky, Clinchy, Gold-
berger, & Tarule’s Women’s Ways of Knowing).
The eco-feminist view of technology is non-neutral
and developed with a specific purpose in mind.
Tools, for example, are shaped and designed for
efficiencies of movement and speed. Embodied
within those tools are values and ideas adopted
by the larger society. Its design offers its users
control over women and the environment.
Liberal feminism, however, perceives technol-
ogy as neutral but recognizes society’s role in
shaping how men and women use technology with
particular emphasis on how women are constricted
in their use through socialization. Liberal femi-
nism considers gender as a socially constructed
concept that is the result of several small steps
Perceived Neutrality of Technology and its Potential Impact
taken to deprive women of what is rightly theirs.
Its perception of technology as neutral, however,
denies the potential of society or culture to impact
technology’s design and development. The third
perspective, technology as masculine culture, sees
technology is wholly embedded in and takes its
definition from the masculine culture (Grint &
Gill, 1995). In this belief, technology contains the
imprint of patriarchal and masculine values and
reflects the social patriarchy of society. Wajcman
(1991) points out that, “As a result of the context
or culture of their production, [technologies] come
to embody particular assumptions about social
relations, to embody ‘patriarchal values’” (p. 17).
Another view, the Afrocentric perspective,
has not been found to be clearly delineated in
the literature (Herzig, 2004) as little attention
has been paid to the issue of race in the study of
technology. The literature that does exist indicates
that technology is used to establish alternate racial
identities and determines a character’s “true”
identity by using technology to show differences
between human races. Technology is used as a
means to modify the appearance and performance
of African Americans so they look and act more
like Whites. Examples include x-ray technology
used to remove short curly hair and to bleach the
skin (Herzig, 2004), much to the harm of the user;
and photography film (Dyer, 1999) which was
developed to enhance the appearance of White
people to the detriment of the appearance of Af-
rican Americans. Other bodies of the literature
tend to ignore the role African Americans played
in shaping technology and inventing it for popular
consumption and vice versa.
While each of these views approaches technol-
ogy on a continuum from being neutral to having a
great impact on members of society, the common
view is that it is technology acting upon society
and not society impacting and shaping technology.
The following explores how science and technol-
ogy can be viewed as socially constructed and is,
therefore, embedded with cultural values.
SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY
STUDIES
Science and Technology Studies (S&TS) view
science and technology as socially constructed
activities that rely on society’s norms and inter-
pretations rather than facts. The acts of science
rely on standards and knowledge claims shaped
by committees and the S&TS field (Sismondo,
2004) investigates how scientific knowledge
and technological artifacts are constructed and
examines how scientists and engineers engage
in the social construction of science and technol-
ogy. Using a constructivist approach (Sismundo,
2004), S&TS sees science and technology being
developed and practiced in social activities and
thereby being impacted by several beliefs. First,
knowledge and reality are constructed and sci-
entists and technologists work to construct them.
Second, knowledge developed in laboratories is
not created under normal or natural circumstances.
Scientists and technologists work to control every
variable in the laboratory, whereas in reality, these
variables have the ability to impact the outcome.
Third, conducting research on concepts that are
assumed to be natural, such as differences between
genders, thus naturalizes those differences. If we,
as researchers, assume that there is a difference
between male and female, then we will find those
differences; however, it is we who have socially
constructed those differences through our obser-
vation rather than being informed by nature that
those differences exist. Fourth, it is difficult to
represent nature accurately through the use of a
theory given the high likelihood that other factors
are impacting what is being observed. We use data
to generate theories but it is entirely possible that
the observed data could be interpreted differently
or that outside factors or additional data would
skew our results in such a manner that our inter-
pretations would be completely different.
The fifth belief relevant to S&TS, hetero-
geneous construction, is the idea that builders
of technology work within a social setting and
813
 Perceived Neutrality of Technology and its Potential Impact
therefore work to construct knowledge and prod-
ucts to fit within that social setting, shaping both
the product and the social world at the same time
(Sismundo, 2004). Heterogeneous construction
means that as engineers work to develop technol-
ogy in a material sense, they are also discovering
ways that society needs training to be able to use
the technology successfully and, therefore, are
looking for ways to shape society for the success-
ful implementation of that technology. Shaping
society can take place in simple acts of how and
when to use the new tool or in more complicated
acts of impacting legislation to require the new
tool to be used instead of existing tools. This is
evidenced by the well-documented history of
such technologies as the zipper (Friedel, 1996),
computer (Zuboff 1988), Sony Walkman® (du
Gay, Hall, Janes, Mackay, and Negus, 1997), and
nuclear reactor (Winner, 1986).
Sixth, while some believe that truth/reality is
separate and exists on its own, S&TS believe that
we construct our own reality and recognize the
possibility that the taxonomy of objects is really
an imposition onto objects by ourselves. Finally,
when we represent an object, that representation
impacts our current and future views of that object.
The underlying belief is that we construct our own
realities and how we view the world. Technology,
used to help represent those realities, is seen as a
product of particular cultures and is designed to
meet the needs of dominant society.
Within S&TS, there are four views of technol-
ogy (Brey, 2005) that inform this paper: Realist
Perspective, Social Constructivism, Hybrid Con-
structivism, and Differentiated Constructivism.
While each of these describe the impact technol-
ogy has on its users, the reader will see that they
progress along a continuum with little cultural
involvement in technology’s design on one end
and a large cultural influence in design at the other
end. At the end of this section, I argue for a fifth
perspective that explains my view of culturally
mediated constructivism, or actively imbedding
cultural values into technology.
814
In the realist perspective, Brey (2005) claims
that artifacts have inherent properties, and agency,
or “an ability to act and make change happen”
(Tisdell, 2001, p. 152) can be attributed to them.
Some of the concepts involved in this position
imply that technologies have inherent powers that
may manifest themselves in any context of use.
Some of these properties include constraints, or
limitations, on their users and the environment. An
example is one pointed out by Winner (1986) who
described the development of Moses’ bridges in
Long Island, New York built to a specific height
above the road to prevent certain vehicles, such
as larger trucks and buses from passing under-
neath, thus keeping out certain groups or classes
of people who could not afford the use of a car.
Other examples include McCormick’s adoption of
molding machines (Winner, 1986), which could be
operated by unskilled labor, and was adopted to
force the break-up of a developing union. The real-
ist perspective focuses on the use of technology’s
ability to hold agency, but plays down the ability
of the user to use the technology for means other
than its design suggests. It assumes that technology
constrains the environment but underestimates the
role technology plays in social contexts.
In contrast, Social Constructivism (Brey, 2005)
asserts that users interpret the way technologies
can be used and recognizes the ability of different
social groups to establish and dominate interpre-
tations of the technology. In what are identified
as affordances, or the perceived properties that
suggest how users should interact with an object,
popular notions of the technology’s purpose per-
suades or regulates their use. An example would
be the crowbar used to break down materials on
a construction site. An alternate interpretation
is using the crowbar to remove locks protecting
someone else’s valuables. Society readily accepts
the use of the crowbar on construction sites but
dislikes its use as a means of breaking and enter-
ing. Critics of social constructivism point out that
it relies heavily on social factors while ignoring
the physical constraints of the technology itself.
Perceived Neutrality of Technology and its Potential Impact
Hybrid constructivism, a third viewpoint,
attempts to bring together the realist and social
constructivism perspectives. Hybrid constructiv-
ism (Brey, 2005) recognizes how social factors
impact the use of technology but also allows
for physical restraints inherent in the design of
technological objects. This view recognizes the
roles of the user and technology, both of which
are active in the equation. Hybrid constructivism
assumes technology use occurs in a network of
users and technology, and both the design of the
technology and social factors of the users should
be examined. It also assumes that the restriction
of using the technology can be ignored by the
user and that affordances do not always need to
be followed. Users and society may redefine the
use of technology as they interact. As actants
(technology and users) continue to engage with
each other, links to common uses are formed
which grow stronger with repetition. As more
and more links are formed, a network of users
and technology is formed, out of which creates
an “understood” method and social context of
using the technology. Recognizing the role both
the user and technology play, it is unnecessary
for research to determine whether properties are
attributable to either the user or the technology.
However, critics claim that this position ignores
the role social contexts play in the design of the
technology, seeking to shape the technology and
the social arena at the same time.
As an answer to critics, Brey (2005) posits the
concept of differentiated constructivism which
argues that properties of an object are due to its
design as well as construction of the society but
sees that each of these components can be separate
from the other. Affordances and constraints can
still exist; sometimes they are imbedded within the
design of the technology, while other times they
are a result of society’s interpretation of technol-
ogy. At other times, affordances and constraints
are due to both social representations and physical
constraints. However, this position still does not
address the role the designers have in attempting
to shape both the technology and social context in
the development of the technology and subsequent
training of users.
I argue for a fifth position, that of culturally
mediated constructivism which recognizes that the
designers of technology are themselves situated
in a social context rife with cultural values and
are attempting to design technology to fit into a
socially constructed culture. I believe technology
contains physical and sociological constraints that
mimic the values of the dominant culture and
potentially hinder use among members of mar-
ginalized cultures. Consider the development of
any new technology. The designers will typically
attempt to visualize who will use the technology
and how. To that end, designers attempt shape
society and specify ways the technology should
be used, in what are often called “scripts”. Scripts
(Akrich, 1992) govern how technology is used and
for whom it is designed. The use of technology
requires certain scripts to be performed in order
to be successful. Consider, for example, using an
automobile which requires the user to sit, face
forward, place at least one hand on the wheel,
etc. Consider headphones of an Apple iPod® or
Sony Walkman®, both of which require the user to
place the headphones over their ears in order to be
able to sufficiently hear their music. This is used
to bring about a degree of conformity in the user,
thus increasing the predictability of the technol-
ogy for individuals and, if enough users employ
the technology, on society (e.g., the automobile).
As designers attempt to develop technology for
consumption by popular society, they will seek to
identify the greatest number of users who would
benefit from the technology and work to appeal
to the public to increase sales.
As a result, new technologies designed for
consumption are imbedded with cultural values
that make them appealing to the public. This
means that the designers are attempting to appeal
to the more prevalent, dominant culture, usually
ignoring the needs and wants of members at the
margins of society, with a slight exception for
815
 Perceived Neutrality of Technology and its Potential Impact
individuals with disabilities. Therefore, these
marginalized groups are faced with attempting
to use technology designed for those outside of
their cultures. As newcomers to the technology
attempt to learn and use these technologies, they
face the choice of adapting to the scripts, modify-
ing those scripts, or rejecting them. If users follow
imbedded scripts, there is potential for users to
face pressure to adapt their actions to enhance
the performance of the technology. Consider, for
example, oral societies that rely more on word of
mouth than text. As they attempt to work within
the dominant culture that relies more heavily on
text as a means of communication, they find it
necessary to adapt their behaviors to keep up to
date and avoid falling “out of the loop”, losing
whatever strides they had made. This adaptation
carried out over several behaviors could modify
thinking and beliefs at the individual level. If
enough marginalized users work to stay within
the scripts, there is a potential their individual
changes in thinking will result in a cultural shift.
If users attempt to modify the scripts to suit
their needs rather than the designer’s needs, they
face the likelihood the technology’s performance
level will be less than desired, or worse, being a
danger to themselves. Finally, if users reject the
scripts and the use of the artifact altogether, they
face alienation and potential ostracization from
society. Individuals who reject or who are unable
to afford the use of such information technologies
as the computer, the Internet, the telephone, cell
phones, etc., are often considered to be out of the
“mainstream” of society. They will likely miss out
on important ways to receive information and fall
further behind. The following section will discuss
how individuals will react to pressures to adapt
to other cultures.
Cultural Adaptation to Technology
If we assume that technology has cultural values
imbedded within it, then users attempting to benefit
from the technology will find themselves facing
816
pressure to adapt to those cultural values. Pressure
to adapt to any new cultural system can result in
changes. While changes that take place are first
seen at the individual or psychological level, the
impact is felt at the group or cultural level (Berry
& Sam, 1997). Individuals who are faced with
these pressures often adapt using varying degrees
of cultural maintenance, contact, and participation.
Cultural maintenance occurs when the individual,
facing pressures to adapt to a different culture,
attempts to retain their current cultural practices,
values, characteristics, and identities. Contact and
participation is the extent to which individuals
choose to interact with other cultural groups or
remain separate. There are four strategies, involv-
ing varying levels of contact and maintenance,
that one can use when facing pressures to adapt to
an encroaching culture: assimilation, separation,
integration, and marginalization.
Assimilation (Berry & Sam, 1997) occurs
when individuals desire to give up their own
culture (low cultural maintenance), to adopt
the dominant culture and seek daily interaction
(high contact and participation) with members of
the dominant culture. The strategy of separation
takes place when individuals choose to hold onto
their own culture (high cultural maintenance) and
avoid contact (low contact and participation) with
other cultures. When the dominant culture im-
poses this on the subordinate culture, it is known
as segregation. Integration (Berry & Sam, 1997)
strategies involve the individual keeping parts of
their cultural identity (high cultural maintenance)
while interacting with other cultural groups (high
contact and participation). The individual is seek-
ing to find ways to merge the new culture with
existing cultural values. Marginalization (Berry
& Sam, 1997) often takes place when individuals
do not want to interact or belong to the dominant
culture (low contact and participation) but find
little reward in maintaining their own culture (low
cultural maintenance).
Use of these strategies is not always consistent
or tolerated by the dominant culture and may result
Perceived Neutrality of Technology and its Potential Impact
in additional stress for the newcomer. Individuals
facing pressure to adapt to other cultures may use
a variety of adaptation strategies depending on the
context and length of time they are immersed in
the other culture. While no particular adaptations
to dominant cultures are favored in any specific
sequence or age, individuals explore several strate-
gies before settling upon one. Strategies (Berry &
Sam, 1997) or behaviors of those seeking to adapt
to dominant culture may not be appreciated by the
dominant culture causing a continuum of difficulty.
On one end of the continuum, individuals feel that
the psychological changes when adapting to the
new culture are easy and part of learning a new
way to behave. In the middle of the continuum,
individuals face “culture shock” or acculturative
stress, that may lead to psychosomatic problems
such as anxiety attacks, avoidance behaviors, or
other stress related behaviors. Learning at this
point along the continuum is difficult and is more
often hindered. At the far end of the continuum,
individuals facing extreme difficulty with adapting
to new cultures may experience mental disease
or psychopathology. The demands of the new
culture have exceeded the ability of the individual
to adapt or cope due to the degree, rapidity, or
other characteristic of the change. The expecta-
tion to adapt to other cultures, such as the culture
of technology, can greatly affect adult learners.
POTENTIAL IMPACT ON
ADULT LEARNERS
Up to this point, this chapter has focused on vari-
ous views of technology, their impact on cultural
groups, and the continuum of technology design
and societal impact. The following section will
describe how technology can negatively impact
adult learners and their subsequent reactions.
Andrew Feenberg (1991) points out that when
management decides to utilize technology in the
workplace, it has four impacts on employees and
the environment. I believe that these same four
effects can be found for adult learners who are
asked to use technology in the learning environ-
ment: (1) decontextualization, (2) reductionism,
(3) autonomization, and (4) positioning. Decon-
textualization is the process by which objects are
taken out of their context and viewed as objects
of technical practice. Once these objects have
been separated from their normal contexts, they
can be analyzed according to their parts and
usefulness without regard to the context that de-
veloped them. Adult learners who are given the
task to use technology often learn to master the
technology under situations foreign to the actual
context of its use. When they are asked to replicate
those skills in real-life situations, they may not
recognize how the context impacts and modifies
the use of the technology. Reductionism occurs
when the secondary characteristics of technology
are ignored, while focusing only on the primary
characteristics. This can be seen when workers
are viewed as objects with certain skill sets and
ignored as people with families, views, feelings,
etc. Adults feel this when, upon arrival at learn-
ing centers, they are assessed on their skills and
knowledge and then given tasks to “fix” or im-
prove their abilities without understanding how
their abilities are situated in the larger scheme of
work or home life.
Autonomization (Feenberg, 2002) is the
process of separating the person in control from
the person being controlled thus preventing the
controller from knowing when his/her control has
a negative impact on the person being controlled.
This is exemplified in the use of technology to
speed up processing for efficiency and profits
while ignoring the problem of repetitive stress
injuries or pollution to the environment (Feenberg,
2002). We see this often when it is the instructor
or computer program making the decision as to
what adults learn without an understanding of what
using technology does to the learner. Consider the
assignment to use a computer to write a paper.
For many learners, this would be a simple and
efficient task due to the ability of the computer
817
 Perceived Neutrality of Technology and its Potential Impact
to allow users to type and edit their paper without
having to start over. However, for some learners,
this assignment can cause great distress because
it requires them to use skills they may not have
or may have on a limited basis. Many learners,
unaware of how a computer works, complain that
they are afraid of using the computer due to their
fear of breaking it.
Positioning (Feenberg, 2002) occurs when
individuals use technology to increase their power
over others. Users of technology who understand
and know how to manipulate the technology can
use this power to improve their standing and posi-
tion with others. Instructors are given additional
power in the learning environment because they
know how to use technology and are able to use
it to make decisions for their students. The use
of technology in adult learning centers helps in-
structors control learning as much as possible, to
“squeeze” every benefit out of learning regardless
of the negative impact it may have on the environ-
ment, the worker, or society.
A poststructuralist approach to analyzing
technology’s impact on adult learners reveals that
using technology can have the same impacts on
adult learners and those impacts will lead to ad-
ditional impacts: alienation, oppression, and fear.
Alienation refers to the effect using technology
will have on marginalized groups in relation to
the dominant culture. Abdul-Gader and Kozan
(1995) describe computer alienation as a “socially
and psychologically induced subjective state of
separation from computers” (p. 541) that results
in lack of power, lack of comprehending of the
computer, distrust of suppliers of computers, and
a sense of isolation from computers and those
involved with them. Using Seemans’ framework
of alienation, the authors created six scales of
computer alienation: Computer powerlessness,
meaninglessness, normlessness, social isolation,
self-estrangement, and cultural estrangement.
Computer powerlessness occurs when the indi-
vidual feels that the computer has control over
the individual, their work process and outcomes
818
and can be felt as a sense of helplessness when it
comes to computers. Meaninglessness indicates
a lack of comprehension of concepts related to
computers, their systems and applications and is
often a result of technical structures and termi-
nology. Normlessness refers to the expectation
to use unconventional means to accomplish
specific goals. Social isolation is a result of the
user feeling separated from computer profession-
als and being reluctant to associate with intense
computer users. Self-estrangement, similar to
social isolation, is indicated when the individual
avoids using computers. Cultural estrangement
is when the individual rejects common societal
values, especially when it comes to informational
technology.
Because our society is becoming more depen-
dent on computers, those who feel alienated by
computers may feel oppressed as they find they
do not fit in with the culture imbedded within
technology. The macro culture of technology
“reflects the larger American Western Culture,
one that values speed, efficiency, ‘progress’, and
the use of technology (machines) to make work
‘easier’” (Irwin, 2000, p. 196). As this is a separate
culture, one where the rules are not explicit, those
who reside at the margins will find conflict and
feel left out, further marginalizing themselves. As
Bruce Sinclair (2004) points out, technology is
“contingent and contains unequal power relation-
ships . . . Technology may be socially constructed,
but the players are not all on the same footing – a
truth familiar to [women and] people of color, who
have also long known that both its benefits and
consequences are distributed unequally” (p. 12).
As marginalized persons attempt to engage with
the power relationships that technology supports,
they may fear the resulting changes to their lives.
If they do take on the culture of the technology
developed for current hegemony, they are faced
with scripts that may require them to adapt or
even abandon their own culture in order to suc-
ceed in the dominant culture. Computer use can
create discord between the user and their culture
Perceived Neutrality of Technology and its Potential Impact
as they are impacted by the culture imbedded in
the technology, thus leading to further alienation
and oppression as the individual attempts to suc-
ceed in a new environment with unspoken rules.
USING CULTURAL STUDIES
TO EXAMINE TECHNOLOGY’S
IMPACT ON ADULT LEARNERS
While there have been a great many studies on
the use of technology with adult learners, there
appear to be very few which take a critical view
of technology and seek to understand how tech-
nology shapes or affects the learner. In this next
section, I propose using cultural studies as a means
to studying technology and its use.
Cultural studies involve “a particular approach
within the wider field of the study of culture”
(Johnson, Chambers, Raghuram, & Tincknell,
2004, p. 9). I believe that cultural studies is the
best approach to studying the effect of technol-
ogy because, as we have seen, technology, social
practices, and adult learning are all governed by
cultural norms which have an impact on how
the adult learner views and uses technology.
The field of cultural studies places culture at the
center of all activities and includes it in studies,
contrary to much of the research being conducted
today. Cultural studies views cultural processes
as a vehicle for powerful social relationships to
be enacted and focuses on six important areas
(Johnson et al., 2004): culture and power, culture
as value, culture as policy, culture as cohesion,
culture as standardization, and culture as language
or understanding.
Culture and power studies seek to examine the
identities of those involved in power relationships
and understand how the process of betterment is
promoted or restricted. The second agenda, culture
as value, explores the “aesthetic or moral value of
literature, music, or art that is supposed to make
them worth studying” (Johnson et al., 2004, p. 10).
Culture as policy examines policies set by large
institutions, usually those of governments, that
organize behaviors and conduct. Culture as cohe-
sion seeks to understand the pressures to conceive
of culture as bounded, uniform, and shared among
many individuals, Cultural studies examines the
relationships between cultures, as in the clashes
between dominant cultures and non-dominant
cultures, and try to understand the view that any
break from the unity of one culture is considered a
social pathology to the other culture. Consider the
hippy movement that broke from the traditional
culture and sought ways to distance themselves
from the norm. Many governmental institutions
made great efforts to subvert and quash the move-
ment, seeing them as deviants within society.
Culture as standardization (Johnson et al., 2004)
looks at the uniformities of mass culture in the
hopes of understanding how commercialization
or commodification commonly found in modern
society can lead to social control. Examples of
this would include the spread of such organiza-
tions as McDonalds, Disney, and Wal-Mart which
provide the means and products for individuals
to conform to the larger society.
Culture as language or understanding (John-
son et al., 2004) encompasses structuralism and
hermeneutics as a means of studying language or
culture. Structuralism (Barker, 2004) examines the
systematic rules that organize language and make
understanding meaning possible. Cultural studies
views structuralism as a means of understanding
how society makes meaning and how the struc-
ture of language impacts the making of meaning.
Hermeneutics sees meaning-making as a process
that resides in the reader or observer rather than
in the author or actor. This conceptualization of
meaning begs the question of how one can study
a text or phenomenon without imparting one’s
own meaning scheme.
Cultural studies have a great deal to offer re-
searchers and practitioners as a method for study-
ing the culture of technology and its impact on
adult learners. In this next section, I will propose
using cultural studies as a means to understand
819
 Perceived Neutrality of Technology and its Potential Impact
how the culture of technology shapes or affects
the learner.
Moments of Inquiry
Research in cultural studies typically occurs in
moments, or practices that gain particular impor-
tance at a particular time in the research process
(Johnson et al., 2004). Research into the interaction
between technology and adult learners can take
place during many moments. I have attempted to
encapsulate a few in this section and will discuss
each in detail.
Interaction of the learner with technology.
Considering that technology is steeped in cultural
values and overtones, it is plausible that technol-
ogy users could be impacted by using its use.
Research needs to be conducted to examine the
extent technology facilitates or hinders the learning
process as the culture of the technology and the
learner either creates a symbiotic or conflictual
relationship. Research in this vein would include
understanding the meaning-making schemes of
learners as they use technology and what changes,
if any, occur in those schemes as the adult learner
uses the technology.
Facilitator with technology. Facilitating
learning is culturally dependent and requires an
in-depth understanding of cultural norms. In order
for facilitators of adult learning to be effective, it
is imperative that they understand how their learn-
ers make meaning. Using technology impacts the
facilitation of learning with adults. Researchers
need to understand how using a culturally loaded
artifact affects a culturally loaded activity, such
as teaching. For example, when engaging adult
learners in a learning process, the act of using
pen and paper will have a smaller impact on the
learner than requiring them to use a computer
tablet. While both require similar skills (i.e., ability
to hold the pen or stylus in one’s hand), the rules
of engagement with the different technologies
requires a higher set of skills for computer tablets
in knowing where the document went once it has
820
been saved. Retrieving a hand-written paper can
be easy if placed in a notebook. The skills required
to retrieve the paper are low and simple. The
same cannot be said of computer tablets as one
must understand the use of the mouse or pointing
device, the file structure, how to power up and
navigate the computer and its operating system.
Research should examine how the influence of
cultural components within technology impact
the facilitator’s ability to teach adults, especially
those at the margins of the dominant society.
Technology as power. Those who are privileged
to use technology hold power and sway over those
who either do not know how to use it or do not
have access to it. As Apple points out, the social
activity of adult education is “tied to the larger
arrangement of institutions which apportion re-
sources so that particular groups and classes have
historically been helped while others have been
less adequately treated” (1990, p. 10 as quoted in
Cervero & Wilson, 2001). Technology, often used
in adult education, has the potential to continue
to perpetuate unequal power relationships and
hinder development of adult learners rather than
providing the opportunity for emancipation. Con-
sider the power dynamics that are established in a
classroom where computers are used. Instructors
who understand and use technology on a regular
basis have more power and control over students
who do not. Now, consider the reverse, where the
learner understands how to use technology and
the instructor does not. The learner has the ability
to work with or against an instructor. Students
who readily understand how to look up readings
would have informational power over those who
do not, perpetuating the pattern that those students
with greater access and knowledge of technology
perform better than those who lack such access.
Research needs to examine the role technology
plays in perpetuating power relationships to the
detriment of marginalized groups or individuals.
Interpretive Flexibility. Interpretive flexibility
(Brey, 2005) is the notion that artifacts can be
interpreted in a variety of ways, including those
Perceived Neutrality of Technology and its Potential Impact
different from designers. A simplistic example is
that of a mug which can be used to hold a beverage
but could also be used as decoration or to hold paint
brushes. Just because the designer expects the user
to conceive of the artifact in a particular way does
not mean that the user will. Designers may view
certain technologies, such as instant messaging
software as a means to maintain contacts with
friends and families, while others may view it as
a way to subvert a dictatorial government and as a
site to overcome institutional oppression. Learning
in both instances takes place under very different
circumstances. It is imperative for researchers to
consider the role interpretive flexibility has on
technology’s use and adult learning.
Acceptance, modification, or rejection of
scripts. As adult learners encounter technology and
embedded scripts (Akrich, 1992), they are faced
with a choice of using it as the designers expect
them to, modifying its use to suit their needs, or
rejecting it outright for another technology or none
at all. Consider research that has shown various
cultural groups use the Internet in less amounts
(Spooner & Rainie, 2000; Lenhart, 2003). Even
when access is taken into consideration, their use
is different. Perhaps an explanation has to do with
the cultural messages or scripts being broadcast
by those technologies. Research needs to be
conducted to better understand how adults learn
or make meaning of those scripts, what processes
they use to modify the scripts, and the impact such
acceptance, modification, or rejection of those
scripts has on the development of their identity.
Learning to use technology. Most important
to adult educators is the need to understand how
adults learn to use technology. Included in this
notion is the call to identify potential models for
learning and adapting technology and understand-
ing how cultural nuances impact the learner’s
approach to creating meaning of new technology.
I believe it would also be important to recognize
the process adults go through when they make
meaning of the intersection of their culture and the
cultural demands of using technology or learning
to adapt to the physical and social constraints of
technology. Adults will necessarily go through a
process of resisting and constraining the cultural
influence of technology and its scripts on their
lives. Adult educators will need to explore how
this occurs and the process adults move through
when encountering such scripts. Finally, consid-
ering the criticisms of diffusion theories and the
diffusion field in general, it is important to examine
the role culture plays in the decision to adopt or
reject technology.
CONCLUSION
Technology is becoming ubiquitous in adult edu-
cation settings yet very little research has focused
on the impact culture imbedded in technology has
on adult learners. This paper seeks to develop
conversation around the role culture plays in the
development and use of technology and its po-
tential impact on adult learners. The point of this
paper is not to claim or point out negative aspects of
technology, but to help readers recognize the need
to critically evaluate the role technology plays in
adult learning and how cultural variables impact
the decision, use, and interpretation of the tech-
nology. Bruce Woll (1997) explains, that “given
the omnipresence of technology in education and
learning today, it is essential for adult education as
an academic enterprise to begin to dialogue with
STS, especially as regards communication and
information technologies” (p. 37). This chapter
has sought to start such dialogue in the hopes of
having a better understanding of how technology
influences adult learners.
REFERENCES
Abdul-Gader, A. H., & Kozar, K. A. (1995). The
impact of computer alienation on information
technology investment decisions: An exploratory
cross-national analysis. Management Informa-
tion Systems Quarterly, (December): 535–559.
doi:10.2307/249632
821
 Perceived Neutrality of Technology and its Potential Impact
Akrich, M. (1992). The de-scription of techni-
cal objects . In Bijker, W. E., & Law, J. (Eds.),
Shaping technology/building society: Studies in
sociotechnical change (pp. 205–224). Cambridge,
MA: MIT Press.
Barker, C. (2004). The SAGE dictionary of cultural
studies. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Berry, J. W., & Sam, D. L. (1997). Acculturation
and adaptation . In Berry, J. W., Segall, M. H., &
Kagitçibasi, C. (Eds.), Handbook of cross-cultural
psychology: Volume three – social behavior and
applications (2nd ed., pp. 291–326). Boston: Al-
lyn & Bacon.
Bowers, C. A. (1998). The cultural dimensions
of educational computing: Understanding the
non-neutrality of technology. New York: Teachers
College Press.
Brey, P. (2003). Theorizing modernity and tech-
nology . In Brey, M., & Feenberg, A. (Eds.), Mo-
dernity and technology (pp. 33–71). Cambridge,
MA: MIT Press.
Brey, P. (2005). Artifacts as social agents . In Har-
bers, H. (Ed.), Inside the politics of technology:
Agency and normativity in the co-production of
technology and society (pp. 61–84). Amsterdam:
Amsterdam University Press.
Cervero, R. M., & Wilson, A. L. (2001). Power
in practice: Adult education and the struggle for
knowledge and power in society. San Francisco:
Jossey-Bass.
Du Gay, P., Hall, S., Janes, L., Mackay, H., &
Negus, K. (1997). Doing cultural studies: The
story of the Sony Walkman. London: Sage Pub-
lications.
Dyer, R. (1999). Making ‘white’ people white
. In MacKenzie, D. A., & Wajcman, J. (Eds.),
The social shaping of technology (pp. 134–140).
London: Open University Press.
822
Feenberg, A. (1991). Critical theory of technology.
New York: Oxford University Press.
Feenberg, A. (2002). Transforming technology:
A critical theory revisited. New York: Oxford
University Press.
Friedel, R. D. (1996). Zipper: An exploration in
novelty. New York: W.W. Norton and Company.
Grint, K., & Gill, R. (Eds.). (1995). The gender
technology relation: Contemporary theory and
research. Bristol, PA: Taylor & Francis.
Heidegger, M. (1977). The question concerning
technology and other essays. New York: Garland
Publishing.
Herzig, R. (2004). The matter of race in histories
of American technology . In Sinclair, B. (Ed.),
Technology and the African-American experience:
Needs and opportunities for study (pp. 155–170).
Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Irwin, L. (2000). Gender inequities in technology
in developing nations: Females and computers in
traditional cultures. Intercultural Education, 11(2),
195–200. doi:10.1080/713665242
Johnson, R., Chambers, D., Raghuram, P., &
Tincknell, E. (2004). The practice of cultural
studies. London: Sage Publications.
Lenhart, A. (2003). The ever-shifting Internet
population: A new look at Internet access and
the digital divide. Pew Internet & American Life
Project. April 2003. Retrieved November 22, 2009,
from http://www.pewinternet.org/~/media//Files/
Reports/2003/PIP_Shifting_Net_Pop_Report.
pdf.pdf
Merriam, S. B., & Brockett, R. G. (1997). The
profession and practice of adult education: An
introduction. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Perceived Neutrality of Technology and its Potential Impact
Misa, T. J. (2003). The compelling tangle of mo-
dernity and technology . In Misa, T. J., Brey, P.,
& Feenberg, A. (Eds.), Modernity and technology
(pp. 1–32). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Sinclair, B. (2004). Integrating the histories of race
and technology . In Sinclair, B. (Ed.), Technology
and the African-American experience: Needs and
opportunities for study (pp. 1–18). Cambridge,
MA: MIT Press.
Sismondo, S. (2004). An introduction to science
and technology studies. Malden, MA: Blackwell
Publishing.
Spooner, T., & Rainie, L. (2000). African-Amer-
icans and the Internet. Pew Internet & American
Life Project. October 2000. Retrieved November
22, 2009, from http://www.pewinternet.org/~/
media//Files/Reports/2000/PIP_African_Ameri-
cans_Repor t.pdf.pdf
Thomas, R. (1995). Introduction . In Heaps, N.,
Thomas, R., Einon, G., Mason, R., & Mackay,
H. (Eds.), Information technology and society:
A reader (pp. 9–11). London: Sage Publications.
Tisdell, E. J. (2001). The politics of positionality:
Teaching for social change in higher education .
In Cervero, R. M., & Wilson, A. L. (Eds.), Power
in practice: Adult education ad the struggle for
knowledge and power in society (pp. 145–163).
San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Wajcman, J. (1991). Feminism confronts technol-
ogy. Cambridge: Polity.
Winner, L. (1986). The whale and the reactor: A
search for limits in the age of high technology.
Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Woll, B. (1997). The Internet, societal learning
technologies and the culture of modernity: A case
study in non-modern adult education theory. Un-
published doctoral dissertation, Northern Illinois
University, DeKalb.
Zuboff, S. (1988). In the age of the smart ma-
chine: The future and work of power. New York:
Basic Books.
KEY TERMS AND DEFINITIONS
Alienation: Effect using technology will have
on marginalized groups in relation to the dominant
culture. The result is a feeling of being left out or
ignored by the society at large.
Culturally Mediated Constructivism: The
act of incorporating cultural norms and values in
the development of technology.
Fear: Increase of anxiety or nervousness as a
result of using technology.
Interpretive Flexibility: The ability to modify
the use of a technology’s use regardless of the
prescribed design.
Oppression: The restricting of movement or
abilities through physical or sociological factors.
Script: Prescribed ways the technology should
be used, usually found within the design and
socialization of technology.
Technology: Tools or artifacts that are an ex-
pression, much like art, architecture, music, and
literature, of the culture developing it.
823
824

Chapter 50
Evaluating Teaching in
Adult Education
James B. Martin
Army’s Command and General Staff College at Ft. Leavenworth, Kansas, USA

Royce Ann Collins

Kansas State University, USA

ABSTRACT
Teaching is the bedrock of the learning environment; however, few instructors receive formal instruction
on how to teach. While the quality of teaching adults can be assessed in numerous ways, these authors
used their experience of creating faculty development programs at small, liberal arts universities to
discuss instructor selection, student ratings, mentorship, and peer review. Looking through the lens of
formative assessment (evaluation for improvement rather than judgment) and faculty development, this
chapter looks at creating a faculty evaluation system which will grow instructors. While many of the
items discussed in this chapter could be used with full-time faculty, the focus for these authors is the
adjunct community who teach in many adult education programs.

INTRODUCTION the management of the adult classroom increases

While the focus of adult education has now turned
to the quality of student learning, and rightfully
so, one of the key considerations in the creation
of strong student learning is high quality teaching.
Teaching adults is quite different from teaching
traditional age students and this difference has
been captured by a number of authors. Under-
standing these differences and allowing for them
in the choice of classroom teaching methods and
DOI: 10.4018/978-1-61692-906-0.ch050
the adult students’ opportunity to make meaning
in ways that are most helpful to them. One of the
best ways to promote high quality teaching in
adult classrooms is by the creation of good faculty
development programs which provide focus on the
uniqueness of adult learners and map out teaching
strategies by which faculty can be more effective
in adult classrooms. A key component of such a
faculty development program is that of evalua-
tion. As will be discussed below, the evaluation
of teaching is a touchy topic in the faculty world.
Few of us enjoy being under a microscope, as it
Evaluating Teaching in Adult Education
makes us uncomfortable and in many instances
in the past has produced no positive outcomes.
This chapter lays out the evaluation component
of a faculty development program and suggests
ways that organizations can evaluate faculty and
aid them in becoming better teachers of adults.
ISSUES, CONTROVERSIES,
PROBLEMS
The largest initial problem most institutions have
in creating a quality faculty evaluation program,
particularly one focused on teaching, is the sins
of the past. How many of us have seen an in-
stitution which talked a lot about teaching and
had a structured program for evaluation, yet it
did nothing worthwhile to improve teaching?
These programs often have neatly laid out com-
ment sheets with little circles for administrators
to pencil, showing that they have been in the
faculty member’s classroom and evaluated them.
The problem in adult programs is often just like
that experienced by one high school teacher who
writes about having no one visit for months and
being unsure of his ability to teach. With no one
to provide feedback he just drifted along in the
direction which seemed right to him, only to get
a visit from his principal in the waning weeks of
the school year. Called to the principal’s officer
for a discussion of his evaluation, he found one of
those neatly laid out forms with all of the blocks
marked “satisfactory”. There were no comments,
there was no discussion, he was handed the form
and asked if he had any questions. The whole
thing took a grand total of about five minutes and
produced absolutely no improvement in him as a
teacher and, in truth, provided his administrator
nothing of substance that could really be used to
evaluate him (Wagner, 2008).
Have any of you ever had such an experience
or heard of one from a colleague? Far too often
this is what happens in faculty evaluation, if any
evaluation occurs at all. It is the belief of this author
that the main focus of evaluating faculty should
not be about compliance or performance reviews,
but about improving the ability of faculty to teach
in the classroom. For faculty in adult programs
this is even more important, because of the unique
ways in which adults make meaning in and out
of the classroom. A large component of the fac-
ulty at traditional universities has long perceived
evaluation of their teaching as an imposition on
their time and potentially an infringement upon
their academic freedom. This is often because
their experiences or the experiences of those
who mentored them have been negative when it
comes to being evaluated. They had one or more
of those experiences described by Wagner (2008)
above and rather than try to correct the system
or search for ways to find someone to help them
become better teachers, they comfortably placed
themselves in a sealed box into which very few
people would dare to come.
Those who teach in adult programs span a
large spectrum of professions. At major universi-
ties, they are most often tenured or tenure-track
faculty members who are discipline experts and
spend their working life in the classroom or writ-
ing. This is also true to some extent in smaller
universities or colleges, if for no other reason
than the requirements of accrediting organizations
for full-time faculty in adult programs as well as
traditional programs. There is, however, a much
greater tendency in adult programs to utilize the
talents of adjunct faculty to teach accelerated or
intensively scheduled courses (Wlodkowski &
Kasworm, 2003). These faculty tend to be subject
matter experts in the discipline they instruct, but
do not teach full-time for their living. An obvious
example would be the use of a senior accountant at
a large corporation to teach a course in accounting
as part of an adult education business program.
The method works quite well, as adults learn not
only from the classroom environment but also
from the experiential side of life. A professional
who can contribute not only the knowledge that is
available in the textbook but experience in the real
825

world of accounting appeals to adult students and
connects with them in a way that enhances their
meaning-making. This system of using adjuncts
makes a great deal of sense educationally and
financially, but it creates an even larger problem
for the institution in faculty development and
evaluation. If the truth is told, unless the full-time
faculty mentioned above are academically from
the field of education, they have not taken classes
in how to teach and most likely have learned their
skills by watching others. The things that they
found helpful about their own professors they
adopted and the things they found useless they
discarded. That is how the majority of instructors
outside of the field of education learned to teach.
It is trial and error in the early years, with maybe
some improvement from self-directed learning
about how to teach adults (Knowles, 1975).
Adjuncts, on the other hand, know that they are
not professional teachers and are very willing
to accept guidance and assistance. The problem
at institutions which employ both full-time and
adjunct faculty in their programs is that the need
to evaluate teaching for improvement extends to
both groups. There a wide range of options avail-
able to evaluate faculty and use such evaluations
as ways to improve teaching rather than as the
proverbial hammer held over the teachers’ head.
Based on the authors’ experiences, the following
section highlights a few of these options and lays
out methods that have been proven helpful in a
variety of adult education settings.
SOLUTIONS AND
RECOMMENDATIONS
The first component of a good teaching evaluation
program begins with teacher selection. While the
process for hiring full-time faculty is extensive
and lengthy, that is normally not the case with
the hiring of adjuncts for adult programs. Far too
often people who have the right degree and are
available become a member of the adjunct fac-
826
Evaluating Teaching in Adult Education
ulty. An alternative to this is to establish a formal
program through which the adult programs hire
faculty from the disciplines they need in a more
reasoned and predictive manner.
One Midwestern liberal arts university estab-
lished a program through which they assessed
the teaching ability of potential adjunct faculty
members and made decisions about hiring them
based largely on that assessment. The assessment
process was fairly straight forward; potential
adjunct faculty members were asked to attend
one of the monthly faculty assessment meetings.
They were instructed to prepare a 20-minute
class on a topic of their choice for presentation
to an adult classroom. They were openly advised
that the school’s model tended towards the idea
of andragogy as espoused by Malcolm Knowles
(1980) versus the common pedagogical model
found in many college classrooms.
With just these instructions the faculty came
to the assessment, normally along with three or
four other candidates for teaching positions. These
candidates were in no way in competition with each
other, as a healthy roster of adjunct faculty was
one of the reasons for the regular conduct of such
sessions. The adjunct candidate was introduced
to the panel which would assess them, normally
a mixture of administrators, full-time and adjunct
faculty members, and students from the school’s
adult programs. In this case, the panel performed
the role as the class of adult students for the session
and the candidate was informed that they could
ask questions and expect answers back from the
panel. If the candidate lectured for the full 20
minutes, the likelihood of them being hired was
slim. If they displayed a basic understanding of
the dynamics of an adult classroom and the ways
in which adults make meaning, then they stood a
reasonable chance of joining the adjunct faculty
pool of the university. Candidates who were suc-
cessful in this stage of the assessment most often
demonstrated the ability to ask the right questions
of the panel and respond to their answers with a
quality follow-on question. By setting the stage
Evaluating Teaching in Adult Education
for quality teaching amongst the adjunct faculty
pool by only hiring individuals who already had
a basic understanding of how adults learn and
how best to approach them in the classroom, the
evaluation of teaching within the institution was
greatly simplified.
At the conclusion of the teaching session, the
candidates were put into a group and provided a
cognitive task to accomplish. It was normally a
task that required discussion, decision-making,
and cooperation. No one was appointed to be the
leader and relatively little additional guidance was
provided to the candidates. Panel members used
a rubric to assess how each candidate reacted to
such a situation and how well they were able to
perform in unstructured environment. This portion
of the assessment was intended to get beyond the
teaching performance of each candidate and as-
sess whether they could work in an ill-structured,
ambiguous environment.
If faculty allow adult students some freedom
to explore in the classroom, the environment there
can often become much less structured than in a
traditional classroom. This institution believed
that faculty who are more comfortable leaving
the script behind them and facilitating a classroom
that is less structured were more successful in
their classrooms. Whether or not you agree with
this line of thought could be subject to debate,
but this institution decided what was important
to it and what fit into its culture. The assessment
was structured to evaluate potential future faculty
members so as to determine whether or not they
would fit into the institutional teaching culture.
There are two key points to take from this mini-
case study: (1) a systematic method of assessing
and hiring adjunct faculty for adult programs will
pay large dividends to the faculty development
program and simplify faculty evaluation and
(2) the assessment of faculty has to be focused
on providing adjunct faculty members who will
fit into the teaching and learning culture of the
institution.
An evaluation process such as the one described
above provides a good first step in a program to
evaluate teaching in adult programs. It does not
mean that nothing else is necessary and it does
not speak to most of the shortcomings of teacher
evaluation represented earlier in the chapter. It
does make such a program more effective because
it can be centered on a faculty which is already
well along in their knowledge of adult learners and
how to teach in adult classrooms (Scott, 2003).
The most common format used for the evalua-
tion of college faculty is the end-of-course student
survey, often referred to as student ratings. Almost
every adjunct who teaches is required to have
these filled out by their students at the end of the
course. They are also used at many schools with
full-time faculty, though quite often they are not
filled out regularly or the results are never used
for improvement. These instruments, which for
all purposes are really satisfaction surveys, can
be a two-edged sword when trying to evaluate
teaching for improvement. They do provide a
window into the teacher’s classroom and create
an opportunity for those who are on the receiv-
ing end of the teaching to express their opinions
concerning the teaching style and methods used
by the faculty member. The biggest problem in
their use lies in the ability of the administrators
who receive them to make positive use of them for
improvement of teaching. If adjuncts know that
their next job hinges on something as fragile as the
reaction of 13 to 20 adult students, they will have
the tendency to do what is necessary to keep those
students happy. This is not a perfect scenario and
most of us would hope that the faculty member
would react differently, but it is the most common
human reaction to this environment.
The way to prevent such a reaction, and open
the door to use these surveys for true teaching
evaluation, is to create a system where the trends
revealed by the surveys are not used as a ham-
mer but as an opportunity to improve classroom
instruction. Admittedly, sometimes the surveys
will reveal information that indicates that a
827

faculty member should not teach again, but the
most common mistake the author has seen over
the years is the use of the numbers as a metric
without any system for analyzing how the overall
numbers were reached. In a class of 12 or 13, if
the faculty member has upset one student over
a low graded product or some other valid issue,
it only takes that one student taking the faculty
member “all the way to the left” on the Likert
scale to skew the numbers out of proportion.
Should the personal issue that the one student
has overwhelm the opinion of the remainder 11
or 12 students? That is often the case with such
instruments if they are not analyzed thoroughly.
If the administrator who is responsible for this
program does not analyze the numbers and talk
them through with the faculty member as a form
of mentoring then such a program will do more
harm than good.
While the introduction above to student rat-
ings may sound negative, that is not the authors’
intention. They can be productive and useful tools
when used in combination with other kinds of data
about the quality of teaching (Cashin, 1999). They
must also be used correctly or you run the danger
of this useful tool becoming a source of friction
within the faculty and/or between the faculty
and the administration. Cashin (1999) points out
in his discussion of “misuse of student ratings”
(p. 26) that one of the most dangerous scenarios
is too much reliance on student ratings. In some
institutions, that would really be total reliance on
student ratings. One of the unseen traps in using
student ratings is that they are easy to use and can
be automated. Students fill out the little bubble
surveys. The forms are collected by a student and
returned to a neutral location, run through some
type of scanning machine, and the administrator
who has responsibility for the program has the
summarized data the next day. A quick look at the
scores on the Likert scale and decisions can be
made as to the quality of teaching from the class-
rooms the night before. Just because the system is
efficient does not mean it is not flawed. The flaw
828
Evaluating Teaching in Adult Education
is normally the human interaction with the system.
Our tendency, when we are harried and too busy,
is to use the efficiencies that modern technology
provides us and call our work good enough. If an
administrator has data from students on her desk,
why should she search for anything more to base
the evaluation of the teacher? It is the belief of
these authors that student ratings are good tools,
but are only part of the tools that should be in
the teaching evaluation toolkit. Cashin (1999)
correctly identifies many of the myths that exist
about student ratings and dispels them with a va-
riety of studies. He goes on to discuss 38 different
considerations for using student rating systems, a
few of which deserve special attention.
“Use multiple sources of data about a faculty
member’s teaching if you are serious about
accurately evaluating or improving teaching”
(Cashin, 1999, p. 29). Cashin’s first consideration
is at the foundation of what this chapter is trying
to express. The evaluation of teaching in adult
classrooms, whether it is for personnel decisions
or improvement, is not a simple one step process
that produces totally accurate results in a short
period of time. Done well, it encompasses multiple
types of evaluation performed over a period of
time and by a number of different people or enti-
ties. While one could also provide such a caution
about other forms of teaching evaluation (peer
review or mentoring), the most common form of
evaluation that is misused by being the only form
of evaluation is the use of student ratings. It is
easy, it is efficient, and far too often it is enough.
“Discuss and decide upon the purpose(s)
that the student rating data will be used for
before any student rating form is chosen or any
data are collected” (Cashin, 1999, p. 29). This
highlights a central question this chapter poses in
the evaluation of teaching: is the evaluation to be
used for personnel decisions or improvement? Just
as in the assessment of student learning, there are
multiple purposes for the same forms of evalu-
ation. When we want to use teaching evaluation
for personnel decisions, we are really using it as a
Evaluating Teaching in Adult Education
summative evaluation. Improvement or growth is
not what is central to this type of evaluation; it is
characterized by being used to measure a faculty
member’s performance at a specific point in time
for the purpose of evaluating their worthiness for
promotion, tenure, reappointment, or some other
form of personnel action. On the other hand,
when we use the data in a formative manner it is
characterized by being used to promote growth
and improvement of the teaching skills being
evaluated. First, the institution should decide the
purpose of the evaluation, and then construct the
student ratings program around that intention.
The type of questions included on the student
survey will also be driven by the focus of the
program (summative or formative). If the focus is
on formative evaluation, then time for discussion
of the results should be included in the program
and, based on the work of Marincovich (1999),
instructors should have access to teaching con-
sultation professionals. In the same way, the point
in time that the survey is administered may also
be affected by whether the focus is summative
or formative. We generally think of the student
surveys as end-of-course or end-of-term surveys,
but many of the ideas found in the collaborative
work of Angelo and Cross (1993) could be utilized
as shorter versions of student ratings, administered
during the course, and used as formative input
by the teacher. Regardless of how the program
intends to use the data, Cashin (1999) is correct
on the need to be intentional about what you want
and how you go about building it.
“Decide how you will treat student ratings
from different academic fields” (Cashin, 1999,
p.33). Anyone who has spent much time trying to
decipher student ratings has learned that the type
of course evaluated makes an impact on the rat-
ings (Cashin, 1990; Hativa & Marincovich, 1995).
Generally, courses that are numbers-based, such
as economics or science, receive tougher ratings
from students. In adult programs that feature ac-
celerated class schedules this is particularly true.
The accelerated program model is much better set
up for social science or humanities courses and
when a numbers-based course is conducted in
such an environment it is habitually rated much
lower. Historians will find themselves with higher
ratings than statistics instructors, even though they
may both teach at the same high level. It is critical
that those who will interpret the results of student
ratings understand this anomaly.
“Educate administrators and evaluators
about how to interpret student rating data”
(Cashin, 1999, p.40). As mentioned directly
above, possibly the critical element to using
student ratings as a tool to evaluate teaching
is to prepare those who will be interpreting the
results. The most common mistake that exists
in adult programs where administrators look at
the results of such data for adjuncts is reducing
the faculty member’s teaching down to a single
number that summarizes the Likert data from the
survey. This number is derived from a complex
set of questions and circumstances that do not
lend themselves to be boiled down to a 3.5 or a
4.3. Those at the institution who are responsible
for using the data, whether deans or department
chairs, teaching consultants at the teaching and
learning center, must be able to analyze the data
and produce an accurate and useful interpretation
of the data for their purposes. Again, depending
on whether the focus of the ratings program is
formative or summative, the type of training that
different audiences will need is different. The key
is that the right type of training for each audience
will produce a program that is effective based on
the goals of the program.
One of the most positive and productive meth-
ods to evaluate teaching in adult classrooms is to
establish a mentorship program at your institution.
Note that the idea here is not to create a coaching
system, which is really what the administrator of
the program should be doing with their faculty, but
a mentoring program. The difference between the
two is a matter of relationship and trust. Mentors
and mentees create a relationship which should
lead to a level of trust and comfort that makes
829

honest discussion and evaluation much easier and
more common (Daloz, 1999). Mentoring works
with full-time faculty and with adjuncts; although
it is more difficult to accomplish with adjuncts,
simply because they are not regularly required
to be on campus as part of their profession. In a
perfect environment the teacher would identify his/
her own mentor and negotiate such a relationship
with the individual selected. This is most often
not possible, and it is up to the leadership of the
program or institution to match up senior faculty
members with more junior ones and try to create
positive synergy between the two individuals. In
large adult education programs, which can often
employ 400-500 adjuncts as part of their faculty,
this type of program is even more critical. The
difference in the selection process in this environ-
ment may be that those being selected as mentors
are often the most senior and trusted members of
the adjunct faculty itself. While it would arguably
be better for a full-time faculty member to mentor
a new adjunct, with such large faculty groups this
is often simply a mathematical impossibility. The
creation of a group of adjuncts that the institution
includes in its process, almost as though they
were an extension of the full-time faculty, is of
critical importance. Not only can they fill the role
as mentors, but they can also serve on the faculty
assessment boards mentioned earlier along with
other university committees.
Mentorship provides junior faculty members
and adjuncts the opportunity to talk through
important teaching questions with another pro-
fessional who is not a threat and does not make
hiring and evaluation decisions concerning their
teaching. This disassociates the stress of the per-
formance review process with the evaluation of
teaching for improvement and allows the mentor
to provide evaluative feedback on teaching to the
mentee in an open and free manner. This type of
relationship, which is best built over time, often
overcomes even the most negative attitude by a
faculty member towards having someone ‘pass
judgment’ on their teaching. The vast majority
830
Evaluating Teaching in Adult Education
of teachers wants to be better at their craft and
would welcome evaluative assistance, if it was not
viewed as pejorative or threatening. The creation of
a mentoring relationship, which provides a shelter
from the threatening aspect of having someone
else evaluate your teaching, brings with it all of
the positives of evaluating teaching for improve-
ment. If someone who is relatively unknown to
an instructor comes into their class to conduct an
evaluation, it will create a different environment
in the classroom than if a trusted mentor comes
to visit. It can also turn the other way, because
with the trust relationship between the mentor and
mentee the roles can be reversed and the mentee
can visit the mentor’s class to make comments
and pick up tips through his/her observation of
the more experienced instructor. This relationship
serves as a positive way to evaluate and improve
teaching that is likely to be accepted by full-time
and adjunct faculty alike.
The mode of instruction and the way the insti-
tution approaches its faculty also make a differ-
ence in the effectiveness of teaching evaluation
programs. It also makes the mentoring relationship
even more important. This is an example of how a
formal administrative evaluator must also take on
the mentoring relationship with faculty. One uni-
versity in the Midwest implemented an electronic
check of instructor facilitation of online courses
(Schulte, 2009). The institution’s policy required
a certain amount of direct contact with the online
students by the instructors. The information was
extrapolated from the university’s course manage-
ment system and instructors who were not meeting
the minimums were informed in an email alerting
them to the observed deficiency in meeting the
requirements. While most instructors received the
mail from the evaluators as developmental and a
means to improve their performance, some were
initially argumentative. With astute follow-up
phone calls and emails from the evaluators, many
of these led to a mutual agreement and compli-
ance with university policy. The response from
the evaluator must be prompt but “even-tempered
Evaluating Teaching in Adult Education
and grounded” in the findings (Schulte, 2009,
p. 113). “Second, after emphasizing an instruc-
tor’s deficiencies, the evaluator should provide
detailed suggestions for improvement” (Schulte,
2009, pp.113-114). Schulte (2009) also states
that instructors are usually very possessive of
their courses and view negative evaluations or
suggestions for improvement as “personal and /
or professional threats” (p. 114). By establishing
a mentoring relationship with the instructors, the
evaluators are able to deliver the negative news
but also develop the instructor in a positive direc-
tion. A large percentage of the instructors who
received these notifications improved in the next
course taught.
While the idea of mentorship program is to
create a professional, trusting relationship with
another teacher in order to improve both teachers,
there is another type of program that can provide
evaluative feedback to teachers without creating
undue tension or angst. When peer review began in
higher education, it was simply a faculty member
inviting a colleague to watch him/her conduct
a class session. In the 1980’s the system began
to expand and assessment specialists began to
study the usefulness of peer-generated comments
(Bernstein, 2008). Although Peter Seldin is not
the only advocate of teaching portfolios, it is his
publication, Changing Practices in Evaluating
Teaching, in 1999 that created a total system of
evaluation and peer-review procedures.
A well conceived and organized program of
peer review can prove invaluable in improving
teaching in an adult education program. The idea
of peer review works because it is evaluation being
done by other teachers for the express purpose of
providing a fresh set of eyes to examine teaching
performance. These aren’t the eyes of an admin-
istrator who will be making personnel decisions
about the teacher being observed, but another
teacher who is proficient in adult classrooms and
can serve as a resource for the faculty member
being observed. These types of programs are
often done informally amongst full-time faculty
members, with peers asking others whose teaching
they respect to stop in and give them feedback on
their next class. It comes up short of the mentor-
ing relationship in that it is not formally nurtured
and grown over time. In an adult program with
a large adjunct teaching pool, this system can be
particularly effective. Senior adjunct faculty, along
with some full-time faculty members, are selected
to serve as peer reviewers by the institution. They
are provided specific preparation and training for
their role, emphasizing its importance and helping
them to an understanding of the benefits and traps
of peer review. A productive way to organize a
peer review is to do a pre-visit interview, so that
the peer reviewer knows who the observed teacher
is and gets a chance to answer whatever concerns
the teacher might have. They should agree on a
period of instruction to observe and then meet
again after the observation to discuss the feed-
back obtained from the observation. They should
utilize teaching rubrics which are designed not as
evaluations for the administration, but as teaching
improvement rubrics which are intended for the
observed faculty member’s use. These rubrics are
based in the characteristics of adult learners and
evaluate the teacher’s ability to teach in a class-
room and take advantage of the literature about
teaching adults and provide a learning environ-
ment that is inclusive, experiential, and active.
The teaching faculty must be attuned to the fact
that their evaluations will be used only by them
in the improvement of their teaching. The peer
reviewers will provide a summary of the multiple
reviews they do over the period of a month or a
quarter, but only in an effort to identify trends.
It is important that the specific observations of
the teacher are not reported to those who make
administrative decisions or the efficacy of the peer
review system can be suspect. The management of
such a system must be well organized to achieve
its specific purpose.
Peer reviewers should be compensated in
some way, as they will be taking significant time
from their normal duties, whether they are full-
831

time or adjunct faculty. One university initially
tied the compensation for adjunct faculty doing
peer reviews to an increased pay rate when they
taught their own courses. This had a negative
effect which was not foreseen, as the adjuncts
taught more classes to achieve increased pay and
had less time to do the reviewing for which the
compensation was designed. It became obvious
that the only productive way to compensate adjunct
faculty for peer reviewing was to pay them for
the reviews that they did, which resulted in more
peer reviews, improved teaching performances,
and greater trending data for the institution.
There is no one way to organize and conduct a
peer review program. They must be suited to the
institutional culture and be clearly explained to
everyone involved. This discussion has focused
on a program that is centered on improvement
and may not meet the personnel decision needs
of some institutions. Obviously, programs can be
built that provide direct feedback to administra-
tors of faculty performance and they are common.
Because our focus here has been on improvement,
our bias has shown in the description of the pro-
gram. High quality peer review programs can
perform both functions, if they are well designed,
ethically administered, and have faculty assent. If
faculty members know the facts about a fair peer
review system they will adopt it with open arms
as a non-punitive way to improve the quality of
their teaching quality and thus the quality of their
students’ learning.
While many faculty welcome assistance with
their teaching practice, some instructors still find
the process intimidating and meaningless. Accord-
ing to Carter (2008), the peer reviewer can help
make this process developmental by applying
a few principles. First, peer reviewers need to
understand a variety of pedagogical approaches.
It is important to understand that there is not just
one best way to teach. Goals and methods will
vary from instructor to instructor. The nature of
a course may be focused on acquiring informa-
tion (empiricist) versus becoming more skilled at
832
Evaluating Teaching in Adult Education
making meaning from the content (constructivist).
Both approaches are valid. Second, peer reviewers
should prepare for the pre-observation meeting
with the instructor. While the reviewer may only
see one class session, he/she needs to understand
the context of that session. Many times courses
build toward a certain competency, so it is im-
portant to understand how the observed session’s
class goals fit in with the overall course goals.
It is important for reviewers to collect material
prior to the class session and review that material
thoroughly prior to the visit. Third, listen carefully
to the instructor’s plan for the class session. It is
important that the reviewer have a good sense of
whether the course is empiricist or constructivist
in nature and the intentions of the instructor. The
reviewer should inquire into the personality of the
group of students, so he/she is fully prepared for the
encounter. It is also important to inquire whether
the instructor has something he/she would like
for the reviewer to particularly observe. Fourth,
during the observation, watch the students and the
instructor. The goal of the class is to engage the
students in learning. What is their body language
stating about the learning environment? Are they
engaged or distanced from the learning? If the class
session is especially long and breaks are a part of
the format, during this time, a reviewer might ap-
proach some of the students and inquire into their
learning experience in the course. Finally, a good
reviewer will check his/her observations with a
post-observation meeting. “Peer review works best
when it resembles formative assessment (intended
for improvement) more than summative assess-
ment (intended to pass a kind of final judgment)”
(Carter, 2008, p. 87). Compliments and sugges-
tions for improvement are equally important.
Approaching this session in a collegial manner
is imperative, so that reviewers can describe the
class session as objectively as possible and make
suggestions on ways to address issues.
Another positive method for evaluating and
improving teaching is to use create a program
utilizing teaching portfolios, as described in Peter
Evaluating Teaching in Adult Education
Seldin’s The Teaching Portfolio (1997). Many in
the adult education world are familiar with the use
of portfolios as useful tools for the assessment of
student learning. Students collect artifacts which
demonstrate their learning and these artifacts can
be analyzed over time to show improvement or
growth towards specific learning outcomes. In
much the same way, a teaching portfolio can be
used to show improvement or growth in a faculty
member’s teaching life. Many universities use a
version of the teaching portfolio as a vehicle for
annual review or the dreaded tenure and promotion
review process. It is a method by which faculty
members can create a visible history of their
teaching and make the argument as to why they
should be granted tenure or promotion. This is a
valuable use for the portfolio, though one that is
often fraught with negative emotions which cre-
ate a negative view of the portfolio process. If an
institution can create an environment in which
portfolios are focused upon the evaluation of
teaching for the purpose of improvement, then
these valuable tools can be seen for the positive
force they can be. In many ways, this is more eas-
ily done when using the teaching portfolio with
a large adjunct faculty. The issues of tenure and
promotion are largely taken out of the equation and
very few schools utilize an annual review system
for adjuncts which would involve their portfolios.
Taking Seldin’s (1997) advice, an adult program
with a large adjunct faculty can embark upon a
program of teaching evaluation and self-evaluation
utilizing the portfolios in a totally positive way.
Seldin’s (1997) thoughts on the use of portfolios
provide insights into some of the more common
questions concerning this method of evaluating
teaching. The following items demonstrate the
things that he is convinced we know as a profes-
sional about portfolios, based on what he refers to
as “hindsight and the benefit of experience” (p. 25).
“We know that portfolios are being used—
and being used successfully—in a variety of
ways” (Seldin, 1997, p. 25). In this chapter we
have focused on using portfolios for the improve-
ment of teaching and to a much lesser extent for
the evaluation of faculty performance. There are
a number of other ways that they can be used, as
they are useful in any endeavor in which the fac-
ulty member needs to document their classroom
experiences and the quality of their professional
work. To a large extent, how they will be used is
often one of the driving factors in how they are
constructed, what artifacts are included, and how
they are maintained.
“We know that preparing and maintain-
ing a portfolio do not consume an excessive
amount of time” (Seldin, 1997, p. 25). Most of
the time spent preparing a teaching portfolio is
consumed in the planning stage, thinking about
how to organize it and what types of artifacts are
desired as components. Seldin (1997) lists a time
of 15 hours to create a portfolio, and if this is
anywhere close to accurate, it is time well spent.
Imagine if someone told you they could improve
your performance as a teacher and it would just
require 15 hours this week and a reasonable amount
of time over the next few semesters; would you
jump at the idea?
“We know that an impressive portfolio can-
not gloss over weak teaching” (Seldin, 1997,
p. 25). One of the common complaints about
portfolios in the author’s experience is the argu-
ment that this will just help those who are good
at putting together pretty products even though
they aren’t particularly good teachers. While this
type of argument might be true in other forms of
record keeping or presentation styles, it won’t work
with a teaching portfolio, because it is based on
the evidence that is represented in the artifacts.
Without good evidence of teaching in the artifacts,
the portfolio simply does not have the weight it
needs, particularly if it is being used for tenure or
promotion. When using the portfolio for improve-
ment, the artifacts really just have to be honest
representations of the classroom teaching experi-
ence and performance of the teacher, allowing for
a quality analysis and a plan for improvement.
833

“We know that preparing a portfolio helps
to improve teaching” (Seldin, 1997, p. 25). In
many ways this process is similar to assessing
student learning. When such assessments are used
in a formative manner, in other words focused on
improvement of performance and growth, then
they will inevitably lead to growth and reflection
on the quality of teaching. Such reflection leads
to an analysis of strengths and weaknesses and
the ability to plan out how to improve upon the
weaknesses and make the most of the strengths.
How many of us take the time to catalog what
works and doesn’t work in the classroom without
some sort of system to give us that structure and
motivation? In essence the teaching portfolio can
provide just such a structure and help us with the
motivation necessary.
“We know that the portfolio is best prepared
in consultation with a mentor” (Seldin, 1997,
p. 26). This observation harkens back to the dis-
cussion earlier in this chapter of the benefits of a
mentor/mentee relationship to evaluating teaching
in adult classrooms. If the most frightening thing
about being evaluated is the trust issue, mentor-
ship helps to get at that fear and reduce it to a
manageable level. If we take all of the benefits
discussed earlier about using a mentor and think
about the portfolio as a way to catalog and orga-
nize the products that are available to us from the
mentorship relationship, then we can begin to use
the observations and insights from our mentors
in an analytical manner to improve our teaching.
In addition, if the mentee has never worked with
a portfolio before the mentor will be able to pro-
vide guidance from their experience concerning
good artifacts and ways to arrange them that will
heighten the level of analysis available to the
mentee. Reasonably, even if the mentor has not
used a portfolio before because the institution is
just now introducing them, two faculty members
who have established a level of trust will be able
to use each other as sounding boards to identify
the best artifacts available to them and how best
to use them.
834
Evaluating Teaching in Adult Education
“We know that open communication re-
garding the use of faculty portfolios is vital to
gaining faculty acceptance” (Seldin, 1997, p.
26). As with so many things in large, complex
organizations, the introduction of the teaching
portfolio must be accompanied by a strategic
communication campaign that ensures that all
stakeholders; faculty, department chairs, deans,
and other administrators understand how it will
be used and its purposes. This candid conversa-
tion should occur before the portfolio becomes
part of the fabric of the institution’s evaluation
system. Doing any less will result in stakeholders
who are mistrustful of the concept and they will
never give the portfolio a chance to be effective.
The early buy-in of a few well thought of faculty
members will also provide a stronger foundation
to help with this communication.
“We know the subjectivity of the portfolio
does not interfere with its use for personnel
decisions” (Seldin, 1997, p. 26). As mentioned
before, one of the purposes of teaching evalua-
tion is for decision regarding tenure, promotion,
and other personnel type actions. The teaching
portfolio also works well for this purpose, but
now rather than in a formative way it is used as a
summative instrument that provides data about the
faculty member’s teaching performance at a spe-
cific point in time. Most institutions use portfolios
in this way for their tenure processes, but others
utilize the data for other purposes having to do
with personnel decisions also. While the portfolio
will contain statements by the teacher regarding
their experience and performance, the artifacts
must provide the required evidence to back up the
statements. The same data that the teacher uses to
track improvement or identify shortcomings can
also be used as evidence to support claims made
in the narrative portion of their portfolio. The use
of the portfolio for this purpose does not diminish
its capacity to improve teaching when used in a
formative manner.
“We know that the benefits derived from
preparing a portfolio are well worth the time
Evaluating Teaching in Adult Education
and energy required” (Seldin, 1997, p. 26).
The research compiled by Seldin (1997) and
his colleagues brings together the experience of
thousands of teachers who have used the teaching
portfolio and found it to be helpful. While it takes
relatively little time to organize a portfolio, the
reflective practice that must be followed in the
selection and analysis of artifacts and the trends
they provide force the teacher to take stock of
their teaching habits and effectiveness. Very few
of us take the time to do that on our own, because
the world around us is a very busy place. This
methodology, using the teaching portfolio, is an
assist in a busy world to slow down and focus on
the important components of teaching.
FUTURE TRENDS
Most of the methods and ideas discussed in this
chapter have been in use for some time. They
have been refined and improved, in this instance
specifically focused on those who are teaching in
adult programs. The future of adult education is
inextricably linked with changes in technology
and new modes of providing education to working
adults. Online or blended programs will continue
to grow in size and frequency, leading to more
and more teachers of adults moving their craft to
new platforms. What these platforms will be in the
future is hard to say. Mobile learning is here with
us now. Adults can take a course on their I-Phone
halfway around the world, connecting with their
teacher or classmates as they travel on business or
pleasure. While one piece of research on teacher
evaluation in this digital environment was men-
tioned above, much is left to be done in this area.
While in the traditional adult classroom it is critical
to spend time watching how the teacher facilitates
group work and how they provide the feedback
and input that is so important to adult learners.
How is this evaluated when the course is online
and instructor is using a Wiki as a collaborative
tool? Will the evaluator be given instructor rights
to the class site and navigate through digitally
“observing” the interaction between students and
the instructor? For many in the profession, these
ideas are farfetched and hard to imagine, but this
is an easy example of how we will have to adapt.
There will be far tougher situations that will re-
quire us to shift our paradigm on what teaching
evaluation should look like.
As more and more electronic tools are incorpo-
rated into courses, instructor evaluations will need
to be altered with these in mind. Rubrics for peer
reviews, student end-of-course evaluations, and
instructor-student interactions assessments take on
new dimensions and approaches in the electronic
medium. Unfortunately, there is already evidence
of some Web-based programs using the same
course evaluation tool as is used for traditional
face-to-face format for the Web-based learning
environment (Harroff & Valentine, 2006). As
instructors have to think about the learning envi-
ronment (whether it is face-to-face or electronic)
and what is the best way to approach the topic in
this format, evaluations of faculty have to change
from the mindset of the face-to-face environment.
CONCLUSION
Throughout this discussion the focus has been on
the evaluation of teaching in an adult classroom
with an eye to improving that teaching. While
there has been some treatment of teaching evalu-
ation for administrative and personnel purposes,
the focus has always come back to the issue of
growth and improvement. That has not been by
accident or without forethought. This chapter
started with a statement concerning the criticality
of the assessment of student learning to the long
term importance of adult education. No other
input to the learning effort can have as negative
or positive an impact than the quality of teacher
in the classroom or learning environment. Good
teachers can overcome bad curriculum, but the
best curriculum in the world will not survive a
835

poor teacher. If adult educators are serious about
providing the best education possible to adult
students, then it has to start with teachers who are
steeped in the characteristics of adult learners and
are experts in their teaching discipline. The way to
this nirvana state is a quality faculty development
program, a major part of which must be high qual-
ity faculty evaluation. The comments of Michele
Marincovich (1999) summarize the underlying
intent of this chapter when she writes “…the edi-
fice of teaching evaluation seems a hollow one to
me if the individuals being evaluated are not also
learning how to be more effective teachers” (p.
46). Institutions that seek to serve adult learners in
their question for meaning-making should focus
on creating a teaching evaluation system that is
not ‘hollow’, but will grow and nurture teachers
to help them improve their teaching endeavors.
REFERENCES
Angelo, T. A., & Cross, K. P. (1993). Classroom
assessment techniques: A handbook for college
teachers (2nd ed.). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Bernstein, D. J. (2008). Peer review and evaluation
of intellectual work of teaching. Change, 40(2),
48–51. doi:10.3200/CHNG.40.2.48-51
Carter, V. K. (2008). Five steps to becoming a
better peer reviewer. College Teaching, 56(2),
85–88. doi:10.3200/CTCH.56.2.85-88
Cashin, W. E. (1990). Students do rate different
academic fields differently . In Theall, M., &
Franklin, J. (Eds.), Student ratings of instruction:
Issues for improve practice. New Directions for
Teaching and Learning, 43 (pp. 113–121). San
Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Cashin, W. E. (1999). Student ratings of teaching:
uses and misuses . In Seldin, P. (Ed.), Changing
practices in evaluating teaching (pp. 25–44).
Bolton, MA: Anker Publishing.
836
Evaluating Teaching in Adult Education
Daloz, L. (1999). Mentor: Guiding the journey
of adult learners. San Francisco: Jossey Bass.
Harroff, P. A., & Valentine, T. (2006). Dimensions
of program quality in web-based adult education.
American Journal of Distance Education, 20(1),
7–22. doi:10.1207/s15389286ajde2001_2
Hativa, N., & Marincovich, M. (Eds.). (1995).
Disciplinary differences in teaching and learn-
ing: Implications for practice. New Directions
for Teaching and Learning, 64. San Francisco:
Jossey-Bass.
Knowles, M. (1975). Self-directed learning: A
guide for learners and teachers. Englewood Cliffs,
NJ: Cambridge Press.
Knowles, M. (1980). The modern practice of adult
education: From pedagogy to andragogy (2nd
ed.). New York: Cambridge Books.
Marincovich, M. (1999). Using student feedback
to improve teaching . In Seldin, P. (Ed.), Chang-
ing practices in evaluating teaching (pp. 45–69).
Bolton, MA: Anker Publishing.
Schulte, M. (2009). Efficient evaluation
of online course facilitation: The “Quick
Check” policy measure. The Journal of Con-
tinuing Higher Education, 57(2), 110–116.
doi:10.1080/07377360902995685
Scott, P. A. (2003). Attributes of high-quality
intensive courses. In R. Wlodkowski and C.
Kasworm (Eds.), Accelerated learning for adults:
The promise and practice of intensive educational
formats (pp. 29-38). New Directions for Adult
and Continuing Education, 97. San Francisco:
Jossey Bass.
Seldin, P. (1997). The teaching portfolio: A
practical guide to improved performance and
promotion/tenure decisions (2nd ed.). Bolton,
MA: Anker Publishing.
Seldin, P. (Ed.). (1999). Changing Practices in
Evaluating Teaching. Bolton, MA: Anker.
Evaluating Teaching in Adult Education
Wagner, T. (2008). The global achievement gap:
Why even our best schools don’t teach the new
survival skills our children need—and what we
can do about it. New York: Basic Books.
Wlodkowski, R., & Kasworm, C. (Eds.). (2003).
Accelerated learning for adults: The promise and
practice of intensive educational formats. New
Directions for Adult and Continuing Education,
97. San Francisco: Jossey Bass.
KEY TERMS AND DEFINITIONS
Constructivist: An approach to a learning
environment where the instructor focuses on the
knowledge that the students will develop as a re-
sult of the discussion and sharing of experiences.
Empiricist: An approach to a learning environ-
ment where the instructor focuses on the content
and information to be acquired by the students.
Formative Evaluation: An assessment that
is used to create change or improvement, in this
case, to improve teaching of instructors.
Summative Evaluation: An assessment that
is used for judgment and decision making.
Peer Review: Evaluation of teaching setting
by another faculty member, which includes a pre-
observation interview, a classroom (or teaching
environment) observation, and post-observation
interview. The relationship should be one that
promotes discussion and development of teach-
ing skills.
Student Ratings: Student evaluations of a
course and instructor; usually a survey completed
at the end of a course. The survey is designed with
the institutions intent for the evaluation in mind.
Teaching Portfolio: A collection of artifacts
documenting an instructor’s teaching activities
and design of a course. The most important com-
ponent of the teaching portfolio is the instructors’
reflections on their own teaching.
Mentorship: A trusting relationship between
two instructors, which allows for honest discus-
sions concerning teaching.
837
838

Chapter 51
Informal Adult Learning
in Simulated and Virtual
Environments
Elisabeth E. Bennett
Tufts University and Baystate Health, USA

ABSTRACT
Sophisticated uses of Information and Communication Technology (ICT) have enabled informal learning
in simulated and virtual environments. This chapter proposes a four-part informal learning model and
explores adult learning in simulated and virtual environments, namely Inter/Intranets, Simulation, and
Robust Virtual Environments. The chapter discusses using logic models for assessment and describes
future trends of informal learning mediated by ICTs.

INTRODUCTION technology, these spaces are appealing because of

Advances in Information and Communication
Technology (ICT) have enabled a new world
of exploration and learning in the Knowledge
Society. The Knowledge Society is fraught with
many paradoxes (Bennett & Bell, 2010), one of
which is the seeming contradiction of deliberately
designing virtual environments to enhance the
freedom and user control needed for informal
learning. Specifically, ICT has created many
virtual spaces for learning that are highly col-
laborative and intellectually engaging (Fitzger-
ald, 2005). Unlike earlier forms of information
DOI: 10.4018/978-1-61692-906-0.ch051
the rich resources available to users and because
they allow a certain amount of chaos when users
control these resources. Despite a clear need to
understand this engagement, attention has been
placed far more on how technology assists formal
learning, such as distance education, rather than
on informal learning.
Distance education, as well as many other
Web-based resources, often provides one-way
content delivery that constrains the contact be-
tween instructors and students rather than foster-
ing a socially interactive approach (Redfern &
Naughton, 2002). Attention is starting to shift to
more natural forms of adult learning embedded
in everyday experiences this captures the essence
Informal Adult Learning in Simulated and Virtual Environments
of informal learning. Informal learning is now
being seen as not just incidental, but an essential
part of innovative and authentic learning in all
environments. It is also an important foundation
for adult education tenets.
Fundamentally, learning is about change. It is a
concept that is at the heart of human existence, yet
learning is a mysterious and difficult concept to
explain. Since it is an internal process of the brain
and body, how we determine what has changed
through learning processes and how these changes
have occurred is a difficult task. To add to this
complexity, groups such as organizations or com-
munities are said to learn as well as individuals.
ICTS can provide avenues for change stemming
from individual and organizational learning.
Since learning is difficult to observe, it must
be conceptualized through proxies. Such proxies
help scholars and practitioners view learning from
a particular lens, design instruction consistent with
envisioned outcomes, and to test the effectiveness
of the instruction. By its very nature, informal
learning is hard to observe and utilize by instruc-
tors, yet it is what adults do continually everyday.
It is also increasingly mediated by the ICTs that
enable virtual environments. There are two main
proxies for informal learning in this chapter.
The first proxy is theory. Learning must be
theorized to promote understanding of how people
engage in learning processes in simulated and
virtual environments. Theories of learning frame
research studies but they also provide a basis for
why a design or learning approach is effective.
This chapter addresses basic adult learning tenets
and informal learning constructs. The second
proxy for this chapter is assessment strategy. As-
sessment is focused on providing evidence that a
student learned. This usually requires a self-report,
measurement tool (as with a test), or observation
of change. While assessment is typically focused
on formal education environments, it is an im-
portant consideration for informal learning. This
is especially so as more educational institutions
and professions hope to understand the value and
impact of informal learning. Some educational
institutions evaluate life experiences of adults
for college credit. In the workplace, organiza-
tions increasingly recognize that knowledge and
learning processes are integral to a firm’s success
in a knowledge-based economy. Assessing what
informal learning has occurred, however, is a chal-
lenge and it requires some thoughtful discussion.
Virtual environments have become incred-
ibly sophisticated in their use of ICT. Despite
the advances of virtual technologies, there is
much work to be done to understand informal
learning in simulated and virtual environments.
For the purposes of this chapter, the definition
of virtual environment is a computer enabled
space that represents aspects of real life. This is
a broad definition that allows us to look at three
areas, namely Inter/Intranets, Simulation, and
Robust Virtual Environments (RVE). The aim
of this chapter is to explore informal learning in
simulated and virtual environments and present
initial thoughts on assessment strategies that can
be translated from formal education to informal
learning. The chapter will address the background
and critical issues, discuss informal learning within
the framework of adult education tenets, describe
informal learning in virtual environments, present
assessment strategies, and address future trends.
BACKGROUND AND ISSUES
The Internet, enabled by sophisticated forms of
ICTs, provides new tools for enhancing the learn-
ing experience. It also makes learning opportuni-
ties more accessible if one possesses the necessary
technical infrastructure. Users are increasingly
participating in virtual environments but also
in the creation of their own Web content; this is
captured in the notion of Web 2.0. The relation-
ship between informal learning and the tenets of
Web 2.0 in the context of ICTs is starting to be
explored. According to Selwyn (2007), Web 2.0
applications trend toward informal consump-
839
 Informal Adult Learning in Simulated and Virtual Environments
tion, communication, and creation of knowledge
through ICTs. This is as important, if not more
important, than formal educational ICT programs
for modern learners because it taps into motiva-
tion to learn and provides greater availability of
learning venues.
ICTs allow informal learning to occur within
a real-life context and this learning is reflective
of a personal motivation to gain new knowledge
and skills. Many new tools and applications are
often first used in the informal learning arena rather
than in an institutional environment (Jokisalo &
Riu, n.d.). This means that virtual environments
are part of the daily reality of adult learners, at
least in industrial nations; but they may be slow
to migrate to education.
Yet informal learning is not always valued in
education or the workplace. For example, convers-
ing in a work environment is often not considered
“real work” and so organizations may not foster
informal learning opportunities because they
cannot be controlled and, perhaps, should not be
controlled (Galvin, 2004). The degree of control
over learning by individuals versus instructors or
organizers is one of several fundamental issues re-
lated to informal learning in virtual environments.
Generational issues impact virtual informal
learning. For many learners, the formal use of ICT
lags behind their out-of-school uses, especially
for younger people who become the leading users
of new technologies without formal instruction
(Fitzgerald, 2005). On the other hand, aging adults
make up a growing percentage of the world’s
total population. ICT can provide opportunities
for senior adults to stay mentally and socially ac-
tive; however, lack of skill to use ICTs can form
a barrier to participation (Ala-Mutka & Punie,
2007). No matter the age of the learner, critical
consumption of information is another concern in
virtual environments in addition to information
privacy and personal safety.
While computer-based learning tends to be
more effective for highly motivated and self-
directed adult learners, it is estimated that half of
840
high school courses will be delivered through ICTs
by 2019, which will allow students to personalize
their learning paths (Christensen, Horn, & John-
son, 2008). As virtual environments become more
engaging to a wider audience, there are growing
concerns about addiction, such as compulsive
reading of blogs, and escapism through virtual
environments like chat rooms. Other issues include
a poor understanding of informal learning in virtual
and simulated environments, which decreases the
quality of the learning experience.
Informal learning is clearly important to the
success of ICTs; however, it has received more
attention in adult education circles than in other
education arenas. Even with an emphasis in adult
education it is still an under-studied phenom-
enon in virtual environments. Informal learning
promotes understanding, knowledge, and skills
outside of the formal curriculum of an education
institution (Livingstone, 1999). In an average
week, Livingstone (1999) estimated that adults
engage in 80% informal learning versus about
20% formal learning. There is a vast amount of
informal learning that occurs outside of formal
education programs. Virtual environments rep-
resent new pathways for informal learning that
are critical to explore.
Informal Learning in Adult Education
Adult Education is a diffuse field. Many diverse
disciplines provide educational programs ranging
from leisure activities and hobbies, activism, pro-
fessional development, and degree progression.
This range fuels lifelong learning. There are a
limited number of university-based academic
programs that offer adult education theory and
research methods. It is an irony to have had adult
education programs close at a time in which adult
learning is that much more important to Knowledge
Society. Content experts in diverse fields, such
as medicine, information technology, landscape
architecture, and others, become adult educators
when they provide training for people in their
Informal Adult Learning in Simulated and Virtual Environments
respective professions. Those who practice adult
education do not always have a solid grounding
in adult learning theory.
In the 20th century, education professionals
and scholars struggled to define adult education
as a field. One formalizing step was to postulate
how adults learn differently from children. Over
thirty years ago, Malcolm Knowles popularized
the concept of andragogy in the United States, a
term that was already in use in Europe. Andragogy
was defined as the art and science of helping
adults learn (Knowles, 1984), which stands in
juxtaposition with pedagogical assumptions of
how to teach children. It places greater emphasis
on instructors as facilitators rather than a teacher-
centric perspective. Knowles proposed five tenets
of adult learning. Adapted from Knowles, Holton,
and Swanson (2005), these five tenets of are:
1. Adults have a high need to know why they
need to know something. They learn best
when they discover their own learning gaps
through real or simulated experiences.
2. The adult self-concept includes taking
responsibility for one’s life, increasing self-
direction, and possessing a deep psychologi-
cal need to control learning.
3. Adults enter into learning with a greater
volume and quality of experiences, and so
they show greater heterogeneity in learning
styles, backgrounds, motivational factors,
and needs. The richest learning taps into
these experiences through activities such as
problem solving, simulation, group discus-
sion, and case method. Prior experiences can
also form presuppositions and biases that
inhibit adults from integrating new material.
4. Adults become ready to learn as a result
of real-life problems and entry into new
developmental stages in life. These stages
can be jumpstarted through such activities
as career counseling and simulation.
5. Adult learning is life-centered rather than
subject-centered. Adults are more motivated
to learn when an activity presents new knowl-
edge values, and skills readily applicable to
real-life.
A common theme in andragogy is the notion
that adults need to integrate learning with their
life experiences and they are more highly engaged
if the learning is authentic or offers simulated
realism. This suggests ICT-enabled learning in
simulated and virtual environments can fit nicely
with adult learning theory. Additionally, new
learning that conflicts with what adults already
know forces them to re-evaluate the prior material
and integrate the new information more slowly
(Zemke & Zemke, 1995). ICTs may help learn-
ers manage prior learning by providing tools for
questioning assumptions but these technologies
can also create new schemas that inhibit learning
when new technology is launched.
Two criticisms of Knowles’ work indicate
that not all cultures tend toward self-direction in
adulthood and the wider social context of the adult
learner seems to be missing (Merriam, Caffarella,
& Baumgartner, 2009). The learner control and
self-direction aspects of andragogy are consistent
with Web 2.0 strategies and advanced uses of ICT,
but not all cultures are prepared to use these strate-
gies. Additionally, the freedom of user control may
be viewed as a threat to some cultures.
Adult education separates adult learning
into three types, which are formal, nonformal,
and informal learning. Merriam, Caffarella, &
Baumgartner (2009) explain that formal learning
is typically part of a program at an educational
institution and it leads to a degree or some type
of credit. Nonformal learning is characterized by
activities that are outside educational institutions
and are often found in the community, such as in
museums or libraries. Informal learning is what
we learn from everyday experiences. They further
call attention to informal learning as spontaneous,
unstructured, and fluid within the context of action,
which can make it difficult for adults to recognize
they are learning. This chapter advances that
841
 Informal Adult Learning in Simulated and Virtual Environments
there are many informal learning opportunities
within simulated and virtual environments, even
if these are part of a formal curriculum. These
opportunities educate but also mis-educate. Given
the tenets of andragogy, informal learning is an
important lens through which to view simulated
and virtual environments and it forms the first
proxy for this chapter.
Types of Informal Learning
Informal learning is a useful concept because it
draws a natural comparison to formal learning by
acknowledging learning that occurs in the spaces
surrounding purposefully designed learning events
(Eraut, 2004). It implies greater freedom and
flexibility for learners, often resulting in tacit or
unspoken knowledge. Since informal learning is
grounded in everyday experiences, there is some
conceptual overlap with experiential learning.
Experiential learning theory suggests ideas are
not fixed and immutable but are formed and
reformed through the transformation of experi-
ence (Kolb, 1984). According to Eraut (2004),
informal learning and learning from experiences
are partnering concepts.
While many formal programs use experiential
learning as a way to develop professional skill
(e.g., internships), informal learning is embedded
in daily life. It describes a wider amount of learning
than the focused objectives of formal programs.
A common term that describes informal learning
is learning in the “white spaces” around curricu-
lum. For example, participants of a continuing
education workshop may carry the discussion
of the content to the break-time, which extends
their learning and generates new questions. This
is sometimes considered the most valuable part
of the workshop. Quite often informal learning is
designed into a course but not made an explicit
objective, which is one reason why some people
prefer face-to-face learning and instructional
technology that allows for more extensive so-
cial interaction. Informal learning and ICTs are
842
integrally connected because technology assists
everyday learning and the sharing of learning
products or lessons. It also provides pathways
for human interaction that increase knowledge
networking.
Informal learning has been conceptualized in a
tri-part typology. Schugurensky (2000) proposed
three distinct types of informal learning, which
are self-directed learning, incidental learning,
and socialization (or tacit learning). He described
these three types as differing in terms of whether
the learner is conscious of the learning and if the
learning is intentional. Self-directed learning is
conscious and intentional. An example of self-
direct learning is when an adult wishes to learn
more about an historical event and so searches
for resources that help fill this learning gap in a
planned way. Incidental learning is unintentional
but a person is conscious that learning has oc-
curred. For example, incidental learning occurs
when someone places a hand on a hot stove and
realizes quickly a bad outcome. It also explains
knowledge that is picked up around the proverbial
“water cooler.” The third area, socialization, is un-
conscious and unintentional. This type of learning
happens when an adult internalizes values, skills,
and behaviors implicitly, such as learning family
norms or an organization’s culture.
Of the three forms, self-directed learning is the
most recognized and researched form (Merriam,
Caffarella, & Baumgartner, 2009) and it is con-
sistent with Knowles’ work since self-direction is
an essential part of adult learning. Tacit learning,
however, has been more challenging to concep-
tualize, research, and apply in adult education.
According to Eraut (1999), however, “thick” tacit
knowledge coexists with “thin” explicit versions
that describe and justify a person’s actions. This
suggests much learning is moved into the tacit
realm and one’s ability to describe it is limited.
Informal Adult Learning in Simulated and Virtual Environments
A Four-Part Model of Informal Learning
Inspired by Schugurensky’s three-part typology,
this chapter proposes a four-part model of informal
learning represented in Figure 1. The model is
built as a matrix that combines Schurgurensky’s
intentional-unintentional and conscious-uncon-
scious distinctions. The first two, self-directed
and incidental, are easier to understand and are
commonly observed because of their conscious
natures. The two that involve tacit knowledge,
however, require more discussion. A few adapta-
tions are reflected in the model.
The first adaptation replaces socialization with
tacit to avoid confusion since the term tacit cap-
tures the unconscious and unintentional learning
that an adult learns on his or her own as well as
that which is learned socially. Skill development
through solo practice may be an example of
tacit learning; humans make minor adjustments
to build expertise in a skill without consciously
Figure 1. Interactivity in the Four-part Informal Learning Model
knowing they are doing it. Many professions still
incorporate an apprenticeship approach to skill
mastery, which depends upon the transfer of
tacit knowledge and skill.
Because of the embedded nature of tacit
knowledge, tacit informal learning must be pulled
by some prompt such as reflection. According to
Polanyi (1966) a person may never be able to con-
sciously consider all of his or her tacit knowledge,
especially embodied knowledge, and the very act
of surfacing tacit knowledge for conscious analy-
sis breaks it apart and requires reassembling the
knowledge in an altered form. After this process
it can never go back to exactly the way it once
was. Additionally, tacit informal learning is meant
to capture Kolb’s (1984) perspective of implicit
processing of knowledge, which suggests that
learning may occur through reorganization of
tacit knowledge as well as adding new knowledge
through a new learning event.
843
 Informal Adult Learning in Simulated and Virtual Environments
Implicit processing may also provide support
for the addition of integrative informal learning
in the four-part model, which is a second adapta-
tion proposed in Figure 1. Schugurensky (2000)
speculated there could be a fourth type of informal
learning that is unconscious but intentional yet
noted he could not find examples that support this
type of learning. This chapter advances integra-
tive learning as a conceptual connection between
creativity and tacit knowledge; tacit knowledge
shifts phases in the creative process and as elements
or altered forms of it become explicit. Integrative
informal learning is theorized here to synthesize
new and existing knowledge in an unconscious
but intentional method. This type of learning
may be responsible for intuitive leaps, creative
insight, and sudden moments of understanding
when puzzle pieces click into place.
Given that adult learners must work extensively
to integrate new and existing experiences, the
integrative informal learning is necessary for mak-
ing sense of new knowledge when the conscious
forms of learning have exhausted their reach. An
adult may engage in pattern matching or evaluat-
ing similarities and dissimilarities of content to
gain a greater depth of understanding. Integrative
learning may be done unconsciously but pushed
to the surface because of the intentionality of the
learning endeavor. The solution to a problem is
realized in a classic “ah-ha” moment when the
answer comes to the surface. Some questions
can be answered through conscious analytical
approaches but there are also instances in which
answers come when least expected. Adults have
a vast fund of prior experiences, personal history,
and knowledge schema, and so integrative infor-
mal learning may be the mechanism that occurs
under the surface of conscious processes as they
struggle to understand new material or solve
problems for which they have little precedence.
Integrative informal learning is also important
to tacit knowledge described in Knowledge Man-
agement literature. Nonaka (1998) advanced that
knowledge creation depends on highly subjective
844
insights and intuition. These connect tacit and
explicit knowledge. Tacit knowledge is hard to
surface to explicit levels, and so he suggested that
symbols and figurative language are important
for tapping into tacit knowledge since there is
more information attached to symbols than can
be explicated. Symbols are an important part of
media-rich ICTs, which makes them important for
learning in virtual environments. Also, integrative
informal learning may help users navigate virtual
environment, perhaps as they follow a type of
intuition or gut feeling that directs selections in
an unconscious but intentional way.
Integrative informal learning helps capture the
mysterious nature of some learning activities. The
human brain may work on a problem while the
adult is unaware of these processes. In this man-
ner, the brain engages in processes that may be
hindered by conscious rationality. To understand
how this happens, we can look to an extraordinary
example of learning. Nicola Tesla, the inventor
of alternating electrical current, was said to have
amazing mental powers. In one of his autobio-
graphical works, he described building the parts
to a new motor, creating design blueprints, and
assembling the motor all in his mind to the most
specific of measurements. He wrote,
I do not rush into actual work. When I get an idea,
I start at once building it up in my imagination. I
change the construction, make improvements and
operate the device in my mind. It is absolutely
immaterial to me whether I run my turbine in
thought or test it in my shop. I even note if it is
out of balance. There is no difference whatever;
the results are the same. In this way I am able to
rapidly develop and perfect a conception without
touching anything. When I have gone so far as to
embody in the invention every possible improve-
ment I can think of and see no fault anywhere, I put
into concrete form this final product of my brain.
Invariably my device works as I conceived that it
should, and the experiment comes out exactly as
I planned it. (Tesla, n.d.)
Informal Adult Learning in Simulated and Virtual Environments
Tesla had the ability to turn the motor on and
test the design in his head, going back after some
time to check wear on the parts. This allowed him
to do quality checks and alter mental blueprints as
if he were testing a physical model in real time.
The report that Tesla could learn in a very inten-
tional way about the wear in a new motor from
mental processes alone, and do so by running a
machine in the background of his mind, suggests
integrative informal learning has merit as a fourth
form of informal learning.
While Tesla was an extreme example, integra-
tive informal learning may help explain some of
the mystery behind sudden leaps of understanding
and creativity. For example, adults who are work-
ing on a problem – that is, they have identified a
learning gap they intend to fill – may hit a limit
of what conscious processes can accomplish at a
given point in time. The solution may come when
their attention is turned away from the problem.
Adults may overcome writer’s block, for example,
by focusing thoughts elsewhere and allowing
integrative processes to step in. It is also possible
that when there is an intentional need to learn,
the unconscious side directs the pursuit of new
experiences to fill the need without a conscious
decision. This may come in the form of a gut
feeling or intuition that a given experience will
be valuable for filling the learning need.
The third and final adaptation includes arrows
in Figure 1 that reflect the informal learning
types interacting fluidly as a person goes about
learning in daily life. It is possible that a person
engages in more than one branch of learning
simultaneously. For example, if one is in a crisis
situation, the conscious side may be summing up
the situation and trying to test known solutions
whereas the integrative side may begin looking for
alternative solutions that access tacit knowledge
and result from a search for patterns. Tesla (n.d.)
described having sudden flashes of insight under
such conditions, which saved his life on at least
one occasion. He also felt that a strong capacity
for introspection was important for insight.
People may be able to switch learning modali-
ties as the need arises. For example, a student may
learn factual information by speaking with another
person but also tacitly tuck away information about
his or her counterpart’s facial expressions and
tone. At work, a training program may encourage
learning new professional skills but also teach a
hidden curriculum related to group norms and
organizational hierarchy. The idea of a knowledge
translation process is supported by the work of
Nonaka, Toyama, and Bysoiére (2003), although
they do not make a direct connection to informal
learning types. Informal learning modalities add a
complexity to learning, which this chapter explores
in simulated and virtual settings.
Simulated and Virtual Environments
Informal learning occurs as humans go about daily
life. Many activities that people once did in person
are now mediated by ICTs. Virtual organizations
are networks of geographically disbursed people
(Colky, Colky, & Young, 2002) and are enabled
by ICT. They are one of many examples of how
life has become virtual in the Knowledge Society.
Virtual experiences produce informal learning. If
the experience is negative, an adult may withdraw
or be unwilling to use new ICT. Positive experi-
ences may be repeated within the framework of
adult needs and motivations. Most importantly,
designers should recognize that people learn con-
tinually in virtual environments. Leisure is also
enhanced by the availability of games, resources,
and access to knowledge networks on the Web.
This section discusses how informal learning is
connected to simulated and virtual environments.
Specifically, the chapter defines the term virtual
and addresses Inter/Intranet technologies, Simula-
tion, and Robust Virtual Environments.
What is Virtual?
The word virtual has numerous meanings and
it overlaps with terms such e- (e.g., e-learning),
845
 Informal Adult Learning in Simulated and Virtual Environments
cyber, and digital. Given the fast pace of innova-
tion, new virtual applications are being discovered
and created continually. As a concept, the term
virtual is difficult to stabilize because it is con-
tinually evolving. One dictionary entry contains
two definitions of virtual that are relevant to this
discussion. First, virtual is “existing in the mind,
especially as a product of the imagination” (virtual,
n.d., para. 1). At first glance, one may question
whether this definition is relevant; however, it is
a useful distinction because it places the mind
(and therefore learning) at the center of virtual
experiences. The quality of virtual experiences
depends on the meaning the learner draws from
these experiences. This meaning may be individual
or co-created in a community as members interact
regularly through virtual technologies.
Another reason this definition is relevant is
the emphasis on imagination. Virtual experiences
touch not only the logical and rational areas
of one’s mind but also one’s imagination. The
symbols, colors, sounds, graphics, patterns, and
other elements of rich media add to the realism
of the experience and touch many more senses
than text alone. By engaging the imagination, it
is possible that we engage more types of learning
than the conscious learning we associate with
formal schooling.
Second, in relation to computer science, virtual
means “simulated, or carried on by means of a
computer or computer network” (virtual, n.d.,
para. 1). This definition captures two ideas. First,
simulation is a component of virtual experiences.
Simulation can be physical or digital. An example
of a physical simulation is role playing in a face-
to-face class or using an aviation task trainer to
learn how to read airplane instruments before
getting into a real cockpit. High-stakes simulation
training is typically computer-enabled and has
virtual components even if the whole simulation
is not embedded in a computer. In the preceding
example, there may be physical instruments read
by the trainee but an advanced flight simulator
incorporates a projection screen and communica-
846
tions from a control tower to mimic the conditions
of a real flight. Simulations can be run in full virtual
environments, which will be discussed in later in
this chapter. Wrapped together, the imaginative
nature and potential for capacity building make
learning enabled by virtual technology important
for innovation.
The advance of ICT toward virtual technologies
has created greater abilities for humans to learn
from an ever-widening set of resources. Most
importantly people have access to other people
for social connection and knowledge building.
ICTs started as scattered and unconnected forms
of technology. For example, early ICT technology
included faxing, email, and videoconferencing.
These have allowed targeted communication
amongst geographically distributed participants.
They also foster communication in an increasingly
global society. By adding new media and integrat-
ing various technologies as a package, ICT has
been used to create virtual environments that are
active communities rather than passive resource
repositories. Informal learning is far richer and
more extensive than in previous generations of
ICT. Social networking for both leisure and work
is on the rise. This chapter will look specifically
at three areas of virtual environments, which are
Inter/Intranets, Simulation, and Robust Virtual
Environments.
Inter/Intranet Environments
There is no doubt that the Internet has been a
critical development in the last two decades. The
speed of knowledge production is breathtaking
and technology continues to evolve quickly. The
Internet provides a virtual environment for tapping
into the latest information in virtually unlimited
categories. The newest generation of adults, the
so-called Generation Y, is technologically savvy.
They have grown up with Internet and mobile
technologies as if these devices have always ex-
isted. The prior generations have adapted to new
technologies to varying degrees and, in some cases,
Informal Adult Learning in Simulated and Virtual Environments
with some skepticism of the reliability of technol-
ogy. Certainly the Internet provided access to many
resources and forms of virtual technology, which
makes it a tremendous resource for self-directed
learning. In the last decade of the 20th Century,
organizations became increasingly networked to
the Internet and also within the organization in
the form of Intranets.
Intranets are designed specifically for a group
or organization, and therefore can be viewed
not only in terms of conscious learning but also
tacit and integrative learning. They are a virtual
space in which essential work and learning occur
(Bennett, 2006). Sophisticated Intranets that are
media rich and culturally relevant open the door
to virtual human resource development in an or-
ganization (Bennett, 2009). This depends heavily
on employees engaging in informal learning by
interacting with content and with other employees.
Organizations are increasingly recognizing the
value of social networking, especially large and
geographically distributed companies. It is getting
to be more common for social technologies to
be applied to business, which allows employees
to post face pages that discuss their interests,
areas of expertise, and allow for chatting around
a virtual water cooler. This function is more
likely to be allowed in an organization that has
a flexible culture that recognizes that innovation
depends on learning that occurs when people and
resources are connected. Certainly this raises is-
sues of intentionality and motivation theorized in
adult learning. The growing body of intellectual
property and learning activities through Inter/
Intranet technologies raises distinct concerns
around creativity and innovation.
Innovation depends upon harnessing creativity,
and it brings into question the role of intellectual
property, which collectives typically attempt to
control. On ideological grounds, some technolo-
gists prefer open-source software so that their ac-
tivities are not controlled by commercial interests.
In American tradition, there has always been a
tension between individual and collective rights.
Intellectual property is a tool that fosters a creative
society but it must be subservient to the creative
process; that is, there is a difference between
simply republishing someone’s information and
transforming it into an innovative new product
(Lessig, 2004). “Mashup” is a commonly used
term that describes the rapid integration of content
from other Web resources to generate Web pages,
and the ability to tag other people’s content. The
ability to take other people’s content could seem
like stealing, yet this is one of the activities that
transforms knowledge and continually refreshes
Internet content. Here, it is critical to separate a
creative process from rigor needed for academic
integrity. It is a value that requires scholars to
understand how ideas are generated. Academic
integrity, intellectual property, and ideological
issues will drive how governments regulate Inter-
net resources. Presently, governmental regulation
varies dramatically from nation to nation.
The Internet is sometimes described as the
largest vanity press as people post opinions and
thoughts on blogs, weigh in on the state of knowl-
edge through wikis, and look for consumer ratings
on hotels, products, and many other things. It is
also an important resource for informal learning.
In one study, women entrepreneurs displayed self-
directed, incidental, and tacit socialization forms
of informal learning when they used the Internet
to access information capital (Thomas & Moisey,
2006). Another study found that transitions (e.g.,
family changes, loss, retirement) occurring late
in life of a set of rural senior adults created an in-
centive for self-directed learning, often involving
Internet searches at the local library as well as a
systematic search of other resources (Roberson
& Merriam, 2005).
There are detrimental effects of Inter/Intranets.
A potential for self-direction and personal motiva-
tion can turn into narcissism as people focus on
the attention they receive by posting shocking
videos on YouTube, for example. Social interac-
tion can turn into cyber bullying or cyber stalking.
The Internet can be a conduit for the very worst
847
 Informal Adult Learning in Simulated and Virtual Environments
of human behavior and therefore should not be
a considered a panacea. Continued research is
needed to understand how Inter/Intranet resources
foster learning and shape the social context of the
adult lifeworld. Although the Internet can provide
access to simulation and robust virtual environ-
ments, these topics are unique enough to discuss
in the following sections.
Simulation
Simulation is defined here as the use of tools,
techniques, and software to reproduce a real-life
environment or scenarios for the purpose of learn-
ing. Simulations can be as simple as role-playing
that ICTs facilitate. For example, a mentor may
help a protégé practice negotiating skills through
role-playing. This could be highly spontaneous
and informal or part of a planned leadership de-
velopment program. Simulation can also be quite
complex, using extensive software and hardware
resources.
Commercial simulation is a multi-million dol-
lar industry that offers value by providing greater
fidelity in simulated environments. Fidelity is the
degree to which the real world is reproduced in
a simulated experience (Page, 2008). The more
sophisticated forms of simulation use ICT to en-
hance the experience of the learner, increase the
fidelity of simulation, allow branching of alterna-
tive scenarios on a given topic, and help prepare
learners for real-life events. Computers assist
with scenario planning and implementation, and
microphones allow direct verbal communication
of geographically distributed participants.
Fidelity is particularly important to adults
because they are looking to solve real-world prob-
lems and are unlikely to be enthusiastic about far-
fetched and artificial exercises (Zemke & Zemke,
1995). Despite high fidelity, there will always be
a need for some suspension of disbelief, whether
the program is for leisure or work. Gaming sys-
tems such as Xbox Live™ connect geographically
distributed people within a simulated environment
848
and offer an example of how leisure activities can
foster informal learning.
Some games simulate combat and require
teams to formulate very quickly, and then to play
together as an integrated, communicative unit
despite the fact that the users have not met before.
Not only are players learning to play the game,
they are learning team dynamics as a byproduct
of the experience, which may create schema that
players could transfer to other environments. Skills
learned in gaming may actually help in master-
ing work tasks, such as robotic surgery. Serious
gaming uses the interactivity and fun of gaming
to teach important and sometimes complex skills.
Research is necessary to explore the kinds of
learning resulting from these experiences.
As mentioned earlier in the chapter, people
learn informally even in a formal program.
Learning can be incidental or tangential to the
objectives of a learning event. Two of the more
common programs that use simulation are avia-
tion and medical education. These are high stakes
training exercises because the skills to be learned
place lives at risk in real-life. Aviation simulation
has been discussed briefly, but some additional
examples from medical education will advance
the discussion of informal learning in simulation.
Simulation in medical education teaches skills,
attitudes, effective patient care, and team dynam-
ics. A simple table-top task trainer can help a future
surgeon learn to stitch artificial skin. More com-
plex simulation creates a simulated environment
driven by a vignette or story-line. An educational
room can represent a hospital room complete with
equipment and a patient mannequin whose voice is
controlled by a preceptor in a control room. Simu-
lation scenarios require a learner to demonstrate
equipment use, apply medical knowledge, conduct
physical exams, and to take leadership on a care
team, all at the same time. Participants must learn
and act in real-time. In some cases it is critical for
healthcare professionals to routinize a response so
that time is saved during a medical crisis.
Informal Adult Learning in Simulated and Virtual Environments
Some objectives of simulation are not made
explicit to a student, which makes it unlike formal
classes in which objectives are generally made
explicit at the start. In fact, some learning objec-
tives are not revealed until the end and sometimes
students are fed misinformation to see how they
react. For maximum effectiveness, students are
unlikely to know the outcome of the simulation.
The scenario can branch in new directions de-
pending on the aptitude of the learner and as the
instructors assess learner needs in the moment.
Simulation may exemplify integrative informal
learning as adults attempt to synthesize learning
into a larger whole in unpredictable and surprising
ways; they have to access knowledge for imme-
diate application in an emotionally charged and
“messy” situation. Tacit learning results from the
way in which students practice the role of doc-
tor. Self-directed learning may also occur when
a student is motivated to expand knowledge of
topic after a simulation encounter.
Branching means that those in charge of the
simulation adjust content along with the student
rather than staying lockstep with the pre-planned
scenario. Here preceptors have to make the de-
cision between keeping a scenario consistent
amongst students versus rising to the need of a
particular student. Also, sophisticated simula-
tion means not just practicing isolated skills but
putting many types of learning together in one
performance. For this reason, there are many
potentialities for informal learning to occur and a
critical piece to the experience is the ability of the
learner to engage in reflection and self-assessment
to make sense of the experience. Additionally,
simulation may expose prior learning, such as
cultural norms and individual characteristics
(Barach, Satish, & Streufert, 2001), that could
impede good performance.
It is not uncommon for emotions to run high
in an intense simulation, which could be barrier
to learning and predispose a learner to a particu-
lar response. Debriefing in a safe environment is
particularly important for mitigating unintended
informal learning. Additionally, it is increasingly
common to record simulations for future review
and it is possible for geographically distributed
preceptors to participate in the simulation through
computer-based video feeds. Informal learning
is present in simulation as well as fully virtual
environments.
Robust Virtual Environments
Virtual environments are not typically designed
for one activity or for winning a simple game
(Lamb & Johnson, 2009). They can be one, two,
or three dimensional, and they are scalable to the
needs of participants. The term Robust Virtual
Environment (RVE) is defined for this chapter as
a sophisticated, three dimension computer-enabled
environment that allows a person to interact with
objects and other people, typically through the use
of an avatar. RVE is often used synonymously
with virtual worlds, and these terms are used
interchangeably in this chapter. Increasingly,
science is allowing for greater realism in RVEs,
such providing mapping software to reproduce
landscapes or simulating fluid dynamics that al-
low graphics to move more naturally in an RVE.
The architecture of an RVE tends to integrate
many different types of technology and is built
to be immersive. For this reason access to RVEs
requires computers with solid processing speeds,
up-to-date software, and adequate bandwidth.
Virtual worlds offer greater social presence
through the use of avatars and offer real-time
learning opportunities (Chapman, 2008). They
allow for practice of important social skills in
safe environments and are highly experiential.
For example, they can provide therapy for autis-
tic adults to learn to handle social interaction in
a positive fashion (Mangan, 2008). This allows
patients to reset response mechanisms. They are
also becoming a popular form of entertainment
and a mechanism for socialization (Steinkuehler,
2004). A downside is that adults can become
addicted to RVEs for social stimulation, which
849
 Informal Adult Learning in Simulated and Virtual Environments
can have negative consequences for personal
and professional relationships. An interesting
paradox here is that time is necessary for users
to learn to navigate and interact within a virtual
world but too much time spent in these realms
can be destructive. Self-regulation is needed in
RVEs so that users monitor how much time they
spend online and what adults are learning within
the virtual worlds.
In RVEs, adults typically create a screen
name or avatar that represents them on-line. In
the more sophisticated virtual worlds, avatars can
be customized to represent and personify what
the user wishes to be on-line. Avatars make the
interaction of RVE citizens seem more authentic
and engaging, which helps avoid the phenomenon
that Xiaging and Hongxin (2007) call loneliness
phobia, which is the absence of social presence
such as gestures and facial expressions. According
to Palloff and Pratt (1999), it is a fallacy to consider
virtual communication as artificial because it is
very human. They also see virtual environments
as being great equalizers that prompt people to
communicate more thoughtfully; however, they
also admit that removal of contextual cues of a
person’s physical environment can be both ben-
eficial and detrimental. It is possible for on-line
communication to promote groupthink rather than
independent thought.
One of the most common RVE’s is Second
Life®. Users from around the world explore this
virtual world with highly customizable avatars.
Users can buy virtual land to create homes, store-
fronts, and meeting places. Avatars move around
the world by walking, flying, or teleporting.
There is so much realism and utility that many
educational institutions are using Second Life®
to recruit students through virtual offices and for
conducting distance education classes. Teachers
and students are able to sit in a virtual classroom,
project slides on screens, and communicate
through text or microphones to discuss content.
More informally, support groups meet in virtual
rooms in which avatars sit in a circle to discuss
850
a health issue or participate in grief counseling.
The advantage of an avatar is that the group can
visually see when a member enters or leaves the
virtual space, and gestures such as hand-raising can
indicate a member has a question. RVEs provide
adults anonymity for exploring issues that they
may not feel comfortable doing in a face-to-face
setting. Adults also have access to people and
resources that they might not otherwise, which
provides opportunities for both formal and in-
formal learning.
Interaction in RVEs is important for co-creation
of knowledge. Researchers in Italy found that af-
fordances of software used to build three dimen-
sion worlds allowed intersubjectivity to develop,
which is a term that alludes to Piaget. It describes
how people interact to develop a greater under-
standing of a subject than merely combining their
individual knowledge and perspectives (Ligorio,
Cesareni, & Schwartz, 2008). Shared understand-
ings are negotiated in virtual worlds, especially if
membership reaches some stability. Communities
of practice may develop shared understanding
through informal learning by sharing of experi-
ences and storytelling (Yorks, 2003). Typically a
community of practice negotiates commons goals
and rules for reaching the goals, which may be
done virtually in an RVE. As adults interact with
objects and people in virtual worlds, informal
learning is a natural part of this experience.
FUTURE TRENDS
The trend toward using simulated and virtual en-
vironments for learning seems to be continuing,
although this will depend on financial resources
needed to continue the development of virtual
technology. Fully immersive virtual environments
will also become increasingly common. These
include virtual caves and bodysuits that stimulate
physical senses. These are quite expensive and
still very experimental. Typically fully immersive
Informal Adult Learning in Simulated and Virtual Environments
environments are not widely available yet whereas
as Internet resources are readily accessible.
Government regulation in various countries
will affect access to the Internet and to virtual
environments in the coming years. The underbelly
of wide open access is that there may be harm to
individuals that governments may wish to avoid.
Also, some ideologies may cut off access if the
freedom found in virtual interaction is deemed
a threat to governmental or regulatory control.
Absent regulation, resources will flow toward the
virtual applications that adults find engaging and
motivating. Also, it is unclear how learning in one
environment will transfer to another environment.
There are numerous factors that affect learning
transfer that range from personal attributes such
as self-efficacy, locus of control, and aptitude,
and also systems factors that facilitate or hinder
learning transfer (Eddy & Tannenbaum, 2003).
While transfer is often valued as “good”, informal
learning transfer should be considered a neutral
concept; it could be beneficial or destructive
depending on what learning is being transferred
and the specific nature of the context in which it
is applied.
Another future trend is the role of assessing
learning in simulated and virtual environments,
which is discussed at length in the next section.
Assessment may help illuminate the dynamics
of informal learning in simulated and virtual
environments.
Assessment
Assessment is the second proxy for this chapter. It
establishes ways to capture and measure whether
learning has occurred, what prior learning exists
as a precursor to new learning, and what learning
patterns adults engage in naturally. Christiansen,
Horn, & Johnson (2008) recommend a balance of
inductive and deductive methods for understand-
ing how technology is changing learning patterns.
It may also help illustrate the interaction between
formal and informal learning. Additionally, there
is a trend away from formal schooling, which
means that there is a need for some mechanism for
assessing personal learning if it is used to qualify
for professions or formal educational programs.
Because interactions can be preserved more eas-
ily in a virtual environment, technology allows
for more possibilities of capturing and analyzing
artifacts of informal learning or potentially real-
time informal learning.
Assessment should address the type of learning
at issue, whether it is knowledge, competence, or
performance, and the progression from novice-
competent-expert when this continuum is at play
(Wass, Bowden, & Jackson, 2007). A simple form
of assessment is observation. For example, a group
member assesses whether others are learning by
listening to the content of small group discussions.
This sheds light on how content is being learned.
Observation can also be used by participants in
Internet chat rooms and RVEs. As people engage
in discussion, their presuppositions, developing
schema, and errors in understanding may become
apparent. Although informal learning and the
growth of human capacity are valued, it is difficult
to assess what has been learned and the value of
the learning experiences. Checklists can provide
a more formal approach to assessment, which
are often used in simulation. Since assessment
in simulation is more advanced, these strategies
can be analyzed and potentially adapted for use
in other virtual settings.
Video-based assessment allows for review of
performance as a teaching and grading tool. One
critical aspect of video-based assessment (includ-
ing Web capture) is the need for consensus on
evaluative criteria, which may be best done with
multiple observers (Freeman, 2007). A crisis situ-
ation requires a mindset that is flexible enough
to accept that errors can be mitigated through
constant situational evaluation; however, learners
can develop fixation errors that keep them from
revising action according to available information
(Lighthall, 2008). An example of a fixation error
is when the learner persists in doing a minor task
851
 Informal Adult Learning in Simulated and Virtual Environments
Figure 2. Components of a Logic Model
rather understanding a higher priority. The chal-
lenge is how to assess this in a fluid and fast-paced
virtual environment. Here, an outside observer
may be able to see things that the individual actors
do not. Lightall (2008) suggested that anticipating
where a situation could head and communicating
this, as well as having established protocols and
an environment in which all input is valued could
help performance in a crisis.
In aviation, one problem with assessing trans-
fer of skills from simulation to real-life is that
many of the situations practiced in the simulated
setting cannot be safely assessed in actual flight
performance (Page, 2008). Self-reflection in these
situations is an excellent tool that allows learners
to appraise how closely their performance matches
the assessment of the experts observing them. It
also allows learners to potentially tap into tacit
knowledge, identify barriers to learning, assess
personal and group performance, and make plans
for future learning or transfer of learning to other
environments.
Design Using Logic Models
Building assessment into the virtual environment
as a proactive rather than reactive measure may
help build more authentic and useful learning op-
portunities. One way to do this is to build a logic
model, which visually shows the theory of change
in a program, policy or project (Frechtling, 2007).
Frechtling described four basic components of a
logic model. Although Figure 2 depicts Inputs as
the first component – that is resources needed such
as funding, materials, or expertise – she suggests
starting with Outcomes. Outcomes are not unlike
objectives in curriculum design but they may
852
be focused on individual, group, or institutional
outcomes and can be set as short, medium, or long
term in time to completion.
Building human capacity through the growth
of new knowledge and skills is a common outcome,
which creates an imperative for understanding
and assessing informal learning. Activities are
defined steps to reach the desired outcomes. These
steps can run concurrently or be placed in a de-
pendent order. If the activities are done, there
should be Outputs that are the easiest way to
determine progress toward the Outcomes. If a
desired outcome is to share knowledge with a
wider audience than an output could be an increase
in the number of unique users counted before and
after a change. Lastly, Inputs are the resources
needed to make the change happen, which could
include tangible and intangible items. This type
of modeling can help professionals design vir-
tual environments to have maximum impact and
to potentially measure the impact with multiple
sources of data. It can also help minimize barriers
to informal learning in a virtual setting. It is
easier to design assessment and analysis upfront
than to retrofit it on the back end; there is much
utility in having a solid assessment strategy.
CONCLUDING THOUGHTS
Although adults learn continually through infor-
mal learning mechanisms, education fields have
paid less attention to informal learning than formal
and non-formal learning. Layered on top of this is
the complexity of the volume of informal learning
opportunities and access to rich resources enabled
by ICT. Part of the complexity is that human in-
Informal Adult Learning in Simulated and Virtual Environments
teraction in simulated and virtual environments
may be experienced differently depending on a
person’s vantage point, prior experiences, genera-
tional differences, and stage of life. ICT designers
need to recognize that users are learners and they
have a clear imperative to explore the connection
between adult learning and ICT further. This in-
cludes understanding the barriers to learning and
the unintended consequences of informal learning
in simulated and virtual environments.
Not all learning opportunities are beneficial
to adults, a notion that highlights the importance
fluidity between design and assessment. The
anonymity afforded by ICT can open the door to
the abuse of others, especially if there is no social
accountability. As more people become technically
savvy they must also become socially savvy about
virtual interactions. Both positive and negative
experiences in simulated and virtual settings
influence future learning, actions, and decisions
in real environments.
The discussion in this chapter suggests an
important implication for practice. A balance
must be struck between controlling for specific
outcomes (or regulating against socially undesir-
able outcomes) and the freedom needed to foster
informal learning and innovation. Creativity
stemming from informal learning in simulated
and virtual environments requires interaction
with the rich resources and a certain amount of
chaos, yet there is pressure to control educational
environments. Social interaction that fosters adult
informal learning is also a key feature of simu-
lated and virtual environments, but it may add to
a seemingly chaotic.
Continuity of membership in virtual groups
may facilitate informal learning. For example,
learning groups that have the opportunity to
study with each other and to develop continuity
of communication seem to outperform groups
that are continually formed and reformed (Rabow,
Charness, Kipperman, & Radcliffe-Vasile, 1994).
Networks of trustworthy people and virtual re-
sources or “webs of trust” (Dyson, 1998), are
also important for so that learning environments
are safe and useful.
Creative research techniques are necessary
for illuminating how learning is occurring in
simulated and virtual environments requires
creative research methods for illuminating how
learning is occurring in these settings and con-
nection between virtual experiences and real
life. The four-part informal learning model is
one potential theoretical frame that can advance
research studies of this nature. Not only should
researchers continue to explore the distinct types
of informal learning but also how they interact
in a holistic fashion in virtual environments. An
intriguing challenge is how to establish empirical
evidence of tacit informal learning, especially the
mysterious nature of integrative informal learning
proposed in this chapter.
One such possibility is to study how adults
solve a learning problem longitudinally, which
may require reflective techniques or observa-
tion to shift tacit learning to the explicit realm.
ICTs that foster interactivity demonstrated in the
four-part informal learning model may become
truly powerful engines for the advancement of
knowledge, innovation, and personal learning.
Ultimately, in practice and in research, informal
learning of all types will influence the development
and transformation of the virtual imagination.
REFERENCES
Ala-Mutka, K., & Punie, Y. (2007/November).
Ageing societies, learning and ICT. eLearning
Papers, 6, 1-9.
Barach, P., Satish, U., & Streufert, S. (2001).
Healthcare assessment and performance: Us-
ing simulation. Simulation & Gaming, 32(2),
147–155. doi:10.1177/104687810103200203
853
 Informal Adult Learning in Simulated and Virtual Environments
Bennett, E. E. (2006). Organizational intranets
and the transition to managing knowledge . In
Anandarajan, M., Teo, T. S. H., & Simmers, C. A.
(Eds.), The internet and workplace transformation
(pp. 83–103). Armonk, NY: M.E. Sharpe.
Bennett, E. E. (2009). Virtual HRD: The inter-
section of knowledge management, culture, and
intranets. In G. McLean, Y. Cho, & E. Cho (Eds.),
HRD’s role in knowledge management. Advances
in Developing Human Resources, 11(9), 362-374.
Bennett, E. E., & Bell, A. A. (2010). Knowledge
society. In C. Kasworm, J. Ross-Gordon, & A.
Rose (Eds.), 2010 Handbook of Adult and Con-
tinuing Education (pp 411-420). San Francisco:
Jossey-Bass.
Chapman, D. D. (2008). Virtual worlds: New
directions for HRD research and practice. In T.
J. Chermack, J. Storberg-Walker, & C. M. Gra-
ham (Eds.), Proceedings of the 2008 Academy of
Human Resource Development Annual Research
Conference (pp. 917-924). Bowling Green, OH:
Academy of Human Resource Development.
Christensen, C. M., Horn, M. B., & Johnson, C.
W. (2008). Disrupting class: How disruptive in-
novation will change the way the world learns.
New York: McGraw Hill.
Colky, D. L., Colky, M. T., & Young, W. H. III.
(2002). Managing and developing people in the
virtual organization. Malabar, FL: Krieger.
Dyson, E. (1998). Release 2.1: A design for living
in the digital age. New York: Broadway Books.
Eddy, E. R., & Tannenbaum, S. I. (2003). Trans-
fer in an e-learning context . In Holton, E. F.
III, & Baldwins, T. (Eds.), Improving transfer
in organizations (pp. 161–194). San Francisco:
Jossey-Bass.
854
Eraut, M. (1999). Non-formal learning in the work-
place – the hidden dimension of lifelong learning:
A framework for analysis and the problems it poses
for the researcher. Unpublished paper presented at
the First International conference On Researching
Work and Learning. Leeds University, England.
Eraut, M. (2004). Informal learning in the work-
place. Studies in Continuing Education, 26(2),
248–273. doi:10.1080/158037042000225245
Fiztgerald, R. (2005). Understanding informal
learning with technology: Insights for ICT in-
tegration. In P. Kommers & G. Richards (Eds.),
Proceedings of World Conference on Educational
Multimedia, Hypermedia and Telecommunica-
tions (pp. 948-954). Chesapeake, VA: AACE.
Frechtling, J. A. (2007). Logic modeling methods
in program evaluation. San Francisco: Jossey-
Bass.
Freeman, A. (2007). Video assessment . In Jackson,
N., Jamieson, A., & Khan, A. (Eds.), Assessment
in medical education and training: A practical
guide (pp. 109–113). Abingdon, United Kingdom:
Radcliffe.
Galvin, T. (2004, April 1). Idle time. Training.
Retrieved from http://www.allbusiness.com/
services/educational-services/4283628-1.html
Jokisalo, E., & Riu, A. (n.d.). Informal learning in
the era of Web 2.0. P.A.U. education. Retrieved
from http://www.elearningeuropa.info/files/me-
dia/media19656.pdf
Knowles, M. S. (1984). Andragogy in action:
Applying modern principles of adult education.
San Francisco: Jossey Bass.
Knowles, M. S., Holton, E. F. III, & Swanson,
R. A. (2005). The adult learner: The definitive
classic in adult learning and human resource
development (6th ed.). London: Elsevier.
Informal Adult Learning in Simulated and Virtual Environments
Kolb, D. A. (1984). Experiential learning: Experi-
ence as the source of learning and development.
Upper Saddle River. NJ: Prentice Hall.
Lamb, A., & Johnson, L. (2009). The potential,
the pitfalls, and the promise of multi-user virtual
environments: Getting a second life. Teacher Li-
brarian, 36(4), 68–72.
Lessig, L. (2004). Free culture: The nature and
future of creativity. New York: Penguin.
Lighthall, G. K. (2008). Crisis resource manage-
ment in healthcare . In Riley, R. H. (Ed.), Manual
of simulation in healthcare (pp. 277–294). Oxford:
Oxford University Press.
Ligorio, M. B., Cesareni, D., & Schwartz, N.
(2008). Collaborative virtual environments as
means to increase the level of intersubjectivity in a
distributed cognition system. Journal of Research
on Technology in Education, 40(3), 339–357.
Livingstone, D. (1999). Exploring the icebergs of
adult learning: Findings of the first Canadian survey
of informal learning practices. Canadian Journal
for the Study of Adult Education, 13(2), 49–72.
Mangan, K. (2008). Virtual worlds turn therapeutic
for autistic disorders. The Chronicle of Higher
Education. Retrieved from http://chronicle.com/
article/Virtual-Worlds-Turn/11607/
Merriam, S. B., Caffarella, R. S., & Baumgartner,
L. M. (2009). Learning in adulthood: A comprehen-
sive guide (3rd ed.). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Nonaka, I. (1998). The knowledge-creating com-
pany . In Harvard Business Review on Knowledge
Management (pp. 21–45). Boston: Harvard Busi-
ness School Press.
Nonaka, I., Toyama, R., & Bysoiére, P. (2003).
A theory of organization knowledge creation:
Understanding the dynamic process of creating
knowledge . In Dierkes, M., Antal, A. B., Child, J.,
& Noanaka, I. (Eds.), Handbook of organizational
learning and knowledge (pp. 491–817). Oxford:
Oxford University Press.
Page, R. (2008). Lessons from aviation simulation
. In Riley, R. H. (Ed.), Manual of simulation in
healthcare (pp. 37–49). Oxford: Oxford University
Press.
Palloff, R. M., & Pratt, K. (1999). Building learning
communities in cyberspace: Effective strategies for
the online classroom. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Polanyi, M. C. (1966). The tacit dimension. Garden
City, NY: Anchor Books.
Rabow, J., Charness, M. A., Kipperman, J., &
Radcliffe-Vasile, S. (1994). William Fawcett Hill’s
learning through discussion (3rd ed.). Prospect
Heights, IL: Waveland.
Redfern, S., & Naughton, N. (2002). Collaborative
virtual environments to support communication and
community in internet-based distance education.
Journal of Information Technology Education,
1(3), 201–211.
Roberson, D. N., & Merriam, S. B. (2005). The
self-directed learning process of older, rural adults.
Adult Education Quarterly, 55(4), 269–287.
doi:10.1177/0741713605277372
Schugurensky, D. (2000). The forms of informal
learning: Towards a conceptualization of the field.
NALL Working Paper #19-2000. Retrieved from
http://www.nall.ca/res/19formsofinformal.htm
Selwyn, N. (2007). Web 2.0 applications as al-
ternative environments for informal learning – a
critical review. Organization for Economic and
Co-operation and Development’s CERI-KERIS
International Expert Meeting on ICT and Educa-
tional Performance. Retrieved from http://www.
oecd.org/dataoecd/32/3/39458556.pdf
Steinkuehler, C. A. (2004). Learning in massively
multiplayer online games. In Y. B. Kafai, W.A.
Sandoval, N. Enyedy, A. S. Nixon, & F. Herrera
(Eds.), Proceedings of the Sixth International
Conference of the learning Sciences (pp. 521-528).
Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
855
 Informal Adult Learning in Simulated and Virtual Environments
Tesla, N. (n.d.). The strange life of Nikola
Tesla. Retrieved from http://www.neuronet.pitt.
edu/~bogdan/tesla/tesla.pdf
Thomas, P., & Moisey, S. (2006). Women entrepre-
neurs: Informal learning and the Internet. Journal
of Small Business Entrepreneurs, 19(2), 183–202.
virtual. (n.d.) The American Heritage® Dictionary
of the English Language (4th ed.). (2003). Retrieved
from http://www.thefreedictionary.com/virtual
Wass, V., Bowden, R., & Jackson, N. (2007). The
principles of assessment design . In Jackson, N.,
Jamieson, A., & Khan, A. (Eds.), Assessment
in medical education and training: A practical
guide (pp. 11–26). Abingdon, United Kingdom:
Radcliffe.
Xiaging, Y., & Hongxin, Z. (2007). Online learn-
ing community building: A case study in China.
Canadian Social Science, 3(5), 102–113.
Yorks, L. (2003). Beyond the classroom: Transfer
from work-based learning initiatives . In Holton,
E. F. III, & Baldwin, T. T. (Eds.), Improving learn-
ing transfer in organizations (pp. 138–159). San
Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Zemke, R., & Zemke, S. (1995). Adult learning:
What do we know for sure? Training (New York,
N.Y.), 127, 33–39.
856
KEY TERMS AND DEFINITIONS
Assessment Strategy: A systematic approach
for appraising an educational experience to de-
termine what learning has occurred and how to
improve future learning events.
Avatar: A three-dimension graphical repre-
sentation of self in a virtual environment.
Informal Learning: Learning that occurs
outside of formal and non-formal education, which
is often incidental or unplanned.
Logic Model: A model of change that analyzes
inputs, activities, and outputs to reach desired
outcomes (adapted from Frechtling, 2007).
Robust Virtual Environment: A sophis-
ticated, three dimensional computer-enabled
environment that allows a person to interact with
objects and other people, typically through the
use of an avatar.
Simulation: The use of tools, techniques, and
software to reproduce a real-life environment or
scenario for the purpose of learning.
Virtual Environment: A computer enabled
space that represents aspects of real life.
 857

Chapter 52
Resourcing Equity for
Online Learners:
Supporting Students-with-Limitations
Andreé Robinson-Neal
Azusa Pacific University, USA

ABSTRACT
As postsecondary online learning opportunities continue to expand and interest in such opportuni-
ties continues to increase, online course and program developers and instructors will more frequently
be faced with students from culturally diverse backgrounds, students with educational and physical
limitations, and students with socioeconomic barriers. This chapter will provide a review of existing
research related to online education, including a discussion of the gaps in research as related to online
postsecondary learning. An exploration of the issues related to providing online instruction to diverse
populations of students who come to higher education with educational accommodation needs, as well
as students whose many cultures have communication styles, expectations, and etiquette that may dif-
fer from person to person, is also included. The chapter concludes with suggestions for improvements
as well as emerging trends in creating and maintaining equity in online course and program delivery.

INTRODUCTION when postsecondary online instructors, program

In his forward to a text about online education,
Parker states that there is a philosophy of learning
“that is based on creating a safe place for learn-
ing focused on the needs of the learner” (Hanna,
Glowacki-Dudka, & Conceição-Runlee, 2000).
Such a philosophy takes on new significance
DOI: 10.4018/978-1-61692-906-0.ch052
and course design specialists and online education
administrators consider the needs of students, par-
ticularly those who do not fit the traditional profile.
The development of Internet-based higher educa-
tion programs and courses has birthed the global
classroom, where students with different styles of
learning can come together in collaboration. This
global classroom experience is further complicated

by a lack of cultural neutrality (McLoughlin &
Oliver, 1999), where the term ‘culture’ can be
used as a catch-all to include differences in race
and ethnicity, age, gender, physical ability, and
learning style.
As online programs and courses provide col-
lege and university students with alternatives to
lecture-style, face-to-face education, educators
are called upon to develop content that not only
meets accreditation standards but also delivers
the promised learning objectives to all students.
Postsecondary institutions have different chal-
lenges related to accessibility due to the fact that
their incoming students are not automatically
followed by the identified goals that were a part
of a special education Individualized Education
Program (IEP) from their primary (identified for
the purposes of this chapter as grades kindergarten
through 8) or secondary (identified as grades 9
through 12) education. College and university
admissions documentation provide instruction
for prospective students who wish their high
school IEP to follow them into higher education
but ultimately the decision rests with the student
with regard to which classes and instructors are
made aware of the need for accommodation. As
a result, many faculty members are unaware of
the education needs of all of the students in their
classes. When students whose first language may
not be the language in which the online class is
provided are considered, the concepts of equity
and accommodation become further complicated.
This chapter provides a review of existing
research related to online education, including
a discussion of the gaps in research as related to
online postsecondary learning. There is an explo-
ration of the issues related to providing online in-
struction to diverse populations of students, along
with suggestions for design and implementation
improvements. A discussion of emerging trends in
creating and maintaining equity in online course
and program delivery and assessment is included.
858
Resourcing Equity for Online Learners
BACKGROUND
Special Education
A discussion related to online higher education’s
population of students with special needs in the
United States would not be complete without a
brief overview of the history of special education
in general. The education of children in the United
States with disabilities was not considered in the
compulsory education laws of the 19th century.
The Constitution made each state responsible for
individual laws related to public education and the
supreme courts in each state were at times called
upon to decide whether the laws excluded students
with special needs. The inclusion of children with
special needs was not added to most state legis-
lation until the late 1960s and early 1970s (Yell,
Rogers, & Rogers, 1998), with federal legislation
being enacted to create a more comprehensive law.
Early federal legislation was expanded through
the years to include the Individualized Education
Program (IEP) that remains today as the primary
support document for public education students
with special needs. In addition to programs that
advance inclusion within the public school system
for students with special needs, Lange and Sletten
(2002) found that many students, particularly those
with social and emotional needs, have chosen to
complete their education at alternative schools.
These two researchers discovered that while
alternative schools traditionally offer smaller
class sizes as well as more individualized atten-
tion, special needs students drop out of school at
higher rates than their colleagues in the general
school population who did not have special needs.
The study of elementary and secondary school
success among special needs students is not a
focus of this chapter, but it is important to note
that success and preparation in primary levels of
education often support success in postsecondary
education (Ferrari & Parker, 1992; Pike & Saupe,
2002; Sadler & Tai, 2001; Stanley, 1971). United
States colleges and universities are not held to
Resourcing Equity for Online Learners
the same legal standard as their elementary and
secondary school counterparts but instead follow
the accessibility tenets set forth in the Americans
with Disabilities Act (ADA), which provides a set
of regulations that govern the ways in which gov-
ernment and social agencies, including colleges
and universities, provide services and maintain
equity for students-with-limitations.
Accessibility and Higher Education
The issue of accessibility as related to higher
education can be complicated, specifically due to
the various ways in which the term can be defined.
One use of the term relates to the “acceptable”
and “unacceptable” factors that hinder or sup-
port a student’s participation in higher education
(Johnstone, 2003), such as family economic status,
gender, race, ethnicity, or religion. For example,
if a student’s family does not have the financial
means to send her to a university, she may decide
either to not go into higher education at all, or
work part-time and attend classes at the local
junior college instead: economic status becomes
an unacceptable factor that hinders this student’s
ability to go to university. Johnstone’s work does
not mention educational ability or limitation
(more commonly referred to as “disability”) as
one of the unacceptable factors that may be an
issue for a prospective higher education student.
However, it should be noted that disabilities that
limit a student’s ability to function in a particular
class or program can also be identified as a barrier.
Disability is a fluid concept subject to method-
ological bias, the distortion of cultural bias, and a
specific context. . . Due to medical advances, there
are growing numbers of the “well” disabled who
are demanding access to opportunities for educa-
tion and training, work, and leisure. (Rocco, 2002)
Gadbow (2001) identifies this group of “well
disabled” persons and defines the group as one
including adult learners with different needs
whose disability should considered along with
other factors such as age, ethnicity, language of
origin, culture, and so forth by course developers
and instructors as they create their courses and
programs. Wagner and Blackorby (1996) sug-
gest that postsecondary educators face a unique
challenge with special needs students because
their rate of attendance at community colleges,
four-year institutions, or universities has been very
low but is rising. As higher education institutions
move more deeply into the use of the Internet for
synchronous and asynchronous instruction, the
use of the term “accessibility” takes on a differ-
ent connotation.
Online Education and
Special Needs Learners
There are federal and state laws that include
various amendments, including sections 504
and 508 of the Vocational Rehabilitation Act,
the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), and
the Assistive Technology Act, that have been
interpreted by the US Department of Education
to encourage public and private colleges and
universities to provide reasonable accessibility
to online education (Edmonds, 2004). However,
since there is no mandated law requiring higher
education institutions to develop their websites or
online programs and courses with consideration
of accessibility for special needs adults, barri-
ers to equitable education exist, such as display
formats that are not compatible with accessibility
software or web pages that cannot be translated
into different languages. Such barriers are often
the unintentional result of more focus being placed
on online program or course development and less
focus being placed on the educational process and
outcomes of students (Schacter, 1999).
The Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA)
was created to protect individuals with special
needs from mistreatment and discrimination.
One area in which the Act falls short involves
the elimination of barriers which are not physi-
859

cal, such as the attitudes of others that special
needs students often face (Agada & Dauenheimer,
2001). As such barriers are eliminated in online
and traditional classroom settings, students with
special needs are better positioned to benefit and
learn in a more equitable environment. Equity has
been defined in terms of equal treatment, equal
access, and equal outcome (Percy, 1989). These
definitions of equity will serve as the framework
for the discussion of issues related to supporting
online students-with-limitations.
LIMITATIONS
Identifying Limitations
Who are these online higher education students-
with-limitations? In the context of this discussion,
the term limitations is broadly defined to include
• Persons with physical and emotional
disabilities,
• Persons entering college or university with
learning disabilities as identified through
a primary or secondary school assessment
and indicated on an IEP,
• Persons whose first language is not the lan-
guage in which the program or course is
taught,
• Persons whose cultural or ethnic back-
ground gives them a different perspective
on the processes of the course,
• Persons whose educational background
gives them a different perspective on the
processes of the course,
• Persons whose socioeconomic condition
limits their level of success, and
• Persons who could be viewed as having a
limitation due to a lack of technical prow-
ess or who do not have current versions of
needed software.
860
Resourcing Equity for Online Learners
The ADA defines a disabled individual as
a person who has a physical or mental impairment
that substantially limits one or more major life
activities, a person who has a history or record
of such an impairment, or a person who is per-
ceived by others as having such an impairment.
(N.A., 2005)
The ADA does not identify specific impair-
ments in its definition but has created this broad
description that can then be interpreted by medical
professionals for the purposes of identifying the
disability when requested.
The National Joint Committee on Learning
Disabilities (NJCLD) defines learning disabilities
specifically as neurological disorders that may
cause an individual to struggle with reading,
writing, and comprehension (LDOnline, 2008).
The NJCLD notes that learning disabilities are
distinct and may exist in tandem with limitations
that can be defined as physical, emotional, or
environmental.
Individuals interested in learning a new lan-
guage may take a course in which they learn rules
of grammar, proper pronunciation, and language
usage. The experience of students whose first
language differs from the language in which an
online course or program is presented does not
include an opportunity to learn the language
context, potentially creating a disadvantage for
students who may be misled by colloquialisms,
language-specific nuances, jargon, and inadvertent
misrepresentations.
A student’s culture or ethnicity affects the
way he or she approaches the course. Tu (2001)
provides an example of the experience of Chinese
students participating in an online program. The
research suggests that because Chinese students
use social context clues to communicate, online
programs or courses that do not take their method
of interaction into account may contribute to a
lack of success. Other researchers suggest that
Resourcing Equity for Online Learners
sociocultural contexts (Warschauer, 1998) and
intercultural interactions (Goodfellow, Lea,
Gonzalez, & Mason, 2001) are important con-
siderations as colleges and universities develop
online programs and courses that are available to
a global audience.
Consider the student who comes from a low-
performing school but whose academic ability was
enough to give him or her access to a college or
university. Most institutions admit students with
grades that fall within an established range in
order to present the option of higher education to
a broader group than only to the highest achievers.
However, when placed in a class with students
whose primary and secondary schools were more
rigorous, the student from a low-performing school
may be working with an educational deficit he or
she never knew existed.
Socioeconomic conditions can also be a barrier
for postsecondary students. For example, those
who have to work in order to pay for their educa-
tion may find themselves struggling to develop
a schedule that includes enough time for rest,
eating, exercise, socialization, and studying. As
mentioned previously, students whose successes
in less-than-stellar primary and secondary grades
were enough for admission to college or university
may find themselves at an educational disadvan-
tage; such early educational experiences are at
times due to the socioeconomic issues affecting
a community or city rather than poor choices by
the students themselves.
Technical prowess is needed to navigate higher
education websites. Quick links, Flash-technology
menu options, and a lack of regular text links may
make it difficult for a student with certain types of
limitations to find general information about an
institution’s programs if the student is not skilled
in navigating sites with such dynamic content or
do not have up-to-date computer hardware. There
may be college or university web pages or third-
party websites that students need to access for
online coursework that are not compatible with
the traditionally used assistive technologies, such
as screen readers or voice recognition programs.
ISSUES WITH ONLINE LEARNING
The Institution
As use of the Internet continues to grow, colleges
and universities are increasing and improving their
web presence through updated websites. Many
of these institutions have added online programs
and courses to their existing catalog of traditional
“on-the-ground” courses. The institutions that
do not have unlimited budget lines for technol-
ogy upgrades such as additional servers, new
software, and additional staff members often opt
for third-party solutions. These third-party solu-
tions, such as Pearson’s eCollege or Blackboard’s
e-learning environment, are often course-building
platforms where colleges and universities pay for
space. Faculty members or others charged with
building online programs or courses use these
technologies and are able to incorporate audio files
and text links in order to provide equal access to
students-with-limitations. Often called a course
or program shell, the builder uses the platform to
make individual spaces that faculty use to store
their course information. Together, the spaces form
a series of online classrooms. One issue that arises
with online offerings created in this way is that
the person charged with creating the program or
course shell does not consider the potential need
of students-with-limitations, because he or she
does not teach the program or course or because
such needs are not an immediate concern.
The Faculty
Consider a scenario: the university has hired a new
instructor to teach an online leadership course. The
instructor has been given the information she needs
to access the shell of her course in order to begin
adding documents, images, and videos. She finds
861

the university’s platform to be quite sophisticated
and dynamic, and because she is knowledgeable
about technology, has no problems uploading pa-
pers, Flash videos, and photographic images. On
the first day of class she receives a message from
the university’s student services office informing
her that one of her incoming students would re-
quire accommodation due to vision impairment.
She calls the university’s information technology
department to find out if the online classroom site
is ADA-compliant but the technician she talks
with reviews his documentation, cannot find an
answer and directs her to the online platform’s
support desk. The support desk representative
reviews her documentation, finds that the platform
is ADA-compliant, collects the instructor’s email
address, and sends her information detailing the
ADA compliance. The instructor is satisfied. At
the start of the second week of class, she notices
that one of her students has not logged in to any
of the assignments or videos. She calls the student
and is embarrassed and upset by the response she
receives. Which of the following responses might
she have encountered?
1. The student informs her that he is only able to
access a computer at the local branch of the
library or at one of the on-campus libraries.
His work schedule has not afforded him the
opportunity to get to one of the university
libraries and the security settings on the local
library computers block the video downloads
required for the assignments.
2. The student informs her that he has not
been able to download the videos because
his accessibility software, which he has not
been able to update, could not translate the
newer format in which the videos had been
created.
3. The student informs her that although his
computer hardware and software meet
both the university and the online course
website requirements, he had not been able
to access the assignments due to a difficulty
862
Resourcing Equity for Online Learners
using his translation software. He explained
that English was his first language and the
translations from the language in which the
course was written to English were not very
clear. He also mentioned that the documents
were not at all compatible with his transla-
tion program.
4. The student informs her that he experienced
technical issues and was unable to get help
from the help desk resources.
5. The student informs her that his screen reader
was not compatible with the institution’s
website.
The answer to the aforementioned question is
“all five:” the online instructor could experience
each of the fictitious scenarios above if she does
not have a complete understanding of how to
ensure that her course is accessible for students
with various kinds of limitations.
There are countless online instructors working
at thousands of colleges and universities around
the world who have likely had an experience
with a student who has limitations. Many of these
instructors may never realize that one or more of
their students operates through a limitation. The
scenarios above provide examples of plausible
interactions with students who are dealing with
possible socioeconomic barriers, possible tech-
nology barriers, or possible language barriers.
However, the story of this fictitious instructor
suggests that she was going to need to prepare
for a student with a visual impairment and in the
end, the student whose work was missing because
of a limitation was not necessarily a student with
the visual impairment, but could instead have
been a student with a different type of limitation,
thus illustrating the difficulty an online instructor
could encounter.
The Student
It is important to note that college and university
students who have limitations are not required to
Resourcing Equity for Online Learners
provide documentation related to the limitation
or to request accommodation. Moreover, there
are countless individuals who may not have been
assessed for a limitation and who made their way
through the early school years with a measure of
success, only to encounter difficulties during the
postsecondary education experience (Baird et al.,
2006; Levinson, 2006; Vaughn & Fuchs, 2003).
A first-year student graduates second in her
high school class and arrives on the college cam-
pus, surprised to see that she has been placed in a
developmental education course. She expresses
her surprise to a counselor, who has to explain
that despite graduating as salutatorian from her
school, her scores on the entrance exam require
that she be placed in developmental courses. Plac-
ing students in developmental courses presents
its own challenges, particularly when the student
in question does not understand why such place-
ment is necessary. Socioeconomic barriers such
as familial poverty or substandard primary and/
or secondary education may influence whether
developmental education courses are deemed
necessary before a student’s entry into traditional
level and online coursework is permitted. College
and university staff members who have the respon-
sibility of working with students whose deficits
are more socioeconomic or cultural in nature
must understand that there more limitations than
those identified by ADA definition or through an
established IEP and should be prepared to direct
students to needed supports.
Institution, Faculty, and
Student Connection
Where do the higher education institution, mem-
bers of the faculty, and population of students-with-
limitations connect? There are five conditions
which should be met for a successful connection
between these three groups:
1. When the college or university has an addi-
tion of online programs or courses, the plat-
form upon which the programs or courses are
built must be, at minimum, ADA-compliant.
2. Online program or course developers must
create shells that allow for accommodations,
such as captioned videos and plain-text links.
3. As online course instructors add content to
the shell, they must be prepared to include
content that can be detected by screen
readers, captioned videos that can translate
audio into text that appears or is read in the
student’s preferred language, and when re-
quired, links to documents that can be viewed
and/or translated easily by accommodation
software.
4. Online course instructors must present
themselves to students in an open fashion,
showing their willingness to learn.
5. Students-with-limitations must be willing to
discuss their needs with the online instructor.
As college and university leaders become more
committed to advancing their institutions’ posi-
tions in the global marketplace, there must also
be a commitment to the cost involved in adding
or building a robust online environment. Devel-
opers of the online program or course shell often
serve as the technical experts at the institution,
since it becomes their responsibility to stay most
current on software changes and updates. Further,
as developers work closely with the institution’s
information technology team there must be a con-
certed effort to inform all members of the admin-
istration, staff and faculty members, and students
about updates and changes. Online instructors
and students however form the informational
foundation upon which the institution’s decisions
should be dependent. Student limitations, such as
vision or other impairment, language barrier, or
educational impairment, influence the marriage
between accommodations that should be built into
the program or course and the needs of the institu-
tion as related to online education. If the instructor
discovers an accommodation need that he or she
cannot build into the online program or course,
863

the shell developer must be informed and work
with the information technology team in order to
make possible the accommodation or a reasonable
work-around. Instructors should work closely with
students to help identify what accommodations
may work, rather than making assumptions about
appropriate supports. Institutional leaders must
be prepared to invest in the updates or technical
assistance needed for an online environment that
is compatible with the needs of the institution,
can be accessed by all students, is or can be made
compatible when accommodations are necessary,
and is adaptable as technology advances occur.
Research Gaps
It is apparent that accommodations for college
and university students-with-limitations can be a
complicated endeavor for institutions that strive
to provide equal access to higher education. The
existing body of literature related to equity in
education focuses on accessibility in primary and
secondary institutions (Brown, Kerr, & Wilson,
1997; Lange & Sletten, 2002; Schacter, 1999),
transitioning students-with-limitations from
secondary to postsecondary education (Wagner
& Blackorby, 1996), and providing electronic
versions of textbooks to “blind, dyslexic, and
otherwise impaired college students” (Kolowich,
2009).
There exists a small body of literature related
to the needs of students-with-limitations who are
attending or planning to attend postsecondary
institutions and participate in online programs
and courses that is specific to particular colleges
or universities. This literature mainly provides
direction for students-with-limitations who are
interested in attending those specific colleges
and universities and what sort of support they can
expect upon their arrival on campus. Researchers
have identified a need for responsibility in acces-
sibility (Edmonds, 2004; Opitz, 2002), as well as
for program and course design that includes con-
sideration for cultural differences (McLaughlin,
864
Resourcing Equity for Online Learners
1999; McLoughlin & Oliver, 1999). Additionally,
researchers are interested in appropriate teaching
and support methods for postsecondary students-
with-limitations (Gadbow, 2001).
The next section on emerging trends includes
more discussion about this existing literature as
well as suggestions for improving equity and
support for students-with-limitations.
EMERGING TRENDS
Equity
Percy (1989) discusses and defines equity from
the standpoint of the implementation of civil rights
policies in the United States. He identifies three
“equity paradigms” (pp. 245-246):
• Equal treatment “requires that all persons
be evaluated by neutral rules and standards,
regardless of personal characteristics.”
• Equal access suggests that obstacles which
serve to prevent certain individuals or
groups from taking “advantage of social
opportunities” must be eliminated.
• Equal outcome requires that the conditions
of “protected classes” of persons be made
equal to those of non-protected classes of
persons.
These three categories of equity can be used as
a lens through which the support of students-with-
limitations can be viewed and will be interwoven
through the sections that follow.
Addressing Accessibility
Students-with-limitations who are considering
their postsecondary education options should work
closely with an advisor or counselor in order to
review various opportunities and to put in place
the documentation needed for accommodation.
Students who decide to disclose a disability or
Resourcing Equity for Online Learners
limitation to their postsecondary institution may
not receive the exact level of services that were
provided by their primary or secondary school.
Rather, the higher education institution is required
to ensure that a student-with-limitation is not
discriminated against (equal treatment) and that
equal access to programs and activities is pro-
vided. A potential pitfall here occurs in the way
Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act defines the
term “equal access.” Section 504 indicates that
equal access is required to be provided by the
institution as long as such access does not cause
an unreasonable burden to provide or does not
require a substantive change in the program or
activity itself (see for example, West, 2006, p. 88).
This can become an issue because the college or
university itself determines how an unreasonable
burden is identified.
Ramsay, Tranter, Charlton, and Sumner (1998)
note that there are “social, educational, and
economic factors” that stand as limitations for
students and that for them transcend the physical
and emotional limitations experienced by others
(p. 20). They advocate for educational reform that
is designed to minimize, if not begin to eliminate,
issues of unequal treatment and access. The issue
raised here is that students who have limitations
such as socioeconomic barriers and obstacles
that are not quantified by education-specific or
medical records too often struggle in postsecond-
ary education settings and are many times not
afforded accommodations or support. Students
who are living with such barriers and limitations
may not disclose their experiences and may not
realize that administrators and staff and faculty
members at colleges and universities are willing
to work with them to determine supports. By not
discussing their particular situations when limita-
tions affect their coursework, these students may
potentially be misunderstood and categorized as
unmotivated or lazy.
How then does a college or university provide
equal access in a manner that does not create an
unreasonable burden for the institution? Higher
education institutions often invest in various
assistive technologies such as screen readers,
Braille calculators, telephone amplifiers, and
in-class aids such as note takers and interpreters
(Opitz, 2002), thereby minimizing the cost for
the student-with-limitation who otherwise would
have to completely bear the burden of supplying
their own accommodation. In order to address so-
cioeconomic barriers, postsecondary institutions
must stay abreast of local, regional, and national
economic trends in order to offer broad-stroke
solutions. For example, the leadership at Azusa
Pacific University, a private evangelical institu-
tion located in southern California, sent an email
communication to its entire student body in order
to inquire about economic barriers; the university
learned of the needs of its students and was able
to provide varying levels of support. This simple
method of communication dealt specifically
with economic need but could be used to reach
students with other limitations as well. Posing a
general question about need that is cushioned in
a relevant explanation and addressing it from the
institution’s leadership is one way a college or
university might assess the needs of both students
who have identified a particular limitation as well
as those who have not indicated a barrier in the
past, can determine which students have some sort
of limitation, and can develop a plan for support
that also provides equal treatment to all students.
Addressing Cultural Issues
It is vital to understand that cultural differences can
be identified as limitations and that issues related
to culture or ethnicity can be seen as barriers to
success for students whose contexts are different
from those of the institution, of the instructor, or
of the other students. In her study of cross-cultural
online teaching, Chambers (2003) examines the
online postsecondary experience of non-English
speakers and found numerous stumbling blocks,
including difficulty understanding social and
educational norms, language proficiency, and lack
865

of attention to the students’ own cultural perspec-
tives and values by faculty members. Chambers
goes on to conclude that despite these difficulties,
students whose culture and language differ from
that in which the online institution is grounded
will be limited but are not themselves “deficient”:
Such disadvantage is likely to undermine the
students’ performance, affecting their ability
to ‘make the grade’, and it is socio-cultural in
nature. Accordingly, there is no justification for
regarding these students as ‘deficient’; rather, they
are diversely, and richly, different. (Chambers,
2003, p. p. 261)
An understanding of “cultural otherness”
(Goodfellow et al., 2001), or the juxtaposition
of student to institutional culture, is necessary as
college and university instructors and program
developers create online courses and programs
that support both equal treatment and equal access
and also foster success for a multicultural student
body. Despite being home to a myriad of ethnici-
ties and cultures, the United States has a history
of marginalization of culturally diverse groups
with regard to education (Giroux & Trend, 1992).
As McLaughlin (1999) suggests, what may be a
widely-accepted practice in one culture may be
inappropriate in another, and such a disparity may
go unnoticed in an online environment.
Institutions of higher education, whether
through “brick and mortar” or online classrooms,
offer programs and courses that are designed to
produce a result. Often the syllabus provides the
student with a list of objectives that clearly out-
line what he or she can expect to receive by the
end of the course. Upon reading the objective,
students whose cultures or languages of origin
differ from the predominant culture or language
of the institution or from that of other students in
the course would most likely still expect to reach
the same result, or an equal outcome. However,
as Warschauer (1998) notes, online technologies
are often “implemented in a restrictive teacher-
866
Resourcing Equity for Online Learners
centered fashion, and that ethnic and language mi-
nority students may be least likely to use computer
networking in ways that enhance critical thinking
and collaborative problem solving” (p. 85). A stu-
dent who participates in online programs or courses
can be identified as a student-with-limitation if he
or she struggles to attain an outcome similar to
that attained by his or her classmates, particularly
when the struggle is due to the student being a
“cultural other”. Tu (2001) found that Chinese
students in online courses often struggled to
reach the expected outcome, not because of the
difficulty of the coursework or due to educational
deficits of the particular students, but because the
online method of delivery did not provide the
social context cues in culturally relevant ways.
The students were unfamiliar with the expected
writing style, experienced culture conflict, had
difficulty with social interactions, and struggled
with language competence (pp. 52-56).
Addressing Teaching Style
What part does teaching play in the experience
of the online postsecondary student-with-limita-
tions? It has been found that many online programs
and courses are little more than computer-based
versions of the traditional in-class offering
(Johnson & Aragon, 2003). There is an often
unspoken expectation that students will absorb
the information presented and through success-
ful completion of tests show their understanding
and comprehension of the material (Swan, 2003).
For a student who lives with dyslexia, Attention
Deficit Disorder (ADD), or other disability that
is problematic to the educational process, success
in such an online environment might be elusive
without support from the instructor who is charged
with providing equal treatment.
There are often students in face-to-face post-
secondary courses who do not fully engage in
interactions with the instructor or other students.
This lack of interaction may be due to many
different reasons, including the student’s lack
Resourcing Equity for Online Learners
of preparedness, lack of interest or initiative, or
shyness. Consider the student-with-limitations and
the list of reasons can grow to include discomfort
with the style of interaction, lack of understanding
with regard to colloquialisms and jokes, or an in-
ability to access the material and prepare for class.
In a traditional classroom setting an instructor can
pick up on which student is not participating and
can address him or her immediately. The online
instructor may notice a lack of participation but
determining its cause or addressing the issue may
not be as easy as it is for the traditional class-
room instructor, who can for example observe
body language. Additionally, online instructors
tend not to engage students in “‘challenge and
explain’ cycles of interaction that are thought to
characterize good interchanges” in face-to-face
courses (Curtis & Lawson, 2001, p. 31).
In an article about the use of assistive tech-
nologies with primary and secondary students,
Hasslebring and Williams-Glaser (2000) discuss
the use of augmentive and alternative communica-
tion (AAC) devices such as synthetic and digital
speech devices (p. 110). Since such technologies
can be used in postsecondary classroom settings
as well, it is important for instructors to be pre-
pared to explain or address questions from other
students about the use of assistive technologies
(e.g., if students notice a digital voice on confer-
ence calls, if students are asked to submit work
for peer review in a certain format that can be
read by assistive devices).
Online course instructors must be prepared to
work with students who have learning difficulties,
physical or other disabilities, or sociocultural is-
sues, just as their physically co-located colleagues
must be prepared. Both traditional and online in-
structors face challenges in this regard, especially
as related to those students who do not request
support or accommodation or who do not know
what assistance is needed.
SUGGESTIONS FOR IMPROVEMENT
Recognizing and understanding the needs of
postsecondary students-with-limitations is only
the beginning. Colleges and universities must go
beyond recognition to action as it pertains to creat-
ing and maintaining equity by providing support
to the people on their campuses who build online
programs, to the faculty members who teach on-
line courses, and to the students who participate
in online offerings.
Program and Course Support
In order to provide online programs and courses
that offer equal treatment, equal access, and equal
outcomes for all students, college and university
leaders must be prepared to invest in appropri-
ate supports. The persons charged with building
online programs should consider the following
factors when creating an online classroom platform
(McLoughlin & Oliver, 1999):
• The type of online space selected should
allow for the creation of community, where
students and faculty members can access
the information needed for the particular
program or course. Students and instruc-
tors should also be able to access supports
external to the program or course, such as
technical assistance.
• The online space should be flexible enough
to reach a cross-cultural population con-
sisting of individuals with varied cognitive
styles.
• The finished product, or what the stu-
dent experiences as the online classroom,
should be designed to incorporate com-
ponents that promote equity in learning
outcomes.
All postsecondary students should know where
and how to access the resources they need. Students
enrolled in traditional on-campus classes are able
867

to enter a student services area to ask questions
or be visited by an information technology staff
member to get help with a computer issue but
as more geographically diverse students join the
institution through online offerings such options
are not always readily available. Providing infor-
mation and technical support, along with “meta-
cognitive supports” that “enhance [the student’s]
ability to study online and facilitate their access
to and retention of knowledge . . . can increase
students’ confidence, reduce stress, and enhance
their learning experience” (Moisey & Hughes,
2008, p. 427). Having such information may help
students-with-limitations better prepare for the
online experience.
In addition to providing all online students with
appropriate access to supports, it is very important
that the individuals responsible for building the
online program provide clear directions regarding
whom to contact when technical problems arise.
Unclear direction and a lack of support, known
as a “digital pothole” (Fisher & Baird, 2005),
can cause students to miss assignments and lose
participation time as well as contribute to frus-
tration with the processes involved in taking an
online course.
Online platform developers must communicate
information about technical support contacts and
so forth to administrators and faculty members
in a manner that is understandable and clear in
order to present a unified front to students. Stu-
dents enrolled in online courses are more likely
to ask their instructor about whom to contact for
technical support, for example, since the instructor
serves as their primary connection to the college
or university. Online environments give the im-
pression of synchronous communication and as
such some students expect an immediate answer
to a question or feel that they have been ignored
when the answer does not come right away; they
then work their way up the ladder of authority,
often posing their question to an upper-level ad-
ministrator when the instructor does not respond
as quickly as desired. It is important that everyone
868
Resourcing Equity for Online Learners
at the institution be able to direct students to the
resources they need.
Instructor and Student Support
Hasslebring and Williams-Glaser (2000, p. 118)
found that many online program and course in-
structors have not received an appropriate level
of technology support or education themselves. It
is vital that faculty members understand and can
function comfortably in the established online
environment. Training seminars and in-service
opportunities must be held regularly since avail-
able technologies are always changing. This author
suggests that such seminars and opportunities
should provide instructors with
• information that is specific to the hardware
provided by the institution,
• information that is specific to the particular
online program or course platform,
• information related to the ADA compli-
ance of the particular online program or
course platform, and
• information about externally-compatible
software and online programs, such as wi-
ki’s, asynchronous social networking sites,
and Massive Multi-Player environments
(i.e., Second Life).
Instructors who are well-prepared in this way
will be better equipped to respond to the needs
of their students.
With particular regard to online students-with-
limitations, instructors must be prepared to adjust
their attitudes about how students learn and how
they demonstrate what has been learned (Gadbow,
2002). At the same time however, instructors
should not feel pressured to know everything about
all available assistive technologies, all possible
special needs, or all available resources that their
students-with-limitations might use. Instructors
should remain open to learning from their students
and should use what they learn to inform admin-
Resourcing Equity for Online Learners
istrators, who can work to change longstanding
policies that may hinder the educational process.
Online instructors provide different services
to their students. Goodyear, Salmon, et al. (2001)
identify eight roles that are involved in online
teaching (p. 69):
1. Process facilitator: facilitates online activi-
ties that support student learning.
2. Advisor-counselor: offers advice or coun-
seling individually to students to help them
engage in the course.
3. Assessor: provides grades, feedback, and
validation.
4. Researcher: helps produce new knowledge
that is related to course content.
5. Content facilitator: directly facilitates the
student understanding of course content.
6. Technologist: makes and supports tech-
nological choices that improve the online
learning environment for students.
7. Designer: creates appropriate online learning
tasks.
8. Manager-administrator: focuses on issues
such as registration, security, record-keep-
ing, and so forth.
Each of these roles is important for all students
but become particularly vital for the success of
students-with-limitations. This author identifies
some additional roles that online instructors must
fill that will contribute to the success of their
special needs students, such as
• Co-learner: asks students what accommo-
dations will work for them.
• Advocate: works to have required accom-
modations accepted by the institution.
• Creative consultant: provides suggestions
for accommodation that the student may
not have considered.
• Specialized education coach: fills in the
gaps by responding to questions about the
technology needed for the course or pro-
viding answers related to issues that stu-
dents cannot readily locate.
Gadbow (2001) suggests that instructors
should also be prepared to connect their special
needs students with training in order to maximize
the students’ ability to use assistive technologies.
Stodel, Thompson, and MacDonald (2006) and
Lim (2004) encourage instructors to coach their
students in online learning, which can serve as a
particularly potent form of support for students.
For example, a student whose first language is
different from the language in which the course
is presented would benefit from gaining a better
understanding of the types of exchanges in which
he or she can expect to participate. Through
coaching an instructor can help a student with a
language difference learn how to navigate through
asynchronous discussion boards. Coaching can
also help students who are struggling with so-
cioeconomic barriers by providing information
about supportive resources and time management
techniques, and can connect students who have
learning deficits with tutors and other resources.
The work of Vatrapu and Suthers (2007) and
Vatrapu (2008) suggests that online learning is not
experienced in the same way by people of differ-
ent cultures. Instructors must also consider culture
and ethnicity, taking care to minimize potentially
offensive or exclusionary language and behavior
within the online environment (McPherson &
Nunes, 2004). Further, instructors should develop
a clear understanding of barriers to success that
are related to culture or ethnicity in order to de-
termine possible supports and accommodations.
Most importantly, each student is an individual
who brings a unique personality, set of beliefs,
and varied experiences into the classroom. Online
instructors will do well to remember not to lump
students into homogenous groups by program or
course but to recognize that individual differences
may be a result of gender, age, ability, ethnicity, and
culture. Instructors can incorporate techniques,
such as providing content in multiple formats by
869

including audio links, PowerPoint presentations,
and captioned videos. Such techniques can help
the instructor create an online environment that
is equitable (Johnson & Aragon, 2003). Further,
the addition of content in multiple formats will
give students with different types of limitations
various ways to retrieve course content.
Equity in Assessment of Outcomes
Suggestions about and research related to creating
equity in online program and course delivery has
been interwoven though the preceding sections, but
in what ways can instructors create and maintain
equity in the assessment of course outcomes?
Types of assessment for online courses can
include examinations, papers or other capstones,
and participation in threaded discussions. As men-
tioned previously, it is important for instructors
to be open to new ideas and ways of demonstrat-
ing that the learning objectives have been met
by all students. An example of equal treatment
would dictate that a capstone project from a
student-with-limitation that is presented in an
agreed-upon format for accommodation must be
assessed in a similar way to that used to assess a
capstone project from a student who has no need
for accommodation. An example of equal access
to assessment would dictate that when a course
examination is offered through an online format
that is inadvertently presented in a way that is
incompatible with a student’s assistive technol-
ogy, the student will be given the opportunity to
complete the examination in another way. An
example of equal course assessment outcomes
would dictate that participation in a threaded
discussion by a student-with-limitation will show
that he or she has received and been able to process
the course information and associated dialogue of
the course to an extent that is similar to students
who did not require accommodation.
Online instructors may also consider adding
accommodation-specific language in the course
syllabus. Since the syllabus is the students’ primary
870
Resourcing Equity for Online Learners
guide to the course, it can be used to provide all
students with information that will alert them to
the fact that their instructor understands learning
differences, is knowledgeable of accommodation
resources, and has incorporated multiple method-
ologies into the course. This information is useful
for the student who uses assistive technologies, or
who would benefit from the flexibility of having
the information translated into his or her language
of origin, as well as for the student who would
appreciate options in how to receive or provide
coursework. The syllabus can be used to instruct
students on the procedures required by the insti-
tution for official accommodation in the course
as well as providing them with the instructor’s
contact information in the event that the student
has a need that is not addressed by ADA standards.
For example, a student may request tutoring but
does not have an IEP-identified learning disability
and by providing contact information the instructor
can connect the student to the resources he or she
needs. Instructors may also be able to assist their
students-with-limitations by allowing additional
time for course completion, by providing timing
accommodations for examinations, or by sup-
porting the student’s work through an interpreter
(Moisey & Hughes, 2008, p. 436).
The instructor is one of the most important
resources for the student-with-limitation who
has decided to take an online course. In addition
to helping the student request needed accom-
modations through the college or university’s
assessment process, the instructor can connect
directly with a student whose needs are not readily
identified and can work individually to create an
equitable educational experience.
FUTURE TRENDS
In 1971, Sewell suggested that colleges and
universities were exclusively responsible for
training workers for future employment oppor-
tunities, stating specifically that “[t]hose who
Resourcing Equity for Online Learners
fail to obtain this training, for whatever reasons,
will be severely disadvantaged in the competition
for jobs and in many other areas of social life as
well” (p. 794). The research of Pallas, Natriello,
and McDill (1989)suggests that there will be a
marked increase in the population of children who
will be educationally disadvantaged in the United
States through the year 2020 (p. 19) and echoes
Sewell by suggesting that this increase will not
only continue to contribute to existing educational
problems in the primary and secondary years but
will affect the larger economic, social, and politi-
cal existence (p. 21).
As 2009 comes to a close, colleges and universi-
ties across the United States are facing budgetary
restrictions, increases in overall enrollments com-
plicated by capping, and human resource issues;
how then can these institutions prepare themselves
for an influx of students-with-limitations? How
will the needs of students-with-limitations be
addressed, particularly in online programs and
courses?
Disabled student enrolment reflects the relation-
ship to diversity countries and, more particularly,
higher education institutions may have. Accessibil-
ity to higher education is easier if policy makers
understand diversity as a source of economic and
social enrichment, and the development of human
capital as a condition of the development of a
knowledge-based society. This standpoint does not
consider disability as a type of deviance but as a
factor of diversity amongst others which must be
taken into account to foster economic and social
well-being towards social cohesion by making
HEI’s physically, socially and pedagogically ac-
cessible. (Ebersold, 2008, p. 225)
One of the most innovative trends in fostering
this social well-being while providing service to
students-with-limitations is the development of
partnerships with community groups in order
to offer ancillary services. As higher education
institutions move forward and include more
students-with-limitations, efforts must be made
to consider “disability” or “difference” in ways
similar to considerations of “diversity”—that
students-with-limitations are not a group to be
‘dealt with’ but rather are a group of individu-
als with needs that may or may not be different
from any other individual on campus. Instructors
provide colleges and universities with front-line
access to the needs of students-with-limitations,
in that the instructor has the primary opportunity
to develop a relationship with his/her student and
can work with administrators and student services
personnel who then can connect the student with
community resources if needed (Jones & Collier,
1990, p. 3).
It has been suggested that IHEs should provide
more mentoring opportunities and synchronous
support, such as tutoring services, for students in
online courses and programs (Funk, 2005). Ad-
ditionally, institutions that have instructors who
are willing to understand their online students,
who take life situations into account, who make
themselves and appropriate resources available,
who use technology resources to create a sense of
community, and who offer courses and programs
that are accessible will most likely see the greatest
decreases in attrition for students-with-limitations
(Diaz, 2002; Funk, 2005; Galusha, 1997; Rovai
& Jordan, 2004) Institutions that are planning
for an increased enrollment of students in online
programs and courses must also be prepared with
appropriate infrastructure for instructors. Many
institutions adapt face-to-face offerings to a dis-
tance environment, yet do not adequately prepare
the instructors to understand and operate in differ-
ent ways (Howell, Williams, & Lindsay, 2003).
Most notably, Howell, Williams, and Lindsay
(2003) suggest that in addition to providing the
technical support necessary for new and innova-
tive programs, addressing the needs of all online
learners, and addressing the concerns of faculty
members and administrators, the greatest trend in
the future of online education is patience.
871

CONCLUSION
As colleges and universities expand their offerings
to include more online programs and courses, it
is important that consideration be given to the
students-with-limitations who register. Much
of the current literature encompasses research
related to software and technology in primary
and secondary school classrooms and the appli-
cation of assistive technology with special needs
children. While the available literature related to
postsecondary students-with-limitations is not par-
ticularly extensive, there are excellent resources
related to cultural and linguistic issues and the
online educational experience. This chapter brings
applicable special needs literature together with
literature related to assistive technology, higher
education and accommodation, and cultural con-
text in order to provide an overview of the types
of limitations that are likely to be encountered by
college and university personnel.
Online course instructors must be prepared to
work with students who bring their past educa-
tional histories, learning difficulties, emotional and
physical barriers, languages of origin, sociocul-
tural contexts, and socioeconomic issues to class.
Instructors who recognize that each of these pieces
can represent a limitation should be equipped to
respond by being prepared to connect students
with on-campus accommodation resources and
with the offices or staff members where social
supports are provided. Instructors should also be
prepared to include multiple ways of connecting to
necessary educational materials when they create
their online programs and courses. By presenting
an online environment that can accommodate the
needs of students-with-limitations, instructors will
create an educational experience that provides
equity to all students.
872
Resourcing Equity for Online Learners
REFERENCES
Agada, J., & Dauenheimer, D. (2001). Beyond
ADA: Crossing borders to understand the psy-
chosocial needs of students with disabilities. In
H. A. Thompson (Ed.), Crossing the divide: Pro-
ceedings of the tenth national conference of the
Association of College and Research Libraries.
Denver, Colorado: American Library Association.
Baird, G., Simonoff, E., Pickeles, A., Chandler,
S., Loucas, T., & Meldrum, D. (2006). Preva-
lence of disorders of the autism spectrum in a
population cohort of children in South Thames:
the Special Needs and Autism Project (SNAP).
Lancet, 368(9531), 210–215. doi:10.1016/S0140-
6736(06)69041-7
Brown, D. J., Kerr, S., & Wilson, D. R. (1997).
Virtual environments in special needs education.
Communications of the ACM, 40(8), 72–75.
doi:10.1145/257874.257891
Chambers, E. (2003). Cultural imperial-
ism or pluralism?: Cross-cultural electronic
teaching in the humanities. Arts and Hu-
manities in Higher Education, 2(3), 249–264.
doi:10.1177/14740222030023003
Curtis, D. D., & Lawson, M. J. (2001). Exploring
collaborative online learning. [JALN]. Journal of
Asynchronous Learning Networks, 5(1), 21–34.
Diaz, D. P. (2002). Online drop rates revisited.
The Technology Source, 93-106.
Ebersold, S. (2008). Adapting higher education
to the needs of disabled students: Developments,
challenges and prospects . In Ischinger, B.
(Ed.), Higher Education to 2030: Demography
(Vol. 1, pp. 221–242). Paris: OECD Publishing.
doi:10.1787/9789264040663-9-en
Edmonds, C. D. (2004). Providing access to stu-
dents with disabilities in online distance education:
Legal and technical concerns for higher education.
American Journal of Distance Education, 181(1),
51–62. doi:10.1207/s15389286ajde1801_5
Resourcing Equity for Online Learners
Ferrari, J. R., & Parker, J. T. (1992). High school
achievement, self-efficacy, and locus of control
as predictors of freshman academic perfor-
mance. Psychological Reports, 71(2), 515–518.
doi:10.2466/PR0.71.6.515-518
Fisher, M., & Baird, D. E. (2005). Online learning
design that fosters student support, self-regulation,
and retention. Campus-Wide Information Systems,
22(2), 88–107. doi:10.1108/10650740510587100
Funk, J. A. T. (2005). At-risk online learners:
reducing barriers to success. eLearn, 2005(8), 3.
Gadbow, N. F. (2001). Teaching strategies that
help learners with different needs. Adult Learn-
ing, 12(2), 19–21.
Gadbow, N. F. (2002). Teaching all learners as
if they are special. New Directions for Adult and
Continuing Education, 93, 51–61. doi:10.1002/
ace.49
Galusha, J. M. (1997). Barriers to learning in
distance education. Interpersonal Computing and
Technology, 5(3-4), 6–14.
Giroux, H., & Trend, D. (1992). Cultural work-
ers and the pedagogy of cultural politics: Writing
against the Empire . In Border crossings: Cul-
tural workers and the politics of education (pp.
230–250). New York: Routledge.
Goodfellow, R., Lea, M., Gonzalez, F., & Ma-
son, R. (2001). Opportunity and e-quality: In-
tercultural and linguistic issues in global online
learning. Distance Education, 22(1), 65–84.
doi:10.1080/0158791010220105
Goodyear, P., Salmon, G., Spector, J. M., Steeples,
C., & Tichner, S. (2001). Competence for online
teaching: A special report. ETR&D, 49(1), 65–72.
doi:10.1007/BF02504508
Hanna, D. E., Glowacki-Dudka, M., & Conceição-
Runlee, S. (2000). 147 Practical Tips for Teaching
Online Groups. Madison, WI: Atwood Publishing.
Hasslebring, T. S., & Williams-Glaser, C. H.
(2000). Use of computer technology to help stu-
dents with special needs. The Future of Children,
10(2), 102–122. doi:10.2307/1602691
Howell, S. L., Williams, P. B., & Lindsay, N. K.
(2003). Thirty-two Trends Affecting Distance
Education: An Informed Foundation for Stra-
tegic Planning. Journal, 4(3). Retrieved from
http://www.westga.edu/~distance/ojdla/fall63/
howell63.html.
Johnson, S. D., & Aragon, S. R. (2003). An in-
structional strategy framework for online learn-
ing environments. New Directions for Adult and
Continuing Education, 100, 31–43. doi:10.1002/
ace.117
Johnstone, D. B. (2003). Cost sharing in higher
education: Tuition, financial assistance, and ac-
cessibility in a comparative perspective. Czech
Sociological Review, 39(3), 351–374.
Jones, D. J. W., & Collier, B. (1990). “High Risk”
Students and Higher Education: Future Trends.
ERIC Digest, 1-3. Washington, DC: ERIC Clear-
inghouse on Higher Education.
Kolowich, S. (2009, August 28, 2009). Textbooks
for the disabled. InsideHigherEd.com. Retrieved
from http://www.insidehighered.com
Lange, C. M., & Sletten, S. J. (2002). Alternative
education: A brief history and research synthesis
(No. H159K70002). Alexandria, VA: National As-
sociation of State Directors of Special Education.
LDOnline. (2008). What is a learning disability?
Retrieved from http://www.ldonline.org/ldbasics/
whatisld
Levinson, E. M. (2006). School psychol-
ogy and college learning disabled students:
Training and service possibilities. Psy-
chology in the Schools, 23(3), 295–302.
doi:10.1002/1520-6807(198607)23:3<295::AID-
PITS2310230311>3.0.CO;2-3
873

Lim, C. P. (2004). Engaging learners in online
learning environments. TechTrends, 48(4), 16–23.
doi:10.1007/BF02763440
McLaughlin, C. (1999). Culturally responsive
technology use: Developing an on-line commu-
nity of learners. British Journal of Educational
Technology, 30(3), 231–243. doi:10.1111/1467-
8535.00112
McLoughlin, C., & Oliver, R. (1999). Instructional
design for cultural difference: A case study of the
indigenous online learning in a tertiary context.
Paper presented at the ASCILITE99, Brisbane.
McPherson, M., & Nunes, M. B. (2004). The role
of tutors as an integral part of online learning
support. Journal. Retrieved from http://www.
eurodl.org/?p=archives&year=2004&halfyear=
1&article=105
Moisey, S. D., & Hughes, J. A. (2008). Support-
ing the online learner . In Anderson, T. (Ed.), The
theory and practice of online learning (2nd ed.).
Edmonton, Canada: AU Press.
N.A. (2005). A guide to disability laws. Wash-
ington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice, Civil
Rights Division.
Opitz, C. (2002). Online course accessibility: A call
for responsibility and necessity. AACE Journal,
10(1), 81–105.
Pallas, A. M., Natriello, G., & McDill, E. L.
(1989). The Changing Nature of the Disadvan-
taged Population: Current Dimensions and Future
Trends. Educational Researcher, 18(5), 16–22.
Percy, S. (1989). Disability, civil rights, and public
policy: The politics of implementation. Tuscaloosa,
Alabama: University of Alabama Press.
Pike, G. R., & Saupe, J. L. (2002). Does high school
matter? An analysis of three methods of predicting
first-year grades. Research in Higher Education,
43(2), 187–207. doi:10.1023/A:1014419724092
874
Resourcing Equity for Online Learners
Ramsay, E., Tranter, D., Charlton, S., & Sumner,
R. (1998). Higher education access and equity for
low SES school leavers: A case study. Adelaide:
University of South Australia.
Rocco, T. S. (2002). The invisible people: Disability,
diversity, and issues of power in adult education.
Paper presented at the Midwest Research-to-
Practice Conference in Adult, Continuing, and
Community Education.
Rovai, A. P., & Jordan, H. M. (2004). Blended
learning and sense of community: A comparative
analysis with traditional and fully online graduate
courses. International Review of Research in Open
and Distance Learning, 5(2), 1–13.
Sadler, P. M., & Tai, R. H. (2001). Success in in-
troductory college physics: The role of high school
preparation. Science Education, 85(2), 111–136.
doi:10.1002/1098-237X(200103)85:2<111::AID-
SCE20>3.0.CO;2-O
Schacter, J. (1999). Does technology improve stu-
dent learning and achievement? How, when, and
under what conditions? Journal of Educational
Computing Research, 20(4), 329–343.
Sewell, W. H. (1971). Inequality of Opportunity for
Higher Education. American Sociological Review,
36(5), 793–809. doi:10.2307/2093667
Stanley, J. C. (1971). Predicting college suc-
cess of the educationally disadvantaged. Sci-
ence, 171(3972), 640–647. doi:10.1126/sci-
ence.171.3972.640
Stodel, E. J., Thompson, T. L., & MacDonald, C. J.
(2006). Learners’ perspectives on what is missing
from online learning: Interpretations through the
community of inquiry framework. Journal, 7(3).
Retrieved from http://www.irrodl.org/index.php/
irrodl/article/view/325/743.
Swan, K. (2003). Learning effectiveness: What
the research tells us . In Bourne, J., & Moore, J.
C. (Eds.), Elements of Quality Online Education,
Practice and Direction. Needham, MA: Sloan
Center for Online Education.
Resourcing Equity for Online Learners
Tu, C. H. (2001). How Chinese perceive
social presence: An examination of interac-
tion in online learning environment. Edu-
cational Media International, 38(1), 45–60.
doi:10.1080/09523980010021235
Vatrapu, R. K. (2008). Cultural considerations
in computer supported collaborative learning.
Research and Practice in Technology En-
hanced Learning, 3(2), 159–201. doi:10.1142/
S1793206808000501
Vatrapu, R. K., & Suthers, D. (2007). Culture and
computers: A review of the concept of culture and
implications for intercultural collaborative online
learning . In Ishiba, T., Fussell, S. R., & Vossen,
P. T. J. M. (Eds.), IWIC 2007, LNCS (Vol. 4568).
Heidelberg: Springer.
Vaughn, S., & Fuchs, L. S. (2003). Redefining
learning disabilities as inadequate response to
instruction: The promise and potential problems.
Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 18(3),
137–146. doi:10.1111/1540-5826.00070
Wagner, M. M., & Blackorby, J. (1996). Transition
from high school to work or college: How special
education students fare. The Future of Children,
6(1), 103–120. doi:10.2307/1602496
Warschauer, M. (1998). Online learning in socio-
cultural context. Anthropology & Education Quar-
terly, 29(1), 68–88. doi:10.1525/aeq.1998.29.1.68
West, L. (2006). Career counselors’ toolkit: Ad-
vising high school students with disabilities on
postsecondary options. Washington, DC: Health
Resource Center.
Yell, M. L., Rogers, D., & Rogers, E. L.
(1998). The legal history of special education:
What a long, strange trip it’s been! Reme-
dial and Special Education, 19(4), 219–228.
doi:10.1177/074193259801900405
KEY TERMS AND DEFINITIONS
ADA-Compliant: Adhering to the regulations
set forth by the Americans with Disabilities Act.
Accessibility: The degree to which the infor-
mation for a program or course can be used by
students-with-limitations.
Asynchronous: Refers to self-directed learn-
ing opportunities that are not coordinated in time,
where learners are not in the same geographical
location as the instructor, such as in correspon-
dence courses.
Equity: In education, when access is not biased
and all are treated fairly.
IEP: Individual education program.
Limitation: Barriers to student success,
including but not limited to physical and emo-
tional disability; language difference; personal
background; learning disability; educational level;
socioeconomic status.
NJCLD: National Joint Committee on Learn-
ing Disabilities.
Synchronous: refers to learning opportunities
where the learning occurs for all students at the
same time and have the ability to communicate
with each other, such as in a virtual classroom.
875
876

Chapter 53
Virtual Collaboration
Shalin Hai-Jew
Kansas State University, USA

ABSTRACT
A key construct in e-learning involves virtual collaborations through computer-mediated communica-
tions tools. These collaborations may be synchronous (real-time) and asynchronous (non-real-time).
Learners work together to learn; conceptualize ideas and designs; solve problems; co-create learning
and presentations; develop plans, designs, and models; simulate role-plays in various contexts; develop
and maintain professional relationships, and coordinate their actions in response to particular situa-
tions and contingencies. A range of technological tools are used to promote rich virtual collaborations:
knowledge structures and digital repositories, learning / course management systems (L/CMSes), web
logs, wikis, immersive synthetic worlds, web conferencing software, mobile devices, live video link-ups,
collaboratories, web laboratories, mixed-reality collaborative spaces, physical-digital tabletops, and
electronic mail and electronic mailing lists. This chapter highlights the various types of virtual collabo-
rations used in e-learning in higher education.

INTRODUCTION find various types of diversified expertise in one

Virtual collaborations, mediated communications
and interactions through computer-mediated com-
munications (CMC), have become a mainstay of
e-learning for a number of reasons. First is that few
human endeavors happen in a vacuum (Johnson
& Hyde, 2003; Fischer, 2004), and it is difficult to
DOI: 10.4018/978-1-61692-906-0.ch053
locale. In remote teaming, there is strength and
diversity of ideas and practices. Second, today’s
generation of learners need to learn the virtual
teaming skills that will enable them to work on both
local and global virtual teams. They will need to be
able to communicate with clarity with colleagues
from different fields (on cross-functional teams)
because of the growing interdisciplinary nature of
most careers. They must become familiar with the
Virtual Collaboration
computer supported collaborative work (CSCW)
strategies and technologies. They must be able to
build digital assets for their electronic portfolios
that will represent them into their professional
lives. Third, virtual collaborations enrich the
electronic learning. They add new perspectives to
a learning experience. They motivate learners to
continue with their studies. Virtual collaborations
and teams may connect “apprentice” learners with
professional practitioners in the field (Kilner &
Hoadley, 2005, p. 272; Rohde, Klamma, & Wulf,
2005), and these may be the first steps of their
immersions into authentic and applied learning in
communities of practice. Fourth, learners today
need to collaborate with others to gain access to
knowledge as a strategic resource, to lead to im-
proved performances in workplaces (Wan, Fang,
& Neufeld, 2008), which have a deep and vested
interest in surfacing and protecting knowledge for
organizational advantages, decision-making, and
survival (Hoffman, Ziebell, Flore, & Becerra-Fer-
nandez, 2008). Virtual communities are critical for
learning organizations (Smits & de Moor, 2004).
Organizations need to efficiently use information:
Efficiency is enhanced through common
knowledge such as organizational culture and
language, the frequency of routines and patterned
activity, and organizational structure. Second,
scope of knowledge integration refers to the
different types of specialized knowledge being
integrated – the more complex and wide scope,
the greater difficulty for competitors to replicate.
Third, the flexibility of integration reflects the
extent to which an organization can renew its
competitive advantage through innovation and the
development of new capabilities. This is achieved
by accessing additional external knowledge as
well as reconfiguring existing knowledge into
new capabilities. (Hustad, 2007, pp. 189 – 190)
In light of this critical competitive advantage
of virtual collaboration, this chapter offers a
review of the research related to virtual work.
This chapter offers an overview of the technolo-
gies related to virtual collaboration; it provides
some examples of virtual collaborations among
learners in higher education, and some insights
on necessary research into the future.
Literature Review
“Virtual collaboration” refers to shared work
conducted through computer-mediated commu-
nications technologies. These involve knowledge
spaces and digital repositories, learning / course
management systems (L/CMSes), web logs, wikis,
immersive synthetic worlds, web conferencing
software, mobile devices, live video link-ups,
collaboratories, web laboratories, mixed-reality
collaborative spaces, physical-digital tabletops,
and electronic mail and electronic mailing lists.
VIRTUAL COMMUNITIES
The research literature identifies four types of
virtual communities: communities of interest,
communities of practice, communities of purpose,
and communities of passion. These are listed in
order of lower commitment to the highest commit-
ment of the participants. The authors define these
labels as non-mutually exclusive and suggest that
these may be various phases of a community as it
evolves over time. The key differentiators include
“the tightness of focus and the subject of the focus”
(a set of interests or of practices). The authors
explain communities of interest as those with a
general diffuse set of shared interests; communities
of practice as those with a tight focus on common
activities or practices; communities of purpose as
those with a common interest (albeit with a range
of different backgrounds), and communities of
passion with a tight focus on a shared interest by
a small group of members (Muller, Carotenuto,
Fontaine, Friedman, Newberg, Simpson, Slusher,
& Stevenson, 1999, pp. 272 – 273), reminiscent
of the concept of a “hot group” (Lipman-Blumen
& Leavitt, 1999).
877

Virtual communities may be loosely coupled
or diffuse, with members not fully aware of
each other and dispersed geographically. Loose
coupling may also indicate the thinness of their
relationships, with many who do not know each
other’s names. Some open-source communities
of developers may be loosely-coupled, with thou-
sands of individuals co-building to the base code
albeit without deeper knowledge of each other.
There are technology tools to help people
identify ad hoc communities based on communi-
cations patterns (Alani, Dasmahapatra, O’Hara,
& Shadbolt, 2003). In other words, communities
may be forming around shared interests and
communications even without people initially
realizing it—and capitalizing on these ad hoc
groups by raising them to the awareness of the
members may be socially (and individually)
beneficial. Virtual communities may be ad hoc
ones that emerge from shared interests in social
networking sites. They may form around shared
globalist (or local) values, with the participants
never fully knowing all the other members’ names.
For example, virtual communities may spring up
after major environmental disruptions, such as
war, with the turning to “alternative resources to
reconstruct, modify, and develop new routines,
or patterns of action, for work and socializing”
(Mark & Semaan, 2008, p. 137).
Virtual communities may be tightly coupled
with regular and planned interactions. They may
be formal communities with defined purposes
and strict boundaries for membership (Liccardi,
Ounnas, Pau, Massey, Kinnunen, Lewthwaite,
Midy, & Sarkar, 2007, p. 226).
Communities of practice (CoPs) may be built
up around information and textual and visual ways
of representing knowledge—such as through
wikis (White, Plotnick, Addams-Moring, Turoff,
& Hiltz, 2008), digital repositories, libraries,
knowledge structures (like ontologies or taxono-
mies), and referatories. Others are built around
tasks—such as problem solving virtual communi-
ties (PSVCs) (Yu, Jiang, & Chan, 2007, p. 144). A
878
Virtual Collaboration
close term is “knowledge network” of users who
share expertise to solve problems (LaContora &
Mendonca, 2003, p. 396). Essentially, CoPs must
offer “mutual engagement, shared repertoire, and
joint enterprise” (Wan, Fang, & Neufeld, 2008,
p. 3).
Virtual communities that are healthy will en-
hance not only individual efficacy but “collective
efficacy” (Carroll, Rosson, & Zhou, 2005). Strong
communities enhance individual performance as
well as group performance. This sense of value-
added is colloquially described as the results
being “more than the sum total of its parts,” such
as creative synergies and insightful serendipity.
Distributed design review enhances the overall
work of the company (Daily, Howard, Jerald, Lee,
Martin, McInnes, Tinker, & Smith, 2000). These
technology-mediated spaces enhance creative
work by allowing teams to prepare by identifying
problems and conducting research; incubating
on the challenges subconsciously; illuminating
the challenge by envisaging the solution as a
prototype, and verifying the solution (Coughlan
& Johnson, 2006).
Optimally, virtual teaming will enhance
goodwill among members to encourage sharing
and to create cognitive capital (Chou & Chang,
2008). Such communities need to consider the
motivational reasons for users to join virtual com-
munities and to contribute (Moore & Serva, 2007)
to encourage their commitment and participation.
CoPs will evolve, and their memberships will
change over time (Zhang, Luo, & Wu, 2008). A
“lifecycle” view of online communities do sug-
gest particular phases in the development of such
communities, with their eventual demise once
participants no longer gain value from the interac-
tions and learning (Iriberri & Leroy, 2009). [Lin
& Lin call these systems “autotrophic” ones—or
those with limited life spans (2006, p. 1).]
Virtual Collaboration
THE NATURE OF VIRTUAL AND
REMOTE INTERRELATIONSHIPS
The traditional instructivist learning model led to
various computer-based trainings, in which learn-
ers engaging with the intelligent machine. Then,
the constructionism model suggested that the
learner’s experience was important to the learning,
so e-learning changed again by considering learn-
ers’ unique needs based on their developmental
stage, their backgrounds, their perceptions, and
their learning experiences. Constructivism then
suggested that knowledge is co-created with other
people through communications and shared work,
so e-learning changed again to incorporate plenty
of lean-channel and rich-channel communications.
An added layer of research in virtual teaming and
innovations highlighted the importance of using
the proper tools in the proper ways to enhance
mutual creativity (Nemiro, 2004) and harness
the human imagination (Penuel, Korbak, Cole, &
Jump, 1999). Virtual work tends to be “emergent”
and “improvisational” (Biuk-Aghai, 2001, p. 279);
the nature of the work requires innovations and
risk-taking. Much shared work is stored in the
“cloud” of the Internet with various distributed
servers and computers managing the data manage-
ment and software services.
Relational capital refers to the level of trust
in a group, the members’ identifications with the
group, their sense of social obligation to participate
in group activities, the following of the group’s
norms (Chou & Chang, 2008, p. 2), the prior his-
tory between group members, and the leadership
in the particular virtual team. Teams may have
members with strong and weak ties based on their
personalities, works roles, levels of interaction, and
history. Some virtual collaboration occurs among
strangers; others occur among those with particular
professional reputations. Some exchanges occur
in situations of anonymity (Kilner & Hoadley,
2005) while others occur between individuals
with full virtual profiles and histories indicated.
The social theory of learning suggests that
online group interactions enhance individual con-
structions of meaning through mental modeling
(vs. the conceptual modeling of subject matter
experts). Effective groups function in the physical
world through “mutual engagement, joint enter-
prise and shared repertoire,” and social identity
of individuals as they acculturate into various
virtual communities will affect their participation
in that group (Goggins, Laffey, & Tsai, 2007,
p. 208). The socialization is a critical aspect of
virtual communities (Cox & Morris, 2004). The
making of objects—“concepts, tools, symbols,
stories, words”—reify the elusive experiences
into real objects (Vranešić & Rovan, 2009, p.
206) and further strengthen the CoPs (Chikh,
Berkani, & Sarirete, 2008, p. 32) and make the
virtual communities more real. The sharing of the
knowledge in CoPs stems from the trust between
members (Vizcaíno, Portillo-Rodriguez, Soto, &
Piattini, 2009).
SOME REAL-WORLD USES OF
VIRTUAL COLLABORATION
Virtual collaborations may surface tacit knowl-
edge (Baker-Eveleth, Sarker, & Eveleth, 2005)
and design ideas (Wyeld, 2005) through informal
and formal interchanges. They may support “in-
formation foraging” and sense-making through
knowledge externalization and organization/
structuring (Shrinivasan & van Wijk, 2008, p.
1237). Communities of design practice (CDPs)
further the field through new practices (Halstead-
Nussloch, Konneh, & Woodruff, 2003), which
need to be proliferated through the field. Medi-
ated, distributed communities are used to integrate
new employees into work organizations (Bures
& Ponce, 2005); people may create mentorship
types of collaborations through distance. Virtual
work in design may span many years (Fischer,
2005). Team members may work with each other
through discrete and separate projects.
879
 Virtual Collaboration

Figure 1. ELATEwiki and its Community of E-Learning Professionals

Some university-based collaborative spaces
are dedicated sites. Figure 1, ELATEwiki and
its Community of E-Learning Professionals,
shows the entry page for this collaborative wiki,
which focuses on E-Learning and Teaching Ex-
change. Figure 2, The University Life Café and
its Student Community Working against Suicide,
brings together students from around the world
to promote mental wellness and healthy behav-
iors. Both of these projects were originated at
Kansas State University (K-State) in 2009. These
communal collaborative spaces were created by
cross-functional teams with expertise in knowl-
edge structures, code development, multimedia,
instructional design, and subject matter expertise
(e-learning and counseling, respectively).
The University Life Café serves both a global
audience hailing from over 87 countries as well
as local learners, faculty, and staff at K-State, with
differing levels of collaboration access (Hai-Jew,
2009).
Prerequisites for Virtual
Collaboration
Virtual collaborations require common-ground
understandings, terminologies, practices, expecta-
tions, and shared objectives. The coordination of
virtual efforts that are technologically mediated

880

(c) 2011 IGI Global. All Rights Reserved.

Virtual Collaboration
Figure 2. The University Life Café and its Student Community Working against Suicide
also require convenient ways to reach all team
members, clear record-keeping of communica-
tions and decision-making, and the proper tech-
nologies with the proper levels of expressiveness
for the type of work. The virtual collaborators
need a shared visual workspace (Kraut, Gergle,
& Fussell, 2002). In other systems, virtual team
members have a shared “situational awareness”
in space-time of a live (or even potential future)
situation based on various information streams
(Louvieris, Collins, & Mashanovich, 2009, p. 3).
Appropriate Technological Functions
To understand the various technologies that may
be employed for virtual collaborations, Figure 3,
(c) 2011 IGI Global. All Rights Reserved.
Lean-to-Thick Mediation Channels Continuum,
highlights contemporary technologies used for
collaborations. These technologies need to have
intuitive interfaces for ease-of-use. They must
help the whole individual communicate (Adams,
Blandford, & Lunt, 2005). And these systems
must be fault-tolerant. In live work, collaborators
move seamlessly between the various technolo-
gies—choosing when a phone call, an email, a
text message, an image capture, a live video
interaction, a 3D image build, or other form of
interaction is necessary.
Socio-technical systems offer affordances and
enablements for people to collaborate; however,
the structures of these systems also offer con-
straints and limitations. Hard constraints are ab-
881

Figure 3. Lean-to-Thick Mediation Channels Continuum
solute requirements (often physical and techno-
logical infrastructure types); light ones may be
temporarily bypassed without negatively affecting
system behaviors. Designing these well may guide
the actions of an online community (Di Iorio &
Zacchiroli, 2006).
Virtual presence. The technologies employed
to mediate the work must offer some basic func-
tionalities. They must capture and communicate
the team member’s individual and collective
presences (telepresences and social presences) in
ways the broaden perception of actions by other
users in a shared collaborative space (Horain,
Soares, Rai, & Bideau, 2005, p. 245) and which
allow user “image management” (Kahai, Carroll,
& Jestice, 2007); this amplification effect may
raise participant efficacy and enhance member
bonding. Awareness tools in virtual collabora-
tion spaces include scoring mechanisms of user
contributions, performance indicators, participa-
tion metrics, user reputation systems, popularity
measures, and other features.
Rich communications. Live communications
may involve live streams of audio and video,
as well as the recording of each. There may be
live text-based micro-blogging or simple text-
messaging. Group members generally must be
able to exchange digital files that capture their
ideas and visualizations; these should be captured
in a versioned way. Murphy notes that all digital
882
Virtual Collaboration
documents “vary in their persistence,” and many
are merely transitory (Murphy, 2001, p. 1). Also,
there must be the ability to connect annotations
and commentary to each prototype or design
or work sample. There must be a record of the
decision-making by each of the group members
tasked with decision-making. Some systems en-
able concurrent or live design, with individuals
sharing their ideas.
Rich interactivity tools for communications
and design may involve all five senses: visual,
auditory, tactile, olfactory, and taste. There may
also be hand-held projection devices, with the
new miniaturization of projection technologies,
for projection-based collaborative virtual-physical
environments (Cao, Forlines, & Balakrishnan,
2007, p. 43). The improvements in these tech-
nologies enable distortion-free projections, as
well as touch-based annotation, movement, and
file transfer of digital elements, to turn physical
surfaces into work spaces.
Informational access and integrity. All team
members—even in an asymmetric collaboration
situation—must have the proper level of access
to the digital resources and information that they
need for their work. The system must allow the
organization to protect its critical informational
assets though (Shands, Jacobs, Yee, & Sebes,
2001), in conjunction with extra-technological
understandings and contractual agreements.
Virtual Collaboration
The system must protect the data integrity—of
all communications, all decisions, and all work. It
must offer a comprehensive archive of all related
work—involving raw files, works-in-develop-
ment, prototypes, plans, and finalized works.
Virtual collaboration spaces often must provide
a sense of shared organizational memory. That
memory has to be accessible through coherent
information management for virtual communities
of practice (Lin & Hsueh, 2002).
Workflow tools. Some information and com-
munications technologies offer clear workflow
tools to enable efficient collaborative work. Oth-
ers provide structures for collaborative processes
called “collaboration scripts” (Dillenbourg, 2002,
as cited in Raija, Päivi, Sanna, & Tony, 2003, p.
504).
Some virtual collaboration spaces involve
authoring tools that enable participants to visual-
ize and create digital contents within that space.
Others enable the sharing of contents created by
third-party authoring tools and other equipment
(such as videography equipment).
Attentional focus. There must also be tools
that focus human attention on the particular in-
formation or digital object or experience that the
group is focused on at the particular time period.
Given the many limitations to human attentional
resources (Gallagher, 2009), tools that highlight
real-time events, design spaces, and current speak-
ers will be important for the virtual team.
User privacy. There may be spaces for private
interchanges, private brainstorming, and private
storage of digital files. There may be spaces for
semi-public and even wholly public sharing of
digital contents. More sophisticated systems have
creator ownership protections—for affirming the
origination of new works and provable sequences
of design (both forensically and legally).
The protection of intellectual property own-
ership. Socio-technical systems need to consider
the psychological state of ownership in the cre-
ation of virtual collaboration design technologies
to encourage the co-creation (Wang, Battocchi,
Graziola, Pianesi, Tomasini, Zancanaro, & Nass,
2006, p. 225) and to support non-violation of
creator ownership and intellectual property rights,
particularly for work that has financial and research
and development (R&D) potential. The criticality
of protecting against the piracy of original works
is critical to the success of collaborative spaces;
without protections, the level of user trust will be
low and detrimental to the shared and individual
work. A concomitant concern involves partici-
pant privacy, which also requires protection for
freer participation in virtual communities (Nov
& Wattal, 2009).
A semi-public / public showcase. However,
such spaces often allow the public showcasing
and sharing of the team’s work. That aspect of
distributing digital information and artifacts is also
critical—to validate the team’s work and to bring
attention to their labors. In a world with scarce
attentional resources, being able to reach out to
decision-makers and the general public will be
important to supporting expensive and long-term
collaborations, which will often require financial
resources and public goodwill.
The achievements of such functionalities may
involve purely web-mediated spaces on desktop
computers. There may be mixed reality and paral-
lel world spaces—involving both real-space and
digital enhancements. These combine real-world
and virtual world collaborators as if they were
co-located in synchronous time (Morde, Hou,
Ganapathy, Correa, Krebs, & Rabiner, 2004).
There are mixed reality games with as real-
world runners and online virtual eluders playing
simultaneously (Crabtree, Benford, Rodden,
Greenhalgh, Flintham, Anastasi, Drozd, Adams,
Row-Farr, Tandavanitj, & Steed, 2004). Digital
poster sessions enable multimedia rich contents
to be shared around conference themes. These
poster sessions include slideshows (narrated and
unnarrated), screen captures, photo albums, audio,
video, simple games, and other types of interac-
tivity; participants in a poster session may post
their comments to a reply thread, and they may
883

subscribe to RSS-feeds (really simple syndication
feeds) to access updates to the archived digital
poster sessions.
Physical learning. Some location-sensitive
learning may enhance the learning of kines-
thetic and muscle memory learning, touch, and
proxemics—in physical embodied learning--in
ambient intelligent spaces, augmented reality, and
mixed reality setups. These may enhance physical
coordination between student athletes, dancers, or
military troops; there may be physical way-finding
with digital enhancements, for example. Wearable
devices may also enhance human performance in
physical environments. Physical props may be
used in physical environments for realism and
tactile effects. Location awareness enables a rich
variety of functionalities in terms of shared visitor
experiences, interactions with virtual reality visi-
tors, connections with friends, understandings of
people’s actions based on locations, and ever-more
informative maps (Brown, MacColl, Chalmers,
Galani, Randell, & Steed, 2003). Researchers de-
scribe hybrid environments which incorporate real
objects that interact in virtual, augmented reality,
and ambient intelligent environments (Lok, Naik,
& Whitton, 2003). Realities are formed from a
mix of information streams.
Exploitation of the physical environment.
Some mobile virtual collaboration is location-
sensitive, with mobile devices being triggered
with particular digital information or experiences
at particular geo-tagged locations. Mobile blogs
collect images, sounds, text, voice, video, and
geographic information system (GIS) information
for sharing (Chatti, Srirama, Kensche, & Cao,
2006). Built-in global positioning systems (GPS)
devices help individuals maintain awareness of
their own locations in relation to others and to
important anchoring locations.
The uses of GPS capabilities enhance various
digital devices—digital cameras, personal digital
assistants, smart phones—to enable more savvy
collaborations. Wireless-enabled tablet laptops
may enable live work-shopping among learners
884
Virtual Collaboration
with enhanced multi-way communications and
problem-solving (Tutty & White, 2006).
Capitalizing on machine intelligence. An-
other technology used in virtual collaborations
involve grid computing, where volunteer citizen
scientists may use some of their computing power
to help process information at a distance or may
use mobile devices or remote sensors to provide
information to professional scientists. These
collaborations may be enhanced by human inter-
activity and communications, so the shared work
goes beyond the sharing of resource capabilities.
Dedicated systems. There are dedicated tai-
lored systems that are created for specific types
of collaborations—like science collaboratories,
industrial design spaces, work process simulators,
book or journal publishing software, or digital
repositories (with curated collections). These
may include specific task-knowledge structures
to enhance the work and special tools to capture
and convey the co-designs.
Virtual spaces may be more freeing of the
human imagination given that they do not force
people into “the rules of the physical world” (Irani,
Hayes, & Dourish, 2008, p. 187). What may be
created may be pure works of the imagination but
which have applications to the real world, such
as scientists imagining a space station or a space
garden or an undersea structure.
Immersive reality. Some involve immersive
and persistent virtual worlds, with many featuring
multi-scale space (with size-variant avatars and
digital objects) (Zhang & Furnas, 2003). Some
virtual collaboration software provides assistance
to the human collaborators by providing relevant
context-sensitive information or using intelligent
agents and tutors (Marin, Hunger, & Werner, 2005)
to support the learning and work process. Another
tool, in a collaboratory, automates information
sharing among participating analysts (Mack, Fado,
Blake, & Widdows, 2006).
Others may involve 3D augmented reality
spaces with tangible input devices that interact
with immersive spaces (Nadeau & Williams,
Virtual Collaboration
2009). Touch and mouse inputs have been tested
with users to identify perceptual differences
in co-located interactions (Müller-Tomfelde &
Schremmer, 2008). Head-mounted displays
convey relevant digital information by sight and
sound overlays on real-world scenes and spaces.
3D video conferencing creates shared virtual team
user environments (Kauff & Schreer, 2002) with
a stronger sense of visual presence. Immersions
enable high-fidelity high-sensory interactions (Na-
rayan, Waugh, Zhang, Bafna, & Bowman, 2005).
Mixed reality. Others may involve virtual
tabletop spaces, which tap into the human familiar-
ity with table spaces but also integrate projected
imagery and touch-screen interactivities. These
designed virtual collaboration spaces consider
the human need for territoriality—in terms of per-
sonal, group, and storage spaces on the workspace
(Scott, Carpendale, & Inkpen, 2004). Those who
collaborate around tabletops often will “reposition
and reorient task artifacts to mediate their interac-
tions” (Tuddenham, 2007, p. 2237).
With live collaborations occurring in remote
studios (of hybrid design), there are endeavors to
effectively link hardware and software with the
least slippage between mediums (Fraser, Lyons,
Looser, & Seichter, 2008, n.p.). Mixed reality
spaces often rely on time-based coordination,
so the tools used cannot have time lag for ef-
ficient learning. Visual and acoustic lags will be
distracting.
Virtual design spaces need to be easily
reconfigurable to adapt to the work with “non-
prescriptive, manipulable loose parts of promote
playful social creativity” (Liccardi, Ounnas, Pau,
Massey, Kinnunen, Lewthwaite, Midy, & Sarkar,
2007, p. 225).
The growing invisibility of collaborative
tools. Some have suggested that the technology
tools themselves will recede more into the back-
ground with the work and design experiences
coming to the forefront (Pingali & Sukaviriya,
2003). Interactions may be one-to-many, few-
to-few, one-to-one, many-to-many, and other
permutations.
Some live web conferencing tools now involve
closed captioning with live people capturing ver-
batim all the words spoken by various speakers.
Some organizations hire digital graphic artists
who will illustrate concepts and ideas—particu-
larly those shared during online virtual keynotes.
Various mitigations like these enrich the virtual
experiences of collaborations and sharing.
Types of Virtual Interactions
and Collaborations
The types of virtual interactions and collaborations
may be conceptualized along a continuum from
simple to complex. Figure 4, A Continuum of
Virtual Interactions and Collaborations, presents
an initial conceptualization of virtual collabora-
tive work. To the left are the more simple virtual
interactions, and as the continuum progresses
right, the mutual work becomes more complex
and more demanding of the technologies. More
complex and enriching human endeavors occur as
well, with co-design and the discovery and shar-
ing of new knowledge as high-end attainments.
The types of interactivity, the types of tech-
nologies employed, and the supervisory and
leadership strategies used all depend on the ambi-
tion of the virtual collaboration endeavor. The
actual work ecologies that are created with the
various technologies will evolve quite uniquely
based on the particular projects.
The Work of a Virtual
Collaborative Team
Virtual collaborations are often based around
shared work. The task of a virtual team follows
some basic and broad phases. The steps include
the following:
1. Icebreakers and introductions
2. Exploration of the virtual work ecology
885

Figure 4. A Continuum of Virtual Interactions and Collaborations
3. Work parameter and objective definitions
4. Role definitions
5. Specific tasking
6. Standards setting
7. Resource distributions
8. Design and prototyping
9. Decision-making
10. Development
11. Review
12. Project launch
Figure 5, General Phases in Virtual Teaming
Work, focuses on problem-based and project-
based virtual teaming. Here, people with differ-
ent skills work together to co-solve problems or
actualize projects.
Different virtual collaboration contexts and
tasks will likely result in variant work cycles.
Having a clear conceptualization of the virtual
collaboration processes and technologies involved
will be beneficial in terms of enhancing the qual-
ity of the virtual collaborations. Team members
who’ve worked with each other on different
projects in the past may come together for differ-
886
Virtual Collaboration
ent shared work, without many of the social
preliminaries. The above is to be understood
loosely not as an absolutist process. Many vir-
tual communities of practice are continuing ones
without any explicit mass entry of various vir-
tual team members, and in such cases, the above
phases may not be discrete ones. A brief sum-
mary of the steps follows below.
1. Icebreakers and introductions
Icebreakers help create a sense of camaraderie
and a safe working environment among a group
of individuals with varied skill sets and perspec-
tives. The telepresence and social presence tools
are important for the social networking aspect of
work. This is often done through human facilita-
tion—such as virtual games that promote infor-
mation sharing and relaxation. Early interactions
also help members acclimate to the culture of the
online workspace. The express values of a virtual
community may also be defined.
2. Exploration of the virtual work ecology
Virtual Collaboration
Figure 5. General Phases in Virtual Teaming Work
This second step defines overall socio-tech-
nical system functions in terms of work spaces
(public, semi-public, and private), work docu-
mentation, and information and resource sharing.
This phase lays the groundwork for how the work
will progress virtually. Each digital environment
has affordances (enablements) and constraints
(limitations), and being aware of this larger work
ecology is important for member orientation and
productivity. The shared authoring and design
tools may also be explored. Multiple tools may
be cobbled for shared virtual collaborations.
3. Work parameter and objective definitions
Collaborative virtual work requires shared
understandings of the goals. This initial step in
virtual collaboration involves the defining of
high-level goals, sub-goals, quality standards,
methodologies, and mutual understandings about
collaborative communications and interactions.
4. Role definitions
The differing roles of the various members
may be defined early on based on skill sets and
interests. Some virtual groups do not define roles
but rather let each individual express his / her
talent in a more free-form way.
5. Specific tasking
The assigning of particular projects may be
done specifically—to individuals and to particular
groups. In other cases, people simply self-select
the work that they want through signing up for a
particular responsibility and then doing the work.
6. Standards setting
Work that has value to a larger group often
has to meet particular requirements. This is true
for academic assignments, and it’s true for digital
learning objects, code, plans, and any number
887

of other outputs that may originate from virtual
collaboration.
7. Resource distributions
Virtual groups need to know who has access
to which resources if there is differentiation. Col-
laborations that exist among team members who
work for different companies may have access
to different sets of resources due to policies and
intellectual property protections. In cases where
trust is not full (most cases), there may be some
variance between levels of access to different types
of information. The access to different levels of
functions also differ, in the same way that “sysops”
(system operators) may make deep-level changes
and access information and functions that others
can’t, virtual teams will have some members who
have more responsibility and access than others.
8. Design and prototyping
In shared design and prototyping work, team
members must bring their expertise together and
see how their various pieces align. They may col-
laborate in real-time at various junctures in the
work to ensure that they’re working in aligned
ways.
9. Decision-making
The standards of the group for deciding which
designs and work to use may be made by a small
committee, by the larger community (as in wikis),
or even by a machine (does the work meet pre-
defined standards as evaluated by a computer?).
10. Development
The development of the objects based on
approved plans proceeds—whether in virtual or
physical or mixed reality spaces.
888
Virtual Collaboration
11. Review
The developed objects are evaluated for stan-
dards. Revisions are made as needed.
Rights releases may be signed at any point
during the process when IP is being exchanged.
Or they may be signed away at the moment people
joined a particular online community.
Before something goes live and into wide pub-
lic use though, IP clearances need to be achieved.
12. Project launch
The fruit of the virtual team’s labors then
is shared with a wider audience—whether it’s
a choreographed dance or machinima play or
digital learning object or e-book (or a print one)
or online publication. Shared research work may
be packaged and displayed.
If the team is motivated, they may move on
to yet another project or a new iteration of earlier
work.
Some Virtual Collaboration
Examples from Higher Education
Higher education has plenty of examples of
students involved in virtual collaborating. Most
online classes involve some sort of ice-breakers by
having students introduce themselves and meet-
and-greet each other. “Jigsaws”—which require
students to conduct research and thoroughly learn
a particular aspect of a study and then report back
on their learning to the class—are very common
types of collaborations. This helps learners feel
responsible for their own work and for students
to benefit from each other’s in-depth studies. The
participants may share study notes.
Students regularly engage in critiques of each
other’s works—their papers, slideshows, designs,
digital artwork, music, business plans, and e-
portfolios. Students collaborate with each other
to create virtual presentations. They participate
Virtual Collaboration
in live virtual events—such as interviews, panel
discussions, professional subject-matter-expert
critiques, and presentations. They meet to make
decisions about budgetary expenditures or busi-
ness plans. They meet around hiring committees
using online spaces that can “protect” some of
the private employment documents.
Students work together around building up
immersive labs and immersive social spaces.
They create avatars and engage in virtual dramas,
which they capture as machinima. They role-play
different characters to simulate historical events
or current debates. They collaborate around the
building and sustaining of social websites. They
problem-solve real-world issues on cross-func-
tional teams virtually. They work around research
and knowledge-creation.
They connect with fellow students from abroad.
They practice foreign languages online, and they
immerse in culturally rich spaces with designed
artifacts. They co-design different virtual spaces
with different functionalities and aesthetics, with
their peers. They co-create newsletters and online
publications. They co-write scripts and stories.
They share research. They create dramas and sce-
narios with their human-embodied avatars. They
work together in virtual “wet labs” to conduct
experiments (through simulations). They “mod”
(modify) the game engine or immersive space
codes for new functions.
Indeed, students collaborate informally even
outside the formal assignments of higher educa-
tion. They text-message each other; they chat on
their cell phones; they get on their webcams to
discuss assignments and shared work; they plan
course (and social) events; they create virtual
study groups and support each other’s learning.
They create flash mob actions around town for
fun. Higher education has gone virtual in terms
of collaborations, and it is impossible to imagine
returning to only face-to-face interactions.
Numerous technological mitigations for
distance enable rich interactivity and shared
co-labor. These enhance the shared face-to-face
time (reversing the distance by coming together
and meeting in physical space) and make those
collaborations more valuable to the participants.
PROS AND CONS TO VIRTUAL
COLLABORATION
Virtual collaboration offers numerous affordances
in terms of remote connectivity and communica-
tions, machine-enhanced creativity and design,
record-keeping, digital resource sharing and archi-
val, and the extension of the human imagination.
The debate is really no longer about whether to
collaborate virtually or not but how to best achieve
those connections.
Currently, there are risks of lost ideas because
of a lack of familiarity with the technologies and
challenges with virtual leadership. There are still
aspects of technology systems and policies that
need to be defined to protect intellectual property
and research and development (R&D). With the
ongoing development of trust and adept human
facilitation (in some cases), virtual collaborators
may be more comfortable about sharing ideas,
resources, and energies in shared work.
CONCLUSION
In the future, virtual collaborations will likely run
the gamut: simple to complex, informal to formal,
short-term to long-term, small-scale to large-scale,
requiring rote learning to creative learning, relying
on lean-channels to thick-communications chan-
nels, and involving local to global team members.
Environmental real-life needs may well create
ad hoc team members in as-yet unforeseeable
collaborations. Collaborations may occur among
people who remain strangers—who all take small
pieces of a larger challenge—such as the push for
global environmentalism. Since trust is such an
important element of virtual collaborations, there
will likely be deeper ways to enhance trust by
889

authenticating identity (through biometrics and
passwords), verifying message integrity (such
as through the use of digital certificates), and to
verify long-term trustworthiness of workplace
team members (through a kind of institutional
memory).
Virtual collaborations may tap wholly into the
imaginary realm and not link back to mid-fidelity
real-world representations. Multi-language tools
may enable richer cross-lingual interactivity. Ever
wider ranges of technologies may be brought
into play to connect people with disparate skill
sets. Given the importance of the information
exchanged in potential cross-organizational col-
laborations, there may well be greater protections
for both the ownership of digital contents and
individual privacy rights.
This area of virtual collaboration has plenty
of room for future research. Case-based studies
of collaboration experiences may be helpful.
Continuing research on applied communications
and collaboration strategies would enhance the
field. New and cutting-edge combinations of
information and communications technologies
applications for virtual collaborations are needed.
Researchers may wish to explore the creative uses
of information and information visualization in
various digital forms and how these encourage
virtual collaborations. How to maintain long-term
virtual collaborations will be important. How to
finesse short-term, ephemeral virtual collabora-
tions will also be valuable.
The world of work, study, and play has funda-
mentally changed with the wide proliferation of
communications technologies. Professionals will
have long-term work relationships and collabora-
tions with people that they may never meet face-
to-face. Learners in higher education are starting to
experience that reality with e-learning and virtual
collaborations—on a range of learning projects.
890
Virtual Collaboration
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
Thanks to my many virtual collaborators on so
many projects. Someday, I may have the good
fortune to meet you each face-to-face, but for
now, we will continue to interact virtually and to
collaborate fruitfully. Thanks to R. Max.
REFERENCES
Adams, A., Blandford, A., & Lunt, P. (2005).
Social empowerment and exclusion: A case
study on digital libraries. ACM Transactions on
Computer-Human Interaction, 12(2), 174–200.
doi:10.1145/1067860.1067863
Alani, H., Dasmahapatra, S., O’Hara, K., & Shad-
bolt, N. (2003). Intelligent information processing:
Identifying communities of practice through ontol-
ogy network analysis. IEEE Intelligent Systems,
18–25. doi:10.1109/MIS.2003.1193653
Baker-Eveleth, L., Sarker, S., & Eveleth, D. M.
(2005). Formation of an online community of prac-
tice: An inductive study unearthing key elements.
In Proceedings of the 38th Hawaii International
Conference on System Sciences (pp. 1-10). IEEE:
Waikoloa Village, Island of Hawaii, USA.
Biuk-Aghai, R. P. (2001). Visualizing structural
and behavioural aspects of virtual collaboration.
IEEE, 279-284.
Brown, B., MacColl, I., Chalmers, M., Galani,
A., Randell, C., & Steed, A. (2003). Lessons from
the lighthouse: Collaboration in a shared mixed
reality system. In Proceedings of the CHI 2003:
Computer Human Interaction (pp. 577-584). Ft.
Lauderdale, Florida, USA. ACM.
Virtual Collaboration
Bures, V., & Ponce, D. (2005). Knowledge-based
support of newcomers integration into an organi-
zation. In Proceedings of the ITiCSE ’05: Tenth
Annual SIGCSE Conference on Innovation and
Technology in Computer Science Education (p.
372). Monte de Caparica, Portugal. ACM.
Cao, X., Forlines, C., & Balakrishnan, R. (2007).
Multi-user interaction using handheld projectors.
In Proceedings of the UIST ’07: Symposium on
User Interface Software and Technology (pp. 43-
52). Newport, Rhode Island, USA. ACM.
Carroll, J. M., Rosson, M. B., & Zhou, J. (2005).
Collective efficacy as a measure of community.
In the proceedings of the CHI 2005: Computer
Human Interaction (pp. 1–10). Portland, Oregon,
USA: ACM.
Chatti, M. A., Srirama, S., Kensche, D., & Cao,
Y. (2006). Mobile Web services for collabora-
tive learning. In Proceedings of the Fourth IEEE
International Workshop on Wireless, Mobile and
Ubiquitous Technology in Education (pp. 129-
133). Athens, Greece.
Chikh, A., Berkani, L., & Sarirete, A. (2008).
Communities of practice of e-learning “CoPE”
– Definition and concepts. In Proceedings of
the 2008 International Workshop on Advanced
Information Systems for Enterprises (pp. 31-37).
IEEE: Constantine, Algeria.
Chou, S.-W., & Chang, Y.-C. (2008). An empirical
investigation of knowledge creation in electronic
networks of practice: Social capital and theory of
planned behavior (TPB). In Proceedings of the
41st Hawaii International Conference on System
Sciences (pp. 1-10). IEEE: Waikoloa Village, Big
Island, Hawaii.
Coughlan, T., & Johnson, P. (2006). Interaction in
creative tasks: Ideation, representation and evalu-
ation in composition. In Proceedings of the CHI
2006: Computer Human Interaction (pp. 531-540)
Montréal, Québec, Canada. ACM.
Cox, A., & Morris, A. (2004). Information dynamics
and discourse in a distributed professional commu-
nity. In Proceedings of the 37th Hawaii International
Conference on System Sciences (pp. 1-10). IEEE:
Waikoloa Village, Big Island, Hawaii.
Crabtree, A., Benford, S., Rodden, T., Greenhalgh,
C., Flintham, M., Anastasi, R., et al. (2004). Or-
chestrating a mixed reality game ‘on the ground.’
In Proceedings of the CHI 2004: Computer Human
Interaction (pp. 391-398). Vienna, Austria. ACM.
Daily, M., Howard, M., Jerald, J., Lee, C., Martin,
K., McInnes, D., et al. (2000). Distributed design
review in virtual environments. In Proceedings of
the CVE 2000: ACM Collaborative Virtual Envi-
ronments (pp. 57-63). San Francisco, California,
USA. ACM.
Di Iorio, A., & Zacchiroli, S. (2006). Constrained
wiki: An oxymoron? In Proceedings of the WikiSym
’06: International Symposium on Wikis (pp. 89-98).
Odense, Denmark. ACM.
Fischer, G. (2004). Social creativity: Turning bar-
riers into opportunities for collaborative design.
In [Toronto, Canada. ACM.]. Proceedings of the
Participatory Design Conference, 2004, 152–161.
Fischer, G. (2005). Distances and diversity: Sources
for social creativity. In Proceedings of the C&C
’05: Fifth Conference on Creativity & Cognition
(pp. 128-136). London, UK. ACM.
Fraser, S., Lyons, M., Looser, J., & Seichter, H.
(2008). ‘Chinese Whispers’: Mediating oscilla-
tions between physical form and digital space. In
Proceedings of the International Conference on
Computer Graphics and Interactive Techniques.
Los Angeles, California, USA.
Gallagher, W. (2009). Rapt: Attention and the Fo-
cused Life. New York: The Penguin Press.
Gergle, D., Kraut, R. E., & Fussell, S. R. (2004).
Action as language in a shared visual space. CSCW
’04 [Chicago, Illinois, USA. ACM.]. Computer
Supported Cooperative Work, 487–496.
891

Goggins, S. P., Laffey, J., & Tsai, I.-C. (2007). Co-
operation and groupness: Community formation
in small online collaborative groups. In [Sanibel
Island, Florida, USA. ACM.]. Proceedings of the
GROUP, 07, 207–216.
Hai-Jew, S. (2009). The University Life Café: Pro-
moting students’emotional health. Educause Quar-
terly. Retrieved December 25, 2009, from http://
www.educause.edu/EDUCAUSE+Quarterly/
EDUCAUSEQuarterlyMagazineVolum/TheUni-
versityLifeCafPromotingS/192953
Halstead-Nussloch, R., Konneh, D., & Woodruff,
R. (2003). Communities of design practice in
electronic government. In Proceedings of the
CHI 2003: Computer Human Interaction (pp.
744- 745). New Horizons: Ft. Lauderdale, Florida,
USA. ACM.
Hoffman, R. R., Ziebell, D., Flore, S. M., &
Becerra-Fernandez, I. (2008). Knowledge man-
agement revisited. IEEE Intelligent Systems,
84–88. doi:10.1109/MIS.2008.51
Horain, P., Soares, J. M., Rai, P. K., & Bideau,
A. (2005). Virtually enhancing the perception of
user actions. In Proceedings of the ICAT 2005:
International Conference on Artificial Reality and
Telexistence (pp. 245-246). Christchurch, New
Zealand: ACM.
Hustad, E. (2007). A conceptual framework for
knowledge integration in distributed networks
of practice. In Proceedings of the 40th Hawaii
International Conference on System Sciences (pp.
189-190). Big Island, Hawaii.
Irani, L., Hayes, G. R., & Dourish, P. (2008).
Situated practices of looking: Visual practice in
an online world. In Proceedings of the CSCW
’08: Computer Supported Collaborative Work
(pp. 187-196). San Diego, California, USA. ACM.
Iriberri, A., & Leroy, G. (2009). A life-cycle
perspective on online community success. ACM
Computing Surveys, 41(2), 11:1-11:29.
892
Virtual Collaboration
Johnson, H., & Hyde, J. (2003). Towards model-
ing individual and collaborative construction of
jigsaws using task knowledge structures (TKS).
ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interac-
tion, 10(4), 339–387. doi:10.1145/966930.966934
Kahai, S. S., Carroll, E., & Jestice, R. (2007). Team
collaboration in virtual worlds. The Data Base for
Advances in Information Systems, 38(4), 61–68.
Kauff, P., & Schreer, O. (2002). An immersive 3D
video-conferencing system using shared virtual
team user environments. In Proceedings of the
CVE ’02: 4th International Conference on Col-
laborative Virtual Environments (pp. 105-112).
Bonn, Germany: ACM.
Kilner, P. G., & Hoadley, C. M. (2005). Anonymity
options and professional participation in an online
community of practice. In Proceedings of the 2005
Conference on Computer Support for Collabora-
tive Learning: The Next Ten Years (pp. 272-280).
Taipei, Taiwan: ACM.
Kraut, R. E., Gergle, D., & Fussell, S. R. (2002).
The use of visual information in shared visual
spaces: Informing the development of virtual co-
presence. In Proceedings of the CSCW 02: Com-
puter Supported Collaborative Work (pp. 31-40).
New Orleans, Louisiana, USA: ACM.
LaContora, J. M., & Mendonca, D. J. (2003). Com-
munities of practice as learning and performance
support systems. IEEE, 395-398.
Liccardi, I., Ounnas, A., Pau, R., Massey, E., Kin-
nunen, P., Lewthwaite, S., et al. (2007). The role of
social networks in students’ learning experiences.
In Proceedings of the Annual Joint Conference
Integrating Technology into Computer Science
Education (pp. 224 -237): Dundee, Scotland: ACM.
Lin, F.-R., & Hsueh, C.-M. (2002). Knowledge map
creation and maintenance for virtual communities
of practice. Information Processing and Manage-
ment: An International Journal, 42(2), 551–568.
doi:10.1016/j.ipm.2005.03.026
Virtual Collaboration
Lin, S.-C., & Lin, F.-R. (2006). Towards an ecologi-
cal perspective on the evolution of online communi-
ties of practice. In Proceedings of the 39th Hawaii
International Conference on System Sciences, 6,
(pp. 134:1). Waikoloa Village, Big Island, Hawaii.
Lipman-Blumen, J., & Leavitt, H. J. (1999). Hot
groups: Seeing them, feeding them, & using them
to ignite your organization. Oxford: Oxford Uni-
versity Press.
Lok, B., Naik, S., Whitton, M., & Brooks, F. P.
(2003). Incorporating dynamic real objects into
immersive virtual environments. Association of
Computing Machinery, 31 -40.
Louvieris, P., Collins, C., & Mashanovich, N.
(2009). Investigating the use and effectiveness of
virtual collaboration desks for collaborative mili-
tary planning. In Proceedings of the 42nd Hawaii
International Conference on System Sciences (pp. 1
-10). IEEE: Waikoloa Village, Big Island, Hawaii.
Mack, G. A., Fado, D., Blake, M. B., & Widdows, D.
(2006). An infrastructure for automating informa-
tion sharing in analytic collaboration. IEEE, 1-11.
Marin, B. F., Hunger, A., & Werner, S. (2005).
Corroborating role theory and intelligent agents: A
new paradigm to support collaborative learning? In
Proceedings of the 2005 IEEE/WIC/ACM Interna-
tional Conference on Intelligent Agent Technology
(pp. 690-693). France.
Mark, G., & Semann, B. (2008). Resilience in
collaboration: Technology as a resource for new
patterns of action. In Proceedings of the CSCW
’08: Computer Supported Collaborative Work
(pp. 137-146). San Diego, California, USA: ACM.
Moher, T. (2009). Putting interference to work in
the design of a whole-class learning activity. In
Proceedings of the IDC 2009: The 8th International
Conference on Interaction Design and Children
(pp. 115-122). Como, Italy.
Moore, T. D., & Serva, M. A. (2004). Under-
standing member motivation for contributing to
different types of virtual communities: A proposed
framework. In Proceedings of the SIGMIS-CPR
’07: Conference on Computer Personnel Research
(pp. 153-158). St. Louis, Missouri, USA: ACM.
Morde, A., Hou, J., Ganapathy, S. K., Correa, C.,
Krebs, A., & Rabiner, L. (2004). Collaboration
in parallel worlds. In Proceedings of the ICMI
’04: 6th International Conference on Multimodal
Interfaces (pp. 333 -334). State College, Penn-
sylvania, USA: ACM.
Muller, M., Carotenuto, L., Fontaine, M., Fried-
man, J., Newberg, H., Simpson, M., et al. (1999).
Social and computing solutions for voluntary
communities of practice: Designing community
space. In Proceedings of the 8th Workshop on
Enabling Technologies on Infrastructure for
Collaborative Enterprises (pp. 271-278). IEEE:
Stanford, California.
Müller-Tomfelde, C., & Schremmer, C. (2008).
‘Touchers’ and ‘mousers’: Commonalities and dif-
ferences in co-located collaboration with multiple
input devices. In Proceedings of the CHI 2008:
Computer Human Interaction: “Tangibles: Input
& Output” (pp. 1149 -1152). Florence, Italy: ACM.
Murphy, L. D. (2001). Digital documents in orga-
nizational communities of practice: A first look.
In Proceedings of the 34th Hawaii International
Conference on System Sciences (pp. 1-10). IEEE:
Waikoloa Village, Big Island, Hawaii.
Nadeau, B., & Williams, A. (2009). Tactful interac-
tion: Exploring interactive social touch through a
collaborative tangible installation. In Proceedings
of the Third International Conference on Tangible
and Embedded Interaction (pp. 147 -152). Cam-
bridge, United Kingdom: ACM.
893

Narayan, M., Waugh, L., Zhang, X., Bafna, P.,
& Bowman, D. (2005). Quantifying the benefits
of immersion for collaboration in virtual envi-
ronments. In Proceedings of the Virtual Reality
Software and Technology (VRST ’05) (pp. 78 -81).
Monterey, California, USA: ACM.
Nov, O., & Wattal, S. (2009). Social comput-
ing privacy concerns: Antecedents & effects. In
Proceedings of the CHI 2009: Computer Human
Interaction, “Privacy and Trust” (pp. 333-336).
Boston, Massachusetts, USA: ACM.
Penuel, W. R., Korbak, C., Cole, K. A., & Jump,
O. (1999). Imagination, production, and collabora-
tion in project-based learning using multimedia. In
Proceedings of the 1999 Conference on Computer
Support for Collaborative Learning (n.p.). Palo
Alto, California, USA.
Pingali, G., & Sukaviriya, N. (2003). Augmented
collaborative spaces. Conference ’03 (pp. 13–20).
Berkeley, California, USA: Association of Com-
puting Machinery.
Raija, H., Päivi, H., Sanna, J., & Tony, M. (2003).
Computer-supported collaboration in a scripted
3-D game environment. In Proceedings of the
2005 Conference on Computer Support for Col-
laborative Learning: The Next 10 Years (pp. 504
-508). Taipei, Taiwan: ACM.
Rohde, M., Klamma, R., & Wulf, V. (2005).
Establishing communities of practice among
students and start-up companies. In Proceedings
of the 2005 Conference on Computer Suport for
Collaborative Learning: The Next Ten Years (pp.
514 -519). Taipei, Taiwan: ACM.
Shands, D., Jacobs, J., Yee, R., & Sebes, E. J.
(2001). Secure virtual enclaves: Supporting coali-
tion use of distributed application technologies.
ACM Transactions on Information and System Se-
curity, 4(2), 103–133. doi:10.1145/501963.501964
894
Virtual Collaboration
Smits, M., & de Moor, A. (2004). Measuring
knowledge management effectiveness in communi-
ties of practice. In Proceedings of the 37th Hawaii
International Conference on System Sciences (pp.
1-9). IEEE: Waikoloa Village, Big Island, Hawaii.
Srinivasan, Y. B., & van Wijk, J. J. (2008). Support-
ing the analytical reasoning process in information
visualization. In Proceedings of the CHI 2008:
Computer Human Interaction (pp. 1237 -1246).
Florence, Italy: ACM.
Tuddenham, P. (2007). Distributed tabletops: Ter-
ritoriality and orientation in distributed collabora-
tion. CHI 2007: Computer Human Interaction (pp.
2237–2242). San Jose, California, USA: ACM.
Tutty, J., & White, B. (2006). Tablet classroom
interactions. In Proceedings of the 8th Australian
Conference on Computing Education (pp. 229-233).
Hobart, Australia: ACM.
Vizcaíno, A., Portillo-Rodriguez, J., Soto, J. P.,
& Piattini, M. (2009). Encouraging the reuse of
knowledge in communities of practice by using
a trust model. In Proceedings of the International
Conference on Information, Process, and Knowl-
edge Management (pp. 28-33). IEEE: Cancun,
Mexico.
Vranešić, H., & Rovan, L. (2009). Ontology-based
data warehouse development process. In Proceed-
ings of the ITI 2009 31st International Conference on
Information Technology Interfaces (pp. 205-210).
Cavtat, Croatia.
Wan, Z., Fang, Y., & Neufeld, D. J. (2008). Indi-
vidual learning and performance in communities
of practice. In Proceedings of the 41st Hawaii
International Conference on System Sciences (pp.
1-11). Waikoloa, Big Island, Hawaii, USA: IEEE.
Wang, Q. Y., Battocchi, A., Graziola, I., Pianesi, F.,
Tomasini, D., Zancanaro, M., & Nass, C. (2006).
The role of psychological ownership and ownership
markers in collaborative working environment.
ICMI ’06: The Eighth International Conference
on Multimodal Interfaces (pp. 225 -232). Banff,
Alberta, Canada: ACM.
Virtual Collaboration
White, C., Plotnick, L., Addams-Moring, R.,
Turoff, M., & Hiltz, S. R. (2008). Leveraging a
wiki to enhance virtual collaboration in the emer-
gency domain. In Proceedings of the 41st Hawaii
International Conference on System Sciences (pp.
1-10). IEEE: Waikoloa Village, Big Island, Hawaii.
Wyeld, T. G. (2005). Role play in 3D virtual envi-
ronments: A pedagogic case study. In Proceedings
of the CHINZ ’05: the ACM SIGCHI New Zeland
Chapter’s International Conference on Human
Computer Interactions (pp. 61 -66). Auckland,
New Zealand: ACM.
Yu, J., Jiang, Z., & Chan, H. C. (2007). Knowledge
contribution in problem solving virtual communi-
ties: The mediating role of individual motivations.
SIGMIS-CPR ’07: Computer Personnel Research
(pp. 144–152). St. Louis, Missouri, USA: ACM.
Zhang, W., Luo, J., & Wu, B. (2008). Study on the
trust mechanism in communities of practice. In
Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference
on Automation and Logistics (pp. 2116 -2119).
Qingdao, China.
Zhang, X., & Furnas, G. W. (2003). The effec-
tiveness of multiscale collaboration in virtual
environments. In Proceedings of the CHI 2003:
Computer Human Interaction (pp. 790-791). New
Horizons: Ft. Lauderdale, Florida, USA: ACM.
KEY TERMS AND DEFINITIONS
Cloud Computing: The uses of the Internet
to deliver software and store digital information
instead of using local physical technological
infrastructures.
Collaboratory: A “center without walls, in
which the nation’s researchers can perform their
research without regard to physical location, in-
teracting with colleagues, accessing instrumenta-
tion, sharing data and computational resources,
[and] accessing information in digital libraries”
(according to W. Wulf, 1989).↜
Collaboration: The act of working together
in a joint, cooperative effort.
Fidelity: Accuracy, adherence to facts and
details, exactness of features.
Global Virtual Teaming: The working togeth-
er of remote team members across geographical,
national, cultural, and functional borders.
Intellectual Property (IP): Property rights
that stem from original and inventive thought
(including copyright, trademarks, and patents).
Interface: The designed interconnection be-
tween humans and computers.
Knowledge Management: The collection,
storage, vetting, management, and distribution
of relevant information.
Lean Channel: A spare low-sensory com-
munications link or tool (as compared to a thick
channel, which carries more sensory information).
Local Virtual Teaming: The working together
of local team members who are close enough to
meet face-to-face but who mediated means to
collaborate for a majority of their interactions,
decision-making, and collaborating.
Multi-Scale: Reflecting varying sizes or stan-
dards of measure (as in time, in size, in distances)
in virtual and immersive spaces.
Social Presence: The multiple representations
of people’s presences in a shared online space
and interaction.
Telepresence: The conveyance of a person’s
“being” in the virtual or online or mediated space
(communicated through icons, voice, textual
information, voice, imagery, avatar, and other
representations).
Virtualization: The translating of an idea or
scene or personage into representations in virtual
immersive spaces.
895
896

Chapter 54
Blackboard Learning System
on College Campuses
Janaki Santhiveeran
California State University, Long Beach, USA

ABSTRACT
This chapter presents a synopsis of the Blackboard Learning System (BLS), highlights how the BLS has
been used in college campuses, and describes the uses of Blackboard tools based on author’s experi-
ence in California State University, Long Beach for graduate level courses. Also, this chapter reflects
on the author’s experiences in developing and facilitating online classroom groups by using Blackboard
tools. Topics discussed include the use of electronic bulletin board and virtual chat in creating online
classroom groups. Group dynamics and procedures such as group formation, membership, cohesion, the
roles of facilitators, and interaction patterns are summarized. The classroom group interaction pattern is
discussed using sample online postings. The author describes how Teaching and Learning Cycle (TLC)
framework is enhanced with the integration of the Blackboard tools for course management, interac-
tion, and assessment of student progress in learning. Finally, this chapter concludes with advantages,
recommendations, and future trends.

INTRODUCTION course software programs, Blackboard is by far

The arrival of web-based course design software
programs such as Web CT, Blackboard, Mallard,
eCollege, and Moodle into college campuses
is changing teaching and learning (Derouza &
Fleming, 2003; Fredrickson, 1999; Landry &
Hartman, 2006; McCollum, 1997). Among these
DOI: 10.4018/978-1-61692-906-0.ch054
the easiest interface for course creation (Fredrick-
son, 1999; Lim, 2001; Landry & Hartman, 2006;
Rempel & McMillen, 2008) and for creating online
groups across disciplines (Pinch & Graves, 2000;
Taylor, 2004). The main focus of this chapter is
the Blackboard Learning System (BLS), which
was created in an academic setting. For more
than a decade, Blackboard Inc. has been flexibly
modifying their tools toward meeting the needs
Blackboard Learning System on College Campuses
of adult learners (Blackboard Inc., 2009; DeNeui
& Dodge, 2006; McCollum, 1997). The earlier
versions of this software were known as Course
Info releases (Blackboard Inc., 2001) and the new
versions include Blackboard Academic SuiteTM
Release 8.0 and Blackboard LearnTM Release 9.0
(Blackboard Inc., 2009; Hwang & Arbaugh, 2009;
Rempel & McMillen, 2008).
Some of these technology-based pedagogical
tools are used to create online groups to increase
interaction and mutual collaborations (Taylor,
2004; Wernet, Olliges, & Delicath, 2000). Web
based discussion as a teaching strategy is growing
in institutions of higher education (Dietz-Uhler
& Bishop-Clark, 2001; Pinch & Graves, 2000;
Gingerich, Abel, D’Aprix, Nordquist, & Rieb-
schleger, 1999; Huff, 2001; McConnell, l994;
Page, Jencius, Rehfuss, Dean, Petruzzi, Olson,
& Sager, 2003). Online classroom groups are
often formed to enhance subsequent traditional
face-to-face meetings (Dietz-Uhler & Bishop-
Clark, 2001; Wernet, Olliges, & Delicath, 2000)
while others are formed to promote learning and
collaboration in distance education classrooms
(Johnson & Huff, 2000; Randolph & Krause,
2002). Electronic Bulletin Board (EBB) is most
commonly used by educators in higher education
(Pinch & Graves, 2000; Randolph & Krause, 2002;
Taylor, 2004) to enhance learning and interaction
(Page et al., 2003; Pinch & Graves, 2000; Taylor,
2004). Only Page et al. used PalTalk, which is
audio conferencing software. Johnson and Huff
(2000) used e-mail to interact with on-campus
and distance education social work students. They
found that students used e-mail more for practical
reasons than for academic enrichment. All other
studies identified in this section predominantly
used text based discussion forums for online
group discussions. Randolph and Krause (2002)
found that both on-campus and distance educa-
tion social work students are less likely to use the
Internet for mutual support and more likely to use
the online tools for individual problem solving
and data sharing. Despite the benefits identified
by several authors, there is very limited literature
that recognizes a classroom as a group (Randolph
& Krause, 2002). In addition, literature written on
online group dynamics and group processes has
been emerging only in recent years (Michinov,
Michinov, & Toczek-Capelle, 2004). Therefore,
a discussion of online groups is important as this
article focuses on online technologies that expand
the opportunities to interact and study the group
formation, characteristics and dynamics of online
classroom groups.
BLACKBOARD LEARNING SYSTEM
ON COLLEGE CAMPUSES
The BLS has been widely used in college campuses
across the globe for both enhancing traditional
classrooms with online activities and for offer-
ing an entire course online. Several studies offer
a perspective on how the BLS has been used
in college campuses in both undergraduate and
graduate education (DeNeui & Dodge, 2006; De
Leng, Dolmans, Muijtjens, & van der Vileuten,
2006; Fredrickson, 1999; Hwang & Arbaugh,
2009; Landry & Hartman, 2006; Lim, 2001;
Rempel & McMillen, 2008; Roberts-DeGennaro,
Brown, Min, & Siegel, 2005; Santhiveeran,
2002). For example, Lim (2001) used asynchro-
nous communication tools in a course involving
laboratory work. Similarly, discussion boards
and group pages were used by graduate students
in social work to assist students with formulat-
ing research problems (Santhiveeran, 2002). In
a study of undergraduate medical curriculum,
students used the Virtual Learning Environment
(VLE) to make quality case presentations (De
Leng, Dolmans, Muijtjens, & van der Vileuten,
2006). In addition, hyperlinks for library articles
during chat sessions supported medical students’
problem-based learning process. An announce-
ment tool and discussion forums offered support
for graduate social work students while they were
doing their internship in human service agencies
897

(Roberts-DeGennaro, et al., 2005). Likewise, San-
thiveeran (2002) found that the teacher’s corner,
using discussion boards, increased students’access
to their instructor beyond the class time and helped
students to participate in learning 24 hours a day
seven days a week. In the same study, students
found course documents and discussion forums to
be extremely helpful in learning research methods
(Santhiveeran, 2002). Graduate business majors
favored an assignment tool over the digital drop
box because it was easy to use and had fewer steps
(Landry & Hartman, 2006).
Studies evaluating the impact of the BLS focus
on impact of technology on student performance,
user trends, and hardships. A positive association
was found between the use of the BLS and the
student performance Results were more powerful
for men than for women in introductory psychol-
ogy courses (DeNeui & Dodge, 2006). Also, a
summative evaluation of research methods courses
found effectiveness of the BLS in increasing stu-
dent-teacher communication (Santhiveeran, 2002;
Santhiveeran, 2006). As first time users, several
students identified lack of time and difficulties
in performing online tasks as major challenges.
In the same study, students found that small task
groups, using discussion board, were least helpful
due to the nature of the course content.
Gender differences were noted by some
authors. For example, female students used
Blackboard tools more often than male students
in face-to-face (F2F) classrooms with online
learning tasks (DeNeui & Dodge, 2006). These
students, on average, accessed the course 89 times.
Graduate students were involved extensively in
online tasks and accessed online communication
capabilities more often than was actually needed
(Santhiveeran, 2006). Overuse may take away
from the time needed to attend to other learning
tasks. The use of BLS prove that college students
acknowledged the importance of new technology,
which influenced how they actively learn, interact,
and collaborate with others.
898
Blackboard Learning System on College Campuses
BLS in Graduate CSULB Courses
California State University Long Beach (CSULB)
is located in Long Beach, California, USA.
CSULB offers both undergraduate and gradu-
ate programs. Since the university is upbeat in
helping faculty members to integrate the BLS,
the university automatically generates virtual
courses for all classes each semester for the past
several years. Yet, the individual instructor makes
a determination on whether to integrate the BLS
into teaching or not. The Blackboard’s enterprise
feature helps the university automate enrollment
of students into the system. The BLS permits the
university to determine their security levels from
its local server. Each registered student at CSULB
accesses the online materials using their unique
student identification number and password. The
author has been using the BLS at CSULB to of-
fer a blended learning environment for 60 plus
graduate level classes and six distance education
classes for over a span of 10 years. The Teaching
and Learning Cycle (TLC) framework is integrated
into these classes to design a learning environment
for adult students (Santhiveeran, 2000). The TLC
framework encompasses organization of course
documents, creating opportunities for problem
solving, interconnected learning tasks, constant
feedback, and ongoing change in course delivery.
The integration of the Blackboard tools and the
TLC framework offered exciting opportunities
for the author by promoting speed of information
transformation and student learning through struc-
ture and consistency in delivering the course con-
tent (see Figure 1). The framework interconnects
the teaching and learning tasks that are performed
when a course is delivered. Therefore, the TLC
framework is course specific. The framework is
based on the assumption that effective teaching
supports learning activities to enable students to
comprehend course objectives. The framework
stresses the importance of instructor-student in-
teraction and collaboration among students and is
Blackboard Learning System on College Campuses
Figure 1. Teaching and Learning Cycle (TLC) Enhanced with Blackboard Capabilities
inclusive of learning that occurs in F2F, blended,
and online environments.
The following examples are presented to de-
scribe how the author has integrated five impor-
tant capabilities of the BLS in graduate level
courses over a period of 10 years. These capa-
bilities include a static information delivery
system, hyperlink capabilities, interactive com-
munication tools, document management and
file-exchange systems, and assessment systems
(see Figure 2).
The static information delivery system encom-
passes course documents and announcements (see
Figure 3). This feature allowed the author to
upload course documents including syllabus,
lecture outlines, handouts, samples, assignment
guidelines, and periodic announcements. Since
the Blackboard interface supports several file
formats including Micro Soft Word, Power Point,
and Excel, PDF, gif, jpeg, and video files (Black-
board Inc., 2007), transformation of these course
documents is typically simple. This tool increased
the speed at which information was delivered and
transferred to students.
Hyperlink capabilities enabled the author to
link documents within and outside the course. A
hyperlink is an inserted link in a word or a phrase
that takes the user from one document to another
document or a website when the user clicks the
word. Hyperlinks were created in the syllabus and
assignment guidelines in order to access journal
abstracts or full-text articles that are available
through CSULB’s library databases such as Aca-
demic Search Complete, PsycInfo, Social Ser-
vices Abstract, Eric, and Lexis Nexis Academic.
Additionally, hyperlinks within announcements
enabled students to access documents instantly
that were posted elsewhere within the course.
899
 Blackboard Learning System on College Campuses

Figure 2. Blackboard Interface (Control Panel Tools for Instructors)

Hyperlinks to external websites were often linked
using “External Link” feature of the BLS.
Document management and file-exchange
systems encompass the digital drop box and assign-
ment tool. The digital drop box, a file-exchange
system in earlier versions of the Blackboard in-
terface, allowed students to archive their work or
submit their assignment for grading. In the new
releases, the author used the assignment tool to
receive assignments from students (see Figure
4)). The assignment tool permitted the author to
download the student assignments for review and
feedback in a timely and efficient way. This tool
promoted time management and manage student
submissions effectively.
The assessment system includes various tools
including surveys, online quizzes, and a grade
book. The author created online quizzes that were
timed and provided instant scores. Online quizzes
facilitated instant and ongoing feedback to stu-
dents. The author used the survey feature to col-
lect data about students at the beginning of a
semester. The grade book feature enabled the
author to update student grades throughout the
semester. Interestingly, the students visited grade
book many more times than expected in a given
semester allowing ongoing feedback to students
about their progress. Communication tools offered
opportunities for both synchronous and asynchro-
nous interaction in live and distance education
classrooms. In addition to posting messages,

900

(c) 2011 IGI Global. All Rights Reserved.

Blackboard Learning System on College Campuses
Figure 3. Blackboard Interface (Course Document View)
students had an option to attach files and delete
files. The author often created subgroups within
a classroom depending upon learning tasks. Small
group members met remotely online to brainstorm
about their assignments. Such group discussions
offered opportunities to recognize struggles, to
offer support, and to provide constructive feed-
back. Since the author did not grade student
participation, there was a huge variation in their
involvement.
Electronic Bulletin Board
Electronic Bulletin Board (EBB) is a network that
offers a means for users to interact 24/7 at their
convenience. Messages posted in the EBB system
can be set to be viewed either by anyone who has
access to the Internet or only by registered users.
The EBB system offers members a means to
(c) 2011 IGI Global. All Rights Reserved.
maintain continuity by creating and maintaining
threaded discussions. The author has prioritized
and timed each task based on project deadlines.
The author usually incorporated topical themes
in online classroom groups based on need. Threads
were based on the graded assignments and discus-
sion topics. Students were resourceful in posting
helpful tips and Web site links relevant to the
current discussion topics. Others were passive in
learning by only reading the postings.
Small Task Groups
Blackboard software offered the capability of de-
veloping subgroups within large classroom groups
(Blackboard Inc., 2004). Self-selected student
leaders voluntarily organized and lead small task
group discussions. Students became forthcoming
with their difficulties as online groups offered
901

Figure 4. Assignment Tool
opportunities to recognize the struggles of other
students with the content. The group members
who lived geographically apart in several differ-
ent counties met online in between classes. The
members who did not attend synchronized group
meetings actively contributed to the discussion
at their convenience using topic-based threads.
Members learned to give other members posi-
tive feedback. Consecutively, the online groups
increased their cohesiveness and productivity.
Classroom task groups are usually short term or
for an entire term. When no grade was assigned
for online participation, there was wide variation
in student participation.
Virtual Chat
The author has utilized the virtual classroom
feature of Blackboard (Blackboard Inc., 2004) to
902
Blackboard Learning System on College Campuses
organize synchronized classroom group meetings.
Chatroom was mainly selected to run single ses-
sion groups. Topics for single session chatrooms
were selected based on the needs and struggles of
students with a specific project or content area. The
author has used chatrooms for two purposes: 1)
for classroom group discussions and 2) for virtual
office hour or individual consultations.
Virtual office hours were used to reach out
to distance education students. The author often
assumed the role of a leader by advising students
and offering virtual consultations via virtual chat.
The questions were usually directed at the author,
as she was the facilitator of the group. Students
interacted with their peers whenever more than a
handful of students participated during a virtual
office hour session. The author did not have a
guarantee of seeing the same students during ev-
ery office hour. Despite the time limitations and
Blackboard Learning System on College Campuses
the nature of being a single session group, each
virtual office hour session provided opportunities
for growth in student knowledge. Do virtual office
hour sessions qualify to be called group meetings?
Since classroom participation is often time
consuming and skewed due to being dominated by
a limited number of students contributing to class
discussions, the author has used chatrooms dur-
ing face-to-face (F2F) classrooms. For instance,
students were asked to post their questions in the
virtual classroom and then given the answers to
their questions verbally, allowing the author to
address every single student’s question. Such
practices were time efficient during exam reviews
and were effective in engaging the quieter students
by posting their questions. Group dynamics and
procedures are discussed in the following section
based on the author’s experience in developing
and facilitating online classroom groups using
EBB and virtual chat.
Communication tools were also utilized for
getting progressive feedback to make constant
improvements in course delivery, an important
component of the TLC framework. Since all stu-
dent communications are stamped with time and
date, the students self-evaluated the extent of their
participation in online activities with ease. The
author used peer ratings not only to get feedback
on one another’s postings or assignments but also
assess student presentations. This was possible
when the course was taught in a lab setting.
The author has widely used the Virtual Learn-
ing Environment (VLE) and Elluminate Live, for
synchronized classroom group discussions with
the entire group for splitting the class into small
groups. The online chat was mainly selected to
run single session group discussions. Elluminate
Live offered opportunities for text and voice chat
and recording capabilities to save and post chat
conversations at a later date. The author used text
based chat for online office hours, brainstorming
sessions, and exam reviews. Exam reviews enabled
even quieter students to participate in discussions.
Virtual office hours were extremely valuable to
reach students at multiple locations especially in
distance education courses. These communication
tools increased active engagement, mutual sharing,
cohesiveness, and collaboration.
Students showed enthusiasm in asking ques-
tions and interacting online. The following post-
ings were retrieved from an online classroom group
using EBB. Several students were interested in
doing the graded projects correctly and their main
goal was to increase productivity. Therefore, they
posted their work at the EBB and asked for the
author’s feedback. A sample interaction pattern
from a large classroom group is as follows. These
postings show how students view the instructor as
an expert and depend on the instructor’s direction
and feedback.
Student (S): T, Will you please give me some
feedback for my lit review? Thanks!
[Posted two paragraphs of her work]
Instructor (T): S, you have demonstrated your
understanding of how to write literature review
of a research article, I am glad you followed the
assignment guideline. Paragraph 1: Looks fine.
Expand after you review other studies. Paragraph
2: You have presented study variables and find-
ings. Suggestions: 1) Add how perceptions about
homelessness differed by gender, educational level
of the respondents, … 2) Discuss about the study
population (study participants) so that association
between participant’s personal characteristics and
perceptions will be clear. 3) Present other findings
relevant to your study variables. Good-luck with
your literature review!
Student (S): Thank you for your suggestions
and input. All is well taken!
In a second sample, several students were in-
terested in understanding the process and concepts
discussed in class. The questions posted in this
category included:
Student 1: Could you please provide a pre-
cise definition and differentiation between RE-
SEARCH articles and other types of articles?
Student 2: I have decided to do a lit review.
Can you please help me with the outline? When
903

can I expect to have it? Could you put it on-line
for me?
Small task group interactions fostered mutual
support. Students helped one another via EBB as
students had the privilege of starting a new thread
and maintain threads by responding to student
postings. Threaded discussions offered continuity
irrespective of the time of response and the person
who was responding to a posting.
The following online posting demonstrates
how mutual assistance occurs in small task groups.
Small classroom groups enabled members to sup-
port and challenge appropriately and to provide
valuable feedback.
Student (G): T, I have been mulling over the
information that you shared with me on Saturday,
during class. Truthfully, I have been thinking about
ways to complete the project. I am hopeful that I
will be able to use the topic because of the long
history I have with the … community and my be-
lief that education is not accessed because it is so
intimidating! …. Before I get more excited about
possible taking … I want to know how feasible
it is and what the scope of work would entail. …
Would I be doing literary search to find defi-
cits? ….
Would I need to conduct a survey or use any
type of instrument? …
Student (L): Hi G, I hope you don’t mind me
responding to your message for T (the instructor).
I think that your topic is interesting as I myself can
relate. … I can totally relate to not having a clue
about the educational resources that were avail-
able to me when I first began my journey through
college. However, I think your topic is too broad
or maybe I’m just not clear as to your objective.
Are you looking to survey the … residents about
their knowledge of educational resources for their
HS children? Do you have a specific target/site? It
seems as though you may need to narrow (your)
topic. Good luck!
Members felt comfortable in expressing
their reactions to one another. A feeling of “I”
emerged quickly into a “We” feeling. Overall,
904
Blackboard Learning System on College Campuses
online classroom group interaction enriched the
learning experience and promoted collaboration.
Students began to feel connected to one another
due to their 24/7 online group interaction. Online
discussion forums minimized the distance between
full-time and part-time students, traditional and
non-traditional students, and students from distant
sites. The extended interactions of students lead to
the development of special interest groups, social
groups and study groups in the offline world.
Members were encouraged to select goals for
themselves. Individual goals selected by the mem-
bers were to improve an understanding of course
content, to learn about the procedures such as how
to do lab assignments, to increase self-confidence,
and to interact with other students. Creating online
classroom groups using EBB and virtual chat do
not have the same constraints as traditional groups.
Face-to-face (F2F) classroom groups needed
classroom time to function. However, online
classroom groups can function independent of
time and space and can accomplish several tasks
outside the classroom time. Classroom task groups
are usually short term, lasted from 4 weeks to 16
weeks. Online classroom groups recreated the
classroom experience for students at their desk-
top. EBB offered opportunities for creating large
course based groups by combining traditional F2F
courses or distance education courses.
ADVANTAGES AND
RECOMMENDATIONS
Although the author has used the BLS in several
of her courses over a period of 10 years, the author
customized each course, using only the needed
tools that were suitable to the learning needs of
the students. There are several advantages to us-
ing the BLS.
Single session virtual group sessions were
popular among distance education students as
they offered opportunities to seek consultations
and to get answers for their questions. These single
Blackboard Learning System on College Campuses
session groups were active whenever students
chose to seek consultations. Although all students
had access to virtual office hour sessions, the
membership for virtual single session group was
self-selected.
Small task groups offered opportunities for
students to convene online group meetings at
their leisure. Topic based threaded discussions
facilitated students to post messages, questions and
answers at their convenience. Group membership
is given to all registered students in online class-
room groups. Members were randomly assigned
to small task groups. The group members were
terminated from each online classroom group
at the end of a semester, therefore the termina-
tion process in these online classroom groups
was smooth. The members were self-motivated
and participated voluntarily in online classroom
groups, as they had to log on to the course Web
sites to participate in online classroom groups.
The author mainly facilitated large online class-
room groups. The largest online classroom group
that was moderated by the author consisted of 49
graduate students. Students viewed the instructor
as an expert and developed dependency on the
directions offered by the author. Although the
author has created several small task groups with
less than six students, students then voluntarily
took the initiative in organizing and facilitating
their online task group meetings. Therefore, small
online classroom groups were facilitated and lead
by student leaders who were self-selected. Despite
several advantages, caution must be exercised
while allowing self-selected students to facilitate
small task groups. At times, self-selected leaders
did not facilitate growth of members instead they
hustled over personal problems and issues. Oc-
casionally, self-selected group leaders lost focus
and slipped into advise-giving.
The author found EBB forums to be an ideal
tool for online classroom groups for the follow-
ing reasons. They are easy to moderate with topic
based threaded messages; convenient in fostering
discussions at the convenience of group members;
and are valuable in offering thoughtful responses
for students who needed solid directions. In online
classroom groups, it is easy to foster collabora-
tions and mutual support. The author often had
a planned agenda for online classroom groups.
Regardless of their structure, topics for classroom
groups are often determined by the emerging
concerns of students regarding content area and
class projects. Online classroom group members
learned to support and challenge other students
appropriately by recognizing differences between
them. Caution must be exercised as instructor
lead groups might lead to too much teaching and
might foster dependency on the directions offered
by the instructor.
Classroom Group Interaction
Since Blackboard has offered user logs document-
ing the activity of group members, the author had
the opportunity to monitor and assess the usage
of passive members, part-time, full-time, distance
education students, and male and female as well.
Online classroom groups encouraged even quieter
students to contribute to online group discussions
or to participate passively by reading online group
postings. Some visited the online classroom groups
much more than their peers, as they were inspired
to read group postings regularly.
Online participation varied depending on
the individual student. In F2F groups, a group
member who was not originally motivated was
motivated by listening to others and by involving
themselves in the experiential activities of the
group. Similarly, a passive member who read the
online postings was encouraged to participate in
online group discussions. The online classroom
group discourses are easy to archive to document
the growth and stages of group development. Such
capabilities offered by BLS made group analysis
of student participation and interaction simple.
The students who had learning as their primary
goal sought consultations frequently from the
instructor by posting questions. Students who
905

were computer savvy and intended to support
others posted valuable web resources. Students
who usually completed their work ahead of time
and believed in productivity and mutual support
actively organized and facilitated small task group
meetings. The students who frequently requested
consultations from the instructor were active on-
line in posting messages. Students who were social
regularly participated in online group meetings.
The students who were quiet were active by
reading and keeping up with online postings.
Students who were not comfortable with the use
of technology did not participate actively in online
group meetings. User logs of online participation
showed that part-time students have participated
online much more than full-time students. Distance
education students actively sought consultations
during virtual office hours, single session groups.
Female students took more turns than male stu-
dents by posting several messages. Likewise,
Holden (1993) reported a difference between
male and female in their cooperative group work.
Online classroom group dynamics promoted team
work and allowed students to be accountable
for their work. Since the author rarely offered
grades for online group participation, students felt
comfortable in learning to interact using online
communication tools. Similarly, in their study
of undergraduates, Sassenberg and Boos (2003)
found that interaction patterns are partly related
to group behaviors in their offline world and are
motivated by the behaviors that meet individual
goals and identity.
Built-in email capability was valuable to
email course announcements instantly by a click
of a single button. The navigational bar allowed
students to navigate through various course com-
ponents within three to four clicks. The author
added navigation bars when needed to highlight
important learning tasks. Students spent as much
time as they wanted in each area, which enabled
students to explore the learning atmosphere cre-
ated by the author. Course statistics and track
user tools allowed the instructor to assess the us-
906
Blackboard Learning System on College Campuses
age of course materials and tools throughout the
semester. Assignment tools enabled the author to
set the deadline and to download student projects
in batches or all at once for grading. The BLS al-
lowed the author to combine classes by creating
only one online class whenever she was assigned
to teach multiple sections of the same course.
The following recommendations are offered to
promote the higher level of use among the college
educators who are using the BLS:
• Creating and delivering online quizzes for
practice will offer progressive feedback to
the students and encourage learning from
anytime and from anywhere.
• Creating online modules using various ca-
pabilities of the BLS will increase learn-
ing time while decreasing the F2F seating
time.
• Active use of tools for peer assessment
will promote reflective and responsible
learners.
• Integrating Elluminate Live (live chat) will
allow instructors to record not only the chat
conversations but also class lectures. Use
of Elluminate Live during office hours will
enable instructors to reach out to students
who might not come for F2F office hours.
• Periodic assessment and the usage of
course materials using course statistics and
track user features will enable instructors
to make ongoing changes in adjusting the
learning environment.
The following recommendations are proposed
to maximize the use of online classroom group
discussions as a teaching strategy.
• Instructors must identify and describe the
purpose of online classroom groups and
group sessions. Instructors must have an
agenda and communicate that information
during pregroup preparation sessions. This
will reduce anxiety among students about
Blackboard Learning System on College Campuses
online classroom groups and will facilitate
students in making an absolute use of the
classroom group to make progress.
• Students must be encouraged to develop
the goal(s) for themselves. Such goals will
facilitate their interaction and online group
behavior.
• Students must be oriented with the process
of learning and the adjustments needed
throughout the growth of online classroom
forums.
• Instructors must balance online sup-
port with real-world in-person support to
promote the educational value of online
classroom groups in minimizing students’
frustration.
• Instructors must balance the opposing im-
pacts of online group size and activity lev-
els to provide a benefit for classroom group
members.
FUTURE TRENDS
Making use of the technology is important in this
era where growing number of students are wired
from everywhere including their own classroom.
The following suggestions are offered to promote
students’ use of the BLS from their classrooms.
• There is a need for having classrooms
equipped with smart panels for students
so that students may access their learning
management systems from their class-
rooms, and thus learn the use of BLS.
• Since increasing number of students own
laptops or cell phones with internet access,
having online discussions or activities by
sharing available technology is becoming
a reality right from classrooms.
• Streaming and recording lectures and chat
conversations is becoming feasible for fu-
ture listening and viewing with the use of
Elluminate Live.
CONCLUSION
The BLS tools have changed completely how the
courses were taught in college campuses. A real-
istic assessment of faculty and student time and
available resources is important for a successful
integration of various capabilities of the BLS in
teaching as time goes on, increased acceptance
of technology among undergraduate and gradu-
ate level students will change the landscape of
college classrooms by changing the way students
learn by generously accessing learning tools right
from their classroom. By evaluating the student
needs and available technological capabilities,
the educators can change the classrooms and the
ways in which technology can be used in everyday
learning. Such realistic assessment will increase
the active use of technology to support learning
tasks and to promote collaborative learning.
The technologies discussed in this chapter
are valuable in teaching social skills through
modeling and behavioral rehearsal and in pro-
moting the collective efficacy of task groups.
The author has participated in several online
groups and have used these media on a regular
basis; thus, the difference between online and F2F
groups has narrowed down. Although the author
is extremely comfortable with online text-based
interaction, the author needed to be cautious in
not generalizing this feeling to others as several of
the students, including online distance education
students, demanded frequent F2F meetings. The
author has largely used online classroom group
meetings and small classroom task groups as a
supplement to traditional and distance education
courses. Therefore, the author’s experience with
online classroom groups might be different from
those who had only online interaction with their
students.
This chapter is the author’s personal reflec-
tion of experiences she has had in developing
and facilitating online classroom groups. This
chapter raises many more questions on group
dynamics and procedures than it answers, as we
907

know very little about the educational potential
of online classroom groups. This chapter invites
a thorough exploration of group dynamics and
group processes to understand the benefits and
challenges associated with synchronous and
asynchronous classroom groups. The technolo-
gies discussed in this chapter can contribute new
vitality to classroom activities and enhance online
classroom group process. At the same time, one
must acknowledge that such change will not be
accomplished without a strong commitment by
the educational institutions, instructors, staff,
and students.
REFERENCES
Blackboard Inc. (2001). Welcome to Blackboard.
Retrieved November 1, 2001, from http://www.
blackboard.com
Blackboard Inc. (2004). Blackboard. Retrieved
June 14, 2004, from http://www.blackboard.com
Blackboard Inc. (2007). More Quick Tutorials.
Retrieved October 30, 2007, from http://www.
blackboard.com/quicktutorials/quicktutorials.htm
Blackboard Inc. (2009). Engaging learners, for
engaging learners. Retrieved October 29, 2009,
from http://www.blackboard.com/Teaching-
Learning/Learn-Platform.aspx
De Leng, B. A., Dolmans, D. H. J. M., Muijtjens,
A., & van der Vieten, C. P. (2006). Student per-
ceptions of a virtual learning environment for
a problem-based learning undergraduate cur-
riculum. Medical Education, 40(6), 568–575.
doi:10.1111/j.1365-2929.2006.02484.x
DeNeui, D. L., & Dodge, T. L. (2006). Asynchro-
nous learning networks and student outcomes: The
utility of online learning components in hybrid
courses. Journal of Instructional Psychology,
33(4), 256–259.
908
Blackboard Learning System on College Campuses
Derouza, E., & Fleming, M. (2003). A comparison
of in-class quizzes vs. online quizzes on student
exam performance. Journal of Computing in
Higher Education, 14(2), 121–134. doi:10.1007/
BF02940941
Dietz-Uhler, B., & Bishop-Clark, C. (2001).
The use of computer-mediated communication
to enhance subsequent face-to-face discussions.
Computers in Human Behavior, 17(3), 269–283.
doi:10.1016/S0747-5632(01)00006-1
Fredrickson, S. (1999). Untangling a tangled web:
An overview of web-based instruction programs.
Technological Horizons in Education Journal,
26(11), 67–74.
Gingerich, W. J., Abel, E. M., D’Apriz, A., Nor-
dquist, G., & Riebschleger, J. (1999). Using a
listserv to extend classroom learning: A Content
Analysis. Journal of Technology in Human Ser-
vices, 16(4), 1–16. doi:10.1300/J017v16n04_01
Holden, C. (1993). Giving girls a chance: patterns of
talk in co-operative group work. Gender and Educa-
tion, 5, 179–189. doi:10.1080/0954025930050205
Huff, M. (2001). Using technological tools to
enhance learning in social work diversity courses.
Journal of Technology in Human Services, 18(1-
2), 51–64. doi:10.1300/J017v18n01_05
Hwang, A., & Arbaugh, J. (2009). Seeking feed-
back in blended learning: Competitive versus
cooperative student attitudes and their links to
learning outcome. Journal of Computer As-
sisted Learning, 25, 280–293. doi:10.1111/j.1365-
2729.2009.00311.x
Johnson, M. M., & Huff, M. T. (2000). Students’
use of computer-mediated communication in a
distance education course. Research on Social
Work Research, 10(4), 519–522.
Landry, B. J. L., & Hartman, S. J. (2006). Engaging
students with online assignments: a replacement
for digital dropboxes and paper assignments.
British Journal of Educational Technology, 37(5),
803–809. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8535.2006.00604.x
Blackboard Learning System on College Campuses

Lim, C. P. (2001). Holistic approach towards the Santhiveeran, J. (2000). Teaching and learning
use of an integrated online delivery and manage- cycle: A computer based solution for curriculum
ment system. Journal of Educational Media, 26(1), management. Conference Proceedings - Informa-
19–33. doi:10.1080/13581650123219 tion Technologies for Social Work Education and
Practice. SC: College of Social Work, University
McCollum, K. (1997). A new industry sprouts up to
of South Carolina. CD Rom.
help professors put courses online. The Chronicle
of Higher Education, 44(10), 33–34. Santhiveeran, J. (2002). Focus Groups: An
approach for summative evaluation of Web-
McConnell, D.(l994). Managing open learning
enhancement. Professional Development: The
in computer supported collaborative learning
Journal of Continuing Education in Social Work,
environments. Studies in Higher Education, 19,
5(2), 46–57.
341–358. doi:10.1080/03075079412331381920
Santhiveeran, J. (2005). Building online com-
Michinov, N., Michinov, E., & Toczek-Capelle,
munication into courses: Possibilities and cau-
M.-C. (2004). Social Identify, Group Processes,
tions. Computers in the Schools, 22(1/2), 43–55.
and Performance in Synchronous Computer-
doi:10.1300/J025v22n01_05
Mediated Communication. Group Dynamics, 8(1),
27–39. doi:10.1037/1089-2699.8.1.27 Santhiveeran, J. (2006). Data mining for Website
evaluation: An exploration of site usage by gradu-
Page, B. J., Jencius, M. J., Rehfuss, M. C., Dean,
ate social work students. Journal of Teaching in
E. P., Petruzzi, M. L., Olson, S. D., & Sager, D.
Social Work, 26(3/4), 181–196. doi:10.1300/
E. (2003). PalTalk online groups: Process and
J067v26n03_12
reflections on students’ experience. Journal for
Specialists in Group Work, 28(1), 35–41. Sassenberg, K., & Boos, M. (2003). Attitude
change in computer-mediated communication:
Pinch, W. J. E., & Graves, J. K. (2000). Using
Effects of anonymity and category norms. Group
web-based discussion as a teaching strategy:
Processes & Intergroup Relations, 6(4), 405–422.
bioethics as an exemplar. Journal of Advanced
doi:10.1177/13684302030064006
Nursing, 32(3), 704–712. doi:10.1046/j.1365-
2648.2000.01531.x Taylor, J. E. (2004). Teaching university students
family caregiving online. Educational Gerontology,
Randolph, K. A., & Krause, D. J. (2002). Mutual
30(5), 423–422. doi:10.1080/03601270490433639
aid in the classroom: An instructional technology
application. Journal of Social Work Education, Wernet, S. P., Olliges, R. H., & Delicath, T. A.
38(2), 259–271. (2000). Postcourse evaluations of WebCT (Web
Course Tools) classes by social work students.
Rempel, H., & McMillen, P. (2008). Using
Research on Social Work Practice, 10(4), 487–504.
courseware discussion boards to engage gradu-
ate students in online library workshops. Internet
Reference Services Quarterly, 13(4), 363–380.
doi:10.1080/10875300802326350 KEY TERMS AND DEFINITIONS
Roberts-DeGennaro, M., Brown, C., Min, J. W., & Assessment System: Includes tools to admin-
Siegel, M. (2005). Using an online support site to ister surveys and quizzes online.
extend the learning to a graduate field practicum in Asynchronous Communication: A delayed
the United States. Social Work Education, 24(3), text-based communication, which allows thread
327–342. doi:10.1080/02615470500050560

909

based discussions. An user could post messages
or participate in an online discussion at any time.
Blackboard Learning System (BLS): A
course authoring software used by instructors in
college campuses.
Hyperlink: A hyperlink is an inserted link
in a word that takes the user from one document
to another document or a website when the user
clicks the word (hypertext).
Learning Management Systems (LMS):
Are course authoring software programs used
by instructors to create learning environment for
students.
910
Blackboard Learning System on College Campuses
Static Information Delivery System: A capa-
bility in the BLS, which allows uploading of file
formats such as MS word, PowerPoint, and PDF.
Synchronous Communication: A real-time
text-based communication, which allows instant
conversation between two or more users.
Teaching and Learning Cycle (TLC): A
framework, which provides a design for a learn-
ing environment. TLC takes into consideration
organization of course documents, creating op-
portunities for problem solving, interconnected
learning tasks, constant feedback, and ongoing
change in course delivery.
 911

Chapter 55
Initial Stages to Create Online
Graduate Communities:
Assessment and Development
Leping Liu
University of Nevada, USA

Livia D’Andrea
University of Nevada, USA

ABSTRACT
This chapter introduces the authors’ experiences to create three online graduate communities, focusing
correspondingly on: (a) conducting program orientation for students enrolled in an online Master’s
program, (b) performing program assessment for Master’s students, and (c) providing an environment
for doctoral students to communicate and support one another. A logistic prediction model was gener-
ated from a pilot assessment on student needs and preference to an online community. Initial steps to
design and develop the three online communities are described. The theoretical framework employed
in the design consists of three design models: Information Technology Design (ITD) integration model,
Analysis, Design, Development, Implementation, Evaluation (ADDIE) design model, and Activity
Structure System (ASS) model.

INTRODUCTION word Google search with “online community” can

Online communities, with the technology changes
over the past two decades, have been gradually in-
tegrated into education and have become a growing
feature in the field of using information technology
in education (Mason, 2000; Santos & Hammont,
2007; Thorpe, 2002). Terms like “virtual com-
munity” or “online community” have received
more and more attention in the literature. A key
DOI: 10.4018/978-1-61692-906-0.ch055
result in 327,000,000 link items in 0.23 seconds.
Most studies on this theme have explored the
potential needs of online communities (Fernback,
2007; Neumann, Hogan, & MacDonaill, 2005),
areas where online communities can be used to
facilitate or improve educators’ work (Aviv, et
al., 2003; Ginossar, 2008; Lau, et al., 2007), and
strategies and methods to effectively use online
learning communities (Ke & Hoadley, 2009).
A community usually serves a particular
group of people with common characteristics
 Initial Stages to Create Online Graduate Communities
and interests. The rationale for creating online
communities for graduate students is based on
the characteristics of this special population in
universities. According to the latest Council of
Graduate Schools report, more students enroll
in the field of education than any other field,
accounting for 25% of total fall 2007 graduate
enrollment in the United States; in fact, of the
321,433 graduate students currently enrolled in
colleges of education, 64% are part-time students
(Bell, 2008). Numerous researchers in the area of
academic persistence have identified involvement
and emotional connectedness to the institution as
key factors in predicting academic persistence
(Lin & Lee, 2006; Norris, 2002). Specifically, the
more often graduate students involve or integrate
into the life of the college, the more likely they
will persist (Tinto, 1997; Zhao & Kuh, 2004).
Involvement also influences learning; the more
they participate in the academic life of the col-
lege, the more successful their learning will d be
(Davenport, 2001; Ke & Hoadley, 2009; Santos,
2007). Since involvement is often at a minimum
among education-major graduate students work-
ing full-time as teachers and administrators, it is
to be expected that teacher education programs
register these dismal degree completion rates.
However, situation could be different if
graduate students have a platform or a convenient
environment that enables them to socially and aca-
demically be involved in college life. According
to the technical functions, operational tools, and
administrative flexibility of online communities
(Farooq, et al., 2007; Henderson, 2007; Lutters
& Ackerman, 2003), a well designed online com-
munity should be able to serve as one solution to
this problem.
Procedures to design an online community are
similar to the design of an information system,
which should be guided through the five stages
of the ADDIE design model: Analysis, Design,
Development, Implementation, and Evaluation
(Gagne et al., 2005; Smith & Ragan, 2005). This
chapter introduces the authors’ experiences with
912
creating three online graduate communities, using
mainly the stages of Analysis, Design, and De-
velopment. First, results from a pilot assessment
on student needs and preferences for an online
community are reported. Second, initial steps to
design and develop the following three online
communities are described:
1. An online community to conduct program
orientation for students enrolled in an online
Master’s program
2. An online community to perform formative
and summative assessment for Master’s
students
3. An online community to provide an environ-
ment of supports and communications for
education doctoral students
BACKGROUND
Online Community
In the literature, there are a variety of descriptions
that define the term community (Brown, 2001;
Dede, 1996; Goodsell & Williamson, 2008). A
definition from the Merriam-Webster dictionary,
“an interacting population of individuals with a
common characteristic or interest in a common lo-
cation within a larger society” (Merriam-Webster,
2009), was used initially in our experiences to
develop the three online communities. Basically,
two major attributes of a community need to be
defined first: (a) people who the community
serves, and (b) purposes of the community (Brown,
2001). Then a list of decisions needs to be made
on: (a) functions of the community, (b) format or
platform on which all community activities take
place, (c) operation and administration of the
community, and (d) other considerations for the
particular population involved (Liu & D’Andrea,
2009; Schlager & Fusco, 2003; Shrivastava, 1999).
Over the past decade, educators’ online com-
munity practice and research have conceptually
Initial Stages to Create Online Graduate Communities
changed the way people think about what a com-
munity can do and how it performs its functions.
An online community provides a cyber-space for
people who are involved to participate in com-
munity activities virtually. Online communities
can be open to public or can be restricted to a
particular interest group (Nonnecke, Andrews,
& Preece, 2006), can be hosted with Web2.0
applications or simply through an online course
(Shrivastava, 1999), can utilize synchronous or
asynchronous online communication technologies
to interact with community members (Liu, 2007),
and can be centrally-controlled by the organizers
or self-controlled by the members (Lutters &
Ackerman, 2003); which will all be determined
through community design (Henderson, 2007;
Lutters & Ackerman, 2003; Rovai, 2003).
Theoretical Framework
The development of online graduate communities
is based on a theoretical framework that consists
of three models. The first model is a three-
dimension Information Technology Design (ITD)
model. It was summarized from a meta-analysis
of twenty years’ worth of literature in the field of
using information technology in education (Liu
& Handerson, 2003; Liu & Johnson, 2003), and
has been examined through a series of technology
integration studies (Liu & Jones, 2004, 2008; Liu
& Maddux, 2008). When the model is used in the
context of a technology integration project (for
instance, development of an multimedia applica-
tion, learning system, or online community), the
term information stands for the content compo-
nents, technology indicates the technology system
or tools, and design includes the strategies and
methods that merge information and technology
to effectively achieve the goals and objectives
of the project. Studies (Liu & Handerson, 2003;
Liu & Jones 2008) have suggested that effective
technology integration would not occur with the
absence of careful design in any single dimension
of the three models (IDT). This model provides a
general guideline for the online community design.
The second one is the five-stage ADDIE model,
the most widely used design model in the field of
using information technology in education (Gagne,
et al., 2005; Smith & Ragan, 2005). Basically, it
is used to design instructional materials, courses,
curriculum, academic programs, technology inte-
gration projects or programs, technology-based
learning applications, courseware or educational
software, and certainly, can be used to design
online communities. The primary tasks at each
of the five stages are: (a) Analysis: to determine
needs and set goals and objectives; (b) Design: to
determine a to-do list and all related preparation
work; (c) Development: to work on and complete
the to-do list; (d) Implementation: to put the
“product” in operation, usually a beta test stage;
and (e) Evaluation: to conduct pilot and formal
evaluation to determine the needs for revision and
a or the revision plan. Then processes start over
again from the first stage Analysis. The ADDIE
model provides detailed guidance for all the steps
in online community development.
Although the ADDIE model has already
provided all detailed guidance to deal with the
special feature of an online community that it
is an activity-based cyber organization, a third
model, the Activity System Structure (ASS)
model (Engestrom, 1987, 1999), is also referred
to as a supplementary portion of the theoretical
framework. The ASS model views the design of
community activities as a system design. It dem-
onstrates the fundamental connections between
the activity structure (in a certain field) and the
existing structures at each individual’s place of
practice (e.g., the program, the school, or the work
place). As Schlager and Fusco (2003) described,
the connections are established through seven
attributes of the model: (a) the activity, (b) the
subjects or participants, (c) the tools: technologies
and conceptual methods, (d) the object or objec-
tive of the activity to be accomplished, (e) the
outcomes from the activity, (f) rules: e.g., “values,
913
 Initial Stages to Create Online Graduate Communities
norms of behavior, trust, or commitment”, and (g)
the division of labor: “the allocation of roles and
responsibilities” (p. 208-209). The ASS model
provides operational strategies and methods in
the online graduate community activity design.
The three models reflect three perspectives of
the design. The ITD model exhibits a conceptual
structure, the ADDIE model lays out the whole
structure with procedures and details, and the
ASS model emphasizes the activity structures.
These theoretical frameworks provide a thorough
foundation on which strategies and methods are
determined and developed to initiate the design
of three online graduate communities. These were
the frameworks within which the three online
communities were designed.
Online Communication
and Technology Tools
Besides all the structural planning, the form of
online communication and selection of com-
munication tools deserve the most attention as
they have been found to be the key to the suc-
cess of online learning and online community
activities (Liu & D’Andrea, 2009; Shrivastava,
1999). In the field of education, almost all online
communications are performed in two forms:
Asynchronous communication and Synchronous
communication (Liu, 2005, 2006). Asynchronous
communication indicates a digital communication
between computers with no timing requirements.
E-mail, discussion board, blog, and wiki are all
asynchronous communication tools, with which
people continue their online communications at
a convenient time. Synchronous communication
is the kind of digital communication between
computers that can happen at precisely the same
time. Online chat, Skype call, and video confer-
ence are such synchronous communication tools,
with which people can perform live online com-
munications.
Both types of communication tools have been
commonly used in distance learning, online cours-
914
es, or organizational administration (Liu, 2007;
Maddux, Liu, Cummings, & Newman, 2005).
However, researchers have not yet obtained suf-
ficient evidence on whether or not or in what ways
those communication tools can be used effectively
in online communities to achieve the communi-
cation goals among community members. Cur-
rently, more and more academic associations or
societies, for instance AACE (Association for the
Advancement of Computer Education) and AECT
(Association for Educational Communications
and Technology), have started online community
activities, such as online conferences, theme blogs,
or webcasts for interest groups. A well developed
international online journal Innovate has hosted
live webcasts for authors of each article published
in the journal since 2005.
Participating in those activities and learning
about all the innovate ideas to manage an online
community, we have been highly inspired to cre-
ate online community services for our graduate
students. Again, the ADDIE and ASS models
are used in designing online communications,
solving practical problems, and improving the
communication functions of the online graduate
communities. The following two main sections
will focus on:
1. the procedures and results of a pilot
assessment
2. the design of three online graduate
communities
A PILOT ASSESSMENT ON
STUDENTS’ PREFERENCES
What to Assess
In the first stage of the ADDIE model—Analysis,
needs assessment should be performed. In most
literature, researchers perform assessment on the
attitude, behavior, and motivation of community
members, since they are the factors contributing to
the success of the community activities and tasks
Initial Stages to Create Online Graduate Communities
(Nonnecke, Andrews, & Preece, 2006; Wang &
Fesenmaier, 2003). That might be the information
we want to obtain at certain stages of community
management. At the beginning point, we first need
to determine whether our graduate students are
willing to join the online community, whether they
are ready to perform the online activities in a cyber
space, and what might be the factors influencing
student preference to join an online community.
Studies of online learning have shown that
students’ previous online experiences and their
technology preparation are two factors that
significantly influence their attitudes towards
online learning (Liu, 2008; Liu & Gentile, 2008).
According to the characteristics of the graduate
student population, their gender and working
status are also added in the list of factors (Liu &
D’Andrea, 2009). Therefore, four factors are to
be examined in the assessment: (a) gender, (b)
self-reported technology preparation, (c) previous
online course experiences, and (d) current work-
ing status. The purpose of the pilot assessment is
to determine the factors that have influence on
graduate students’ preference for an online com-
munity. The specific research question associated
with the assessment is:
Can the probability that a graduate student
prefers to join an online community be influenced
by any of the four factors (gender, technology
preparation, online course experience, and work-
ing status)?
Table 1. Variable Coding
€€€€€€€Variables
€€€€€€€(P) – Preference (RV)
€€€€€€€(G) – Gender (EV)
€€€€€€€(T) – Technology Skills (EV)
€€€€€€€(O) – Previous Online Courses (EV)
€€€€€€€(W) – Working Status (EV)
Note: RV: Response Variable, EV: Explanatory Variable
Participants
Participants in the pilot assessment were 134
education major graduate students enrolled in the
college of education in a western state university
at the time the data were collected. All participants
were the potential members of the to-be designed
online communities. Among them, 87 were fe-
males and 37 were males. Degree distribution
information was not included since we focused
on the general population of graduate students.
They were all traditional students, not enrolled in
online degree programs.
Measurements and Procedures
A questionnaire was sent to graduate students
who were taking technology introduction courses.
The questionnaire collected information on five
variables: (a) Preference – whether a student
prefers to join an online graduate community or a
traditional community that meets face-to-face; (b)
Gender; (c) Technology skills – whether a student
considers him/herself computer skillful or does
not feel comfortable using computer technolo-
gies; (d) Online learning experiences –whether a
student has taken at least one online course before
or not taken any at all; and (e) Working status –
whether a student has a full time job or not. The
information was then coded as shown in Table 1,
and entered to a database.
€€€€€€€Values
€€€€€€€1 €€€€€€€0
€€€€€€€Online Community €€€€€€€Traditional Community
€€€€€€€Female €€€€€€€Male
€€€€€€€Skillful €€€€€€€Not Skillful
€€€€€€€Taken €€€€€€€Not Taken
€€€€€€€Full Time Working €€€€€€€Not Full Time Working
915
 Initial Stages to Create Online Graduate Communities
Data Analysis
A logistic regression was carried out to determine
whether gender (G), technology skills (T), Online
learning experiences (O), and working status (W)
can be used to predict a student’s preference (P)
to join an online graduate community. Logistic
regression is a method of statistical modeling
appropriate for categorical outcome variables. It
describes the relationship between a categorical re-
sponse variable and a set of explanatory variables.
The response variable is usually dichotomous;
typically the two outcomes are either “yes” or
“no.” The explanatory variables can be categori-
cal or continuous.
The four explanatory variables were gender
(G), technology skills (T), Online learning ex-
periences (O), and working status (W), and the
Figure 1. Roc Curve
916
response variables was preference (P, preferred to
join an on-line community). They were all coded
with the values of 1 and 0, and the meanings of
1 or 0 are defined in Table 1. The assumptions of
logistic regression were checked and no violations
were found.
Results
The model that included all four explanatory
variables was significant (X2 = 88.396, p < 0.001)
and accounted for about 70% of the variation in
the response variable (R2 = 0.707), indicating that
this model significantly predicts group member-
ship. The Hosmer and Lemeshow Goodness-of-Fit
Statistic of 6.237 (p < 0.284) was not significant,
indicating that the hypothesis that the model
provides a good fit of data should be accepted.
Initial Stages to Create Online Graduate Communities

The receiver operating characteristic (ROC)
curve, plotted from this model (See Figure 1.), rises
quickly and the area under the curve is consider-
ably large, indicating that this logistic regression
model has relatively high predictive accuracy.
This model can be used to predict a student’s
preference to join an online graduate community,
as 26out of 35 scores (about 74%) of 0 (prefer to
traditional community) and 95 out of 99 scores
(about 96%) of 1 (prefer to online community)
were successfully predicted by the model.
A significant Wald chi-square value for a
given variable indicates that the variable is sig-
nificantly related to the response variable. As
shown in Table 2, the Wald chi-square values were
significant for three explanatory variables except
for gender (p <0.166). Since the model with all
four variables was significant (X2 = 88.396, p <
0.001), all four explanatory variables, including
gender, were included in the model equation. The
Parameter Estimate generates the estimated coef-
ficients of the fitted logistic regression model that
are used to formulate the following logistic regres-
sion equation:
logit (ˆp) = −4.092 + 0.983(G) + 2.730(T) +
1.891(O) + 2.581(W)
The sign (ˆp) indicates an estimated probabil-
ity value for the response variable to be 1, and
logit represents logit transformation of the event
probability.
The estimated coefficients indicate that, for
example, when the variable T (Technology skills)
is 1 (that is, when the student considers him/herself
technology-skillful), the logit transformation of
event probability (that he/she would prefer to join
an online community) increases by 2.730.
If the odds ratio for a given variable is larger
than 1, the probability of the response variable
being 1 increases, and if the odds ratio is smaller
than 1, the probability decreases. For example,
the odds ratio for (T) is 15.329. This means that a
student would be 15.329 times more likely to join
an online community if he or she is self-rated as
technology skillful, compared to those who rate
themselves as not comfortable with technologies.
Summary
In summary, the results indicate that a student is
more likely to join an online community if he/she
feels comfortable with technologies, has taken
some online courses before, and works work full
time. Gender does not significantly influence a
student’s preferences. We have added these factors
into the design plan, especially when choosing
technology tools and designing certain online
activities. In this pilot assessment, although the
sample was not a random sample and the results
might not be generalizable to the entire popula-
tion of students, the participants were potential
members of the online community to-be-designed,
and the results reflected students’ needs and pref-

Table 2. Logistic Regression Outputs

€€€€€€€DF Parameter Standard Wald €€€€€€€P Odds

€€€€€€€Estimate €€€€€€€Error €€€€€€€Chi-Square €€€€€€€Ratio
Gender €€€€€€€1 €€€€€€€0.983 €€€€€€€0.709 €€€€€€€1.923 €€€€€€€0.166 €€€€€€€2.674
€€€€€€€Technolog Skills €€€€€€€1 €€€€€€€2.730 €€€€€€€0.702 €€€€€€€15.105 €€€€€€€0.001 €€€€€€€15.329
Online €€€€€€€1 €€€€€€€1.891 €€€€€€€0.697 €€€€€€€7.359 €€€€€€€0.007 €€€€€€€6.624
€€€€€€€Courses
Work Status €€€€€€€1 €€€€€€€2.581 €€€€€€€0.702 €€€€€€€13.527 €€€€€€€0.001 €€€€€€€13.208
Constant €€€€€€€1 €€€€€€€-4.092 €€€€€€€1.041 €€€€€€€15.446 €€€€€€€0.001 €€€€€€€0.017

917
 Initial Stages to Create Online Graduate Communities
erence to online communities. The goals of this
pilot assessment were achieved.
DESIGN OF ONLINE
GRADUATE COMMUNITIES
Three online graduate communities have been
developed since the pilot assessment was com-
pleted. The first one is to conduct online program
orientation for students enrolled in our online
Master’s programs, the second one is to perform
formative and summative assessment for all
Master’s students in our programs, and the third
one is a doctoral student community. We used an
online course system WebCampus to develop the
“shell” of the online communities, as it provides
an information delivery system, synchronous and
asynchronous communication tools, and conve-
nient access for all students in the university. Initial
steps to develop the three online communities
were as follows.
Online Community I: Online
Program Orientation
Our department offers an option for graduate stu-
dents to complete two Master’s programs entirely
online: MEd in Educational Psychology, and MS
in Information Technology in Education. All the
course work, advisement, and administrative work
are required to completed online. To provide the
consistency of advisor work, we have created this
online community and included it as part of our
online Master’s programs. The target population
is our Master’s students enrolled in the two online
programs. A WebCampus course shell is used as
the community activity platform. The mission is
to get online students familiar with the program
and complete their online study plan.
The community structure aligns with the online
program structure with five functions: (a) search
for program information: program documents are
provided; (b) search for resources: all the relevant
918
web links, office contacts, and online learning
support from the university are provided and
updated; (c) program progressing event remind-
ers: critical dates and deadlines are provided, (d)
advisor’s room: contact and communication tools
to communicate with advisor or other professors
are provided; and (e) discussion board: themes
discussion or exchange information with other
online students.
Activities are required that use all five func-
tions to search for program information, contact
the advisor, set a program plan with all timelines,
and communicate with other students enrolled in
the online Master’s programs. After they complete
the program orientation, they stay in the commu-
nity until they graduate.
This online community has been operating well
for three years, and now it is required as a one-
credit “course” for the online program students.
Being such a unique feature and critical portion
of our online program, it has kept online students
connected with the whole online master graduate
community. In terms of community design, we are
at the beginning of the Implementation stage in
the ADDIE model. More thorough work needs to
be done to fully implement all the functions and
activities. Formal evaluation on this community
has not been conducted yet.
Online Community II: Master
Studies and Assessment
The second online community is for our Master’s
students from all programs, online and traditional
students are all included. The main goal of this
community is to conduct formative and summa-
tive assessment on all Master’s students’ learning
progress. Similar to the first community, the second
goal is to provide a space that is available all the
time for students to obtain necessary information
and timely help, and to communicate with the
whole group. A WebCampus course shell serves
as the “location” of community activities.
Initial Stages to Create Online Graduate Communities
Our Master’s program assessment consists of
two portions. First, formative assessment requires
students to create an on-going program study
portfolio. The portfolio is based on the national
standards in the area, and course work files or
learning outcome records s are matched to the
standards and included in the portfolio. At the end
of the program, all the standards should be met.
Second, summative assessment includes a pre-
assessment examination taken at the beginning of
the program, and a final comprehensive examina-
tion taken at the completion of the program.
The community structure aligns with the pro-
gram assessment structure with five functions:
(a) search for program information: program
documents, portfolio standards, and assessment
examination guidance are provided; (b) portfo-
lio lab: a place for students to get instructions,
practices, examples, or any help in creating their
portfolios; (c) examination room: where the stu-
dents take the pre-assessment examination and
the final comprehensive examination.
A second goal of the community is to provide
a space that is available all the time for students
to communicate. To achieve this goal, functions
similar with the first community are provided,
including (a) search for resources, (b) program
progressing event reminders, (c) “offices” of
professors, and (d) discussion board.
This community is at the stage of Development
and Implementation. The major part of the work
in creating this community involves converting
all the functions, materials, and activities from
the traditional format to the online format. Tak-
ing into consideration the three influential factors
obtained from the pilot assessment, we have care-
fully designed the use of online tools, orientation
of online activities, and administration of online
exams to prepare those who do not prefer an online
community for the relatively-new (to them) online
environment. After the full implementation of the
online community design, we will forward our
steps to the last stage of ADDIE model—Evalu-
ation and possible revisions.
Online Community III: A Place to Doc
The target population of this online community is
doctoral students in all the programs of the college
of education. It is named as A Place to Doc, and
uses a WebCampus shell as well (See Figure 2).
This site was designed based on how students re-
sponded to another survey asking them what kinds
of things they felt they needed to stay connected
to each other and to the institution. Results of the
survey pointed to three main areas, one was access
to faculty without having to come to campus, the
second area related to wanting to know what is
going on at school, such as activities, deadlines,
and other factual information. The third area was
more socially oriented and revolved around want-
ing access to each other in order to share resources,
interests, and to be able to brainstorm solutions
for whatever problems or ideas they had.
While the first two communities focus more
on exact academic processes of students’ studies,
the third one combines the social activities and
academic activities into one. The community
structure aligns with the structure of doctoral
students study, work, life, and communication
levels. Five main functions are provided: (a)
Faculty Interviews: where students can listen to
their committee members talk about their expec-
tations for the doctoral process; (b) Resources:
that include writing guides, grammar help, aca-
demic-writing resources, job networking sites,
and job opportunities, including tips for interview-
ing; (c) International Student Corner: to help our
international students feel included, (d) Discus-
sion: this link includes two discussion boards, one
for academic discussions related to dissertation
work and academic interests and the other, what
we call “the lounge.” The lounge is for fun discus-
sions about hobbies, hiking and skiing outings,
jokes, and a textbook exchange program; and
finally (e) Scrapbook: a section where students
can post graduation pictures and other artifacts
they want to share with each other. We also use
the site to announce dissertation defense dates,
919
 Initial Stages to Create Online Graduate Communities
Figure 2. A Place to Doc
teaching assistantships, interesting announce-
ments just for doc students, and other important
information that students might not get unless
they were on campus.
This “A Place to Doc” is more at the completion
line of the Implementation stage in the ADDIE
model. We are planning to collect feedback from
this site for the next stage of Evaluation.
FUTURE STUDIES
Based on our experiences and research findings
in the literature, we see three immediate future
study themes in the scope of online community
design. The first theme is assessment research.
In this chapter, we only presented a pilot assess-
ment of graduate students’ preference for online
communities. It is only a small portion of needs
assessment that should be done in the Analysis
stage of ADDIE model. Continuing assessment
will be conducted to obtain information on what
graduate students need and what the online com-
munity can do. A needs survey has been developed
(See Appendix A) for further data collection, and
we expect to develop a structure of needs that
920
could be incorporated into the structure of the
community and structure of the activities.
Second, the development of the three online
communities is moving towards the last stage of
the ADDIE model, the Evaluation stage. Studies
on online community evaluation will be a thorough
area of study in which all the theories, strategies,
methods, and statistics should be employed, or
modified if necessary, to fit the specific structures
of the three online communities. Furthermore,
results from the evaluation studies may raise new
issues and research themes.
The third future-study theme could be online
community activity design. In this chapter, we
mainly introduced the macro design of the com-
munity structures, and have not presented the
detailed designs of activities yet. With the clear
guidance provided in the ASS model, we should
be able to systematically design the online activi-
ties, which will definitely open another window
to the field.
CONCLUSION
In conclusion, online communities can be viewed
as another technology tool in the field of education.
Initial Stages to Create Online Graduate Communities
Whether this tool would be effective to achieve
what it is expected to do depends on how it is
designed, and whether detailed design procedures
are carefully followed. Theoretically, the design
models (ITD, ADDIE, and ASS) have summarized
a set of general rules of design, which have been
examined and applied hundreds of times by educa-
tors in the field of educational technology. Would
they ensure quality outcomes from the designs?
The answer is uncertain. Each case is different. To
apply the set of general rules to each specific case
requires not only careful work, but also a deep
understanding of the nature and unique features
of the case and how the different structures of
the models could be merged, or modified into the
overall structure of the instruction ?
Both research literature and our experiences
have taught us that assessment and evaluation are
two very critical and necessary stages in the design
of any project. Information obtained from these
two stages provides the right way things should
be done in a particular case, or maybe in the field
in general. Developing a thorough agenda of as-
sessment and evaluation in the scope of online
community research will be our long term goal.
We have presented our experiences with de-
signing online graduate communities, raised some
issues with possible solutions, and suggested some
directions for further studies. We hope our work
will be of help to other educators, researchers, and
designers in the field. We welcome comments to
improve our work and research.
REFERENCES
Aviv, R., Erlich, Z., Ravid, G., & Geva, A. (2003).
Net work analysis of knowledge construction
in asynchronous learning networks. Journal of
Asynchronous Learning Networks, 7(3), 1–23.
Bell, N. E. (2008). Graduate enrollment and
degrees: 1997 to 2007. Washington, DS: Council
of Graduate Schools.
Brown, R. E. (2001). The process of community-
building in distance learning classes. Journal of
Asynchronous Learning Networks, 5(2), 18–35.
Davenport, E. (2001). Knowledge management
issues for online organizations: Communities of
practices as an exploratory framework. The Jour-
nal of Documentation, 57(1), 61–57. doi:10.1108/
EUM0000000007077
Dede, C. J. (1996). The evolution of distance
education: Emerging technologies and distributed
learning. American Journal of Distance Education,
10(2), 4–36. doi:10.1080/08923649609526919
Engestrom, Y. (1987). Learning by expanding: An
activity-theoretical approach to developmental
research. Helsinki: Orienta-Konsultit.
Engestrom, Y. (1999). Expansive visibilization
of work: An activity-theoretical perspective.
Computer Supported Cooperative Work, 8(1-2),
63–93. doi:10.1023/A:1008648532192
Farooq, U., Schank, P., Harris, A., Fusco, J., &
Schlager, M. (2007). Sustaining a community
computing infrastructure for online teacher pro-
fessional development: A case study of design-
ing tapped in. Computer Supported Cooperative
Work, 16(4/5), 397–429. doi:10.1007/s10606-
007-9049-0
Fernback, J. (2007). Beyond the diluted commu-
nity concept: A symbolic interactionist perspective
on online social relations. New Media & Society,
9(1), 49–69. doi:10.1177/1461444807072417
Gagne, R. M., Wager, W. W., Golas, K. C., &
Keller, J. M. (2005). Principles of instructional
design (6th ed.). Belmont, CA: Thomson.
Ginossar, T. (2008). Online participation: A content
analysis of differences in utilization of two online
cancer communities by man and women, patients
and family members. Health Communication,
23(1), 1–12. doi:10.1080/10410230701697100
921
 Initial Stages to Create Online Graduate Communities

Goodsell, T. L., & Williamson, O. (2008). The Liu, L., & D’Andrea, L. (2009). Online program
case of the brick huggers: The practice of an online advisory and assessment: Strategies and tips . In
community. City & Community, 7(3), 251–271. McFerrin, K., Weber, R., Carlsen, R., & Willis,
doi:10.1111/j.1540-6040.2008.00260.x D. A. (Eds.), Technology & Teacher Education
Annual 2009 (pp. 111–116). Charlottesville, VA:
Henderson, M. (2007). Sustaining online teacher
AACE.
professional development through community
design. Campus-Wide Information Systems, 24(3), Liu, L., & Gentile, T. (2008). Online Training to
162–173. doi:10.1108/10650740710762202 prepare counselors for online counseling: New
strategies and tools . In Bonk, C., Lee, M. M.,
Ke, F., & Hoadley, C. (2009). Evaluating online
& Reynolds, T. (Eds.), E-Learn in Corporate,
learning communities. Educational Technology
Government, Healthcare and Higher Education
Research and Development, 57(3), 487–510.
Annual 2008 (pp. 1579–1586). Charlottesville,
doi:10.1007/s11423-009-9120-2
VA: AACE.
Lin, H. F., & Lee, G. G. (2006). Determinants
Liu, L., & Henderson, N. J. (2003). An informa-
of success for online communities: An empirical
tion technology integration system and its life
study. Behaviour & Information Technology, 25(6),
cycle: What is missing? Computers in the Schools,
479–488. doi:10.1080/01449290500330422
20(1/2), 93–106.
Liu, L. (2005). Communication design and student
Liu, L., & Johnson, L. (2003). A technology in-
online learning. In W. Pearman, M. Mallott, E.
tegration model and weak areas. In W. Pearman,
Oshiro, R. Stiller, E. Flower, T. Gregson, & D.
M. Mallott, E. Oshiro, R. Stiller, E. Flower, T.
Yang (Eds.), Hawaii International Conference
Gregson, & D. Yang (Eds.), Hawaii International
on Education: Conference Proceedings (p. 7).
Conference on Education: Conference Proceed-
Honolulu, Hawaii: HICE.
ings (p. 5) Honolulu, Hawaii: HICE.
Liu, L. (2006). Communication design and team
Liu, L., & Jones, P. (2004). Impact of online
building in teacher education Web based courses .
communication design on student motivation and
In Crawford, C., Carlsen, R., Gibson, I., McFerrin,
performance. Journal of Research on Education,
K., Price, J., Weber, R., & Willis, D. A. (Eds.),
14(1), 40–56.
Technology & Teacher Education Annual 2006
(pp. 2594–2599). Charlottesville, VA: AACE. Liu, L., & Jones, P. (2008). Create Web-based
multimedia learning applications: Ideas for Web
Liu, L. (2007). A synchronous communication
2.0 and E-learning 2.0. In C. McNaught & C.
tool for online learning: Strategies, issues and
Montgomerie (Eds.), Proceedings of ED-MEDIA,
outcomes . In Crawford, C., Carlsen, R., Gibson,
Educational Multimedia, Hypermedia and Tele-
I., McFerrin, K., Price, J., Weber, R., & Willis,
communications (pp. 4601-3606). Charlottesville,
D. A. (Eds.), Technology & Teacher Education
VA: AACE.
Annual 2007 (pp. 2399–2404). Charlottesville,
VA: AACE. Liu, L., & Maddux, C. (2008). An online course
to prepare school counselors for online career
Liu, L. (2008). To teach “online-teaching” through
counseling . In McFerrin, K., Weber, R., Carlsen,
an online course: Design and implementation . In
R., & Willis, D. A. (Eds.), Technology & Teacher
Bonk, C., Lee, M. M., & Reynolds, T. (Eds.), E-
Education Annual 2008 (pp. 3035–3040). Charlot-
Learn in Corporate, Government, Healthcare and
tesville, VA: AACE.
Higher Education Annual 2008 (pp. 1766–1771).
Charlottesville, VA: AACE.

922
Initial Stages to Create Online Graduate Communities
Lua, K. S., Siong, K. H., Tang, H. Y., Cheng, P.
W., Cheung, K. S., & Chan, S. W. (2007). An
innovative web-based peer support system for
medical students in Hong Kong. Medical Teacher,
29, 984–986. doi:10.1080/01421590701551748
Lutters, W. G., & Ackerman, M. S. (2003). Joining
the backstage: Locality and centrality in an online
community. Information Technology & People,
16(2), 157–182. doi:10.1108/09593840310478676
Maddux, C., Liu, L., Cummings, R., & Newman,
J. (2005). Aids and cautions in planning, develop-
ing, and delivering online instruction in higher
education. Innovate, 1(4), 8.
Mason, R. (2000). From distance education
to online education. The Internet and Higher
Education, 3(1-3), 63–74. doi:10.1016/S1096-
7516(00)00033-6
Merriam-Webster. (2009). Community. Retrieved
on December 2, 2009, from http://www.merriam-
webster.com/dictionary/community
Neumann, M., Hogan, D., & MacDonaill, C.
(2005). Semantic social network portal for
collaborative online communities. Journal of
European Industrial Training, 29(6), 472–487.
doi:10.1108/03090590510610263
Nonnecke, B., Andrews, D., & Preece, J. (2006).
Non-public and public online community partici-
pation: Needs, attitudes, and behavior. Electronic
Commerce Research, 6(1), 7–20. doi:10.1007/
s10660-006-5985-x
Norris, P. (2002). The bridging and bonding role
of online communities. The Harvard International
Journal of Press/Politics, 7(3), 3–13.
Rovai, A. P. (2003). Straegies for grading online
discussions: Effects on discussions and classroom
community in internet-based university courses.
Journal of Computing in Higher Education, 15(1),
89–107. doi:10.1007/BF02940854
Santos, I., & Hammond, M. (2007). Learning
community or community-minded learning
group: A case study of an online course. Journal
of Internet Commerce, 6(2), 51–72. doi:10.1300/
J179v06n02_05
Schlager, M. S., & Fusco, J. (2003). Teacher pro-
fessional development, technology, and communi-
ties of practice: Are we putting the cart before the
horse? The Information Society, 19(3), 203–220.
doi:10.1080/01972240309464
Shrivastava, P. (1999). Management classes
as online learning communities. Journal of
Management Education, 23(6), 691–702.
doi:10.1177/105256299902300607
Smith, P. L., & Ragan, T. J. (2005). Instructional
Design. Danvers, MA: John Wiley & Sons.
Thorpe, M. (2002). From independent learning to
collaborative learning . In Lea, M. R., & Nicoll, K.
(Eds.), Distributed learning: Social and cultural
approaches to practice (pp. 131–151). London:
RoutledgeFalmer.
Tinto, V. (1997). Classrooms as communities:
Exploring the educational character of student
persistence. The Journal of Higher Education,
68(6), 599–622. doi:10.2307/2959965
Wang, Y., & Fesenmaier, D. R. (2003). Assessing
motivation of contribution in online communities:
An empirical investigation of an online travel
community. Electronic Markets, 13(1), 33–45.
doi:10.1080/1019678032000052934
Zhao, C. M., & Kuh, G. D. (2004). Adding value:
Learning communities and student engagement.
Research in Higher Education, 45(2), 115–137.
doi:10.1023/B:RIHE.0000015692.88534.de
KEY TERMS AND DEFINITIONS
Community: An interacting population of
individuals with a common characteristic or inter-
est in a common location within a larger society.
923
 Initial Stages to Create Online Graduate Communities
Online Community: A group of people with
common characteristic or interest interacting in
a cyber space with online communication tools.
Needs Assessment: Collecting and analyzing
information to determine (a) the needs of a group
of people to something new or to-be-developed,
and (b) things need to be done to ensure the suc-
cess of the new thing to-be-developed.
Communication Design: The decisions about
forms, technology system and tools, schedules,
themes, and people involved in communication.
924
Community Structure: The relationships
among the people, missions and goals, manage-
ment, activities, and outcomes involved in a
community.
Activity Structure: The relationships among
the subjects, actions, objectives, tools, rules and
outcomes involved in an activity.
Logistic Regression: Logistic regression is
a method of statistical modeling appropriate for
categorical outcome variables. It describes the
relationship between a categorical response vari-
able and a set of explanatory variables.
Initial Stages to Create Online Graduate Communities

APPENDIX A

Evaluation Checklist

Section I. Needs for Studies

I wish to have an online community to share some general course/program information
I wish to have an online community to discuss course project ideas with other graduates
I wish to have an online community to share research resources with other graduates
I wish to have an online community to discuss ideas about my thesis/dissertation
I wish to have an online community to get feedback about my research from other graduates
I wish to have an online community to get feedback about my research from other researchers
I wish to have an online community where I could get resources or help with statistics
I wish to have an online resource where I can get help and support for my studies in general

Section II. Needs for Communication and Support

I wish to have an online community to share some thoughts on graduate-related common issues
I wish to have an online community to receive support when I experience pressure from studies
I wish to have an online community to receive support when I experience pressure from work
I wish to have an online community to receive support when I experience pressure from family
I wish to have an online community to discuss more trends of research in the field
I wish to have an online community to get information on relevant grant opportunities
I wish to have an online community to get information on job interview experiences or tips
I wish to have an online community for peer communication and support in general

Section III. Needs for General Information

I wish to have an online community to get information on graduate activities
I wish to have an online community to get information on finance support
I wish to have an online community to get information on conference travel support
I wish to have an online community to get information on related visiting scholar’s speech
I wish to have an online community to get information on international scholarly opportunities
I wish to have an online community to get information on campus employment opportunities
I wish to have an online community to get information on job opportunities in the field
I wish to have an online community where I could get graduate-study related information

continued on following page

925
 Initial Stages to Create Online Graduate Communities

Section IV. Needs for Online Community

I prefer an online graduate community because it provides the flexibility for participation
I prefer an online community with synchronous and asynchronous communication functions
I would like to see the audio/video clips being used in the online community
I would like to see the small group communication being used in the online community
I prefer an online community where some ongoing academic activities are available
I prefer an online community where some professional mentoring activities are available
I’d appreciate an online community where some online workshops are available upon request
I think an online community would better serve us to meet the needs in the above three sections

Section V. Other Needs (Please type in as separate items

926
 927

Chapter 56
Boundaryless Work and
the Role of Mobile ICT
Ragnhild Mogren
Stockholm University, Sweden

Camilla Thunborg
Stockholm University, Sweden

ABSTRACT
The change of structures of work towards fewer boundaries in time, space and tasks are sometimes re-
ferred to as boundaryless work. ICT is pointed out as one cause of this tendency. The aim of this chapter
is to discuss the role of mobile ICT in the forming of the borderland between work and non-work and
the identities formed in relation to this borderland: how is mobile ICT used in work and non-work, how
is this use related to the forming of a borderland between work and non-work, what are the character-
istics of the identities formed in this borderland? Narratives of experience of mobile ICT practices are
analysed by means of social theories. The results show that mobile ICT is used as a boundary object
between work and non-work. In distinguishing between functions and artefacts, between time and space,
different identities are formed: extended work identity, border identity and boundaryless identity.

INTRODUCTION in relation to learning has been elaborated the

The present chapter focuses on adults using mo-
bile ICT in work and non-work practices and the
identities formed in relation to the borderland
between work and non-work. Several researchers
have pointed out the importance of understanding
adult learning as ongoing processes in daily life
(Lave & Wenger, 1991; Engeström & Miettinen
1999; Sawchuk, 2003). The forming of identity
DOI: 10.4018/978-1-61692-906-0.ch056
last decades, especially in theories where learn-
ing is defined as participation in communities of
practice (Lave & Wenger, 1991; Wenger, 1998).
Most studies concerning this view of learning have
focused on already existing practices with a long
historical and cultural tradition. In this chapter,
social practices formed by the use of mobile ICT
are discussed, leading up to questions about what
a social practice is as well as how it is formed in
the daily life of working adults.

BACKGROUND
The changes of structures of work towards fewer
boundaries in time, space and tasks are sometimes
referred to as boundaryless work (Allvin et al.,
2006; Hagström, 2007; Ohlsson, 2008). The
emergence of the network society is, together with
other structural changes related to post-industrial
society, pointed out as a source of this tendency
(Aronsson, 2005).
The research of Allvin et al. (2006) points out
that traditional structures – such as time and space
– tend to be replaced in the “new working life”
by actors’ setting boundaries of their own. In her
research on teleworkers and freelance reporters,
Hansson (2004) studied the characteristics of work
conditions in flexible work settings and how the
actors handled these conditions. Hagström (2007)
focuses on the different kinds of competence
needed to orient oneself and act autonomously in
boundaryless work settings. His results indicate
that the more boundaryless the work context is,
the greater the demand is for collective and exis-
tential competence.
Some studies related to boundaryless work
are concerned with the problem of coping with
the border between work and other spheres of
life. According to Allvin et al. (2006), a general
feature of these studies is the tendency that work
intrudes on non-work rather than the opposite.
Kylin (2007) studied the interaction between work
and non-work in home-based telework. Her study
shows that flexible work arrangements seem to
bring about a need for new ways of differentiation,
since the boundaries are needed both to structure
and legitimise work and to mark detachment
from work.
Fenwick (2006) studied workers in bound-
aryless employment and their daily negotiation
of tasks, objects, knowledge and relationships.
She calls these processes “nomadic movements”
and argues that these should be characterised as
working the boundaries rather than setting them,
because in boundaryless work people and contexts
928
Boundaryless Work and the Role of Mobile ICT
are always changing. Salamoun Sioufi and Green-
hill (2007) discuss the role of ICT in boundaryless
work practices in terms of nomadism. From their
point of view, the concept of nomadism brings to
the fore the actors’ conditions of crossing bound-
aries, as well as constituting new boundaries by
means of the use of ICT. According to them, the
crossing of old boundaries and the constitution
of new ones contribute to the formation of an
identity as a nomad.
The Rise of the Mobile
Network Society
In the middle of the twentieth century, the first
communication satellite was launched. For the
first time ever instantaneous communication
from one side of the world to the other was pos-
sible. According to Giddens (1999) instantaneous
communication is not just a means of conveying
information more quickly, its mere existence alters
“the very texture of our lives” (Giddens, 1999, p.
11); it has an impact on the big systems as well as
on the most personal parts of our lives.
Today, wireless communication technology is
spreading round the world faster than any other
information and communication technology. Mo-
bile ICT1 has within the last ten years moved from
being a technology used by a privileged minor-
ity to being a mainstream technology (Castells
et al., 2006). The cell phone has evolved from
function as a substitute for voice communication
into a “multimodal, multimedia, portal system of
communication” (Castells et al., 2006, p. 245),
offering tools for web browsing, e-mail service,
music listening, photography, video recording,
calendaring and more. Ling and Donner (2009)
describe the rise of the cellphone era in terms of
two phases, the first concerning connectivity:
the amount of people connecting to each other
via cellphone technology increased very rapidly
during a fairly short period of time. The other
phase is characterized by reachability: according
to Ling and Donner (op.cit.), the cellphone has
Boundaryless Work and the Role of Mobile ICT
become the “de rigueur accessory” (p. 10); it has
given rise to new forms of social networks and it
has developed social cohesion.
Social change due to the spread of mobile ICT
is often discussed in terms of changed relations
between time and space (Castells et al., 2006;
Geser, 2004; Ling & Campbell, 2009). Castells
et al. (op cit), call the development of the cell
phone a rising mobile network society. They
describe a number of social trends and patterns
emerging from the interaction between mobile
communication and society, one of them concern-
ing the concepts of time and space: In their view,
wireless communication blurs spatial contexts and
time frames; the communication takes place in a
new spatial context and in a new time dimension.
Geser (2004) puts it like this:
The most general function of cell phones is to
lessen the degree to which social relationships and
social systems are anchored in space, and they
increase the degree to which they are anchored
in particular persons. (Geser, 2004, p. 40)
Castells et al. (2006) argue that mobile com-
munication is better defined by its capacity for
connectivity than by its mobility: because of the
diffusion of wireless access to the internet, cell
phones have evolved from functioning as mobile
substitutes for the fixed-line phone to representing
a capacity to access global and local networks
from any place at any time. In addition, they point
out that research shows that subjects of wireless
communication enhance their autonomy, that is,
autonomy vis-à-vis social and cultural norms as
well as spatial location and time constraints.
Previous studies on mobile ICT and the
boundary between work and non-work concern
different strategies for, perceptions of and ways
of using mobile artefacts in this context: Golden
and Geisler (2007) examined how workers used
and interpreted the personal digital assistant
(PDA) as a boundary-management resource.Their
results show that users interpret their technologi-
cal practices as expressions of personal agency,
using the PDA to control the boundary between
work and non-work through integration as well
as segmentation of work and non-work.
In his study on work, mobility, technology and
regions, Laurier (2002) describes and discusses
the so-called boundary work of his informant,
a mobile office worker who to a great extent
organizes her work from the car, using the cell
phone. He points out different strategies used for
managing the effects of inhabiting two different
domains at once (work and non-work) and of be-
ing constantly on-call, for instance the one called
“call screening”.
Towers et al. (2006) studied the role of mobile
ICT in so-called work extension, the ability to
work outside the office. The informants of their
study, workers who carried their work outside
the office, used mobile ICT devices, such as cell
phones, for this purpose, but also mobile appli-
cations, i.e., applications used for work on the
home PC. They found that the ability to perform
work extension is a dual-edged sword: the use of
mobile ICT provides flexibility with respect to the
timing and location of work on the one hand, but
on the other hand, it also increases expectations
of availability, which leads to greater workload.
THE AIM OF THIS CHAPTER
In this chapter, the boundary between work and
non-work is discussed in terms of a borderland
where activity patterns, norms and identities are
being formed. The aim is to explore and discuss the
role of mobile ICT in the forming of a borderland
between work and non-work practices and the
identities formed in relation to this borderland.
The aim is further specified in three questions:
• How is mobile ICT used in work and non-
work practices?
• How is this use related to the forming of a
borderland between work and non-work?
929

• What are the characteristics of the identi-
ties formed in relation to the borderland
between work and non-work?
In elaborating these questions, an illustrative
example from narratives of actors’ experience of
various cell phone practices in work and non-work
is used. It is based on data from interviews2 with
employees at a large company who all use the cell
phone in daily life. The company is one of the
main providers of telecommunication solutions
in Sweden. There are no fixed-line phones at the
office, and the employees are provided with, and
strongly requested to use, advanced cell-phone
technology as a working tool. They are also
permitted to use the phone in non-work. The cell
phones are provided with technical functions and
services such as (beside phone call) e-mail client,
calendar (compatible with the calendar of the PC),
sms and mms3 services, voice call, camera, music
player and more.
THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK
Social theories, and in particular the concepts of
social practice, boundary objects and identity,
are presented as a theoretical framework in this
section.
The Borderland as a Social Practice
Theories of social practice take as their point
of departure that all human activity is socially
embedded. Wenger (1998) views it as follows:
The concept of practice connotes doing, but not
just doing in and of itself. It is doing in a histori-
cal and social context that gives structure and
meaning to what we do. In this sense, practice
is always social practice. (Wenger, 1998, p. 47)
Giddens (1984) defines social practice as a
relation between the continuous flow of human
930
Boundaryless Work and the Role of Mobile ICT
activity and its order across time and space. A
social practice is formed by human activity on
the one hand and by the routines maintained in
human activity on the other. He describes this as
a duality of structure:
The duality of structure is always the main
grounding of continuities in social reproduction
across time and space. It in turn presupposes the
reflexive monitoring of agents in and as constitut-
ing the durée of daily social activity. But human
knowledge ability is always bounded. The flow of
action continually produces consequences which
are unintended by actors, and these unintended
consequences also may form unacknowledged
conditions of action in a feedback fashion. (Gid-
dens, 1984, pp. 26-27)
The relation between actors and structures
is seen as a social reproduction across time and
space. Even if human actors are seen as capable
of changing routines, they tend to reproduce rather
than change them as a part of the ongoing social
practice (Giddens, 1984). This reproduction is
upheld by actors and by the structured components
and principles that organize the social activities.
Structures are therefore seen as both rules and
resources. They both enable and limit action for
the actors involved. A community of practice is
according to Wenger (1998) a special type of social
practice which is constituted by a mutual engage-
ment, a negotiation of a joint enterprise and by
a shared repertoire of, for example, symbols and
by language. Like Giddens (1984), he describes
the community of practice as constantly chang-
ing, but these changes could be both reproductive
and developmental. There are also similarities
between the definition of community of practice
(Wenger, 1998) and the definition of activity
system (Engeström & Miettinen, 1999).
Work and non-work could be defined as differ-
ent social practices, and the forming of a border-
land as the negotiation of, or working (Fenwick,
Boundaryless Work and the Role of Mobile ICT
2006), the boundaries between these practices.
According to Towers et al. (2006):
A boundary exists when there are two territories,
spaces or areas whose limits or extent can be
determined. (Towers et al., 2006, p. 595)
According to Wenger (1998), boundaries are
continuities and discontinuities, that is, they are
not sharp lines of demarcation, but they do reflect
the specificity of different enterprises and an ongo-
ing production of local identities and meanings[3].
In Giddens’ (1999) line of argument, however,
mobile ICT is important for the forming of dif-
ferent social practices, also including the borders
between these practices.
MOBILE ICT AS A
BOUNDARY OBJECT
In this chapter the concept of mediating tool is used
to understand the embeddedness of mobile ICT in
social practices. The concept of mediation refers
to the interaction between actors and tools when
they act or experience the world. The mediating
tools can be physical (such as ICT) as well as
linguistic and can be regarded as a link between
the individual and the collective (Engeström,
1999). Hatano and Wertsch (2001) emphasise that
even though the actor is seen as a unique agent
carrying out unique actions he or she is always
formed by different mediating tools. Furthermore,
the concept of boundary object (Engeström et al.,
1995; Star & Griesemer, 1989; Wenger, 1998) is
used to understand how mobile ICT can mediate
between different social practices. The concept
of boundary object was coined by Star (Star &
Griesemer, 1989). According to her, a boundary
object is an object with the capacity of translating
between different viewpoints:
Boundary objects are objects which are both
plastic enough to adapt to local needs and the
constraints of the several parties employing them,
yet robust enough to maintain a common identity
across sites. (Star & Griesemer, 1989, p. 393)
The creation and handling of boundary objects
is a key process in developing and maintaining
coherence across intersecting social worlds. A
boundary object may be abstract or concrete,
such as repositories (e.g., a library or a museum),
ideal types (e.g., a diagram or an atlas), coincident
boundaries (e.g., a common accommodation) or
standardised forms (e.g., standardised methods).
Engeström et al. (1995) elaborate the concept
further. In their view, boundary objects serve as
mediating artefacts in actors’ “boundary cross-
ing” between different activity systems involving
diverse tools, languages, rules and social relations.
Wenger (1998) defines digital technology and sys-
tems as boundary objects since they are designed
for participation in different social practices. For
him, boundary objects are artefacts, documents,
concepts etc. around which communities of prac-
tice organize their interconnections.
The cell phone is seen as a boundary object.
Since this artefact is carried by actors between
different social practices, such as work and
non-work practices, it mediates activity, rules,
resources and identities between these practices.
In this way, the cell phone becomes a party to the
negotiation of the boundary between work and
non-work, or to the forming of the borderland
between these practices.
IDENTITIES IN SOCIAL PRACTICES
When dealing with changes related to globalisa-
tion, where ICT seems to have an impact, changes
in identity are also discussed (Castells, 1997; Gid-
dens, 1999). The concept of identity is related to
definitions of “who I am” and “are coming to be”
in relation to different life situations and experi-
ences. Castells (1997) takes three different origins
of identities as a point of departure: legitimising
931

identity, resistance identity and project identity.
Legitimising identity refers to the extension of
the dominant institutions in society. Resistance
identity is an oppositional identity where actors
are building strategies for resistance in relation
to the logic of domination. The project identity,
finally, refers to actors’ building a new identity in
relation to the cultural material available within
the social structure (Castells, 1997).
In social perspectives, identity is defined in
terms of how actors present themselves in rela-
tion to or with references to others (Thunborg,
1999). Goffman (1959) distinguishes between
expressions given and expressions given off,
where expressions given are related to traditional
communication, and expressions given off consist
of actions interpreted by others according to their
frame of references as regards the situation in ques-
tion. Goffman’s way of defining social identity is
also related to Mead’s (1934) way of describing
the forming of a social self as the relation between
“I” and “me”, where “I” is related to the acting
self, while “me” is related to the process of see-
ing oneself from the perspective of the other and
from that position forming a relation to the world
in general. The “me” is thereby seen as a social
form of the self.
When studying identity as a social phenom-
enon, some researchers focus on a person’s
integration of different life experiences (Alheit,
1986), others on identities in and of organiza-
tions (Czarniawska-Joerges, 1997), occupations
(Thunborg, 1999), professions (Collin, 2009), or
on identities as related to different kinds of work
(Brown & Kirpal, 2007).
In this chapter, the character of the identities
formed in relation to the borderland between
work and non-work is focused. Identity is seen
as changeable in relation to different situations
and contexts (Lave & Wenger, 1991). As the
borderland is seen as a social practice, the form-
ing of identity is also seen in relation to this
social practice. Wenger (1998) uses the concept
932
Boundaryless Work and the Role of Mobile ICT
of “community of practice” as denoting an arena
for identity formation as follows:
The concept of identity serves as a pivot between
the social and the individual, so that each can be
talked about in terms of the other. It avoids sim-
plistic individual-social dichotomy without doing
away the distinction. The resulting perspective is
neither individualistic, nor abstractly institutional
or societal. It does justice to the lived experience
of identity while recognizing its social character
– it is the social, the cultural, the historical with
a human face. (Wenger, 1998, p. 145)
According to Wenger (1998), identities are
formed in processes of negotiation of meaning in
a community of practice. Giddens (1984) defines
social identities in relation to social positions in
social practices as follows:
A social position can be regarded as a social iden-
tity that carries with it a certain range (however
diffusely specified) of prerogatives and obligations
that an actor who is accorded that identity (or is
an “incumbent” of that position) may activate
or carry out: these prerogatives and obligations
constitute the role-prescriptions associated with
that position. (Giddens, 1984, p. 84)
Social identity could be discussed in terms of
reproduction or development. Giddens (1984) uses
the concept of duality of structure when discussing
social reproduction across time and space. This
reproduction is upheld by actors’ acting, and by
the structuring components or principles whereby
actors organize their activities. Some prerogatives
and obligations related to the social identity could
therefore be seen as resources and structures for
the borderland between work and non-work.
Boundaryless Work and the Role of Mobile ICT
THE MOBILE ICT PRACTICE:
AN ILLUSTRATION
To illustrate the mobile ICT practice, the narra-
tives of actors’ experiences of different cell phone
practices in work and non-work are presented.
The actors describe the cell phone as an im-
portant, integrated tool, used both in work and
non-work. The integrated character is generating
mobility:
It is simply the tool [...], apart from the evident
fact that you make a lot of phone calls, there are
a lot of sms, if I’m not at work I read and send
e-mails with my cell phone [...]
The cell phone is, in the context of work,
seen as the most important tool used beside and
together with the PC.
[...] if you are sitting in front of the computer you
can enter Outlook and send your text message that
way, via the application instead. Actually, I think
that’s my favorite service.
It is seen as a tool for getting control over
tasks (what to do), time (when to do it) and space
(where to be, when doing it). The actors state that
the cell phone is highly related to work practice
and work tasks; however, most of the actors also
use it privately. One actor does not even have a
fixed-line telephone at home. It is told almost as
a secret since the cell phone is said to be handled
with moderation when used privately:
[...] I have only a cell phone, no fixed-line phone
at home [...] we may use it privately, but we ought
to use it with moderation.
The cellphone is not seen as a totally private
tool; private use has to be legitimized. The actors
describe different ways of using the cell phone.
Some describe themselves switching on the cell
phone as a matter of routine when getting into the
car or on the train in the morning. Their work day
is planned by using certain functions such as cal-
endar or sms and making phone calls to organize
and coordinate. One actor describes an ordinary
morning in the car on the way to office as follows:
[...] and I make phone calls before a meeting or
something, and there are likely a few sms also,
if I want to tell something more specifically, so
to speak
The actors describe three different situations
when they turn off the cell phone. One of them
describes that it is turned off when the work day
ends. Another is not answering work-related calls
after leaving the workplace building. A third ac-
tor, finally, is turning it off at night when going to
sleep. One of them puts it like this while talking
about receiving e-mails to the cell phone in the
middle of the night:
[...] and then the cell phone beeps and I get that
e-mail, and when I have been woken up a couple of
times I get the idea of switching off the phone [...]
According to their descriptions, the actors try
to find ways of not being disturbed by the cell
phone when working. Work is thereby not sup-
posed to be interrupted by private phone calls,
sms or other matters. One actor tries to protect
non-work from work interference and describes
himself as “a bit odd”:
I may have an odd relation to my job. On prin-
ciple I don’t work much when I’m out of office.
[...] When I leave I stop working, I only work if I
have to. Therefore, I never practice ‘work where
you are’. When I’m in the park I want to watch
the birds [...].
The actors use the functions of the cell phone
differently in different situations. Some functions
and technical artefacts are used for work tasks,
others for private matters. The cell phone is used as
933

a tool for work tasks, while a stationary computer
is used for handling both work-related tasks and
private matters. One actor, for instance, does not
take private calls on the cell phone, but regards a
private chat on the job computer as an appropri-
ate activity. Other actors use two different e-mail
accounts in the same cell phone, one for private
matters, and one for work tasks:
[...] when I act professionally I use the job e-mail,
otherwise the personal e-mail and it is a deliberate
choice to have them separated from each other
Finally, one actor does not use the chat-function
of the cell phone at work since chatting is consid-
ered to be a private activity.
Summing up, according to the narratives of the
actors, the use of mobile ICT with its functions for
mobility seems to contribute to the integration of
work and non-work practices. On the other hand,
the use of mobile ICT also seems to bring about
a tension between when to work and when to be
off duty. The actors describe three different ways
of acting in relation to this tension. First, work
seems to extend into non-work practices. Secondly,
actors seem to separate work from non-work by
switching on and turning off the cell phone after
work hours (time) or when leaving the workplace
building (space). Thirdly, actors seem to separate
work and non-work by using different physical
or applicatory artefacts.
IDENTITIES IN THE BORDERLAND
BETWEEN WORK AND NON-WORK
In the previous section, the narratives of mobile
ICT practices were presented. With these narra-
tives we will further discuss the forming of the
borderland between work and non-work and the
identities formed in relation to this borderland.
At least three types of borderland are found: the
borderland as an extended work practice, the
border practice and, finally, the borderland as a
934
Boundaryless Work and the Role of Mobile ICT
boundaryless practice. The identities formed in
these types of borderland are discussed as extended
work identity, border identity and boundaryless
identity.
EXTENDED WORK PRACTICE
Extended work practice is related to the narra-
tives of the work place norms described by the
actors. The cell phone, on the one hand, is seen
as an integrated tool between work and non-work
practices. On the other hand, it is seen mainly as
a work tool. Private use should be handled with
moderation and actors state that they try to protect
work from private interference. At the same time
actors are switching on the cell phone in the car and
on the train, which extends the work day. Finally
the narratives about protecting work from private
calls during work hours seem to say something
about the extension of work into non-work but
not the other way around. Extended work identity
could be described as a consequence of the tension
between the integrating function and the work
place norms. Actors describe the tension between,
on the one hand, the freedom of choosing when
and where to work and the feeling of never being
off duty on the other.
BORDER PRACTICE
Border practice relates to the narratives about find-
ing routines for when to switch on or turning off
the cell phone. The identity formed is related to
work place norms where work and non-work are
separated by time and space. Even if mobile ICT
makes it possible to work elsewhere or at other
times, actors seem to find routines for separating
between them. They create a border. In relation
to other actors this way of protecting non-work
is described as odd.
Boundaryless Work and the Role of Mobile ICT
Table 1. The use of mobile ICT and its relation to the forming of identities in the borderland between
work and non-work practices.
The use of mobile ICT The borderland between work and non-
work
Mobile ICT is used as an integrated work tool Extended work practice
used after work hours.
Mobile ICT is used either as a work tool or as Border practice
a non-work tool. Routines for switching on
and turning off is related to time and space.
Mobile ICT is used as integrated tools where Boundaryless practice
distinctions between work and non-work
are made by using different applications or
artefacts.
BOUNDARYLESS PRACTICE
Boundaryless practice relates to the narratives
of actors using mobile ICT as an integrated tool,
where new ways of structuring are formed. Dif-
ferent physical or applicatory artefacts are used to
separate work and non-work. This way of using
mobile ICT creates new work-place norms as
regards where to work with what as well as when
to work or when to be off duty. It also creates a
new way of looking at non-work practices. In this
social practice, some physical as well as applica-
tory artefacts are seen as private tools while others
are seen as work tools. The boundaryless identity
being formed in this borderland is characterised
by a person moving in and between work and
non-work by using different functions of mobile
ICT in different practices.
SUMMARY
In Table 1 an attempt is made to sketch the rela-
tion between the use of mobile ICT in work and
non-work practices.
The identities formed in the borderland
between work and non-work
Extended work identity
Border identity
Boundaryless identity
DISCUSSION
The aim of this chapter is to explore the role
of mobile ICT in the forming of a borderland
between work and non-work practices and the
identities formed in relation to this borderland.
Castells et al. (2006) argue that the main advan-
tage of mobile communication is its capacity for
connectivity. In a similar way, Ling and Donner
(2009) point out connectivity as the first major
theme of the rise of the cellphone era. They also
identify a second theme of this development: a
new level of reachability. According to the illus-
trative examples above, the mobility of the cell
phone – as manifested in connectivity as well as
reachability – contributes to the integration of
work and non-work practices. At the same time,
already existing work-place norms expressed
in the mobile practices distinguish work from
non-work. For the actors involved, this creates a
tension where three different types of borderland
and identities are formed: extended work practice,
border practice and boundaryless practice.
BORDERLAND AND IDENTITY
In the extended work practice, mobile ICT seems
to become a boundary object (Engeström et al.,
1995; Star & Griesemer, 1989; Wenger, 1998)
935

which extends work and reduces non-work
practice. In extended work practice, an extended
work identity is formed where there is a tension
between work autonomy and never being off
duty. Work seems to expand in time and space,
and the negotiation of actors carrying this iden-
tity with its prerogatives (cf. Giddens, 1984)
concerns when work ends and non-work starts.
Previous research concerning boundaryless work
has come to a similar conclusion, i.e. work seems
to expand into private life (Allvin et al., 2006;
Towers et al., 2006). This identity can be related
to Castells’ (1997) discussion about legitimised
identities where the expansion of work seems to
be legitimised as well.
Border practice is characterised by boundaries
in time and space between work and non-work.
The identity formed is a border identity. In this
practice, mobile ICT is not to be seen as a bound-
ary object; the borderland might not even exist.
The border identity is defined as odd, in relation
to existing norms for protecting work. However,
this identity is carrying with it old prerogatives
concerning when and where to work. Castells
(1997) would probably define this type of identity
as a resistance identity in relation to existing norms.
Interestingly enough, previous research concern-
ing the autonomy in handling new demands in
working life is often concerned with the developing
of individual competence in setting boundaries
(Hagström, 2007; Hansson, 2004; Kylin, 2007;
Ohlsson, 2008). Research concerning the use of
mobile ICT in boundaryless work (Golden &
Geisler, 2007; Laurier, 2002) points out, from the
same perspective, actors’ competence in setting
boundaries between work and non-work.
Finally, boundaryless practice seems to be
formed in the use of mobile ICT in terms of
physically and applicatory artefacts as boundary
objects. In this borderland a boundaryless iden-
tity is formed. There is a continuous negotiation
between work-related and non-work related
activities in this borderland. This identity could,
using Castells’ (1997) terminology, be called a
936
Boundaryless Work and the Role of Mobile ICT
project identity. In previous research identities
of “nomadity” have been used for describing the
boundarylessness (Fenwick, 2006; Salamoun
Sioufi & Greenhill, 2007).
Fenwick (op.cit.) shows that boundaryless
workers tend to flow into and out of structures,
moving in two conflicting directions: on the one
hand, towards becoming and anchoring a bounded
subject position, and towards escaping or flying
from boundaries on the other. According to Geser
(2004), the most general function of the cell phone
is to lessen the degree to which relationships and
systems are anchored in space, and to increase the
degree to which they are anchored in particular
persons. Our illustration, though, points at mobile
ICT as an anchor in itself that becomes a part of
the forming of the boundaryless identity.
BORDERLAND AS A
SOCIAL PRACTICE
We have defined borderland as a type of social
practice (Giddens, 1984) where mobile ICT is
regarded as a boundary object. New routines and
rituals, such as switching on and turning off the
cell phone, have been presented above. These are
structural principles and components (op cit, 1984)
of the borderland between work and non-work.
Two of the three different types of borderland
can also be defined as communities of practice
(Wenger, 1998): borderland as an extended work
practice and borderland as a boundaryless practice.
In extended work practice, the negotiation and
shared repertoire are related to the specific work-
place within the telecom company. In borderland
as a boundaryless practice, the negotiation of a
joint enterprise and shared repertoire is related to
the practice of mobile ICT in itself.
Boundary Objects
It seems as if mobile ICT as a mediating artefact
(Engeström, 1999) between social practices is
Boundaryless Work and the Role of Mobile ICT
mainly found in the borderland as extended work
practice and in the borderland as boundaryless
practice. In the borderland of extended work
practice, the boundary object expands work in
time and space. In the borderland of boundaryless
practice, the cell phone is analysed as a boundary
object consisting of several objects in itself which
are used in the crossing of boundaries in time and
space, but also as part of the forming of new ones.
Speaking with Engeström et al. (1995), mobile
ICT might also become the object of the mobile
ICT activity system instead of being the mediating
artefact in boundaryless practice?
Identity
Identity is defined in terms of how actors pres-
ent themselves in relation to or with reference
to others (Thunborg, 1999). According to Mead
(1934), identities are formed by seeing oneself
from the perspective of the other and by forming,
from that position, a general view of the world.
Goffman (1959) is also relating to actors’ expres-
sions with reference to others. In our example the
actors are referring to others while talking about
their mobile practices. They all seem to be defin-
ing what to become in the borderland. One way
of understanding the three identities is to regard
them as different phases in the development of a
relation to the boundarylessness (Castells, 1997),
another is to regard them as situated in relation to
different mobile practices (Fenwick, 2006; Lave
& Wenger, 1991; Wenger, 1998).
Mobile ICT
According to Castells et al. (2006), wireless com-
munication takes place in new spatial contexts
and in new time dimensions. They argue that
wireless technology blurs spatial contexts and
time frames. As we have seen, the mobile ICT
practice seems to contribute to the forming of a
new spatial context and a new time dimension: it
enables the employee to work almost anywhere
and anytime. This seems to lead on to the form-
ing of an extended work practice also shown in
previous research. In this chapter, however, we
have also discussed other social practices where
diverse boundaries are formed in relation to mobile
ICT as a boundary object. These practices could
be an important object for future studies.
FUTURE TRENDS AND PRACTICAL
IMPLICATIONS OF THE STUDY
In this section, we are discussing the future trends
concerning mobile ICT, borderlands and identities.
These are related to the development of mobile
ICT, the development of work and, finally, to
future research about adults’ learning while using
mobile ICT.
Implications for the
Development of Mobile ICT
The diffusion of mobile ICT and the development
of applications are proceeding rapidly. At the same
time research points out a trend towards boundary-
less work and nomadism (although certain kinds
of work are of course excluded from this trend).
These two trends do not necessarily move in the
same direction. According to Wenger (1998),
design of artefacts involves first and foremost the
relationship between the practices of design and
the practices of use.
There is a possible gap between boundary-
less or nomad practices on the one hand and the
practice of design of mobile ICT technology on
the other. What kinds of technology and applica-
tions are required to meet the demands of the new
identities formed in relation to the borderland?
Existing technology does not seem to be designed
for boundarylessness. Furthermore, the design of
technology tends to be based on individual users
interacting with technical artefacts; but who is
the user, and what is use? According to Giddens
(1999) and Wenger (1998), all doing is related to
937

social practices. Maybe designers should rethink
the user and the use, focusing on social practices
instead (Wenger, 1998)?
IMPLICATIONS FOR ORGANIZING
WORK AND NON-WORK
One of the implications of this chapter is that old
workplace norms are of importance in the form-
ing of a borderland. Norms as regards when and
where to work are either creating a society where
people work all the time, or a society where the
mobility of the technology becomes unimportant.
A workplace where the mobility of mobile ICT is
exploited will have to discuss new ways of orga-
nizing work where new norms can be formed. It is
also important to discuss what kinds of work areas
are focused in boundaryless work research, and
in what way this will change over time. Sawchuk
(2003), for example is taking a working-class
perspective on information technology. Although
mobile ICT has become a mainstream technology,
there are still differences regarding the extent to
which mobile ICT use is accepted at work. In
this chapter, we have focused on those who are
supposed to use mobile ICT at work.
FUTURE RESEARCH
There is a need for further research on the social
aspects of mobile ICT. Boundaryless work as well
as the identities formed in boundaryless work
practices will probably continue to change. In
order to understand adult learning in this context,
we need more research on non-work practices,
what the actors within these practices do and how
they use mobile ICT. Therefore, we have started
a research project studying young adults related
to two different communities of practice: a small
company developing digital media products and a
female rock band. In this study, the flow of activi-
ties in the participants’ daily lives are captured as
938
Boundaryless Work and the Role of Mobile ICT
well as the interaction of the cell phone with other
technical artefacts and the way the cell phone
mediates new actions in different areas.
CONCLUSION
In this chapter we have discussed the role of mo-
bile ICT in the forming of a borderland between
work and non-work practices and the identities
formed in relation to this borderland. Drawing on
social perspectives on practice and identity, we
have pointed out three different borderlands, seen
as social practices, and three identities related to
these: extended work practice and extended work
identity, border practice and border identity, and,
finally, boundaryless practice and boundaryless
identity. The narratives of experiences of mobile-
ICT use, in work and non-work practices have
been used as an illustrating example.
REFERENCES
Alheit, P. (1986). Taking the knocks: Youth unem-
ployment and biography – A qualitative analysis.
London: Cassell.
Allvin, M., Aronsson, G., Hagström, T., Johansson,
G., & Lundberg, U. (2006). Gränslöst arbete. So-
cialpsykologiska perspektiv på det nya arbetslivet
[Boundaryless work. Sociopsychological perspec-
tives on the new working life]. Malmö: Liber.
Aronsson, G. (2005). Gränslöst arbete eller ar-
betets nya gränser? [Boundaryless work or new
borders at work?]. Tvärsnitt, nr 2. Stockholm:
Vetenskapsrådet.
Brown, A., & Kirpal, S. (2007). Concluding
chapter . In Brown, A., Kirpal, S., & Rauner, F.
(Eds.), Identities at work (pp. 211–240). Bonn:
Springer. doi:10.1007/978-1-4020-4989-7
Castells, M. (1997). The power of identity. Oxford:
Blackwell.
Boundaryless Work and the Role of Mobile ICT
Castells, M., Fernández-Ardèvol, M., Linchuan
Qiu, J., & Sey, A. (2006). Mobile communica-
tion and society: A global perspective. London:
MIT Press.
Collin, K. (2009). Work-related identity
in individual and social learning. Jour-
nal of Workplace Learning, 21(1), 23–35.
doi:10.1108/13665620910924899
Czarniawska-Joerges, B. (1997). Narratives of
individual and organizational identities. com-
munication yearbook, 17, 193-221.
Engeström, Y. (1999). Activity theory and indi-
vidual and social transformation . In Engeström,
Y., Miettinen, R., & Punamäki, R. R. (Eds.),
Perspectives on activity theory (pp. 19–38s).
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Engeström, Y., Engeström, R., & Kärkkäinen, M.
(1995). Polycontextuality and boundary cross-
ing in expert cognition: Learning and problem
solving in complex work activities. Learning
and Instruction, 5, 319–336. doi:10.1016/0959-
4752(95)00021-6
Engeström, Y., & Miettinen, R. (1999). Introduc-
tion . In Engeström, Y., Miettinen, R., & Punamäki,
R. L. (Eds.), Perspectives on activity theory (pp.
1–18). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Fenwick, T. (2006). Escaping/becoming subjects:
Learning to work the boundaries in boundaryless
work . In Billett, S., Fenwick, T., & Somerville,
M. (Eds.), Work, subjectivity and learning: Under-
standing learning through working life (technical
and vocational education and training: Issues,
concerns and prospects) (pp. 21–36). Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.
Geser, H. (2004). Towards a sociology of the mo-
bile phone. Sociology in Switzerland: Sociology
of the Mobile Phone. Online Publications. Zurich,
May 2004 (Release 3.0).
Giddens, A. (1984). The constitution of society:
Outline of the theory of structuration. Cambridge:
Polity Press.
Giddens, A. (1999). Runaway world – How glo-
balisation is shaping our lives. London: Profile
books.
Goffman. E. (1959). The presentation of self in
everyday life. New York: Penguin Books Ltd.
Golden,A.G.,&Geisler,C.(2007).Work-lifebound-
ary and the personal digital assistant. Human Rela-
tions, 60, 519. doi:10.1177/0018726707076698
Hagström, T. (2007). Arbetslivspedagogik och
det gränslösa arbetet – En transaktionell ansats
[Work-life pedagogy and boundaryless work. A
transactional approach]. Pedagogisk forskning i
Sverige, årgång, 12(4), 257-280.
Hansson, M. (2004). Det flexibla arbetets villkor –
om självförvaltandets kompetens [Self-governing
competence for flexible work]. Stockholm: Stock-
holms universitet, Pedagogiska institutionen.
Hatano, G., & Wertsch, J. V. (2001). Sociocultural
approaches to cognitive development: The consti-
tution of culture in mind. Human Development,
44, 77–83. doi:10.1159/000057047
Kylin, C. (2007). Coping with boundaries – A
study of interaction between work and non-work
in home-based telework. Stockholm: Stockholms
universitet, Psykologiska institutionen.
Laurier, E. (2002). The region as a socio-technical
accomplishment of mobile workers . In Brown,
B., Green, N., & Harper, R. (Eds.), Wireless world
– Social and interactional aspects of the mobile
age (pp. 46–61). London: Springer-Verlag.
Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning:
Legitimate, peripheral participation. Cambridge,
NY: Cambridge University Press.
Ling, L., & Donner, J. (2009). Mobile communi-
cation. Cambridge: Polity Press.
939

Ling, R., & Campbell, S. C. (2009). Introduction:
The reconstruction of time through mobile com-
munication practices . In Ling, R., & Campbell, S.
C. (Eds.), The reconstruction of space and time:
Mobile communication practices (pp. 1–15). New
Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Publishers.
Mead, G. H. (1934). Mind, self and society from a
standpoint of a social behaviorist. Chicago: The
University of Chicago Press.
Ohlsson, J. (2008). Mellan jobb och fritid .
[Between work and leisure] In Tedenljung, D.
(Ed.), Arbetsliv & pedagogik (pp. 33–54s). Lund:
Studentlitteratur.
Salamoun Sioufi, R., & Greenhill, S. (2007).
Who crosses boundaries? Critiquing information
technology and nomadic work practices. Con-
ference Proceedings, 5th Critical Management
Studies Conference 11-13 July 2007. University
of Manchester.
Sawchuk, P. (2003). Adult learning and technol-
ogy in working-class life. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press.
Star, S. L., & Griesemer, J. R. (1989). Insti-
tutional ecology, ‘translations’ and ‘bound-
ary objects’: Amateurs and professionals in
Berkeley’s museum of vertebrate zoology,
1907-39. Social Studies of Science, 19, 387.
doi:10.1177/030631289019003001
Thunborg, C. (1999). Lärande av yrkesiden-
titeter. En studie av läkare, sjuktsköterskor och
undersköterskor. [Learning occupational identi-
ties. A study of physicians, nurses and assistant
nurses]. Linköping: Institutionen för pedagogik
och psykologi. Linköpings universitet.
Towers, I., Duxbury, L., Higgins, C., & Thomas,
J. (2006). Time thieves and space invaders:
technology, work and the organization. Journal
of Organizational Change Management, 19(5),
593–618. doi:10.1108/09534810610686076
940
Boundaryless Work and the Role of Mobile ICT
Wenger, E. (1998). Communities of practice:
Learning, meaning and identity. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.
KEY TERMS AND DEFINITIONS
Borderland: A social practice where the
boundary between diverse social practices – es-
pecially practices related to work and non-work
– is negotiated.
Boundary: Boundaries exist when there are
two territories, spaces or areas whose limits or
extent can be determined. They are defined as
continuities and discontinuities. They are not
sharp lines of demarcation, but they do reflect the
specificity of different enterprises and an ongo-
ing production of local identities and meanings.
Boundary Object: An object with the capacity
of translating between different viewpoints. In this
study the cell phone is seen as a boundary object,
mediating between work and non-work practices.
Boundaryless Work: A way of talking about
the tendency of changed structures of work towards
fewer boundaries in time, space and tasks.
Community of Practice: A special type of
social practice which is constituted by a mutual
engagement, a negotiation of a joint enterprise and
by a shared repertoire of, for example, symbols
and by language.
Identity: The concept of identity is related
to definitions of “who I am” and “are coming to
be” in relation to different life situations and ex-
periences. In this chapter, a social perspective of
identity is used. Identity is defined here in terms
of how actors present themselves in relation to or
with reference to others.
Mediating Artefact: The interaction between
actors and tools when they act or experience the
world. In this chapter the concept is used to under-
stand the embeddedness of mobile ICT in social
practices. It can be physical as well as linguistic.
Boundaryless Work and the Role of Mobile ICT

Mobile ICT: Mobile information and com- ENDNOTES

munication technology, the cell phone and other
more advanced mobile artefacts which offer tools
1
Mobile ICT = Mobile information and com-
and services for web browsing, e-mail and more, munication technology, a comprehensive
such as the PDA, the BlackBerry or the I-phone. term for the cell phone and other more
Nomadism: A way of talking about the ac- advanced mobile artefacts which offer tools
tors’ conditions of crossing boundaries, as well and services for web browsing, e-mail and
as constituting new boundaries by means of the more, such as the PDA, the BlackBerry or
use of mobile ICT. the I-phone
Social Practice: A way of stressing the so-
2
Four women and two men aged between 25
cial embeddedness of all human activity. In this and 55.
chapter, social practice is defined as a relation
3
Wenger (1998) defines meaning as experi-
between the continuous flow of human activity ences of everyday life
and its order across time and space.

941
942

Chapter 57
Online Learning and
Instruction in Health:
Addressing the Demands for
Education and Training through
Computer-Based Technologies
Michelle Lee D’Abundo
University of North Carolina, USA

Cara Lynn Sidman

University of North Carolina, USA

ABSTRACT
Online learning and instruction are important components of adult education in the field of health. This
chapter describes how computer-based technologies are being applied in the training and continuing
education of health professionals and in health promotion. Curriculums previously thought to be in-
appropriate for web-based delivery are now being offered online. Innovations in online learning and
instruction have improved delivery of web-based education and have provided educational opportunities
for many that were “unreachable” by traditional classrooms. An example of how a solely face-to-face
course was revised and delivered in three formats including face-to-face, blended and completely online
is provided, as well as examples of best practices and future trends for online learning and instruction.

INTRODUCTION ate need of reform. Whatever route to health care

How to improve the health of Americans may
be the most salient and controversial problem in
today’s society. With rising health care costs, an
aging population and the need to treat increasing
numbers of people with chronic health conditions,
the United States health care system is in desper-
DOI: 10.4018/978-1-61692-906-0.ch057
reform is taken, adult health education will play
a significant role in meeting increased demands
for the training and continuing education of health
professionals and in health promotion. This chapter
will explore how online learning and instruction
is used to educate health professionals and how
online delivery is applied in health promotion.
Distance education, e-learning, computer
mediated, web-based, and online instruction are
Online Learning and Instruction in Health
terms used to describe education delivered through
computer-based technologies. Whatever term is
utilized, it is clear that computer-based technolo-
gies are essential components of the preparation
and continuing education of health professionals
and in the promotion of health among corporations,
communities, organizations, and individuals. For
many health professions, formal education, as well
as continuing education, includes some type of
web-based learning, with some programs com-
pletely online. In this chapter, health promotion
refers to all education and programming relating
to health that is intended to promote positive
health outcomes. The American Journal of Health
Promotion (2009) recently revised their definition
of health promotion to the following:
Health Promotion is the art and science of help-
ing people discover the synergies between their
core passions and optimal health, enhancing their
motivation to strive for optimal health, and sup-
porting them in changing their lifestyle to move
toward a state of optimal health. Optimal health is
a dynamic balance of physical, emotional, social,
spiritual, and intellectual health. Lifestyle change
can be facilitated through a combination of learn-
ing experiences that enhance awareness, increase
motivation, and build skills and, most important,
through the creation of opportunities that open
access to environments that make positive health
practices the easiest choice.
There are a variety of health promotion inter-
ventions and programs conducted online. Health
care professionals and health educators are us-
ing online instruction to teach patients. Higher
education courses that promote lifelong wellness,
including physical activity-based courses, are also
using online learning formats.
Health promotion initiatives that utilize tech-
nology have been described as e-health and tele-
medicine. Like the definition of health, the field
has had a difficult time establishing a universal
definition of e-health. In a systematic review of
the term e-health, Oh et al (2005) stated that all
definitions reviewed included disparate concepts,
including health, technology, and commerce with
varying degrees of emphasis on each. Another term
used to describe technology-based health promo-
tion is telemedicine. The United State Distance
Learning Association (2009) defines telemedicine
as “The application of information technology (and
infrastructure) in the healthcare industry in support
of patient care and patient related activities. Usu-
ally used to let a physician in a remote location
assist with a medical procedure or diagnosis or
consultation” (Distance learning: Key terms you
might want to know, para. 4).
Another emerging term, which has no accepted
definition in the area of technology and health
promotion, is Health 2.0. Health 2.0 refers to self-
directed learning about health that is completed
online through accessing websites, podcasts, and
social networking like chat rooms and discussion
boards. In our view, e-health and telemedicine
represent health promotion initiatives that are
educational interactions and activities driven by
health professionals and instructors, while Health
2.0 is health-related education directed by the
individual. It is clear that in this evolving field
of technology and health, terms and definitions,
as well as uses and innovations, will continue to
evolve.
The purpose of this chapter is to understand
how computer-based technologies are meet-
ing the demands for education and training in
health through online learning and instruction.
The specific objectives are to: 1) understand the
benefits, quality indicators, and use of online
learning and instruction in health, 2) discuss the
effectiveness of online learning and instruction
in health, 3) provide strategies for blended and
online instruction in health in higher education,
4) provide recommendations for the facilitation
of blended and online learning and instruction,
and 5) discuss future trends for online learning
and instruction in health.
943

BACKGROUND
In 2006, the health care industry employed 14
million people (Bureau of Labor Statistics, 2008)
including health-related professions like nursing,
occupational therapy, athletic training, respiratory
therapy, physicians, physician assistants, social
workers, and health educators. According to the
Bureau of Labor Statistics (2008) between 2006
and 2016, the health care industry will generate
3 million additional jobs, more than any other
industry. As the largest industry in the United
States, the demands for preparation and continuing
education of health-related professions comprise
a significant percentage of adult education con-
ducted in America.
Health care professionals are in demand
throughout America, but are particularly needed
in Health Professional Shortage Areas (HPSAs).
Health professional(s) shortage area means a
shortage of health professionals in an urban or
rural area, a population group, or in a public or
nonprofit private medical facility. According to
the Department of Health and Human Services
(2009), 16,585 practitioners are required to meet
the need for primary care providers in HPSAs.
Other health professional shortages are in dental
care, where 9,579 practitioners are needed, and in
mental health, with a need for 5,352 practitioners.
In order to meet the demands for qualified
health care professionals in America, institutions
of higher education have sought cost efficient
and effective methods of preparing and training
health care providers. One way to address the high
demand for education, especially for areas that do
not have institutions of higher learning, is to offer
and expand distance education opportunities. The
current use and continued expansion of online
learning and instruction in higher education has
caused health-related disciplines (and most other
disciplines) to ask some difficult questions, which
will be explored in this chapter.
The health and wellness of individuals, com-
munities, and society are largely dependent on
944
Online Learning and Instruction in Health
health care providers and health promotion efforts.
Consequently, much discussion and debate has
occurred as the delivery of adult education and
training has evolved to include web-based learning
and instruction in the field of health. Some of the
significant questions and issues in the discussion
about online learning and instruction include the
benefits, quality indicators, and the current use
in the field of health.
One of the most often asked questions is,
“what are the benefits of online learning and
instruction?” For potential students who are em-
ployed full-time, on active-duty in the military,
have family obligations, or are geographically
remote, online or blended programs may be the
only option for completing their education. Ac-
cording to Chaney et al (2009), distance education
programs benefit students, faculty/instructors,
and the university at large. For students, online
learning creates increased access, greater variety,
convenience in education through scheduling, the
ability to balance life outside of school (Hollis
& Madill, 2006), and reduced graduation time
(due to easier access)(Chaney, 2009). Chaney
believes distance education diversifies student
populations as courses are accessible from any
part of the country or world. Hollis and Madill
(2006) state when given the option, students
choose a combination of face-to-face and online
learning in formal education. While all students
are not suited for online learning, those that are
self-directed learners have the potential to thrive
in blended and online educational environments.
The benefits of online instruction for faculty
include flexibility in scheduling, reduction of com-
mute and travel, documentation of student work,
records of student and instructor interaction, and
archival data for assessment. For the university,
costs are also reduced as all types of printing are
eliminated when course materials and assessments
are conducted online. Many campuses do not
have the classroom space to offer all the courses
needed for their students. Online courses create
virtual space without the need for physical space
Online Learning and Instruction in Health
in a classroom. Online learning and instruction
can also benefit the campus environment. Many
campuses have struggled to resolve parking and
air quality issues. Distance education reduces
travel to and from campus, which significantly
reduces student and faculty costs for travel, and
the inevitable environmental effects associated
with auto admissions.
Another question asked is, “what are the qual-
ity indicators of online learning and instruction
for health-related professional education?” Like
all disciplines, health professionals, faculty, and
students have their opinions about what contributes
to effective web-based learning and instruction.
Reeves and Reeves (2008) provide 10 dimensions
that should be considered during the instructional
design, implementation and evaluation of online
courses in health and social work. The model they
describe for health and social work education in-
cludes the following 10 dimensions of interactive
teaching and learning: (1) pedagogical philosophy;
(2) learning theory; (3) goal orientation; (4) task
orientation; (5) source of motivation; (6) teacher
role; (7) metacognitive support; (8) collaborative
learning support; (9) cultural sensitivity; and (10)
structural flexibility. While the description of these
dimensions is beyond the scope of this chapter,
overall they emphasize important pedagogical
practices translated from the face-to-face to the
online environment.
Chaney and colleagues (2007) describe similar
quality indicators of distance education, with some
additional ones specifically related to technology.
These researchers agree with the importance of
interaction, especially between the students and
teacher. Other best practices include incorporating
the use of active learning techniques, providing
prompt feedback, and respecting diverse ways
of learning. Examples of ways to integrate best
practices into online education are provided later
in this chapter.
How is online learning and instruction used
in the training of health professionals? Allied
health care utilizes three models of e-learning:
blended learning, online learning, and continuing
education (Stewart & Wright, 2004). Blended
learning includes both face-to-face and online
learning and instruction. Online learning is learn-
ing and instruction that is completely web-based.
Continuing education for health professionals is
offered in both blended and online formats. In
fact, most health-related disciplines are using a
combination of online and face-to-face learning
in their programs.
Through a review of research focused on
computer-enhanced classroom-based teaching,
online courses, online degree programs, and on-
line continuing professional education, Hollis and
Madill (2006) recommend that both online and
face-to-face teaching and learning opportunities
accommodate all types of students and faculty.
Hollis and Madill (2006) emphasize the use of mul-
tiple technologies to enhance interaction between
students, and between students and instructors.
However, to optimize the effectiveness of online
learning, they believe appropriate preparation and
support is required for both students and faculty.
THE ISSUE OF EFFECTIVENESS
IN ONLINE LEARNING AND
INSTRUCTION IN HEALTH
Several issues in online learning and instruction in
health have already been discussed, but perhaps the
most salient issue in online learning and instruction
in health is whether or not online instruction is an
effective mode of educating health professionals.
In other words, can online learning and instruc-
tion produce competent health professionals? It
is inevitable people will compare the outcomes of
online learning and face-to-face environments in
health. However, at this point, it seems that almost
all face-to-face classrooms include some type of
online learning and it is probably safe to say that no
health professional training curriculum will ever
be exclusively online learning and instruction. At
some point, a health professional’s training will
945

include some face-to-face instruction and some
computer-based learning and instruction.
Skeptics still question whether or not online
learning and instruction is an effective way to edu-
cate health professionals. Like the assessment of
face-to-face classroom learning, online education
is influenced by a multitude of factors including,
but not limited to, faculty training and course
design. Therefore, it is very difficult to determine
as a whole if online learning and instruction is
an effective mode of educating health profes-
sionals. However, valid assessment practices for
online instruction have been created and can be
implemented. In addition, since technology is
already heavily used by health professionals, it
seems appropriate for technology to play a role
in their education.
Online education is currently being used in
course work, internships and in continuing educa-
tion for health professionals. Web-based educa-
tion has been used to teach medical students. For
example, a web-based self-study was developed
to teach medical students how to help smokers
quit and how to prevent others from starting to
smoke. The curriculum taught medical students
how to develop effective counseling skills in the
prevention and treatment of smoking (Pederson,
Blumenthal, Dever & McGrady, 2006). In another
study, third- and fourth-year medical students
who completed a web-based women’s health
curriculum reported valuing learning women’s
health, preferred the self-directed learning over
lecture, scored highly on knowledge tests, and
were involved in more high-level discussions of
women’s health with faculty (Zebrack et al, 2005).
Online instruction can also be used to enrich
fieldwork, or internship placements. Information
and assessments for clinical instructors can be
delivered electronically through an online course
management system such as Blackboard. Face-
to-face class formats can be enriched through
the availability of a multitude of supplemental
online materials. Konin (2004) discusses how to
enhance clinical education, like Athletic Training,
946
Online Learning and Instruction in Health
through the use of web-based programs. McLeod
and Barbara (2005) state, “The use of online chat
rooms was seen to be beneficial to encouraging
peer support while on fieldwork for allied health
students”(p.276).
The use of online chat rooms is a way to bring
students and instructors together while fieldwork
requires them to be geographically remote.
Online learning and instruction has also been
shown to be effective in the continuing education of
health professionals. Williams (2006) conducted a
meta-analysis of 25 studies assessing achievement
in distance education in allied health and found
that distance education is as effective as face-to-
face instruction. Student achievement outcomes
were positively correlated with work experience
and professional knowledge. Outcomes were
also better for distance education experiences
that included multiple learning and instructional
strategies including, but not limited to, interaction
and introspection.
In addition to the education and training of
health professionals, online learning and instruc-
tion has been used effectively in health promo-
tion efforts. Researchers have examined online
health promotion programs and found them to
be effective methods of information delivery
(Parlov, Cowdery & Hoerauf, 2004; Shegog et
al, 2005). Wantland et al (2006) conducted a
meta-analysis of effects of patient knowledge
and behavioral change outcomes in web-based
and non-web-based interventions. In 16 of 17
web-based interventions reviewed, participants
showed improved knowledge and behavioral
outcomes. Some advantages of computer-based
health promotion activities include individual
tailoring, consistency of content, the incorporation
of media, and availability of the program when a
person is ready to make a change.
The effective use of online learning and in-
struction has been discussed for course work,
internships, continuing education and health pro-
motion efforts. Some skeptics of online education
seem to fear this method of education is going to
Online Learning and Instruction in Health
completely replace the face-to-face classroom.
Rather than being fearful of online learning and
instruction, it should be viewed as a way to offer
a variety of learning opportunities and methods
of delivery for a changing student population,
workforce, and society. Hollis and Madill state
(2006), “Evidence suggests that blending combi-
nations of technologies with computer mediated
learning enhances interaction and could address
the higher order learning needs of professional
programs such as occupational therapy”(p.61).
In order to meet the health promotion goals
of several universities and colleges, university
basic study curriculums include required hours
in courses that promote lifelong wellness. Many
such courses are delivered in face-to-face formats
and require participation in some type of physical
activity. Like issues involved in the preparation
of future health professionals, there are obstacles
encountered in accommodating the diverse needs
of learners in the university setting. The following
section focuses on strategies for integrating online
learning and instruction into an already existing
face-to-face physical activity and wellness course.
STRATEGIES FOR CREATING
EFFECTIVE ONLINE LEARNING
AND INSTRUCTION IN HEALTH
For the practitioners and faculty that design,
implement, and evaluate training of future health
professionals and health promotion interventions
and programs, it may be difficult to envision how
to develop blended and online courses/programs
from existing traditional curriculums. There may
also be concerns about how to ensure that objec-
tives are being met in blended and online formats.
The following example may be used as a guide
for developing blended and online instruction
focused on health promotion in higher education.
The information may be applied to the training of
future health professionals as well health promo-
tion activities outside of education. Perhaps the
most unique aspect of the course is the opportunity
for the assessment and evaluation of the student
outcomes based on three modes of course delivery.
PED 101: Physical Activity
& Wellness Overview
Some courses previously thought to be impos-
sible to teach in a web-based format like physical
education are now being delivered in blended and
online formats. At the University of North Carolina
Wilmington, PED 101: Physical Activity & Well-
ness, the required basic studies lifetime health and
wellness course that serves approximately 3,000
students per year, has been transformed to align
its curriculum with national health objectives and
university strategic goals, and to streamline its
delivery and administration using relevant tech-
nologies. Part of this transformation has included
establishing clear student learning outcomes based
on accumulating research evidence supporting the
most effective ways to facilitate knowledge, skills,
attitudes, and behaviors associated with long-term
adherence to healthy behaviors.
Modifications that needed to be made to meet
the learning objectives included the development
of a new custom book, relevant course assign-
ments, and an efficient and effective means of as-
sessment. The course modifications were based on
theoretical evidence that self-determination (Deci
& Ryan, 1985) and self-efficacy (Bandura, 1977;
Bandura, 1997) are more associated with adher-
ence to healthy behaviors. In addition, changes to
the course were made with consideration to the
needs of the non-traditional population of students
at UNCW that work full-time, live at a distance,
and can only take courses in an online format to
obtain their degrees. Incorporating a more inde-
pendent, autonomous-based physical activity lab
and lecture format through the use of technology
made sense to help students incorporate physical
activity into their daily schedule on their own
(and not in the group lab format). As a result of
all these needs, PED 101 was refocused to include
947

updated content, skill development conducive to
lifelong physical activity behaviors and improved
quality of life (i.e., promotion of self-efficacy, and
teaching self-management skills such as goal-
setting, logging and reflecting on target unhealthy
behaviors), physical activity requirements based
on national health guidelines, and wellness-based
activities that include all dimensions (i.e., physi-
cal, social, emotional, spiritual, and intellectual).
Our research assessing the impact of this
new curriculum on physical activity and well-
ness variables is still in its infancy. However, we
found exercise self-efficacy to be associated with
positive outcomes among college populations
(Sidman, D’Abundo, & Hritz, 2009). Concur-
rently, the PED 101 course delivery has evolved
into three distinct course formats that all involve
an online component using a Blackboard-based
online course management system. Descriptions
of each class format including face-to-face (f2f)
lab/f2f lecture, f2f lab /online lecture, and online
lab/online lecture are provided.
Face-to-Face (F2F) lab/
f2f Lecture Format
The Majority of the Students
are Enrolled in Face-to-Face
(F2F) Lab/F2F Lecture
format of PED 101 course format, which involves
two 50-minute face-to-face lab activities per week
and one 50-minute face-to-face lecture each week.
The f2f lab activities range from vigorous physical
activities such as total body conditioning, group
exercise, and running, to more moderate activities
such as tennis, volleyball, swimming, Tai Chi,
fencing, and walking. Another important distinc-
tion among the f2f lab activities is that some are
more skill-based, while others are more fitness-
based. For example, in the skill-based labs, the
students are learning the techniques, strategies,
and movement patterns associated with success-
ful participation in lifetime sports (i.e., tennis,
948
Online Learning and Instruction in Health
fencing, volleyball) and may not necessarily be
achieving levels of physical activity necessary to
improve fitness. In the fitness-oriented lab sec-
tions (i.e., circuit training, mini-marathon, total
body conditioning, group exercise, etc.), students
participate in physical activities specifically
designed to improve fitness by increasing their
heart rate to the target zone for a minimum of
30 minutes each session. Although there is some
overlap between the two types of lab activities,
with the fitness-based labs teaching some skill
and the skill-based labs teaching some fitness, this
is the primary distinction between the two. The
weekly face-to-face lectures (with approximately
250 students per section) convey applicable and
relevant health/wellness content (extending be-
yond the book) through interactive, multi-media
presentations taught by an experienced instructor.
F2F Lab/Online Lecture
The second format of PED 101 is the f2f lab/online
lecture. The f2f lab is the same as described previ-
ously, in which the students choose the physical
activity that best meets their needs. The online
lectures are weekly, like the f2f lectures, and are
the same interactive, multi-media presentations.
The only difference is that they are taught by
an experienced instructor via screen recording
software (Camtasia Studio, version 6) and then
posted online for students to view asynchronously.
All PED 101 students have access to step-by-
step instructions for how to access and actively
engage in the material and they are also provided
comprehensive study guides for assistance with
quiz preparation.
Online Lab/Online Lecture
The third and perhaps the most unique format is
the online lab/online lecture. This is especially
true because PED 101 is classified as a physical
education course, and the physical activity com-
ponent, a fundamental part of the experience, is
Online Learning and Instruction in Health
often questioned as to how it can be “done” online.
With that said, however, the same course objectives
and student learning outcomes, includingphysi-
cal activity, can be achieved in the fully online
format, but only with careful attention to sound
health behavior change theories and instructional
technology principles. In fact, the online lab format
has the potential to actually exceed the f2f labs
in terms of student outcomes due to the associa-
tion of its autonomous components to long-term
behaviors. Data collection is currently in progress
to determine such differences.
The online lecture is the same as described
previously, but the online lab truly is innovative.
The strength in its curriculum and online features
is due to the theoretical basis in which decisions
were made regarding the physical activity and
wellness components and the specific online
instructional design methods selected. Being that
the course is so large, consistency across sections
also guides decisions, but not at the expense of
compromising learning objectives.
Due to the fact that physical activity is such
an important part of the PED 101 experience,
finding a way for students in the online format to
successfully participate in physical activity, and be
held accountable, has been a challenge well met.
From a theoretical foundation, we have figured
out how to make this aspect successful from an
anecdotal standpoint (students have reported how
this online course has helped them become mo-
tivated for physical activity each week and how
they enjoy being able to choose the type, location,
and time of day for each physical activity; for
quantitative analyses, data collection is in process
and will be reported elsewhere). The challenge
is that we want students to be independent and
autonomous, but we also want to hold them ac-
countable for their physical activity. As physical
educators who strongly believe in a wellness and
lifetime-based approach, this section is intention-
ally designed to preclude “forcing” students to do
one particular activity, as research indicates the
more intrinsically motivated individuals are, the
more likely they are to adhere to a behavior (Deci
& Ryan, 1985). More specifically, Deci and Ryan
have stated “To be self-determined is to endorse
one’s actions at the highest level of reflection;
when self-determined, people experience a sense
of freedom to do what is interesting, personally
important, and vitalizing” (Deci & Ryan, 2009,
Self-determination theory: An approach to human
motivation theory and personality, para. 1).
Therefore, to hold students accountable for a
well-rounded physical activity program, we started
with the Physical Activity and Public Health
Guidelines for healthy adults (under age 65) estab-
lished by the American College of Sports Medicine
(ACSM) and American Heart Association (AHA)
(Haskell et al., 2007). The basic recommendations
published by these credible organizations include
a choice of participation in moderately intense
cardiovascular activity 30 minutes a day, 5 days
per week or vigorously intense cardiovascular
activity 20 minutes a day, 3 days per week. They
also include a resistance component where indi-
viduals perform 8 to 10 strength-training exercises
of 8 to 12 repetitions, two times per week. Due
to the dose-response relationship between physi-
cal activity and health, these are the minimum
requirements, where additional activity can lead
to greater fitness benefits and chronic disease risk
reductions, but that is the individual’s choice. For
the PED 101 requirement, a minimum of 3 days
per week of 30 minutes of cardiovascular activ-
ity (with minimum of 10-minute bouts) and two
days per week of resistance activity (20-minute
bout minimum) are recorded on daily Physical
Activity Logs (along with detailed reflections).
Students are also responsible for providing ad-
ditional verification of their choice (e.g., fitness
center instructor’s signature on a verification form,
pedometer step counts, or video clip of activity.
The idea is to put the responsibility on them so
there is no question that the students actually did
participate in the activity they record. The greater
the detail, the better, in order for the instructors to
accurately assess their participation in the mini-
949

mum requirements of each activity, their progres-
sion, and their adherence to the other principles
of training learned in the course.
To fully develop an optimally balanced physi-
cal activity program, a flexibility component is also
recommended by ACSM, and therefore incorpo-
rated into the PED 101 student’s responsibilities.
The guidelines include statically stretching all
major muscle groups (ideally) 5 to 7 days per week,
while holding the stretches for 15-30 seconds, and
performing 2 to 4 repetitions per stretch (ACSM,
2006). We require the 5-day minimum,10-minute
bout duration for flexibility activities.
It is important to note that these guidelines also
emphasize the importance of enjoyment and try-
ing a wide variety of activities to stay motivated.
That truly is the essence of PED 101’s physical
activity and wellness basic studies course, in all
formats, and a particular strength of the indepen-
dent online lab format.
In addition to the physical activity behavioral
objective of PED 101, the objectives of improv-
ing knowledge, self-management skills, and
participating in new wellness activities are met
through the course assignments and assessments.
Knowledge, from the book and lectures, is evalu-
ated via six online quizzes (with the lowest quiz
grade dropped), and is the same for both f2f and
online lectures. The quizzes are open for a limited
amount of time (two days), and are open book/
open note with academic honor code thoroughly
emphasized. In fact, the online lecture students
are asked to watch a video called “The Enforcer”
which humorously and effectively portrays the
importance of independent work and confiden-
tiality through a university-specific skit-based
parody of college students being seen cheating
by a hypothetical enforcer.
Assignments range from trying new activities
in each dimension of wellness, keeping a behav-
ior journal, selection of fitness assessments, and
completing a goal setting assignment. Aside from
the weekly Physical Activity Logs required for
online lab students, the only other assignment
950
Online Learning and Instruction in Health
variation is participation in four interactive discus-
sion boards. The objective of this assignment is to
simulate the f2f interaction that typically occurs
in the f2f labs by creating a non-threatening in-
teractive teaching-learning community to engage
in the course content. The Discussion Board
topics include introductions to each other and to
the course content, goal setting, physical activity
program planning, healthy eating habits, and how
to become an informed consumer. These topics
were carefully selected to supplement the lecture
and quiz information and encourage students to
apply the health and wellness knowledge to their
lives, while gaining valuable input from their
classmates through on-going discussions.
The other assignments shared by both the online
and f2f formats are a 7-day Behavior journal, a
short- and long-term goal setting assignment, and
wellness activities in each of the five dimensions
(i.e., spiritual, emotional, physical, intellectual,
and social). Using an online course management
system, all of these assignments are posted online
for students to download, then complete on their
own, and then to submit online for the instruc-
tors to grade. Assignment examples and grading
rubrics are provided online for students to review
prior to completion. A detailed course schedule
and syllabus are posted for each student in the
online course management system.
One additional, and somewhat unique use of
technology for this multi-section, multi-instructor,
large basic studies course, is the use of SharePoint
to organize course documents and establish com-
munication among all students and instructors by
the PED 101 Coordinator. Posted on SharePoint
are the chapter study guides, announcements
regarding extra credit opportunities, and online
surveys to collect pre-post data. This has definitely
improved the organization and administration of
the course, and has kept the students “alerted” via
daily email summaries when new postings occur.
The major transformation of the PED 101
curriculum and format, necessitated by the es-
tablishment of student learning outcomes more
Online Learning and Instruction in Health
appropriately aligned with national health objec-
tives and university goals, has evolved to become
a wellness-focused learning experience where
students adopt and (hopefully) maintain healthy
behaviors for the lifetime. A longitudinal quantita-
tive and qualitative study is in the development
phase with the purpose of following these students
one year after the course, and also one, three, and
five years post-graduation to determine its impact
on physical activity and health variables. Of par-
ticular interest of this study will be whether or not
there are differences in physical activity five years
after taking the course between students in the
Online Labs who were allowed to self-determine
their physical activity and the f2f Lab students.
In the meantime, the online format is receiving
positive feedback and successfully meeting the
needs of students. The possibility does exist that
online physical education may better meet the
long-term goal of the course to develop lifelong
healthy behaviors than the face-to-face lab, which
does not allow for autonomy. Only time, and lots
of data, will tell!
RECOMMENDATIONS FOR
FACILITATING ONLINE LEARNING
AND INSTRUCTION IN HEALTH
This section provides recommendations for faculty
training health professionals, instructors provid-
ing continuing education and health practitioners
delivering health promotion initiatives in online
and blended formats. The first suggestion is to
increase comfort levels with technology. When
an instructor is unsure about the technology be-
ing applied in the course, such apprehension can
limit the success of the entire educational experi-
ence. While it is impossible to know everything,
developing a solid foundational knowledge of
the online course management system and the
other technologies to be implemented is essential
before beginning to teach. Some ways to improve
technological skills are to watch relevant tutorials,
attend training sessions, and talk to colleagues to
increase background, comfort, and use of tech-
nology. Technology issues and “techno-stress”
associated with technology issues will occur in
practice. However, the more comfortable the in-
structor is with online applications and technical
support services, the more successful the overall
online teaching and learning experience for the
instructors and students.
Another recommendation is to start with the
learning objectives, and then determine how tech-
nology can help meet those objectives (not vice
versa). One mistake professionals and educators
make when designing online courses for the first
time is to incorporate the latest innovations in
technology without forethought regarding how
these innovations specifically address the learn-
ing objectives. While it is important to utilize
a combination of audio, visual, and interactive
modules to meet diverse learning styles, technol-
ogy that is inappropriately utilized can actually
compromise the learning objectives. Therefore,
it is recommended that prior to incorporating any
type of technology into a course, review the student
learning outcomes and then match relevant and
appropriate technologies with course activities, as-
signments, discussions, and/or interactive learning
modules. For example, if a learning objective in
a health/wellness course is to log and personally
reflect on an unhealthy target behavior in order
to increase awareness, an assignment to keep a
journal and record personal thoughts and feelings
would suffice. Requiring an online discussion for
students to share personal thoughts and feelings
regarding their unhealthy behaviors is not neces-
sary (and may not even be appropriate) to meet
that learning objective.
When developing education for health, start
with blended courses before moving to completely
online formats. For some health professionals
and health faculty, it is difficult to decide how to
adapt existing educational materials, activities
and programs to web-based delivery. The PED
101 curriculum example provides ideas about
951

how to integrate blended and online delivery for
previously face-to-face educational formats. For
both blended classrooms and completely online
learning environments, there are a numerous on-
line resources that are available for educational
purposes. For example, PBS provides much of
their health-related programming on their website
and includes educational materials for discussing
the content. Bennett (2005) describes the potential
for using The Multimedia Educational Resource
for Learning and Online Teaching (MERLOT) as
an online resource linked to thousands of learning
objects. Resources available include online learn-
ing materials, peer reviews, learning assignments,
and user comments, all organized by discipline.
Instructional technology consultants are also
available to assist with the development of online
learning materials and curriculums.
Finally, when courses are offered completely
online, go beyond content and strive to increase
interaction! One criticism of online learning and
instruction is that it limits both student-to-student
and instructor-to-student interaction. Instructors
that teach both online and face-to-face formats
realize that interaction largely depends on the
facilitation of the class and the members of the
class itself. In order to continue to raise aware-
ness about web-based education, it is important
to educate practitioners, students, and the public
about the potential of online education.
One way to alleviate some of the concern about
the lack of instructor and student interaction in
online classes is to design strategies to promote
interaction and build community among students
and participants. Stow (2005) states that in on-
line courses, activities should include multiple
types of interaction. The author recommends
that the instructor communicate with students in
a timely manner. Stow suggests that methods like
chat rooms, discussions, and feedback allow the
students to become actively engaged in order to
decrease the transactional distance.
In order to increase student interaction and
build community in blended and online course
952
Online Learning and Instruction in Health
formats, instructors may want to integrate “Course
Buddies” into their courses. The objective of us-
ing “Course Buddies” is to create a community of
learners in blended and online courses and in health
promotion programs delivered in a web-based
format. To begin the “Course Buddy” selection,
instructors can ask students to post introductions
that include three things that most people do
not know about them and include a picture. The
next step is to have students review each others’
introductions and find three people that they have
things in common with or they want to get to know
better. Then instruct students to e-mail potential
“Course Buddies” to exchange contact information
or just communicate by using e-mail. The process
of finding “Course Buddies” in itself helps build
community and enables students to learn more
about each other. Once “Course Buddies” are
established, students can discuss activities, study
for exams, or work on assignments together.
Another way to increase interaction is to adapt
an activity called the Identity Pie (used in many
face-to-face adult education classrooms) to online
and blended classroom formats. The objectives
of the Identity Pie activity are to: 1) help build
community through understanding other students’
backgrounds, and 2) help students reflect about
their identity to shape their views of health issues.
In order to begin the Identity Pie activity, the fa-
cilitator can introduce the activity by explaining
that personal opinions about the health topics are
greatly influenced by who they are and where they
are from. The introduction of the activity may be
delivered asynchronously or synchronously. Use
of a podcast, along with a transcript of the podcast
to facilitate the Identity Pie activity, is beneficial.
To begin the activity, facilitators may say
“Health professionals must be aware of how their
personal opinions about health may affect their
profession.” Next, have the students draw or cre-
ate a circle on their computer. Then have students
make a list of all the things that contribute to who
they are and their identity. For example, here are
some things that might be listed: gender, religion,
Online Learning and Instruction in Health
home town, family background, political views,
occupation, etc. Next, ask students to proportion-
ately represent how much influence each of the
items on has on their identity. Instructors may
provide an Excel file with a formula to create the
Identity Pie Chart to post in a discussion area. In
the discussion area of the course website, instruc-
tors may ask the following questions to promote
critical reflection: How has your identity changed
over the past five years? How will it change when
you graduate college? How does your identity
influence how you feel about today’s major health
issues? If students are comfortable, they may share
their Identity Pies with friends, families, or course
buddies by posting their Identity Pie created in
Excel. By sharing their Identity Pies with “Course
Buddies” they may continue to build community
in the online course. To encourage critical reflec-
tion and continued processing of this activity,
students can be asked to create a reflection about
their experiences creating their Identity Pie and
sharing it with others. Please see Figure 1 for an
example of an Identity Pie.
Another strategy for increasing interaction
among students, patients, or clients in an online
or blended educational experience is to use Feed-
back Loops. Feedback loops can be used to track
student perceptions about the effectiveness and
their experience in an online course. Feedback
can be collected from students throughout the
course. To collect feedback at the beginning,
middle and end of the course, the following in-
quiries could be made: 1) Please provide one word
that describes your experience with the course so
far, 2) I would like your feedback about what is
going well and what could be improved in this
course. Please provide one thing that is working
well and one thing that could improve your ex-
perience in this course, and 3) Please provide any
final thoughts about your experience with this
course. The feedback collected from students may
be presented back to students in numerous formats.
Instructors may post comments verbatim or sum-
marize comments by theme. The feedback can be
posted in Discussion sections to have students
brainstorm about addressing some of the issues
that may have been brought up.
FUTURE TRENDS
The future for online learning and instruction in
health seems promising as we strive to meet the
demands of the ever-changing health care needs
with accessible training and continuing educa-
tion opportunities. However, to further facilitate
successful use of online delivery methods to
train health professionals and to promote health,
data-based research describing and analyzing its
effectiveness is essential. Advocacy on the part
of professionals in health-related disciplines is
also critical for web-based education methods
to be embraced. Part of such advocacy includes
increasing awareness of the online opportunities
that already exist and exploring the potential of
alternate computer based methods of delivery.
Those interested in advocating for online educa-
tion may want to join The United States Distance
Learning Association.
In order for online learning to continue to grow
and become embraced, myths associated with this
mode of instruction need to be dispelled. While it
is undoubtedly serving a need, and the technologies
available to interact with learners from a distance
continue to evolve, professionals and educators
with substantial reservations regarding its role in
teaching and learning remain. It is recognized that
online learning is not for everyone, and it may not
be the best method for teaching certain types of
curriculum, yet it is certainly effective if taught
based on sound instructional design principles and
by well trained instructors. A successful future in
the health field that optimizes the use of online
teaching and learning depends on the collabora-
tion and communication among professionals
regarding the most effective ways to meet learning
objectives. Once those are established, technology
953

Figure1. Identity Pie
use can be designed around those objectives, and
not vice versa.
Another trend in online education is peer re-
view. As online learning and instruction continues
to expand in health-related disciplines, much
discussion focuses on how to ensure the quality
of web-based programming. Peer review has been
suggested as a way to review and improve online
course delivery as well as health promotion efforts.
Quality Matters © (QM) (Quality Matters, http://
www.qualitymatters.org/, 2006) is a peer-review
process designed to certify the quality of online
courses. The Quality Matters’ process uses a rubric
to review eight broad standards in blended and
online courses that include: learning objectives,
assessment and measurement, resources and ma-
terials, learner engagement, course technology,
learner support and accessibility. Many programs
throughout the country have created their own
versions of peer review or “online observations”
to assess the quality of web-based curriculums.
Finally, health instructors and practitioners
must develop an understanding of how to inte-
grate Health 2.0 into educational experiences for
future health care providers as well as patients and
clients. As stated earlier in the chapter, Health 2.0
is self-directed learning utilizing the plethora of
information available online. Most health instruc-
tors and practitioners prefer to work with informed
954
Online Learning and Instruction in Health
students, patients or clients, but health practitioners
may wonder how much of the information from
Health 2.0 activities is accurate or being applied
effectively. Future research may need to focus
on whether individuals are using Health 2.0 to
replace the expertise of health professionals, to
supplement information from health experts, or
both. It will be interesting to see how Health 2.0
activities influence health practitioners and the
field of health promotion in general.
CONCLUSION
As described in this chapter, online learning and
instruction have become important components
of formal and continuing education for health
professionals and in health promotion programs.
Curriculums that have been thought to be inap-
propriate for web-based delivery are now being
offered online. Innovations in online learning
and instruction have improved delivery of web-
based education and have provided educational
opportunities for many that were “unreachable” by
traditional classrooms. As web-based educational
opportunities continue to expand, it is our hope that
more health professionals and the general public
will learn about the efficacy and possibilities of
online learning and instruction.
Online Learning and Instruction in Health
REFERENCES
American College of Sports Medicine. (2006).
ACSM’s guidelines for exercise testing and pre-
scription (7th ed.). Baltimore, MD: Lippincott
Williams & Wilkins.
American Journal of Health Promotion. (2006).
Definition of health promotion 2.0: Embracing
passion, enhancing motivation, recognizing
dynamic balance, and creating opportunities.
Retrieved on October 26, 2009 from http://www.
healthpromotionjournal.com/publications/jour-
nal/en2009-09.htm
Bandura, A. (1977). Self-efficacy: Toward a
unifying theory of behavioral change. Psycho-
logical Review, 84, 191–215. doi:10.1037/0033-
295X.84.2.191
Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of
control. New York: W.H. Freeman & Company.
Bennett, J. (2005). Using MERLOT in the class-
room. Athletic Therapy Today, 10(3), 37–39.
Bureau of Labor Statistics. (2008). Career guide
to industries. Retrieved on October 20, 2009 from
http://www.bls.gov/oco/cg/cgs035.htm
Campbell, M., Gibson, A., Richards, D., & Callery,
P. (2008). Online vs. face-to-face discussion in a
web-based research methods course for postgradu-
ate nursing students: A quasi-experimental study.
International Journal of Nursing Studies, 45(5),
750–759. doi:10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2006.12.011
Chaney, B., Eddy, J., Dorman, S., Glessner, L.,
Green, B., & Lara-Alecio, R. (2009). A primer on
quality indicators of distance education. Health
Promotion Practice, 10(2), 222–231. http://search.
ebscohost.com. doi:10.1177/1524839906298498
Deci, E., & Ryan, R. (2009). Self-determination
theory: An approach to human motivation &
personality. Retrieved on October 16, 2009 from
http://www.psych.rochester.edu/SDT/
Deci, E. L., Ryan, R., Chaney, B., Eddy, J.,
Dorman, S., & Glessner, L. (2009). A primer
on quality indicators of distance education.
Health Promotion Practice, 10(2), 222–231.
doi:10.1177/1524839906298498
Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (1985). Intrinsic moti-
vation and self-determination in human behavior.
New York: Plenum.
Department of Health and Human Services Health
Resources and Service Administration. (2009).
Shortage Designation: HPSAs, MUAs & MUPs.
Retrieved on October 21, 2009 from http://bhpr.
hrsa.gov/shortage/index.htm
Ellery, J., McDermott, R., & Ellery, P. (2007).
Computers as a formal continuing education tool:
Moving beyond intention. American Journal of
Health Behavior, 31(3), 312–322.
Haskell, W. L., Lee, I.-M., Pate, R. R., Powell, K.
E., Blair, S. N., & Franklin, B. A. (2007). Physical
activity and public health: Updated recommenda-
tion for adults from the American College of Sports
Medicine and the American Heart Association.
Medicine and Science in Sports and Exercise, 39(8),
1423–1434. doi:10.1249/mss.0b013e3180616b27
Hollis, V., & Madill, H. (2006). Online learning:
the potential for occupational therapy education.
Occupational Therapy International, 13(2), 61–78.
doi:10.1002/oti.209
Hopper, K., & Johns, C. (2007). Educational
technology integration and distance learning in
respiratory care: practices and attitudes. Respira-
tory Care, 52(11), 1510–1524.
Konin, J. (2004). Using a Web-based program
to enhance clinical education. Athletic Therapy
Today, 9(1), 20.
McLeod, S., & Barbara, A. (2005). Online technol-
ogy in rural health: supporting students to overcome
the tyranny of distance. The Australian Journal of
Rural Health, 13(5), 276–28. doi:10.1111/j.1440-
1584.2005.00717.x
955
 Online Learning and Instruction in Health

Oh, H., Rizo, C., Enkin, M., & Jadad, A. (2005). Stewart, J., & Wright, V. (2004). E-learning in al-
What is eHealth (3): A systematic review of pub- lied health care. Athletic Therapy Today, 9(1), 7–9.
lished definitions. Journal of Medical Internet Re-
Stow, R. (2005). Minimizing the distance in dis-
search, 7(1), N.PAG. http://search.ebscohost.com
tance learning. Athletic Therapy Today, 10(2),
Parlove, A., Cowdery, J., & Hoerauf, S. (2004). 57–59.
Acceptability and appeal of a Web-based smoking
The National Cancer Institute. Dictionary of can-
prevention intervention for adolescents. Interna-
cer terms. Retrieved on October 28, 2009 from
tional Electronic Journal of Health Education,
http://www.cancer.gov/dictionary/?expand=T
71–78.
The United State Distance Learning Association.
Pederson, L., Blumenthal, D., Dever, A., &
Distance learning: Key terms you might want to
McGrady, G. (2006). A web-based smok-
know. Retrieved on November 2, 2009 from http://
ing cessation and prevention curriculum for
www.usdla.org/Glossary_Distance.pdf
medical students: Why, how, what, and what
next. Drug and Alcohol Review, 25(1), 39–47. Wantland, D., Portillo, C., Holzemer, W., Slaugh-
doi:10.1080/09595230500459503 ter, R., & McGhee, E. (2004). The Effectiveness
of web-based vs. non-web-based interventions:
Quality Matters. (2006). Inter-institutional quality
A meta-analysis of behavioral change outcomes.
assurance in online learning. Retrieved on October
Journal of Medical Internet Research, 6(4). http://
26, 2009 from http://www.qualitymatters.org/
search.ebscohost.com, doi:10.2196/jmir.6.4.e40.
Reeves, P., & Reeves, T. (2008). Design con- doi:10.2196/jmir.6.4.e40
siderations for online learning in health and
Williams, S. (2006). The effectiveness of distance
social work education. Learning in Health and
education in allied health science programs: A
Social Care, 7(1), 46–58. doi:10.1111/j.1473-
meta-analysis of outcomes. American Journal of
6861.2008.00170.x
Distance Education, 20(3), 127–141. doi:10.1207/
Schutt, M., & Hightower, B. (2009). Enhancing s15389286ajde2003_2
RN-to-BSN students’ information literacy skills
Zebrack, J., Mitchell, J., Davids, S., & Simpson,
through the use of instructional technology. The
D. (2005). Web-based curriculum. JGIM: Jour-
Journal of Nursing Education, 48(2), 101–105.
nal of General Internal Medicine, 20(1), 68–74.
doi:10.3928/01484834-20090201-11
doi:10.1111/j.1525-1497.2005.40062.x
Shegog, R., McAlister, A., Hu, S., Ford, K., Me-
shack, A., & Peters, R. (2005). Use of interactive
health communication to affect smoking inten-
KEY TERMS AND DEFINITIONS
tions in middle school students: a pilot test of the
“Headbutt” risk assessment program. American Blended Learning and Instruction: Includes
Journal of Health Promotion, 19(5), 334–338. both face- to-face and online learning and instruc-
Sidman, C. L., D’Abundo, M. L., & Hritz, N. tion.
(2009). Exercise self-efficacy and perceived Course Buddies: An ice-breaker or introduc-
wellness among college students in a basic stud- tion strategy used to build community in blended
ies course. International Electronic Journal of and online courses and in health promotion pro-
Health Education, 12, 162–174. grams.

956
Online Learning and Instruction in Health
E-Health: Health promotion initiatives de-
livered online.
Face-to-Face Learning and Instruction:
Course activities and instruction occur in the
traditional classroom without the use of online
learning and instruction.
Health Promotion: Refers to all education and
programming relating to health that is intended
to promote positive health outcomes.
Health-Related Professions: Professions
involved in the delivery medical care and health
promotion including but not limited to nursing,
occupational therapy, athletic training, respiratory
therapy, physicians, physician assistants, social
workers, and health educators.
Online Learning and Instruction: Learning
and instruction that is completely web-based.
957
958

Chapter 58
Staying Legal and Ethical in
Global E-Learning Course
and Training Developments:
An Exploration
Shalin Hai-Jew
Kansas State University, USA

ABSTRACT
In global e-learning, a mix of laws, policies, and professional practices informs the work environment.
While legal issues may be addressed at the institutional level through the important work of legal counsel
(university lawyers) and administrators, line-level faculty and staff have responsibilities to uphold and
adhere to a variety of laws, ethical principles, policies, and “best practices” for staying legal.

INTRODUCTION with each other. This means re-shooting video

Re-using a Stylebook? A course designer is
working under a federal grant to develop an online
course that will be used around the country. Dur-
ing the work, a stylebook is originated that may
have wide applicability to a variety of projects.
Should that course designer be able to re-use the
generic outlines of the stylebook for other projects?
Should other online contents be re-usable in other
training contexts? Why or why not?
Versioning a Curriculum for Cultural
Palatability: Trainings being developed for a
conservative country involve the stipulation that
no males or females be depicted as interacting
DOI: 10.4018/978-1-61692-906-0.ch058
with only males making the decisions and doing
the work. Any imagery of women should follow
strict guidelines for what may be shown. What
should the course designer(s) do? What should
course designers do when the messages in courses
and trainings go against broader ethics or values
or political sensibilities? How far should realities
be re-depicted for cultural palatability?
Embedded “Social Justice” Messages: The
research on the “affordances” of socio-technical
spaces suggests that every training experience
has some cultural meanings—some intention-
ally embedded, and some accidentally created.
A simulation designer has been asked to embed
social justice messages in the immersive space and
design. How transparent should these messages
Staying Legal and Ethical in Global E-Learning Course and Training Developments
be? Should learners be made aware that such
messages have been embedded? Why or why not?
What if some messages involve the projection of
a country’s “soft power”?
Commercial Interests in Educational Train-
ings: Various multinational companies would like
to capitalize on product placement in immersive
online learning spaces. They want their products
to receive attention from a global marketplace.
They ask the course designers if they may embed
their products or methodologies into various on-
line trainings. What should the course designers
do? Why?
Trade Secrets: A global course involves
high-end creative design. Some of the work will
involve blueprints for different projects or de-
signs or looks-and-feels. Others will involve full
business plans. Students own the rights to their
own works. However, the course is one that other
students, graduate teaching assistants, and faculty
members all have access to. Subject matter experts
(SMEs) and experts in the field may also have
access, for student learning. The instructor wants
students to be as creative as possible, but he / she
also wants students to have their own intellectual
property protected. Their work is not at the level
of professional research and development (R&D),
but there are still valuable creative insights, some
of them actionable. What should the instructor
do to warn students of potential loss of IP? What
policies should be put into place at the course
level to protect the work? In cases of e-portolios,
gallery shows, and graduation presentations, how
may intellectual property be protected?
The five above cases tap into some ethical and
legal issues that may arise in the development of
global e-learning. Developing courses for a global
e-learning environment involves a range of local,
national, and international legal concerns. These
involve issues of social justice, human identity
and dignity, accessibility, the ownership of intel-
lectual property, and actual learning.
BACKGROUND
The rationales for pursuing “clean” course or
training developments are manifold. First, a
legally clean build means less retrofitting of the
original course or training contents. Second, it
means professional work and a pristine hand-
off when the work has been completed. Third, a
legally sound curricular build often aligns with
ethical and moral principles. Fourth, adherence
to legal standards may ultimately mean avoid-
ance of litigation, or preparedness for litigation,
if that becomes unavoidable. Figure 1: “Why
‘Legal’ Global E-Learning Builds” addresses
these rationales.
Defining legal standards in every country or
context that global e-learning may be applied is
non-trivial. Laws and policies are constantly
changing. Even more complicated are the social
and cultural mores that are extant among peoples
in different times and places. The changing socio-
technological landscape makes the definition of
such standards even more complicated. A range
of global special interests advocate for changes
based on their needs, which affects this legal
landscape.
The most practical method would be to under-
stand the “local” laws and policies thoroughly,
extract the applicable principles, consult with local
legal counsel, and make sure all the contents and
curricular build practices are vetted. For particular
curricular builds to be used in certain sensitive
environments, those should go through extra layers
of vetting for “fit” to the particular environment.
Evolving technological realities will also affect
the legal environment. Wikis and blogs that offer
real-time publishing to the world have implica-
tions on copyright and publishing. Many shared
creation sites have defined and implicit rules
that guide their evolution, even those with a “no
rules” approach (Butler, Joyce, & Pike, 2008).
The ease of creating online identities has meant
widespread impersonations. The uses of learning
/ course management systems (L/CMSes) mean
959
 Staying Legal and Ethical in Global E-Learning Course and Training Developments
Figure 1. Why “Legal” Global E-Learning Builds
that institutions of higher learning and faculty
have become distributors of digital contents. Peer-
to-peer networks that allow for the exchange of
digital objects has meant a greater ease of shar-
ing copyrighted materials. The trackability of
individuals within a “digital enclosure” means a
large diminishment of privacy (Andrejevic, 2007).
Legal principles apply both to the process and
contents of the e-learning builds. Figure 2: “Legal
Applications to Both ‘Processes and Contents’ in
Global E-Learning” shows some of the processes
and contents involved in a curricular build. The
follow should be understood as a recursive process,
not just a linear chronological one.
The legal concerns vary at the various stages
of e-learning development and underlying the
digital deliverables.
960
Using Principles and Practices
to Frame the Work
The legal environment affecting e-learning cannot
be said to directly originate from an ethics frame-
work; rather, ethical and moral issues may be un-
derstood as a backdrop to all human activities and
societies. Understanding the ethical substructure
may enhance the discussion of applicable laws.
An Ethical Framework: No
Right-Wrong Binary
The ethics of a profession may be acquired through
the communities of practice—those line staff, who
work in the field and face ethical challenges daily.
Regulatory agencies that guide the contents of the
learning may also play a role; finally, professional
societies also define professional values of right
and wrong. Needless to say, ethical decision-
Staying Legal and Ethical in Global E-Learning Course and Training Developments
Figure 2. Legal Applications to Both “Processes and Contents” in Global E-Learning
making does not fall along an easy right-wrong
(1-0) binary but is often much more complex.
Codes of ethics stem from the value systems
of a people. Some universal ethical concepts
involve the concept of doing no harm to others.
This entails promoting the public’s health, safety,
and well-being. This means avoiding untruths that
may lead to harmful mindsets, atttitudes, decisions,
or behaviors. To compete, individuals must use
fair play, not deceit or subterfuge. They shouldn’t
engage in “reverse engineering” others’ designs
without permissions or requisite acknowledg-
ments. People should only share objective and
truthful information when that information is
relevant for professional purposes; they should
not engage in harmful actions or gossip. Here,
employees must not misrepresent their skill-sets
and education, and they should not over-reach
in terms of their skills. They should give credit
where it’s due.
Individuals need to be treated fairly, with
human dignity. No one should be discriminated
against for any reason, and no one should be ha-
rassed. Their individual human rights should not be
contravened. Their personal privacy rights require
protection, in regards to image, to information, to
health, and other factors.
(c) 2011 IGI Global. All Rights Reserved.
People should not take what does not belong
to them—particularly in regards to unearned
privileges or others’ (intellectual) properties or
others’ professional responsibilities. The protected
creative intellectual property of those in the en-
vironment should also be respected.
Professional ethics suggest that people should
consider their employer’s and clients’ best interests
in their work and information-sharing. Employees
need to follow company policies (that are ethi-
cal) and should not misuse company resources;
they need to complete a full day’s work for the
pay. They should empower their clients to make
fully-informed decisions. They must maintain
confidentiality of trade secrets along with privy
client information. (Note: In the same way, certain
technologies and products may not be exported
outside of various national jurisdictions based
on “export controls”.) On the other hand, if legal
requirements suggest the need for information
access (such as under subpoena, under open meet-
ings laws, under federal freedom of information
acts), information may need to be preserved and
protected.
They need to maintain their own integrity and
high standards for every aspect of work. They
should not use their positions for private gain
or special advantage. They should not use their
961
 Staying Legal and Ethical in Global E-Learning Course and Training Developments
positions to benefit family or friends unfairly
(nepotism). They should not exploit others. They
need to work with professional transparency. In
return, employees may be expected to be treated
fairly based on employment laws, which define
workplace safety, due process, non-discrimination,
and privacy protections, among others.
They should accord people respect in every
phase of the work. Respect for others relates to the
sharing of decision-making, credit, and relevant
information. This may also mean respect for oth-
ers’ cultures and belief systems and values—in
the design, development, and deployment work.
ELEMENTS THAT WORK
AGAINST ETHICS
Some work-place-based elements that may make
ethical work harder include structural ones. These
include a lack of a process and procedure to build
learning ethically along with a lack of ethical and
legal awareness and training. There may be no legal
counsel, and there also may not be legal forms
used for rights releases. There could be a lack
of leadership, time pressures, budgetary limits,
professional “laziness,” and poor documentation
and record-keeping.
A Case Approach
Currently, there is apparently no legal ontology
for the laws and guidelines that inform course
and training design for global e-learning. There
are no “paradigm” or “use” cases. Because this
chapter is built up from professional practices,
this framework of practice will offer a necessar-
ily idiosyncratic view and approach to the thicket
of laws.
This inductive approach relies on the preceding
judicial opinions of case laws (Zhang & Kop-
paka, 2007) and how those have filtered down
to practice. Legal reasoning draws from hybrid
schemes of argumentation: “precedent cases, rules,
962
policy goals, moral principles, jurisprudential
doctrine, social values and evidence” (Gordon &
Walton, 2009, p. 137). Case law (decisions made
on particular cases brought to trial) offers some
general guidance. Legal citations are necessar-
ily multi-dimensional and polysemic (Zhang &
Koppaka, 2007, p. 124). Legal reasoning involves
establishing the facts of the case, the establishment
of relevant laws, and the application of the laws
on the particular situation (Hage, 2001). Ideally,
“legal coherence” may be formed through a sense
of consistency, comprehensiveness, and the mutual
support of the elements of the theory (Hage, 2001,
p. 23). While there have been efforts at creating
computerized legal reasoning for learning (Ashley,
2009, p. 1), much of law is interpretive (Poulin,
Bratley, Frémont, & Mackaay, 1993), so legal
expertise is often required for actual advisement
and direction.
FIVE BROAD AREAS OF FOCUS
Areas of legal concern for global e-learning in-
volve the following five areas: (1) social justice;
(2) human identity and dignity; (3) accessibility;
(4) ownership of intellectual property, and (5)
actual learning. These terms will be defined here
for semantical clarity.
(1) Social justice broadly refers to the endeav-
ors to enable more people around the world to
access education and important information—to
improve their lives. Endeavors in the social justice
part involve narrowing the “digital divide” and
making much more information available through
open-source and open-access endeavors.
(2) Human Identity and Dignity refers to the
upholding of learner privacy and the protection
of people’s reputations. This involves following
high standards for the design of human research
and then informed consent of participants in the
actual research. This also acknowledges people’s
rights to their own appearances via media release
rights. People have a right to know how their im-
Staying Legal and Ethical in Global E-Learning Course and Training Developments

Table 1. Five Areas of Legal Concern for Global E-Learning

1. Social Justice 2. Human Identity and 3. Accessibility 4. Ownership of 5. Actual Learning

Dignity Intellectual Property
Narrowing the digital Upholding of learner Alt texting of imagery Respect for intellectual Academic freedom
divide privacy Transcription of audio property Anti-fraud measures in
Open-source and copy- Avoidance of learner Timed text or captioning Copyright and intel- e-learning environments
right releases of digital defamation of video lectual property (IP) Quality standards upheld
information and contents Anti-libel practices Live transcription of protections in e-learning
Open-access to informa- Anti-slander practices real-time webinars Patenting Transparency about
tion in journals and deep Informed consent for Accessibility measures Upholding of digital learning methods and
repositories human research in immersive environ- rights management messages
Media release permis- ments Trademark support
sions Standards agreements Uses of contractual
Free speech across platforms, agreements and memo-
software, and computer randums of agreement
products Commercial IP standards
for for-profit courses and
trainings

ages and information will be used. No personal
images may be used for commercial purposes
without their express release of that image. People
also have privacy rights to their likeness (although
generally not in public spaces). People also have
a right not to be defamed or slandered or libeled.
As part of professional ethics, they also generally
have a right to know whether the materials that
result from an audio or video recording session
will be used for a for-profit or a non-profit product.
(3) Accessibility refers to the building of e-
learning that aligns with universal design or ac-
commodative learning for those with disabilities.
These endeavors lower barriers to digital access.
These efforts may go even further to promot-
ing the needs of vulnerable at-risk populations
(Weissman, 2002).
The (4) Ownership of Intellectual Property
suggests the importance of protecting the own-
ership rights surrounding creative thoughts put
into tangible form—whether these are images,
writings, audio, or video captures.
(5) Actual Learning involves educational
professionalism in terms of upholding quality
standards in e-learning, offering accurate informa-
tion and processes, upholding transparency about
the learning methods and contents, and ensuring
the identities of all learners, so as to be able to
verify the learning.
Table 1, Five Areas of Legal Concern for Global
E-Learning, highlights some of the values and
practices that would support each area of focus.
It may be helpful to understand where these
concepts and practices apply in a workplace en-
vironment. These elements fit into the design
process, the acquisition of raw materials, the
development process, and the deployment with
live learners.
Some of the main U.S. laws that apply to the
higher education e-learning environment follow
below. Please note that laws will vary between
nations and regions, and those laws need to be
studied thoroughly for appropriate global instruc-
tional design. Also, any institution that would
move into the global realm—even with targeted
regions—needs to study the environment clearly
and set up the proper professional structures to
enable the globalization of the curriculum.
LEGAL MITIGATIONS
When there are different levels of legality in dif-
ferent countries, it would seem wise to comply
with the strictest legal guidelines when multiple

963
 Staying Legal and Ethical in Global E-Learning Course and Training Developments

Table 2. Some Application US Laws and Guidelines

Some Applicable US Laws and Guidelines

Intellectual Property (IP):
US Copyright Office (http://www.copyright.gov/)
US Patent and Trademark Office (http://www.uspto.gov/)
Creative Commons Licensure (http://creativecommons.org/)
The Digital Millennium Copyright Act (http://www.copyright.gov/legislation/dmca.pdf and http://www.gseis.ucla.edu/iclp/dmca1.htm)
Educational Angles of IP:
Fact Sheet on Fair Use (http://www.copyright.gov/fls/fl102.html)
The Technology, Education and Copyright Harmonization Act (The TEACH Act) (http://www.copyright.gov/docs/regstat031301.html)
Information Access:
Freedom of Information Act (http://www.usdoj.gov/oip/index.html)
Electronic Freedom of Information Act (http://www.usdoj.gov/oip/foia_updates/Vol_XVII_4/page2.htm)
Privacy Rights:
Family Education Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA) (http://www.ed.gov/policy/gen/guid/fpco/ferpa/index.html)
Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act
http://www.hhs.gov/ocr/privacy/
Accessibility:
The Americans with Disabilities Act (http://www.ada.gov/)
Section 508: The Road to Accessibility (http://www.section508.gov/)
(Note: Orphaned works legislation is being considered in the US at the time of publication.)

versions exist. High-value instructional design
builds often rely on oversight by in-country le-
gal counsel to ensure the cleanness of the work.
Deploying a curriculum that is not clean may
incur numerous legal costs and the harming of a
learning “brand.”
Some course builders may include clauses that
force any lawsuits to be settled in the jurisdiction
of the originating institution of higher education.
Such legal clauses are only as enforceable as the
national and state-level laws allow. Others may
have clauses that force any disagreements into me-
diation. Others still may have airtight disclaimers
that may dissipate some of the legal risks but not
all. Making a professional and good-faith effort
is critical to the work.
DISCUSSION
Building Global E-Learning
Courses and Trainings
Prior to engaging the work, those who would build
global e-learning are already under the strictures
of legally-binding contractual agreements. These
involve complex grants that fund the work and
often define the co-ownership of research discov-
eries that have research and development (R&D)
or innovation value. Many stipulate the need to
publicize the research as a pre-requisite for the
funding, which may involve publishing to a digital
repository or library or formal website.
There are memorandums of agreement (MOAs)
or memorandums of understanding (MOUs) with
those doing work-for-hire (researchers, photog-
raphers, videographers, instructional designers,
actors, graphic artists, and others), and various
intellectual property releases for the designs and
digital contents. These define who ultimately
owns all the raw and processed digital files and
teaching methodologies, usually the institution
of higher education. The main subject matter ex-
perts and professors / instructors may also retain
some limited rights to the course, if they are to
move to another institution of higher education.
Most courses created for higher education do not
transfer well to the commercial or workplace realm
because of the legal releases and the problem of
clearing intellectual property for commercial use.
Accrediting agencies may have guidelines for
the quality of the training that is being created

964
Staying Legal and Ethical in Global E-Learning Course and Training Developments
as well as a legal process for moving the course
through the system.
Each domain field has a variety of profes-
sional ethics and values; it has conventions for
appropriate research, respected ways of teaching
and learning, and embedded purposes. These fac-
tors all need consideration even before a course
build begins.
Curricular Design. Research informs the
design of the curriculum. This research often
includes the capturing of information about the
learning contents and skills to be delivered, the
technologies involved, and the specific needs of the
learners (based on prior learning, demographics,
language preferences, culture, and other factors).
Human-based research involves the guidelines
of the institutional review board, which defines
responsibilities for human-based research and the
needs for informed consent. No research may be
done without this vetting process on a university
campus, and even surveys need to be vetted for
“exemption” status. This process ensures that no
harm to other people is caused in the research.
The actual design of the learning needs to
consider strategies for capturing information and
digital contents, and building these for learning in
an accessible way. The building of accommoda-
tions for accessibility is also important, to reach the
widest possible range of potential learners. Digital
course files need to be in universal product for-
mats for the widest “playability”. Text documents
need to be machine-readable, which means that
they cannot be scanned images. Tagging should
identify a document’s structure and markup, so
those using text readers may understand the docu-
ment’s structure. Clear, simple English should be
employed for the greatest understanding. There
should be text equivalents of visuals, sounds,
and videos. Color should be employed with
proper contrasts and with proper understandings
of color-blindness, to ensure that the visuals are
understandable. Data tables should be built in a
text-readable way, with clear contents in each table
cell. Live, synchronous online events should be
designed to be fully accessible, in the lead-up to
the event, the live event, and then post-event, with
proper text-accessible information. Users should
have controls over automations and sequenced
actions—such as those in simulations.
Web accessibility is a guiding principle given
the need for broad inclusion of the world’s peoples,
the significant audience size, the popularization
of mobile devices and “non-traditional browsers”
of the Web, long-term cost savings, and legal
responsibilities (Sierkowski, 2002, p. 288).
Early endeavors also involve the researching of
potential competitor logos, phrases, or trademarks,
based on the ambitions of the global e-learning
courses or trainings. Due diligence by checking
with the proper offices for trademark and patent
protections is critical; ensuring that a particular
URL (uniform resource locator) has not been
taken is also important.
The Acquisition of Digital Contents / Cre-
ation of Digital Contents. Intellectual property
concerns lie at the heart of the acquisition and
creation of digital contents. An e-learning course
involves the distribution of copyrighted digital ma-
terials. The assumption of intellectual property is
that the users of such contents know the provenance
(origins) of the contents and have legal rights to use
those contents. The intellectual property regime
was structured so as to encourage individual and
group creativity by allowing benefits to flow to
the originators, but also to encourage corpora-
tions to fund research—to benefit innovations.
Ultimately, most original materials will end up in
the public domain to benefit all. However, usu-
ally, much time has to pass before that situation
comes about. Finding the owners of particular
works may be quite convoluted. Multimedia and
audiovisual works may not have clear lines of
ownership. For example, music rights may break
out in terms of property ownership—whether it’s
the music composition, lyrics, or performance. The
rights to a dance may split along the ownership
of the choreography, the recorded performance
(in a fixed form), and the accompanying music.
965
 Staying Legal and Ethical in Global E-Learning Course and Training Developments
A work may split into multiple rights held by
different people and entities.
Non-profit accredited institutions of higher
education may find that their uses of some de-
fined materials are protected exemptions under
“fair use” laws, but that depends a lot on “risk
management” and analysis of four basic factors:
1. The purpose and character of the use, includ-
ing whether such use is of commercial nature
or is for nonprofit educational purposes
2. The nature of the copyrighted work
3. The amount and substantiality of the portion
used in relation to the copyrighted work as
a whole
4. The effect of the use upon the potential
market for, or value of, the copyrighted work
A “transformative use” of a copyrighted work
may involve its use in a parody (which makes fun
of the prior work), a criticism, or research—which
essentially repurposes the original work for new
value. Mash-ups and remixes may sometimes
fall into this category if the copyrighted work is
truly and essentially transformed in the creation.
Universities have to show true educational
use of a work to justify “fair use” exemptions
of the copyright laws. Lawyers generally advise
against using more of a work than is needed for
the educational application, with less always being
better. It’s also important not to use the so-called
“heart of the work,” which may affect the third
point about the amount and substantiality of the
portion of the copyrighted work used.
Self-created works by faculty may be co-owned
with the institution of higher education, with that
determined by university policies, the “facts of
the case,” and any legal agreements between the
parties. Trademarks need to be respected and
properly labeled, so as to avoid their dilution.
Patented technologies and processes should not
be mis-used without legal permissions. Trade
secrets should not be unduly released.
966
Those who build online learning need to
maintain accurate records and documentation of
all media releases and intellectual property agree-
ments. This is important for clarity and profes-
sional oversight or audit. This is also important if
any part of the work becomes part of a legal issue.
If an online course moves beyond the non-profit
accredited realm, and it becomes commercial,
then the exemptions under “fair use doctrines”
and “performance rights” will no longer apply.
Copyright releases of contents for non-commercial
purposes also will not apply. Rather, this means
that commercial rules of intellectual property will
be applicable, and the course designers may have
to start from the beginning to build a course for
the commercial environment.
Only works released into the public domain, or
those developed and owned outright by the course
developers, or purchased with the appropriate
rights (optimally for the life of the learning objects
or into perpetuity), may then be used. The evidence
of the legal acquisition of the digital contents
should also be maintained. Further, multimedia,
music, videos, and films are considered “compi-
lation works” with copyright that disaggregates
among various pieces. In some cases, acquiring
rights may mean pursuing the various component
parts for clearing rights releases for the visuals,
the music, the lyrics, and other elements.
Information that may be requested by a court
of law or the general public—including various
communications, documents, and other infor-
mation—may have to be made available under
legal requirements. Given those potentialities,
all potentially relevant information needs to be
protected and preserved.
Course developers may sometimes have to
convert the format of various file types into more
contemporary ones. If a work is available com-
mercially, people should purchase that version to
use. Copying a VHS version of a tape to a digital
format is not allowable if a digital version of that
taped content is available for sale. The Digital
Rights Millennium Act disallows any breaking of
Staying Legal and Ethical in Global E-Learning Course and Training Developments
“digital rights management” protections on digital
contents except for very narrow uses (by media
faculty for a particular defined learning context),
so that act may never be contravened even if the
end goal is legal (e.g. making a backup copy of a
legally acquired, properly owned work).
Course developers are advised to pursue legal
copyright releases on most contents that are not
fully and clearly usable. If they are unable to
identify an owner, they will at least be able to
show good faith efforts to a judge. It is possible
that works that are shown as “orphaned works”
(works disavowed or neglected by their respective
creators) may be more open to wider use.
Alpha “α” Testing. Alpha testing—the in-
house testing of an online course—is an important
part of turning out online learning that functions in
various online environments, platforms, browsers,
and technologies.
The testing should involve a clear preview of
online learning policies, which should be legally
vetted and then clearly displayed. Accredited
institutions of higher education usually have
clear policies about student rights. There are
defined policies on how to contest grades from a
distance, how to access services, and other related
procedures.
Beta “β”Testing. Beta-testing involves the
bringing in of specific learning publics to test a
course, based on the user or learner point-of-view.
This will require proper releases of those engaged
in this assessment.
An online course or training needs to prove
its efficacy through pre-and-post assessments,
verification of learner identities, proctoring, and
other aspects. Legal university policies address
issues of student academic honesty, accommoda-
tions for those with officially established needs,
and due process rights in case of grade and other
challenges. Core academic policies strive to create
a safe learning environment by defining in-class
conduct.
Going Live in a Global Context. Very little
goes live online anymore without legal disclaimers
that help focus what the learning is about and the
limitations of the learning. Before any information
goes live, there’s editing to make sure that nothing
“privy” is released: no financial information, no
trade secrets, and no unpublished research.
For faculty-led courses, the instructors need
to uphold various legal practices. One is the
protection of student information, based on their
privacy rights. They also need to respect students’
copyright over their own work. They may not
usurp student work for their own publishing or
teaching. Some research that is funded by the
university though may suggest university rights
to the student research. Learners have a right to
their own opinions and free of speech, which
means non-censorship of college and university-
level publications. Private information needs to
be handled securely, and if there are data compro-
mises, many states require notification of those
whose information has been compromised.
Technological and policy efforts have been put
into place to ensure the verifiability and authenti-
cation of learners in a course, to head off potential
academic fraud. There should be technological
“digital rights management” endeavors to prevent
copyrighted works from being used beyond the
last formal day of the course and to prevent the
works from being illegally distributed further.
These endeavors may involve streaming video
and audio files (instead of allowing for their full
download), using low-resolution thumbnails of
images, disabling copy capabilities, using water-
marking and spiders to track contents, deploying
“electronic shrinkwraps” to fix contents, and other
digital rights management endeavors. Computer
forensics may also be brought into play to evalu-
ate online behaviors to head off impersonations.
In terms of marketing a course, no promises
about precise results should be made, or else this
may be misconstrued by the public as a bind-
ing contract. This may create liabilities for the
institution of higher education. There have been
lawsuits over educational malpractice that have
967
 Staying Legal and Ethical in Global E-Learning Course and Training Developments
been decided on the sense of a contractual promise
in the advertising.
Educational institutions and organizations may
have to protect certain types of learner informa-
tion in situations requiring legal “discovery” of
information. They may have to preserve digital
information for forensic investigations that will
stand up in a court of law. Information manage-
ment is guided by various regulations.
Retrofitting / Curricular Updates. At the
time when a course needs retrofitting, it would
make sense to do another “environmental scan”
of the legal environment for the pre-requisites of
global course builds.
Legal requirements in higher education are
constantly changing (Kaplin & Lee, 1995) as
are the technological capabilities, many of them
mandated by law (Chan & Koo, 2007, p. S2C-16).
For example, the issue of “reproducible scientific
research” (with special applications to computer
code, for example), may require its own set of
laws and standards (Stodden, 2009, p. 37). The
end user license agreements (EULAs) and terms
of services for immersive learning spaces have
affected virtual world experiences (Balkin &
Noveck, 2006).
Research Opportunities
Working in a global environment adds another
layer of understandings and risks. Different
countries have different laws about how infor-
mation should be managed; the ownership of
information; the human interaction portrayals
that are allowable in a particular culture, and
the contents of a curriculum. Learning the finer
points of each international learning context will
be a necessary pre-requisite for building learning
for global entities and learners. This will mean
important front-end research work, continuing
vigilance, and legal vetting of development pro-
cesses, learning contents, and human-facilitation
of learning. Once baseline understandings have
been acquired, development teams will have to
968
maintain continuing awarenesses of the changing
legal landscapes.
The research literature would benefit with more
global and international insights about applicable
laws. It is assumed that particular incidences may
serve as tripwires for surfacing legal issues.
CONCLUSION
Many workplaces offer legal protections to em-
ployees if they are acting within the bounds of
their professional responsibilities. A joke goes
like this. A university administrator consults with
the campus’s legal counsel about a specific issue.
The school president asks, “What does the law
say?” The lead lawyer says, “What would you
like it to say?” The joke conveys a truism, which
is that laws provide general guidelines but do not
spell out exactly how a particular case may play
out. In the informal parlance, there is “no bright
line” defining how a situation may be read. There
are basic “safe harbors” of parameters of use for
some digital contents, but most cases are decided
on a case-by-case basis.
Different organizational environments may be
more comfortable with different levels of risk. Liti-
gation is expensive and certainly not the preferred
route for settling most professional disagreements.
For the sake of legal and ethical concerns and
workplace efficiencies, it makes common sense
to codify laws into the actual practices of global
e-learning design and development. It is advisable
to continually review the applicable international,
foreign, federal and state laws and their implica-
tions as these are in constant churn.
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
Thanks to Pete Paukstelis and Cheryl Strecker,
legal counsels at K-State, for their rigorous and
supportive work on my behalf on a number of
projects. Thanks to R. Max.
Staying Legal and Ethical in Global E-Learning Course and Training Developments
DISCLAIMER
The author is not a lawyer. The contents here are
informational only and not any kind of legal ad-
visement. People who would use this information
do so at their own sole risk. Please consult with
your official legal counsel for any legal questions.
REFERENCES
Andrejevic, M. (2007). iSpy: surveillance and
power in the interactive era. Lawrence: University
Press of Kansas.
Ashley, K. D. (2009). Ontological requirements
for analogical, teleological, and hypothetical legal
reasoning. In Proceedings of the ICAIL ‘2009:
Twelfth International Conference on Artificially
Intelligence and Law (pp. 1-10). Barcelona, Spain:
ACM.
Balkin, J. M., & Noveck, B. S. (2006). The state of
play: Law, games, and vrtual worlds. New York:
New York University Press.
Broninghaus, S., & Ashley, K. D. (2003). Predict-
ing outcomes of case based legal arguments. ICAIL
’03: Sixth International Conference on Artificially
Intelligence and Law (pp. 233-242). Edinburgh,
Scotland, United Kingdom: ACM.
Butler, B., Joyce, E., & Pike, J. (2008). Don’t look
now, but we’ve created a bureaucracy: The nature
and roles of policies and rules in Wikipedia. In
Proceedings of the CHI 2008: Computer Human
Interaction (pp. 1101-1110). Florence, Italy: ACM.
Chan, H. H., & Koo, S. G. M. (2007). Ethical and
legal awareness in location-based wireless system
design projects. 37th ASEE / IEEE Frontiers in
Education Conference (pp. S2C-16 to S2C-19).
Milwaukee, Wisconsin, USA.
Gordon, T. F., & Walton, D. (2009). Legal reason-
ing with argumentation schemes. In Proceedings
of the ICAIL ’09: Twelfth International Conference
on Artificially Intelligence and Law (pp. 137-146).
Barcelona, Spain: ACM.
Hage, J. C. (2001). Formalizing legal coherence.
In Proceedings of the ICAIL-2001: International
Conference on Artificially Intelligence and Law
(pp. 22-31). St. Louis, Missouri: ACM.
Kaplin, W. A., & Lee, B. A. (1995). The Law of
Higher Education: A Comprehensive Guide to
Legal Implications of Administrative Decision
Making (3rd ed.). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Poulin, D., Bratley, P., Frémont, J., & Mackaay,
E. (1993). Legal interpretation in expert systems.
ACM, 90-99.
Sierkowski, B. (2002). Achieving Web acces-
sibility. In Proceedings of the SIGUCCS’02:
Special Interest Group on University and College
Computing Services (pp. 288-291). Providence,
Rhode Island, USA: ACM.
Stodden, V. (2009). The legal framework for
reproducible scientific research licensing and
copyright. Computing in Science & Engineering,
IEEE, 35-40.
Weissman, E. J. (2002). An evaluation of online
learning environments (OLE) on the adult at-risk
population. Consortium for Computing Sciences
in Colleges, 142-154.
Zhang, P., & Koppaka, L. (2007). Semantics-
based legal citation network. In Proceedings of
the ICAIL ’07: Tenth International Conference on
Artificially Intelligence and Law (pp. 123-130).
Palo Alto, California, USA: ACM.
969
 Staying Legal and Ethical in Global E-Learning Course and Training Developments
KEY TERMS AND DEFINITIONS
Accessibility: Meeting legal requirements for
usability by those with disabilities in the senses
such as sight, hearing, mobility, and others.
Alternate Input Device: Technologies that
support human interaction with computers, such
as types of keyboards, mice, speech recognition /
voice controlled systems, head-controlled pointing
systems, eye-tracking devices, and others.
Alt Text: Alternative text, text that accom-
panies an image to describe its informational
contents.
Assistive Technology: Devices and equipment
that give support to those with disabilities.
Authentication: The verifying of identity or
information.
Defamation: Injury to the reputation of another
(through slander or libel).
Disability: A physical or mental handicap.
Disclaimer: A legal clause that disavows legal
responsibility.
Ethics: Values or right or wrong, moral prin-
ciples.
Intellectual Property: Tangible property cre-
ated from original creative thoughts and which
may be protected through copyright, patenting,
trademarks, and other registrations (based on a
commercial property-based system)
Impersonation: The fraudulent taking on the
identity of another person.
Jurisdiction: The authority and responsibility
to administer justice; power; an area of respon-
sibility.
Liability: An obligation for which one is liable.
970
Libel: Defamation of another person or entity
through written or printed words or pictures.
Media Release: A form that is given to those
who may participate in a recorded event giving
rights to the use of their image and voice for the
media capture (as a release of some privacy rights).
Patent: A legal exclusive right granted to an
inventor (by the government) to make, use or
sell an original invention (or process) for a set
period of time.
Provenance: The trackability of an object
to a source; the derivation of a particular object.
R&D (Research and Development): The
work of originating the ideas and strategies for
research into topics that may result in new or
improved commercial products.
Slander: Defamation of another person or
entity through spoken words or gestures.
Text Equivalent: The informational value of
an image, audio, or video, described in written
textual form to enhance the accessibility of the
object.
Text Reader: A software program that enables
a website’s contents to be read aloud through a
computer interface.
Universal Design: Principles of design prin-
ciples to create environments, products, com-
munications, and experiences that are the most
broadly accessible, with built-in accommodations
(These standards have been described as the fol-
lowing: equitable use; flexibility in use; simple
and intuitive; perceptible information; tolerance
for error; low physical effort, and size and space
for approach and use, according to the Center for
Universal Design.)
 971

Chapter 59
Increasing Adult Learner
Engagement in E-Learning
Courses through Learner
Case Writing
Rosemary B. Closson
University of South Florida, USA

Carmeda Stokes
University of South Florida, USA

ABSTRACT
This chapter proposes learner case writing (LCW) as a case-based method that has been successfully
used to increase adult learner engagement in an online asynchronous environment. LCW is a response
to the expressed need identified in the literature for increased incorporation of experiential activities
in e-learning environments. A critical discussion of the theoretical base and learning principles that
underpin this method (such as experiential learning, action learning, authentic learning, and situated
learning) is also provided. Phases of the LCW process are outlined and key challenges the authors
encountered while using the LCW process online are presented. The authors describe their responses
to mitigate the challenges experienced and make general recommendations for online learning using
experiential approaches. This chapter concludes with final thoughts on future trends.

INTRODUCTION learners can easily become passive (Chen, 2006)

In this chapter we address learner case writing
(LCW) as a way to increase the engagement of
adults in e-learning courses. We base this on two
concerns expressed respectively in the e-learning
literature and the adult education literature. Firstly,
the concern from the e-learning perspective is that
DOI: 10.4018/978-1-61692-906-0.ch059
in the online asynchronous course environment
even in discussion forums which is arguably one
of the more dynamic features of an asynchronous
e-learning course. Secondly, adult education
espouses the value of experiential learning as
a key component of the adult learning process
(Knowles, 1980; Boud, Cohen, & Walker 1993)
although what comes under the tent of “experi-
 Increasing Adult Learner Engagement in E-Learning Courses through Learner Case Writing
ential learning” has wildly different implemen-
tations from “ropes” courses to problem-based
learning (Fenwick, 2000). Unfortunately, there
is no strong empirical evidence that experiential
learning (problem-based or otherwise) contributes
to increased cognition (Hmelo-Silver, 2004).
A particular challenge arises in determining
how to incorporate experiential activities in an
e-learning environment. Using problem-based
learning approaches, especially case studies, has
been one extremely appealing way to employ
experiential approaches with adult learners on-
line; in this chapter we discuss a way to do this
using learner developed case studies. In 1986 in
the medical field, Barrows identified six types of
problem-based learning: “lecture-based cases,”
“case-based lectures,” “case methods,” and “modi-
fied case-based,” “problem-based” and “closed
loop problem based learning.” Learner case writing
is not in Barrows taxonomy. And although cases
of various types are regularly used in the profes-
sional fields of business, law and medicine there
is primarily only empirical evidence that learner
enjoyment may be enhanced (Closson, 2009). In
other words, learners will report that they very
much “like” the course when case studies are
employed. But then in online environments that
may not be insignificant given that many adult
learners who, as much as they are attracted to the
convenience, regret the loss of many context rich
elements present in the face-to-face classroom
(Stodel, Thompson, & McDonald 2006).
Learner case writing is an iterative process
where adult learners choose and research a mean-
ingful incident that happened to them or that they
are intimately familiar with in their workplace. In
our course students identify a critical management
incident. Collaboration with a small group of class
colleagues allows for learners to gain ongoing
feedback throughout the term as they write their
case. Interviews with individuals knowledgeable
about the management incident are conducted by
the learner. Each learner produces a full case study
where they have analyzed the case and applied
972
pertinent management principles. The learning
goal is for all learners to gain insight about how
management concepts, principles, and strategies
operate in the real world of their organization.
The objectives of this chapter are addressed in
the sections that follow where we broadly outline
pertinent learning theory that provide support
for the learner case writing process as a viable
activity in asynchronous learning environments.
We then discuss problems relevant to learner case
writing online followed by our responses to the
problems and our recommendations to those who
might choose to use the LCW technique. We close
this chapter with a discussion of future trends for
adults learning online and implications for learner
case writing as a meaningful contribution to the
repertoire of those who educate adults online.
BACKGROUND
Our premise is that learner case writing (LCW) en-
gages online learners with course content through
an explication of one of their own meaningful
experiences, collaboration with classmates, and
reflection through iterative reviews and revisions
as they research and write their own case study.
We suggest this is an especially appropriate task
that enriches online learning for adults because
it grows out of assumptions about the nature of
adult learners. Learner case writing is experien-
tial, encourages reflection, and allows learners to
collaborate. As we discuss relevant background
theories and principles that inform learner case
writing we use the following terms interchange-
ably: online learning, e-learning and asynchronous
learning.
Adult Learners
Malcolm Knowles (1980) distilled several key
assumptions about the adult learner which have
become almost more significant now, because of
the rise in e-learning, than at the time he wrote of
Increasing Adult Learner Engagement in E-Learning Courses through Learner Case Writing
them. These assumptions, though contested, have
resurfaced because they are not only relevant,
but in the case of self-directedness, critical for
the successful online learner. Succinctly stated
Knowles assumed that adults desire that the
content be immediately applicable, that adults
are internally motivated, and are self-directed
and therefore desire to take an active role in
their own learning. And finally, his assumptions
included that experiences define the adult and
therefore, should be used for learning and that
when adults enter the learning environment they
are purposeful and ready to learn (pp. 43-44).
Knowles’ assumption of self-directedness of the
adult learner has been contested by Pratt (1988)
who posits that the self-directedness of the adult
is not a permanent characteristic but a situational
attribute contingent upon the learners’ compe-
tence, confidence, and commitment. Pratt notes
for example that an adult may be less self-directed
when she feels less competent and this may vary
depending upon the subject matter of the course.
Commitment may vary depending on whether or
not the learner was mandated to participate in a
learning activity.
Learner Engagement Online
Educators interested in using a technique like
learner case writing may want to know the extent
to which it is supported by a theoretical base or
learning principles. There are a number of dif-
ferent but related theoretical perspectives and
principles to support learner case writing as an
activity that has the potential to engage the adult
learner’s experience. Many of these are well
known to adult educators: experiential learning
theory (Kolb 1984), problem-based learning (Bar-
rows, 1986), action learning (Reg Revans, 1982
as cited in DeWolfe-Waddill, 2006), authentic
learning (Herrington, Reeves, Oliver, & Woo,
2004), situated learning (Lave & Wenger, 1991).
All rest on a constructivistic philosophical base.
That is “meaning and knowledge are constructed
and reconstructed from a complex mosaic of social
experiences, and it is this process of personal con-
struction that ensures continuous development”
(Garrison & Archer, 2000).
In this section we briefly outline each area,
pointing to areas of overlap, and identifying what
the relevant perspective contributes to our under-
standing of the reasons why learner case writing
might be particularly appealing to the needs of
adults learning online.
Theory and principles. Learning from one’s
own experience is one of the major assumptions
upon which adult educators build a great number
of adult learning activities. However when adult
educators speak of experiential learning it is not
always clear what is meant. In our case, experi-
ential learning is “the process of human cognition
achieved by differentiating meaning derived from
theoretical and non-formal life experiences with
that attained through formal education” (Fenwick,
2000). Implied in the constructivist model of ex-
periential learning (Fenwick, 2000) is the capacity
to narrate and reflect on one’s life experiences.
In a similar vein, Kolb’s (1984) experien-
tial learning cycle at a very fundamental level
emphasizes the importance in learning to “look
again” (Brew, 1993, p.92). To look again at an
experience in order to analyze, to reflect, and
finally to try out a new way of doing that has
grown out of one’s re-examination of the experi-
ence. Problem based learning (PBL) is a broad
category of experiential learning that includes
various approaches but centers on experiences
conceived as problems. In professional fields
(e.g., law, medicine) these problems are packaged
into cases that are then analyzed by learners. The
goal is not only to learn key concepts from the
analysis of the case but to learn the discipline’s
approach to problem-solving. Classic PBL uses
a tutor to assist learners in a process of problem
analysis. A tutor facilitates the learners through the
following problem-solving process: identification
of facts, generating hypotheses, identification of
learner’s knowledge deficiencies, application of
973
 Increasing Adult Learner Engagement in E-Learning Courses through Learner Case Writing

Table 1. A continuum of problem-based approaches

Case methods Learner case writing Action learning

Problem most structured Somewhat structured Problem least structured
Teacher directed Shared direction Learner directed
Authored by an expert Authored by learner No author. Problem is “live.”

new knowledge and finally abstraction (Hmelo-
Silver, 2004, p. 237). The tutor’s role is to assist
the learners in recognizing the cognitive processes
they have used in problem-identification as well
as problem-solving. However, the term PBL, like
experiential learning, is loosely used today and
much of what people frequently refer to as PBL
does not use a tutor and may overlook the concern
with reflecting on process.
Action learning also centers on problem solv-
ing as a mechanism for learning but it differs
substantively in that the focus is a live problem
not a pre-packaged problem. Action learning is
“a means of development, intellectual, emotional
or physical that requires its subjects, through
responsible involvement in some real, complex
and stressful problem, to achieve intended change
to improve their observable behavior henceforth
in the problem field”(Revans, 1982, as cited in
DeWolfe-Waddill, 2006, p.159). The outcome of
action learning is not only cognitive and internal
but an expected change externally in the work-
place where the learner acts upon the “problem.”
DeWolfe-Waddill (2006) is one of the few who
has used action learning successfully online.
Although learner case writing is not the same
as action learning we have found in using LCW
that some learners, because the problem they write
about is real, and because during the research work
colleagues are interviewed, employees can be
galvanized and action on the problem sometimes
does result. In Table 1 action learning is shown in
comparison with learner case writing. The range
of problem-based approaches could be said to
stretch from teacher-centered to learner centered.
On one end of the continuum the learner is most
active and the problem is least structured—action
learning might be an example and on the opposite
end might be the case study technique—a circum-
stance where the learner’s involvement is limited
to analyzing the case, primarily a passive activity
(Lohman, 2002). Learner case writing (LCW) falls
somewhere near the middle.
Much of the supportive literature written from
a constructivist perspective about online learning
advocating increased interaction couches their
discussion in terms of authentic and situated
learning. Because of the somewhat inconsistent
usage of these terms in the literature it is hard to
tell what is known about learning outcomes using
these approaches. At first glance, authentic learn-
ing seems intuitively to infer learning from expe-
rience. However, only Knobloch (2003) seems to
have compared experiential and authentic tenets
and examined them thoroughly; although, he does
not address e-learning. But still his effort is in-
structive. As a result of his analysis, he encouraged
agricultural educators to move away from simply
thinking of experiential learning as “hands on”
but to consider rooting their experiential learning
practice in the more structured characteristics and
assessments of authentic learning which he sum-
marized using criteria developed by Wehlage,
Newmann, and Secada (1996 as cited in Knobloch,
2003, p. 23): construction of knowledge (synthe-
sizing, hypothesizing, or reaching conclusions
that provide new meaning), disciplined inquiry
(time for thorough exploration and dialogue that
builds shared understanding), value beyond school
(the extent to which learners make connections
between substantive knowledge and personal
experiences or public problems). Knobloch

974
Increasing Adult Learner Engagement in E-Learning Courses through Learner Case Writing
clarifies the considerable overlap between expe-
riential learning and authentic learning making
visible authentic learning’s greater specificity
detailing the nature of an authentic activity. He
uses authentic learning interchangeably with
situated learning (2006) and delineates 10 discrete
characteristics of authentic tasks (Herrington,
Reeves, Oliver, & Woo, 2004); thus, again point-
ing out how much more defined it is than expe-
riential learning. Herrington et al. (2004) note that
the characteristics of authentic learning tasks can
be applied in various learning contexts such as
simulations and case studies. One of the reasons
that Herrington (2006) argues vigorously for these
approaches is because she believes learning man-
agement systems (e.g., Blackboard or WebCT)
have contributed to a tendency in higher education
to use LMS to deliver content which alone does
not constitute learning. Herrington (citing Miller,
2000) describes the existing higher education
approach to online learning as the four Gs: teach-
ers generate content, gather resources, group in-
formation, give information to students (p. 5). We
believe that learner case writing (LCW) breaks
the “four G” mold because it requires ongoing
interaction within and outside the class in the
following ways: learners interact with workplace
colleagues to conduct interviews and collect data
pertinent to their case; learners work together in
small groups to help refine their problem and
later work together as peer reviewers and coach-
es through the research and drafting phase of case
writing; each learner interacts with the faculty
member at least three times in order to receive
feedback on their drafts before their final product
is graded.
Unfortunately, there appears to be limited
empirical research documenting the influence
authentic and situated learning approaches have
on learning outcomes. On the bright side however
the U.S. Department of Education (U.S. DOE)
(2009) conducted a meta-analysis of the research
done about online learning. The most encourag-
ing bright light in the DOE findings relevant to
our interests is that “a tool or feature prompting
students to reflect on their learning was effective
in improving outcomes” (p. 44); although, the
disciplines that found reflection an asset seemed to
be weighted towards the more technical disciplines
(e.g., chemistry, biology). Reflection is a large
part of the value, we believe, of the learner case
writing process, which is why we remain encour-
aged by these findings. An important consideration
when weighing the DOE findings is that the age
range of participants in research studies selected
through the DOE’s screening process was 13 years
to 44 years of age. Therefore, one cannot tell to
what extent the findings might have been more
pronounced if they were disaggregated by age.
Garrison and Archer (2000) noted that instruc-
tional system developers tend to conceive learning
from a behavioristic perspective while adult edu-
cators conceive of learning from a constructivist
perspective (i.e., collaborative and meaning mak-
ing, p. 186). As much as we resonate with Garrison
et al. and although we have built opportunities
for learner-to-learner interaction into LCW in
order to build community, evidence supporting
its connection to positive learning outcomes is
mixed. Rovai (2002) found significant correla-
tion between perceived sense of relationship with
classmates and perceived increased cognition
among graduate students but Bernard, Brauer,
Abrami and Surkes (2004) studying undergradu-
ates had contradictory findings. Their students’
posttests showed a lowered desire for interaction.
The researchers held two possible interpretations
of the findings: (1) student’s were disappointed
at the level of interaction in the course; (2) stu-
dent’s need for interactivity was not as critical
to learning as the student’s first thought at the
outset of the course. Finally, DeWolfe-Waddill
(2006) found that when she used action learning
in an online course students did not develop a
sense of community. She posits the reasons may
be due to the short five week time frame or that
student’s worked on their own problems not a
shared problem case. However, of the 10 senior
975
 Increasing Adult Learner Engagement in E-Learning Courses through Learner Case Writing
managers who completed her study most perceived
a positive change in their learning and said they
changed behavior. Overall, key authors in the
area of situated and authentic techniques speak to
the benefit of learners working together (Reeves,
Herrington, & Oliver, 2002; Garrison & Archer,
2000; Lebow & Wager, 1994). Serdyukov and
Serdyukova (2009) demonstrate a strong research
base supporting the value of online interactivity
where they remind us that because of the context
stripped online environment interactivity and
communication take on a heightened salience.
Despite mixed findings linking interactivity and
community with increased cognition we believe
collaborative activities are beneficial because
these activities address the isolation that online
learners tend to experience (Song, Singleton,
Hill, & Koh, 2004). In the LCW activity we have
found that because students work on their case
throughout most of the term and they work in
groups providing feedback, critique and encour-
agement to one another they interact in important
and helpful ways that we believe contributes to a
sense of community online.
Adult education for the most part accepts the
assumptions Knowles identified (1980) espe-
cially the salience of the adults’ experience as a
framework and reference point for learning. As
we become more concerned about how to develop
effective learning environments and experiences
online we find ourselves with renewed interest
in Knowles’ assumptions. Authentic learning
and situated cognition rely on experiences that
resonate with the learner; evolving research on
the neuroscience of the brain seems to support
processes that build on meaningful experiences
as a base for learning. Construction of knowledge
and disciplined inquiry, two of Knobloch’s three
authentic learning components (as derived from
Newmann, 1996) encompass the phases of the
learner case writing activity outlined below. His
third area, “value beyond school” is not a part of
the activity but interestingly had presented a prob-
lem for us in implementing the activity. Learners
976
often found that as they conducted the activity their
workplaces were positively affected. Sometimes
because of the learner conducted interviews the
problem being investigated was taken up by the
organization. The steps in the LCW process are
described in the following table.
USING LEARNER CASE WRITING
ONLINE
In this section we address problems we experi-
enced when using the learner case writing process.
We will also discuss responses that we found help-
ful. We close this section with recommendations
for future use of the LCW process.
Problems and Responses
We found that problems regarding the implemen-
tation of learner case writing online fell into two
areas: the online environment, and the learner
case writing process itself. In this section we first
describe the problems that arose followed by a
description of our response.
The online environment. Learner case writ-
ing is designed to build positively on learner’s
experiences and we believe it meets some criteria
for authentic learning; however, an intervening
variable for every online activity is the online
environment within which the course is deliv-
ered. In our experience two factors within that
environment have been of special significance.
Issues related to technology and issues related to
staving off feelings of learner isolation. Regarding
technology, the learner’s familiarity and hence
their discomfort with the technology has been a
recurring problem; this is not unlike findings from
the research about courses online (Muilenberg
& Berge 2005, as cited in Tyler-Smith, 2008).
Many of our graduate students who have been
out of undergraduate school for as few as five
years complain that our online interface (we use
Blackboard) has changed radically in that time
Increasing Adult Learner Engagement in E-Learning Courses through Learner Case Writing

Table 2. Learner Case Writing Process

LCW Process
Phases
Phase 1: Pre-work for LCW
Case story (Maslin-Ostrowski & Ackerman
in Galbraith, 1998)
Case analysis
Phase 2: Field Research
Preparation for field research
Conduct field research
Phase 3: Case Writing
Case construction
Instructor feedback
Peer feedback
Phase 4: Findings Discussed
Case study presentation
Student Actions
Write a short story about a management dilemma student experienced or observed
Review, analyze and receive feedback on a pre-written case.
Request permission to conduct the research; based on guidelines in the syllabus outline their
case story; compose a list of appropriate questions to use in conduct of field research
Schedule appointments, conduct interviews
Construct their own case by synthesizing and reflecting on interview responses and organiza-
tional and critical incident background
Instructor feedback provides learners with guiding questions regarding course concepts prompt-
ing reflection on their case and also encourages them to consider the organization of their case.
Peers in case conference groups read and provide feedback about the coherence of their partner’s
case and may provide alternative ways of analyzing the case
Cases are discussed with peers in case conference groups; a decision is made about the most
salient course concepts across cases along with examples. These are presented to the class.

period to the point that they find it unfamiliar
and somewhat intimidating. Furthermore, as the
technology improves learners who were initially
tentative about their ability online find themselves
constantly having to learn slightly newer versions
of Blackboard. Learner’s lack of technical skills
and the inevitable technology problems have been
cited as contributors to the attrition rate in e-learn-
ing programs (Tyler-Smith, 2008). As we have
gradually begun to move our master’s program to
a fully online program we have students who do
not have appropriate computer hardware for the
advancing technology. A significant and related
problem is that even as the university increases
support for faculty to develop online courses and
programs there is no concurrent development of
infrastructure to support students whose technical
skills are inadequate for the technology in use.
Garrison and Archer (2000) point out that the
adult educator’s predilection with creating “a com-
munity of learners” can, in the academic setting,
create frustration (p.147). Furthermore, Brook
and Garrison (1995 as cited in Garrison & Archer,
2000) found that adult students in higher educa-
tion were overwhelmingly concerned with areas
such as course content and course expectations (p.
147) as their primary order of business. However,
given the apprehension that adults frequently
experience in e-learning environments negotiat-
ing the technology, the LMS interface, the course
content, discussion forums and online journals
(Tyler-Smith, 2008) it is expected that many adults
can be overwhelmed and feel a sinking sense of
“aloneness” in the first days of an online course.
This may be aggravated in the online environment
by the lack of personal, face-to-face, continuous
interaction which can result in less opportunity
for development of personal relationships among
participants. For instance, the lack of eye contact,
nonverbal cues and voice found in a face-to-face
course can result in miscommunication between
learners, or learners and the instructor.
In light of Brook and Garrison’s findings
(1995 as cited in Garrison & Archer, 2000) about

977
 Increasing Adult Learner Engagement in E-Learning Courses through Learner Case Writing
the centrality of learning expectations for the
adult learner it is understandable that a number
of adults, when faced with the press to learn
technology plus the unfamiliar LCW process, had
difficulty understanding instructional goals and
expectations for the course. To reduce the level
of anxiety and frustration students expressed as a
result, we incorporated a face-to-face orientation
at the beginning of the course. This “kick-off”
session allowed students to review the syllabus
with the instructor, express any questions they
had related to the goals and objectives of the
course, as well as discuss any technical concerns.
We also scheduled a pre-Elluminate session in
which students were provided an opportunity to
practice logging on to the system and to become
familiar with using features (such as chat, audio,
emoticons, whiteboard, etc) that they would use to
review the case analysis assignment and address
questions about the LCW process.
During our initial implementation using the
LCW process online we realized early on that
there was a need to assess learner skill level with
technology as well as to verify students’ access to
equipment with suitable software requirements for
the course. For instance, we found there were some
learners who did not own a computer, had never
taken an online course, or had limited technical
skills and thus were not comfortable interacting or
submitting work through an online environment.
In the next iteration of the course, we developed
a “Getting Started” module with quizzes on tech-
nology, to determine if the student’s computer
was appropriate for the course and so that the
learner could become comfortable with the online
environment. Quick tip sheets were developed to
assist students with navigating the Blackboard
system and to prepare students for participation
in discussion boards. And finally, an interactive
tutorial was developed to walk students through
the steps in the case analysis process.
To establish feelings of connection in the
online environment we incorporated face-to-face
meetings called case conferences(Hammerness,
978
Darling-Hammond, & Shulman, 2002) at the
beginning, middle, and end of the course so that
students could build rapport with the instructor and
peers. This blended approach of online learning
worked exceptionally well in addressing student
feedback that they needed time to get to know
their peers with whom they would be partnering
on group projects during the course. Without this
time students felt their team process was impaired.
In the design of the course, we also included small
team-based activities to provide multiple oppor-
tunities for student interaction and collaboration.
Not only is the technology frequently a hurdle
but few of our learners were familiar with case-
based learning on which the learner case writing
process is based. It is to a discussion of problems
and responses to the LCW process that we turn now.
The LCW process. In Table 1 we attempted
to distinguish LCW based on three criteria one
of which was the extent to which the problem
is structured versus non-structured. Others have
noted that academic problems tend to be well de-
fined, characterized by having only one method of
obtaining the correct answer and unconnected to
the learner’s personal experience (Sternberg, Wag-
ner, & Okagaki, 1993 in Herrington et al., 2004;
Schön, 1991). This is in contrast to problems in the
“real” world which tend to be messy, ill-defined,
and require more analysis and more information
seeking to determine the nature of the problem.
Real problems have multiple correct solutions,
and are emotionally resonant (Sternberg et al.,
1993, as cited in Herrington et al., 2004; Schön,
1991). Learners who choose their own cases based
on critical incidents significant to them almost
always choose incidents that are emotionally
important. We found that as students were faced
with researching their incident in order to write
a case it was clear that many did not realize there
could be multiple perspectives about the facts of
the incident. This was actually wonderful news as
we hoped that learners through the LCW process
would develop the capacity to view a manage-
ment problem in more than one way. However,
Increasing Adult Learner Engagement in E-Learning Courses through Learner Case Writing
we found that learners would form their interview
questions assuming their personal perspective was
the only perspective; in other words, they started
out inadvertently wanting to use the interview to
confirm their own point of view.
In order to explain the learner case writing
activity to students they first needed to understand
what a “case” was. Few students in our courses had
prior experience with case-based learning. This
meant that students had no experience in how to
analyze a case, no familiarity with what it meant to
learn from a case, and of course no idea of what it
meant to write one’s own case. Succinctly put they
had no model for the product or the process. At the
same time that the students lacked a model; we had
no model for what issues to expect. A particularly
sensitive issue occurred around power dynam-
ics in the student’s workplace. These dynamics
are manifested in both potentially positive and
negative ways. On the positive side, as students
pursue their field research they have raised their
own visibility in the organization as they focus
on understanding an organizational problem. For
some students the result was a positive change
in the organization’s perception of them. On the
negative side, some students identified problems
that although emotionally powerful and important
to the organization hold the potential to stir up old
wounds and raise unpleasant questions.
With any new process it is difficult to lay out
precisely the directions you want the learners to
follow. We found because learners were unfamiliar
with case-based learning and therefore there was
little meaning they could bring to “writing their
own case” there was a period where they operated
in a fog lacking clarity about what they were do-
ing and why. Individual responsibilities in their
case conference groups were unclear and they
remained anxious about their ability to complete
the culminating product—their own case. As
students began to organize themselves for their
field research they discovered that many of the
colleagues who knew the details of the incident
they wished to address had left the company or
were busy upper level managers who although
they indicated they were willing to participate in
the activity found it hard to schedule time for the
interview. This led to the issue of time. Students
found the LCW process time consuming. It took
the entire 15 week term. It was time consuming
for the faculty as well. Student anxiety required
faculty time to address their concerns. For ex-
ample, the instructor held several individual
phone conferences with students when they had
difficulty connecting management concepts to
their case. Typically the instructor could suggest
several relevant concepts which encouraged the
student to determine the most appropriate concept.
To address students’ lack of experience with
learning from cases we used various scaffolding
techniques throughout the LCW process. For
instance, in order to familiarize students with
case based learning the second step of our LCW
process provided them the opportunity to analyze
a professionally written case about a real company.
We then used question prompts to guide learners
through the analysis of pre-written cases and
elaboration prompts to elicit relevant explana-
tions from students related to course concepts.
When students began writing their own cases,
reflection prompts were used to activate prior
knowledge about their cases, engage students
in high-level critical thinking concerning their
identified problem of their case, and prepare
them for construction of new understanding of
their cases based on contrasting viewpoints from
field research without direct teaching of specific
strategies (Ge & Er, 2005).
We have students work in small groups of
three to four students to provide peer reviews
and feedback to each other throughout the LCW
process. We believe, this promoted reciprocal
learning as students offered and received informa-
tion, co-constructed ideas, and negotiated meaning
from the cases. This also provided learners with
multiple opportunities to see various perspec-
tives, alternative solutions, and consider things
they may not have noticed working individually.
979
 Increasing Adult Learner Engagement in E-Learning Courses through Learner Case Writing
It has also been argued that peer learning helps
the internalization of skills and builds students’
confidence in performing tasks related to problem
solving (Schunk, 1987 as cited in Ge & Er, 2005).
As mentioned earlier, there were many issues
related to field research that we did not anticipate
but to which we had to quickly respond. In situ-
ations where students expressed concerns with
power dynamics concerning their identified case
we suggested various recruitment strategies such
as informing prospective interviewees that infor-
mation sought was for course assignment only,
and that all participants as well as the organiza-
tion would be fictionalized for anonymity. When
a student proposed using a particular case that
could result in negative or harmful consequences
for the learner selection of an alternative case
was suggested. To attend to the issue of time
constraints for collecting data, students were ad-
vised to consider phone conferencing rather than
scheduling a face-to-face meeting as an option.
It should be noted that students were required to
obtain instructor approval of research questions
before interviewing (to ensure questions were
not leading, biased toward the learners’ opinion,
written to confirm rather than gain information, or
framed in a way that would impede data collection
or deeper understanding of the case problem). In
situations where students had limited access to
data related to their cases they were encouraged
to be creative and identify alternative avenues for
data collection such as using articles that might
have been written about their organization or
interviewing a friend about their critical incident.
Finally, we encouraged students to be mindful of
time management, to not procrastinate in com-
pleting important steps in the LCW process (i.e.,
problem identification, interviewee identification,
development of research questions, conducting
the interview, etc.).
Perhaps because students were new to case-
based learning and LCW there was a tendency
to focus so intently on process that they some-
times lost sight of their task to also reflect on
980
and make connections to course concepts. There
were instances where a learner only focused on
one aspect of their case and could not initially
identify alternative ways of viewing the same
incident. Given that appreciating multiple per-
spectives in management problems was one of the
main goals of using the LCW process along with
understanding that problems are seldom concrete
or have one solution, we incorporated informal
(via case conferences) and formal (a paper) peer
commentary into the feedback process. Peer
commentary provided an immediate way for the
learner to recognize another point of view was
possible. We also used interim deliverable dates
so that the instructor had several opportunities to
ask students to clarify and/or to expound on areas
where learners may have focused too narrowly.
In this way we sought to ensure that learners
engaged with course concepts related to insights
gained through the LCW process and we believed
it important that they continued to reflect on their
management issue.
LCW has the potential to be a double-edged
sword because at the same time that students
become very engaged in the field research and
fascinated with what the research reveals they
can fail to analyze their case for course concepts.
RECOMMENDATIONS
In this section we discuss recommendations which
are based on lessons we have learned using the
LCW process online.
It is clear to us after having used the LCW
process online multiple times that employing a
learning technique unfamiliar to students within
the online environment which is also unfamiliar
terrain to adult learners intensifies the opportu-
nity for miscommunication. For this reason our
foremost recommendation is that a pre-assessment
of learners’ online technical skills be done that
provides the instructor information on the learner’s
comfort and experience level with online courses
Increasing Adult Learner Engagement in E-Learning Courses through Learner Case Writing
to ensure they understand the attitudes, skills, and
dispositions they will be expected to demonstrate,
and to prepare students for the challenges of online
learning (Serdyukov & Serdyukova, p. 12, 2009).
It would be especially helpful if the results of such
an assessment could be individualized so that the
instructor knows who may need additional tutor-
ing in the technical aspects of the LMS. Ideally,
institutions that are moving toward more frequent
use of online courses should develop a standard of
baseline knowledge all students must possess prior
to beginning coursework. That means institutions
should provide an infrastructure that adequately
prepares students for the online learning tasks
they will face.
Research presents a mixed picture about the
contribution of interaction to learning online;
however, the prevailing view indicates that in-
teractivity and communication are key factors
vital in student achievement and satisfaction in
online environments (Serdyukov & Serdyukova,
2009). The LCW process is one approach to do so.
LCW encourages communication and interaction
between students and the instructor throughout the
process through iterative reflection and feedback.
At the beginning of the course we recom-
mend that instructors discuss the nature of a case
(what they are used for, what can be learned from
them). We also believe it is important to discuss
why groups will be used during the LCW process
(for support, seeing different views) and provide
students with guidelines for developing/improving
teamwork and collaboration. Most importantly,
we suggest that instructors who choose to use
this process provide learners with examples of
LCWs written by other students. Again, the use
of CBL in courses will be new to many learners,
however, LCW will be new to almost all learners
as this is a process that is very rarely used in the
classroom. Providing learners with examples of
what the end product could look like, we believe,
may help reduce the amount of anxiety students
experience with LCW thus increasing likelihood
of their success.
LCW goes beyond using discussion boards
to promote interaction amongst students, by en-
couraging students to construct and share their
knowledge through active participation, analysis
and reflection, reading the recommended litera-
ture and making explicit references to the course
literature, as they provide feedback to peers on
learner cases.
FUTURE TRENDS
The number of adults learning online is increas-
ing not only in the academy but in business and
industry where arguably the bulk of adult education
takes place in the form of human resource develop-
ment. At least two studies of graduate students have
found no difference between learning face-to-face
and learning online (Gagne & Shepherd, 2001;
Yaw, 1999) and the DOE’s meta-analysis (2009)
found that classes online on average produced
stronger student learning outcomes than face-to-
face courses. At the same time there are estimates
that the completion rate for workplace e-learning
is as low as 10% (Murphy, 2001). The profile of
adult learners in the workplace indicate they are
older and more geographically dispersed and have
a different motivation for learning (Tyler-Smith,
2008) than their counterparts in higher education.
This is not to say that completion rates in the
academy are stellar. Some estimate that drop-out
rates in e-learning courses are 10-20% higher than
face-to-face courses (Carr, 2000 in Tyler-Smith,
2008). Two things seem clear: adult learning
online will continue to rise driven by a desire for
institutional cost-savings and learner desires for
convenience but we need to know more about
teaching and learning techniques that may help
them learn most effectively online. We do not
know yet whether these techniques will be dif-
ferent from those used with school age children.
We suspect that the LCW technique, because it
directly draws on the adult learners’ experience and
uses reflection on that experience as the template
981
 Increasing Adult Learner Engagement in E-Learning Courses through Learner Case Writing
for learning, is a teaching and learning activity
that may transfer well from the academy to the
workplace. In the academy we believe that LCW
breaks the “four G” mold (Miller, 2000 as cited
in Herrington, 2006) and provides faculty with a
way to engage learners in meaningful reflection
about substantive content.
CONCLUSION
We have discussed learner case writing, an in-
teractive case-based method, that can be used to
engage adult learners online. The four phases of
the LCW process build on theories of adult learn-
ing principles and constructivistic theory about
the value of learner-to-learner interaction and the
value of incorporating learner experience into the
learning process. Our experience with LCW has
been positive. LCW aligns fairly closely to the
criteria Wehlage et al. (1996 as cited in Knobloch,
2003) described for authentic learning tasks: con-
struction of knowledge, disciplined inquiry, and
value beyond school. Garrison’s findings (1995 as
cited in Garrison & Archer, 2000) that adults first
and foremost want learning expectations clarified
is particularly salient in the online environment
where context is stripped of nonverbal cues, eye
contact and voice intonation. We have described
that when using a process totally unfamiliar to
adults, who may already be anxious when faced
with the unfamiliar medium of asynchronous
learning, it is critical to create opportunities for
adult learners to clarify learning expectations in a
face-to-face format or alternatively this could be
accomplished using an interface like Elluminate
which is synchronous and allows for learners to
communicate with one another orally and via a chat
feature. Finally, many learners in our experience
have found the field research phase required to
write their own case a profound experience. But
because the potential power of that experience is
lodged in the emotional significance it has for the
learner they often have to be coached to see the
982
difference between interviewing to prove their
own point of view versus interviewing to gain a
broader perspective. This is in itself an important
lesson for many of the students with whom we
have worked using LCW.
REFERENCES
Barrows, H. S. (1986). A taxonomy of problem-
based learning methods. Medical Education,
20(6), 481–486. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2923.1986.
tb01386.x
Bernard, R., Brauer, A., Abrami, P., & Surkes, M.
(2004). The development of a questionnaire for
predicting online achievement. Distance Educa-
tion, 25(1), 31–47. .doi:10.1080/015879104200
0212440
Boud, D., & Walker, D. (1993). Introduction . In
Boud, D., Cohen, R., & Walker, D. (Eds.), Using
experience for learning (pp. 1–17). Buckingham,
UK: The Open University Press.
Brew, A. (1993). Unlearning through experience .
In Boud, D., Cohen, R., & Walker, D. (Eds.), Using
experience for learning (pp. 87–98). Buckingham,
UK: The Open University Press.
Chen, C. C., Shang, R., & Harris, A. (2006). The
efficacy of case method teaching in an online
asynchronous learning environment. International
Journal of Distance Education Technologies,
4(2), 72–86.
Closson, R. (2009). How are problem based learn-
ing and case study used in continuing education:
A review of the literature. Journal of Continuing
Higher Education, 49(6), 517–534.
DeWolf-Waddill, D. D. (2006). Action e-
learning: An exploratory case study of action
learning applied online. Human Resource
Development International, 9(2), 157–171.
doi:10.1080/13678860600616347
Increasing Adult Learner Engagement in E-Learning Courses through Learner Case Writing

Fenwick, T. J. (2000). Expanding concep- Knobloch, N. A. (2003). Is experiential learning

tions of experiential learning: A review of the authentic? Journal of Agricultural Education,
five contemporary perspectives on cognition. 44(4), 22–34.
Adult Education Quarterly, 50(4), 243–272.
Knowles, M. S. (1980). The modern practice of
doi:10.1177/07417130022087035
adult education. New York: Association Press.
Gagne, M., & Shepherd, M. (2001, April). Distance
Kolb, D. A. (1984). Experiential learning. Cliffs,
Learning in Accounting: A comparison between
NJ: Prentice-Hall Englewood.
a distance and a traditional graduate accounting
class. T.H.E. Journal, 29(9), 58–65. Retrieved Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning:
from http://www.thejournal.com/magazine. Legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.
Garrison, D. R., & Archer, W. (2000). A trans-
actional perspective on teaching and learning: Lebow, D. G., & Wager, W. W. (1994, February).
A framework for adult and higher education. Authentic activity as a model for appropriate learn-
Oxford, UK: Pergamon. ing activity: Implications for design of computer-
based simulations. In Proceedings of Selected
Ge, X., & Er, N. (2005). An online support system
Research and Development Presentation (pp.
to scaffold real-world problem solving. Interac-
1–8). Nashville, TN: Association for Educational
tive Learning Environments, 13(3), 139–157.
Communication and Technology.
.doi:10.1080/10494820500382893
Lohman, M. C. (2002). Cultivating problem-
Hammerness, K., Darling-Hammond, L., & Shul-
solving skills through problem-based approaches
man, L. (2002). Toward expert thinking: How
to professional development. Human Resource
curriculum case writing prompts the development
Development Quarterly, 13(3), 243–261.
of theory-based professional knowledge in student
doi:10.1002/hrdq.1029
teachers. Teaching Education, 13(2), 219–225.
doi:10.1080/1047621022000007594 Murphy, H. L. (2001). E-learning put to the test.
Crain’s Chicago Business, 24(35), 1–3.
Herrington, J. (2006). Authentic e-learning in
higher education: Design principles for authentic Newmann, F. M. (1996). Authentic achievement:
learning environments and tasks. In Proceedings Restructuring schools for intellectual quality.
of World Conference on E-Learning in Corporate, Jossey-Bass.
Government, Healthcare, and Higher Educa-
Pratt, D. D. (1988). Andragogy as a relational
tion. Retrieved from http://edserver2.uow.edu.
construct. Adult Education Quarterly, 38(3),
au/~janh/Elearn/Site/Authentic%20design_files/
160–181. doi:10.1177/0001848188038003004
paper _24193.pdf
Reeves, T. C., Herrington, J., & Oliver, R. (2002).
Herrington, J., Reeves, T. C., Oliver, R., &
Authentic activities and online learning. Proceed-
Woo, Y. (2004). Designing authentic activities
ings of the 25th HRDSA Annual Conference Qual-
in web-based courses. Journal of Computing in
ity conversations: Research and Development
Higher Education, 16(1), 3–29. .doi:10.1007/
in Higher Education, 25, (pp. 562-567). Perth,
BF02960280
Western Australia: Higher Education Research
Hmelo-Silver, C. E. (2004). Problem-based learn- and Development Society of Australasia.
ing: What and how do students learn? Educational
Psychology Review, 16(3), 235–266. doi:10.1023/
B:EDPR.0000034022.16470.f3

983
 Increasing Adult Learner Engagement in E-Learning Courses through Learner Case Writing
Rovai, A. P. (2002). Sense of community per-
ceived cognitive learning and persistence in
asynchronous learning networks. The Internet
and Higher Education, 5, 319–332. doi:10.1016/
S1096-7516(02)00130-6
Schön, D. (1991). Educating the reflective prac-
titioner. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Serdyukov, P., & Serdyukova, N. (2009). Effec-
tive communication in online learning. Presented
at the IFIP World Conference on Computers in
Education, Brazil. Retrieved October 27, 2009,
from http://www.wcce2009.org/proceedings/
papers/WCCE2009_pap124.pdf
Song, L., Singleton, E. S., Hill, J. R., & Koh, M.
H. (2004). Improving online learning: Student
perceptions of useful and challenging character-
istics. The Internet and Higher Education, 7(1),
59–70. doi:10.1016/j.iheduc.2003.11.003
Stodel, E. J., Thompson, T. L., & MacDonald,
C. J. (2006). Learners’ perspectives on what is
missing from online learning: Interpretations
through the community of inquiry framework.
International Review of Research in Open and
Distance Learning, 7(3), 1–24.
Tyler-Smith, K. (2008). Early attrition among first
time elearners: A review of factors that contrib-
ute to drop-out, withdrawal and non-completion
rates of adult learners undertaking elearning
programmes. Journal of Online Learning and
Teaching, 2(2), 73–85.
U.S. Department of Education, Office of Plan-
ning, Evaluation, and Policy Development and
Program Studies Service. (2009). Evaluation
of evidence-based practices in online learning:
A meta-analysis and review of online learning
studies. Retrieved December 6, 2009, from
http://www.ed.gov/about/offices/list/opepd//ppss/
reports.html
984
Yaw, D., & Gilman, D. (1999). A comparison of
final grades of distance education learners to
classroom learners. (ERIC Document Reproduc-
tion Service No.444 435).
KEY TERMS AND DEFINITIONS
Case-Based Learning: Learning activities
that use situations, typically authored by a subject
matter expert, that can be based on a real organi-
zation and real people but also can be fictional.
Case Conference: When students gathered in
groups (face-to-face or online) to provide feedback
about one another’s learner-written cases.
Case Conference Groups: The groups that
students worked in to analyze a case and to pro-
vide feedback and support as each member wrote
their own case.
Learner Case Writing: Learners identify a
critical incident at their workplace or another or-
ganization where they may volunteer or worship
that they then research. They use the research and
the various perspectives they gain to describe the
incident and then analyze it using concepts from
the course content.
Peer Commentary (Informal): Open-ended
feedback that groups of students provide to one
another.
Peer Commentary (Formal): A paper provid-
ing an alternative analysis of a peer’s case.
Problem-Based Learning: Learning that uses
problem analysis, and sometimes resolution, as
the basis for learning.
 985

Chapter 60
Knowledge Building Online:
The Promise and the Process
David S. Stein
The Ohio State University, USA

Constance E. Wanstreet
The Ohio State University, USA

Hilda R. Glazer
Capella University, USA

ABSTRACT
This chapter explores the promise and process of knowledge building in online environments. The promise
lies in the dual capability of knowledge building to support the collective learning of future adult learn-
ers by building on the information artifacts produced by present learners, thus improving upon what
is known about a subject. Electronic tools for sharing emerging thoughts facilitate knowledge building
and expand its reach outside the immediate classroom to involve learners from any part of the world
in inquiry-based discussions. The knowledge-building process involves participation, collaboration,
and achieving shared understanding. A case study of adult learners attempting higher levels of learn-
ing shows knowledge building in process. The chapter proposes a staged approach to preparing adult
learners to engage in knowledge building.

INTRODUCTION ing content in a given field (McConnell, 2006;

Learning in online environments can be viewed as
a continuum ranging from individual information
acquisition to collaborative knowledge genera-
tion. Although the discourse on online learning
seems to embrace cooperative and collaborative
approaches to learning assessment, discussion has
not moved toward the higher level of learning—
knowledge generation, which adds to the exist-
DOI: 10.4018/978-1-61692-906-0.ch060
Sorensen, 2005; Barab, MaKinster, & Scheckler,
2004). For example, a discussion board might be
thought of as a place for individual performance
within a cooperative learning environment in that
the dialogue helps individual students better un-
derstand the content or gain more insight into its
application or implications. In that scenario, the
task of the discussion board is to help the student
master content as prescribed by the instructor
(Rockwood, 1995). Discussion spaces, including
wikis, can also be thought of as tools for collab-

orative learning and the generation of knowledge
products. Collaborative tools offer open-ended
spaces appropriate when learners are asked to
achieve a new understanding by bringing together
their experience, ability to search for information
and pose questions, and a willingness to test ideas
and intensively examine the information they have
generated. In that way the learners have pushed
forward their understanding that originally was
based on authoritative sources.
For adult learners, the possibilities inherent in
the discussion board and other sharing tools may
not be fully realized in higher education. The tools
for sharing information in computer-mediated
environments are growing faster than instructors
can rethink the ways in which instruction can
enable adult learners to take advantage of the
technologies to engage in higher levels of learning.
This chapter explores the promise of knowledge
building in online environments. A case study of
adult learners attempting higher levels of learning
shows knowledge building in process.
BACKGROUND
Networked learning helps adult learners actively
pursue knowledge building and rely less on the
instructor as the primary source of knowledge
construction and dissemination. The outcome
from a network-type of collaborative approach
is a deeper and original understanding of an area
of inquiry that comes from learners working to-
gether to contribute to a goal that is greater than
simply achieving a classroom project. Indeed,
Hewitt (2004) questioned papers, projects, and
exams typical in classroom learning communi-
ties as artificial contrivances that do not provide
meaning outside of the classroom. Knowledge
building, on the other hand, has been described
as a higher level of engagement and intellectual
development achievable through online learning
environments (McConnell, 2006). Knowledge
building is based on the idea that social groupings
986
Knowledge Building Online
can facilitate individual and collective learning.
Knowledge building adds to the communal way
of seeing the world, while learning adds only to
an individual’s repertoire of perspectives (Lippo-
nen, 2000). Knowledge building revolves around
inquiry rather than around knowledge acquisition
and retention.
The terms knowledge and information are
interrelated constructions that have multiple
meanings. Following arguments advanced by
Stenmark (2002), this chapter positions knowledge
as the internal cognitive structures adults have for
organizing, integrating, and applying concepts
to the external world. Information is the external
representation of one’s thoughts expressed in
words, images, nonverbal signs, or other artifacts.
Information is the physical form that represents
knowledge. When individuals in collaboration
with others restructure, evaluate, assign meaning,
and modify their internal cognitive perspectives,
knowledge is produced. Prior knowledge is used
to interpret experience and information, and in-
formation is necessary to build new knowledge.
The term knowledge building has been used to
refer to task-based and problem-solving groups
and seems to involve the application of existing
content to novel situations. However, knowledge
building as a learning activity is a different pro-
cess. Knowledge building is an act of creation
that stands apart from its creators. Participation
and engagement produce a collective understand-
ing of an issue, phenomenon, or situation. In the
classroom, the thoughts that emerge are new to
the learners, superior to their previous under-
standings, and for the good of all (Bereiter, 1994;
McConnell, 2006). Knowledge building goes
beyond sharing of thoughts and moves toward
new collective thoughts that can emerge only in
a community committed to pushing the basis of
existing knowledge and learning ideas for others
to expand further. In that way, knowledge-building
communities differ from communities of prac-
tice (Lave & Wenger, 1991), which unite people
engaged in the same occupation or career, and
Knowledge Building Online
task-based communities, which produce a specific
product (Riel & Polin, 2004). Knowledge-building
communities are appropriate when the subject
matter is issue- or problem-focused rather than
foundational. Knowledge building is appropriate
for adult learners, who come to an educational ex-
perience with expectations for active involvement
in the learning activities and who bring various
perspectives to the learning situation (Vella, 2007).
A revised Bloom’s taxonomy for online learning
considers collaboration and publishing knowledge
as higher order thinking skills appropriate for the
21st century (Churches, 2009).
The Knowledge-Building Process
Knowledge building moves learners to the center
of the learning process. In online environments,
a knowledge-building approach to learning
resembles the way knowledge is created in the
natural world. The goal is to expand upon the
existing canon; i.e., the text and lectures, to solve
problems through a collaborative process that
improves upon what is known about a subject.
Bereiter (1994) described the knowledge-
building process as progressive discourse that pro-
duces better thinking about content. Progressive
discourse involves a commitment to work toward
a common understanding that alters individual
thoughts and creates new collective thoughts.
In addition, progressive discourse involves a
commitment to base emerging thoughts on evi-
dence and openness, and to expand the number
and scope of thoughts that the group considers
valid, whether they agree with them or not. The
artifact produced is an external representation of
the communal thought and advances the collec-
tive understanding of an issue in an intentional
way that enhances the intellectual growth of the
individual learner and the community of learners
to which that learner is now joined (Riel & Polin,
2004). The knowledge produced has meaning to
the participants and lives beyond the classroom
in which it was produced. It advances intellectual
growth rather than only meeting the project goals
needed to receive a grade.
Knowledge-Building in
the Classroom
Knowledge building has been studied as a learning
strategy in elementary schools (Lipponen, 2000;
Hewitt, 2004; Scardamalia & Bereiter, 1994),
more so than in higher education. Higher educa-
tion seems to focus on task learning conducted in
distributed collaborative networks rather than on
knowledge building (Riel, 2009). For example,
Riel’s adult learners were satisfied with their par-
ticipation and engagement and produced products
that seemed to move the learners to a greater depth
of knowledge; i.e., moving from fact-seeking to-
ward constructing explanations, theories, abstract
concepts, and publishing new content. However,
their movement retained a fact-based, authoritative
understanding. McConnell (2006) investigated
the experience of learning online in collaborative
environments and found that most students were
satisfied with the experience. Sorensen (2005)
designed a model that encouraged participation,
engagement, and motivation and that produced
“enormous amounts of relevant collaboratively
developed student initiatives, student perspectives,
and student experiences” (p. 451). Although the
project increased information available to the
group and was theoretically based, the results did
not support the notion of knowledge building.
The model encouraged information sharing and
information summarizing necessary to meet the
course requirements.
Boyer (2003) developed a process to move
adult learners from an individual approach to
learning toward a self-directed yet collaborative
approach to knowledge construction through the
use of learning contracts. The process recognized
that individual learning styles were subordinated
to the attainment of a project formed from the
“juncture of commonality” (Boyer, 2003, p. 372).
Riel (2009) suggested the use of learning circles
987

as a way for learners to form this “juncture of
commonality.” Sharing information through a
network distributes wisdom and communicates
the need for equal participation and reciproc-
ity in terms of contributing to the goals and the
good of the group. Each learner works on his or
her own project and contributes to the sharing of
information for others’ projects. These are task-
based groups in which knowledge is acquired and
shared to help individuals achieve their own and
the group’s learning goals.
Knowledge Building and
Adult Learners
Knowledge building is an appropriate learning
strategy for adult learners because it recognizes
that adults enter a learning situation with experi-
ence as well as personal perceptions of the world
based on that experience (Vella, 2002). Knowledge
building employs experience and subjects it to
critical examination through dialogue with oth-
ers. Thus, group members become aware of new
possibilities and multiple perspectives. With their
experience, independent thoughts, and individual
learning needs, adults are well suited to learning
environments that focus less on the instructor
and typical classroom-based assignments and
more on the learners and the process of generat-
ing knowledge applicable to their lives beyond
the classroom.
Knowledge building moves learners toward
independence and builds their skills as self-
directed adult learners (Grow, 1991). Agreement
about good scholarship or mastery of subject mat-
ter will be embedded in issues generated by the
learner (Knowles, 1986). Together with faculty,
adult learners determine competencies that need
to be developed, specify the particular objectives
for inquiry, identify potential learning resources,
determine what might constitute evidence of ac-
complishment, and agree on a means for valida-
tion (Brockett & Hiemstra, 1991; Knowles, 1986;
Vella, Berardinelli, & Burrow, 1998).
988
Knowledge Building Online
Knowledge Building and Technology
Electronic tools for sharing, recording, and posting
emerging thoughts facilitate knowledge building.
The network for connecting thoughts is provided
by online course management systems. On a
particular issue or problem, learners can move
from reliance on authorities to creating and testing
knowledge from collaborative work. The output,
or product, of the activity is a knowledge artifact,
which is not a summary of individual thoughts
but rather a map showing a way to understand
or think about an issue that improves on earlier
ways of understanding and that can contribute,
perhaps, to the learning of another group. In es-
sence, one might think of the output in terms of
a creative piece to which others can respond and
can reshape as the community continues to learn
more about a particular topic. The goal is not
merely to produce a product; it is also to commit
to making a contribution that pushes the group’s
understanding about an issue beyond the existing
public knowledge (Scardamalia & Bereiter, 1994).
Knowledge-Building Characteristics
Stenmark (2002) suggested that to build knowl-
edge in community, members must share a com-
mon understanding of the information based on
cultural backgrounds. Hewitt (2004) cited a shared
history and shared norms, goals, and practices as
factors that contributed to higher levels of learning
and knowledge building. Sorensen (2005) added
that knowledge building also included shared
linguistic abilities as well as similar intellectual
backgrounds and levels of interest in the activity
of knowledge generation. Riel (2009) suggested
that trust, respect, open approaches to thinking,
individual responsibility, and group reciprocity
were necessary elements for knowledge sharing
and building to occur. Similarly, Bereiter (1994)
suggested that the qualities of mutual understand-
ing, empirical testability, expansiveness in think-
ing, and openness to new ideas were essential to
Knowledge Building Online
knowledge building. Those qualities take time
to establish.
In both elementary (Lipponen, 2000) and high-
er education (McConnell, 2006) environments,
learners developed a shared history while engaged
in long-term projects with the same colleagues
during a prolonged time period. McConnell’s
learners participated in a two-year program and in
workshops lasting between four and eight months.
Boyer’s (2003) self-directed-learning contracted
groups lasted one year. Riel and Sparks (2009)
described a year-long action research project us-
ing the learning circles concepts. However, most
classrooms are an artificially formed collection
of individuals without a shared history of work-
ing together. Most learners have varying levels
of expertise, may not necessarily be skilled in
group learning processes, and have a short time
commitment to a learning event lasting between
10 and 15 weeks. Given those constraints, what
occurs in an online course that moves learners
from information acquisition or task completion
to knowledge building? What might be the pre-
cursors to generating the commitment to becom-
ing a knowledge-building group? What might
help groups move, as Scardamalia and Bereiter
(1994) suggested, from repeating what is known
to explaining situations by advancing new ideas,
testing those ideas with evidence, subjecting those
ideas to public scrutiny, refining the thoughts,
and, finally, publishing an idea on the forefront
of our understanding with the acceptance of the
community to which one belongs?
BUILDING KNOWLEDGE IN
COMMUNITY: A CASE
This case will illustrate a framework for knowl-
edge building that is appropriate for adult learners.
Learners’ shared their perceptions of how they
participated in an online, collaborative learning
experience with knowledge-building as the out-
come. As they prepared for their discussions and
moved through the process, certain themes arose,
which center around participation, collaboration,
and achieving shared understanding. A collabora-
tive knowledge-building framework is proposed
with which to examine Bereiter’s (1994) four
progressive discourse commitments of mutual
understanding, empirical testability, expansion,
and openness. The collaborative knowledge-
building framework represents the group voice
that results from shared understanding. Shared
understanding reflects the dynamic interaction
between a learner’s personal meaning and the
group’s collaboration (Schrire, 2004). Shared
understanding is influenced by two factors: readi-
ness to participate and connecting to collaborate
(Wanstreet & Stein, 2010).
Becoming Ready to Participate
The foundation of the collaborative knowledge-
building process is the members’ readiness to par-
ticipate. A number of researchers have described
the importance of participation as a factor in
developing and maintaining knowledge-building
communities (Lock, 2002; Wanstreet & Stein,
2010). Based on the literature and a thematic
analysis of interview transcripts, this chapter de-
fines readiness to participate as learners becoming
engaged with others and generating the situations
to be discussed. Learners reported becoming ready
to participate by creating a welcoming climate,
establishing relationships, feeling emotionally and
cognitively comfortable, and formulating initial
thoughts on the discussion topic.
Creating a welcoming climate. Socializing at
the beginning of the course was necessary to create
a welcoming climate. Participants who reported
conditions for creating a knowledge-building com-
munity began to feel part of the group as they got
to know each other though course activities, such
as introductory discussion board postings and ori-
entation chats. Initial connections structured into
the design of the course helped learners identify
989

similar interests and goals that helped them come
together as a team.
A welcoming climate helped Ashton get to
know her group and feel more interpersonally
connected than she had in previous face-to-face
courses:
Sometimes when you are online you can be more
personable. . . . Through the student introduction
. . . we tell everyone who we are . . . [and] get to
know a little bit about everyone’s background.
Usually when you are in a face-to-face class,
you just say your name and maybe where you are
from but you don’t have the details—whether you
are married, have kids, all those types of things.
When purposeful interactions to encourage
climate-setting were not built into the course
structure, learners reported a lack of connection
from the beginning that hindered knowledge
building. As a result, rather than feeling welcome,
those learners reported feeling disconnected. Meg
reported feeling isolated from her classmates
and feeling as though the course was designed
for independent learning: “Because I didn’t talk
to anyone and I didn’t even know what anyone
looked like, I couldn’t put a face to a name.”
Another student was excluded because she
was late for the initial discussion:
I never got into the group. I was late for the first
group meeting. . . . They had met and had a brief
discussion about how they were going to answer
the discussion questions . . . so there was nothing
to do. (Susan1)
Establishing relationships. Establishing rela-
tionships involves genuine caring and withholding
judgment (Belenky, Clinchy, Goldberger, & Ta-
rule, 1986). Ilene reported being more connected to
her group and building more relationships online:
I looked at a [student] profile and I saw another
scientist. When you look at that kind of stuff, you
990
Knowledge Building Online
connect with people without saying a word because
you have information about them right there.
Al, a colleague of Ilene’s, remarked on the
importance of becoming friends and nurturing
the relationship:
I know her strengths, she knows my strengths. We
know each other’s weaknesses. That’s all part of it.
. . . Now that I know her well, one of my goals is
not to disappoint her and my other team members.
Tami felt interpersonal relationships were
stronger online than in her face-to-face classroom
experiences:
I know these people by name, and I know some-
thing personal about every one of them—yeah,
significantly personal. . . . I know them better than
I’ve known any other students—maybe with the
exception of one—in another class.
An important aspect of facilitating productive
group relationships is norm articulation (Graham,
2003). Setting norms allows group members
to build a sense of harmony that contributes to
knowledge building, as Nancy recounted:
We didn’t have any arguments . . . because at
the very beginning we laid down some ground
rules. We had a moderator, and that person was
responsible for keeping the discussion on track.
And each week there was a different moderator.
Group members who had difficulty establish-
ing relationships reported dissatisfaction with the
learning experience. Diane reported that her group
went “haywire,” and Samantha felt as though her
group acted “like a big dysfunctional family:”
In the back of my head I’m going, oh, my goodness,
we are graduate-level students. We are profession-
als. . . . It’s extremely disappointing because this
is supposed to be a wonderful learning experience
Knowledge Building Online
and you’ve got 30- to 40-year-olds acting like
teeny boppers.
Feeling emotionally and cognitively comfort-
able. Being ready to participate in collaborative
knowledge building includes feeling emotionally
and cognitively comfortable about participating in
a discussion. This includes feeling as though your
input will contribute to the understanding of the
group. Susan described the feeling as “chemistry:”
I think there’s chemistry—I think that’s a factor in
it. I’ve been in groups where I felt a bond intel-
lectually or in terms of style. When you become
a group is when you bond with certain people.
The development of trust among group mem-
bers contributes to emotional and cognitive com-
fort. Ilene described the role of trust in helping
her fulfill obligations to others in her group: “You
don’t want to let other people down so you might
work a little harder on an assignment to make sure
you’re dotting your i’s and crossing your t’s.”
Comfort evaporated when group members were
perceived as untrustworthy. Vince reported that
the “environment didn’t force” becoming a
knowledge-building community with members
who could trust one another: “Even in the very
last assignment we were making plans at the very
last minute to cover the situation because we didn’t
have confidence in the people.”
Experience in collaborative learning—or lack
thereof—has an effect on cognitive and emotional
comfort. Hasler-Waters and Napier (2002) report
that students do not become collaborators simply
by being put into groups; and the skills to be learned
are especially important in online environments
that lack nonverbal communication, as Tami noted:
I had some assumptions about what that leader
role would be. And the first night, our poor leader
was clueless. And part of it, I think, that’s her
nature, and part of it is it was just so new to her,
and she was so confused, and she couldn’t find all
the postings, and she was unprepared. She wasn’t
ready to get her own thoughts together, not to
mention facilitating other people’s thoughts. So
the very first discussion, I thought I was going
to go insane.
Formulating initial thoughts on the discussion
topic. Readiness to participate means that learners
are prepared to engage in the dialogue and create
an understanding that addresses the issue in novel
ways (Cosier & Glennie, 1994). Formulating initial
thoughts in advance of the discussion contributed
to learners’ preparedness and ultimate satisfaction
with the knowledge-building process:
I had a great learning experience because Steve
was knowledgeable and interested in having a
good discussion. . . . I really wanted to be part of
a group that would actually have discussions. . .
.I could have had somebody who didn’t read the
material say, “How can we answer this?” (Susan)
A number of learners expressed frustration
at their colleagues’ lack of preparation for the
discussion. Diane said, “I wonder if they didn’t
do any of the readings and didn’t know enough to
answer the question, so they were just answering
it from what they thought.” Tami reported that
half of her group was unprepared:
We had eight group members. There are four of
us who are heavily engaged in the topic and I
would say have good depth of thought and good
challenges. There is at least half of the group, in
my opinion, that has either a) checked out, or b)
has not read the material and cannot contribute
in a meaningful way, or c) just doesn’t get it.
Samantha’s group developed an approach to en-
courage reading and formulating initial thoughts:
991

We said for the final [assignment] that if you
wanted to participate, you have to post something
written. If you don’t post by a certain date, you
do it on your own. No questions asked.
Readiness to participate is reflected in the
willingness of group members to get to know
one another and the course material in a way that
supports collaborative learning. Being unprepared,
uncomfortable, or noninclusive hinders partici-
pation and the ability of the group to achieve an
understanding of the content that is shared by all.
In terms of Bereiter’s (1994) progressive discourse
commitments, mutual understanding and open-
ness are pertinent to participation. Those groups
that set norms did not include the idea that they
would work toward a common understanding
satisfactory to all, nor that they would be open to
criticizing any belief or position while trying to
resolve an impasse or achieve a higher goal. Had
they done so, it is likely that half of Tami’s group
would not have “checked out,” Diane’s would not
have gone “haywire,” and Samantha’s would not
have acted like a “dysfunctional family” because
of their previous commitment to making progress
through discussion.
Connecting to Collaborate
Collaborative learning takes place in academic
spaces that recognize learners as producers of
knowledge. To generate knowledge in a col-
laborative fashion means acquiring new skills,
including the ability to work in groups with
persons of various backgrounds; to communicate
effectively, both orally and in writing; to combine
independent and interdependent work to produce a
meaningful outcome; and to use social networking
and collaborative software (Lipponen, 2002). Es-
tablishing a collaborative environment that leads
to shared understanding requires ample dialogue
that connects group members with one another
to explore and understand various perspectives
deeply (Stein et al., 2007). Based on the literature
992
Knowledge Building Online
and thematic analysis of interview transcripts,
this chapter defines connecting to collaborate
as dialogue that supports a knowledge-building
experience. Learners reported connecting to col-
laborate by brainstorming, exploring all points of
view, challenging perceptions, ensuring equality
of voices, and stretching individual perspectives
to embrace others’ perspectives.
Brainstorming. Brainstorming, exchanging
ideas, and making suggestions are necessary for
collaboration and knowledge building to occur
(Wanstreet & Stein, 2010). Exchanging ideas led
to knowledge construction through deep and mean-
ingful interactions during regularly scheduled
chats, telephone conversations, e-mail messages,
and asynchronous discussion board postings.
Kevin felt that sharing ideas with peers through
various technologies assisted him in his thinking:
To me, it acted as a clarifier. I thought that we
were going one way, and we might have a chat
or an audio bridge [that] either steered me back
on course or confirmed that I wasn’t off track.
Exploring all points of view. Exploring perspec-
tives in depth supports meaning-making through
sustained communication (Garrison, Anderson,
& Archer, 2001). Through discussion and feed-
back, divergent points of view lead to additional
exploration:
I can sit back at the computer, send in [my thoughts]
and get some feedback from my fellow students,
read what their thoughts are, and it sparks other
thoughts in me. (Ty)
Vince, a member of a group that had difficulty
connecting to collaborate, reported deficiencies
in exploring all points of view: “I think the
questions were designed to be very in depth, and
the discussions just remained shallow.” Diane
reported sharing ideas that never led to explora-
tion on the part of the group: “We all contributed
Knowledge Building Online
comments, but I don’t think the comments were
broadly accepted.”
Challenging perceptions. Tom felt his learning
was strengthened through interactions that chal-
lenged his viewpoints:
It gives you different notions, because otherwise
you’re your own compass unless you get other
peoples’ feedback. So my experience would have
been totally through tunnel vision unless I had
inputs coming along the way.
When challenging another group member’s
perceptions is not done with tact, however, the
collaborative connection is strained:
If Jim Smith didn’t think like me, Jim would come
back and say, “That’s ridiculous. This is how it
goes in human resource development.” (Diane)
A challenge without empathy can be inter-
preted as rudeness and damage the climate for
participation:
I found people to be . . . more challenging in an
impolite way than I would expect face to face.
And that’s turned me off. (Tami)
Ensuring equality of voices. To be a safe place
for thinking, an online learning environment
should provide opportunities for multiple voices
to be heard (Turpin, 2007). Equality of voices can
be compromised, however, by language barriers
that are perceived as an individual shortcoming
and not as an opportunity for the group to draw
in participants:
One of the ladies in our group was Korean. On
one hand, you’d think it might help her by being
able to read it. The fact is she couldn’t contrib-
ute nearly as much because she had a hard time
keeping up. She has trouble putting any words
together on a keyboard, let alone a conversation
on a keyboard. (Vince)
Vince noted a second aspect related to ensur-
ing equality of voices: the willingness of group
members to take on the responsibility of contrib-
uting their voices:
My only concern [about the learning experience]
was that it was not equal. I would have thought
that if we were going to have groups together to
accomplish a task it would have been more of an
equal distribution in those groups; and I don’t
feel it was equal at all. . . . every single draft
there was [sic] only two and sometimes three of
us that responded to that draft. Everybody else
said it was perfect or gave some kind of response
where you know they didn’t read it. They couldn’t
have read it. It was that way over and over and
over and over.
Stretching individual perspectives to embrace
others’ perspectives. Collaborative connections
are enhanced by embracing others’ perspectives
(Belenky et al., 1986). Susan described this as an
iterative process that helped her “come up with
new and innovative ways of thinking”:
I would type in the answers as we were talking
and massage it a little. I’d send it to him. He’d
massage it a little and send it back. . . . I changed
my mind-set during this course. This did more for
me from that standpoint . . . that I’ll apply to the
rest of my life.
Diane noted the value of different backgrounds
in helping her embrace other perspectives:
Some people in my group tend to be out of the
arts and sciences backgrounds. I came out of
health care. When you get people from different
undergraduate realms, you tend to do things dif-
ferently and appreciate other people’s point of
view on things. I learned from that.
Brainstorming and exploring all points of
view are ways of connecting to collaborate that
993

help group members stretch their perspectives. In
terms of Bereiter’s (1994) progressive discourse
commitments, empirical testability and expan-
sion are pertinent to connecting to collaborate.
Empirical testability involves framing questions,
arguments, and propositions in ways that can be
supported by evidence. Group members who
buttress their positions with examples from the
readings contribute to the empirical testability
of their discourse. Group members such as Jim,
however, who retorted that Diane’s contribution
was “ridiculous” hinder progressive discourse.
Expansion involves a commitment to broaden the
number and scope of propositions that the group
considers valid, whether they agree with them or
not. Learners who were not willing to explore all
points of view, such as those in Vince’s group,
engaged in shallow discussions that could not lead
to shared understanding and knowledge building.
However, Tom noted that having his viewpoints
challenged lessened his “tunnel vision,” thus
expanding the ideas under consideration in his
group’s discussion. The performance of the groups
in relation to connecting to collaborate was uneven,
which ultimately affected their ability to come to a
common understanding of the issues and possible
resolutions under discussion.
Achieving Shared Understanding
Shared understanding is a new perspective that did
not exist before the group’s discussion and that
the group members come to accept as their new
position and meaning. Shared understanding is the
result of knowledge building. Achieving shared
understanding is difficult to do in a classroom
situation with contrived groups of learners who
may not be committed to collaborating, as Vince
acknowledged:
The bottom line is that the objective was met . . .
and we used the technology, and . . . you walked
away with knowledge of the history and philoso-
phy of adult education. And I accomplished that.
994
Knowledge Building Online
Whether I did it as a group or because of myself,
I don’t know. I don’t think it really matters.
Diane reported being alienated from her
group’s perspective: “I don’t know that I agree
with everything they’re saying. . . . I am teaching
myself, but what I have available to me is what
they‘re saying.” In both examples, group mem-
bers lacked a commitment to work toward mutual
understanding. In addition, they lacked the time
necessary to develop a shared history of working
together and open approaches to their thinking.
Conditions for Knowledge Building
The following conditions help foster knowledge
building: (1) group members commit to partici-
pate in the manner described above and (2) group
members employ collaboration skills, which in-
clude exhibiting an attitude that subjects content
to critical examination. Groups that meet those
conditions will experience intersubjectivity and
will agree upon meanings that the community
comes to accept as knowledge. In addition, the
community will have a high degree of confidence
that the knowledge it generated expresses the mem-
bers’ common understanding of a phenomenon.
FUTURE TRENDS
Future trends in knowledge building will be influ-
enced by two domains: technology and pedagogy.
In terms of technology, virtual worlds, wikis, and
other Web collaborative tools will be used to
develop and publish information artifacts. Un-
like today’s course management systems, which
operate only within the sphere of the immediate
classroom, future systems will reach out across
space boundaries to facilitate knowledge build-
ing without walls to include those outside the
classroom. No matter what form the collaborative
tools take, they will allow for permanency so that
knowledge can be built over time. This will apply
Knowledge Building Online
to learning environments in the classroom and at
the workplace.
Regarding pedagogy, instructors and learners
will use technology and previous information
products to build an ongoing literature of the
class. Instead of using previous work as a basis
for the next class, instructors today tend to have
each class start at the same place. In the future,
instructors and learners will keep the information
products growing by thinking about how what
they do will advance the understanding of the
learners coming through the next class. The class
itself will become redesigned to connect learners
to make contributions.
Designing classrooms by levels of expertise
is another pedagogical possibility enabled by
technology. Classes might be organized around
particular issues, and learners would be selected
to be part of the class based on postings describing
their potential contributions to better understand
the issue. Classes would be composed of learn-
ers with diverse backgrounds appropriate to the
issue or issues selected for study. Learners as
resource persons could be invited from any part
of the world to join in the discussions or serve as
readers or commentators.
CONCLUSION
The promise of knowledge building lies in its
dual capability to support the collective learning
of future learners by building on the informa-
tion artifacts produced by present learners and
improving upon what is known about a subject.
Electronic tools for sharing emerging thoughts
facilitate knowledge building and expand its reach
outside the immediate classroom. However, it
is the mind-set of instructors and adult learners
more than the technology that helps or hampers
the knowledge-building process.
To help adult learners move from repeating
what is known to creating and testing new ideas,
a collaborative knowledge-building framework
that accounts for participation, collaboration, and
shared understanding could be used. Becoming
ready to participate in collaborative knowledge
building is the foundation of the framework and in-
volves climate setting, establishing relationships,
feeling emotionally and cognitively comfortable,
and formulating initial thoughts on the discussion
topic. Connecting to collaborate is achieved by
brainstorming, exploring all points of view, chal-
lenging perceptions, ensuring equality of voices,
and stretching individual perspectives to embrace
others’ perspectives. Shared understanding is
individual and collective ownership of a new
perspective accepted by the group.
The case study illustrated the difficulty in
generating knowledge, given an artificial class-
room situation, time constraints, and a lack of
commitment to the ideas of progressive dis-
course. Learners were primarily concerned with
sharing information rather than with adding to
the existing content in the field. To assist the
knowledge building process, instructors could
conduct discussions around the idea of commit-
ments when setting norms. These commitments
include working toward mutual understanding,
framing arguments in ways that can be supported
by evidence, expanding the scope of propositions
the group considers valid, and being open to
critically examining any stance that will advance
the discussion (Bereiter, 1994). In order to make
those commitments, adult learners must accept the
idea of distributed learning and understand that
they each play a part in it, not only within their
group but within interlocking groups in the class.
In that way, knowledge building will support the
collective learning of the present group as well
as future learners.
Knowledge building is not a natural class-
room expectation and requires a reframing of the
skills that adult learners bring to the classroom
as well as the expectations that instructors have
for outcomes. Rather than seeing learning as an
individual activity, adult learners should practice
the skills learned in the workplace, community,
995

or family and transfer the skills of collaboration
and commitment to the classroom. Learning
how to have a productive discussion, learning
how to critically assess individual experience
with established content, and learning to trust
in emerging understandings are components of
the knowledge-building process that need to be
nurtured in classroom environments. In the adult
classroom, learners take ownership of the activities
and of the products of those activities. Knowledge
generation can be a visible representation of adult
learners’ taking ownership in and responsibility
for advancing the learning of all who have an
interest in issues relevant to adult lives.
AUTHOR NOTE
The authors thank Jennifer Calvin and Christine
G. Wagner for their assistance with initial data
collection and analysis.
REFERENCES
Barab, S. A. MaKinster, J. G., & Scheckler, R.
(2004). Designing system dualities: Character-
izing an online professional development com-
munity. In S. Barab, R. Kling, & J. Gray (Eds.),
Designing for virtual communities in the service
of learning (pp. 53-90). New York: Cambridge
University Press.
Belenky, M. F., Clinchy, B. M., Goldberger, N. R.,
& Tarule, J. M. (1986). Women’s ways of knowing:
The development of self, voice, and mind. New
York: Basic Books.
Bereiter, C. (1994). Implications of postmodern-
ism for science, or, science as progressive dis-
course. Educational Psychologist, 29(1), 3–12.
doi:10.1207/s15326985ep2901_1
996
Knowledge Building Online
Boyer, N. (2003). The learning contract process:
Scaffolds for building social, self-directed learn-
ing. Quarterly Review of Distance Education,
4(4), 369–383.
Brockett, R., & Hiemstra, R. (1991). Self-direction
in adult learning. New York: Routledge.
Churches, A. (2009). Bloom’s digital taxonomy.
Retrieved from http://edorigami.wikispaces.cm/
Bloom%27s+Digital+Taxonomy
Cosier, J., & Glennie, S. (1994). Supervising the
child protection process: A multidisciplinary in-
quiry . In Reason, P. (Ed.), Participation in human
inquiry (pp. 99–119). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Garrison, D. R., Anderson, T., & Archer, W. (2001).
Critical thinking and computer conferencing:
A model and tool to assess cognitive presence.
American Journal of Distance Education, 15(1),
7–23. doi:10.1080/08923640109527071
Grow, G. (1991). Teaching learners to be self-
directed. Adult Education Quarterly, 41(3),
125–149. doi:10.1177/0001848191041003001
Hasler-Waters, L., & Napier, W. (2002). Building
and supporting student team collaboration in the
virtual classroom. Quarterly Review of Distance
Education, 3(3), 345–352.
Hewitt, J. (2004). An exploration of community in
a knowledge forum classroom: An activity system
analysis . In Barab, S., Kling, R., & Gray, J. (Eds.),
Designing for virtual communities in the service
of learning (pp. 210–238). New York: Cambridge
University Press.
Knowles, M. S. (1986). Using learning contracts.
San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning:
Legitimate peripheral participation. New York:
Cambridge University Press.
Knowledge Building Online
Lipponen, L. (2000). Towards knowledge
building: From facts to explanations in pri-
mary students’ computer-mediated discourse.
Learning Environments Research, 3, 179–199.
doi:10.1023/A:1026516728338
Lock, J. V. (2002). Laying the groundwork for
the development of learning communities within
online courses. Quarterly Review of Distance
Education, 3(4), 395–408.
McConnell, D. (2006). E-learning groups and
communities. Berkshire, England: Open Univer-
sity Press.
Riel, M. (2009). The learning circle model: Build-
ing knowledge through collaborative projects. Re-
trieved from http://sites.google.com/site/online-
learning circles/Home/learning-circles-defined.
Riel, M., & Polin, L. (2004). Online learning com-
munities: Common ground and critical differences
in designing technical environments . In Barab,
S., Kling, R., & Gray, J. (Eds.), Designing for
virtual communities in the service of learning (pp.
16–50). New York: Cambridge University Press.
Riel, M., & Sparks, P. (2009). Collaborative
knowledge building: Blending in-class and online
learning formats. Distance Learning, 6(3), 7–14.
Rockwood, H. S. III. (1995). Cooperative and
collaborative learning. The National Teaching
and Learning Forum, 5(1), 8–10.
Scardamalia, M., & Bereiter, C. (1994). Computer
support for knowledge-building communities.
Journal of the Learning Sciences, 3(3), 265–283.
doi:10.1207/s15327809jls0303_3
Schrire, S. (2004). Interaction and cognition in
asynchronous computer conferencing. Instruc-
tional Science, 32, 475–502. doi:10.1007/s11251-
004-2518-7
Sorensen, E. (2005). Networked eLearning and
collaborative knowledge building: Design and
facilitation. Contemporary Issues in Technology
& Teacher Education, 4(4), 446–455.
Stein, D. S., Wanstreet, C. E., Glazer, H. R.,
Engle, C. L., Harris, R. A., & Johnston, S. M.
(2007). Creating shared understanding through
chats in a community of inquiry. The Internet and
Higher Education, 10(2), 103–115. doi:10.1016/j.
iheduc.2007.02.002
Stenmark, D. (2002). Information vs. knowledge:
The role of intranets in knowledge management.
Proceedings of the 35th Hawaii International
conference on System Sciences. Retrieved from
www. hicss.hawaii.edu/HICSS_35/HICSSpapers/
PDFdocuments/DDOML02.pdf
Turpin, C. A. (2007). Feminist praxis, online
teaching and the urban campus. Feminist Teacher,
18(1), 9–27. doi:10.1353/ftr.2008.0017
Vella, J., Berardinelli, P., & Burrow, J. (1998).
How do they know they know? Evaluating adult
learning. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Vella, J. K. (2002). Learning to listen, learning
to teach. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Vella, J. K. (2007). On teaching and learning:
Putting the principles of dialogue education in
action. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Wanstreet, C. E., & Stein, D. S. (2010).Gender
and collaborative knowledge building in an online
community of inquiry . In Wang, V. C. X. (Ed.),
Encyclopedia of information communication
technologies and adult education integration.
Hershey, PA: Information Science Reference.
KEY TERMS AND DEFINITIONS
Collaborative Knowledge Building: Dia-
logue that involves brainstorming, exploring all
points of view, challenging perceptions, ensur-
997

ing equality of voices, drawing in participants,
demonstrating the ability to withhold judgment,
stretching individual perspectives to embrace
others’ perspectives, and sharing experiences
over time.
Commitments to Progress in Discourse:
(1) to work toward mutual understanding that
is satisfactory to all members of the group; (2)
to frame questions, arguments, and propositions
in ways that can be supported by evidence; (3)
to expand the number and scope of propositions
that the group considers valid, whether they agree
with them or not; and (4) to be open to critically
examining any belief or stance if it will advance
the discourse (Bereiter, 1994).
Connecting to Collaborate: Dialogue that
supports a knowledge-building experience.
Knowledge: Internal cognitive structures for
organizing, integrating, and applying concepts
to the external works. Knowledge is represented
in a physical form as an information product
(Stenmark, 2002).
Knowledge-Building Community: Learn-
ing environments in which the construction of
knowledge is a collective goal.
Participation: Becoming engaged with oth-
ers and generating the situations to be discussed.
998
Knowledge Building Online
Progressive Discourse: Knowledge building
that goes beyond existing knowledge to produce
thoughts that are new to the learners and superior
to their previous understandings.
Readiness to Participate in a Discussion:
Creating a welcoming climate, establishing re-
lationships by showing genuine interest, relating
to others, demonstrating acceptance and empathy,
feeling emotionally and cognitively comfortable
about participating in a discussion, and formulating
initial thoughts on the discussion topic.
Shared Understanding: A new knowledge
creation influenced by participation and col-
laboration and achieved by exchanging individual
knowing for group knowing, thus changing from
individual perspectives to a joint perspective that
emerges from collective contributions. Shared
understanding is individual and collective owner-
ship of a new perspective accepted by the group.
ENDNOTE
1
Pseudonyms are used to protect privacy.
 999

Chapter 61
Age, Race and Gender Issues
Related to On-Line Learning
M. F. Stuck
State University of New York, SUNY Oswego, USA

Mary. C. Ware
State University of NY – Cortland, USA

ABSTRACT
Research has shown that demographic factors such as age, race, ethnicity and gender affect one’s com-
munication skills, learning style preference, and consequently, one’s preferences for aspects of on-line
learning. This chapter will explore the literature related to these issues (i.e., age, race, gender) as they
affect students’ preferences for and success with various styles of on-line learning (e.g., distance learn-
ing, hybrid or blended courses, mobile learning technology).

INTRODUCTION BACKGROUND

This chapter will review literature from a variety
of sources concerning connections among gen-
der, race/ethnicity, age and on-line learning and
will focus on implications of these findings for
designers of distance/on-line learning. In areas
where research is lacking or inconclusive, needed
research questions will be posed.
The authors are extremely interested and
knowledgeable about these issues since they are
both experienced on-line faculty and have done
extensive work in the areas of gender and diversity.
DOI: 10.4018/978-1-61692-906-0.ch061
For some time now, on-line learning has been seen
as the panacea for various goals and dilemmas
related to higher education:
• the early ideal of offering courses to stu-
dents truly “at a distance” from the brick-
and-mortar campus – ideally, adult students
with busy lives and students not enrolled at
one’s own institution – a marketing tool
• the actuality of offering courses to one’s
own students who have difficulties attend-
ing face to face classes – “non-traditional”
students, students working full or part-
 Age, Race and Gender Issues Related to On-Line Learning
time, one’s students still enrolled but serv-
ing in the military
• the reality of offering courses to any stu-
dent on any campus at any time
• and the most recently noted positive aspect
of on-line learning: the ability to continue
delivery of courses in the event of disasters
– natural (e.g., floods, H1N1 flu, blizzards)
or man-made (e.g., biological or chemical
attacks or other problems).
Despite these lofty goals, issues of age, gender,
race, and social class have often not been explored
sufficiently related to on-line learning.
Adult learners, sometimes called nontradi-
tional adult learners, one of the first “targets” for
on-line learning, express preference for on line
learning and other forms of individualized credit-
bearing instruction, given their busy schedules
and demands of their lives. However, a mismatch
between adult learners and distance learning has
sometimes been predicted -- given adult learners’
relative lack of technology experience (compared
to younger students) and need for frequent com-
munication with instructors (Ausburn, 2003).
Despite these observations, the largest group of
on-line learners today are nontraditional (e.g.,
26 and over) students studying part-time. It must
be noted, however, that the dropout rate for on-
line learning is higher than that for face-to-face
instruction – perhaps implying that some of those
who register are not prepared for the rigors and
requirements of on-line learning (Diaz, 2002;
Filkins et al., 2001, Frankola, 2001)
Diversity concerns have broadened research on
learning style differences between the genders, and
research also has focused on differences in races/
ethnic groups in terms of learning/communication
style and preference. Since distance learning’s
effectiveness depends upon communication and
learning style, developers of on-line instruction
need to consider gender and racial differences as
well as those related to age (Barrett & Lally, 1999;
Proost & Elen, 1997; Sullivan, 2001).
1000
GENDER ISSUES
The phenomenon of on-line/distance learning does
not occur in a vacuum. The various contexts in
which such learning resides (e.g., a student tak-
ing one course to learn a specific skill; a student
taking a degree program on-line; an institution
offering a selection of on-line courses) need to
be recognized and articulated. It is in the social
science realm that the ramifications of such cat-
egories as gender, race, and age (as context) are
fully examined.
Thus, it is important to understand the term
gender as used in most of the social sciences.
Gender is a social construction of the expectations,
rights and privileges that societies have decided
that females and males should follow and have. As
a child grows, those around him/her provide pre-
scriptions, proscriptions, and models of behavior
which are felt to be appropriate to the child’s sex.
This constant barrage of “gender rules” socializes
the child into belonging to a culturally specified
gender and there is a great deal of social pressure
for an individual to follow these “rules”. One’s
gender then shapes the individual’s opportunities
for education, work, family, sexuality, reproduc-
tion, authority, and the individual’s potential to
make an impact on the production of culture and
knowledge. (Lorber & Farrell, 1991)
Within those constructions are often built-in
“limitations” to what each gender can or ought
to be able to do, including accomplishments in
education. While some people “push the envelope”
and go beyond the constructions of limitations for
their gender (e.g., CEO who is female) and others
in fact “fulfill” the expectations for their gender
(e.g., male becoming a pro football player), some
are hampered by the gender rules.
In computing and technologically related ac-
tivities, women have often avoided these areas, or
been “helped” so much by males that the ability to
develop skills has been hampered. It is difficult to
realize, but personal computers have been around
a relatively short period of time and within that
Age, Race and Gender Issues Related to On-Line Learning
short period, women’s roles with computers have
changed markedly. In a 1985 study of images in
computer magazines, Ware and Stuck found
that only women would be shown in portrayals
which are computer phobic; that women would
be shown draped across printers and advertising
computers in dresses that look more likely evening
wear; and that few women are portrayed as the
computer using managers, programmers, and
systems analysts which they are. (p.214)
Over twenty years later the images in ad-
vertising have changed to some degree, but the
questions about the skills and involvement of
women in areas related to computing still need to
be examined, including issues of on-line learning
skills and success.
It would be assumed that being familiar with
the internet would give students a “head start” in
using on-line delivery of learning. Women had
a disadvantage related to “familiarity” with the
internet until about 2001. Before that time, women
did not use the internet as much as men (Clark &
Gorsky, 2001). Currently, women have access to
the internet as much as men do, but they utilize it
differently. According to Ono and Zavodny (2003)
women are “less frequent and less intense” users
of the Internet (p. 111). This would imply that a
course delivered on the internet might seem more
“familiar” to men, at least at the outset.
A study by McSporran and Young (2001) sug-
gests that women and older students in on-line
courses perform better than men and younger
students because of better writing skills, time
management and motivation. Barrett and Lally
(1999) found that males and females displayed
different roles in on-line learning. Their findings
seem both to run counter to (i.e., men’s longer
posts and social exchange), and reinforce, tra-
ditional gender (i.e., women’s interactivity and
connectivity in communications) stereotypes:
men’s contributions to discussions were, typically,
more numerous and longer than those of women,
and that the contributions made by men tended
to include greater levels of social exchange than
those of women. Women, however, appeared, typi-
cally, to be more interactive than men, i.e. their
messages included implicit or explicit references
to previous contributions. (p.59)
However, Chyung (2007) exploring both gen-
der and age found that younger male students had
the fewest number of posts; it was hypothesized
that lived experiences of older students may pro-
vide the basis for more frequent and substantive
posts in on-line courses.
Another issue affecting women (both in on-
line and face-to-face learning environments) is
that women tend to underestimate their skills.
In Hargittai and Shafer’s study (2006), men and
women were not different in their actual skills to
navigate on-line, but women self-assessed their
skills significantly lower than men evaluated their
skills. It must be noted that the “estimation” of skill
is not the same as “having” a skill. Women ARE
as skilled as males in on-line learning, but they
appear to doubt their abilities in that area. Ware
(2010) found that her female graduate students
were more likely than males to contract for a B
grade when given the choice on an on-line grading
contract. Despite this lack of confidence, women
may actually exceed men in competence and ben-
efit more than males related to learning on-line.
For example, in Rovai and Baker’s study (2005)
female students not only posted more messages
but also developed a stronger sense of community
and a greater level of perceived learning than male
students did during an on-line class.
Chyung (2007) studied several variables
including self-efficacy related to age and gen-
der. Self-efficacy refers to the perception of an
individual that he/she would have the capability
to perform in a way which would change the
outcome of some event, in the case of an on-line
course, the knowledge gained and the grade earned
1001
 Age, Race and Gender Issues Related to On-Line Learning
(Bandura, 1994). Chyung’s participants were
students who enrolled in a master’s degree level
on-line course titled, “Introduction to Instructional
& Performance Technology,” at a midsized uni-
versity in the northwestern region of the United
States during four semesters between 2004- 2006
. She found that female students improved their
self-efficacy significantly more and scored sig-
nificantly higher on the final exam than did male
students after the distance learning course. This is
an important finding because, not only did female
students perform better, but they learned that they
were more capable!
Students tend to do better in learning modes
which they prefer. Some research has shown that
females show a preference for on-line learning.
Cuthrell and Lyon (2007) tell us that gender is
emerging as a factor impacting student satisfaction
in on-line courses. In a study of female university
students, Sullivan (2001) found that the majority
of the women in the study enjoyed on-line classes.
Beyond the issues of convenience and flexibility,
these students felt the on-line atmosphere offered
a better social atmosphere for the expression of
their ideas and opinions (Rovai & Baker, 2005).
It might be surmised (although the researchers
did not particularly explore this) that females are
often overpowered by rhetorically dominant males
in some face-to-face classes and they can play an
equal role in an on-line situation.
Since Cross (1981) published her classic
research on adult students in the 1980s, the pro-
portion of women participating in adult education
has increased (Wlodkowski et al., 2001). Recent
analyses suggest that women and men often differ
in their goals and motivation for pursuing higher
education (Steward, Gimenez, & Jackson, 1995).
The current demographic profile of adult students
“suggests a need for research that considers adult
students’ motivation and investigates their per-
sistence and academic success in terms of age,
gender and socioeconomic status. Currently, this
research does not exist” (Wlodkowksi et al., 2001,
1002
p. 7). This quotation is even more important in the
face of recent developments in on-line learning.
RACE
Like gender, race must also be viewed in a social
science context. Race is a social construction of
identity based loosely on external characteristics
and is related to the term, racism, part of the
structure of society, a continuing ideology which
defines and justifies differential treatment based
on skin color. In the United States, these dynam-
ics “maintain and rationalize White privilege and
power” (Feagin as cited in Anderson & Collins,
2010, p. 67; Rothenberg, 2010). Like gender, such
social constructions define the expectations, rights
and privileges that societies have decided for each
“race”, often resulting in different educational ex-
periences, thus possible different distance learning
experiences. More studies of the relationship of
race to distance learning are needed. As Flowers,
Moore, and Flowers (2008) write:
there are relatively few studies that have exam-
ined African American students’ experiences and
outcomes in distance education (Rovai & Ponton,
2005). … more African American students are
entering higher education and an increasing
number of these students are enrolled in distance
education courses. (Waits & Lewis, 2003, pp.3-4)
Flowers, Moore, and Flowers (2008, p. 4)
found “African American students who took six
or more distance education courses were more
satisfied with distance education courses than
with traditional courses.” Similar findings (e.g.,
correlating greater experience with distance learn-
ing with satisfaction with distance learning) are
also reported for white students, so this may not
be enlightening from a “racial difference” point
of view. It may be that those who persist in taking
distance learning courses gradually begin to prefer
them, or that those who take more distance learn-
Age, Race and Gender Issues Related to On-Line Learning
ing courses find a way to succeed in them, and
thus prefer them, regardless of race. Nonetheless,
Rovai and Ponton (2005) suggest that very little is
known about on-line learning environments and
African Americans. It is known that there is an
achievement gap in traditional educational pro-
grams related to the issue of race. As Wlodkowski
et al. (2001, p11) summarize:
The literature suggests that low-income and
underrepresented racial and ethnic students are
“at risk” in traditional college settings (Astin,
1993; Allen, 1992; American Council on Educa-
tion, 1993). African-Americans and Hispanics
are significantly below European-Americans in
the percentage of young adults with a bachelor’s
degree or higher. African-American, Hispanic and
Native American college participation rates and
degree attainment are disproportionately lower
than those of European-American students (Wilds,
2000, pp. 6-7).
There have been few, if any, studies which
have attempted to find whether there is a racially
related achievement gap in distance learning.
However, a large sample distance learning study
at Old Dominion University (Koch, 2005) found
that, holding other things constant, African-
American students were assigned a grade .460
lower than white students when taking distance
learning courses, while Asian and Asian-American
students were assigned a grade .046 lower than
white students (though this latter estimate is not
statistically significant).
The author of the above study attempted to
explore several potential reasons for this gap.
He posited that:
Minority students are less well prepared aca-
demically.
Minority students are subjected to intentional and
unintentional discrimination.
Minority students might have non-classroom
characteristics (work schedules, family respon-
sibilities, and the like) that impose demands upon
them that white students do not experience.
Minority students are not as comfortable as major-
ity, white students in distance learning situations
because they are not included as often in study
groups, chat room conversations, and bull sessions
where learning may occur. (Koch, 2005, p.15.)
Koch (2005) systematically attempted to ex-
plore all four of these possibilities and it appeared
that these students’ transfer grade point average
and high school average were better predictors
of success than race, meaning that the students’
preparation appeared to be more of a factor
than race in explaining the lower grades given
to African American students. The question of
whether various ethnic groups may have differ-
ing non-academic characteristics, for example,
differing work schedules, family responsibilities,
and the like, was another possible explanation. It
was found that
minority undergraduate students (especially
African-American) were more likely to be char-
acterized by one of nine “risk factors” that NCES
(National Center for Educational Statistics) be-
lieves contribute to lower academic performance
and drop outs. NCES cites risk factors such as a
student having dependents of children, being a
single parent, working full time, and so forth. The
typical white student had an average of 2.0 such
risk factors, while the typical African- American
student exhibited an average of 2.7 such risk fac-
tors (NCES, 2002). (Koch, 2005, p. 18)
Koch (2005) concluded that the only plausible
explanation related to race for the lowered grades
of African American students in this study were
the issues of “risk factors” above, as they were
able to rule out the other possible explanations.
1003
 Age, Race and Gender Issues Related to On-Line Learning
There was one final “confounding” factor – in-
terestingly, related to gender:
it is worth noting that the NCES study also found
that women undergraduate students had more risk
factors than men (2.2 versus 2.1, on average), but
nonetheless excel [over] men students in terms of
grade point average. (Koch, 2005, p. 18.)
As noted in the Koch study described above,
there is an additional complication involved in
research about race and distance learning. That
is the fact that “race” often includes a number
of subsets: African-American, Asian, Latino/a
(it should be noted that Latina/o and Asian are
actually “ethnic” or “geographic” categories,
not strictly “racial” categories). The Koch study,
while attempting to study race as one variable,
had collected data for African Americans, Asians,
and Asian Americans. In addition, Koch noted that
many underrepresented students did not indicate
their race/ethnicity when completing demographic
data. Another complicating factor is that of bi-
racial students who are forced to decide what
racial category to claim. Many factors, includ-
ing cultural issues, prior educational experience,
varying degrees of acceptance by the dominant
culture, etc., operate to make various racial/ethnic
groups different from others. Students in typical
distance learning classes who are used as subjects
in distance learning research usually consist of
small samples of individuals representing various
racial backgrounds in a class of primarily “white”
students, or they are homogeneous (e.g., a class at
a traditionally Black college). Thus obtaining data
on racial differences related to on-line learning is
problematic, at best.
In terms of enhancing on-line learning for
African Americans, a sense of “community” has
been found to contribute to their learning in an
on-line course. This general concept is also true
for Caucasians, however researchers need to fur-
ther explore what would make a classroom seem
“communal” for African-American students, and
1004
if those factors are different for African- American
and “white” students.
Rovai and Jordan (2004) suggest:
that the racial achievement gap that has been
widely reported in many traditional educational
programs also exists in fully on-line univer-
sity courses, and that this gap covaries with the
classroom community gap (i.e., as the gap in
classroom community gets smaller, so does the
gap in achievement).[In the study reported by
these authors] Black students possessed a weaker
sense of community and achieved lower grades
than their White peers in the predominantly White
on-line environment (59 percent White; 37 percent
Black; 4 percent other). (p. 3)
Related to this, Rovai and Jordan (2004) have
a positive suggestion:
Perhaps the achievement gap can be closed by
designing and presenting on-line and blended
courses that respond to the culturally-diverse
backgrounds of all students. Future research
should be directed at identifying collaborative
and facilitative on-line instructional strategies
that foster a sense of community and increase
academic achievement among culturally diverse
students. If we can determine how to increase
sense of community among minority students in
predominately White on-line learning environ-
ments, perhaps we can…promote high achieve-
ment among all students. (p. 3)
AGE
Age obviously is a variable which can be mea-
sured from birth to death, however when dealing
with on-line learning, the focus is generally upon
the age of students who comprise the “non tradi-
tional” segment of the education population. In
other words, this section is not examining age as
Age, Race and Gender Issues Related to On-Line Learning
a variable in the traditional undergraduate (young
adult) population.
The largest group of on line learners today are
nontraditional (e.g., 26 and over) students study-
ing part-time (Ausburn, 2003).
As noted at the beginning of this chapter, adult
students have been considered the most likely
beneficiary of the increased trend toward on-line
learning, because adult students are known to:
Sometimes be “place bound”;
Be working or involved with child care;
More likely to have a spouse or significant
other with whom they juggle time and logistic
constraints.
Bean and Metzner (1985) tell us that demo-
graphically adult students are more likely to be
married, and they tend to resemble the “at risk”
population of traditional students. They are more
likely to come from families of lower socioeco-
nomic status and lower parental educational at-
tainment than do traditional-age students.
Most studies of on-line learning have attempted
to report results which provide data related to the
age of students and their satisfaction or success.
One problem with these data have been that often
ALL (or nearly all) the students have been in their
20s, and an age difference, if found, would not be
very enlightening.
Wojciechowski and Palmer (2005) found the
age of the student to be of significance when
examined in relation to the grade received in an
on-line class (the sixth most significant of factors
studied). Overall, the younger the student, the
lower the grade earned. This supports previous
research that found age of an on-line student is
related to course completion. For example, Willis
(1992) found that students over 30 and less than
50 years of age are most likely to successfully
complete an on-line course, and Didia and Hasnat
(1998) found the older a student was, the better
she or he performed.
The Old Dominion study (Koch, 2005) cited
earlier included age as a variable as well, in terms of
success in a distance learning course. Koch found
The older the student, the better grade he/she was
likely to earn. Specifically, a student who is ten
years older than the average will earn a grade
that is .14 higher. Maturity appears to confer
advantages to distance learning students who
sometimes must be self motivated (Bisciglia and
Monk-Turner, 2002) and cannot always count
upon peer support. (2005, p. 14.)
This finding is consistent with the findings of
the NCES (2002) study of American undergradu-
ates (both on campus and distance) in 1999-2000,
which found that 42.6 percent of undergraduates
aged 18 or younger earned mostly Cs and Ds, or
lower, while only 23.1 percent of undergraduates
aged 30-39 earned average (C) or below average
(D and F) grades (NCES, 2002).
With overwhelming evidence (above) that age
assists students in achieving success in distance
learning courses, an obvious question follows:
What makes older students perform better in
distance learning courses? One possible explana-
tion follows.
Berenson et al. (2008) found that Emotional
Intelligence (EI) correlated highly with success in
an on-line course and cited references to indicate
that emotional intelligence increases with age –
thus age may (by providing greater emotional
intelligence) contribute to success in an on-line
course. As Berenson et al. (2008, p. 12) noted
The main finding of this study was that EI was the
primary predictor of academic success in on-line
courses, but the combination of EI and personality
served as a stronger predictor of on-line student
academic success. EI was directly associated with
GPA among on-line students.
The direct correlation between EI and age
was consistent with Goleman (1998) and Bar-On
(2006) who reported a positive correlation between
EI and age. That is, the older the participants, the
greater their emotional intelligence.
1005
 Age, Race and Gender Issues Related to On-Line Learning
Emotional intelligence has several, but related
definitions:
The awareness of and ability to manage one’s
emotions in a healthy and productive manner.
Emotional Intelligence (EI) … is based on the
notion that the ability … to understand their own
emotions, and those of the people they work with,
is the key to better … performance.
In the world of on-line learning, interacting in
virtual time and space with few or many individuals
of varying backgrounds and technological skills
dealing with all kinds of materials, some possibly
sensitive to some individuals, may very much im-
pact one’s emotions. Thus, the greater developed
one’s Emotional Intelligence (attributed to being
chronologically older), the greater the possibility
for success in on-line courses.
AGE AND GENDER CONNECTIONS
As noted earlier, Chyung (2007) explored both
gender and age in students taking an on-line
course. She found that younger male students had
the fewest number of posts in on-line discussions.
Older and female students had longer and more
elaborated posts. Roberts and Dyer (2005, p. 3)
indicate that in terms of attitudes toward distance
learning:
Age is also related to student attitudes in a dis-
tance-learning environment (Berg, 2001; Brouard,
1996; Irani, Scherler, Harrington, & Telg, 2001).
The influence of gender is inconclusive (Lim,
2001; Ory, Bullock, & Burnaska, 1997; Oxford
et al., 1993).
However, Welsh (2007) sought to identify
factors predicting success in a community college
on-line course. Her literature review pointed to age
and gender as useful variables. Her very thorough
multivariate analysis examined 20 variables for
predicting success in such a course and neither
age nor gender had statistically significant effects.
1006
A number of other studies have also found no
significant predictive power related to success in
distance learning by using either age or gender.
Koohang and Durante (2003) examined age
and gender as factors related to perceptions of
a Web-based learning assignment in a distance
learning course. They found no significant dif-
ference among levels of subjects’ age and their
perceptions. In terms of gender (male and female),
they found no significant difference either.
AGE and RACIAL DIFFERENCES
Age (perhaps the factor of “maturity”) seems to
help overcome some of the problems noted in the
previous section related to racial/ethnic differ-
ences. Only a few studies reported age and race
effects. However, of these, Tweedell (2000) found
that adult African-American and Hispanic students
persisted as well as adult European American
students in an accelerated program. Wlodkowski
et al. (2001) reported that
In a national study of college achievement, Oster-
lind (1997) found higher achievement in English
among students 25 years and older when compared
with students between18 and 24 years of age. The
difference was even more pronounced for colle-
gians over the age of 35, who scored highest of
all. Each older category achieved progressively
more gains. Thus, there is initial evidence that
lower income and ethnic/racial marginalization
may not be associated with lower persistence and
success for older college students. (Wlodkowski,
2001 p. 7)
Basically, this information leads one to believe
that, as the student ages, any deleterious effects of
race/ethnicity seem to disappear. This factor could
be due to the increased emotional intelligence
referred to above.
Age, Race and Gender Issues Related to On-Line Learning
CONCLUSION
The author (Koch, 2005) of a comprehensive study
of distance learning tells us that:
Distance learning now is a large, highly diverse
enterprise in the United States and involves
hundreds of thousands of students. NCES (2002)
estimated that 1.32 million U.S. undergraduates
were distance learning students in 1999-2000.
With some exceptions, we know the identity and
several relevant characteristics of these students.
Hence, one of our foremost empirical needs now
is straightforward---we must learn much more
about why students succeed and fail when they
undertake distance learning. (Koch 2005, p. 20.)
[Italics are the author’s.]
In this chapter we have presented data about
gender, race/ethnicity, and age and on-line/distance
learning. Given the inconclusiveness of some of
the data related to race/ethnicity and changing
demographics and emphases in the social sci-
ences, it may be productive, in future studies, to
look at social class as an additional significant
variable in students’ success/failure, satisfaction
and self-efficacy as well as the above factors. It
is no secret that students – regardless of color/
ethnicity and/or gender – in poorer neighbor-
hoods tend to have a lesser quality elementary and
secondary school experience than students from
more economically advantaged neighborhoods.
This poorer quality schooling experience, coupled
with related economic factors – having to work,
having parent(s) that work, etc., early in a child’s
schooling experience could lead to less success,
satisfaction and self-efficacy in on-line learning.
Also related to race, several possible “reasons”
for gaps in academic performance cited in the Old
Dominion Study (Koch, 2005) need to be critically
examined and related questions asked:
Some possible reasons:
Minority students are subjected to intentional
and unintentional discrimination
Minority students are not as comfortable as
majority, white students in distance learning
situations because they are not included as often
in study groups, chat room conversations, and
bull sessions where informal learning may occur.
(Koch, 2005, p.15.)
There is a related question:
• If, as has been suggested, some students do
not identify their race when surveyed, how
can either discrimination or exclusion be
claimed?
These “reasons” and related questions are
important and need to be carefully and thoroughly
investigated.
Related to age and gender, as Chyung (2007)
has pointed out
more research on age and gender differences in
academic on-line environments is needed to make
conclusive implications of the impact that age
and gender may have on adult learners’ on-line
behavior, self-efficacy, and academic performance
(p. 215).
While the studies cited above have provided
various findings, many other studies found “no
significance” when gender or race, or age and
on-line learning was being examined. This con-
clusion of “no significance” needs investigation.
Does this mean there really are no differences
related to on-line learning and gender or race or
age? Or does it mean that classical statistics may
not be the most useful tool by which to measure
significance in this case? Do we need to look
at significance using Wiseman’s (1974, p. 326)
paradigm: “Is it [the finding] significant because it
illustrates or reveals something of a more general
(and significant) nature about human behavior?”
The issue of experience and comfort with
technology may be VERY significant for those
people for whom that experience is lacking, even
if statistical tests show “no significance”. If even
1007
 Age, Race and Gender Issues Related to On-Line Learning
one student in an on-line course lacks experience
with the technology (i.e., hardware and software),
this will impact that student’s success, ability to
“belong” to the on-line community, and willing-
ness to become involved. These dynamics of
on-line learning may be important, even if not
statistically significant. Qualitative studies may
be more likely to reveal information of this nature.
The authors have found few examples of such
studies relating age, gender, or race with on-line
learning experiences.
Likewise, another factor must be taken into
consideration. One’s identity is not lived in
compartments. That is, one doesn’t simply have
gender, or simply have “race”, or simply have an
age. These aspects and other aspects of identity
intersect with one another. Hence, a single, twenty-
something, “white”, able-bodied male may have
very different experiences with on-learning than
a 50-something, Latina, working full-time – and
the difference with on-line learning may not be
able to be attributed to just age, or just race or
ethnicity, or just labor market status.
Not only should future studies address ap-
propriate use of technology and pedagogy but
future studies also need to address age, gender,
race and social class related to distance learning
and also the intersections of identities, as well as
the meaning(s) of “significance” (in Wiseman’s
interpretation, as mentioned earlier) in order to
yield more meaningful information related to these
areas and distance/on-line learning.
Having said that, Flowers et al. (2008, p. 5)
reinforce Chyung’s (2007) points, and further
suggest:
future research on this topic should continue to
focus on student-centered investigations of dis-
tance education that illustrate the appropriate
use of technology and pedagogy and how the two
can be more advantageous and enhance student
satisfaction (Hara & Kling, 2000).
1008
Related to the need for research into appropri-
ate use of technology and pedagogy, perhaps, it
would be more fruitful to look at the qualities set
forth for quality teaching of adults (andragogy)
rather than the historical pedagogy. For while
the characteristics of andragogy as described
by Kelly (2006) are indeed characteristics of
the adult (based on assumptions and findings
related to those assumptions), successful on-line
learner, these characteristics may also be related
to other aspects of identity and distance learning.
Perhaps we need to investigate gender and race/
ethnicity, age and their intersections in light of
these factors also:
Concept of the learner: is he/she always in-
creasingly self directed?
Role of the teacher: Is this role (Guide and
facilitator) always what is needed?
Role of the learner’s prior experiences: Do we
need to provide some interventions so students
whose backgrounds differ from the “mainstream”
can provide a rich resource for learning (self and
others)?
Readiness to learn: Are all students (based
on race, age, gender) equally “ready” to learn?
develops out of life tasks and problems
Orientation to learning: Are all these learners
able to be on task or problem centered?
Motivation: Are there different ways to enhance
internal motivation and curiosity depending on
race, gender and age? (Adapted from Kelly (2006)
Italicized information added by the authors)
Germain-Rutherford & Kerr (2008) provide
another useful perspective related to the above.
Their thought-provoking work makes it clear
that various cultural groups may have different
preferences for various features of instructional
design. For example, Asian students tend to prefer
a more hierarchical learning setting, in which
the instructor takes more control of the learning.
Thus, a distance course designed with principles
which have been accepted in the United States
as “good andragogical practice” would make a
distance learning course culturally DIFFICULT
Age, Race and Gender Issues Related to On-Line Learning
for students who prefer the teacher to take an
authoritarian role. Germain-Rutherford & Kerr
(2008, p. 10) also quote from Tylee (2002) who
proposed a set of questions for the instructional
designer:
• What degree of personal interaction should
be developed?
• What motivational aspects should be
included?
• What balance should there be between group
and individual opinions?
• How will the needs of groups which are not
comfortable with uncertainty be addressed?
• Will learning emphasize individual or group
work?
• How should social and contextual dimen-
sions be addressed?
• Does the nature of the work promote a
critical, conventional or unconventional
approach?
• Is the teaching style didactic or participatory?
• How will the issue of different learning
styles of learners with culturally different
backgrounds be addressed?
• Is it preferable to develop different in-
terfaces for those with different cultural
backgrounds?
• Should different learning approaches be
offered to cater to different learning styles?
• Should there be a choice of evaluative activi-
ties that address cultural differences?
It is clear that on-line learning in all of its varia-
tions is here to stay. Educators need to continue
careful investigation into the various possible
factors related to success in on-line environments,
including personal characteristics such as gender,
race, ethnicity, age, social class and their intersec-
tions as well as their connections to andragogical/
pedagogical design of on-line courses – perhaps
specifically adapted to meet the needs of various
specific groups of learners.
REFERENCES
Anderson, M. L., & Collins, P. H. (2010). Race,
class, and gender: An anthology (7th ed.). Bel-
mont, CA: Wadsworth.
Ausburn, L. J. (2003). Beyond the inflection point:
The softer side of learning’s new digital landscape.
Scholar-Practitioner Quarterly, 2(1), 79–97.
Bandura, A. (1994). Self-efficacy . In Ramach-
audran, V. S. (Ed.), Encyclopedia of human behav-
ior (Vol. 4, pp. 71–81). New York: Academic Press.
Barrett, E., & Lally, V. (1999). Gender differ-
ences in an on-line learning environment. Jour-
nal of Computer Assisted Learning, 15, 48–60.
doi:10.1046/j.1365-2729.1999.151075.x
Bean, J. P., & Metzner, B. (1985). A conceptual
model of nontraditional undergraduate. student
attrition. Review of Educational Research, 55(4),
485–540.
Berenson, R., Boyles, G., & Weaver, A. (2008).
Emotional intelligence as a predictor of success
in online learning. The International Review of
Research in Open and Distance Learning [On-
line] 9,(2). Retrieved November 27, 2009, from
http://www.irrodl.org/index.php/irrodl/article/
view/385/1049
Bisciglia, M., & Monk-Turner, E. (2002). Differ-
ences in attitudes between on-site and distance-site
students in group teleconference courses. Ameri-
can Journal of Distance Education, 16(1), 37–52.
doi:10.1207/S15389286AJDE1601_4
Chyung, S. Y. (2007). Age and gender differences
in online behavior, self-efficacy, and academic
performance. The Quarterly Review of Distance
Education, 8(3), 213–222.
Clark, C., & Gorski, P. (2001). Multicultural
education and the digital divide: Focus on race,
language, socioeconomic class, gender, and dis-
ability. Multicultural Perspectives, 3(3), 39–44.
doi:10.1207/S15327892MCP0303_7
1009
 Age, Race and Gender Issues Related to On-Line Learning
Cross, K. P. (1981). Adults as learners: Increas-
ing participation and facilitating learning. San
Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Cuthrell, K., & Lyon, A. (2007). Instructional
strategies: What do online students prefer? Journal
of Online Learning and Teaching, 3(4). Retrieved
September 10, 2009, fromhttp://jolt.merlot.org/
vol3no4/cuthrell.htm
Didia, D., & Hasnat, B. (1998). The determinants
of performance in the university introductory fi-
nance course. Financial Practice and Education,
8(1), 102–107.
Diaz, D. P. (2002, May/June). Online drop rates
revisited. The technology Source. Retrieved Sep-
tember 12, 2009, from http://mivu.org/default.
asp?show=article&id=981
Filkins, J., Kehoe, L., & McLaughlin, G. W.
(2001). Retention research: Issues in comparative
analysis. Retrieved November 28, 2009, from
http://oipr.depaul.edu/open/general/air_paper_01.
doc
Flowers, L. A., Moore, J. L., III, & Flowers, L.
O. (2008). African American students’ satisfac-
tion with distance education courses. Winter
2008, 9(3). Retrieved October 24, 2009, from
http://studentaffairs.com/ejournal/Winter_2008/
AfricanAmericanStudents.html
Frankola, K. (2001). Why online learners drop
out. Workforce, 80, 53–58.
Germain-Rutherford, A., & Kerr, B. (2008). An
inclusive approach to online learning environ-
ments: Models and resources. The Turkish Online
Journal of Distance Education, 9(2), 64–85.
Hara, N., & Kling, R. (2000). Students’ distress
with a web-based distance education course: An
ethnographic study of participants’ experiences.
Information Communication and Society, 3(4),
557–579. doi:10.1080/13691180010002297
1010
Hargittai, E., & Shafer, S. (2006). Differences
in actual and perceived online skills: The role of
gender. Social Science Quarterly, 87(2), 433–448.
doi:10.1111/j.1540-6237.2006.00389.x
Kelly, D., & Diana, K. (2006). Adult learners:
Characteristics, theories, motivations, learning
environment. Retrieved December 4, 2008, from
http://www.dit.ie/media/documents/lifelong-
learning/adlearn_chars.doc
Koch, J. (2005). Does distance learning work?
A large sample, control group study of student
success in distance learning. e-jist (E-journal of
instructional science and technology), 8(1), 1-21
(March 2005). Retrieved December 20, 2009,
from http://www.ascilite.org.au/ajet/e-jist/docs/
vol8_no1/fullpapers/James.Koch.pdf
Koohang, A., & Durante, A. (2003). Learners’ per-
ceptions toward the web-based distance learning
activities/assignments portion of an undergraduate
hybrid instructional model. Journal of Informa-
tion Technology Education, 2,105-13. Retrieved
September 14, 2009, from http://informingscience.
org/jite/documents/Vol2/v2p105-113-78.pdf
Lorber, J., & Farrell, S. (Eds.). (1991). The social
construction of gender. Newbury Park: Sage.
McSporran, M., & Young, S. (2001). Does gen-
der matter in online learning? ALT-J, 9(2), 3–15.
doi:10.1080/0968776010090202
National Center for Educational Statistics. (2002).
The condition of education. Washington, D.C.:
U.S. Dept. of Education, National Center for
Educational Statistics.
Ono, H., & Zavodny, M. (2003). Gender and the
internet. Social Science Quarterly, 84(1), 111–121.
doi:10.1111/1540-6237.t01-1-8401007
Proost, K., & Elen, J. (1997). Effects of gender
on perceptions of and preference for telematic
learning environments. Journal of Research on
Computing in Education, 29(4), 370–385.
Age, Race and Gender Issues Related to On-Line Learning
Roberts, T. G., & Dyer, J. (2005). The influ-
ence of learning styles on student attitudes and
achievement when an illustrated web lecture is
used in an online learning environment. Journal
of Agricultural Education, 46(2), 1–11.
Rothenberg, P. S. (2010). Race,class and gender
in the United States (8th ed.). New York: Worth.
Rovai, A., & Baker, J. D. (2005). Gender differ-
ences in online learning: Sense of community,
perceived learning, and interpersonal interac-
tions. Quarterly Review of Distance Education,
6(1), 31–44.
Rovai, A., & Jordan, H. (2004). Authors’ response
to reviewer commentary by Eastmond. The Inter-
national Review of Research in Open and Distance
Learning, 5(2). Retrieved November 28, 2009,
from http://www.irrodl.org/index.php/irrodl
Rovai, A. P., & Ponton, M. K. (2005). An examina-
tion of sense of classroom community and learning
among African American and Caucasian gradu-
ate students. Journal of Asynchronous Learning
Networks, 9(3), 77–92.
Steward, R. J., Gimenez, M., & Jackson, J. D.
(1995). A study of personal preferences of suc-
cessful university students as related to race,
ethnicity, and sex. Journal of College Student
Development, 36, 123–131.
Sullivan, P. (2001). Gender differences and
the online classroom: Male and female college
students evaluate their experiences. Community
College Journal of Research and Practice, 25(10),
805–818. doi:10.1080/106689201753235930
Tweedell, C. B. (2000). Retention in accelerated
degree completion programs. Proceedings of the
National Conference of the Adult Higher Educa-
tion Alliance (pp. 38-46). Chicago, October 4-7,
2000. Retrieved December 18, 2009, from http://
www.ahea.org/conference/proceedings/2000.pdf
Tylee, J. (2002). Cultural issues and the online
environment. Australian Society for Educational
Technology. International Education and Tech-
nology Conference. RetrievedAug.31, 2007, from
http://www.csu.edu.au/division/landt/resources/
documents/cultural_issues.pdf
Ware, M. (2010). Learning contracts as part of
instructional design and evaluation . In Wang, V.
C. X. (Ed.), Assessment and evaluation of adult
learning in career and technical Education (pp.
107–128). Hangzhou, China and Hershey, PA:
ZUP and Information Science Reference.
Ware, M. C., & Stuck, M. F. (1985). Sex-Role
Messages vis-a-vis Microcomputer Use: A Look
at the Pictures. Sex Roles, 13, 3–4. doi:10.1007/
BF00287911
Welsh, J. B. (2007). Identifying factors that predict
student success in a community college online
distance learning course. Dissertation Prepared
for the Ed.D. Degree, University of North Texas.
Willis, B. (1992). Effective distance educa-
tion: A primer for faculty and administrators.
(Monograph Series in Distance Education, No.
2). Fairbanks: University of Alaska State Wide.
Wiseman, J. (1974). The research web. Urban
Life and Culture, 3(3), 317–328.
Wlodkowski, R., Mauldin, J., & Gahn, S. (2001).
Learning in the fast lane from lumina new agenda
series. The center for the study of accelerated
learning, school for professional studies . Regis
University, 4(1), 1–50.
Wojciechowski, A., & Palmer, L. (2005). Indi-
vidual student characteristics: Can any be predic-
tors of success in online classes? Online Journal
of Distance Learning Administration, VIII(II).
1011
 Age, Race and Gender Issues Related to On-Line Learning
KEY TERMS AND DEFINITIONS
Adult Learners: (also sometimes called “non-
traditional adult students”) – refers to students who
are beyond the traditional age of formal schooling
(e.g., usually over 26 years of age).
Andragogy: Qualities or characteristics of
effective education for adults (often contrasted
with pedagogy – see below).
Emotional Intelligence: The awareness of and
ability to manage one’s emotions in a healthy and
productive manner.
Gender: A social construction of the expec-
tations, rights and privileges that societies have
decided that females and males should follow.
Hybrid or Blended Courses: Distance learn-
ing courses which have a face-to-face component
(e.g., some classes meet together; others are
conducted on line).
1012
Mobile Learning Technologies: the use of
PDAs, cell phones and other mobile devices in
the design and use of distance learning courses.
Pedagogy: Effective techniques for teaching
individuals who are “traditionally aged” students
(e.g., pre-kindergarten through college age).
Race: A social construction of identity based
loosely on external characteristics such as skin
color, characteristics of one’s hair, and facial
features.
Racism: The “ideology that all members of
each racial group possess characteristics or abili-
ties specific to that race, especially to distinguish
it as being either superior or inferior to another
racial group.”
Self-Efficacy: The perception of an individual
that he/she would have the capability to perform
in a way which would change the outcome of
some event, in the case of an on-line course, the
knowledge gained and the grade earned.
 1013

Chapter 62
Virtually Onboarding
and Supporting Adult
Students in College Using
Web 2.0 Technologies
Pamela M. Golubski
Carnegie Mellon University, USA

ABSTRACT
The transition to college is a difficult time for most students. Students experience changes in interpersonal
and social adjustment, academic and career concerns, as well as personal change (Bishop, Gallagher,
& Cohen, 2000). For adult learners this transition can be further complicated by working full-time and
family responsibilities. Thus, failure of any student to not successfully adjust and acclimate into his or
her new college community can greatly affect the student’s persistence and academic success (Tinto,
1993). While most colleges offer a short term in-person orientation to help new traditional-aged students
integrate into a college campus, adult students are often left without an option. Though, an alternative
method of orienting, acclimating, and supporting adult learners might be realized through the use of
virtual and Web 2.0 technologies. Through this method, college staff and faculty members can onboard
adult students to campus by virtually interacting, advising, communicating, and supporting them.
Additionally, a virtual onboarding program can encourage adults to socialize with their peers and be
acclimated to campus support services and offices, in an effort to increase a student’s social integration
and interaction, academic preparation and success, and college adjustment.

INTRODUCTION Statistics, 2009). The failure to retain students

Today, approximately 58 percent of students who
enter a four-year institution will persist to earn
bachelor degrees within six years (U.S. Depart-
ment of Education, National Center for Education
DOI: 10.4018/978-1-61692-906-0.ch062
is often attributed to the lack of opportunities
to encourage and allow students to successfully
adjust and acclimate into their college community,
regardless if it is a brick and mortar or a virtual
campus (Tinto, 1993).
While most colleges offer a short term in-person
orientation in an effort to help new traditional-aged
 Virtually Onboarding and Supporting Adult Students in College Using Web 2.0 Technologies
students adjust, integrate, and orient into college;
adult learners are often left out of the equation.
The rational might be that adult students do not
have the time to commit to attending an in-person
orientation due to balancing lives complicated by
full-time employment and families. However, in an
effort to serve traditional-aged students and adult
learners alike, an alternative method to in-person
orientation and student support services might be
realized by utilizing virtual and Web 2.0 technolo-
gies. Orientation is essential in that it provides
students with social interaction and integration
between classmates, staff and faculty members,
as well as introduces students to available student
support offices and services.
ACCLIMATION PROCESS
Orientation of Students:
A College Perspective
In an effort to better understand why and how adults
can be virtually onboarded to college, traditional
face-to-face orientation methods must be under-
stood from a college perspective. It is imperative
that institutions of higher education orient new
students, regardless of age, to life and services
on campus and in the classroom. New student
orientation is a set of activities with the intended
purpose of helping student successfully adjust
and acclimate to college. Orientation links the life
experienced before college with what life will be
like as a student (Gordon & Grites, 1984). The
specific purposes of orientation include: (1) high-
lighting skills necessary for students to conquer
the difficult college transition, (2) assisting with
academic adjustment, (3) encouraging personal
adjustment, commitment, and development, (4)
helping families understand the challenges and
responsiblities the student will face, (5) creating
a sense of community, (6) integrating the student
into the campus culture, (7) aiding in providing
student with information about the college cam-
1014
pus, student services, activities, policies, and cur-
riculum, and (8) providing social interaction with
peers, staff, and faculty members (Pascarella &
Terenzini, 2005; Perigo & Upcraft, 1989; Twale,
1989). Orientation is often the first face-to-face
interaction a new college student will have with
the institution upon accepting admission, hence
why orientation programs are ranked as the third
most successful retention initiative (Beal & Noel,
1980).
The first one-day orientation program was
introduced in 1888 at Boston University. It wasn’t
until 1923, that the University of Maine established
the first week-long orientation, which incorporated
social activities, counseling, and placement test-
ing. Attrition has been a strategic goal of college
administrators since the 1970’s, and orientation
is viewed as a campus wide integrated event for
increasing retention by educating new students
about how to experience academic, personal, and
social success in college (Upcraft & Farnsworth,
1984).
At most institutions, student orientation takes
place prior to the beginning of the fall semester
through an in-person venue. Though, in recent
years some colleges have tried to implement
student orientation via an online format, by using
Learning Management Systems (LMS) like Black-
board, eCollege, or Moodle. During the summer
students are enrolled in an online orientation course
where various aspects of the college culture, his-
tory, curriculum, and services are incorporated into
weekly lessons and/or threaded discussions. Upon
completion, a student’s knowledge is tested and
a specific score must be earned for the student to
officially pass orientation (Miller & Myron, 2003).
Orientation programs are also used to create
commitment and affinity to an institution after a
student accepts admission, but before he/she starts
classes. Orientation has the primary purpose of
better preparing student to be successful in college,
thus increasing matriculation and reducing the
number of students withdrawing (Perigo & Up-
craft, 1989; Twale, 1989; Upcraft & Farnsworth,
Virtually Onboarding and Supporting Adult Students in College Using Web 2.0 Technologies
1984). Stripling and Hinck’s (1993) research dis-
covered that 90 percent of new students thought
orientation was a worthwhile endeavor.
While colleges have utilized in-person methods
of orienting new students since the late 1800’s,
corporations may have created the framework for
virtually orienting new employees. Orientation in
the corporate world is not a new concept and is
termed onboarding. The success that corporation
have experienced with online orientation, may
lead colleges to begin to consider offering virtual
orientation programs to new students. These on-
boarding initiatives would be especially beneficial
for adults whose lives are complicated by work
schedules and family commitments.
Onboarding New Employees:
A Corporation Perspective
The American Society of Training and Develop-
ment (ASTD) estimated that for-profit businesses
spend $79.75 billion annually on internal training
and onboarding initiatives (Heathfield, 2008).
New employees decide within the first six months
if they will or will not stay in that position (Butler,
2008), just as new students are deciding if the col-
lege they chose to attend is right for them (Tinto,
1993). Corporate onboarding programs include
individualized training, assimilation, resources,
support, acclimation, integration, and acceleration
of a new employee into the company’s culture
and the employee’s new position. Onboarding
programs are usually interactive, event-based, col-
laborative, and offer experiential ways to introduce
new employees to areas such as co-workers, the
company’s services, products, benefits, strategic
plan, mission, philosophy and/or core values
(Boehle, 2008; Brodie, 2005). The overall mis-
sion of onboarding employees is to increase the
new hire’s effectiveness, retention, engagement,
and satisfaction while decreasing anxiety and
turnover (Friedman, 2006). Research found that
employees who participated in an onboarding
program were 69 percent more likely to be at the
same company three years later compared to em-
ployees who were not exposed to an onboarding
initiative (Brodie, 2005).
Onboarding programs can begin the first day
on the job and extend through the first year of
employment. Reese (2005) determined that it takes
an average of 30 to 180 days for an employee to
reach a point in which he/she can actively perform
and be fully engaged in a company and his/her
position. During the first 30 to 120 days, it is criti-
cal that a new hire be integrated into his/her peer
group (Reese, 2005). Social networking sites are
being used to acquaint new employees. Companies
such as MentorScout have created software that
allows current employees to create and post pro-
files, much like Facebook, as an avenue for new
employees to get to know their co-workers and
supervisors. These profiles contain areas such as
interests, education, current projects, hobbies, and
family (Social networking: The newest employee
engagement tool, 2007).
Brown (2008) discovered that the primary
reason a new employee left a position was that
he/she did not feel welcomed as a member of the
team or organization. The lack of social integration
into a college community was also found to be
a major reason why students left college (Tinto,
1993). In an effort to assist employees’ acclimate
into a company, the Corporate Leadership Council
stated that onboarding should involve 40 percent
support services and 60 percent team building
and social engagement (Friedman, 2006). To go
one step further, some companies are taking the
“day zero” approach to orienting new employees.
This method of onboarding occurs immediately
after an employee accepts a position but before
he/she starts and arrives at the worksite (Butler,
2008). The “day zero” approach is similar to pre-
orientation which is used in higher education.
Pre-orientation occurs in the summer before a
student starts classes (Boehle, 2008). The “day
zero” approach usually opts to utilize an online
method of distributing information. Accounting
giant PricewaterhouseCoopers launched “PwC
1015
 Virtually Onboarding and Supporting Adult Students in College Using Web 2.0 Technologies
Portal” a web-based onboarding interface in Janu-
ary 2007. The system acts as a self-service support
in which new employees can learn about PwC
business, culture, and values. The portal includes
video, e-learning, and e-resources (Boehle, 2008).
Finally, when a new hire resigns from a com-
pany or a student leaves an institution, there is a
financial loss experienced in relation to recruit-
ing time, training costs, and/or tuition dollars.
Therefore, it is evident that retention of students
and employees is a complex challenge for higher
education and corporations alike. Vincent Tinto’s
Model of Student Departure serves as the founda-
tion theory for administrators in higher education
to better understand the attrition of college stu-
dents and how to better combine orientation and
onboarding into one initiative.
RETENTION IN HIGHER EDUCATION
Tinto’s Model of Student Departure
Tinto’s (1975, 1987, 1993) Model of Student
Departure has been the theoretical foundation
for retention research in higher education. Tinto’s
model views student departure as complex pro-
cesses between the individual and the institution
as a result of the degree of involvement, academic
and social integration that a student experiences
while at college. Tinto’s Model of Student De-
parture analyzes the complex relationship that
occurs between the student and the institution
that results in early departure. Tinto discovered
that a student’s departure from an institution was
due to five critical factors that include (1) a lack
of personal commitment, (2) time and resource
adjustment issues, (3) the lack of a social network
or social integration, (4) academic difficulty, and
(5) the lack of clear academic and career goals
(Tinto, 1975, 1993).
What makes Tinto’s model unique is that most
other retention models only focused on one or
two factors that contributed to student attrition.
1016
In past research, when students left an institution
of higher education, these students were referred
to as “dropouts” or “failures”. In terming students
“dropout” or “failures”, it assumed that the student
did not possess the capabilities or characteristics
to succeed in college (Tinto, 1993). Currently,
students who leave an institution are viewed from
an attrition standpoint. Students who voluntarily
leave college should not be considered academic
failures (Tinto, 1975, 1987, 1993). In an effort to
better understand student departure, Tinto’s (1993)
model further divides the causes of departure into
three critical areas: (1) individual characteristics
prior to entering college, (2) the experiences of
the individual upon entry into the college com-
munity, and (3) the effect of external forces that
hinder the college experience.
(1) Individual characteristics include intention
and commitment towards earning the degree and
learning. Intention is the individual’s personal
goals that guide his/her related educational activity.
According to Tinto, the higher the educational goal,
the more likely the student will persist. Commit-
ment is the level of motivation that influences a
student’s drive to complete a degree program in
that commitment “not only help set the boundaries
of individual attainment but also serve to color
the character of individual experiences within the
institution following entry” (Tinto, 1993, p. 37).
(2) In the college experiences critical area,
Tinto included four clusters of occurrences or
circumstances that effect the student’s decision
to either depart or remain enrolled at a college.
These clusters were entitled (a) adjustment, (b)
difficulty, (c) incongruence, and (d) isolation and
describe how the individual interacts within the
institutional environment. Adjustment (a) is the
process of transitioning from one environment to
another, such as being a stay at mother to being a
full-time college student. The transition to college
is difficult for most new students regardless of age
and assistance and support during this transitional
time is important to combat attrition.
Virtually Onboarding and Supporting Adult Students in College Using Web 2.0 Technologies
During the difficulty (b) cluster, a student might
withdrawal if he/she can’t meet minimal academic
standards/requirements. Therefore, students must
receive assistance in a timely manner when ex-
periencing academic difficulty at college (Tinto,
1993). For an adult student the difficulty cluster
would further be complicated if tutoring was only
available during the traditional, weekday (9 am to
5 pm) time frame when many adult students are
working full-time jobs. Colleges would need to
offer support services during non-traditional hours
such as evening and weekends. Tinto claimed that
the difficulty cluster affects all students not just
disadvantaged or minority students (Tinto, 1993).
Incongruence (c) is the third cluster and refers
to the lack of fit between the needs, interests, and/
or preferences of an individual and the higher
education institution. This lack of fit could range
from academic, social, or community needs. When
a student experiences incongruence, he/she doesn’t
feel a sense of belonging to the college commu-
nity. This need for belonging can be explained
by referring to Maslow’s (1943) hierarchical
theory. Maslow states that all people have five
basic needs. These needs include physiological
(oxygen, food, and water, safety needs (security),
love, affection, and belongingness (giving and
receiving love, affection and the sense of belong-
ing), esteem (respect and confidence, from both
self and others), and self-actualization (need to
be and do what is desired). The hierarchy theory
is represented as a pyramid, where lowest basic
physiological needs are at the bottom and the
need for self-actualization is at the top. Lack of
advancement in the hierarchical pyramid is often
experienced by students during their first year in
college. When viewing incongruence in a social
realm, the issue is usually reflected in peer rela-
tionships where the student doesn’t feel his/her
values and interests match those of classmates.
This can be extremely challenging when adult
learners are in courses where the enrollment is
primary traditional-aged students.
The final cluster is isolation (d). Isolation
occurs when a student cannot establish himself/
herself into a social network and lacks the “per-
sonal bonds that are the basis for membership in
the communities of the institution” (Tinto, 1993,
p. 56). The absence of meaningful relationship
with peers and other institution staff or faculty
members often contributes to a sense of isolation,
thus potentially leading to departure.
The third (3) cause of student departure is due to
the influence of external forces that interfere with
the student’s college experience. Tinto identified
these as competing obligations and multiple roles
that can contribute to early withdrawal decisions.
This can range from a student that is caring for
small children to a student who has to work full-
time to finance his/her education. External forces
causes according to Tinto are most often experi-
enced by students who do not reside on campus,
such as adult students. This is due to these students
being more susceptible to external forces through
the actions or circumstances of family, work, and
the community in which they reside (Tinto, 1993).
These external forces can and do often create
threats to students’ educational interests.
Lastly, Tinto never asserts that if colleges suc-
cessfully integrate and involve students academi-
cally and socially that they won’t leave. He does
confirm that organized integration into a campus
community does lead to lower student departure
rates. It must be noted that only approximately 15
percent of students leave college due to academic
dismissal, with the majority departing voluntarily
(Tinto, 1993). This being stated, it is crucial that
colleges design initiatives and programming that
will help students orient socially, emotionally,
and academically into college and the educational
experience.
While most colleges believe orientation serves
this purpose, adult students are often left to fend
for themselves. Adult students are required to
perform a self-directed orientation which includes
socialization, dealing with transition issues, and
becoming acquainted with available student
1017
 Virtually Onboarding and Supporting Adult Students in College Using Web 2.0 Technologies
support services on their own such as tutoring,
academic and career advising, and financial aid.
Consequently, institutions need to offer a form of
orientation to adult learners. A perfect alternative
might be realized by utilizing virtual and Web
2.0 technologies. Before Web 2.0 technologies
can be explored as an onboarding alternative it is
first important to understand transition theory and
socialization that occurs during college.
TRANSITION TO COLLEGE
Schlossberg’s Transition Theory
All students experience some form of positive and
negative transition as they begin college. Whether
a student is starting college for the first time as
an adult or is going back after an extended time
of raising a family, higher education institutions
have the responsibility of ensuring all students are
offered orientation programming. This orienta-
tion should encourage and empower students to
successful transition into the college community,
academically, and socially (Schlossberg, 1984).
Schlossberg (1984) researched how transition
affects a person’s ability to adapt to a changing
environment. Transition is defined by Schlossberg
(1984) as “any event or nonevent that results in
change in relationships, routines, assumptions,
and/or roles within the settings of self, work, fam-
ily, health, and/or economics” (p. 43). According
to Schlossberg, it is important to understand the
transition as it relates to a particular individual,
which includes the type, context, and impact of
the change. The impact that the transition has on
the individual determines the degree to which the
change/transition alters the individual’s daily life.
With adult learners this transition could cause
extreme challenges and changes. Schlossberg
(1984) found that from the day a student accepts
admission into a college, he or she begins to
experience change. This could include arranging
for babysitting of children while the student is
1018
at class to changing a work schedule to accom-
modate classes. Schlossberg (1984) Transition
Theory accounts for four key factors that either
strengthen or weaken the ability for a student to
cope with the college transition. Those four factors
are: situation, self, social support, and strategies,
commonly referred to as the “four S’s. College
administrators need to help students evaluate the
four S’s by individually questioning students. The
questions in each factor include, (1) Situation:
What kind of transition is it? Is the situation per-
ceived as positive, negative, expected, unexpected,
desired, or dreaded? Did the transition come at
the worst or best time possible? Is it voluntary or
imposed? Is the student at the beginning, middle,
or end of the transition? (2) Self: What kind of
strengths and weaknesses does the student bring
to the situation? What is the person’s previous
experience in making a similar transition? Does
he or she believe there are options? Is he or she
optimistic and able to deal with ambiguity? (3)
Social Support: Are there people who are likely to
help or hinder the student in getting through the
transition? Does the student have support from
family, friends, co-workers, and supervisors? In
what ways do those people give support? In what
ways do people hinder the student’s efforts to
change? Discovering the answers to how adults
answer the questions regarding situation, self,
and social support can also help insure that col-
leges better prepare and educate adult students
for the transition to college through developing
specialized onboarding programs. The fourth “S”
in Schlossberg (1984) Transition Theory includes
the strategies stage. Upon locating answering
to situation, self, and social support, during the
strategies stage, specialized initiatives must be
designed and implemented to help students cope
with transition issues (Schlossberg, 1984). An
admission counselor, academic advisor, and/or
staff support member can work closely with an
adult student to develop a personal action plan
in an effort to ensure the student takes advantage
Virtually Onboarding and Supporting Adult Students in College Using Web 2.0 Technologies
of all available support serves and is prepared to
combat any challenges that may arise.
Schlossberg (1984) also concluded that stu-
dents need to be supported during all stages of
transition to help eliminate barriers that may
place a barrier between the student and success.
Therefore, colleges must offer support services
and specialized programming to assist all students
during this transition, not only the traditional-aged
students residing on campus in resident halls.
Lastly, administrators, academic advisors, and
staff members must be educated and possess a
clear understanding of how college transition may
impact and affect all students, traditional-aged and
adult students alike. A component of the college
transition includes socialization interaction and
integration.
SOCIALIZATION INTERACTION
AND INTEGRATION
Braxton and Lee (2005) have described college
social integration as the harmonious relationship
between a student and the social system within an
institution of higher education. If a student doesn’t
successfully become integrated into a college’s
social system, there is an increased risk of attrition
(Bean, 2005). It only seems logical that student
persistence researchers have identified social inte-
gration and friendship support as imperative fac-
tors that contribute to students’ academic success
and retention (Astin, 1984; Light, 2001; Pascarella
& Terenzini, 2005; Schlossberg, 1989; Spady,
1971; Tinto, 1975, 1987, 1993). During college,
a student’s peer interactions in some cases have a
greater influence on a student’s college experience
than his/her classroom experience (Astin, 1993;
Terenzini, Springer, Yaeger, Pascarelle, & Nora,
1996). For example, Strage (2000) discovered that
the development of positive relationships with
peers accounted for higher levels of confidence
in students regarding their ability to succeed in
college. In addition, through regression analysis,
Upcraft and Gardner (1989) identified that rela-
tionships with peers during college was a valid
predictor of both student success and retention.
According to Bauer and Liang (2003), de-
veloping social relationships is one of the three
most important aspects that can help ease the
transition into college. Social interaction involves
sharing interests, experiences, activities, and
conversations. In a world of technology, virtual
conversations are sometimes the preferred way
for students to interact, and might be especially
necessary for adults commuting to campus and
working full-time jobs. Research has found that
students who live on campus in residential halls
feel more socially and academically connected to
campus (Blimling, 1993). Therefore, it becomes
even more important for adults students, who do
not reside on campus, to be provided with those
same social interactions and opportunities. In an
effort to better serve adult learners, student ser-
vices could invoke a virtual option of socializing,
acclimating, and supporting this non-traditional
population of students.
VIRTUAL STUDENT
SUPPORT SERVICES
More often than not, student support services
have been designed with the focus of success-
fully serving the traditional-aged student, who
resides on campus and attends a brick and mortar
campus (Gaide, 2005). As a result, student ser-
vices are often ineffective and underdeveloped
for other student populations, such as adult or
distant learners (Yalama & Aydin, 2004). Most
college administrators overlook the need to offer
support services to adults, including changes such
as being open in the evenings and/or weekends.
Secondly, many student support offices have
not fully integrated into the concept of utilizing
Web 2.0 technologies. Therefore, to better serve
adult students, colleges need to add interactive
options to services, such as Instant Messaging,
1019
 Virtually Onboarding and Supporting Adult Students in College Using Web 2.0 Technologies
video conferencing, and digital document sharing.
Professional staff members must be available to
work, interact, and communicate will all students
and for many adults this might best occur through
a virtual venue (Gaide, 2005; Reeves, Herrington,
& Oliver, 2004; Vail, 2006). Adult and distant
learners will change the genre of support services,
as professionals will need to work non-traditional
hours, while learning how to make use of and
implement various technologies. Additionally,
college administrators will have to examine and
revise current office policies, procedures, strate-
gic plans, and mission statements in an effort to
include more virtual initiatives (Meyer, 2002). In
a virtual world adult learners can also experience
orientation, socialization, and acclimation to col-
lege through Web 2.0 technologies like Facebook,
Google Groups and Twitter.
VIRTUAL AND WEB 2.0
TECHNOLOGIES
Web 2.0
Web 2.0 or the read/write Web is the Internet’s
second generation of innovative applications and
networks termed by Timothy O’Reilly in 2004.
Web 2.0 uses World Wide Web technology and
web design to allow for the facilitation of creative
content, information sharing, and collaboration
among users (Maloney, 2007). Users are permit-
ted to write and publish to the Web 2.0 without
possessing any specialized technological skills. In
the past extensive design and programming experi-
ence was necessary to create a simple web page
(Hauser, 2007). However, Web 2.0 offers some
unique differences in that it allows for collabora-
tive knowledge over static information, users apply
knowledge management over content manage-
ment, and social interaction over isolated surfing
(Maloney, 2007). The most popular technologies
associated with this new second generation of the
Web are wikis, weblogs, podcasting, video and
1020
audio sharing, social networking, social tagging
(folksonomies), social bookmarking, and RSS
(real simple syndication) feeds (Coombs, 2007).
These technologies are all user-centered, user-
generated, and user-controlled (Gooding, 2008).
Students can benefit from the Web 2.0 because it
encourages an active, participatory role for users.
The challenge for colleges is to determine how
to incorporate the paradigm-altering virtual and
Web 2.0 technologies into orientation, acclimation,
and socialization. Several Web 2.0 technologies
can be utilized in an effort to better serve adult
learners. These technological components include
Facebook, Instant Message, Google Groups, Twit-
ter, and Skype. Facebook
It is estimated that 93 percent of college stu-
dents are active participants in an online social
networks site (OSNs), such as Facebook (www.
facebook.com) (Prentiss, 2007). Each day 85
percent of college students log on to Facebook
to communicate with friends and classmates.
Students use the site to share photos, read the
wall postings, and send messages (Arrington,
2005). Facebook is the most popular OSN, with
over 350 million users representing over 40,000
educational institutions and 700,000 businesses
internationally. The average Facebook user spends
more than 55 minutes per day on Facebook (Face-
book, 2009.). The site acquires 150,000 new users
daily (Hoffman, 2008). Grossman (2007) believes
that Facebook’s popularity stems from its opt-in
social philosophy, whereas students want to be
associated and active in campus networks as a
way to get or stay connected.
Facebook was created in 2004 by Mark Zuck-
erburg, a Harvard University student, who wanted
to design a replacement for the paper version of
the college picture directory. The intended purpose
of Facebook was to connect people through an
online network directory (Bugeja, 2006). Until
May 2006, the site was exclusively for U.S. college
students who had a valid college e-mail account
(.edu). Facebook now expands internationally and
subscribers include high school students, profes-
Virtually Onboarding and Supporting Adult Students in College Using Web 2.0 Technologies
sors, college staff members, alumni, parents, and
corporate employee users (Bugeja, 2006).
A Facebook profile allows a user to create and
edit his or her own unique web presence. The site
can achieve and result in the same benefits asso-
ciated with face-to-face communication, such as
pleasure, inclusion, relaxation, and socialization
(Adler & Rodman, 2008). A user, not Facebook,
determine how much information he/she wants
to disclose publicly in their profile. Basic user
information could include college major, institu-
tion, relationship status, interests, activities, hob-
bies, favorite movies, shows, books, and quotes,
birthday, and personal information such as address,
phone number, and e-mail address (Mullin, 2006).
The user can adjust privacy settings to make his
or her profile viewable to only established friends
and networks or public which makes the profile
viewable to the entire Facebook community. In
2006, the site added a newsfeed privacy (www.
facebook.com/privacy) feature that functions
like an RSS feed and alerts a user each time a
“friend” makes any changes to his/her profile
(Henig, 2006). These changes can include when
a user leaves a group, changes his/her interests,
or makes a status change (Vaidhyanathan, 2008).
Facebook also allows users to upload images,
text, video, and sound (Jones & Soltren, 2005;
Kolek & Saunders, 2008). Once a profile has
been created, users can then begin to befriend
other users by sending a friend request. If the
friend accepts (confirms the friendship) then the
two users are linked through a social network.
Additionally, users can create and join groups
that have either private or public viewing status.
Once users are friends or members of the same
group, they can send messages to each other. In
2008, the site launched a new feature (Online
Friends) that allows networked friends to Instant
Message (IM) each other on Facebook when
both members are logged into the site. Lastly, in
2009 the new “linked feature” will automatically
link Facebook to a user’s Yahoo, Google, and/or
MySpace accounts.
Other features of Faceboook include “tagging”,
which allows site users to identify individuals,
write comments, or express opinions regarding
a photograph. The “wall” function provides an
open message board for networked members
to read, view, and respond to posts. Messages
can be anything from a birthday wish to posting
information about an upcoming event. Users can
also use what is called “wall-to-wall”, which
allows friends to post messages back and forth.
The “My Events” feature permits users to invite
and post event announcements. The user can then
RSVP if he/she will attend. There is a section
where users can post and share resources such
as important web links. Finally, users can update
their status, telling others where or what they are
currently doing, seek advice from others, post a
quote, or ask a question. Facebook users can also
engage other users in virtual gaming applications.
Some of the most popular Facebook applications
include FarmVille, Mafia Wars, and Café World.
Ellison, Steinfield, & Lampe (2007) examined
the social systems that formed within Facebook.
The researchers concluded that Facebook did
possess the potential for users to develop social
relationships, as well as maintain and build on
existing ones which is an important finding for
the success of Facebook as a beneficial social
venue for students.
While students are considered experts on using
and communicating via Facebook, many college
faculty and staff members have not begun to un-
derstand the potential positive impact Facebook
could have on students and the college experi-
ence (Bugeja, 2006). Facebook benefits include
encouraging students’ social development and
support, (Esposito, 2007) and retention (Tinto,
1993) which are important components of the
college experience. The virtual socialization that
occurs on Facebook has the capability to expose
students to classmates that they might otherwise
not meet in person. Social networking sites can
aid in the formation of relationships between di-
verse students, such as adult and traditional-aged
1021
 Virtually Onboarding and Supporting Adult Students in College Using Web 2.0 Technologies
student populations. This virtual interaction can
enable students to feel more affinity and belong-
ing to their campus community (Educause, 2006).
Through Facebook, a college can create a
private group on Facebook to serve as virtual
network portal for non-traditional aged students.
This group should be created the summer before
students start classes, thus allowing the adults to
interact and communicate virtually prior to start-
ing college (Farrell, 2006). Through Facebook an
informal support group could begin to form. It
might be important for adult students to have peers
that better understand the struggles that arise with
attending college while balancing a family and/
or a career. This interaction is beneficial in that
most adult students are not spending much time
on campus, outside of attending classes.
The “Wall” feature of a Facebook group ac-
count would allow students to post messages/
announcements to other group members. This
could be an offer to split the costs of babysitting,
make arrangements to study together on the week-
ends, or share a ride to campus. The wall could
also be used by college staff members to post
policy changes or reminders about an upcoming
deadline. The threaded discussion option would
allow users to post and respond to messages on a
specific topic. For example a topic might be the
fear associated with taking a math class after 20
years. Upon starting a thread, academic advisors
and college staff members could reply by offering
advice and supportive suggestions to the students
through the online discussion, such as supplemen-
tal instruction being offered or tutoring.
Additionally, Facebook possesses the ability
to act as a one stop shop to learn about valuable
campus resources. A Facebook group could be
established that would provide students with ac-
curate information about institutional policies,
procedures, support programs, and academic
departments (Habley, 2004). The information
could be updated by administrators in the various
departments and students would be able to put a
1022
face with the staff member who is managing that
specific service on campus.
The “My Events” feature allows college admin-
istrators to invite students to events or activities.
The invitation can be accessed to obtain more
details. The RSVP feature on “My Events” enables
students to register to attend an event or activity
online as opposed to the student visiting the of-
fice in person to sign up. Additionally, students
could sign up for events 24 hours a day from the
convenience of their own homes. When a student
RSVPs to attend an event, a friendly reminder is
forwarded to the user.
Lastly, the “Online Friends” feature would
encourage students to communicate in a private
venue between classmates, faculty members, advi-
sors, and or support service staff members without
scheduling a one-on-one meeting. This function
is easy to use and a college administrator would
be able to easily identify who he/she is chatting
with during the session. Virtual Facebook hours
could be available in the evening to accommodate
adult students busy schedules. For students who
do not use Facebook, another option to increase
social interaction and engagement is by offer-
ing virtual hours using Instant Messaging (IM).
Instant Messaging
Instant Messaging (IM) is a type of Com-
puter Mediated Communication (CMC), under
the domain of Information and Communication
Technologies (ICT). This simply means that a
user can share digitally-based information such
as text, audio, and video over a network of com-
puters (Internet) with another user (Baron, 2005).
IM programs like AOL/AIM Instant Messenger
(dashboard.aim.com/aim), Yahoo Messenger
(messenger.yahoo.com), Skype (www.skpe.com),
Facebook (www.facebook.com), and Microsoft
(MSN) Messenger (im.live.com/messenger/im/
home) allow a user to chat with another user in
real-time (asynchronous) by sending messages
back and forth. Most of the above IM programs
are not compatible with each other, so it is often
necessary to establish and advertise what IM
Virtually Onboarding and Supporting Adult Students in College Using Web 2.0 Technologies
program a college office will utilize to student
users (Lipschultz & Musser, 2006). An alternative
option might be to utilize programs like Meebo
(www.meebo.com) or Trillan (www.trillian.im)
that support multiple IM services. These sites al-
low for one identity to be used across multiple IM
programs (Yahoo, AIM, MSN, XMPP, Bonjour
and Skype) and all contacts (users) are collected
under one compressive list. The use of Meebo
and Trillan can help prevent identify confusion
amongst users, as all IM names are compiled in
one location.
Staff and faculty members must begin to
understand the need to add a virtual communica-
tion modality to better connect with students that
need an alternative method or time of interaction
(Lipschultz & Musser, 2007). Advisors and sup-
port staff members can opt to hold IM sessions in
the evenings or weekends to accommodate adult
students. IM sessions could be open discussions
or topic based. Topics could include understanding
the core curriculum, assistance with completing
financial aid forms, or balancing school, work,
and family. IM hours are best when offered in two
hour increments. Thus during this time, student
would be encouraged to log in and seek advice,
ask questions, and receive answers. If college
administrators want to make the IM session more
personal in an effort to make the interaction feel
more like a one-on-one advising session, then
Skype is the perfect virtual option.
Skype
Skype allows users to communicate in real-time
(asynchronous) by text, voice and/or video over
an Internet connection. For users to take advantage
of the free Skype software, a student and staff/
faculty member would need a computer, an Inter-
net connection, microphone, and a webcam that
supports video. Skype makes virtual conferencing
effortless and easy. Advisors could offer students
the option of Skype advising sessions to discuss
majors, registration, curriculum, and academic
concerns. An added perk of Skype would be to
provide adult learners access to campus services
and staff members through an Internet connection,
when coming to campus might be an impossible
option for students working full-time. An adult
learner could schedule a time to effortlessly log
in from his/her desk at work and attend a virtual
advising session to discuss his/her academic plan.
Therefore, Skype has the ability to ensure that no
student is ever restricted from getting the help or
assistance they need.
Finally, Skype can support audio conferences
where up to five people can communicate at one
time. This might be a way to arrange group tutor-
ing for adults to attend after they put their young
children to bed for the evening. The Skype file
transfer feature would further enable information
to be disseminated and shared in an effective and
timely manner, which would encourage and permit
students to work virtually on group assignments/
projects. Another free Web 2.0 technology that can
be helpful in onboarding adult students to college
is Google Groups.
Google Groups
Google Groups is a user friendly virtual tool that al-
lows collaborative communication between group
members. In February 2001, Google acquired Deja
News, a search engine which provides access to
Usenet newsgroup articles. Through the Google
interface the newsgroups could be accessed and
users were provided the opportunity to create their
own (non-Usenet) groups, thus Google Groups
(http://groups.google.com). Google Groups offers
members large storage limits and easy customiz-
able group portal pages. Accounts are free and
groups can be public or private. Google Groups
are usually theme, topic, and/or interest based so
a group that a college might start to help mothers
make the transition to return to college might be
called, “mommiesgotocollege”
The first feature of a Google Group that col-
leges can utilize is the threaded discussion board,
1023
 Virtually Onboarding and Supporting Adult Students in College Using Web 2.0 Technologies
similar to that offered by Blackboard, eCollege, or
Facebook. This discussion feature allows students
to interact virtually with each other and college
staff members by posting and responding to threads
(messages). A threaded discussion is easy for
users to follow, and has the benefit of fostering
interaction, reciprocity, and cooperation among
users (Brescia, Swartz, Pearman, Balkin, & Wil-
liams, 2004). Online discussions can help students
better understand policies, majors, and curriculum
since students have an opportunity to be active
as opposed to passive in the exchange of ideas,
concepts, and questions (Dillon, 1994; Miller,
1992). Additionally, threaded discussions permit
students to have a shared space where questions
or concerns can be posted, answered, and saved
in an open forum by college professionals. The
users have the ability to reflect and link ideas and
concepts to each other to bring about a complex
exchange of ideas, advice, and suggestions (Bonk
& Kim, 1998; Sabine & Gilley, 1999).
Once a student becomes a member of a Google
Group he/she can read, respond, and post messages
to the group account. There is a mass e-mail feature
that sends a message to all members using a single
e-mail point of contact. Members can also upload,
share, and access files. Once a file is uploaded,
it will remain permanently in the Google Group
account. The document can easily be accessed and
located when needed. This would be a great loca-
tion for an advisor to post curriculum guidelines
and various institutional forms.
Google Groups is especially beneficial for
an institution that has limited server space for
documents that require extensive amounts of
memory, such as podcasts, pictures, and video.
Each student services office could create a virtual
web presence and space for students to commu-
nicate with professionals, seek information, and
request advice through creating a Google Group.
The portal can act as a one stop shop where a
student could access academic documents, leave
a message, set up a meeting, or post a question
on the threaded discussion. Through this portal
1024
a virtual onboarding initiative could be designed
for students that would otherwise be unable to
attend in-person orientation or when orientation
is not offered. The best aspect of Google Groups
is that the pages allow for a unique blend of
communication, interaction, and information
sharing. Through a virtual orientation via Google
Groups, an adult student could be introduced to
everything that a traditional-student experience
while attending in-person orientation. This vir-
tual venue would allow for adult learners to log
on and review materials as time permits in their
busy schedules. Components of orientation could
be recorded using a video device and uploaded
on the Google Group so adults would not miss
important orientation speakers, workshops, and/
or academic convocation.
Twitter
Twitter is another kind of Web 2.0 social net-
working and micro-blogging technology. Twitter
enables users to send and read posts from others.
The catch of this technology is that posts can not
be greater than 140 characters. These computer
generated text like messages are called “Tweets”.
The users who join your network and read your
messages are called “Followers”. The specific
function of this technology allow for sharing of
quick informative messages or posts. Tweets can
be either public or private and a user chooses the
level of security.
Twitter can be used to disseminate information
since most individuals would admit that their e-
mail inboxes are already full of spam. Thus Twitter
is an excellent resource in getting a quick message
blast out to students. For example, a Tweet can
let students know that their FASFA forms must
be completed by May 1st in order to qualify for
financial aid. Twitter accounts for college students
should be arranged by topics of interest. So if a
student is interested in learning more about tutor-
ing services then he/she will become a follower
Virtually Onboarding and Supporting Adult Students in College Using Web 2.0 Technologies
of that Twitter account, which might be called
“tutoringinfo”.
Since most adult learners have over-extended
lives, Twitter can be used to keep adults on task to
meet important deadlines. For example, an advisor
can send out Tweets about items that should be
completed in preparation for fall registration or
placement testing. Tweets can help students think
of things they might have otherwise forgotten
or not considered. This approach is completed
by posting a question to followers. An example
might be, “Do you need some additional help
in your Math or English Class? This might get
students interested and thinking about attending
walk-in tutoring or evening supplement instruc-
tion sessions.
Daily or weekly announcements can be posted
to Twitter. Fir example the financial aid office
could post weekly Tweets about specific schol-
arship available or a faculty member might post
a link to a website where students can buy the
required textbooks for his/her class for half price.
Finally, Twitter can be used to highlight and
broadcast an event, new initiative, or the latest
award that the college won. This will ensure that
those living on and off campus are informed on
college happenings. This information sharing can
also help create a greater sense of community
and affinity to the institution, thus with hopes of
increasing retention. Twitter on the other hand
can be used simply to promote specific campus
events to students. This could be everything
from a commuter appreciate event to a weekend
service-learning project. While using technology
is a value tool, legal breaches of security can arise
if administrators and students are not carefully
educated regarding its hazards.
LEGAL ISSUES REALATED
TO WEB TECHNOLOGIES
All college staff and faculty members must adhere
to and abide by the laws that govern activities and
communication occurring in the higher education
settings. The Family Educational Rights and Pri-
vacy Act (20 U.S.C. § 1232g; 34 CFR Part 99)
of 1974 also known as FERPA, or the Buckley
Amendment, mandates procedures for managing
and maintaining students’ educational records. The
Family Policy Compliance Office (www.ed.gov/
policy/gen/guid/fpco/index.html), within the U.S.
Education Department oversees and enforces the
student privacy act. Any institution, public or
private, who receives funding through a program
associated with the Department of Education falls
under the constraints of FERPA.
An “educational record” is any record main-
tained by an institution about a student (U.S.
Department of Education). An educational record
encompasses all records transmitted or stored
electronically, along with those in a paper format.
A record includes e-mails, text and IM messages,
photographs, microfilm/microfiche, video and
audio tapes (Van Dusen, 2004). All educational
records are to be kept in the sole possession of
the institution staff or faculty member and not
to be revealed or accessed by any other person
(The Office of Family Policy Compliance, Fam-
ily Education Rights and Privacy Act). While
the Internet and Web 2.0 provides higher educa-
tion administrators and faculty members with a
venue to easily communicate and disseminate
information to students, the practice can lead to
violations in student privacy outlined by FERPA.
For example, while encryption, secure-servers,
and fire walls are installed to protect privacy
and personal information, problems still arise
due to the insecure transmissions that may result
in third person receiving or reviewing private
information (Cate, McDonald, & Mitrano, 2008).
College professionals and students who opt to use
Web 2.0 technologies must be made aware of the
types of information that they should never share
and/or post even if the technology or group is
deemed private. This could include items such
as student identification number, social security
numbers, and financial record of any kind even
1025
 Virtually Onboarding and Supporting Adult Students in College Using Web 2.0 Technologies
when needed for financial aid packages. If col-
leges use virtual and Web 2.0 technologies then
they must be responsible in ensuring the safety
of students’ privacy.
CONCLUSION
As more adults continue to enroll and return to col-
lege, there is an increased need to orient, socialize,
support, and retain this population of students. A
perfect solution to enhancement student support ser-
vices, acclimate, orient/onboard, and integrate adult
students to the college campus could be realized
through the use of virtual and Web 2.0 technologies.
As traditional-aged students are offered in-person
orientation, adult learners could be provided with
virtual opportunities to communicate, interact, and
establish relationships with peers, college staff
members, and academic advisors. As the Web 2.0
continues to grow in popularity, colleges won’t be
able to overlook the many benefits that are offered
by such technologies. These benefits include ease
of use, cost-effectiveness, ability to offer increased
outreach, and improved convenience for students.
A college in the past might have been viewed as a
building with four walls. However, today a virtual
college can be as successful as a brick and mortar
college as long as it provided all students with equal
opportunities to orient, acclimate, socialize, and
experience academic, and personal success within.
REFERENCES
Adler, R. B., & Rodman, G. R. (2008). Understand-
ing human communication. New York: Oxford
University Press.
Arrington, M. (2005). Eighty-five percent of
college students use Facebook. Retrieved De-
cember 10, 2009, from http://www.techcrunch.
com/2005/09/07/85-of-college-students-use-
facebook/.
1026
Astin, A. W. (1984). Student involvement: A de-
velopmental theory for higher education. Journal
of College Student Personnel, 25, 297–308.
Astin, A. W. (1993). What matters most in col-
lege: Four critical years revisited. San Francisco:
Jossey-Bass.
Baron, N. S. (2005). Conference Proceeding from
the American Association for the Advancement
of Science: Instant messaging by American col-
lege students: A case study in computer-mediated
communication. Washington, DC.
Bauer, K. W., & Liang, Q. (2003). The effect
of personality and precollege characteristics on
first-year activities and academic performance.
Journal of College Student Development, 44(3),
277–290. doi:10.1353/csd.2003.0023
Beal, P. E., & Noel, L. (1980). What works in
student retention?Iowa City, Iowa: American
College Testing Program.
Bean, J. P. (2005). Nine themes of college stu-
dent retention . In Seidman, A. (Ed.), College
student retention: Formula for student success
(pp. 215–243). Westport, CT: Praeger Publishers.
Bishop, J. B., Gallagher, R. P., & Cohen, D. (2000).
College students’ problems: Status, trends, and
research . In Davis, D. C., & Humphrey, K. M.
(Eds.), College counseling: Issues and strategies
for a new millennium (pp. 89–110). Alexandria,
VA: American Counseling Association.
Blimling, G. S. (1993). The influence of college
residence halls on students . In Smart, J. (Ed.),
Higher education: Handbook of theory and re-
search (pp. 248–307). New York: Agathon.
Boehle, S. (2008, February). True vision. Training
(New York, N.Y.), 45(2), 32–39.
Virtually Onboarding and Supporting Adult Students in College Using Web 2.0 Technologies
Bonk, C., & Kim, K. (1998). Extending sociocul-
tural theory to adult learning . In Smith, M. C., &
Pourchot, T. (Eds.), Adult learning and develop-
ment: Perspectives from educational psychology
(pp. 67–88). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Braxton, J. M., & Lee, S. D. (2005). Toward reli-
able knowledge about college student departure .
In Seidman, A. (Ed.), College student retention:
Formula or student success (pp. 107–128). West-
port, CT: Praeger Publishers.
Brescia, W. F. Jr, Swartz, J., Pearman, C., Balkin,
R., & Williams, D. (2004, Fall). Peer teaching
in web based threaded discussions. Journal of
Interactive Online Learning, 2(3), 1–22.
Brodie, J. M. (2005, November). Getting manag-
ers on board. HRMagazine, 105–108.
Brown, J. (2008). Employee orientation: Keeping
new employees on board: Tips for new employee
orientation. About.com Human Resources. Re-
trieved December 6, 2009, from http://humanre-
sources.about.com/od/retention/a/keepnewem-
ployee_3.htm.
Bugeja, M. J. (2006, January 27). Facing the
facebook. The Chronicle of Higher Education,
52(21), C1.
Butler, K. M. (2008, January). Getting employees
to stay on board instead of jumping ship. Benefit-
News.com: Benefit Corner Office, 13-14.
Cate, B., McDonald, S. J., & Mitrano, T. (2008,
April 4). The law, digitally speaking. The Chron-
icle of Higher Education, 54(30), B14.
Coombs, K. (2007). Building a library web site
on the pillars of web 2.0. Computers in Libraries,
27(1), 16–19.
Dillon, J. T. (1994). Using discussion in the
classroom. Philadelphia: Open University Press.
EDUCAUSE Learning Institute. (2006). Seven
Things You Should Know About Facebook. Re-
trieved December 11, 2009, from http://www.
educause.edu/ir/library/pdf/ELI7017.pdf.
Ellison, N. B., Steinfield, C., & Lampe, C. (2007).
The benefits of Facebook “friends”: Social
capital and college students’ use of online social
network sites. Journal of Computer-Mediated
Communication, 12(4), 1–4. doi:10.1111/j.1083-
6101.2007.00367.x
Esposito,A. (2007, September). Saving face(book):
Engage through facebook and retain relevance.
Academic Advising Today, 30(3), 24–29.
Facebook (2009). Press room: Company statistics.
Retrieved on December 11, 2009, from http://
www.facebook.com/press/info.php?statistics
Farrell, E. (2006, September). Judging roommates
by their facebook cover. The Chronicle of Higher
Education, 53(2), A63.
Friedman, L. (2006, November). Are you losing
potential new hires at hello? Organizations need
strong new hire onboarding processes. Funda-
mentals, 25-27.
Gaide, S. (2005). Seven steps to meeting the techni-
cal needs of online students. Distance Education
Report, 9(16), 4–5.
Gooding, J. (2008). Web 2.0: A vehicle for
transforming education. International Journal
of Information and Communication Technology,
4(2), 44–53.
Gordon, V. N., & Grites, T. J. (1984, July). The
freshman seminar course: Helping students suc-
ceed. Journal of College Student Personnel,
25(4), 315–320.
Grossman, L. (2007, September 7). Why facebook
is the future. Time, 170(10), 54.
1027
 Virtually Onboarding and Supporting Adult Students in College Using Web 2.0 Technologies
Habley, W. R. (2004). The status of academic
advising: Findings from the ACT sixth national
study. Manhattan, KS: National Academic Advis-
ing Association.
Hauser, J. (2007). Media specialists can learn web
2.0 tools to make schools more cool. Computers
in Learning, 27(2), 6–8.
Heathfield, S. (2008). Training: Your investment
in people development and retention. About.
com Human Resources. Retrieved December 9,
2009, from http://humanresources.about.com/od/
educationgeneral/a/training_invest.htm
Henig, S. (2006, September 22). After a redesign,
facebook hastily offers new privacy protections.
The Chronicle of Higher Education, 53(5), A35.
Hoffman, C. (2008, June 26). The battle for face-
book. Rolling Stone (San Francisco, Calif.), 1055,
65–71.
Jones, H., & Soltren, J. H. (2005, December 14).
Facebook: Threats to privacy. Retrieved Decem-
ber 11, 2009, from http://groups.csail.mit.edu/
mac/classes/6.805/student-papers/fall05-papers/
facebook.pdf
Kolek, E. A., & Saunders, D. (2008). Online disclo-
sure: An empirical examination of undergraduate
Facebook profiles. NASPA Journal, 45(1), 1–25.
Light, R. J. (2001). Making the most of college:
Students speak their minds. Boston: Harvard
University Press.
Lipschultz, W., & Musser, T. (2006). Proceeding at
the National Conference of the National Academic
Advising Association: IM 101: An Introduction to
the use of instant messaging in academic advising,
Indianapolis, IN.
Lipschultz, W., & Musser, T. (2007). Instant mes-
saging: Powerful flexibility and presence. Clear-
inghouse of Academic Advising Resources Advising
Issues & Resources. Retrieved on December 9,
2009, from http://www.nacada.ksu.edu/clearing-
house/advisingIssues/Instant-Messaging.htm
1028
Maloney, E. J. (2007, January 5). What the web
2.0 can teach us about learning. The Chronicle of
Higher Education, 53(18), B26.
Maslow, A. H. (1943). Motivation and personality.
New York: Harper.
Meyer, K. A. (2002). Quality in distance educa-
tion: Focus on online learning. Wiley Periodicals,
29(4), 67.
Miller, M. T., & Myron, L. (2003, January). Inte-
grating technology into new student orientation
programs at community colleges. Community
College Journal of Research and Practice, 27(1),
15–23. doi:10.1080/713838080
Miller, S. (1992). Creating change: Towards a
dialogic pedagogy. (Report Series 2.18). Albany,
NY: National Research Center on Literature Teach-
ing and Learning. (ERIC Document Reproduction
Service No. ED 349 582)
Mullin, J. (2006, June). Facebook and disposition
assessment. Academic Advising Today, 29(2).
Retrieved December 11, 2009, from http://www.
nacada.ksu.edu/AAT/NW29_2.htm
Pascarella, E. T., & Terenzini, P. T. (2005). How
college affects students: A third generation of
research (Vol. 2). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Perigo, D., & Upcraft, M. (1989). Orientation
programs. In M. Upcraft, J. Gardner, J., & Associ-
ates (Eds), The freshman year experience: Helping
Students to survive and succeed in college (pp.
82-94). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Prentiss, K. (2007, April 5). Weblog when the
content is crappy, the pipe doesn’t matter: Colleges
and facebook. Increasing Engagement in Educa-
tion Through Technology, Community, Leader-
ship and Training. Retrieved December 7, 2009,
from http://www.thesabloggers.org/2007/05/
when_the_conten.html.
Virtually Onboarding and Supporting Adult Students in College Using Web 2.0 Technologies
Reese, V. (2005, Winter). Maximizing your
retention and productivity with on-boarding.
Wiley InterScience. Retrieved December 10,
2009, from http://www.heidrick.com/NR/
rdonlyres/DA7EC785-C15D-47FA-A6E0-
DD60F9294056/0/HS_OnBoarding.pdf
Reeves, T. C., Herrington, J., & Oliver, R. (2004). A
development research agenda for online collabora-
tive learning. Educational Technology Research
and Development, 52(4), 53–65. doi:10.1007/
BF02504718
Sabine, G., & Gilley, D. (1999). Taking it online:
A bootstrap approach. In Proceedings of the
Mid-South Instructional Technology Conference.
Retrieved December 4, 2009, from http://www.
mtsu.edu/~itconf/proceed99/gilley.htm.
Schlossberg, N. K. (1984). Counseling adults in
transition: Linking practice with theory. New
York: Springer.
Schlossberg, N. K. (1989). Marginality and matter-
ing: Key issues in building community . In Roberts,
D. C. (Ed.), Designing campus activities to foster
a sense of community. New Directions in Student
Services (pp. 5–15). San Francisco: Jossey Bass.
Social networking: The newest employee engage-
ment tool? (2007, November). HRFocus, 8.
Spady, W. (1971). Dropouts from higher edu-
cation: Interdisciplinary review and synthesis.
Interchange, 1, 64–85. doi:10.1007/BF02214313
Strage, A. (2000). Predictors of college adjustment
and success: Similarities and differences among
southeast-Asian American, Hispanic, and white
students. Education, 120, 731–741.
Stripling, W. R., & Hinck, C. L. (1993). New
student orientation: Student assessment of a
program’s content. Retrieved December 12, 2009,
from http://eric.ed.gov/ERICDocs/data/ericdoc-
s2sql/content_storage_01/0000019b/80/13/25/19.
pdf
Terenzini, P., Springer, L., Yaeger, P., Pascarelle,
E., & Nora, A. (1996). First-generation college
students: Characteristics, experience, and cogni-
tive development. Research in Higher Education,
37, 1–22. doi:10.1007/BF01680039
The Office of Family Policy Compliance, Fam-
ily Education Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA).
Retrieved December 11, 2009, from http://www.
ed.gov/print/policy/gen/guid/fpco/ferpa/index.
html.
Tinto, V. (1975). Dropouts from higher education:
A theoretical synthesis of recent research. Review
of Educational Research, 45, 89–125.
Tinto, V. (1987). Leaving college: Rethinking the
causes and cures of student attrition. Chicago:
The University of Chicago Press.
Tinto, V. (1993). Leaving college: Rethinking the
causes and cures of student retention. Chicago:
The University of Chicago Press.
Twale, D. J. (1989). Social and academic devel-
opment in freshman orientation: A time frame.
National Association of Student Personnel Ad-
ministrators Journal, 27, 160–166.
Upcraft, M. L., & Farnsworth, W. M. (1984).
Orientation programs and activities . In Upcraft,
M. L. (Ed.), Orienting students in college: New
directions for student services (pp. 27–52). San
Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Upcraft, M. L., & Gardner, J. N. (1989). A com-
prehensive approach to enhancing freshmen suc-
cess . In Gardner, L. M. (Ed.), The freshman year
experience, helping students survive and succeed
in college (pp. 1–12). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
U.S. Department of Education. Family Educa-
tional Rights and Privacy Act. (1974). Retrieved
December 9, 2009, from http://www.ed.gov/
policy/gen/guid/fpco/ferpa/index.html.
1029
 Virtually Onboarding and Supporting Adult Students in College Using Web 2.0 Technologies
U.S. Department of Education, National Center
for Education Statistics. (2009). The Condition
of Education 2009 (NCES 2009-081) . Indicator
(Minnesota Mining and Manfuacturing Com-
pany), 22.
Vaidhyanathan, S. (2008, February 15). Naked
in the ‘nonopticon’. The Chronicle of Higher
Education, 54(23), B57.
Vail, K. (2006). Back to basics: How to run a
first-rate program. Distance Education Report,
10(3), 5–7.
Van Dusen, W. R., Jr. (2004). FERPA: Basic guide-
lines for faculty and staff a simple step-by-step
approach for compliance. Retrieved December
11, 2009, from http://www.nacada.ksu.edu/Re-
sources/FERPA-Overview.htm.
Yalama, N., & Aydin, C. H. (2004). Proceedings
from The Eleventh Annual Distance Education
Conference: Effectiveness of the student support
for online learners: The facilitators’point of views.
Texas A&M University: Houston.
KEY TERMS AND DEFINITIONS
Adult Learner: A student who is age 24 years
or older when he/she enrolling in an institute of
higher education as an undergraduate student.
Attrition: The term used to describe students
who drop out or leave an educational institution.
Facebook: A Web 2.0 technology that allows
users to create a personal profile in an effort to
establish, develop, and maintain a network of
friends and groups.
Google Groups: A free service offered by
Google that allows those with similar interests
to form a virtual group the supports such com-
munication as threaded discussions, postings,
document sharing, and e-mails.
Orientation: A program of specialized in-
person activities that a higher education institu-
tion organizes to orient, acclimate, socialize, and
1030
welcome new college students to campus that
usually occurs before the first week of classes
begin during the fall semester.
Onboarding: The process a corporation or
company uses to successfully orient, acclimate,
and integrate new employees into an organization’s
culture, mission, workforce, and environment.
Pre-Orientation: A program of specialized
activities that a higher education institution orga-
nizes to orient, acclimate, socialize, and welcome
new college students to campus prior to the start
of the semester. Pre-orientation usually occurs
during the summer before a student arrives on
campus for the start of classes. The format is
usually offered through a virtual or online venue.
Skype: Free software that allows users to
communicate in real-time (asynchronous) by text,
voice, and/or video with the help of an Internet con-
nection, computer, microphone, and/or webcam.
Traditional-Aged Student: A student who
is age 18 to 23 years old and enrolled in a higher
education institution immediately following
graduating from high school.
Threaded Discussion: A chronological list-
ing of users’ electronic comments or discussions
that are grouped according to common themes
or topics, which are called threads. Users can
reply to a particular posting within a thread and
each posting has the potential to build off those
submitted prior.
Twitter: A Web 2.0 technology that combines
social networking and micro-blogging to allow
users to send and read posts (Tweets) that are not
greater than 140 characters in lengthen.
Web 2.0: The Internet’s second generation of
innovative applications and networks that allow
a user to read, write, and publish to the web to
creative content, share information, and collabo-
rate among users. The most popular examples of
Web 2.0 technologies include wikis, weblogs,
podcasting, video and audio sharing, social net-
working, social book marking and messaging,
folksonomies, and RSS feeds.
 1031

Chapter 63
Bringing Together Personal
Learning, Higher Education
Institutional Elements, and
Global Support for a Re-
Orientation toward a Focus on
Lifelong Learning and Education
John A. Henschke
Lindenwood University, USA

ABSTRACT
This extended research study focused on bringing together personal learning, higher educational insti-
tutional elements to be considered for helping higher educational institutions and individual learners
in various countries to re-orient themselves toward a focus on lifelong learning, and placing this within
the support and context of lifelong learning and education around the globe. Research is presented on
the background and experiences of various higher educational institutions and individual learners in
this regard, developing a tentative policy statement and identification of the elements of a re-orientation
toward lifelong learning focus as products of several worldwide conferences. In addition, the support of
UNESCO in its global reach encourages this to move forward rapidly into the future.

INTRODUCTION approaches for fulfilling their educational desires.

Higher education institutions around the world in
the 21st century are being faced with serving the
educational and learning needs of a non-traditional
population [older than the traditional college age
of 18-22]. This new population requires different
DOI: 10.4018/978-1-61692-906-0.ch063
Their individual abilities in lifelong learning influ-
ence how they enact learning. They come into the
higher education setting on a part time basis, study
and take courses for a period of time, and then
drop out for a while. They return later, seeking to
‘pick up’ their course of study again where they
were when they were previously enrolled. The
institutions have to deal with shifting populations,

learning needs, how to work in these situations,
and placing this within a global context of sup-
porting lifelong learning and education.
BACKGROUND
Research Design
This extended research focused on bringing to-
gether personal learning, higher education institu-
tional elements to be considered for helping higher
educational institutions and individual learners in
various countries to re-orient themselves toward
a lifelong learning focus, and placing this within
the support and context of lifelong learning and
education around the globe. This global support
was especially prominent from the United Nations
Education, Scientific and Cultural Organization
(UNESCO). Some Adult Educators at the Uni-
versity of Missouri — St. Louis (UMSL) were
involved in researching the background of this
topic on the North American Continent and the
Northern Hemisphere. Other Adult Educators at
The University of The Western Cape [UWC], Cape
Town, South Africa were involved in research-
ing the background of this topic on the African
Continent and the Southern Hemisphere (Flint, et
al., 1999; Serving Adult Learners…, 2000; Wood,
2001; Walters, n.d.; Walters & Volbrecht, n.d.).
This information was shared as one back-
drop for a worldwide conference on the topic of
“Lifelong Learning, Higher Education and Active
Citizenship” held in Cape Town in October, 2000.
There were 95 Adult Educators from 19 countries
at the conference. This was also a follow-up and
continuation of the work begun at the UNESCO
Fifth International Conference on Adult Education
[CONFINTEA V] in Hamburg, Germany, 1997
(Agenda…, 1997), continued at the University of
Mumbai, India in 1998 (Mumbai Statement…,
1998), and the UNESCO World Conference on
Higher Education in Paris in 1998.
1032
Bringing Together Personal Learning
These gatherings of adult educators resulted in
the formulation of The Cape Town Statement on
Characteristic Elements of a Lifelong Learning
Higher Education Institution (2001). They named
six major elements. The next step in the process
saw the two schools from South Africa and The
University of Missouri, changing those six ele-
ments to seven major elements, and developing
measurable performance indicators [MPI] for the
practice of lifelong learning in higher education
institutions.
A five member team from The University of
Missouri [UM] went to Cape Town to work with
personnel from The University of The Western
Cape [UWC] in May, 2001. The aim and task of
this meeting was to address the issue of moving
a higher education institution from a traditional
orientation toward a lifelong learning orienta-
tion. They developed Measurable Performance
Indicators [MPI] for tracking the progress of
any educational institution in the direction of
Lifelong Leaning. This information also applies
to the educational function of other institutions as
well. This coming together of adult educators two
different times resulted in the formulation of the
Cape Town Statement on Characteristic Elements
of a Lifelong Learning Higher Education Institu-
tion, and the MPI. The six [and ultimately seven]
elements included: [1] Overarching Frameworks,
[2] Strategic Partnerships, [3] Research, [4] Teach-
ing and Learning Processes, [5] Administration
Policies and Mechanisms, [6] Decision Support
Systems, and, [7] Student Support Systems and
Services.
An additional study adds some perspective
on the responsibility of the learner in developing
and maintaining an orientation toward lifelong
learning. Li [2005] presented her findings on a
system of lifelong learning at the Commission
on International Adult Education [CIAE] Pre-
Conference of the American Association for Adult
and Continuing Education, Pittsburgh, PA. Her
system is narrowly focused on the learner and
does not take into account what an educational
Bringing Together Personal Learning
institution may need to do to be supportive in the
process of helping the learner maintain a lifelong
learning orientation.
However, taken from the institutional perspec-
tive of moving toward supporting a comprehensive
system of lifelong learning and education, United
Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Or-
ganization [UNESCO] Education Sector (Quality
Education…, November, 2008) organized four
major conferences on education, with twenty re-
gional and sub-regional conferences and meetings
convened to prepare for these world conferences
and the related documents that resulted from them.
The four conferences focused on a comprehensive
vision of quality education, equity and sustain-
able development. The four conferences included
one in higher education, and are as follows: (1)
The 48th International Conference on Education
– Inclusive Education: the Way of the Future,
11/2008, Geneva, Switzerland; (2) The World
Conference on Education for Sustainable Devel-
opment – Moving into the Second Half of the UN
Decade, 3-4/2009, Bonn, Germany; (3) The 2009
World Conference in Higher Education – The New
Dynamics of Higher Education and Research for
Societal Change and Development, 7/2009, Paris,
France; and, (4) Sixth International Conference
on Adult Education-CONFINTEA VI – Learning
and Living for a Viable Future: the Power of Adult
Learning, 12/2009, Belem, Para, Brazil.
Some of the important changes that occurred
during the development of the process of the higher
education re-orientation toward lifelong learning
are included. However, this is not limited to the
following definition and good faculty practices.
DEVELOPING A LIFE LONG
LEARNING DEFINITION
A master concept or principle regarded as the
continuous and never complete development,
changes, and adaptation in human consciousness
that occur partly through deliberate action but even
more as a result of the business of living, where
learning may be intentional or unintentional that
includes acquiring greater understanding of other
people and the world at large, based on six pillars
of learning: learning to live together, learning to
know, learning to do, learning to be, learning to
change, and learning for sustainable development
(Henschke, 2000, 2006, 2009a; Delors, 1998).
Faculty Development of
Good Practices Oriented
Toward Understanding and
Helping Adults Learn
Maehl (2000) developed a somewhat compre-
hensive perspective on faculty development in
this regard, He garnered this from observing the
practices and experiences of 34 higher educa-
tion institutions. There were six elements in his
estimation, and they follow.
1. Determining learner needs
◦⊦ assessed carefully
◦⊦ addressed
▪〉 fairly &
▪〉 equitably
2. Adult learning programs
◦⊦ arise from needs assessment
◦⊦ planned to accomplish learner
outcomes
3. Adult learning experiences
◦⊦ high quality
▪〉 positive learning environment
▪〉 flexibility
▪〉 adaptability
▪〉 mutual respect between
teacher &
learner
◦⊦ adult learner-centered
▪〉 encouraging a positive psycho-
logical environment by learning
▪〉 allowing learner participation in
the design of experiences
▪〉 relating learning to learner’s
1033

prior experience &
application
▪〉 using varying types of learning
techniques
▪〉 recognizing & addressing dif-
ferent learning styles
▪〉 providing continuous feedback
to learners
▪〉 arranging appropriate physical
settings
4. Adult learning assessment
◦⊦ outcome based
◦⊦ (designed to evaluate participants’
previous learning
▪〉 formal or
▪〉 informal
5. Faculty and staff needing
◦⊦ to be adequately prepared to work
with adult learners by
▪〉 participating in faculty develop-
ment learning experiences &
▪〉 keeping abreast with the current
literature and research in how to
help adults learn
◦⊦ to participate in ongoing evaluations
and development of their own capa-
bilities in six major building blocks
of
▪〉 beliefs and notions about adults
learners
▪〉 perceptions concerning qualities
of effective teachers
▪〉 ideas of the phases and sequenc-
es in the learning process
▪〉 teaching tips and learning
techniques
▪〉 implementing the prepared plan
▪〉 cultural and contextual
awareness
◦⊦ to articulate and clarify their own
teaching philosophy regarding adult
learners
6. Programs for adult learners having
◦⊦ clearly stated missions
1034
Bringing Together Personal Learning
◦⊦ sufficient resources to carry out their
missions
▪〉 rigorous financial administra-
tion that supports the adult, life-
long learning mission
▪〉 necessary services for
◦⊦ learning &
◦⊦ student support
▪〉 policies governing
◦⊦ learner confidentiality &
◦⊦ other matters
▪〉 ethical standards for
◦⊦ learner recruitment &
◦⊦ professional practice
7. IDENTIFYING CHARACTERISTICS
OF HIGHLY EFFECTIVE ADULT
LEARNING PROGRAMS
Characteristics of Highly Effective Adult Learning
Programs are clearly delineated by a major piece
of research (Billington, 1988, 2000; Henschke,
1987, 2000). It was as though this research snapped
multiple pictures of a barely visible phenomenon
from various angles, and when developed, all
pictures revealed the same clear image. Results
revealed that adults can and do experience signifi-
cant personal growth at midlife. However, adult
students grew significantly only in one type of
learning environment; they tended not to grow
or to regress in another type. What was the dif-
ference? The seven key factors found in learning
programs that stimulated adult development are:
1) An environment where students feel safe
and supported, where individuals needs and
uniqueness are honored, and where abilities
and life achievements are acknowledged and
respected.
2) An environment that fosters intellectual
freedom and encourages experimentation
and creativity.
3) An environment where faculty treats adult
students as peers-accepted and respected as
Bringing Together Personal Learning
intelligent experienced adults, whose opin-
ions are listened to, honored, and appreciated.
Such faculty members often comment that
they learn as much from their students as
the student learn from them.
4) Self-directed learning, where students take
responsibility for their own learning. They
work with faculty to design individual
learning programs which address what each
person needs and wants to learn in order to
function optimally in their profession.
5) Pacing or intellectual challenge. Optimal
pacing is challenging people just beyond
their present level of ability. If challenged
too far beyond, people give up. If challenged
to little, they become bored and learn little.
Pacing can be compared to playing tennis
with a slightly better player; your game
tends to improve. But if the other player is
far better and it’s impossible to return a ball,
you give up overwhelmed. If the other player
is less experienced and can’t return one of
your balls, you learn little. Those adults who
Figure 1.
Table 1. Learning Theory
The Instructional Paradigm
> Knowledge existing ‘out there’
> Knowledge coming in ‘chunks’ & ‘bits’ delivered by instructors
> Learning as cumulative and linear
> Fits the ‘storehouse of knowledge’ metaphor
> Learning as teacher-centered
> Learning as teacher controlled
> ‘Live’ teacher, ‘live’ students required
> The classroom and learning are competitive and individualistic
> Talent and ability are rare
reported experiencing high levels of intel-
lectual stimulation – to the point of feeling
discomfort—grew more.
6) Active involvement in learning, as opposed
to passively listening to lectures. Where
students and instructors interact and dia-
logue, where students try out new ideas in
the workplace, and where exercises and
experiences are used to bolster facts and
theory, adults grow more.
7) Regular feedback mechanisms for students
to tell faculty what works best for them
and what they want and need to learn—and
faculty who hear and make changes based
on student input.
8. CHANGING FACULTY ROLES
Emphasis on changing faculty roles focused on
moving according to the following paradigm
(Lemkuhle, 2000; Henschke, 2000): (See Figure 1)
The Learning Paradigm
> Knowledge existing in each person’s mind & being shaped by
individual experience
> Knowledge being constructed, created, and internalized
> Learning as a nesting & interacting of frameworks
> Fits the ‘learning how to ride a bicycle’ metaphor
> Learning as student-centered
> Learning as the students’ responsibility
> ‘Proactive’ learner required with teaching resources accessible
> Learning environments and learning are cooperative, collabora-
tive & supportive
> Talent and ability are abundant
1035

Table 2. Productivity/Funding
> Definition of productivity as instructing the unlearned
> Cost per hour of instruction per student
> Funding for hours of instruction
THE MEASURABLE PERFORMANCE
INDICATORS
The background of research on Lifelong Learning
(LLL) resulted in a practical measurement sys-
tem for indicating whether a higher educational
institution is moving in that direction. One of
the major trends in LLL focuses on Performance
Indicators (PI) that requires the characteristic
elements to be measurable and concrete in action
(Henschke, 2000; Taylor, et al, 2000). It is well to
note that moving higher educational institutions
toward serving the needs of all lifelong learners
is a lifelong endeavor that will continue for many
years. The discussions between the University of
Missouri [UM] Team and The University of The
Western Cape [UWC] Personnel modified the
original six (6) “Characteristic Elements” into
seven (7). The seventh one that was added to the
original six was “Decision Support Systems. A few
accompanying “Measurable Performance Indica-
tors” [MPI] are indicated in the list that follows.
The complete MPI Instrument is available from
the author by request from the following e-mail:
jhenschke@lindenwood.edu
Table 3. Nature of Roles
>Faculty as authoritarian experts
>Faculty as primarily lecturers
>Faculty and students acting independently and in isolation
>Teachers classifying and sorting students
>Staff serving/supporting faculty and the process of instruction
>Any expert can teach
>Line governance; independent actors
1036
Bringing Together Personal Learning
> Definition of productivity as helping adults learn
> Cost per unit of learning per student
> Funding for learning outcomes
(1) Overarching Frameworks — provide the
context that facilitates operation as a lifelong
learning institution. This would mean that all
stakeholders relating to the institution have
a financial policy and implementation plan,
the legal framework, and the cultural/social
sensitivity as a foundation to operating the
institution for serving lifelong learners.
(2) Strategic Partnerships & Linkages — form
collaborative relationships internationally,
with other institutions nationally, and with
other groups in society. The indicators need-
ed will focus on increasing the institution
wide concern with promoting and increas-
ing the number and quality of partnerships
across multiple departmental, institutional,
national, and international boundaries.
Decisions regarding choice of programmes,
assessment of learning outcomes, curriculum
design and methods are a shared responsibil-
ity based on collaborative processes among
academic staff, service staff and learners.
(3) Research — includes working across disci-
plines, institutions, investigating what kinds
of institutional adjustments need to be made
>Faculty as models exemplifying lifelong learning
>Faculty as primarily designers & implementers of adult learning
techniques & environments
>Faculty and students working in teams with each other and with
other staff
>Teachers helping develop every student’s competencies and
talents
>All staff as educators who help produce student learning and
success
>Empowering learning through challenging and complex means
>Shared governance, teamwork
Bringing Together Personal Learning
to help the institution better serve lifelong
learners: i.e. convenience, transportation,
child care services, locations of offerings,
library accessibility, computer and website
services, etc. In addition, targets are set for
increasing and encouraging a broader range
of research paradigms: action research, case
studies, story telling, etc.
(4) Teaching & Learning Processes — Educators
will need to move their teaching and learn-
ing processes away from the “instructional
paradigm” toward the “learning paradigm,”
thus encouraging self-directed learning,
engaging with the knowledges, interests
and life situations which learners bring to
their education, and using open and resource
based learning approaches. They will need to
use different teaching methods that respond
to the diverse learning styles of lifelong
learners, including CO-learning, interactive
learning, and continuous learning while
integrating appropriate technology. The
learners and faculty will need to mutually
design individual learning programs that ad-
dress what each learner needs and wants to
learn in order to function optimally in their
profession. This all means that the institution
plans to employ and develop faculty who
see their primary roles as facilitators of the
learning process as opposed to dispensers of
information, thus moving their development
toward: knowing as a dialogical process; a
dialogical relationship to oneself; being a
continuous learner; self-agency and self-
authorship; and connection with others.
(5) Administration Policies & Mechanisms —
service to learners is the top priority of the
administration. The mission statement and
allocation of resources, including staff-
ing is increased to reflect the institutional
commitment for operating a lifelong learn-
ing institution. The operational system in
imbued with a belief that demonstrates
active and systematic listening turned into
responsiveness to meet needs of lifelong
learners. Registration, class times, and
courses — including modular choices and
academics support — are available at times
and in formats geared to the convenience of
learners.
(6) Decision Support Systems — provide within
the institution and community an atmosphere
that is people-centered, caring, warm, infor-
mal, intimate and trusting. It also maintains
a demographic profile on programs aimed at
increasing the numbers of: students served,
courses offered, locations of offerings, and
contracts for educational programs with
different organizations.
(7) Student Support Systems & Services —
provides learner-friendliness, convenient
schedules, and in various ways encourages
independent learning. Obligations and re-
sponsibilities of the learners, educational
providers and administration service are
made clear from the beginning.
A more extensive explanation of num-
ber four [4] above is included on the
topic above. It is on the teaching and
learning process.
The Teaching and Learning Process
• Educators encourage self-directed learn-
ing; engage with the knowledges, interests
and life situations which learners bring to
their education and use open and resource
based learning approaches.
• The institution provides a central infra-
structure in the form of Libraries services,
informational support and personnel nec-
essary for lifelong learners.
• Self-directed learning (SDL) is one of the
highly effective characteristics of Lifelong
Learning (LLL). SDL is where students
take responsibility for their own learning.
They work with faculty to design individual
learning programs that address what each
1037

person needs and wants to learn in order
to function optimally in their profession..
• Active involvement in learning – opposed
to passively listening to lectures, where
students and instructors interact and dia-
logue, where students try out new ideas in
the workplace, where exercises and experi-
ences are used to bolster facts and theory
– helps adults grow more.
Institution role –Plans exist to employ and
develop faculty who see their primary roles as
facilitators of the learning process as opposed
to dispensers of information.
1. The institution employs faculty who do not
limit themselves to the traditional role of
lecturer in the classroom, and may perform
in blended roles that include administrative
duties, advising, teaching and facilitating.
[Council for Adult & Experiential Learning
(CAEL)]
2. The institution engages all learners in a thor-
ough process of education and career plan-
ning to Determine their level of educational
development upon entry, their educational
and career goals, and a plan for reaching
these goals as efficiently as possible. [CAEL]
3. Number of credits awarded for Recognition
of Prior Learning (RPL) / Alternative mis-
sions and life experiences are increased by
a certain percentage within a specified time
period.
4. The institution is supportive of staff
development.
5. The institution supports on-going summa-
tive evaluations at the end of the modules
for the improvement of instruction and for
the benefit of learners.
6. Up-to-date records are kept of enrollment
and throughput of adult learners.
7. Content of the lecturer development needs
to be oriented toward facilitation of LLL.
1038
Bringing Together Personal Learning
8. The institution approves and certifies a
variety of instructional delivery systems.
9. The institution provides an atmosphere that
is people-centered, caring, warm, informal,
intimate, and trusting.
Educator role
• The educator should understand and re-
flect the values of the mission in curricu-
lum design and delivery.
• Educators will respond to the needs of
students who enter alternative admissions
policy.
• An environment is needed where faculty
treats adult students as peers – accepted
and respected as intelligent, experienced
adults whose opinions are listened to, hon-
ored, and appreciated.
• The educators are encouraged to use dif-
ferent te4aching methods and techniques
to respond to the diverse learning styles
of LLLs including co-learning, inactive
learning, and continuous learning while
also integrating appropriate technology.
10. Educators and tutors demonstrate com-
petencies as lifelong learners’ effective
learner-centered instruction.
11. An environment is provided where
faculty treats adult students as peers—
accepted and respected as intelligent
experienced adults whose opinion are
listened to, honored, and appreciated.
12. Educators will improve their own
competencies in LLL.
13. Educators will offer themselves to the
students as exemplifying a model of
LLL.
14. The curriculum is developed so that tra-
ditionally marginalized social groups
inside and outside the institution can
be full participants.
Bringing Together Personal Learning
15. Assessment is conducted in various
forms and used to improve the quality
of learning in LLLs.
16. Educators optimally pace and challenge
the learners’ intelligence just beyond
their present learning abilities.
Learner role
17. Learners provide the faculty with relevant
information so they can assess educational
development and convey credit where
appropriate.
18. Learners engage actively in the process of
learning.
19. Learners perceive that their individual needs
and uniqueness are respected.
20. Learners perceive that their abilities and life
achievements have been acknowledged and
respected in the classroom.
21. Learners are engaged in a self-assessment
process for determining readiness for self-
direction in carrying out their LLL.
22. Learners will engage in Self-Directed
Learning (SDL).
23. Learners will seek intellectual challenge.
24. Learners will engage actively with the lec-
turer and other students.
25. Learners will pursue intellectual freedom,
experimentation and creativity.
26. Learner expects to be treated as an intel-
ligent adult whose opinions are listened to,
honored, and appreciated.
It is obvious that the internal structure of this
educational system on re-orientation toward life-
long learning is focused on the interaction between
the institution and the learner. Each has a part in
making the system work and accomplishing the
goals of the system.
All of the above within the Measureable Per-
formance Indicators comes very close to what
Knowles (1990, 1995) and Henschke (2009b,
2010) explained as the element of andragogy
which means ‘the art and science of helping
adults learn’. Although much of what is referred
to pertains to adults, this foundation adds exten-
sively to what may be seen as relating to human
beings in general regarding their learning. This
also is reflective of Kohl’s (2000) and Smith’s
(1998) work in lifelong learning, and Taylor, et
al. (2000), on the competency requirements for
educators of adults.
ANOTHER INDICATOR SYSTEM
OF LIFELONG LEARNING
An additional study adds some perspective on
the responsibility of the learner in developing
and maintaining an orientation toward lifelong
learning. Li [2005] presented her findings on a
system of lifelong learning at the Commission
on International Adult Education [CIAE] Pre-
Conference of the American Association for
Adult and Continuing Education, Pittsburgh, PA.
Lifelong learning literacy in her study is defined
as having the skills/abilities to continue learning
throughout the lifespan—knowledge, skills and
attitudes we need to be developing from child-
hood. It seldom finds the term lifelong learning
literacy in the literature. However, being aware of
lifelong learning and possessing the competence
of lifelong learning are keys to future success.
Therefore, the term is meaningful and deserves
full attention. The research looked at lifelong
learning literacy from the perspectives of lifelong
learning abilities/competences, the characteristics
of lifelong learners, and self-directed learning to
formulate the research framework.
This research was intended to find out the
contents of lifelong learning. The Delphi Method
was used with 30 research targets who are either
scholars who have had in-depth researches on
lifelong learning, people who actually work in the
field of lifelong or exemplary lifelong learners.
In the contents of the indicator system, the input-
process-output (IPO) model was applied to cover
1039
 Bringing Together Personal Learning

the three aspects of cognition, skill/knowledge
and attitudes and to establish a system of lifelong
learning literacy
Li’s (2005) system is narrowly focused on
the learner and does not take into account what
an educational institution may need to do to be
supportive in the process of helping the learner
maintain a lifelong learning orientation. The
structure of her indicator system is composed of
three tiers: domains, dimensions and indicators.
There are three domains, including learning input
[LI], learning process [LP], and learning output
[LO]. The LI consists of three dimensions: self-
awareness, learning awareness, and basic cogni-
tive concepts. The LP includes four dimensions:
learning strategies and methods, pursuit and
integration of learning resources, learning time
planning / management, and team learning. The
LO takes into account the final two dimensions:
learning evaluation, and learning transfer. The
paper provides the definitions of the domains, and
fully describes and explains as the indicators, the
meaning of each dimension which are the labels of
very specific indicators. Details of the three tiers
of this indicator system [domains, dimensions,
and indicators] are provided below.
Planning Structure of the
Indicator System
he or she willing to invest time in learning
continuously.
2. Learning Process [LP] – in the learning
process an individual acquires the ability of
lifelong learning, including learning strate-
gies and methods, pursuit and integration of
learning resources, learning time planning/
management, and team learning.
3. Learning Output [LO] – an individual enjoys
lifelong learning and is able to self-evaluate
learning status, including learning evaluation
and learning transfer.
Second Tier: Dimensions – 9
• LI – Learning Input
1) Self-Awareness
2) Learning Awareness
3) Basic Concepts
• LP – Learning Process
4) Learning Strategies and Methods
5) Pursuit and Integration of Learning
Resources
6) Learning Time / Planning and
Management
7) Teaming Learning
• LO – Learning Output
8) Learning Evaluation
9) Learning Transfer

Three [3] Tiers: Third Tier: Indicators – 9

• Domains Provides Further Descriptions of Each Specific

• Dimensions Indicator in Each Dimension
• Indicators
(A) LEARNING INPUT
First Tier: Domains -- 3 Definitions 1. Self-Awareness – the ability to know one’s

1. Learning Input [LI] – means the correct • Interests

understanding about lifelong learning and • Attitudes
the readiness for lifelong learning. Only • Abilities
when an individual has a positive attitude • Needs and appreciate the importance of
toward learning and is ready for learning, is • Self-Recognition

1040
Bringing Together Personal Learning

• Self-Realization also (in the Learning • writing

Process) of great importance is
◦⊦ Personal Recognition of
Subjectivity
five indicators
• understanding his/her own interests, atti-
tudes or abilities
• awareness of the importance of self-recog-
nition and self-achievement
• understanding his/her potential and devel-
oping suitable habits
• positive self-recognition and self-discipline
• having high persistence
2. Learning Awareness – the ability to
• Recognize the meaning and importance
of lifeling learning abilities
• Set learnng goals
• Further develop learning plans based on
personal needs
six indicators
• able to find motivations for participation
and learning
• understanding the necessity of participat-
ing in learning activities
• strong awareness of the connections be-
tween lifelong and daily life
• understanding his/her own personal learn-
ing type
• able to make learning plans based on his/
her own needs
• able to set his/her learning objectives
3. Basic Cognitive Concepts – the basic abili-
ties of
• listening
• speaking
• reading
• concept formation
• abstract thinking
these are basic personal cognitive abili-
ties for learning activity participation.
three indicators:
• having basic proficiencies of / abilities of
◦⊦ listening
◦⊦ speaking
◦⊦ reading
◦⊦ writing
having the abilities to apply
mathematic
◦⊦ concepts
◦⊦ skills
having the abilities of
◦⊦ concept formation
◦⊦ abstract thinking
(B) LEARNING PROCESS
4. Learning strategies and methods -- an in-
dividual can use effectively in learning activities
• methods used to promote understanding
• learning and memorizing new knowledge
to fulfill personal learning goals
eight indicators – including able to
• detect and distinguish the emotions, inten-
tions, motivations and feelings of others
• effectively use all kinds of resources to
make learning plans
• select suitable information and services to
facilitate the implementation of learning
plans
• use memory strategies
• use creativity and imagination to solve
problems
• achieve learning objectives through the
process of self-decision-making, problem
solving and planning

1041

• systematically analyze the known and un-
known parts of problems
• adapt to different environments and use
different learning skills.
5. Pursuit and integration of learning resources
-- abilities of individual learners to
• collect and analyze information
• make critical judgments
• use and integrate resources in the process
of learning
In this society of information explosion, each
individual should learn how to
• collect data
• analyze information
• to find out helpful data
• further used and organize the data
Many scholars also regard information literacy
as one of the abilities required for development of
life-long learning skills.
six indicators-- including able to
• collect and analyze data
• to use IT tools and technologies
• use resources to make analysis and
judgment and to integration learning
information
• use the information searching functions of
different kinds of media
• able to find, select, evaluate, organize, use
and create information
• overcome learning difficulties based on
personal learning resources.
6. Learning time planning/management
• the skills of time management of a learner
• in the learning process
1042
Bringing Together Personal Learning
• in order to guide and arrange his/her per-
sonal learning activities
• to use free time reasonably and effectively
four indicators -- including able to
• do effective time management and use it
in daily life
• keep regular learning activities and good
physical conditions
• fully use learning skills to arrange learning
plans,
• plan learning participation early and im-
plement personal learning plans
7. Team learning
• the sharing of learning results
• collaboration of individual learners with
others
• to fulfill tasks in the learning process
In the society of life-long learning, team learn-
ing will be
• an irreversible trend
• an important ability for learners to learn
◦⊦ how to work with others in a team
◦⊦ accept the common goals of the team
◦⊦ in order to complete the common
learning tasks
three indicators -- including able to
• communicate and cooperate with others
• clearly express himself or herself and share
experiences with others
• discuss learning objectives and cooperate
with others to complete the tasks
(C) LEARNING OUTPUT
8. Learning evaluation -- the ability to ef-
fectively evaluate one’s performance in learning
activities.
Bringing Together Personal Learning
four indicators – including able to
• self-evaluate learning efficiency
• design creative learning activities in the
future
• use learning results to improve future
learning quality
• have reflective learning and thinking on
this learning event.
9. Learning transfer -- the ability to effectively
apply what one has learned to related contexts in
daily life.
five indicators -- including able to
• use what he or she has learned in future
planning
• use what he or she has learned in future
planning
• use the learned skills and knowledge at
work
• use the leaned knowledge to promote fam-
ily harmony
• use the learned knowledge to help commu-
nity building development
In this system, the sole responsibility is upon
the learner. In addition, it is much more detailed,
than the previous system, on the perspective of
the learner regarding what the learner needs to
do, and the learners’ responsibility in the learn-
ing process. It is not related to anything that an
educational institution would have to do with the
learning process.
Updates and Follow-Through on
The Cape Town Statement and
Implementing the “Measurable
Performance Indicators” into
Various Institutions
In 2002, John A. Henschke was instrumental in
enlisting two people he knew and had worked with
to translate the Cape Town Statement into two
other languages beside English. Dr. Eihab Abou-
Rokbah, a Saudi Arabian Ph. D, graduate from the
University of Missouri - St. Louis, translated it
into the Arabic language. Ms. Wang Yan, Director
of the International Educational Programs at the
Beijing [Peoples’ Republic of China] Academy of
Educational Sciences translated it into the Man-
darin Chinese language. These are being used in
the countries where these languages are spoken
in conjunction with the efforts of the UNESCO
Institute of Education [UIE].
In September, 2003, a six-year review on
the UNESCO Institute of Education [UIE] 1997
Hamburg, Germany CONFINTEA V Conference
was held in Bangkok, Thailand. The “measurable
performance indicators” [MPI] for characteristic
elements of a lifelong learning higher education
institution were distributed and discussed among
the eighteen [18] representatives of the participat-
ing institutions. The MPI have also been shared
and presented at numerous adult education confer-
ences in the USA and internationally.
In addition, Barnes, Jewish, Christian [BJC]
Health System in St. Louis, MO [the fourth larg-
est health care system in the USA] adopted the
MPI as the standard toward which the institution
will move itself in re-orienting their focus. In
2004, Dr. Susan Isenberg, a Ph. D. graduate from
University of Missouri - St. Louis, and Director
of the Center for Training and Development, a
BJC Center for Lifelong Learning at Christian
Hospital, implemented adult learning principles
[andragogical] and the MPI into their institutional
operation. They developed “Strategic Plan 2004”
with the vision to be recognized as a magnet
lifelong learning center by 2009. The Strategic
Plan includes four [4] major components: Dem-
onstrate Excellent Customer Service, Demonstrate
Teamwork to Earn Each Other’s Trust, Create a
Change Welcoming Healthy Work Culture, and Be
Financially Responsible (Strategic Plan…, 2004).
The reflection of this BJC Strategic Plan
moving forward is depicted in additional docu-
ments entitled: “Operational Plan,” “GAP Plan,”
1043

and “Action Plan.” Results from the first year of
implementing the Strategic Plan included the fol-
lowing new things: Place, name, responsibilities,
programs, partnerships, and attitude. The second
year results instituted: An e-learning center, online
registration, Wound Center, Diabetes Center, six
[6] promotions to leadership positions of the origi-
nal twelve [12] staff. In addition, Dr. Isenberg has
been promoted to a new staff position [reporting to
the President], that will oversee the development
of the Christian Hospital in accordance with the
adult learning [andragogical] principles and the
Measurable Performance Indicators [MPI], thus
connecting these with Corporate Profitability (Ac-
tion Plan…, 2004; Gap Plan…, 2004; Operational
Plan…, 2004).
In the 2002 annual report of the Division of
Lifelong Learning (2002) at The University of
The Western Cape [UWC] in South Africa, they
posted their progress regarding key performance
areas of lifelong learning: Recognition of Prior
Learning [RPL], advocacy for a lifelong learning
orientation, workplace learning and continuing
education, part-time studies, and lifelong learning
research and teaching. By 2003 the UWC Senate
decided to adopt a thematic approach to monitoring
the lifelong learning mission at UWC.
The theme for 2004 at UWC (Monitoring…,
2001) was on accredited part-time studies, in
which they also developed the substantially re-
vised fourth edition of “Juggling to Learn” (2005),
which is a handbook for students, educators and
administrators in the UWC part-time programme.
The aim of this document is to improve the qual-
ity and success of part-time provision at UWC
by: [1] Providing suggestions for getting started
in the programme; [2] Giving information on
useful services; [3] Giving tips on learning and
teaching; and, [4] Communicating the protocol
and encouraging its implementation. In 2005,
progress on lifelong learning had materialized to
the point that UWC made reports on recognizing
prior learning (The University…, 2005), equity
and access for adult learners and workers (Equity,
1044
Bringing Together Personal Learning
access…, 2005), and, profiles of success (Profiles
of Success…, 2005).
Helping to Reorient Higher
Education in the First Decade
of the 21st Century
Strategic support from UNESCO was forthcom-
ing. Through the numerous conferences they con-
vened, national reports they received upon request,
and action documents they facilitated in helping
produce, the strong emphasis was to encourage the
shift of higher education institutions away from
a traditional educational approach and toward
an orientation of lifelong learning and education
(Boucouvalas, 2009; GRALE, 2009; Harnessing
the power…, 2009; Quality education…,2008).
Since 1949, UNESCO has convened Six
International World Conferences in Adult Edu-
cation (named CONFINTEA): one conference
every 12 years [1949 – Elsinore, Denmark; 1960
– Montreal, Canada; 1972 – Tokyo, Japan; 1985 –
Paris, France; 1997 – Hamburg, Germany; 2009
– Belem, Para, Brazil]. Each of them in one way
or another made a contribution toward what is
now a worldwide concern with lifelong learning
and education.
During 2008 and 2009 there were 23 related
and preparatory conferences and meetings leading
up to the Belem CONFINTEA VI (Quality educa-
tion…, 2008). UNESCO’s Medium Term Strategy
2008-2013 reads on lifelong learning as follows:
Development and economic prosperity depend on
the ability of countries to educate all members of
their societies and offer them lifelong learning. An
innovative society prepares its people not only to
embrace and adapt to change but also to manage
and influence it. Education enriches cultures, cre-
ates mutual understanding and underpins peaceful
societies. (p. 3)
At the 2009 World Conference in Higher Edu-
cation, emphasis was placed on Higher Education
Bringing Together Personal Learning
promoting ethical values and attitudes among
students that solidifies learning throughout life
in fulfilling their responsibility toward society
and their sensitivity to local, national and global
realities. Following the conference title ‘The new
dynamics of higher education and research for so-
cietal change and development’ the major themes
were on: internationalization, regionalization and
globalization, equity, access and quality, learning,
research and innovation. Very clearly articulated
was higher education’s role in addressing major
global challenges like sustainable development,
education for all, and poverty eradication, which
will require them to be in a mode of lifelong learn-
ing and education (Quality education…, 2008.
Boucouvalas (2009) in reporting her reflec-
tions about the UNESCO World Conference on
Higher Education [WCHE], indicated that there
appeared to be a movement of higher education
toward resonance with the theory and practice
that adult education has embraced for decades.
This included concepts of lifelong learning,
learner-centered approaches, learning how to
learn, critical consciousness, recognition of
non-formal and informal learning, participatory
research, marginalized and disadvantaged groups,
self-managed learning, and transformational
learning. She offered the observation that it may
be meaningful to build bridges between higher
education and adult education.
The WCHE adopted a Communique at the
final plenary session which was included in
Boucouvalas’ (2009) report. There were two
major statements [items 18 and 21, both on page
18 of her report] pertaining to higher education’s
responsibility relating to lifelong learning. The
first item is regarding the training offered by
higher education.
The training offered by institutions of higher
education should both respond to and anticipate
societal needs. This includes promoting research
for the development and use of new technolo-
gies and ensuring the provision of technical and
vocational training, entrepreneurship education
and programmes for lifelong learning. (Item # 18)
The second item in the WCHE Communique
regarding higher education’s responsibility for
lifelong learning is on the topic of the quality of
overall objectives.
Quality criteria must reflect the overall objectives
of higher education, notably hhe aim of cultivat-
ing in students critical and independent thought
and the capacity of learning throughout life. They
should encourage innovation and diversity. Assur-
ing quality in higher education requires recogni-
tion of the importance of attracting and retaining
qualified, talented and committed teaching and
research staff. (Item # 21)
The Global Report on Adult Learning and
Education [GRALE] (2009) was generated by
UNESCO based on the requested national reports
which they received from 154 UNESCO Member
States on the state of adult learning and educa-
tion, and five Regional Synthesis Reports and
secondary literature.
These reports were provided preparatory to
CONFINTEA VI, held December 1-4, 2009,
in Belem, Para, Brazil. GRALE indicates the
need to situate adult education within a lifelong
learning perspective and a capability approach.
This underscores and reiterates what each of the
previous five CONFINTEA Conferences has also
emphasized.
The Belem Framework for Action is the Of-
ficial Document that resulted from CONFINTEA
VI. It is entitled: Harnessing the power and
potential of adult learning and education for a
viable future (Harnessing the power…, 2009). It
was adopted by the Member Nations at the final
plenary session of UNESCO CONFINTEA VI,
December 4, 2009. It will help guide adult learning
and education [including higher education] in the
next 12 years around the globe. It is appropriate
1045

to include a final quote from that document on
lifelong learning.
The role of lifelong learning is critical in ad-
dressing global and educational issues and chal-
lenges. Lifelong learning “from cradle to grave”
is a philosophy, conceptual framework and an
organizing principle of all education, based on
inclusive, emancipatory, humanistic, emocratic
values, all-encompassing and with the vision of
a knowledge-based society. We reaffirm the four
pillars of learning as recommended by the Inter-
national Commission of Education for the 21st
Century, namely learning to know, learning to
do, learning to be, learning to live together. (p. 2)
CONCLUSION
Research on the movement of Higher Education
away from a traditional educational approach
toward a lifelong learning orientation has been
transpiring over a period of more than 12 years.
Much of the original impetus came as a result
of the collegial working relationship between
The University of The Western Cape (UWC) in
Cape Town, South Africa, and The University of
Missouri System in the USA. A foundation was
laid between the Northern Hemisphere and the
Southern Hemisphere, represented by these two
institutions and their connections with wider bod-
ies of literature and the United Nations Education,
Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO).
A definition of lifelong learning was developed,
and then best practices of faculty for helping
adults learn were identified. This was implemented
into indicators for performance to most helpful
to realize lifelong learning in the constituents.
Another lifelong learning system was identified
that focused mainly on the adult learner. As time
progress, updates and follow-through activities
were exemplifying how lifelong learning was
being used in higher education as well as other
1046
Bringing Together Personal Learning
institutional systems. During the last two years
of the first decade of the 21st Century, UNESCO
became very prominent in consolidating the re-
search and practice of lifelong learning in adult
and higher education and strategically encouraging
its implementation. The promise for the future
appears to be in moving from rhetoric to action
in the many years that are ahead of us.
REFERENCES
Action Plan for 2004-2009 (2004). Christian
hospital center for training and development. St.
Louis, Missouri.
Agenda for the Future and The Hamburg Decla-
ration. (July, 1997) CONFINTEA V-UNESCO
International Conference on Adult Education,
Hamburg, Germany.
Billington, D. D. (1988). Ego development and
adult education. Doctoral Dissertation, Santa
Barbara, CA: The Fielding Institute.
Billington, D. D. (2000). Seven characteristics
of highly effective adult learning programs. New
Horizons for Learning, Seattle: New Horizons.
Retrieved from http://www.newhorizons.org
Boucouvalas, M. (2009). Report on UNESCO
World Conference on Higher Education. Unpub-
lished Manuscript. Falls Church, VA.
Delors, J. (1998). Learning: The treasure within
(Rev. ed.). Report to UNESCO of the International
Commission on Education for the Twenty-first
Century. Paris, France: UNESCO.
Division of Lifelong Learning [DLL], (2002).
Annual report. The University of the Western
Cape, Bellville, Cape Town, South Africa [SA].
Retrieved December 29, 2009, from www.uwc.
ac.za/dll
Bringing Together Personal Learning
Equity, access, and success in higher education
in South Africa for adult learners and workers.
(2005). Retrieved December 29, 2009, from C;\
ptreseai’ch\che 2005 0313 draft article — v3mbsw.
doc.B, CT, SA: UWC Document.
Flint, T. A. (1999). Best practices in adult learn-
ing: A CAEL / APQC benchmarking study. New
York: Forges Custom Publishing.
Gap Plan March 2004. (2004). Christian hospital
center for training and development. St. Louis,
Missouri.
Global report on adult learning and education
[GRALE]. (2009). Hamburg, Germany: UNESCO
Institute for Lifelong Learning.
Harnessing the power and potential of adult
learning and education for a viable future: Belem
Framework for Action. (2009). CONFINTEA
VI-UNESCO Sixth International Conference in
Adult Education. Belem, Para, Brazil.
Henschke, J. A. (1987). Training teachers of adults
. In Materials & methods of adult education. Menlo
Park, CA: Klevens Publications.
Henschke, J. A. (2000). Moving a university or
college toward a lifelong learning orientation. In
Proceedings of the International Conference on
Lifelong Learning. Beijing, China: Beijing Normal
University— Divisions of Lifelong Learning &
International Comparative Education; Beijing
Adult Education Association; Caritas Adult &
Higher Education Service — Hong Kong.
Henschke, J. A. (2006). Common elements for re-
orienting higher education institutions in various
countries toward lifelong learning: Research and
implications for practice. In E. P. Isaac-Savage
(Ed.), Proceedings of the Midwest Research to
Practice Conference in Adult, Continuing, Com-
minity and Extension Education (pp.86-92). St.
Louis, MO: University of Missouri.
Henschke, J. A. (2009a). Six pillars in lifelong
learning: Learning to know, learning to do, learn-
ing to live together, learning to be, learning to
change, and learning for sustainable development.
Unpublished paper at the Lindenwood University,
St. Charles, MO.
Henschke, J. A. (2009b). Engagement in active
learning with Brazilian adult educators. In G.
Strohschen (Ed.), Handbook of blended shore
learning: An international adult education hand-
book (121-136). NY: Springer Science+Business
Media, LLC.
Henschke, J. A. (2010). A productive decade of
andragogy’s history and philosophy 2000-2009.
In V. C. X. Wang (Ed.), Assessing and evaluating
adult learning in career and technical education
(53-85). Hangzhou, China: Zhejiang University
Press and Hershey, PA, USA: IGI Global.
Juggling to learn: Planning for success in the
part-time program (4th substantially Rev. ed.).
(2005). A handbook for students, educators and
administrators in the part-time programme.Bell-
ville, Cape Town, South Africa: The University
of The Western Cape.
Knowles, M. S. (1990). The adult learner: A
neglected species (4th ed.). Houston: Gulf Pub-
lishing Company.
Knowles, M. S. (1995). Designs for adult learning:
Practical resources, exercises, and course outlines
from the father of adult learning. Alexandria, VA:
American Society for Training and Development.
Kohl, K. J. (Ed.). (2000). Lifelong learning trends:
A profile of continuing higher education (6th ed.).
Washington, D. C.: The University Continuing
Education Association.
Lemkuhle, S. (2000). Instructional & learning
paradigm. Adopted from Barr & Tagg (Eds.),
Change, 1995 (p. 16). Adapted by Henschke.
Columbia, Missouri: University of Missouri.
1047

Li, A. T. (2005). Building an indicator system of
lifelong learning literacy. In J. A. Henschke (Ed.),
Proceedings of the Commission on International
Adult Education (CIAE) Pre-Conference of the
American Association for Adult and Continuing
Education (AAACE) Conference (pp.103-112).
Pittsburgh, PA.
Maehl, W. H. (2000). Lifelong learning at its best:
Innovative practices in adult credit programs. San
Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Monitoring the implementation of the lifelong
learning mission. (27 October 2004). Draft report
prepared for submission to the Senate Lifelong
Learning Committee (SLLC). Accredited part-
time studies provision at The University of The
Western Cape [UWC]. B, CT, SA: UWC Docu-
ment.
Mumbai Statement on Lifelong Learning, Active
Citizenship and the Reform of Higher Education.
(April, 1998). Department of Adult and Continu-
ing Education and Extension of the University of
Mumbai in Mumbal, India. Statement developed
and made in preparation for the World Conference
on Higher Education: Higher Education in the 21st
Century in Paris, October, 1998.
Operational Plan 2004. (2004). Christian hospital
center for training and development. A BJC Center
for Lifelong Learning. St. Louis, Missouri.
Profiles of Success for 2005. (2005). Cape Town
/ Bellville, South Africa: The University of the
Western Cape — Division of Lifelong Learning.
Quality Education, Equity and Sustainable Devel-
opment: A holistic vision through UNESCO’s four
World Education Conferences 2008-2009 (2008).
United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cul-
tural Organization [UNESCO], Education Sector.
Serving Adult Learners in Higher Education.
(2000). Principles of Effectiveness, Executive
Summary. Chicago: Council for Adult and Ex-
periential Learning.
1048
Bringing Together Personal Learning
Smith, W. (1998). Report and recommendations
on the implementation of lifelong learning at
UWC. Unpublished Manuscript — University
of Missouri.
Strategic Plan 2004. (2004). Christian hospital
center for training and development. A BJC renter
for lifelong learning. St. Louis, Missouri.
Taylor, K. C., Marienau, C., & Morris, F. (2000).
Developing adult learners: Strategies for teachers
& trainers. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
The Cape Town Statement on Characteristic Ele-
ments of a Lifelong Learning Higher Education
Institution (2001). Cape Town, South Africa:
The University of the Western Cape. Retrieved
December 29, 2009, from http:llwww.uwc.ac.za/
dll/conferencelct-statement.htm
The University of The Western Cape JUWCJ
recognizes your prior learning: Your experience
and motivation can become the key to your fu-
ture degree at UWC. (2005). B, CT, SA: UWC
Document.
Walters, S. (n.d.). Draft report and recommenda-
tions on the implementation of lifelong learning
at UWC. Unpublished Manuscript — UWC.
Walters, S., & Volbrecht, T. (n.d.). Developing
lifelong learning at the University of the Western
Cape: strategic plan for the university mission
initiative on lifelong learning. Unpublished
Manuscript — UWC.
Wood, T. (2001). Academic planning 2001. Un-
published Manuscript — UWC.
KEY TERMS AND DEFINITIONS
Collaborative: Good willed, team up, sup-
portive, side with, form an alliance with, pull
together, cooperative.
Comprehensive: Complete, all-embracing,
integral, whole, lacking nothing, conclusive.
Bringing Together Personal Learning
Effective: Vital, influential, momentous, sig-
nificant, consequential, strong, firm, vigorous,
energetic, guiding.
Empower: Energize, strengthen, electrify,
enable, endow with power.
Ethical: Virtuous, pure as the driven snow,
principled, just, loving, prudent, faithful, impec-
cable.
Interactive: Working together, joint, mutual
relationship, compatibility, interpenetration, re-
ciprocate.
Learning: Finding out, inquiring, self-instruc-
tion, ascertaining, illumination, acquiring wisdom.
Lifelong: Abiding, continuous, durable, last-
ing, enduring, from cradle to grave.
Model: Epitomize, exemplify, set an example,
personify.
Pillar: That on which some superstructure
rests, supporting member, foundation.
Proactive: Undertake, get one’s mind into,
initiative, self-direct, take in hand, assume re-
sponsibility.
Re-Orientation: Move in another direction,
reformulate, refashioning, reformulation.
1049
1050

Chapter 64
Program Development
in Adult Education:
An Example
Victor C. X. Wang
California State University, Long Beach, USA

ABSTRACT
Education and training programs for adults come in all shapes, sizes, and formats (Caffarella, 2002, p.
2). It is the responsibility of adult learning professions to develop sound and meaningful programs for
mature learners. Often times these programs are affiliated with certain universities. Any program propos-
als in adult education require essential components such as program standards, need for the program,
mission and goals of the program, curriculum, faculty, assessment methods, external funding and survey
results. Depending on institutions’needs, other components may be required. It is self-explanatory that the
purpose of program development in adult education is to encourage continuous growth and development
of mature learners. Adult learners should be the center of attention when it comes to the development
of sound and meaningful programs. The chapter will provide an exemplary example for adult learning
professionals who have just graduated from graduate programs in adult education.

INTRODUCTION almost become a trend that when the economy

During the time of budget cuts and furloughs,
it is vital that adult learning professionals learn
to develop sound and meaningful programs for
adult learners in respective institutions of higher
learning. Graduates from adult education pro-
grams are often asked to develop adult education
programs by their affiliated institutions. It has
DOI: 10.4018/978-1-61692-906-0.ch064
is in a bad shape, more mature learners return
to schools to retool their skills and knowledge
in order to find other employment when the
economy recovers. University administrators are
often professionals with other academic degrees
than degrees in adult education. Naturally, these
administrators will seek help from graduates from
adult education programs called adult learning
professionals. When these administrators come
to adult learning professionals to assist them in
Program Development in Adult Education
developing programs, this means the administra-
tors are committed to doing the right things for
adult learners. Some university administrators
may turn away from adult learning professionals
and take any advice from professionals in other
fields of study. When this happens, we say these
university administrators are not committed to do-
ing the right things for adult learners. Or we may
say that university administrators place politics
over students’ needs. Then, it is adult learning
professional’s responsibility to fight on behalf of
adult learners in order to win back the opportunity
to develop sound/meaningful programs for adult
learners in the field.
Once the opportunity is back in the hands of
adult learning professionals, Caffarella (2002)
reminds us that in addition to the purpose men-
tioned in the abstract, the four purposes in de-
veloping programs for adult learners are to (1),
assist people in responding to practical problems
and issues of adult life; (2), prepare people for
current and future work opportunities; (3), assist
organizations in achieving designed results and
adapting to change, and (4), provide opportuni-
ties to examine community and societal issues,
foster change for the common good, and promote
a civil society. Her four purposes in conducting
program development for adult learners do not
deviate from the three kinds of changes that most
educators and trainers are engaged in promoting,
that is, the goal of program development is to
foster three kinds of change: individual change,
organizational change, and societal change (Rog-
ers, 1995; Caffarella, 2002). Once the purposes
or goal of program development are clear, adult
learning professionals need to gather resources to
include important and necessary components of a
sound/meaningful proposal in order to persuade
university or organizational administrators to
buy into the proposal. Most administrators are
reluctant to spend money on a new program. It
is vital that adult learning professionals focus on
existing resources to support the new program
proposal in order to get full support from uni-
versity or organizational administrators. While
many online universities do support adult learn-
ing programs for mature learners, so many other
universities often treat adult learners primarily as
a lucrative source of income. As noted by Bash
(2003, p. 6), “because these programs typically
require less overhead and diminished services,
there are abundant examples of colleges and
universities that opt for adult programs merely
to satisfy financial than philosophical needs.”
Institutions that treat adult programs as the campus
cash cow do not seem to understand the nature of
adult learners or adult programs. When this hap-
pens, adult learning professionals are faced with
tremendous difficulty in terms of implementing
a sound/meaningful program that philosophically
makes sense to adult learners. Readers can treat
this chapter as a case study chapter in order to
learn a lesson from vicissitudes and plight that
the author’s adult program had to go through
between 2007 and 2010.
BACKGROUND
The PDW Department began to offer adult pro-
grams to mature learners since the founding of
this public university in 1949. In California in
the United States, there are so many what we
call Regional Occupational Programs (ROP),
adult schools, and community colleges. Naturally
mature learners would need a place to obtain
their teacher certification, BS degree, or MA
or MS degrees in adult education or Career and
Technical Education. The department used to be
called Department of Vocational Education for
so many years. Two decades ago, the name was
changed to Department of Occupational Studies
as some leading universities such as University
of Georgia began to have a department called
Department of Occupational Studies. Although
the name is different from the previous one, all
these departments are about serving the learning
needs of adult learners. At the turn of the 21st
1051

century, there seemed to be a movement towards
changing department names. The Department of
Occupational Studies was changed to the Depart-
ment of PDW. It must be pointed out that the
name was imposed upon the department without
due agreement from the faculty in the field as it is
too broad. It can be the name of a whole college.
Prior to 2007, the former department leader was
authorized to develop a distance learning program
for the department. It did not take this department
a very long time before the department emerged
as the largest department for adult learners on the
West Coast of the United States. To date, there
were over 2000 adult learners studying in the
Distance Learning Program and several hundred
state side students studying in the various adult
programs in the department of PDW. Over the
years, this leader also brought in over X million
grant monies to support the various adult programs
in California. The mission was clear, that is, to
generate long-term revenue gains to support any
further program development for adult learners
in order for mature students to get value added
degrees to survive and thrive in the 21st century
new economy. However, his set of goals clashed
with the different sets of goals set by the former
college leader in the college. As the former de-
partment leader continued to send huge checks
to the college and the university overall, he kept
on bringing innovative ideas about rebuilding the
various programs for adult learners in the depart-
ment. Unfortunately, none of his ideas or checks
was appreciated by the former college leader who
was supported by the university leaders. To cut a
long story short, because the department leader
“defied” their leadership in the college and at the
university, he was “bought out” by the university.
Then, the former college leader “installed” other
new leaders. None of these new leaders knows
anything about the nature of adult learners or
CTE programs. Tons of complaints began to oc-
cur, and some students even complained about
their mis-management and wrong leadership to
the higher ranking officials. Because of their lack
1052
Program Development in Adult Education
of knowledge or skills to effectively manage a
distinctively different department, they failed to
maintain accreditation from Western Accreditation
of Schools and Colleges in the Spring semester of
2009. It was in this semester these administrators
decided to “dissolve” the Department of PDW.
Their dissolution proposal was supported by the
then provost. Normally when a university decides
to dissolve an academic department, it is because a
department fails to generate any long term revenue
gains because of low enrollment or no enrollment.
This was not the case with the Department of PDW.
There has been a huge demand for adult programs
in this state and very few universities offer adult
programs or CTE programs. Well over 2000
mature students used to study in this department.
Where would they go to secure their education and
training in order to contribute to society? It was
in the spring semester of 2009 that the author of
this chapter saw this great opportunity to develop
a program proposal and submit it to the university
administrators. Although the VPS did not show
any interest in this viable program for adult learn-
ers, some department chairs whose background is
similar to adult education showed great interest.
The proposal is still being discussed. As soon as
this chapter is published, there is a good chance
that the program will be implemented in the state.
See below the whole program proposal and pay
special attention to the essential components of
this proposal.
THE EXAMPLE: A VIABLE
PROGRAM PROPOSAL THAT
CAN BE IMPLEMENTED
Standards for Graduate
Programs in Adult Education
Adult Education is a recognized field of graduate
study with a distinctive body of knowledge that
embraces theory, research, and practice relating
to adult learners, adult educators, adult education
Program Development in Adult Education
and learning processes, programs, and organiza-
tions (Merriam & Brockett, 2007). Graduate adult
education developed as a field of study in the 1920s
and 1930s, and the Commission for Professors
of Adult Education was established nationally in
1955. It currently meets at the annual American
Association for Adult and Continuing Educa-
tion (AAACE) and Adult Education Research
Conference (AERC) meetings. Adult Education
university-based programs are dedicated to meet-
ing the demand for providing graduate education
for those interested in understanding, fostering,
and articulating the ways in which adults learn and
can be helped to learn in a wide range of settings.
There is a historic commitment to promoting in-
novation in teaching-learning strategies, adoption
of emerging technologies, and social change.
Graduate students in adult education are seek-
ing academic careers or preparation for leadership
and practice in a range of adult education settings.
Examples include continuing education, adult
learners(ing) in postsecondary environments,
distance learning organizations, program develop-
ment, adult basic education, cooperative exten-
sion, workplace learning, gerontology, nonprofit
or community education, places of worship, as
well as many other contexts. Adult education, as a
field, places emphasis on developing diverse and
equitable cultural and economic sustainability in
schools, workplaces, and communities through
the facilitation of adult learning and collaboration
among participants.
MASTER OF SCIENCE: ADULT
EDUCATION/ADULT ESL
The intent of the following proposal is to modify
and add the degree program, Adult ESL, at WPD
to the existing degree program, Career and Techni-
cal Education, (CTE). Students at this university
major in Career and Technical Education after they
complete their teaching credential courses in CTE
or adult education. Over the years, the number of
students declaring the above mentioned major
and teaching credentials has steadily increased.
In particular, our distance learning programs have
seen a particularly large increase. Over the years,
students have asked us if we would add a master’s
degree in adult education so that they could pursue
such a degree. Every semester, many students in
our current programs ask us about such a degree.
Some potential students from other universities,
including part time instructors, have also asked us
about such a program in adult education. With such
a degree in adult education, graduates will be able
to teach a variety of courses, both CTE as well as
adult education per se, in adult schools, regional
occupational programs, secondary schools, and
community colleges or corporate training settings.
To date, the College of Education does not
have a department or program that offers adult
education courses to accommodate the needs of
working adults. Very few programs in California
offer a master’s degree program in adult educa-
tion, and no programs in California offer a master
level degree in adult ESL. The student body in the
department of PDW consists of exclusively adult
learners, mainly non-traditional learners, and a
number of them have shown interest in a master
level degree in adult education—many want a
concentration in Adult ESL. With globalization
impacting the education market, some students
will be positioned to teach Adult ESL courses in
other countries if they can complete a master’s
degree in Adult ESL. Immigrants in California will
benefit by being instructed by teachers who have
master’s degrees in Adult ESL. In other words,
they have their own areas of expertise that they
could teach to others. However, they may lack
knowledge and skills in instructional strategies,
pedagogy, philosophical, foundational knowledge
and research skills in adult education.
This new degree program does not require
the creation and approval of any new courses.
Four existing courses in the Designated Subjects
Credential Program could apply, or be slightly
revamped. The same two research methodology
1053

courses used currently in the College of Education
could apply towards this new degree. Elective
courses, enhancing cognate areas, could be taken
in College of Health and Human Services and in
the College of Education on campus. Existing
Linguistic and Education courses offered through
the College of Education could also apply:
1. Linguistics--486—3 Units (Our credential
students have been taking this course)
2. EDP587—Literacy and Linguistics—3
Units
3. EDP589—Adult Literacy and Language
Diversity—3 Units
4. EDP576—Ed. & Diversity or EDP 577—
Educational Linguistics—3 Units
See Figure 1 the knowledge package created
by an adult education program.
Advisory Board
With the help of the advisor board, the department
was able to develop pertinent curricula for the
program. Board members have been instrumental
in encouraging the development of this program
Figure 1.
1054
Program Development in Adult Education
in order to increase the pool of qualified profes-
sionals in this field.
1. Dr. AA, Professor, President of International
Adult and Continuing Education Hall of
Fame, Emeritus, North Carolina State
University
2. Dr. BB, Associate Professor and Assistant
Department Chair of Adult Education,
Editorial Board Member of Adult Education
Quarterly, Texas A&M University
3. Dr. CC, Associate Dean of College of
Education and Health Professions, Professor
of Adult Education, University of Arkansas,
Fayetteville
4. Dr. DD, Professor and Program Director
of Adult Education, University of Georgia,
Athens
5. Dr. EE, Professor of Adult Education, Series
Editor of Adult Education Books of Krieger
Publishing Company and consultant for
Adult Education Quarterly, University of
Georgia, Athens
6. Dr. FF, Visiting Professor in the department
of Adult Education, Penn State University
Program Development in Adult Education
7. Dr. GG, Associate Professor and Program
director of Adult Education, Northern Illinois
University
NEED FOR THE PROGRAM
The last part of the 20th century witnessed the
growth of the field known as adult education.
Adult learning programs have grown significantly
on the majority of campuses in the US during the
past 20 years, and one of the foremost aspects of
higher education in the 21st century is the grow-
ing importance of the adult learner. According
to the National Center for Education Statistics,
90 million Americans participated in some kind
of formal adult learning in 1999 (Canja, 2002, p.
27). In a study conducted by the United Nations
Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organiza-
tion (Valentine, 1997; Merriam, Caffarella, &
Baumgartner, 2007), fully 90.6 percent of those
surveyed in the United States cited career-or- job-
related reasons for participation in adult education
and 9.4 percent cited “personal interest.” Oppor-
tunities for jobs as adult education teachers are
expected to be favorable. Employment is expected
to grow as fast as the average for all occupations
through 2014, and a large number of job openings
are expected due to the need to replace people who
leave the occupation or retire. Significant employ-
ment growth is anticipated especially for ESOL
teachers, who will be needed by the increasing
number of immigrants and other residents living
in this country that need to learn, or improve, their
English skills. Needless to say, California has
large populations of residents who have limited
English skills. Because CTE is often associated
with blue collar workers, many universities in
the nation have changed their CTE programs to
Adult Education Programs in order to attract more
adult students.
The demand for such a program in adult educa-
tion in California is a result, in part, of the large
job market and numerous career opportunities that
await graduates of the program. According to the
California Teachers Association, the adult school
program alone touches over several million adults
a year in the state. Graduates of the program are
expected to serve in school districts, community
colleges, community or faith-based organizations,
volunteer literacy organizations, public or private
nonprofit agencies, public libraries, state agencies,
correctional facilities, the California Conservation
Corps, the California Youth Authority, and the
California Department of Developmental Ser-
vices. While the adult education programs in the
University of California system produce research-
oriented graduates, the CSU system needs to
add master level programs in adult education to
produce practitioners that can serve in the above
mentioned schools and agencies.
MISSION AND GOALS
OF THE PROGRAM
Mission
The mission of the adult education program is
to take the leadership role in promoting adult
education, providing professional development,
and effecting change to best serve the needs and
interests of adult education, and the people of
California.
Goals
1. To provide adult and occupational educa-
tors with the necessary competencies for
success and employability in public and
private institutions and agencies offering
programs requiring the Master of Science
in Adult Education.
2. To satisfy all requirements of California
State law and the Commission on Teacher
Credentialing dealing with vocational and
adult teacher licensing, and to serve as a
catalyst for influencing legislation when it
is in the best interest of the teachers served
by the program.
1055

3. To provide candidates with the skills, knowl-
edge, and attitudes requisite for successful
experience as teachers of adult learners.
4. To serve as a primary resource to persons
pursuing studies related to the expansion
and improvement of existing courses and
programs related to adult education, and
to make such educational programs more
relevant to the world of work.
5. To provide teachers and teacher candidates a
comprehensive array of experiences in order
to develop needed competencies including
an awareness of and appreciation for the role
of technology in adult educational programs.
6. To develop in teachers the ability to help
others become aware of and understand
their own aptitudes, interests, and values
as they relate to their career choices, life
experiences, and their lifelong preparation
for the world of work.
7. To provide resource information on a variety
of occupations and job-related requirements
to teacher education programs.
8. To develop in teachers the understanding of
the need to anticipate and prepare for change
in adult education in order to better meet
societal, learner, and educational needs.
9. To aid teachers in developing a sense of pride
and appreciation for the teaching profes-
sion as it relates to adult education and the
American economic system.
CURRICULUM
Adult education coursework should clearly dis-
tinguish between masters and doctoral levels in
terms of defining outcomes relevant to beginning
and advanced graduate study. For both levels,
adult education places a value on the concept of
praxis, of integrating theory and practice in such
a way that good practice informs and enhances
development and use of theory; and, in the reverse,
that good theory informs and enhances the devel-
opment and application of practice. Further, adult
1056
Program Development in Adult Education
education places a high value on innovation and
acknowledges the influence of technology both
in terms of content and delivery of curriculum
(Wang, 2009). The Commission recommends
consulting the best practices for distance delivery
developed by relevant professional associations.
For some programs, masters, and doctoral stu-
dents will have some overlap in core coursework.
When they are taught separately, the following
core topical areas, taught from diverse and critical
perspectives, are suggested at the master’s level.
These suggestions are for topical areas, and are
not necessarily equivalent to separate courses:
• Introduction to the nature, function, and
scope of adult education
• Adult learning and development
• Adult education program processes, in-
cluding planning, delivery, and assessment/
evaluation
• Introductory study of how technology in-
fluences adult education
• Historical, philosophical, and sociological
foundations of adult education
• Overview of educational research
These core areas are supplemented by ad-
ditional study appropriate to student needs and
goals, which may emphasize a range of leadership
roles (e.g., administrator, teacher, counselor). A
student’s area of specialty may relate to study
within the range of specialty areas reflected in the
adult education faculty or may extend to study with
other faculties. In general, it is unlikely that any
adult education graduate program will contain all
the supporting courses that students require (e.g.,
business, community development, philosophy,
political science, sociology, psychology, etc.), and
students should be encouraged to seek out and
supplement program instruction through selected
coursework and learning experiences with other
appropriate faculties or program areas.
At the doctoral level, these suggestions are for
topical areas, and are not necessarily equivalent
Program Development in Adult Education
to separate courses. The suggested core topical
areas include:
• Advanced study of adult learning (theory
and research)
• Historical, philosophical foundations of
adult education
• Study of leadership, including theories or
organizational leadership, administration
and change
• Analysis/study of the changing role of
technology in adult education
• Study of issues of policy in relation to
adult education
• Analysis of globalization and international
issues or perspectives in adult education
• In-depth analysis of social, political, and
economic forces that have shaped the
foundations and discourse within adult
education
• Advanced specialty courses relevant to
unique program and faculty strengths (e.g.,
continuing professional education, work-
place learning, social movement learning)
• Appropriate depth of qualitative or quan-
titative research methodology coursework
to support dissertation research and ability
to utilize existing literature
Students entering doctoral study with a mas-
ter’s degree in another field may be asked to take
prerequisites from the adult education master’s
level courses. At the master’s level, select doctoral
courses may be used as a supplement to additional
study congruent with students’ needs and goals.
Adult education doctoral study can be a Ph.D.,
an Ed. D., or both options may be available at some
institutions. Institutions offering both options
should provide clear information on the distinc-
tions between the two degrees. Generally, the
Ed. D. focuses on translating theory and research
into practice, and has the larger goal of preparing
practitioners or scholar-practitioners who will be
well-informed, credible leaders in the field of adult
education. The Ph. D. emphasizes the study and
synthesis of theory and research, and can produce
dedicated scholar-researchers committed to the
advancement of knowledge and scholarship in the
field and may also produce scholar-practitioners
who wish a strong depth in research preparation
for practice.
EXPLANATION OF THE
STRUCTURE OF THE PROGRAM
The curriculum of the program is designed to
provide students with a broad-based educational
background in order for them to become success-
ful practitioners and leaders in a dynamic multi-
cultural working environment. Academic and
supporting courses, plus hands-on experience, are
integrated into the structure of the curriculum in
order to provide a strong foundation for students
when they enter the job market upon graduation.
Many of our potential students are in-service teach-
ers or full time employees in various agencies.
They bring to class a plethora of prior experience
which provides the richest resource for learning in
our program. In addition to major requirements,
students must have completed a bachelor’s degree
and maintain a GPA of at least 2.85.
The curriculum of the major is designed so that
it will be able to meet the academic accreditation
standards set by the Accreditation Commission
for Programs in Adult Education. The intent is to
seek accreditation in the future, and it is believed
that the proposed major would strengthen the
existing degree programs and offer more career
options to graduates.
The curriculum of the program includes 12
units of coursework that are required to acquire
the core knowledge of adult education. Similar
coursework is required by all comparable pro-
grams at other universities around the nation. The
curriculum provides a sequencing structure that
enables student to obtain necessary competencies
1057

prior to proceeding to higher level courses. The
core courses offered are as follows:
410 – Curriculum Development for Adult
Learners
411 – Assessing and Evaluating Adult Learning
413 – History and Philosophy of Adult Education
(CTE)
435 – Principles of Adult Education
The above four classes are the required
credential courses dealing with CTE and adult
education. Noteworthy is the fact that CTE and
Adult Education are inseparable fields.
The California Commission on Teaching Cre-
dentialing will approve the above four courses
for our credential program. This means students
will obtain two teaching credentials in CTE and
Adult Education before they enter the master’s
program in adult education. Then our existing
research methodology courses will be utilized.
Students will be advised to take EDP400— Critical
Analysis of Issues & Problems in Education & the
Workplace course to enable them to do research
in the field. As they are about to finish taking all
the required courses, students will be advised to
take EDP520 or 595—Research Methods course
so that the coursework will help students complete
their theses, thus becoming better consumers of
research in the field of adult education.
As an exit requirement students can choose to
take a comprehensive exam or to write a thesis.
Either option will satisfy the requirements of an
MS in adult education.
If approved, this university will be the only
campus to provide a master’s program in Adult
Education with one more option that offers an
emphasis in Adult ESL to serve the State of
California. The online teaching option will reach
students from all over the state. The geographi-
cal location served by the university is an area of
substantial need for graduates in this field. Out
of state students and international students are
also welcome to pursue such a degree in adult
1058
Program Development in Adult Education
education. A few grant writers will be invited
to support students with their grant monies. The
faculty in the current credential program has
professional ties with prominent grant writers in
California and in other states. The faculty in the
current credential program also has the capability
to recruit students from other countries. Some
universities from China and Russia have already
communicated their need to send their graduate
students to a potential Adult Education Program
at the university.
Learning Outcome Assessment Plan
1. Prepare lesson plans in which the instruc-
tional objectives, testing, teaching strategies,
safety considerations, classroom materials,
and assessment plans are coordinated and
consistent with each other.
2. Evaluate the effectiveness of students’ own
instruction.
3. Develop a curriculum, including scope and
sequence charts, course outlines, and coor-
dinated, consistent lesson plans.
4. Debate the social, philosophical, economic,
and political factors that have affected adult
education from 1856 to the present, including
the impact of technology.
5. Synthesize the contributions and philoso-
phies of the local, national and international
leaders in adult education.
6. Demonstrate second language acquisition
techniques.
7. Evaluate techniques in teaching Adult ESL.
8. Apply principles of adult learning to indi-
vidual classrooms in adult education.
9. Develop working philosophies in adult
education that can be used in day to day
teaching and learning situations.
10. Design meaningful research-oriented proj-
ects that can be used to guide adult teaching
and learning.
11. Demonstrate computer applications and
research methods.
Program Development in Adult Education
Table 1. Curriculum Map for the MS in Adult Education
Courses in the curriculum and the Learning Outcomes
Core Courses
410—Curriculum Development for Adult Learners—3 Units
411—Assessing and Evaluating Adult Learning—3 Units
413—Philosophical Foundations of Adult Education (or CTE)--3
Units
435—Principles of Adult Education--3 Units
****** The above courses are existing credential courses at the
university
EDP400--3 Units
EDP520 or 595--3 Units
PROF 519---Human Performance Strategies—3 Units
COUN530 Career Development and Decision Theory—3 Units
EDP573 Intercultural Foundations of Education—3 Units
COUN580 Vocational Work Evaluation Systems—3 Units
Either*** Comprehensive Exam
12. Describe ethical and socio-political influ-
ences affecting adult education.
13. Provide opportunities for students to explore
individual interests and talents in adult
education.
14. Articulate multicultural education
competencies.
METHODS OF ASSESSMENT,
CRITERIA OF ACHIEVEMENT, AND
TIMELINES
The following methods of assessment can be
used: objective examinations, criterion referenced
examinations, library research-based papers,
student-conducted research, summaries, analy-
ses, and reviews of relevant studies and research
reports; group projects requiring application of
concepts to relevant problems and issues, practi-
cal application examinations such as case studies,
class presentations graded using a standard rubric,
************************************
Develop meaningful lesson plans for adult learners from andragogical
perspectives
Apply adult learning theories to assess and evaluate adult learning
Apply and evaluate prevalent teaching philosophies in adult education
Design effective instructional strategies for adult learners
Existing course in college of education
Finish their theses by using quantitative or qualitative methods or
mixed methods research
Newly approved course at the university
An existing course in College of Education
An existing course in College of Education
An existing course in College of Education
Or***Thesis
participation in classroom discussions that indicate
the individual student’s ability to perceive and cite
relationships, concepts, principles, and theories
graded using a standard rubric, research reports,
practical application examinations, case studies,
class presentations, class simulations, fieldwork,
site visitations, portfolios, small-group collabo-
ration, and discussion, are all used to measure
stated outcomes. Criteria of achievement can
also be reflected in students’ competencies such
as successfully passing the comprehensive exam
or successfully defending the thesis. In general,
one-half of the students’ performance objectives
will be assessed per academic year. If assessment
of any of the students’ performance objectives
falls below acceptable levels, then those particu-
lar performance objectives will be assessed each
semester, and interventions will be applied until
satisfactory levels are achieved, as feasible.
1059

Table 2. Curriculum Map for the MS in Adult Education with Concentration in Adult ESL
Courses in the curriculum and the Learning Outcomes
Core Courses
410—Curriculum Development for Adult Learners—3 Units
411—Assessing and Evaluating Adult Learning
413—Philosophical Foundations of Adult Education--3 Units
435—Principles of Adult Education--3 Units
****** The above courses are existing credential courses at the
university
EDP400--3 Units
EDP520 or 595--3 Units
******The above 6 courses are existing courses at the university
Linguistics 486—3 Units
EDP578 Literacy and Linguistics—3 Units
EDP589 Adult Literacy and Language Diversity—3 Units
EDP576 Ed. & Diversity or EDP577 Educational Linguistics—3
Units
Either*** Comprehensive Exam
Review and Assessment of Results
The results of the learning outcome assessment will
be reviewed and evaluated annually by program
faculty. In case the criterion of achievement is not
obtained, strategies will be developed to improve
the curriculum in order to ensure that the learning
outcome is achieved in the future.
EXISTING COURSES AND OTHER
RESOURCES THAT WOULD
BE USED IN THE PROGRAM
Courses that already exist and have been previ-
ously approved for inclusion in the program will
be used in the master’s degree. EDP400 and
EDP520 or 595 have been in existence since the
university was founded in 1949. These two courses
enable students to obtain knowledge and skills in
doing research in adult education. The credential
1060
Program Development in Adult Education
************************************
Develop meaningful lesson plans for adult learners from andragogical
perspectives
Apply adult learning theories to assess and evaluate adult learning
Apply and evaluate prevalent teaching philosophies in adult education
Design effective instructional strategies for adult learners
Complete the first three chapters of their theses
Finish their theses by using quantitative or qualitative methods or
mixed methods research
Apply linguistic analysis of the English Language (This is an existing
course at the university)
An existing course in College of Education
An existing course in College of Education
An existing course in College of Education
Or***Thesis
courses have been previously approved in our
credential programs.
Well trained faculty members already exist
in the department and in College of Education
and no additional resources are needed for the
implementation of this program. Although there
is a real potential for growth that would depend
on the availability of additional resources, we can
continue to offer a quality program at existing
levels of resources until such time that additional
resources might become available.
The existing courses can be offered during
regular semesters including summer sessions. The
core courses can be offered every other semester,
depending on availability of faculty members in
the department. In rare cases, part time instructors
can be hired to teach some of the courses only
when enrollment is on the increase.
Program Development in Adult Education
FACULTY MEMBERS
Faculty Member Qualifications
Institutions offering a graduate degree, major,
certificate or specialization in adult education
appear in a variety of organizational forms and
with differing language. For example, some
programs are independent departments while
others are combined with other program areas
into departments with interdisciplinary degrees
with specializations in adult education. Full-time
members of the adult education faculty should have
an earned doctorate in adult education or a related
designation. Other designations or language may
include, though are not limited to: lifelong educa-
tion, community education, cooperative extension,
and continuing education. Additional part-time,
adjunct or courtesy-appointed faculty should have
earned doctorates in adult education or relevant
related fields with knowledge of and, preferably,
experience in adult education. Other criteria for
consideration are as follows:
• Academic rank necessary for graduate sta-
tus in a tenure eligible position
• A record of leadership, as evidenced by
significant positions in the adult education
field, profession and university
• A record of contributions to adult educa-
tion scholarship
• A continuing commitment to adult edu-
cation theory, research and knowledge of
current best practices
Selection or hiring of faculty should be on the
basis of their particular expertise and contributions,
and the following general criteria:
• An earned doctorate or specialization in the
adult education area of their competency or
a closely related discipline approved at the
discretion of the adult education faculty
• Evidence of interest and commitment to
the field of adult education
• A record of contributions to scholarship
relating to courses to be taught or areas
of advisement (e.g., adult basic educa-
tion, community development, continuing
professional education, human resource
development)
Resources available to adult education faculty
members should be on par with resources made
available within the surrounding college and uni-
versity contexts in terms of salary, office support,
travel support, graduate student assistantship, or
other forms of research support.
Adjunct or Courtesy-Appointed
Faculty Members
Adult education programs should develop and
document an explicit rationale for the participa-
tion of full-time, part-time, and adjunct/associate
faculty with understandings about what roles,
responsibilities, contributions, and privileges
faculty members should expect to have based
upon their full-time, part-time, adjunct/associate
and tenure eligible/non tenure eligible position.
In exceptional cases, suitable experience may
be substituted for the doctorate when appointing
part-time or adjunct/associate faculty members.
Part-time or adjunct/associate faculty members
are individuals whose assignments to the adult
education area are limited due to:
• A full-time administrative role at the
university
• A major commitment as a faculty member
in another program or university
• A formal joint appointment between adult
education and another recognized unit in
the university
• A research appointment related to grants or
contract funded work
1061

• An assignment outside of the university
(business, government, voluntary agency,
consultant)
• A retired or emeritus adult education fac-
ulty member
As enrollment increases, part time instructors
will be hired to teach courses in this major. Before
any part time instructors are hired, the department
must make sure that part time instructors have the
required education, scholarship, and experience
needed for this major. Unqualified personnel will
not be considered. As enrollment increases, tenure
track faculty from the fields of adult education
and adult ESL will be hired to teach courses in
this major to alleviate the workload by the follow-
ing faculty from the College of Education. And
existing courses from the College of Education
will be revamped according to national standards
concerning developing adult education programs
in California.
List of Faculty Members Who are Qualified
to Teach the Program (Faculty curriculum
vitae should be included as attachments to
the program)
Dr. HH (Careers)
Dr. II (ESL)
Dr. JJ (Diversity, language)
Dr. KK (Adult Education and CTE, Comparative
Adult Education)
Dr. Victor C. X. Wang, Credential Coordinator
(CTE, Adult Education and ESL)
PARTNERS AND POTENTIAL
ADDITIONAL FUNDING
The Designated Subjects Credential Program
already partners with a number of community col-
leges on the CTE Teacher Preparation Pipeline. In
particular we have a strong working relationship
with the CTE Teacher Pipeline at El Camino Col-
lege. Their program coordinator, Naomi Tokuda,
1062
Program Development in Adult Education
has indicated a MS in Adult Education would
add a welcome component to the CTE Teacher
Pipeline. Their program has had a solid track
record in securing grant funding and creating in-
novative partnerships. They have committed to
including the this university’s Adult Education
degree program, as well as our Designated Sub-
jects Credential program, in any appropriate grant
projects. Ms. Tokuda is particularly interested in
recruiting students into such a program.
In addition, Dr. Ernest Brewer has agreed to
serve as a consultant to help bring grant monies to
this adult education program. Ernest W. Brewer,
Ed.D., is a Professor of Educational Administra-
tion and Policy Studies and Principal Investigator/
Director of Federal Programs at The University
of Tennessee. Dr. Brewer is a successful grant
writer and grant administrator and has brought
millions of dollars to his university. Dr. Brewer
has authored/co-authored over 100 books, book
chapters, articles, monographs, and technical
reports. He has received such awards as the Excel-
lence in Teaching Award, the Outstanding Service
Award from the IVETA, and the Outstanding
Faculty Counselor Award from Kappa Delta Pi.
His current research interests, that are frequently
intertwined, include job satisfaction, occupational
stress, and job burnout.
Include Reports from Comparable Academic
Areas Reporting the Results of Consultation on
According to a report (May, 2007) by an
external reviewer, Dr. John A. Henschke from
University of Missouri, St Louis, a master’s pro-
gram in adult education should be added to the
department since the department has been about
vocational education and adult education. While
the department has been offering an MA in Oc-
cupational Studies (formerly known as vocational
education), no master’s degree program has been
offered in adult education. To add an MS in adult
education would justify the department name.
According to an informal oral report produced
by Professor Kathleen P. King from Fordham
Program Development in Adult Education
University, Department of Adult Education and
Human Resource Development, a master’s degree
program in the department should be offered in
order to offer more career options for adult learn-
ers in California.
The above individuals have been highly re-
spected in the field. John A. Henschke has been
inducted into the International Adult and Con-
tinuing Education Hall of Fame and Kathleen P.
King has been nominated for this International
Adult and Continuing Education Hall of Fame.
These two individuals have served on national
and international committees in adult education.
Include Results of a Market Survey to Support
the Estimated Demand for the Program
No market survey was distributed, but anec-
dotal evidence from CTE students indicate an
interest and need. In addition, the following data
were derived from the Department of Labor, Bu-
reau of Labor Statistics and required textbooks in
adult education in the nation.
• The field of adult education offers var-
ied and rewarding career opportunities.
Teacher, instructor, tutor, professor, lec-
turer, facilitator, trainer, coach, and men-
tor are some of the titles used to describe
professionals in this field. Adult educators
teach in many different settings, includ-
ing public schools, colleges, universities,
businesses, vocational schools, job train-
ing centers, and community organizations.
Because teachers of adults are required
around the world, this occupation offers
plenty of opportunity for traveling and
teaching abroad.
• Adult and vocational education teachers
held about 588,000 jobs in 1998. A vari-
ety of establishments employed adult and
vocational education teachers in 1998:
public school systems; community and ju-
nior colleges; universities; businesses that
provide formal education and training for
their employees; schools and institutes that
teach automotive repair, bartending, busi-
ness, computer skills, electronics, medi-
cal technology, and other subjects; dance
studios; job training centers; community
organizations; labor unions; and religious
organizations.
• Employment of adult and vocational edu-
cation teachers is expected to grow about
as fast as the average for all occupations
through 2008 as the demand for adult
education programs continues to rise.
Opportunities should be best for part-time
positions, especially in fields such as com-
puter technology, automotive mechanics,
and medical technology, which offer at-
tractive—and often higher-paying—job
opportunities outside of teaching.
• According to the National Center for
Education Statistics, an estimated 4 out
of 10 adults participated in some form of
adult education in 1997. Participation in
continuing education grows as the edu-
cational attainment of the population in-
creases. To keep abreast of changes in their
fields and advances in technology, an in-
creasing number of adults are taking cours-
es—often subsidized or funded entirely
by employers—for career advancement
or to upgrade their skills. In addition, an
increasing number of adults are participat-
ing in classes for personal enrichment and
enjoyment. Enrollment in adult basic edu-
cation and literacy programs is increasing
because of changes in immigration policy
that require basic competency in English
and civics. And, more employers are de-
manding higher levels of basic academic
skills—reading, writing, and arithmetic—
which is increasing enrollment in remedial
education and GED preparation classes.
• Employment growth of adult vocational-
technical education teachers will result
from the need to train young adults for
entry-level jobs. Experienced workers who
1063

want to switch fields or whose jobs have
been eliminated due to changing technol-
ogy or business reorganization also require
training. Businesses are finding it essential
to provide training to their workers to re-
main productive and globally competitive.
Cooperation between businesses and edu-
cational institutions continues to increase
to insure that students are taught the skills
employers desire. This should result in
greater demand for adult and vocational
education teachers, particularly at commu-
nity and junior colleges. Since adult edu-
cation programs receive State and Federal
funding, employment growth may be af-
fected by government budgets.
• Additional job openings for adult and vo-
cational education teachers will stem from
the need to replace persons who leave
the occupation. Many teach part time
and move into and out of the occupation
for other jobs, family responsibilities, or
retirement.
• Teachers of adult literacy and remedial
education held about 98,000 jobs in 2004.
State and local governments employ the
majority of these teachers, who work in
adult learning centers, libraries, commu-
nity colleges, juvenile detention centers,
and corrections institutions, among other
places. Others work for private educational
institutions and for social service organi-
zations, such as job-training or residential
care facilities.
• Most programs require teachers to have at
least a bachelor’ degree; a public school
teaching license is required for public pro-
grams in some States.
• Opportunities for teachers of English as a
second language are expected to be very
good because their classes should be in
demand by the increasing number of resi-
dents with limited English skills.
1064
Program Development in Adult Education
• Job opportunities are generally expected
to be very good—although they will vary
somewhat from field to field—as numer-
ous openings for all types of postsecondary
teachers result from retirements of current
postsecondary teachers and continued in-
creases in student enrollments.
REQUEST TO DEVELOP UNDER
FAST TRACK PROCESS
This proposal is being submitted under the Fast
Track curriculum process because no new courses
are added to the existing courses in the depart-
ment. All courses exist in comparable programs
in all other universities, especially land-grant
universities that have a master’s degree in adult
education. Further, the following criteria are met:
• The program can be offered at a high level
of quality by the university within existing
resource base.
• The program can be offered by faculty
members who are well established in adult
education.
• The program can be offered by faculty
members who are widely published in
adult education.
• The program is not subject to specialized
accreditation. NCATE is authorized to
accredit such a program and the faculty
members in the department have worked
with NCATE before.
• No major outlay will be required to imple-
ment the program.
• The program is consistent with all existing
state and federal law and trustee policies.
• The proposal is not for a joint doctoral
program.
• The program has been subjected to a thor-
ough campus review and approval process.
Program Development in Adult Education
FUTURE TRENDS
As we have walked into the 21st century, a peren-
nial debate will continue to focus on philosophical
differences: Traditional versus Adult Students. The
dichotomy between advocates for adults and those
advocates for K-12 students (Sissel, Hansman, &
Kasworm, 2001) will continue to spark more sub-
sequent research. Other topics such as low status
of adult programs, lack of institutional support of
adult programs, the cash cow syndrome, lack of
faculty investment, experiential learning of adult
learners will continue to dominate adult educa-
tion research (Wang, 2008). Unless university or
organizational leaders believe that adult programs
are philosophically viable, both adult programs
and mature students won’t get due support from
institutions of higher learning. As long as adult
learners are treated as second class citizens, they
will fight hand in hand with their adult learning
mentors to gain a higher status on campus.
CONCLUSION
This chapter has used some real life examples to
illustrate how a sound/meaningful program pro-
posal can be developed in order to get institutional
support. Without institutional support, any viable
adult programs cannot be implemented. In addition
to taking into consideration purposes and goal
of program development, essential components
must be included. Although this program pro-
posal did not include a section on Cost Analysis,
it did mention that no existing recourses would
be required. This is vital because administrators
hate to spend money on a new program during
this time of budget cuts and furloughs. As the
Department of PDW is being dissolved, viable
programs will survive and thrive under the right
leadership. And more importantly, more adult
programs will be successfully added. Even though
resistance will be met one way or the other since
administrators and adult learning professionals
are not on the same page, with adult learners and
faculty’s persistence, the learning needs of mature
learners will be accommodated by institutions.
After all, adult learners are looking forward to
any attractive knowledge packages. They don’t
mind contributing to any universities’ long term
revenues gains. If one institution fails to accom-
modate their learning needs, other institutions
will do at all cost to serve the needs of mature
learners as they are the backbone of the workforce
nationally and internationally.
REFERENCES
Bash, L. (2003). Adult learners in the academy.
Bolton, MA: Anker Publishing Company.
Cafffarella, R. S. (2002). Planning programs for
adult learners: A practical guide for educators,
trainers, and staff developers (2nd ed.). San
Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Canja, E. T. (2002). Lifelong learning: Challenges
& opportunities. CAEL Forum and News, 26-29.
Merriam, S. B., & Brockett, R. G. (2007). The
profession and practice of adult education: An
introduction. San Franscico: Jossey-Bass.
Merriam, S. B., Caffarella, R. S., & Baumgart-
ner, L. M. (2007). Learning in adulthood: A
comprehensive guide (3rd ed.). San Francisco:
Jossey-Bass.
Rogers, C. E. (1990). Diffusion of innovations
(4th ed.). New York: Free Press.
Sissel, P. A., Hansman, C. A., & Kasworm, C. E.
(2001). The politics of neglect: Adult learners in
higher education. New Directions for Adult and
Continuing Education, 91, 17–27. doi:10.1002/
ace.27
1065

Valentine, T. (1997). United States of America: The
current predominance of learning for the job. In
P. Belanger & Valdivielso (Eds.), The emergence
of learning societies: Who participates in adult
learning? (pp. 95-108). New York: Elsevier.
Wang, V. C. X. (2008). Facilitating adult learning:
A comprehensive guide for successful instruction
(Rev. ed.). Boston, MA: Pearson Education.
Wang, V. C. X. (2009). Handbook of research on
E-learning applications for career and technical
education: Technologies for vocational training .
In Wang, V. C. X. (Ed.), The theory and practice
of teaching in today’s colleges and universities
(pp. 764–778). Hershey, PA: Information Science
Reference.
KEY TERMS AND DEFINITIONS
Cash Cow: Any business venture, operation,
or product that is a dependable source of income
1066
Program Development in Adult Education
or profit. In this chapter, cash cow refers to uni-
versities depending on adult learners’ tuition fees
for a source of long-term gains.
Low Status: A position of inferior status; low
in station or rank or fortune or estimation, In this
chapter, low status refers to the inferior status as
compared to that of traditional age students.
Change: A noun here meaning the act or fact
of changing; fact of being changed.
Program: A plan of action to accomplish a
specified end.
Furlough: A vacation or leave of absence
granted to an employee.
Curriculum: The aggregate of courses of study
given in a school, college, or university.
Standard: Something considered by an author-
ity or by general consent as a basis of comparison;
an approved model.
 1067

Chapter 65
Future Methods of
Adult Education
John K. Hope
University of Auckland, New Zealand

ABSTRACT
The purpose of this chapter is to provide a vision of future information and communication technology
based methods of adult education informed by recent pedagogical and technological developments.
Macro trends that may influence the future of adult education methods are examined, followed by detailed
scrutiny of particular methods that are likely to be utilised in the near future. The chapter concludes
with a review of the more distant future and suggestions to adult educators.

INTRODUCTION home (Listverse, 2007). Future predictions can

The art of predicting the future has provided gain-
ful employment for oracles and astrologers from
time immemorial. Futurology, based on known
science, also has deep historic antecedents. No
matter what the source, attempts to predict the
future that prove correct attract wide publicity,
as in the insightful works of Leonardo da Vinci,
but even more so when they are proved incorrect.
Ken Olson, founder of well-known mainframe
computer manufacturer Digital Equipment (DEC)
is reported as saying in 1977 that there was no
reason anyone would want a computer in their
DOI: 10.4018/978-1-61692-906-0.ch065
come back to haunt their initiators when a net
savvy generation can read the predictions on their
home computers.
Predictions of technology use in education have
not fared well either. Built on soaring growth of
mass media television penetration in the United
States, scholarly books and journal articles about
the predicted growth of educational television were
written, leading to confident 1950’s predictions
that educational television would be the dominant
form of technology used in education. With 50
million dollar backing from the Ford Foundation
and Congress, a plane was commissioned to circle
above the Midwest beaming educational television
to six states. Finding that classroom uptake was

only two to four percent; the plane was grounded
(Tyack & Cuban, 1995). History reveals that
educational television did not deliver its touted
potential. The same can be said for use of radio,
film and video in education; limited uptake and
no golden bullet solution to educational problems.
Unlike some of its predecessors, the personal
computer, and particularly, the almost universal
availability of the internet, has fulfilled the touted
potential of changing the face of adult education.
Knowles 1970’s prediction that adult education
would be delivered electronically in the 21st
century has proved spectacularly accurate with
almost all adult educators now using electronic
technology in one form or another.
Time changes all. Fifty years later, one current
trend that will be mentioned later in this chapter,
describes the re-introduction of educational tele-
vision as a mainstream medium for the delivery
of adult education in some Asian countries. And
despite the exponential growth of electronically
delivered adult education, traditional face-to-face
delivery methods survive alongside the new tech-
nological innovations, and, are likely to continue
in the foreseeable future. Just as the invention of
the computer and, more latterly, the widespread
availability of the internet, changed the face of
the adult education at the end of the 20th century,
recent dramatic changes in the political, social,
educational and economic systems of the world,
combined with the continued and inexorable
march of technological innovation, could stimu-
late new trends in adult education that will once
again change its visible face in directions that as
yet, we know not. Dron (2007) warns us that “It
is a dangerous and foolhardy thing to attempt to
predict the future of such a young and volatile
discipline as e-learning” (p. 312). Despite the
dangers, this chapter attempts to analyse the pres-
ent to extrapolate pedagogical and technological
trends that may provide a guide to future methods
used in adult education.
1068
Future Methods of Adult Education
BACKGROUND
An encyclopaedia of information and commu-
nication technology (ICT) integration into adult
education can encompass a superabundance of
research in many areas, so definition of the disci-
plinary areas discussed in this chapter is necessary.
For the purposes of this essay, adult education
includes both formal adult education within the
higher education sector that often leads to award
of a qualification and, informal education, such
as community education, that is less likely to lead
to a formal qualification. Future methods using
ICT includes non-computer technologies, such
as telephones and television, as well as the more
familiar computer-based technologies. Electronic
delivery of adult education, termed e-learning, has
a joint focus on traditional, face to face methods
that incorporate ICT but, more pervasively, dis-
tance education technology, both synchronous
and asynchronous.
Leonardo’s prediction that helicopters would
fly was fulfilled. Every day, helicopters noisily
remind us that Leonardo was correct. But, the
first helicopter to fly bore minimal resemblance
to the detail in Leonardo’s helicopter design. We
can predict a broad view of future trends in tech-
nologically enhanced adult education methods
but the detail is unlikely to be apparent until later.
Future predictions tend to be broad in scope, as
much of the future is likely to be predicated on
trends developing in the present, but the detail of
the outcome only emerges when the prediction is
fulfilled. Hence a sample of current background
drivers of future adult education method trends
within political, economic, socio-cultural, tech-
nological and pedagogical dimensions will be
briefly examined with the intention of providing
a lens into the future.
Examples of political drivers of trends in adult
education that have potential to continue in the
future include the increasing use of electronic
delivery of adult education to implement state
policies, for example, increasing adult literacy in
Future Methods of Adult Education
third world countries. Asia has 60% of the world’s
population and two thirds of the world’s poorest
people but also has the largest number of adult
learners in the world, most being educated by open
and distance learning (Latchem & Jung, 2010).
Another political driver that has influenced adult
education, state censorship of educational mate-
rials, was relatively straight forward in the days
of hard-copy educational text books, but is now
much more difficult due to the exponential growth
of internet access, and, in particular, widespread
take-up of social networking communication.
Continued development of open sourced software
and transnational mobile access to the internet
suggests that state sponsored Net censorship will
become even more difficult in the future, leaving
those who wish to improve their knowledge more
freely able to do so.
Increasing economic drivers of trends in adult
education include globalisation. More interna-
tional competition leads to demand for better
skilled and more innovative workers. Both first
and third worlds suffer from a surplus of under-
skilled workers and a shortage of appropriately
skilled workers who can adapt to rapid changes
in technology (National Centre on Education and
the Economy, 2009). This, in turn, generates a
need for vocationally oriented, skill-based worker
education, increasingly electronically delivered.
In a time of global depression, budget deficits
drive educational providers towards cheaper,
mass education delivery methods such as distance
delivery and electronic access to educational
resources, rather than expensive paper-based
resources. Unemployment drives many of those
so affected towards adult education to upgrade or
broaden their skill set. The internet becomes the
first source of that education.
Responding to these drivers is the growth of
corporately funded cyber institutions. The che-
quered growth of distance and often borderless
education is likely to continue under the auspices
of private, for-profit businesses as typified by The
University of Phoenix, media/state university part-
nerships as exemplified by U21 Global, continent
wide initiatives like the African Virtual University,
national open universities illustrated by the United
Kingdom Open University and Indira Gandhi
National Open University, or globally available,
single brand, niche market qualifications such
as the Duke University Global Executive MBA.
Reductions in public funding resulting from the
2009 global economic downturn provides oppor-
tunities for the private sector to further infiltrate
the adult education market although, setting the
higher education examples listed above aside, the
private sector is still dominated by short training
programmes and drop-out rates tend to be high
(Ryan, 2008). Economic reality will ensure that
both of these shortcomings are resolved in the
future, resulting in a move from competition
between traditional higher education providers,
predominantly universities, to competition with
a much wider range of providers, using advanced
technological methods.
Social drivers include increasing restraints on
time. Longer working hours, two working parent
families and travel difficulties in grid-locked cities
drive citizens, wanting both employment related
and recreational related adult education, to seek
any-time, any-where delivery of education that fits
with their increasingly frenetic lifestyles. Rising
migration rates and refugee movements create
new pools of adult learners in destination coun-
tries who want to adapt to their new environment
hence look towards adult education to bridge their
language, social and employment capabilities. The
phenomenon of aged SeniorNet users, which is
often highlighted in news media articles, is the
result of a major demographic change. Rapidly
aging populations in developed countries are
likely to create a new and very important market
for adult education targeted at seniors that have
longer retirements and want to continue to learn
but, need more user friendly and ‘age customised’
technology and delivery systems. Communication
capability to combat loneliness for people who
cannot physically get about, and to provide more
1069

integrated communication/security systems for
those living alone, will also drive technological
development and provide opportunity for inte-
grated adult education delivery.
Pedagogical drivers include the changing
languages of education, firstly the widespread
adoption of English as the medium of instruction
but, more recently, the increasing transnational
use of other languages that is driving the devel-
opment of electronic translation programmes.
Internet traffic in Mandarin now exceeds that in
English, so what does that infer for adult educa-
tors considering the largest educational market in
the world? Electronic transmission of educational
opportunities requires more access to computer
technology and new computer skills to access the
newer forms of delivery. The pervasiveness of the
Internet provides access for everyone to previ-
ously unavailable knowledge that is now freely
available by click of a mouse but, better access
to more sophisticated knowledge housed in data-
bases and electronic libraries will increasingly be
requested by adult learners. Mercurial expansion
of freely available knowledge stored electronically
increases the possibility of electronic plagiarism
to occur, leading to requests from educators for
more robust electronic systems to guard against
cheating.
Technological trends influencing methods in
adult education include the reducing cost and
increasing functionality of electronic equipment
that provides more opportunities for more learners
to have access to capable electronic learning tools.
Ever increasing memory capacity of computer
equipment enables more sophisticated learning
delivery systems to be utilised. Increased speed of
delivery via broadband is now taken for granted
and even faster systems are not far over the horizon
but, the advent of computer security issues, spam
and hacking, can limit the advantages of speed
and access to more resources.
All of the above trends are known to have
transformed the adult education of today and are
therefore most likely to continue to do so in the
1070
Future Methods of Adult Education
future. In summary, the trends outlined above
suggest that the future of technological methods
in adult education is increased use of electronic
technology, more often delivered by distance, with
a consequent reduction in traditional face to face
delivery. E-learning is the foundation on which
life-long education will be built (Dinevski, 2007).
FUTURE PEDAGOGICAL
METHODS AND RELATED
TECHNOLOGICAL DEVELOPMENTS
IN ADULT EDUCATION
Broad trends driving future change in adult educa-
tion have been listed above but the adult educator
and adult student readers of this book are likely
to be more interested in predictions of the future
technological methods used in adult education.
Future changes to pedagogy and technology
methods will be examined in detail below.
Future Pedagogical Methods
in Adult Education
In Western countries and, more latterly, in Asia,
the traditional bread and butter teaching and
learning methodology of adult education, direct
instruction based on exposition, has been chal-
lenged by newer learning theories more commonly
utilised within the compulsory schooling sector.
Socio-constructivist learning was propounded
by Vygotsky (1978) as having a fundamental
role in learning. Vygotsky stated that learning
is constructed by the learner in a social context
rather than directly transmitted in an individual
context. That this form of learning has potential
for more future use in technology enhanced adult
education can be seen in the exceptionally rapid
growth in popularity of social networking tech-
nology such as Twitter and Facebook. Although
social networking began as a communication
and relationship strategy, it is increasingly being
utilised for learning, and provides a 21st century
Future Methods of Adult Education
application of socio-constructivist learning that
is likely to be prevalent in the future.
Other learning strategies that have been built
on the socio-constructivist model deserve men-
tion here. Task-based learning, where students
construct their own learning while completing
real-life tasks using ICT applications for deliv-
ery, has obvious relevance for industry training.
Similarly, problem-based learning, where learners
systematically investigate a problem by utilising
knowledge from many different fields is often
Internet-based and also has industrial applica-
tions. Resourced-based learning focuses on use
of the Internet to gather resources relevant to a
set task and has application in a range of adult
learning contexts including language acquisition,
developing Internet searching skills and gathering
resources for other learning tasks.
Blended e-learning is a strategy that combines
the pedagogical approaches described above with
e-learning strategies and has great potential for
future development within adult education. As
the name suggests, blended e-learning combines
different pedagogical models, ‘real’ and ‘virtual’
domains, utilises a variety of media and can be
delivered in a variety of modes, such as combina-
tions of face to face and on-line delivery. Littlejohn
and Pegler (2007) list multiple components of
blended e-learning including traditional on-line
study supported by a tutor, writing blogs and
podcasts on handheld devices and using authentic
simulations and game-playing to explore real-life
problem solving. The appropriate blend is coop-
eratively compiled as a function of the learner’s
needs with the instructor’s teaching objectives
and can utilise the new Web 2.0 learning tools
that feature user control via open content. The
opportunity to combine traditional with newer
ICT based learning strategies has made blended
learning the preferred approach in Asia (Latchem
& Jung, 2010) and its flexibility suggests that it will
be the preferred approach in many adult education
contexts beyond Asia in the foreseeable future.
As on-line adult education delivery increases,
particularly delivery by distance, issues surround-
ing the assessment of learning become more
pronounced. Assessment can be viewed as a
necessary evil by some educators but it is one of
the most powerful determinants of learning, so fu-
ture methods of assessment do need examination.
Newer forms of assessment that take advantage of
the electronic storage and dissemination potential
of technology are increasingly common and can
be expected to replace much of the traditional
knowledge-based assessment associated with di-
rect instruction. The newer electronic assessment
strategies are more suited to the analysis of deeper
learning and encompass more kinds of learning.
It will be of some comfort to adult educators that
some of the new assessment strategies are more
interesting to mark than traditional coursework.
One example that has great potential for further
development is the use of electronic portfolios.
An e-portfolio is a personalised collection
of multi-media evidence of learning, stored and
presented on a web-based information manage-
ment system, allowing it to be reorganised, re-
fined, cross-referenced and searched over time
(Clarke, 2008). It can include documents, images,
video-clips, web links and audio-files, in fact,
any representations of a body of work. Collected
over time, e-portfolios can be a more authentic
form of assessment used to demonstrate socio-
constructivist learning by allowing the learner to
construct their own evidence of learning using a
variety of electronic media and storage formats.
This form of assessment is not confined to a time
and place, as in a test or examination. Its particular
benefit is that the construction of the e-portfolio
can enhance learning by the promotion of self-
assessment and critical reflection (Campbell &
Gibson, 2008).
A key feature of e-portfolios is the increasing
use of multimedia in the teaching and learning
process. Multimedia includes use of words, both
written and oral, and pictures, including animation
and video. The strength of multimedia learning
1071

is the association of words and pictures to aid
the development of mental representations and
hence deepen learning (Mayer, 2005). Learning
via multimedia is not new. Text with accompa-
nying pictures as a learning aid began thousands
of years ago but, the invention of computer en-
hanced multimedia has accelerated use of multi-
media in learning and instruction exponentially.
Open sourced Web 2.0 technology, with its use
of multimedia-based social networking, is now
part of the mainstream in many adult education
programmes. A cautionary statement applies to
the temptation for innovative adult educators to
enthuse over the latest technology application and
incorporate whatever new electronic technology
is available into their coursework. Witness the
number of blogs of dubious quality devoted to
documenting learning progress now being used
in higher education. Cautions aside, Web 2.0
multimedia offer opportunities for adult educators
to cross generational divides and engage more
closely with adult learner needs.
As more new technologies become widely
available, issues such as cognitive load become
more pertinent to the adult educator. The term
‘information overload’ became common with the
advent of the Internet making much of the world’s
knowledge readily available to any learner. Cog-
nitive load is the demand for working memory
resources to process information (Kalyuga, 2009).
When multimedia are utilised, the potential for
cognitive overload to occur is likely to increase.
Any user of the Internet will be familiar with
the distractions that pop-up advertisements and
graphics provide. The use of colour, animation and
sound overwhelm the senses, all being deliberately
designed to distract the user from the initial task.
Even academic literature searches can provide
distractions when interesting and unexpected re-
sults move attention away from the original focus.
Managing cognitive overload in such a way that
multimedia enhances learning, without overload-
ing cognitive processes, will be an increasingly
essential skill for future adult educators.
1072
Future Methods of Adult Education
New technology assisted assessment method-
ology, such as e-portfolios, can improve learning
but, can also introduce new problems. The oppor-
tunity for cheating and plagiarism to occur can
increase exponentially, particularly when adult
education is delivered by distance. The increasing
availability of the world’s net-sourced literature at
the touch of a keystroke can increase the temptation
to plagiarise and the convenience of technology
assisted searching, followed by ‘copy and paste’,
can also simplify the process.
The unsolicited arrival of email offering to
provide bogus degrees, ready written essays
for popular courses, offers to provide custom-
written assignments for a fee and the pressure to
acquire qualifications in contemporary society,
can increase the temptation to cheat. Technology
provides cheap means of cheating at the click of a
mouse, previously only available to those wealthy
enough to pay for a private tutor. Technological
solutions to cheating and plagiarism are now used
in many institutions. Turnitin and MyDropBox are
examples of software that can detect illegal and
unethical behaviour in assignments. Newer ver-
sions under development and available in the near
future will be able to detect plagiarism in graphics
and even the audio component of podcasts but,
are unlikely to solve all plagiarism and cheating
problems. Transnational education and migration
that brings together differing educational cultures
and differing values, has the potential to exacer-
bate the problems of cheating and plagiarism, and
requires social as well as technological solutions.
Although more sophisticated assessment tools,
such as the use of e-portfolios with their more
limited reliance on written essays, is an aid in the
fight against cheating, the market for technological
solutions to cheating and plagiarism is likely to be
a key feature of future adult education delivered by
electronic means, particularly in higher education.
Designing e-learning environments and the
management of e-learning have become research
topics in themselves. On-line discussions have
increasingly become a common and effective
Future Methods of Adult Education
component of an e-learning course. Managing the
interactions in a virtual discussion requires differ-
ent techniques dependent on whether the discus-
sion is synchronous or asynchronous, with both
techniques being different from those required
for a face-to-face discussion (Juwah, 2006). As
future adult educators increasingly move on-line,
adoption of new pedagogical tools is likely to
require new teaching skills. This suggests that
in-service education for adult educators moving
into new electronic learning environments will be
an increasingly noticeable trend in the near future.
The pedagogical futures outlined above imply
changes in the role of the adult educator. Adoption
of socio-constructive teaching and assessment
implies changes to the way that courses are written
and assessed but, even more so, rapid changes in
technology can provoke cognitive overload for the
adult educator considering which new technology
to adopt. How to keep up or, more importantly,
which developments to keep up with, will be
a critical question for the adult educator of the
future to address.
Future Technology
Frequent reference to newer technology was made
in the pedagogical methods discussion above.
Donavant (2009) describes changes to adult edu-
cation resulting from technology advances as “a
paradigm shift, or at least a paradigm creep” (p.
227). Closer scrutiny of the advances in technol-
ogy that create this paradigm movement follows.
Use of multimedia in adult education, with
its heavy reliance on memory hungry graphics,
requires increased bandwidth to avoid sleep-
inducing download times. Increased bandwidth, in
turn, encourages more users who then download
increasingly memory hungry multimedia. The
outcome is complaints about slow download
speed that do not decrease despite major increases
in bandwidth. This problem is exacerbated in
countries where technology is less advanced.
Fibre optic cabling and wireless networks are
helping solve the problems of dependence on
copper cabling but further developments will be
needed in the future. Use of intelligent networks
that can bypass low speed nodes have been touted
as a partial solution to this problem (Payne, 2008)
and optical interconnectivity across regional and
national boundaries can be expected to improve
network capability (Wittgreffe, Dames, Clark, &
McDonald, 2008).
Exponential increases in memory storage ca-
pacity are an obvious technological development.
A glance into the computer desk drawer in an office
will probably uncover discarded, two-year-old
flash memory sticks whose memory capacity was
labelled in megabytes, having been supplanted
by even smaller devices labelled in gigabytes.
Already under development are memory sticks
that can communicate via wireless technology
without the need to be plugged into a computer
(Pearson, 2008). When combined with one of the
many higher quality, portable electronic readers
now becoming available, the potential of these tiny
and very portable devices to enhance anywhere,
anytime access to information, may enable adult
students to pick up courseware while eating their
lunch at work or, to download information from
the plethora of digital libraries and educational
databases now available to many adult learners.
Situated e-learning opportunities such as this
will help solve the problems of limited time and
physical transport difficulties inherent in busy
city life and provide enhanced opportunities for
adult educators to deliver customised learning
programmes, without the constraints of classrooms
and timetables.
One of the conundrums of the first decade of
the 21st century has been the advent of older com-
munication technologies, mainstream television
and newspapers, helping to rapidly disseminate
knowledge about the newer communication tech-
nology, electronic social networking. Electronic
social networking technologies, more commonly
known via trade names such as Bebo, Facebook,
Flickr, Myspace, YouTube, Twitter and the like,
1073

have introduced millions of members of the general
public to tools that also have potential for use in
education. What in the past was termed gossip,
sensational newspaper and on-line reporting of
celebrities and politicians telling the world about
often private matters, has serendipitously informed
the world about the potential of these new com-
munication tools, and motivated a generation
of adults to begin distributing their tacit knowl-
edge to the world via wikis, blogs and podcasts.
Populist literature about the pseudo-psychology
of social networking often focuses on narcissistic
abnormalities, but less about educational use.
Herein lays an area of great future potential for
the adult educator. If adults are motivated enough
to want to communicate with others on a daily
basis using social networking technology purely
for entertainment, there is potential for learning
via socio-constructive groups to appeal to many
would-be adult learners.
Wikis, blogs and podcasts can exploit the Web
networking and knowledge sharing characteristics
inherent in generation X and Y adult learners for
educational purposes. Kings et al. (2008) suggest
that future knowledge management systems will
build on Web 2.0 knowledge articulation pro-
cesses, such as those mentioned above, because
they create a link between web-based social
recreational activity and shared learning. There
are many examples of successful application of
social networking tools into adult education but, in
the words of Dron (2007), “social software could
have far greater potential than it has so far been
credited with, introducing a whole new category
of potential interactions, which are qualitatively
different from those of traditional systems” (p.
238), such that a new term, edutainment, has
been coined to encompass the intersection of
learning and entertainment. Specific examples of
the future potential of social networks for adult
educators follow.
Blogs, essentially electronic diary notes being
written by an individual in reverse chronologically
order, are increasingly incorporated into e-port-
1074
Future Methods of Adult Education
folios and can provide a rich record of authentic
learning. Being available to any Internet user,
the open nature of blogs can help, or hinder, the
attainment of educational objectives. Being open,
others with similar interests but unknown to each
other, can make contact, share resources and rein-
force each others’ learning. The risk is denigration
into social chitchat around interpersonal issues or
public dissemination of confidential information,
just as personal diaries had the potential to do if
published. Blogs cut out the wait for publication.
The world knows the instant the ENTER button
is pressed.
Wikis are web pages that can be updated by
any user; best known via Wikipedia, now the most
used encyclopaedia in the world. Wikis differ from
blogs in that they are collaboratively initiated
and can be open to all or, private to a specified
group. The collaborative nature of wikis makes
them particularly suited to joint projects, research
networks and user groups.
Podcasts are publically available multimedia
broadcasts of collations of information that can
be incorporated into e-portfolios. Their pedagogi-
cal strength is effectively electronic publishing,
their ability to present the results of individual
or collaborative work to a wider audience, hence
authenticating learning and aiding the dissemina-
tion of information to unknown audiences.
Tweets differ in that they begin by a search
for contacts with people of like interest in a topic.
Sharing of information and contacts follows,
often in real time. Media reports focus on the
possibility of linking with the rich and famous
but, a hidden trend is that of education networks.
The New Zealand Qualifications Authority tweets
students to remind them of exam dates and an
international “teacher Tuesday” tweet network
brings new contacts to those interested in learning
with technology (Stannard, 2009).
Social networking’s close alignment with
socio-constructive learning theory suggests that
it has enormous potential for greater educational
utilisation in the near future. But, no technology
Future Methods of Adult Education
or learning system is perfect. As with all teaching
and learning since history began, the future task
for adult educators is to develop protocols that
minimise the disadvantages and maximise the
advantages that these new technologies offer. More
sophisticated social networking applications are
bound to arrive between the writing and publishing
of this chapter. The future for adult educators is to
determine the pedagogical strengths, rather than
the novelty factor, of new technology, and make
use of the most appropriate technology methods
for the educative purpose. New is not always best.
Other readily available software applications
that were initially developed for entertainment
purposes but have greater future application for
use in adult education include facial recognition
software, voice recognition software and software
that allows physical movement. Many families use
freeware Skype to communicate when separated
by distance and, in like manner, some adult educa-
tors communicate with their students. The feature
that makes Skype distinctive is the ability to see
the person you are communicating with. This fea-
ture has potential for use in assessment because it
ensures that the person answering the questions or
demonstrating their e-portfolio is the same person
enrolled in the course. Facial recognition capable
software can also improve interactivity between
student and teacher by allowing teachers to sense
body language and physical context.
Voice recognition developments are also likely
to become more widely used in future. Adult
educators who experimented with early voice rec-
ognition programmes that required hours of voice
recognition ‘training’ before they were of any use
at all, can look to the voice recognition capability
already available on GPS machines and exotic car
management systems to see the potential these
developments hold for adult education. Precision,
portable distance calculators, now available for
most of the world’s golf courses, combine GPS
positioning and sophisticated graphics with voice
recognition recording capability, for example,
‘seven iron’, to provide golfers with measurements
and club selection to the pin from wherever on
the fairway, for any golf course, almost anywhere
in the world, at any time. Initially developed for
recreational and professional use by golfers, an
education application is not difficult to imagine.
Lecturers could add voice comments and anec-
dotes to course notes, graphics and simulations on
a portable device while otherwise engaged, such
as travelling by public transport. This information
could be broadcast immediately via wireless to
students elsewhere in the world and recorded for
later consideration on a communication-capable
flash memory stick.
Similarly, entertainment oriented applications
such as the widely used physical movement capa-
ble, interactive gaming system Wii, have potential
use in adult education training programmes, where
precise physical movements must be learned.
Electronic simulations have long been used
in education, particularly in the sciences where
experiments would be prohibitively expensive,
involve long time periods or be dangerous to con-
duct physically. Simple simulations have evolved
into complex course management packages that
allow laboratory work to be completed by distance
without the need to hire material laboratories and
staff members at remote sites. One such example
from the field of computer engineering provides
a package that allows electrical circuits to be
designed and tested virtually and also includes
plagiarism detection systems to obviate this
potential problem when the physical presence of
a tutor is not possible (Rodriguez et al., 2007).
Simulation packages, such as that described above,
have been confined mainly to physics, electronic
engineering and computer science (Ratti, Gep-
petti, & Fiore, 2007) but other applications such
as biology experiments and applications suited to
vocational skill development in the private sector
are likely to become more universally available
in future, as there are cost benefits if the applica-
tion can cater for large numbers of students in
remote locations.
1075

Simulations developed for gaming entertain-
ment are very sophisticated and in common use
world-wide but, their use in adult education is
less so. Despite availability for restricted applica-
tions for many years, virtual reality applications
have not become mainstream tools for most adult
educators. Virtual reality programmes such as
Second Life and Second Earth (the confluence of
Second Life and Google Earth) provide a virtual
environment via avatars, where real life situations
can be acted out by game players, without the
consequences such actions would imply in real
life. Virtual Harlem is another virtual reality ap-
plication where students learn about the history
of Harlem by virtually ‘being there’. The inter-
activity available within this application allows
personal interest studies to be completed such as
a study of apprenticeship-internship relationships
(Sosnoski et al., 2006). Future use of virtual real-
ity is likely to expand given the massive growth
already apparent within the gaming industry but,
the expense of creating virtual environments and
the difficulty older generations of adult have in
appreciating the potential of edutainment applica-
tions, may limit its uptake for mainstream adult
educators who prefer ubiety.
Readers may well ask why there is not a section
in a future methods chapter devoted to artificial
intelligence (AI). Despite the hype which early AI
developments created, such as an AI chess player
that could defeat a human, AI developments have
remained in the applied area where they are used
to control washing machines and vehicle gear
changes (Thompson, 2008). Adult education
applications of AI, remain in the realm of the
more distant future but, despite this assertion, the
technological future has a history of appearing
sooner than we expect.
Other new electronic courseware applications
have demonstrated potential for use to support
future adult education methods. Among many
others, Blackboard and WebCT course manage-
ment systems have been used by adult educators
for many years. Future course management ap-
1076
Future Methods of Adult Education
plications will be less complex to operate, more
user friendly and more able to accommodate
multimedia. Open source systems that are more
able to incorporate new technology applications,
such as Bodington, Claroline, Dokeos, Moodle
and Sakai, are already available and replacing the
older course management programmes in many
institutions. As more mature adult learners, who
are less confident with electronic technology than
generation X and Y adult learners, are introduced
to e-learning, the need for user friendly course
management software becomes more critical.
Another generation of course management soft-
ware, designed more exclusively for use with the
mobile technology described later in this chapter,
is also beginning to appear (Sung, 2007).
As more integrated web applications, such as
Moodle, are developed, weaknesses in existing
Web technology become more apparent. Of note
here is the choice of HTML as the language of
the Web. HTML does not provide information
on the semantics of the webpage, such as when it
was created and by whom. Further problems can
be created by semantic ambiguities, for example,
the many different currencies called pound, the
differences between which, computers have dif-
ficulty in recognising (Warren & Davies, 2008).
The semantic web is an attempt to solve these
problems but, as yet, is not fully developed. Ander-
son (2006) reports the existence of an educational
semantic web (ESW) that attempts to create the
capacity to retrieve and sort vast amounts of Web
content in a variety of formats such as text, on-line
discussions, video and animations. It could also
enhance socio-constructive learning by making
it easier to build student to student, and student
to teacher, learning communities between people
with like interests. If fully developed in the future
the ESW could provide a valuable tool for adult
educators seeking to harness the full potential of
Web 2.0 technology.
ICT is not confined to computers. Other ICT
technology that has application for adult educa-
tors includes interactive video conferencing,
Future Methods of Adult Education
television and mobile phone technology. Video
conferencing has had a chequered career. What
began in the 1990’s as a heavily touted solution to
distance barriers became sidelined due to incom-
patibility of systems, high cost of installation and
phone tolls, and user unfriendliness. Many adult
educators will have attended a video-conference
that did not work. The advent of Internet-based
videoconferencing has helped solve the problems
of communication costs and reliability but, video
conferencing still has limited uptake within adult
education. Newer versions of Skype, applications
utilising mobile phones and the development of
pedagogy specific to this communication mode
have the potential to revitalise interactive video-
conferencing and begin to exploit the potential
with which interactive video-conferencing was
launched.
Despite the reservations about early experi-
ments with educational television quoted at the
beginning of this chapter, learning utilising
television, termed t-learning, has staged a come-
back. Access to video on-demand has revitalised
television edutainment and the introduction of
digital television greatly enhances the learners’
opportunity to select educational material suited to
their needs. However, television learning remains
predominantly a one-way transmission medium
to passive learners. Despite this limitation, there
are applications that are suited to mass-media
transmission via television and these are being
extensively used in underdeveloped Asian com-
munities. One example will demonstrate the scale
of this revitalisation of an electronic medium.
China has a Central Agriculture Broadcasting and
TV School that provides formal and non-formal
agro-technical assistance to millions of farmers in
remote areas of China (Latchem & Jung, 2010).
There are one billion people in the world now
connected to the Internet but, four billion people
have mobile phones. Unlike computer-based
technologies where the fastest growth was in
Western countries, the fastest growth in mobile
phone networks occurs in Asia and offers great
potential for adult education. This potential can be
illustrated by consideration of Cambodia, a country
that has the lowest Internet penetration in Asia but,
has the highest ratio of telephone users connected
via wireless technology (Latchem & Jung, 2010).
Learning utilising mobile phone technology,
termed m-learning, is touted as a learning solution
for adults who do not have access to computers
due to cost, location and personal preference
restraints. M-learning began, and persists, with
walkmans and audio cassettes to learn material
such as foreign languages. The explosive uptake
of mobile phone and PDA technology places more
sophisticated applications such as text messaging,
photographs and video-clips in the hands of every
mobile phone owner and is a simple and effective
collection device for e-portfolio evidence.
Always connected Blackberrys, iPhones and
similar PDAs provide immediate access to mes-
saging, email, planners and the Web anywhere,
anytime. Consequently, they have rapidly become
indispensible to those able to afford the technology.
Intelligent phones allow synchronous and often
expensive verbal communication but, of more use
to pecuniary challenged students, text messaging
allows students extremely cheap, asynchronous ac-
cess to tutors for questions related to coursework.
The 2009 Microsoft award for the most innovative
teacher in the world went to a New Zealand teacher
who pioneered the use of m-learning in the New
Zealand compulsory schools sector, where 10%
of schools already use phones to share documents,
reinforce learning with multimedia and record
lessons (Smith, 2009). The implications for the
adult education sector are obvious.
3G phones that will operate in most countries
are ubiquitous at the time of writing. 4G phones
that offer even more seamless connectivity will
be on sale within the next ten years (Dennis &
Wisely, 2008). Extensive catalogues of video clips
and movies are already downloadable from public
databases and commercial sources such as Google
and Apple. The relative cheapness of mobile phone
technology compared to computer technology
1077

and, the increasingly rich source of education
related downloadable material, provides huge
adult education potential for the under-developed
world and for industrial training applications. Its
mobility also provides credible opportunities to
personalise distance learning anywhere, anytime.
Lack of compatibility can require converters to
be needed in some countries but, increasingly,
technological solutions to compatibility problems
are built into each new generation of phone tech-
nology. Just as most mobile phones now include
a camera, the next generation of mobile phones,
available in 2010, will have built-in projectors that
could be used in collaborative learning situations
by projecting onto a nearby wall, greatly enhanc-
ing cheap, collaborative learning opportunities.
Flip cameras that include software and a flip
out USB plug for direct connection to a computer
are already on sale. Flexible screens that can be
rolled up for storage have been developed and will
be available in the near future. These compact,
flexible screens will make large screen viewing
on mobile phones and PDAs possible as well as
revolutionising the portability and weight of com-
puters and any other devices requiring screens.
Further developments of m-learning could occur
as the capacity of mobile phones and PDA’s to
screen television broadcasts becomes more readily
available and development of more capable touch
screens that can sense complex finger inputs, such
as a pinch, will enhance user-friendliness, as has
proved successful on the Apple iPhone and now
been incorporated in Windows 7. More intelligent
PDA’s that provide voice reminders based on cal-
endar bookings and automatically switch to silent
mode when participating in a scheduled meeting
are examples of small technological developments
that will enhance the use of mobile technology in
the immediate future (Mitchener, 2008).
When coupled with socio-constructive peda-
gogy, the technological innovations described
above provide a glimpse of the adult education
methods either, available now and little used by
adult educators or, available in the near future. It
1078
Future Methods of Adult Education
is the author’s personal view that growth in the
educational use of cheap mobile phone technol-
ogy has the potential to revolutionise adult edu-
cation, particularly in the third world, and will
also become increasingly common in first world
countries as the two most significant drawbacks,
lack of interconnectivity and small screen sizes,
are overcome.
IMPLICATIONS OF FUTURE TRENDS
IN ADULT EDUCATION METHODS
Announcements heralding the latest new tech-
nology seldom create a major stir. People do not
queue outside shop windows as they did when
the first television set appeared in a shop window.
Nor do reports that the world’s total information
knowledge has doubled cause headlines, as they
once did. We have become conditioned to ever
present and more rapid change, often ignoring
changes when they do not affect our daily lives.
But changes that do impact on our daily life
tend to capture our attention. This is so for adult
educators. It would be unusual to find an adult
educator who has not made the transition to us-
ing computer or phone technology in one form or
another to assist with their daily work. That said,
the majority of adult educators do not use all of
the latest technology in their work. Early adoption
of technology remains in the realm of the small
number of research scientists and visionary en-
thusiasts within niche areas. Most adult educators
gradually incorporate new technology into their
work only when it has become populous, because
its efficacy is then proven and user friendliness
achieved. Most have suffered the consequences of
technology that is unreliable and technical support
that is non-existent at some point in their career.
Stepping aside from the extremely innovative
and complex new technologies, such as virtual
reality, that are likely to take many years to be-
come mainstream, there are other future trends
Future Methods of Adult Education
that adult educators should watch and be prepared
to respond to.
The key to future change is human motivation.
When people are personally motivated because a
new technology is likely to improve their personal
life, they will adopt it. At the time of writing in
New Zealand, a new law banning cell phone use
while driving is about to be enacted. Consequently,
fear of large fines and driver licence disqualifica-
tion has increased sales of legal, hands free phone
equipment, such as voice activation equipment,
exponentially.
The trend to utilise socio-constructive learn-
ing theory with Web 2.0 social networking to
improve learning, appeals to many learners and
is often more effective, so programmes that are
built around that format are likely to increase.
“The convergence of collaborative constructivist
ideas and emerging instructional technologies are
transforming high education” (Garrison & Akyol,
2009, p. 19) and, by implication, are likely to
do so in the non-formal sector as well. Difficult
economic circumstances, decreasing free time and
transport difficulties all contribute to more people
wanting anywhere, anytime communication for
their personal life and it is not difficult to see that
there will be an increasing market for anywhere,
anytime adult education. The increasing popular-
ity of distance education, even for those living in
the same city as the education provider, is closely
related to the problems of shrinking time avail-
ability, working parents, traffic jams and smog. In
response to these issues, the Indian government
is aiming at 40% of higher education delivery
by distance in 2010 (Evans, Haughy, & Murphy,
2008). The increasing availability, capacity, user
friendliness and cheapness of intelligent mobile
devices such PDA’s, Blackberrys and iPods ap-
peals to most people from a personal perspective
and they are suited to the newer forms of learning.
This suggests that they will be much more com-
monly incorporated within adult education in the
not too distant future.
Not all like to follow the general trends de-
scribed above. Just as paper-based adult education
distance programmes still exist because they suit
some educators and learners, a trend to improve
existing transmission models using small techno-
logical changes is apparent, for instance, incorpo-
rating an electronic component, such as a graphic,
into an assessment for a paper-based course. The
popularity of blended courses is pertinent here
as they allow older and newer technology to be
blended to suit both educator and learner.
Freely available information, videos, software
packages and learning programmes proliferate
and much that was previously the realm of the
adult educator working in an institution is now
available without cost, requiring only the ability to
search it out on the Net. Freeware tends to focus
on vocational and recreational learning, simpler
applications that apply to more easily taught topics.
The niche for future adult education is the more
complex formal education, often qualification
bearing and having quality assurance credibility.
Clearly evident to this author is the importance
of re-defining the conception of the adult educa-
tors academic work life. Panda (2008) notes that
policies promoting lifelong, blended and flexible
learning, coupled with technological develop-
ments, demand the application of new educational
technology by adult educators. Technology has
changed the world irreversibly. Publicly funded
adult educators now work in competition with
the private sector and freely available educational
provision, often funded by advertising. Competi-
tion that was once limited to a few adjacent, adult
learning focussed institutions is increasing at the
local, national and transnational levels and com-
petitive options are readily available on the Net.
Expecting customer orientation, younger adult
learners look for options that suit their personal
needs rather than accepting the traditional options
that have been provided. What Michael Peters
aptly calls the “prudentialisation of education”
(Peters, 2005, p. 123), where the risks of educa-
tion are transferred from the state to the individual
1079

consumer, is particularly pertinent to the non-
compulsory adult education sector. Increasingly,
the adult educator of tomorrow will need to be more
customer-oriented, business oriented, distance
education oriented and be willing to investigate
new technological and pedagogical innovations.
Work will not be confined to traditional semesters,
working hours or local time zones, and technol-
ogy will be required to bridge the gap between
time available to the educator and time required
by the student. International partnerships in both
the public and private sectors are likely to be
increasingly important to provide a wider range
of expertise, economies of scale and the funding
required to develop new forms of delivery that
are responsive to technological developments and
changing learner needs.
Most adult educators began their teaching
lives in classrooms and lecture theatres and not all
studied education or psychology. Apprenticeship
models, picking up the direct instruction ‘how
to teach’ models from older colleagues, sufficed
as training. New technologies, new pedagogies
and differing learner expectations require new
approaches to work. The next generation of adult
educators will be digital natives (Prensky, 2001),
younger teachers who, having grown up with
computer technology, use it intuitively. Others
will be Prensky’s digital immigrants, more ma-
ture adult educators who were early adopters of
computer technology, the kind that wrote many
of the articles quoted in this chapter. But there
are relatively few digital natives and digital im-
migrants in adult education. Hence the need for
in-service education provision for adult educators.
A sample of the digital skills useful for future
adult education include knowledge about how
to select more recent digital tools and electronic
course management tools (Blair, 2007), synchro-
nous and asynchronous discussion skills, design
principles for social software, solving problems
with social software (Dron, 2007), how to make
best use of web 2.0 for teaching and, for some
Luddites, advanced training in electronic searching
1080
Future Methods of Adult Education
skills to better understand the increasing complex-
ity and sophistication of the virtual libraries that are
growing so rapidly on many campuses. Scholar-
ship will also be transformed with semantic web
applications that allow simplified bookmarking of
different electronic sources in addition to the use of
referencing systems such as Endnote (Greenhow,
Robelia, & Hughes, 2009). Of some consola-
tion is Gudea’s (2008) note that many teachers
benefit from exposure to different educational
environments. Some appreciate the increasing
interaction with their students that application of
newer pedagogies can provide. Others find that
on-line teaching offers more flexible use of time
and location for their workday, particularly when
travelling, hence easing pressure on the lecturer.
CONCLUSION
Despite the obvious difficulty of predicting the
future of technology methods for adult education,
analysis of change drivers and current trends in
pedagogical and technological development has
provided a lens into the future, be it a misted over
lens that can only provide a blurry outline of what
lies ahead. That very few predicted an event as
devastating as the recent economic downturn can
be seen by the number of people who lost large
sums of money because they could not see the
early warning signs clearly.
Warren, Davies and Brown (2008) suggest that
there are five fundamental trends driving future
change in the use of ICT. Three are technological,
being delivering applications as a freely available
service, semantic technology and the increasing
ubiquity of technology. A fourth trend is eco-
nomic, the increasing emphasis on collaboration,
particularly with the business world. The fifth is
social, the social interactivity capability of Web
2.0 applications. To this could be added research.
The use of ICT enhanced learning methods in
adult education is a developing field where many
questions remain unanswered (Latchem & Jung,
Future Methods of Adult Education
2010, p. 193). The key to the future for adult
education methods is freely available knowledge
based on focussed research pertinent to the sector.
Most adult education related research is focussed
on higher education (Latchem & Jung, 2010),
but adult education also encompasses the non-
qualification bearing sector. Research focussed on
compulsory schooling does not necessarily apply
to the adult education sector. Despite recent meta-
analyses of large bodies of technology focussed
research papers, further comparative research
is still needed into the benefits or otherwise of
on-line versus face to face, synchronous versus
asynchronous, and blended versus single mode
learning methodologies for adult education.
(Bernard et al., 2009).
Technological change happens so quickly that
research to ascertain its veracity, or otherwise, can
arrive some years later, by which time a newer tech-
nology has superseded the earlier version. While
early adoption can provide a competitive edge,
in the long term, adoption of untested technology
can lead to negative effects for both learners and
providers of adult education. Some funders of the
for-profit virtual universities have found this to
their cost. In the continued harsh economic times
that are predicted for the near future, the risk of
a reduction in technology enhancing teaching
and learning strategies research increases, and
should be vigorously opposed. Adult educators
looking to incorporate future methods should look
to the conceptions and understandings that have
proven, research-based efficacy for the situation
under consideration. That may not be the latest
and greatest technological innovation.
Despite this educationally sensible advice,
adult educators who have a particular interest in
the latest technological methods can still speculate
wildly about the future. Consider the implications
of a web-brain implant link, touted by one of the
founding fathers of the Internet, Vint Cerf, to
become reality in the foreseeable future (Hume,
2009). If this daring prediction proves commer-
cially and ethically feasible in the longer term, it
could change adult education methods irreversibly,
just as the invention of the computer once did.
REFERENCES
Anderson, T. (2006). Interaction in learning and
teaching on the Educational Semantic Web . In
Juwah, C. (Ed.), Interactions in online educa-
tion: Implications for theory and practice (pp.
141–155). London: Routledge.
Bernard, R. M., Abrami, P. C., Borokhovski,
E., Wade, C. A., Tamin, R. M., & Surkes, M. A.
(2009). A meta-analysis of three types of inter-
action treatments in distance education. Review
of Educational Research, 79(3), 1243–1289.
doi:10.3102/0034654309333844
Blair, K. (2007). Course management tools as
‘gated communities’: Expanding the potential
of distance learning spaces through multimodal
tools . In Bailey, E. P. (Ed.), Focus on distance
education developments (pp. 41–54). New York:
Nova Science Publishers Inc.
Campbell, K., & Gibson, S. (2008). The evolution
of assessment in distance education . In Evans, T.,
Haughey, M., & Murphy, D. (Eds.), International
handbook of distance education (pp. 341–365).
Bingley, UK: Emerald Group Publishing.
Clarke, A. (2008). E-learning skills (2nd ed.).
Hampshire, UK: Palgrave Macmillan.
Dennis, R., & Wisely, D. (2008). Mobility and ICT
. In Warren, P., Davies, J., & Brown, D. (Eds.),
ICT futures: delivering pervasive, real-time and
secure service (pp. 129–142). Chichester, England:
John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
Dinevski, D. (2007). Lifelong learning will be
based on e-learning: What is the way to come
there? In Bailey, E. P. (Ed.), Focus on distance
education developments (pp. 107–133). New York:
Nova Science Publishers.
1081
 Future Methods of Adult Education

Donavant, B. W. (2009). The new, modern practice Latchem, C., & Jung, I. (2010). Distance and
of adult education. Adult Education Quarterly, blended learning in Asia. London: Routledge.
59(3), 227–245. doi:10.1177/0741713609331546
Listverse. (2007). Top 30 failed technology
Dron, J. (2007). Control and constraint in e- predictions. Retrieved October 28, 2009, from
learning: Choosing when to choose. Hershey, http://listverse.com/2007/10/28/top-30-failed-
PA: Idea Group Publishing. technology-predictions/
Evans, T., Haughey, M., & Murphy, D. (2008). Littlejohn, A., & Pegler, C. (2007). Preparing for
Conclusion: Which futures for distance educa- blended e-learning. London: Routledge.
tion? In Evans, T., Haughey, M., & Murphy,
Mayer, R. E. (2005). The Cambridge handbook
D. (Eds.), International handbook of distance
of multimedia learning. New York: Cambridge
education (pp. 869–876). Bingley, UK: Emerald
University Press.
Group Publishing.
Mitchener, J. (2008). Device futures . In Warren,
Garrison, D. R., & Akyol, Z. (2009). Role of
P., Davies, J., & Brown, D. (Eds.), ICT futures:
instructional technology in the trans formation
delivering pervasive, real-time and secure service
of higher education. Journal of Computing in
(pp. 27–38). Chichester, England: John Wiley &
Higher Education, 21, 19–30. doi:10.1007/
Sons.
s12528-009-9014-7
National Centre on Education and the Economy.
Greenhow, C., Robelia, B., & Hughes, J. (2009).
(2009). International trends in adult education
Web 2.0 and classroom research: What path should
and lifelong learning. Retrieved September 25,
we take now? Educational Researcher, 38(4),
2009, from http://www.jff.org/sites/default/files/
246–259. doi:10.3102/0013189X09336671
AdultEdInternationalFINAL.PDF
Gudea, S. (2008). Expectations and demands of
Panda, S. (2008). Strategic planning and distance
online teaching: Practical experiences. Hershey,
education . In Evans, T., Haughey, M., & Murphy,
PA: Information Science Publishing.
D. (Eds.), International handbook of distance
Hume. T. (2009, August, 23). What’s the future education (pp. 477–498). Bingley, UK: Emerald
of technology? Sunday Star Times, C3. Group Publishing.
Juwah, C. (2006). Interactions in online educa- Payne, D. (2008). The future all optical network
tion: Implications for theory and practice. New – Why we need it and how we get there . In
York: Routledge. Warren, P., Davies, J., & Brown, D. (Eds.), ICT
futures: delivering pervasive, real-time and secure
Kalyuga, S. (2009). Managing cognitive load in
service (pp. 93–114). Chichester, England: John
adaptive multimedia learning. New York: Infor-
Wiley & Sons.
mation Science Reference.
Pearson, I. (2008). Over the horizon . In Warren,
Kings, N. J., Davies, J., Verrill, D., Aral, S.,
P., Davies, J., & Brown, D. (Eds.), ICT futures:
Brynjolfsson, E., & Alstyne, M. V. (2008). So-
delivering pervasive, real-time and secure service
cial networks, social computing and knowledge
(pp. 215–226). Chichester, England: John Wiley
management . In Warren, P., Davies, J., & Brown,
& Sons.
D. (Eds.), ICT futures: delivering pervasive, real-
time and secure service (pp. 17–26). Chichester,
England: John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

1082
Future Methods of Adult Education
Peters, M. (2005). The new prudentialism in
education: Actuarial rationality and the entrepre-
neurial self. Educational Theory, 55(2), 123–136.
doi:10.1111/j.0013-2004.2005.00002.x
Prensky, M. (2001). Digital game-based learning.
New York: McGraw-Hill.
Ratti, G., Geppetti, L., & Fiore, L. (2007). Remote
laboratories: current status and future challenges .
In Morales, A. V. (Ed.), Distance education issues
and challenges (pp. 169–184). New York: Nova
Science Publishers.
Rodriguez, S., Pedraza, J., Garcia, A., Nieto, M.,
Rosales, F., & Zamorano, J. (2007). Laboratory
work management environment for distance edu-
cation in computer engineering . In Morales, A. V.
(Ed.), Distance education issues and challenges
(pp. 93–130). New York: Nova Science Publishers.
Ryan, Y. (2008). Borderless education and business
prospects . In Evans, T., Haughey, M., & Murphy,
D. (Eds.), International handbook of distance
education (pp. 741–764). Bingley, U.K.: Emerald
Group Publishing.
Smith, J. (2009, September 8). Learning by
cell-phone pushes the boundaries. The New
Zealand Herald. Retrieved 7 November, 2009,
from http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.
cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10595914
Sosnoski, J., Jones, S., Carter, B., McAllister, K.,
Moeller, R., & Mir, R. (2006). Virtual Harlem as
a collaborative learning environment: A project of
the University of Illinois at Chicago’s Electronic
Visualization Lab . In Weiss, J., Nolan, J., Hun-
singer, J., & Trifonas, P. (Eds.), The international
handbook of virtual learning environments (Pt.
2) (pp. 1289–1320). Dordrecht, The Netherlands:
Springer. doi:10.1007/978-1-4020-3803-7_54
Stannard, R. (2009, September 1). Tweet yourself
to a new circle. Times Higher Education. Retrieved
8 September, 2009, from http://www.timeshigh-
ereducation.co.uk/story.asp?sectioncode=26&sto
rycode=407984
Sung, Y. (2007). Software infrastructure for teach-
ers: A missing link in integrating software with
instruction. Teachers College Record, 109(11),
2541–2575.
Thompson, S. (2008). Artificial intelligence comes
of age . In Warren, P., Davies, J., & Brown, D.
(Eds.), ICT futures: Delivering pervasive real-time
and secure services (pp. 153–164). Chichester,
England: John Wiley & Sons.
Tyack, D., & Cuban, L. (1995). Tinkering towards
utopia: a century of school reform. Cambridge,
MA: Harvard University Press.
Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The
development of higher psychological processes.
Harvard, MA: Harvard University Press.
Warren, P., & Davies, J. (2008). The semantic web
– from vision to reality . In Warren, P., Davies, J.,
& Brown, D. (Eds.), ICT futures: Delivering per-
vasive real-time and secure services (pp. 55–66).
Chichester, England: John Wiley & Sons.
Warren, P., Davies, J., & Brown, D. (2008). Con-
clusions . In Warren, P., Davies, J., & Brown, D.
(Eds.), ICT futures: delivering pervasive, real-time
and secure service (pp. 228–233). Chichester,
England: John Wiley & Sons.
Wittgreffe, J., Dames, M., Clark, J., & McDonald,
J. (2008). End-to-end service level agreements for
complex ICT solutions . In Warren, P., Davies, J.,
& Brown, D. (Eds.), ICT futures: delivering perva-
sive, real-time and secure service (pp. 115–128).
Chichester, England: John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
KEY TERMS AND DEFINITIONS
Asynchronous: Electronic communication
that does not require those participating to be
on-line at the same time.
1083

Blogs: A personal diary or journal written in
reverse chronological order and available to the
public on a website.
E-Learning: Learning that includes the use
of ICT.
E-Portfolio: An electronic compilation of
evidence to show knowledge of a subject.
ICT: Information and communication tech-
nology.
Podcast: Publically available multimedia
broadcasts of collations of information.
1084
Future Methods of Adult Education
Socio-Constructivist learning: Learning
constructed by the learner in a social context.
Synchronous: Electronic communication that
is instant so requires the participants to be con-
nected electronically at the same time.
Virtual Reality: A computer driven system,
often including special glasses or headgear, that
gives the impression that the user is in another
world.
Wikis: On-line documents jointly compiled
by groups such as Wikipedia.
 1085

Chapter 66
Adult Education and
Globalization
Manuel Ahedo
University Rovira i Virgili, Spain

ABSTRACT
The chapter discusses how globalization has affected institutional changes in adult education. In the
background it introduces first the necessary definitions and presuppositions for the analysis of both
adult education and globalization, and second, it highlights the underpinnings of the changes in adult
education and learning in the last decades. The main thrust of the chapter deals with three main issues
that relate adult education and globalization: first, the importance of contexts, systems and trends in
changing adult education under the age of globalization; second, the relation between globalization
and adult education and lifelong learning policies; and thirdly, the case of lifelong learning policies
in the European Union is presented as an example of supra-national continental economic and politi-
cal integration on national policies. Finally, after pointing to several future research directions, some
concluding remarks are offered.

INTRODUCTION from industrial economies towards knowledge-

Modern globalization can be generally understood
as an intensification of world-wide interdependen-
cies and relations between societies and individu-
als. This intensified world-wide interdependency
has been stimulated and facilitated by the rise of
the new Information and Communication Tech-
nologies (ICT). Simultaneously, the ongoing shift
DOI: 10.4018/978-1-61692-906-0.ch066
based economies in the most developed part of
the world has coincided with a rapid process of
industrialization in many developing countries,
and with the emergence of new forms of social
structuration, stratification and inequalities. At
societal level, life-age stages have become more
blurred under volatile and longer life-projects,
and professional and personal evolutions have ac-
quired a more permanent feature in complex labor
careers. Adulthood is thus redefined and perceived

as a period of maturity with continuing change. All
these changes call for a new re-conceptualization
of the role of education, training and learning in
societies in the 21st century.
Current debates on modern globalization do
not exhaust interpretations and conclusions. Glo-
balization is a highly complex phenomenon and
process that social sciences are only beginning
to understand. However, and inspired mainly by
some empirical evidence, two main general aspects
can be suggested to frame how to understand
modern globalization: a) the crucial discussion
on the winners and losers of globalization, while
socio-economic inequalities have increased in the
last decades; b) that modern globalization is better
characterized by its cultural nature in the actual
expansion and intensification of world-wide in-
terdependencies (Dodri, Meyer, & Hwang, 2006).
This modern world-wide transformation process
is argued to have two main dynamics or trends.
First, a “diffusion process” of similar practices and
patterns world-wide, which contribute to the rise of
a world-wide polity, society and culture. Second,
an “increased international inter-dependency” be-
tween and among societies beyond the boundaries
of the increasingly weakened nation-states, thus,
opening for a higher influence of global factors
on the realities of local societies and communities,
and groups and individuals.
Adult education, after the general industrial
era of the second half of the 20th century, has now
become part of the discussions and analyses about
the role of information, knowledge and learning
in the emerging society, and analysis has evolved
towards a adult learning perspective. In a growing
number of societies and economies (industrial-
izing, advanced industrialized, and service and
knowledge-intensive) adults are increasingly
expected to develop and manage on-going life
projects combining work and education, in order
to acquire the necessary skills to carry out their
professional and personal careers (Brown, Green,
& Lauder, 2001, Crouch, Finegold, & Sako, 1999).
The development of general and specific skills in
1086
Adult Education and Globalization
the current business and labor markets has tended
to be a difficult task for states, as Culpepper (2003)
argues after analyzing the different ways by which
states aimed to upgrade workforce’s skills in
industrial Small and Medium-sized Enterprises
(SMEs) in two localities in Germany and France.
Traditionally, adult learning has been characterized
as having a double dimension: a) the organized
formal teaching and instruction programs; and
b) the incorporation of practice and experience
as a source of learning. The integration of the
two dimensions has always been a tension and a
potential, an integration which has been somehow
especially forced by the globalization process.
These two dimensions of adult learning have been
institutionalized in the two main traditions of adult
learning: adult education and lifelong learning.
Adult education refers to the theoretical and
school-based education aimed at different direc-
tions and objectives. In this regard, a growing
number of educational institutions and organiza-
tions have increased their efforts and strategies
to develop programs specifically designed to
adult population. In the current age of growing
world-wide globalization, several adult education
programs can be identified: (a) in developing third
world countries adult education tends to prioritize
social education in combination with provision of
basic technical and skills for community develop-
ment projects; (b) in second-world countries and
newly industrialized countries adult education
prioritizes general training development, aimed
at upgrading the general skill-base of the society;
(c) and in advanced industrialized countries adult
education tends to take two forms: the humanistic
and civic development, and the further training
through personalized skill development where
personal development, both professional and per-
sonal, has become a common and multiple goal.
In a nutshell, all these adult training programs can
be summarized as “organized learning in adjusted
school-based programs”.
Lifelong learning is based very much on the
social and practical dimension of learning. This
Adult Education and Globalization
type of approach to adult learning also opens
space to recognize the informal and non-formal
learning that takes place in social situation and
in practices and routines. Adult learning can thus
adopt multiple forms and the theoretical part of the
learning is expected to relate more to the practical
part. To the contrary, rapid scientific progress in
developed societies calls also for a higher need to
look at the theoretical foundations of all knowl-
edge and technologies. From a perspective of the
challenges that globalization posses to economies,
societies and education, what is also questioned
is the general traditional pedagogy. It can be
perceived a growing demand to develop more
updated pedagogies, or better said andragogy,
to integrate foundational theories with practical
practices, maybe through the concepts of practical
theories and founded practices.
The general argument of the chapter is that
globalization, understood as a cultural process,
rather than as an economic or capital transfor-
mation, and is part of a general structural change
in our societies moving towards post-industrial
or rapid industrializing societies, with its new
forms of inequalities, and new forms of social
structuration and stratification. Generally, mod-
ern globalization has fostered so far two main
world-wide dynamics: the diffusion of common
and certain converging standards and norms, and
the inter-dependency across societies that in some
cases lead to further instances of cross-national
integration. Regarding adult education and learn-
ing, globalization is having direct and indirect
effects in the understanding of how adults in
their different ages and life stages can learn and
acquire new skills and competences, and thus
become active participants of their national and
local economies and societies.
BACKGROUND
Here the main definitions and basic presupposi-
tions and frameworks on adult education and
globalization are provided, as the basis for the
more substantial analysis.
Adult Education: Different National
and Continental Traditions
Adult education is a very particular sub-system in
the national educational systems. Whereas provi-
sion of basic, secondary and tertiary education has
been part and parcel of the general modernization
process during the 20th century, adult education
has tended to be placed in a periphery, depending
ultimately on the strength and organization of dif-
ferent social classes and movements, such as labor,
professions, middle class, etc. In this sense, a high
variation in adult education models is expected,
both at nation-state and continental levels.
In the Western or first world adult education
has been more integrated within the general
modernization process. Western Europe adult
and life-long education resembles an idea of
humanistic educational development. In Europe,
the Nordic tradition of adult education displays a
more substantial difference, based on the large state
and public dimension of education for all, aimed
at maintaining higher levels of social cohesion
and inclusion in the different spheres of society
(Korsgaard, 2002; Rubenson, 2006). European
traditional liberalism has thus incorporated a col-
lective dimension, and therefore implies certain
state responsibilities. This common tradition can
be observed in the development of this educa-
tion in the EU’s policy strategies (Lee, Thayer,
& Madym, 2008), European lifelong education
has internalized a form of European liberalism,
which is the base of the Western European ideol-
ogy. In North America, adult education has also
involved a public dimension, but has been framed
under a more liberal tradition. Dewey’s optimistic
pragmatism was aimed at promoting bottom-up
processes of learning developments, without much
overall collective frameworks. In Canada, adult
education presents a therapeutic model, and the
1087

state provides certain mechanisms for appropriate
training for job market purposes.
In the second and third-world countries varia-
tion is higher (Little, 2000; Merriam, Courtenay,
& Cervero, 2006). First, in second-world or
newly industrializing countries, adult education
can adopt multiple meanings, depending on the
political organization of the country, and especially
the use of education by state and party elites as
a mechanism to control the rapidly changing so-
ciety and social groups. This can be the case of
Mexico (Torres & Schuguresnky, 1994). In Asia,
adult education displays a high level of variation,
due to their significant different political evolu-
tions during the 20th.century. In Japan, adult and
lifelong learning has a rich tradition, and adheres
to a cultural model that involves about one-third
of the population, a tradition that has been rather
strong in recent policy reforms (Ogawa, 2009).
In China, the system of adult education in the
1950s was oriented to manpower planning, but
evolved in the 1970s towards a lifelong education
approach, which since the 1980s gave rise to indi-
vidual aspirations, ending in a general expansion
in all kinds of adult education (Kai-Ming, Xinhuo,
& Xiabobo, 1999). In the current and rapidly
changing Russia, the previous socialist tradition
has undergone a process of change and reform
alongside the institutionalization of capitalist and
market practices; under uncertain socio-economic
conditions adult education is struggling to find
new status, meanings (Zajda, 1999). Second, in
developing countries in the South, adult education,
although a relatively recent phenomenon, has been
developed as an imported tool, and has been put
into practice for politically controlled develop-
ment projects in community, agriculture, and so
forth. In that sense, it was an important part of
training programs for practical purposes, as was
observed by Torres and Schuguresnky (1994) in
the case of Tanzania.
In general, it can be said that traditions and
models of adult education and national and
supra-national continental level, are due to the
1088
Adult Education and Globalization
specific ways and paths during the 20th century.
The modernity of the 19th and 20th centuries in
Western Countries operated as the main point of
reference for general development, without clearly
delivering substantial results. Although it is clear
that there are multiple traditions and models both
at national and continental levels, it is also possible
to perceive that latest changes in many of these
cases indicate certain tensions with regard to the
challenge of how to combine a humanistic and a
practical orientation of adult education alongside
with individual opportunities. In this sense, adult
education and training have traditionally had
strong demarcation lines between them, but there
are recent indications that the lines are beginning
to blur. Whether this tendency is mainly a trend in
the developed world is still uncertain and rather
contingent, depending on many macro-structural
factors, and here the dynamics of globalization
are a very important factor.
Globalization: The Challenges of
Increasing Internationalization
Globalization is not a straightforward phenomenon
to be socio-scientifically analyzed. So accustomed
to analyzing national societies, many theoretical
and methodological limitations constrain the
analytical power of this emerging supra-national
and cross-national phenomenon (Martin, Metzger,
& Pierre, 2006). Ideological and political fac-
tors make the globalization debate an intensive
dispute between globalists and globaphobics
(Ritzer, 2009). Whereas the globalists emphasize
the positive aspects of globalization, especially
the greater economic success and the spread of
democracy, the globaphobics stress the negative
aspects of globalization, especially for the less
well-off parts of the globe.
Although globalization is mainly understood
as an economic process, where production, trade
and consumption chains have gained a highly
trans-national character, it also has an important
political dimension. Economically, the 2nd world
Adult Education and Globalization
war gave birth to the Bretton-Woods institutional
system, with the creation of the economic gover-
nance institutions, namely, the World Bank, the
International Monetary Fund, the General Agree-
ment on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) that in 1994
became the World Trade Organization. In parallel,
the Organization for the Economic Cooperation
and Development (OECD) was constituted in
1948 and has since then increased membership
(currently it has about 30 developed nation-states)
and international power (it has developed close
relations with the Bretton-Woods organizations
and with different organizations of the United
Nations-UN). Politically, the UN was born in
1945 under the leadership of the United States,
and it has since then promoted a large number
of Inter-Governmental Organizations (INGOs).
Lechner (2009) agrees with Boli and Thomas
in that INGOs are one of the main drivers of the
so-called “global associational revolution”, as
they grow more rapid that the Non-Governmental
Organizations (NGOs).
An important discussion on globalization is
whether it cannot be better understood as Ameri-
canization or Westernization. From post-colonial,
development, and world-systemic perspectives,
globalization has been criticized as being a new
phase in the old and long dominance of the world
by the Western countries (Ritzer, 2009; Robertson,
2006). Another crucial discussion is whether the
state has declined in power in favor of global
international forces and institutions. In this issue,
a middle ground position would argue that the
nation-states might well have lost part of their
traditional political and sovereign powers, but
they still maintain important regulatory capacities
to tackle globalization and to defend the interest
of their state and their citizens.
Despite all these discussions and lack of con-
clusive interpretation, there are, however, two
fundamental questions concerning globalization.
First, which are the main descriptive features of
globalization?, and second, what drives globaliza-
tion?. Regarding the first question, globalization
can be defined as a process of stretching social
relations, regionalization, intensification of flows,
increasing interpenetration, all this taking place
within a global infrastructure. Social relations
are increasingly stretched via networks of con-
nection across the world. Regionalization refers
to the increased interconnection between states
that border on each other, being the case of the
European Union the most developed case of
world-regional or continental integration. Flows
of information, people, technologies, knowledge,
products, services and capital have been intensified
in the last decades. All these bring about the level
of interpenetration between apparently distant
cultures and societies that come face to face with
each other at local level, creating increase diversity.
All these processes can be possible because the
development of a global infrastructure, such as
the new ICTs. Concerning the second question on
what drives globalization, the answer is more dif-
ficult. Some would point to the role of the global
infrastructure, and especially to the ICTs. Some
others would indicate the role of the neo-liberal
ideology that has tried to eliminate barriers and
obstacles to individual decision and mobility. In
Western societies, this neo-liberal ideology has
forged a process of individualization and indi-
vidual empowerment. ICT have also facilitated a
process of harmonization of international technical
standards, as the huge expansion of the ISO norms
exemplify. Neo-liberalism has been profusely ap-
plied to economy, and it has stimulated a process
of marketization of commodities. Behind these
drivers are multiple groups and organizations
As stated in the introduction the modern and
intensified phase of globalization has two main
effects or dimensions. First, the “diffusion process”
of similar practices and patterns world-wide can
contribute to the rise of a world-wide society and
culture within convergence dynamics. This is the
thesis of the world-society and world-culture theo-
ries (Boli, 1999; Lechnner, 2006). Other authors,
such as Dodri, Meyer and Hwang (2006) argue
for an expansion of formal organizations world-
1089

wide during the second half of the 20th century. In
sum, these perspectives focus on the similarity of
many world-wide trends, fostering certain degree
of homogenization and convergence. The second
dimension refers to an “increased international
inter-dependency” between and among societies
beyond the boundaries of the increasingly weak-
ened nation-states, thus, opening for a higher
influence of global factors on the realities of
local societies and communities, and groups and
individuals. However, mutual interdependency
can foster increased relations and connections,
but they do not directly imply convergence.
Complementarities between differences are also
an effective solution to inter-dependency. In all,
these two effects foster both a tendency towards
universalizing and homogenizing patterns, such
as the integration in global continental regions
(Europe, North America, Latin America, East Asia,
etc.), and also towards new lines of diversity and
heterogenizing patters, both intra-national and
cross-national.
Educational Change in Late
Modernity: From Fragmented
Education Systems to Post-
Secondary Learning Societies
Education in general, and in particular provision
of education, has experienced an intensive expan-
sion and diffusion along the 20th century (Ramirez
& Boli, 1987). Almost all countries world-wide
have been involved in a construction and institu-
tionalization of their national system. In fact, the
creation of a national education system has been
part and parcel of the constitution of a modern
nation-state, as a fundamental homogenizing
mechanism in nation-state building and control.
However, in many new independent states due to
the de-colonialization process in the second half
of the 20th century the construction of national
systems of education has been slower and less
effective. An important number of states in these
countries can be regarded as failed states, while
1090
Adult Education and Globalization
political elites have opted for other strategies to
control society, although quite often rather non-
effective control.
By more or less mid 21st. century the sub-
systems of basic primary and the higher education
or levels were already established and institutional-
ized in most developed countries. Basic compul-
sory education was already established and fully
implemented by the mid 21st. century. Higher
education too was rather institutionalized by the
1960s. In fact the university student revolts in 1968
were an example of the importance of the higher
education system by that time. There was also a
clear and exclusionary linkage between the basic
and the higher education, through a theoretically-
oriented secondary sub-system, which has been
maintained as such in many developed countries
until recently. In between the first-primary and
higher-tertiary sub-systems there was a broad
area of multiple and diverse educational choices
and levels. In the last two decades or so, many
countries have developed ways and mechanisms
to access higher education from vocational or
similar education. In this sense, the organization
of the secondary system has played an important
role in integrating all the levels and sub-systems
of national education systems.
In many Western societies the last decades
have seen the emergence of new educational sys-
tems, through a long process of intended reforms
and systemic dynamics. An education field that
has been object of reforms has been the broad
area of technical and applied education, which
has covered a range of different educational and
training programs, such as vocational courses,
technical colleges, polytechnic universities, etc.
This broad area can be defined as the technical
or practical area. The clear distinction between
the higher-education and the technical educa-
tion made researchers propose the concept of
binary-system, meaning that there were two clear
educational paradigms and systems. Nevertheless,
slow reforms and changes in the system since the
1960s and 1970s, which clearly intensified in the
Adult Education and Globalization
1980s and 1990s, made the binary distinction
blurred and less marked. Researchers began to talk
about a post-binary educational system, as was
argued by Scott (1995). In Europe the post-binary
system became more unified when the connec-
tions between the theoretical and the technical or
practical were legally approved and organized. In
related concerns, for example, King (2000) pays
attention to how the post-compulsory education
and the education of young adults became relevant
in the 1970s, where post-secondary education
and education of individuals aged between 15
and 22 became a critical aspect in the emerging
education system. In fact, the education system
dealing with these young adults has turned out to
be of critical importance in the further evolution
of adults as students and learners. In other words,
the initial vocational and training is an important
determinant of the working of adults’ further or
continuing training.
The general shift that has been broadly ac-
knowledged in the literature has been from educa-
tion to learning, specifically from adult education
to lifelong learning, within a general recognition
of the rise of a more learning or knowledge society
and economy (Jarvis, 2000). Scholars have identi-
fied that in the current technological, innovation
and information-oriented societies, the sources
of learning have expanded, and that traditional
educational institutions do not longer own the
monopoly of valuable knowledge and learning.
The clear example is the expansion of the distance
universities, which by intensive and extensive use
of different kinds of new technologies provide a
comparable level of learning through new and
innovative forms. Learning, however, is a much
more difficult task for policy intervention than
education. This was emphasized by Field (2000),
who devoted attention to the shift from lifelong
education to lifelong learning in the current
reflexive-oriented society of learning individuals,
and noted the difficutlies by government to desig
appropriate policy strategies to promote learning
and lifelong learning in particular.
From an individual learning perspective,
Folke, Hake and Schedler (2004) view lifelong
learning as a kind of transitional learning. In the
current post-industrial era in many developed
economies, with hyper competition and where
labor markets and consumption are increasingly
volatile, learning organizations and a workforce
engaged in lifelong learning are needed. These
authors stress the challenge to integrate economic
needs and personal interests and motivations in
lifelong learning policies, and advocate for a more
biographical approach or “life-wide learning”,
where individuality and changing evolution can
adjust in more effective ways.
In a comparativist tradition the shift from
education to learning has also been discussed
(Instance, Schuetze, & Schuller, 2002). Compara-
tive researchers have been privileged observers of
these changes at cross-national and international
level. In this sense, Broadfoot (2000) proposed
a clear need to carry out a comparative learnol-
ogy. In her view, a “neo-comparative education”
should focus on learning and its relationships with
cultural and social factors at macro-level, in order
to understand how individuals can be encouraged
to engage successfully with the various ways and
forms of learning opportunities that are increas-
ingly emerging in the new millennium. Lifelong
learning has been subject to global trends, where
certain common tendencies have been identified.
Jarvis (1999) in the late 1990s identified already
an important tension, which in most Western de-
veloped countries affected the role of Universities
in the provision of up-grading skills and train-
ing to adults active in their labor careers. Jarvis
argued that if higher education institutions did
not integrate this demand within their traditional
Once that both globalization and adult educa-
tion and learning have been defined and their main
driving and changing dynamics grounded, it will
be now discussed how globalization influences
and affects adult education.
1091

GLOBALIZATION’S EFFECTS
ON ADULT EDUCATION
Three main effects of globalization on adult educa-
tion are presented: first, the double global-national
tension in the comparative education literature;
second, the global influence on local-national
policies; and third, the case of the European
Union’s lifelong learning policies is presented,
as an example of an intensive cross-country in-
terpenetration and integration.
Systems, Contexts,
Models, and Trends
In the comparative educational literature a double
need can be detected: a need to include the global
to understand the national, and a need to stress the
nation-state and cultural system and context as a
way to understand the old and new cross-country
differences. In this literature there has been a
growing body of scholarly work pointing to the
importance of the global to understand national
realities. Likewise, there has also been a grow-
ing recognition of the importance of the national
systems, contexts and cultures on education. This
is a sign of the importance of the national culture
and state systems for the understanding of the
enduring cross-country differences. This can also
be an indirect indication of globalization effects,
as the nation-state and culture operates as a first
filter of global dynamics, with the enduring capac-
ity to deviate and filter the global pressure, and
thus to reproduce the national state and cultural
particularities.
The emerging global dimension was introduced
in education analysis rather early, especially in
the comparative education traditions. Morrisson
(1995) made a global reading of the challenges
faced by adult education in general, and called
for the need of all nations to adopt a more adap-
tive learning system, learner-centered, change-
focused, value-based, technologically mediated,
and built no open systems principles. In the 1990s,
1092
Adult Education and Globalization
Cowen (2000) suggested that a good comparative
education would involve several questions: read
the global, understand transitologies, comprehend
‘the other’ and analyze pedagogies. For Cowen,
the global was not synonymous with understand-
ing globalization. Instead, reading the global
could also involve seeing civilizations as central
categories of analysis. Thus, for comparative edu-
cation, both regions and rims as units of analysis
contain the category of border (as in the sense of
a legal boundary between nations) and the terms
on which that may be collapsed, for example, for
free trade or to establish common equivalences in
educational qualifications for the freer movement
of skilled labor. Both regions and rims as units
of analysis also contain the category of border
or boundary in the sense of socially structured
immunity to the polluted, or a socially structured
embracement of the pure.
More recently, Crossley and Jarvis (2000)
and Crowsley (2002) have made a strong argu-
ment about the need of looking at contexts and
cultures in order to understand educational change
and learning process. Crossley (2002) states that
“concern with context, it is argued, is perhaps the
most enduring characteristic of disciplined com-
parative and international research in education. It
is also central--but in many different ways--to the
contemporary reconceptualization of the field”.
In their view, sensitivity to culture and context
is also central to postcolonial theorizing, to the
rationale for differing units of analysis, and to
many emergent strategies designed to bridge the
gap between research and policy and practice.
Among the global trends affecting directly and in-
directly adult education is the intensive expansion
of individualized training and development (Luo,
2006). Alongside the rise of the human resource
management paradigm in the last 3-4 decades, a
growing number of firms and organizations have
adopted a personal training approach to satisfy both
organizational and personal interests and needs.
In sum, these authors point to the increasing
presence of the global in local realities. There are
Adult Education and Globalization
two main ways of global influence on local reali-
ties: the systemic and the policy. The systemic in-
fluence can take place more easily when a country
is highly exposed to global dynamics, and when the
country is pressured to maintain certain privileged
place in the international economy. In these cases,
how the global pressures affect national system
depends also on the kind and strength of the global
pressure. A good example of this can be the effects
of the latest PISA evaluation on education by the
OECD, and how certain advanced countries with
modest evaluations have rapidly reacted, and
embarked in a process of institutional reform and
change, which has the potential of bringing sys-
temic hybridizing. Systemic hybridizing is when
features of others national systems get adopted
and intermingled with the domestic ones, produc-
ing within the traditional nation-state boundaries
both a higher systemic heterogeneity and hybrid-
izing. This is not an easy process to be observed,
since it requires sophisticated methodological
and analytical techniques to depict it. Spain can
be a good example of systemic hybridizing. As
a new and late comer in the 1990s to vocational
and training policies (including lifelong learning)
within the intensive EU’s policy and institutional
process, the traditional Spanish weak and simple
system has increasingly become complemented
with various mechanisms and logics, and now
the system of general initial and further training,
together with a novel system of lifelong learning,
displays a rather complex and hybrid character.
The other form that the global can affect the local
is by policy pressure. This can be a direct rather
coercive pressure, as the cases of the developing
countries from the development funding organiza-
tions. In advancing and developed countries this
can also take the form of source of authority and
legitimacy for local policy-makers. This will be
the theme of the next section.
The Policy Globalization of
Global and Local Policies
Global institutional dynamics and aspects have
received a rapid increasing attention since the
1990s. Two main issues have been analyzed: the
tensions between the global and the local policies,
and the expansion of official and institutional
global discourses, logics and institutions.
With regard to the relations between the global
and the local, literature tends to point to tensions,
conflicts and dilemmas. Arnove and Torres (2007)
deal the dynamic interplay of global, national,
and local forces as they shape the functioning
and outcomes of education systems in specific
contexts. Various chapters in the book call for a
rethinking of the nation-state as the basic unit for
analyzing school-society relations; provide new
ways of conceptualizing equality of educational
opportunity and outcomes; call attention to the
need to study social movements in relation to edu-
cational reform; emphasize the value of feminist,
postcolonial, and culturally sensitive perspectives
to comparative inquiry into the limitations as well
as potential of education systems to contribute to
individual development and social change; and
provide detailed critical accounts of how various
international financial and technical assistance
agencies shape educational policy and practice
in specific regions of the world.
With regard to the expansion of the global
discourses, literature tends to adopt a rather criti-
cal standpoint. Spring (2008) reviews research
on globalization and education, and states that
it involves the study of intertwined worldwide
discourses, processes, and institutions affecting
local educational practices and policies. He argues
that there are four major theoretical perspectives
concerning globalization and education: world cul-
ture, world systems, postcolonial, and culturalist.
The major global educational discourses are about
the knowledge economy and technology, lifelong
learning, global migration or brain circulation, and
neo-liberalism. The major institutions contributing
1093

to global educational discourses and actions are
the World Bank, the Organization for Economic
Cooperation and Development, the World Trade
Organization, the United Nations, and UNESCO.
In a more empirical approach, Lechner (2006),
based on Baker and Le Trende (2005), points to the
importance of the educational state in many coun-
tries, referring to the increasing public funding
of compulsory or basic education. This, together
with the slow but growing public expenditure in
social and welfare policies in many countries, is
explained in terms of states’ core in the globaliza-
tion era. In this explanation, state investment in
basic education and minimum of social welfare
are considered as the basic strategies by states to
cope with the volatile and uncertain economy, by
providing its citizens with basic skills and basic
security from which to maneuver individually and
collectively in the turbulent globalizing economy
and culture.
The international education agenda has had
two parallel dynamics: the technical and the dis-
cursive. The technical side has concentrated on
the construction of new statistics on education. As
Cussó and D’Amico (1999) argue, the UNESCO
statistics have been highly influenced by the tech-
nical rationale and statistics of OECD and World
Bank. The objective of these two organizations
is to prioritize policy-oriented information, rather
than traditional UNESCO’s information on invest-
ment and inputs. In that sense, the new statistics
are more interested in outputs and performance,
in order to make effectiveness and efficiency
analysis. This quantitative orientation has also
affected UNESCO’s general approaches, as can
be observed in the “Education for all” program,
launched in 2000 and targeted at 2015. Goldstein
(2004) criticizes this “one size fits all” numeri-
cal approach, because early evidence pointed to
side-effects distortions on educational systems.
Mundy (2007) and King (2007) deal with the
role of multilateral agencies in building a global
agenda. Mundy accepts some positive possibilities
to develop a global educational governance, as
1094
Adult Education and Globalization
long as the technical contribution of the concept
of governance is deployed. A similar argument is
made by Summer (2008), inspired by the Cana-
dian system and policy of adult education. King,
however, is rather skeptic. In his analysis of the
educational dimension of the global development
agenda over the period 1990 to 2006, a weak
participation of the developing countries is found,
and therefore a low level of ownership. King
emphasizes the weak argumentation and evidence
to focus on basic education and to constrain aid
to secondary, technical and higher education,
and criticizes the excessive focus on targets, and
a lack of holistic and sectoral and inter-sectoral
development projects.
In sum, since the mid-20th century an increasing
number of international actors have arisen, their
power has institutionalized, and their practices
have included from statistics, through funding,
to authority and legitimacy. Each nation-state has
faced differently the pressures from these global
actors, depending basically on their position in
the international economic and political division.
Nevertheless, all countries have been somehow
affected and influenced by one or other global
dynamic.
European Union’s Lifelong
Learning Policies
The EU experience with life-long learning and
continuing education has been long and significant.
This long evolution has been object of various
analyses. Lee, Thayer and Madyun (2008) ana-
lyze the evolution of the EU’s lifelong learning
policies. The do it from an institutional learning
perspective, where it is observed how the EU and
its institutions look around and selectively adopt
other policies developed by other organizations.
This approach is consistent with a globalization
dimension where organizations and institutions
have higher mutual knowledge on each other
and more monitoring capacities. These authors
propose a new periodization of the evolution from
Adult Education and Globalization
the initial moments in the late 1950s and 1960s
through the general vocational and educational
training policies, until the latest lifelong learning
strategies derived from the Lisbon agreement in
the year 2000.
Dehlmel (2006) too examines the process that
leads lifelong learning to become increasingly
a popular slogan in the field of EU educational
policy. Dehlmel describes how lifelong learning
has emerged as the central strategy in EU educa-
tion and training policy, since the international
context of the 1970s. Dehlmel evaluates too how
this concept has been applied, the objectives and
the effects. According to this author, lifelong
learning has mostly been a flexible and all-
catching concept that within a growing concern
for economic and business competitiveness has
provided a framework tool to stimulate national
strategies in lifelong learning. In this sense, the
concept has been used to stimulate a general
convergence of EU’s economies towards a higher
level of international performance. In Dehlmel’s
view, and based on Nóvoa and DeJong-Lambert
(2003), all this suppose a new phase aimed at
establishing a European educational area, within
a renewed political will to make national systems
converge. But the key question is how to make
the many national systems converge or become
similar. An answer to this question can be found
in Ertl (2006).
Ertl (2006) analyses whether the new policy
instruments adopted in the Lisbon agenda in
2000 have really brought about substantial and
fundamental changes in the educational and
training policies, and specifically in stimulating
positive convergence, that is changes to the best
performance and practices. The key analysis is
focused on the new policy instrument, that is,
the Open Method of Coordination (OMC). This
new principle of cooperation focuses on the joint
search for, and dissemination of, best practices
and the development of common benchmarks and
guidelines. It implements structures and mecha-
nisms that might lead to similar developments in
the Member States. Nóvoa and DeJong-Lambert
consider the OMC to be an important part of
the EU’s convergence policy, arguing that the
‘Europeanization of education’ is based on this
method of establishing standards and benchmarks,
enforcing the illusion that each country is free to
follow its own path. Ertl’s position, however, is
the opposite: there is no evidence that the OMC
has fostered substantial changes, and there is no
clear indication of convergence.
One could comment that by 2006 it might
have been too early to assess the OMC’s results.
Five-six years might well be a short period as to
bring changes. In any case, the OMC is a clear
example of the effects of globalization in the
policy making. It is an example of recognition
that societies can know each other, that they are
interested in knowing mutually in more depth,
and that by knowing others deeper, each society
or state will be able to select the most appropriate
information and learning for their own realities.
By this kind of process, both national systems
and models, and the aggregated European system
and model, instead of becoming more converged
around a more single and one-logic model, turn
out to be more hybrid, richer in internal variation,
and with more capacities and flexibilities to adapt
to on-going problems and challenges. As stated
above, the hybridizing of so far national systems
and models is also one of the main effects of
globalization on national-local realities. Robert-
son and Keeling (2008) recognize that the EU
policy-making processes have become a kind of
laboratory and inspiration for others. She uses the
case of the higher education policy process, around
the harmonization of the Bologna process, which
has been a very important source of inspiration
for several reforms in other developed countries,
such as Australia and United States.
In sum, the example of the EU’s lifelong
learning policies serves to examine the two main
possible effects of globalization on national-local
realities: Glocal policies and systemic hybrid-
izing. In this European case, the supra-national
1095

and continental economic and political integration
during the last 3-4 decades has brought about
both some kind of global policies at European
level, and arguably certain tendencies towards a
systemic hybridizing, although this latter is still
subject of further research.
FUTURE RESEARCH DIRECTIONS
There are three main lines for further research.
First, comparative learning systems. Aiming to ad-
vance from comparative educational research, and
acknowledging the shift from education to learn-
ing, implies that learning needs to increasingly
become one of the central objects of comparative
analysis. Second, global educational policies. If
global discourses are gaining authority power and
providing sources of technical legitimacy, national
and local policies are facing the challenge of how
originally and effectively to integrate the powerful
and expanding global policy discourses with their
own particular problems. Research should look
at these multiple local responses and strategies
to cope with the global. And thirdly, at a more
nuanced and sophisticated level, educational and
learning systems in countries with a certain level
of exposure to global and international landscapes,
are entering a phase of system hybridation, where
the constitutional features of their national systems
and models increase in number and character. To
observe how this hybridation process improves or
not the previous system or model can be a very
crucial and critical question for research.
CONCLUSION
The chapter has mainly presented the most im-
portant ways in which globalization affects adult
education and learning. In order to do that, both
globalization and adult education and learning
have been defined and their main changes pre-
sented. Later, three main influences of globaliza-
1096
Adult Education and Globalization
tion on adult education have been discussed. First,
the growing importance of the national contexts
and cultures on education is a first indication of
globalization effects, as the nation-state and culture
operates as a first filter of global dynamics, with the
enduring capacity to deviate and filter the global
pressure, and to reproduce the national state and
cultural particularities. Second, the globalization
of adult education policies, whereby global logics
and discourses enter local national policy-making
processes. Third, the case of European Union’s
lifelong learning policies has been presented as
a possible adequate example of both systemic
hybridizing and policy globalization.
REFERENCES
Arnove, R. F., & Torres, C. A. (Eds.). (2007).
Comparative education: The dialectic of the
global and the local (3rd ed.). New York: Row-
man & Littlefield.
Baker, D., & Le Trende, G. K. (2005). National
differences, global similarities: world culture and
the future of schooling. Stanford, CA: Stanford
University Press.
Boli, J. (1999). Constructing world-culture: in-
ternational non-governmental organizations since
1875. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
Broadfoot, P. (2000). Comparative education
fort he 21st century: Retrospect and prospect.
Comparative Education, 36(3), 357–371.
doi:10.1080/03050060050129036
Brown, P., Green, A., & Lauder, H. (2001). High
Skills: Globalization, competitiveness and skill
formation. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Cowen, R. (2000). Comparing futures or com-
paring pasts? Comparative Education, 36(3),
333–342. doi:10.1080/713656619
Adult Education and Globalization
Crossley, M. (2002). Comparative and inter-
national education: contemporary challenges,
reconceptualization and new directions for the
field. Current Issues in Comparative Education,
4(2), 81–86.
Crossley, M., & Jarvis, P. (2001). Comparative
education for the 21st century: An international
response. Special number of Comparative Educa-
tion, 37(4), 405-408.
Crouch, C., Finegold, D., & Sako, M. (1999). Are
skills the answer? The political economy of skill
creation in advanced industrial countries. Oxford:
Oxford University Pres.
Culpepper, P. C. (2003). Creating cooperation:
how states develop human capital in Europe.
Ithaca: Cornell University Press.
Cussó, R., & D’Amico, S. (2005). From develop-
ment comparatism to globalization comparativ-
ism: Towards more normative international edu-
cation statistics. Comparative Education, 41(2),
199–216. doi:10.1080/03050060500037012
Dehmel, A. (2006). Making a European area of
lifelong learning a reality? Some critical reflec-
tions on the European Union’s lifelong learning
policies. Comparative Education, 42(1), 49–62.
doi:10.1080/03050060500515744
Drodri, G. S., Meyer, J. W., & Hwang, H. (Eds).
(2006). Globalization and organization. World
society and organizational change. Oxford: Ox-
ford University Press.
Ertl, E. (2006). European Union policies in educa-
tion and training: the Lisbon agenda as a turning
point? Comparative Education, 42(1), 5–27.
doi:10.1080/03050060500515652
Field, J. (2000). Lifelong learning and the new
educational order. United Kingdom: Trentham
Books.
Folke, J. G., Hake, B. J., & Schedler, P. E. (2004).
Lifelong learning as transitional learning. Adult
Education Quarterly, 54, 280–291.
Goldstein, H. (2004). Education for All:
the globalization of learning targets.
Comparative Education,40(1), 7–14.
doi:10.1080/0305006042000184854
Istance, D., Schuetze, H. G., & Schuller, T. (Eds.).
(2002). International perspectives on Lifelong
learning: from recurrent education to the knowl-
edge society. McGraw-Hill House. UK: Open
University Press.
Jarvis, P. (1999). Global trends in lifelong
learning and the response of the Universi-
ties. Comparative Education, 35(2), 249–257.
doi:10.1080/03050069928017
Jarvis, P. (2000). Globalisation, the learning soci-
ety and comparative education. Comparative Edu-
cation, 36(3), 343–355. doi:10.1080/713656613
Kai-Ming, C., Xinhuo, J., & Xiaobo, G. (1999).
From training to education: Lifelong learning in
China. Comparative Education, 35(2), 119–129.
doi:10.1080/03050069927928
King, E. (2000). A century of evolution in com-
parative studies. Comparative Education, 36(3),
267–277. doi:10.1080/713656620
King, K. (2007). Multilateral agencies in the
construction of the global agenda on educa-
tion. Comparative Education, 43(3), 377–391.
doi:10.1080/03050060701556331
Korsgaard, O. (2002). A European Demos? The
Nordic adult education tradition—folkeoplys-
ning—faces a challenge. Comparative Education,
38(1), 7–16. doi:10.1080/03050060120103829
Lechner, F. J. (2009). Globalization: The making of
world society. United Kingdom: Wiley-Blackwell.
1097

Lee, M., Thayer, T., & Madyun, N. (2008). The
evolution of the European Union’s lifelong learn-
ing policies: an institutional learning perspec-
tive. Comparative Education, 44(4), 445–463.
doi:10.1080/03050060802481496
Little, A. (2000). Development studies and com-
parative education: context, content, comparison
and contributors. Comparative Education, 36(3),
279–296. doi:10.1080/713656612
Luo, X. (2006). The spread of “Human resources”
culture: Institutional individualism and the rise of
personal development training . In Drodri, G. S.,
Meyer, J. W., & Hwang, H. (Eds.), Globalization
and organization: World society and organiza-
tional change (pp. 225–240). Oxford: Oxford
University Press.
Martin, D., Metzger, J.-L., & Pierre, P. (2006). The
sociology of globalization: Theoretical and meth-
odological reflections. International Sociology,
21, 499–521. doi:10.1177/0268580906065298
Merriam, S. B., Courtenay, B. C., & Cervero, R. M.
(Eds.). (2006). Global issues and adult education:
Perspectives from Latin America, Southern Africa
and the United States. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Morrison, T. R. (1995). Global transformation
and the search for a new educational design. In-
ternational Journal of Lifelong Education, 14(3),
188–213. doi:10.1080/0260137950140302
Mundy, K. (2007). Global governance, educational
change. Comparative Education, 43(3), 339–357.
doi:10.1080/03050060701556281
Nóvoa, A., & De Jong-Lambert, W. (2003). The
education of Europe: apprehending EU educa-
tional policies . In Phillips, D., & Ertl, H. (Eds.),
Implementing European Union education and
training policy: a comparative study of issues
in four member states (pp. 41–72). Dordrecht:
Kluwer. doi:10.1007/0-306-48077-8_3
1098
Adult Education and Globalization
Ogawa, A. (2009). Japan’s new lifelong
learning policy: exploring lessons from Eu-
ropean knowledge economy. International
Journal of Lifelong Education, 28(5), 601–614.
doi:10.1080/02601370903190011
Ramirez, F., & Boli, J. (1987). Global patterns
of educational institutionalization . In Thomas,
G. M. (Ed.), Institutional structure: constructing
state, society and the individual (pp. 150–172).
Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
Ritzer, G. (2009). Globalization: A basic text.
United Kingdom: Wiley-Blackwell.
Robertson, S. L. (2006). Absences and imaginings:
the production of knowledge on globalization and
education. Globalisation, Societies and Education,
4(2), 303–318. doi:10.1080/14767720600752882
Robertson, S. L., & Keeling, R. (2008). Stirring
the lions: strategy and tactics in global higher
education. Globalisation, Societies and Education,
6(3), 221–240. doi:10.1080/14767720802343316
Rubenson, K. (2006). The Nordic model of
lifelong learning. Compare, 36(3), 327–341.
doi:10.1080/03057920600872472
Scott, P. (1995). The meanings of mass higher
education. London: Open University Press.
Spring, J. (2008). Research on globalization and
education. Review of Educational Research, 78(2),
330–363. doi:10.3102/0034654308317846
Summer, J. (2008). Governance, globalization and
political economy: perspectives from Canadian
adult education. Adult Education Quarterly, 59(1),
22–41. doi:10.1177/0741713608325170
Torres, C. A., & Schuguresnky, D. (1994). The
politics of adult education in comparative per-
spective: models, rationalities and adult educa-
tion policy implementation in Canada, Mexico
and Tanzania. Comparative Education, 30(2),
131–152. doi:10.1080/0305006940300205
Adult Education and Globalization
Zajda, J. (1999). Adult education and lifelong
learning in Russia: new developments in Rus-
sia. Comparative Education, 35(2), 151–161.
doi:10.1080/03050069927946
KEY TERMS AND DEFINITIONS
Adult Education: The provision of knowledge
to adults through institutionalized educational
institutions and schools.
Adult Learning: The process by which adults
in active and interactive situations can acquire
different types of valuable knowledge and skills.
Globalization: A world-wide process by which
traditional national societies become more inte-
grated and inter-dependent mainly in economic
and political dimensions.
Global Educational Policies: The integration
of global policy discourses into national-local
policy practices.
Hybrid Learning Systems: A new way to look
at changes in the national educational systems,
due mainly to the influence of external forces
globalization process, or to increasing diversity
within nation-states.
Benchmarking: The act of comparing with a
successful or model reference aimed at improving
and emulating.
Comparative Learnology: A novel way to
analyze current emerging educational systems and
models within the learning and the globalization
paradigms.
1099
1100

Chapter 67
Barriers to Adult Education
Participation, Distance
Education, and Adult Learning
E. Paulette Isaac
University of Missouri-St. Louis, USA

ABSTRACT
Volumes of research exist which explains adults’ participation in adult education. Research suggests that
adults participate in adult education for a variety of reasons. Nonetheless, adults also face a variety of
barriers to their participation. Whether in a traditional or distance education format, adults may confront
barriers to their learning. Now that technology plays such an important role in adult learning, new and
returning adults may find additional barriers. Some barriers are within learners’ control. On the other
hand, institutions can take measures to eliminate other barriers and enhance learning.

INTRODUCTION of these activities were clandestine in nature,

Although adult education was professionalized
in the United Stated in the 1920s, adults have
participated in adult education for hundreds of
years. At one point, formal adult education was
considered elitist (Stubblefield & Keane, 1994).
Only those with the financial means could attend.
On the other hand, many were legally prohibited
from participating as a result of federal and state
laws (Neufeldt & McGee, 1990). When formal
education was unattainable or illegal, many adults
participated in informal learning activities. Some
DOI: 10.4018/978-1-61692-906-0.ch067
while others were offered to the general public.
Earlier in our history, adults participated in adult
education as a means to economic status. Others
simply saw it as an escape from oppression.
With the establishment of land-grant institu-
tions, evening colleges, and extension programs
(Stubblefield & Keane, 1994), adults were able to
participate in education like never before. Today,
education is available to all adults. With the advent
of new distance learning technologies, more adults
can partake in adult education. It has opened the
door for adults with busy schedules and those in
rural areas to participate in adult learning activities.
Barriers to Adult Education Participation, Distance Education, and Adult Learning
However, despite our advances, adults face
barriers to participation as well as learning. The
terms barriers and deterrents have been used in-
terchangeably in the literature relative to adults’
lack of participation in educational activities.
Darkenwald and Valentine (1990) indicate that a
deterrent is a negative or positive force that works
in combination with other forces that impact
participation. On the other hand, a barrier is an
“absolute blockage” (p. 30) which prevents an
adult from participating in adult education. Silva,
Cahalan, Lacierno-Paquet, and Stowe (1998) sug-
gest that “Factors that inhibit or prevent people
from participating in activities such as AE [Adult
Education] are sometimes referred to as barriers,
constraints, deterrents, impediments, or obstacles”
(p. 1). The terms barriers and deterrents will be
used interchangeably throughout this chapter.
Knowledge relative to participation barriers can
assist program planners in attracting and retaining
adult learners. In addition, addressing learning
barriers can enhance the learning experience of
adults in the classroom. In this chapter, a review
of the literature on barriers to adult education par-
ticipation and learning in traditional and distance
education formats are examined.
BACKGROUND
Adult Education Participation
Numerous researchers have conducted studies to
explain why adults participate in adult education
(Boshier, 1971, 1991; Boshier & Collins, 1985;
Morstain & Smart, 1977; Fujita-Stark, 1999;
Hawkins, 2007). In general, job enhancement/
professional development is cited as a motivation
for participation. Other motivations have included
a love of learning, social interaction, social stimu-
lation, and enhancement of communication skills,
just to name a few. However, the context of learning
also impacts motivations. For example, in her study
of childcare workers, Hawkins found that they not
only participated for enhanced job performance,
but they also participated to improve childcare
programs. In an examination of African Ameri-
can churches, Isaac, Guy, and Valentine (2001)
reported that spiritual and religious development,
support in facing personal challenges, and family
togetherness motivated adults to participate in
church-based educational programs. In a study of
soldiers, Covert (2002a, 2002b) found that they
participated to prepare for their transition to civil-
ian life, to get a credential, and for self-efficacy
enhancement. Some motivations of older adults’
are consistent with that of their younger counter-
parts, yet others are distinctive. For example, they
participate to keep up with new technologies and
information, to be fulfilled, to learn new skills,
intellectual stimulation or a love for learning, to
escape boredom, for social contact or interac-
tion with others, and to pursue new interests or
hobbies (Mulenga & Liang, 2008; Sloane-Seale
& Kops, 2007). Adults have a variety of reasons
for participating in adult education. Some are
consistent among adult learners. However, some
are unique based on the learner and the context.
Although some adults may be highly motivated
to participate in educational activities, others are
confronted with barriers that impede or deter their
participation.
Barriers to Participation
In a landmark study, Johnstone and Rivera (1965)
identified two major types of barriers—external
(situational) and internal (dispositional). Situation-
al barriers to participation include transportation
or costs of engaging in an educational activity,
whereas a dispositional barrier may be someone’s
negative attitude or perception. Costs and time con-
tinue to be major barriers to participation (Chao,
DeRocco, & Flynn, 2007). Furthermore, family
and work constraints (Manning & Vickery, 2000;
Martindale & Drake, 1989) can deter adults from
participation. Wlodkowski (1999) contends that
1101
 Barriers to Adult Education Participation, Distance Education, and Adult Learning
educational background and age are the two most
common components of dispositional barriers.
Somewhat akin to dispositional barriers are
psychosocial (Darkenwald & Merriam, 1982) or
sociocultural (Hayes & Darkenwald, 1988) barri-
ers. Adults facing this barrier have “individually
held beliefs, values, attitudes, or perceptions that
inhibit” their “participation in organized learning
activities” (Darkenwald & Merriam, p. 137). For
example, someone could believe they have poor
study habits or are too old to learn anything new.
In addition, if an adult is still holding on to a nega-
tive schooling experience, it could prevent the
person from participating. In her examination of
low-income adults, Stanley (2003) found that fear
and self-concept were psychosocial obstacles that
prevented adults from acquiring computer literacy.
It is further pointed out that, “Self-concept and
attitude towards learning are important decision
points” (Malhotra, Shapero, Sizoo, & Munro,
2007, p. 83) impacting participation. More im-
portantly, psychosocial and sociocultural barriers
consist of “the role of social forces generally, and
membership and reference groups specifically,
in forming and maintaining attitudes toward
participation in education” (Darkenwald & Mer-
riam, p. 137). “That is, the reflection of a social
environment in which education is not perceived
as important or useful” (Blair, McPake, & Munn,
1995). To illustrate, a family member may be
discouraged from or ridiculed for participating in
formal adult education if other family members
have not participated. So, not only can a person’s
attitude be a barrier to participation, perceptions
from members within cultural groups might influ-
ence participation.
Expanding on barriers to participation from
an examination of Carp, Peterson, and Roelf’s
work, Cross (1981) concluded that there are
three distinct barriers. In addition to situational
and dispositional barriers, she categorized some
barriers as institutional. According to Cross,
these are “practices and procedures that exclude
or discourage working adults from participating
1102
in educational activities” (p. 98). In other words,
these are created by the institutions providing
the adult learning activities. As such, she further
delineates institutional barriers into five areas.
They include location or transportation problems.
Courses that do not catch the interests of learners or
that do not meet their practical needs. Procedures
and time requirements can be problematic. For
example, if potential learners have to complete
mounds of paperwork to enroll, they may become
discouraged from participating. On the other
hand, adults working a typical 8-hour shift (i.e.,
9-5) would find it difficult to attend a course that
begins at 4:30 p.m. Finally, a lack of information
about programs offered and procedural matters is
another institutional barrier. Similar to this barrier
is the notion of informational barriers (Darkenwald
& Merriam, 1982). According to Darkenwald
and Merriam, they include an institution’s lack
of communication regarding program offerings
and “the failure of many adults . . . to seek out
or use the information that is available” (p. 137).
Even though many adults have Internet access,
this can still be problematic for those who are not
Internet active.
Although it has been over four decades since
Johnstone and Rivera (1965) first reported adult
education participation barriers, institutions are
still erecting barriers for adult learners. The
“traditional structure and organization of higher
education pose significant barriers” (Chao, et al.,
2007, p. 3). Many adults no longer want to take
years to obtain a degree or certificate. Thus, the
traditional 16-week format of most universities is
no longer attractive to some adult learners. Adults
want to get their credentials as quickly as possible.
Most recently, Malhotra et al. (2007) developed
a six-factor typology that identifies adults’ barriers
to participation. Their typology supports earlier
findings on barriers. For example, bad experience
included such things as being tired of school and
a belief that low grades and lack of program re-
quirements would prevent a person admission to a
program. No place to study and too much red tape
Barriers to Adult Education Participation, Distance Education, and Adult Learning
were classified as institutional barriers. Although a
lack of resources is often associated with a lack of
money, Malhtra et al. found that a lack of energy
or stamina as well as home and job responsibilities
describe this barrier. Relative to course offerings,
examples include unavailability of desired courses
and “no information about the places or people
offering” (p. 85) courses. Another barrier in their
typology is the cost/benefit ratio. Some adults do
not favor a strict attendance requirement. Others
cannot get credit for the degree, and thus see no
reason to participate. The last factor in the typol-
ogy is child care. As would be expected, a lack
of personal child care or institutional child care
facilities reflects this barrier. However, it also in-
cludes costs of books and supplemental materials.
Ironically, a large community college district in
the Midwest, with four campuses, recently voted
to close two of its child care facilities as a result
of budget constraints (Cambria, 2009). All six
barriers of Malhotra et al.’s typology coincide
with situational, institutional, informational, and
psychosocial barriers.
Some older adults are participating in adult
education (Ford & Orell, 2005; Mulenga & Liang,
2008). Nonetheless, there are those who do not.
However, there is a “dearth of research on older
adults who do not participate in educational ac-
tivities” (Sloane-Seale & Kops, 2007, p. 21). The
little that does exist indicates that barriers for older
adults coincide with other adult learners—time,
lack of information, lack of motivation, lack of
transportation and money. However, unique to this
group is a fear of new technologies and physical
disabilities (Sloane-Seale & Kops). Furthermore, a
loss of vision, hearing, and motor skills can deter
older adults from participation (Cercone, 2008;
Chaffin & Harlow, 2005).As the aforementioned
discussion suggests, barriers are often categorized
by non-demographic variables. Darkenwald and
Valentine (1990) used demographic variables
to describe five types of adults deterred from
participating in adult education. They are people
deterred by (a) personal problems, (b) a lack of
confidence, (c) educational costs, (d) no interest in
organized education, and (e) no interest in available
courses. Time constraints represented “profound
deterrents for the population as a whole” (p. 35).
Research findings on barriers and deterrents
demonstrate that deterrents is a multidimensional
concept, the variables are influenced by prospec-
tive learners’ perceptions of their magnitude;
and the impact of variables on participation vary
according to an individual’s characteristics and
circumstances (Kerka, 1986). While adult learn-
ers may face a number of barriers to participate
in adult education, some do overcome them just
to find barriers to their learning.
ADULT LEARNING
Adults engage in formal and informal learning
throughout their lifespan. Whether intentional or
not, adults engage in learning daily. Undoubtedly,
learning is a central activity in higher education
(McLinden, McCall, Hinton, & Weston, 2006).
There are theories which explain how adults learn
(Merriam & Caffarella, 1999, Merriam, Caffarella,
& Baumgartner, 2007), tools to determine adults’
learning styles, and assessments to determine,
what, if anything, adults have learned (Boston,
2002; Kolb & Kolb, 2005). Many instructors
use learning assessments to determine which
instructional techniques to use in the classroom.
Although these can be helpful, using assessments
to determine students’ best learning style can be
problematic (Isaac, 2009). Instructors should seek
to enhance learning by removing any barriers that
may exist.
Barriers to Adult Learning
Despite the numerous barriers adults face to en-
gage in adult learning activities, many are able to
persist and participate. However, when they enter
the learning environment, they may be confronted
with additional barriers to their learning.
1103
 Barriers to Adult Education Participation, Distance Education, and Adult Learning
The learning environment is a crucial com-
ponent in the learning situation. The physical
environment can appear gloomy with rooms that
are poorly lit. In addition, the seating arrangement
can impact learning. Chairs arranged in rows are
reflective of secondary schooling. They are not
conducive for adult learners. Also, if an adult had
a negative schooling experience, the room arrange-
ment may awaken bad memories. Instructors can
also make the learning environment unfriendly.
They show little respect for learners and the knowl-
edge and experience they have. Additionally, some
instructors do not make the learning environment
inclusive based on curriculum used. For example,
if African Americans are portrayed in stereotypical
roles, such as a housekeeper, some learners may
feel uncomfortable in the classroom (Guy, 1999).
Depending on the context, some learners lack a
motivation to learn. And, instructors do not employ
any techniques to motivate these adults to learn.
Many instructors use instructional techniques they
were introduced to, such as lecture. This can limit
learners based on their preferred learning style.
Barriers to learning can impact learners in
the traditional classroom as well as the distance
education setting. However, as the next discus-
sion indicates, there are barriers that are unique
to online learners.
DISTANCE EDUCATION
Distance education has been described as a
learning situation whereby a student and instruc-
tor are separated physically or geographically.
According to Zirkle, Norris, Winegardner, and
Frustaci (2006), distance education “is almost
exclusively used to describe the transmission of
instruction from one location to multiple locations
via telecommunication technology that is either
synchronous . . . or asynchronous” (p. 103). This
is espoused by Yoon (2003) who states that, “the
term highlights the media used and the intent
to reach non-traditional students by overcom-
1104
ing geographical distance” (p. 20). Historically,
distance education involved correspondence
courses (Stubblefield & Keane, 1994). Teachers
and students would send assignments and tests to
one another, which could take weeks for either to
receive. Since distance education now includes
technology, correspondence courses are no longer
relegated to written material (Parsad, Lewis, &
Westat, 2008). Even though it no longer takes
weeks for instructors and learners to communicate
with one another, other barriers exist.
Barriers to Distance
Education and Learning
Barriers to learning exist in the traditional class-
room as well as the distance education setting.
Most of us attended classes whereby we looked
at our instructor for 50 to 90 minutes. We were
able to see facial expressions and gestures and
hear variations in tones. All of these are lost with
the online learning. Hence, for some learners,
the absence of an instructor is a barrier (Zirkle
et al., 2006).
Isolation has been commonly cited as a barrier
to online learning (Berge, 2002; Burgess, 2007).
Although learners may be online in the comfort of
their home, when they perceive a lack of feedback
from the instructor (Galusha, 1998; Zirkle, 2004),
they may feel that the instructor is not concerned
about them. In fact, Stein and Glazer (2003)
indicate that access to faculty has been “identi-
fied as critical to success” (p. 10). Some online
instructors fail to recognize “that many students
bring with them histories of imposed silence and
marginalization” (Burgess, p. 52). This too, can
cause feelings of isolation. Isolation is closely
aligned to a lack of social presence.
According to Aragon (2003), social presence
was birthed from the concept of immediacy and
is widely discussed in communications literature.
Immediacy is the psychological distance between
a communicator and a receiver. A lack of imme-
diacy would include the no presence of humor,
Barriers to Adult Education Participation, Distance Education, and Adult Learning
personal examples, or calling students by name.
Some adult learners need to feel connected to
the instructor and class participants. Social pres-
ence can “create a level of comfort” whereby
adult learners “feel at ease around the instructor
and other participants” (Aragon, p. 60). When
a learning environment lacks social presence, it
can appear impersonal to learners and decrease
the information shared (Aragon).
Institutional barriers exist that impact learn-
ing. Sometimes the course content can serve as a
barrier. In their examination of business educa-
tion teachers and students, Zirkle, et al. (2006)
discovered that educators believed “the ability
to learn career/technical skill content outside of
a traditional classroom appears to be the biggest
challenge for learners at a distance” (p. 113). They
specifically noted that skills needed in a lab could
only be obtained through “actual interaction with
the equipment” (p. 113). As with traditional set-
tings, the instructor may be a barrier to learning.
Faculty may have mastered the content, but can
find it difficult to transfer that knowledge to an
online format. In addition, some faculty lack the
technological skills needed for an online format
or find difficulty in keeping abreast of all the
changes (Zirkle, et al.). Another barrier among
faculty is the notion of intellectual reluctance,
which questions the value of legitimacy of online
learning (Mitchell & Geva-May, 2009). Faculty
reluctance can manifest itself in a lack of prepara-
tion, limited course activities, and limited contact
with learners. Furthermore, faculty are thrust into
online teaching without the necessary training
needed to facilitate an online course.
Similar to faculty, some students bring their
own barriers to distance education environment.
Some students are not technologically savvy
enough to participate in online courses. Zirkle,
et al. (2006) suggest that “many students learn
best through direct interaction with the instructor
and other students, a feature lacking in distance
education” (p. 105).
Despite its popularity and increased use and
need, adult learners can be confronted with bar-
riers to their learning. Some barriers, like those
in traditional settings, are institutional in nature.
However, some students are not technologically
prepared for online learning. Yet, there are mea-
sures which can be taken to reduce or limit these
and other barriers.
Addressing Barriers
Barriers exist that prevent adults from participat-
ing in adult education. Additionally, adults have
to contend with barriers to learning. Relative to
institutional and informational barriers, costs can
be reduced, financial aid provided and flexible
payment plans provided. Institutes must keep
abreast of the latest trends, such as employment
opportunities, and offer courses of interest to adult
learners. Support services must be provided for
non-traditional learners. Courses should be offered
at a time conducive for working adults.
Instructors, as part of the institution, play a
critical role in addressing barriers. The instructor
must show respect for learners. Knowles (1980)
suggests that adults have a wealth of experience.
Instructors should value and capitalize on that
experience (Howell, 2002). This can be accom-
plished simply by including and building upon the
“student’s experiences in the learning process”
(Howell, p. 3). In that sharing, however, instructors
must not minimize the learners’ experiences in any
way. Another technique for learning enhancement
is allowing students to reflect on their learning
(Brookfield, 2006; Cranton, 2006; Howell, 2002;
Mezirow, 1991; Mezirow & Associates, 2000).
Brookfield (2006) suggests the one-minute paper,
the muddiest point, the learning audit, and student
learning journals. Another technique is the use of
the Critical Incident Questionnaire. Students are
asked to respond to questions relative to the class
topic. It can be administered after each class period
or periodically throughout the term. It allows the
instructor to gauge learning and student introspec-
1105
 Barriers to Adult Education Participation, Distance Education, and Adult Learning
tion. Another tool for removing barriers is using
a variety of instructional techniques. Galbraith’s
(2004) edited book provides many examples of
instructional techniques that can be used in the
classroom. Instructors should not be intimidated by
new techniques. They are encouraged to step out
of their “instructional” comfort zone to enhance
learning for all adult.
A participative environment should be cre-
ated and learners empowered (Howell, 2002).
To empower learners, self-directed learning is
encouraged (Atherton, 2009; Banz, 2008; Reder &
Strawn, 2000; Terry, 2006). A common technique
used for self-directed learning is a learning con-
tract. Students determine their learning objectives,
strategies and tools for meeting those objectives,
and evidence of meeting their learning goals.
Motivating adults may enhance learning as
well. There are motivational conditions or men-
tal/emotional states of being which contribute or
enhance a person’s motivation to learn–inclusion,
attitude, meaning, and competence (Wlodkowski,
1999, 2004). Inclusion is awareness by learners
whereby they are respected by and connected to,
not only the instructor, but other course partici-
pants. In other words, they feel that their experi-
ences and opinions are valued and that a certain
level of trust exists. This, for example, would be
important for a female student in a predominately
male classroom setting. The learning environment
must be conducive to all people regardless of their
background or ethnicity. Attitude is a combina-
tion of concepts, information, and emotions that
cause adults to react one way or another toward a
particular person or group of people, ideas, events,
or objects. Attitudes are learned for the most part
and influence adults’ activities and environments.
To illustrate, suppose a man was raised in a family
where he was taught to believe that certain ethnic
groups were inferior. If he enrolls in a course
where the instructor is from one of those groups,
he may decide not to participate in the school
term. On the other hand, he may participate and
challenge or disrespect the instructor throughout
1106
the course. In doing so, he is reacting to what he
has learned from his home environment. So, a
person’s attitude about something or someone
inevitably influences his or her motivations to
participation. For learning to be meaningful, it
must be connected to a goal or purpose. In other
words, there has to be some derived benefit from
the learning experience. “Competence theory
assumes that people naturally strive for effective
interactions with their world” (Wlodkowski, 1999,
p. 77). In applying this theory, when adults feel
that they are progressing from the knowledge they
gain, they feel competent.
For older adults, a number of strategies can be
employed to enhance their learning. In a traditional
classroom, lighting is important. Using large fonts
that are easy to read is helpful for this group of
learners. In addition, offering courses during the
day time is preferred. Online courses have to be
more engaging “to create a more successful learn-
ing environment for online learners” (Notess &
Lorenzen-Huber, n. d., para. 29). Furthermore
older learners need a better evaluation of their
achievement and satisfaction and “a clearer reward
systems and incentives for completing online
learning” (Notess & Lorenzen-Huber, para. 29).
Traditional formats should be one of many
used for learning. Online and hybrid courses can
also be used. “Learners and instructors both need
to adapt and change as they learn how to use this
new medium” (Cercone, 2008, p. 139). For any
learning context, a number of strategies can be
used to overcome learning barriers. A physical and
social climate of respect (Howell, 2001; Knowles,)
should be created and collaborative modes of
learning encouraged. Johnson and Aragon (2003)
provide a useful instructional strategy framework
for online learning. They suggest instructors (a) en-
courage student reflection, (b) motivate students,
(c) avoid giving students too much information,
(d) create real-life contexts, (e) encourage and
promote social interaction, (g) provide hands-on
activities, and (h) encourage student reflection.
Cercone further suggests that a variety of graphics
Barriers to Adult Education Participation, Distance Education, and Adult Learning
and images as well as graphic organizers be used.
Additionally, she recommends chunking informa-
tion “into 5-9 bits of information” (p. 140). For
students in online settings instructors must serve
as a “trusted source in areas beyond the content of
the course” (Burgess, 2007, p. 52). Burgess further
suggests that online instructors serve as mentors
to students. Regardless of the context, faculty
should provide timely feedback and respond to
student emails in a reasonable amount of time.
They must also be aware of student differences
in the learning environment.
FUTURE TRENDS
As we move further into the twenty-first century,
we can expect to see changes in adults’ participa-
tion and distance education. Adults are no longer
working with one employer over their entire
career. Recent industry changes require adults
to acquire new skills. Additionally, with our cur-
rent economy, more adults have been forced to
participate in adult education in order to make
themselves marketable.
There are indications that changes in student
enrollment are already occurring. According to
Howell, Williams, and Lindsay (2003), student
enrollments will continue to increase. Yet, current
higher education infrastructures will be unable to
handle the proliferation. Hence, distance education
courses will become more important than ever.
In fact, “the competition for students is moving
from physical space to cyberspace” (p. Whiteman,
2002, p. 3). This is espoused by Cercone (2008)
who states, “More distance learning programs are
being developed annually; therefore, increasing
numbers of adult learners will be tapping into this
new resource for education” (p. 139). Programs
may become shorter in duration, to meet the “get
learning now” needs of adults.
The fortitude of faculty resistance to change
will diminish, if institutes of higher learning
intend to be competitive. Faculty must use dif-
ferent instructional techniques. This is inclusive
of using Internet resources. They must engage
in training and keep abreast of new technologies
that impact distance education and learning. This
may become of minimal concern in the future as
more and more instructors believe that certain
technologies aid them in reaching their teaching
objectives (Howell, Williams, & Lindsay, 2003).
Howell, et al. identified the following trends rela-
tive to distance education:
1. More courses, degrees, and universities
will become available through distance-
education programs;
2. Among other distance-education media, the
Internet will become a dominant force;
3. The distinction between distance and local
education will disappear;
4. The need for effective course-management
systems and Web services will continue to
grow; and
5. The need for learning and teaching strategies
that exploit the capabilities of technology
will increase
In addition to an increase in traditional and
non-traditional student participation, older adults
will continue to participate. Unlike their parents,
baby boomers are living longer and engaging in
educational activities like never before. Research
indicates that their participation in educational
activities contributes to their successful aging
(Sloane-Seale, Kops, 2008). Programs must reflect
topics of interest to older adults. Older adults will
become more technologically literate and may
require more distance education courses as well.
CONCLUSION
An understanding of adults’ motivations and bar-
riers to adult education participation and learning
can assist programmers in recruiting and retain-
ing adult learners. Some overcome personal,
1107
 Barriers to Adult Education Participation, Distance Education, and Adult Learning
institutional, or other barriers to participate. As
the earlier discussion indicates, more adults will
engage in learning. While some may prefer the
traditional format, many will also be attracted to
distance education. Institutions play a vital role
in reducing barriers to participation. Regardless
of the context, educators must also do their part
to eliminate barriers to learning. Some barriers
in the online format are different from the tradi-
tional setting and thus require different methods
to resolve. According to Yoon (2003),
Regardless of different online learning settings,
students’ meaningful learning experiences come
from a an effective online education program in
which course instructors, instructional designers,
learners, system developers, technical support
staff members, managers, and administrators
closely collaborate to use technologies for foster-
ing active and interactive learning environments.
(p. 28)
As more adults will engage in adult education,
educators and providers must be aware of barriers
confronting learners and take a pro-active role to
eliminate them.
REFERENCES
Aragon, S. R. (2003). Creating social presence
in online environments. In S. R. Aragon (Ed.),
Facilitating learning in an online environment (pp.
57-68). New Directions for Adult and Continuing
Education, No. 100. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Atheron, J. S. (2009). Learning and teaching:
Learning contracts [Online]. UK: Retrieved from
http://www.learningandteaching.info/teaching/
learning_contracts.htm
Banz, R. (2008). Self-directed learning: Implica-
tions for museums. Journal of Museum Education,
33(1), 43–54.
1108
Berge, Z. L. (2002). Obstacles to distance train-
ing and education in corporate organizations.
Journal of Workplace Learning, 14(5), 182–189.
doi:10.1108/13665620210433873
Blair, A., McPake, J., & Munn, P. (1995). A new
conceptualization of adult participation in educa-
tion. British Educational Research Journal, 21(5),
629–644. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org.
ezproxy.umsl.edu/stable/pdfplus/1501743.pdf.
doi:10.1080/0141192950210506
Boshier, R. (1971). Motivational orienta-
tions of adult education participants: A fac-
tor analytic exploration of Houle’s typol-
ogy. Adult Education Journal, 21(2), 3–26.
doi:10.1177/074171367102100201
Boshier, R. (1991). Psychometric properties of
the alternative form of the education participation
scale. Adult Education Journal, 41(3), 150–167.
doi:10.1177/0001848191041003002
Boshier, R., & Collins, J. B. (1985). The Houle
typology after twenty-two years. A large-scale
empirical test. Adult Education Quarterly, 35(3),
113–130. doi:10.1177/0001848185035003001
Boston, C. (2002). The concept of formative as-
sessment. ERIC Clearinghouse on Assessment
and Evaluation College Park: MD. (ERIC Repro-
duction Service No. ED470206). Retrieved from
http://www.ericdigests.org/2003-3/concept.htm
Brookfield, S. (2006). The skillful teacher: On
technique, trust, and responsiveness in the class-
room. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Burgess, K. R. (2007). Mentoring as holistic
online instruction. In S. C. O. Conceição (Ed.),
Teaching strategies in the online environment (pp.
49-56). New Directions for Adult and Continuing
Education, No. 113. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
doi 10.000/ace.246
Barriers to Adult Education Participation, Distance Education, and Adult Learning
Cambria, N. (2009, November 20). STL Com-
munity College trustees vote to close child care
centers. Stltoday.com. Retrieved from http://www.
stltoday.com/blogzone/ the-grade/higher-edu-
cation/2009/11/stl-community-college-trustees-
vote-to-close-child-care-centers/
Cercone, K. (2008). Characteristics of adult learn-
ers with implications for online learning design.
AACE Journal, 16(2), 137–159. Retrieved from
http://www.editlib.org/p/24286.
Chaffin, A. J., & Harlow, S. D. (2005). Cognitive
learning applied to older adult learners and tech-
nology. Educational Gerontology, 31, 301–329.
.doi:10.1080/03601270590916803
Chao, E. L., DeRocco, E. S., & Flynn, M. K.
(2007). Adult learners in higher education: Bar-
riers to success and strategies to improve results.
Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Labor.
Covert, C. M. (2002a). Counseling adult learners
for new careers: The motivations and Barriers as-
sociated with postsecondary educational partici-
pation of soldiers in transition. (ERIC Document
Reproduction Service No. ED471458). Retrieved
from http://www.eric.ed.gov/ERICDocs/data/er-
icdocs2sql/ content_storage_01/0000019b/80/1a/
a1/26.pdf
Covert, C. M. (2002b). Soldiers preparing for
new careers: An examination of the motivations
and barriers associated with postsecondary edu-
cational participation of nontraditional students
in transition. (ERIC Document Reproduction
Service No. ED472121). Retrieved from http://
www.eric.ed.gov/ERICDocs/data/ericdocs2sql/c
ontent_ storage_01/0000019b/80/1a/af/37.pdf
Cranton, P. (2006) Understanding and promoting
transformative learning: A guide for educators of
adults (2nd edition). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-
Bass Publishers
Cross, K. P. (1981). Adults as learners. San Fran-
cisco, CA: Jossey-Bass Publishers.
Darkenwald, G., & Valentine, T. (1990). Deter-
rents to participation in adult education: Profiles
of potential learners. Adult Education Quarterly,
41(1), 29–42. doi:10.1177/0001848190041001003
Darkenwald, G. G., & Merriam, S. B. (1982). Adult
education: Foundations of practice. New York,
NY: Harper & Row.
Fujita-Starck, P. J. (1996). Motivations and char-
acteristics of adult students: Factor stability and
construct validity of the Education Participation
Scale. Adult Education Quarterly, 47(1), 29–40.
doi:10.1177/074171369604700103
Galbraith, M. W. (Ed.). (2004). Adult learning
methods: A guide for effective instruction (3rd
ed.). Malabar, FL: Krieger Publishing Company.
Galusha, J. M. (1998). Barriers to learning in dis-
tance education (416377th ed.). ERIC Document
Reproduction Service No.
Guy, T. C. (Ed.). (1999). Providing culturally rel-
evant adult education: A challenge for the twenty-
first century. New Directions for Adult and Continu-
ing Education, No. 82. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Hawkins, T. H. (2007). Why child care providers
participate in training and education: An analysis
of motivation (Doctoral Dissertation, University
of Missouri - St. Louis). Retrieved from http://
proquest.umi.com/pqdweb?index=0&did=1
428848221&SrchMode=2&sid=2&Fmt=6&VIn
st=PROD&VType=PQD&RQT=309&VName=
PQD&TS=1256598300&clientId=45249
Hayes, E. R., & Darkenwald, G. G. (1988). Attitudes
toward adult education: An empirically-based con-
ceptualization. Adult Education Quarterly, 40(3),
158–168. doi:10.1177/0001848190040003004
Howell, C. L. (2002). Facilitating responsibility
for learning in adult community college students.
(ERIC Document Reproduction Service No.
ED451841). Retrieved from http://www.eric.
ed.gov/ERICDocs/data/ ericdocs2sql/content_
storage_ 01/0000019b/80/16/f2/e8.pdf
1109
 Barriers to Adult Education Participation, Distance Education, and Adult Learning
Howell, S. L., Williams, P. B., & Lindsay, N.
K. (2003). Thirty-two trends affecting distance
education: An informed foundation for strategic
planning. Online Journal of Distance Learning
Administration, 6(3). Retrieved from http://www.
westga.edu/~distance/ojdla/fall63/howell63.html.
Isaac, E. P. (2009). Assessing adult learning and
learning styles . In Wang, V. (Ed.), Assessing and
evaluating adult learning in career and technical
education (pp. 173–185). Charlotte, NC: Informa-
tion Age Publishing.
Isaac, E. P., Guy, T., & Valentine, T. (2001).
Understanding African American adult learners’
motivations to learn in church-based adult educa-
tion. Adult Education Quarterly, 52(1), 23–38.
doi:10.1177/07417130122087377
Johnstone, J. W. C., & Rivera, R. (1965). Vol-
unteers for learning: A study of the educational
pursuits of adults. Hawthorne, NY: Aldine.
Kerka, S. (1986). Deterrents to participation in
adult education. (ERIC Reproduction Service
No. ED275889 86).
Knowles, M. S. (1980). The modern practice of
adult education: From pedagogy to Andragogy
(2nd ed.). New York: Cambridge Books.
Kolb, A. Y., & Kolb, D. A. (2005). The Kolb learn-
ing style inventory. Version 3.1: 2005
Malhotra, N. K., Shapero, M., Sizoo, S., & Munro,
T. (2007). Factor structure of deterrents to adult
participation in higher education. Journal of
College Teaching and Learning, 4(12), 81–90.
Retrieved from http://www.cluteinstitute-online-
journals.com/PDFs/719.pdf.
Manning, C. K., & Vickery, C. E. (2000). Disen-
gagement and work constraints are deterrents to
participation in continuing professional education
among registered dietitians. Journal of the Ameri-
can Dietician Association, 100(12), 1540–1542.
doi:10.1016/S0002-8223(00)00427-2
1110
Martindale, C. J., & Drake, J. B. (1989). Factor
structure deterrents to participation in off-duty adult
education programs. Adult Education Quarterly,
39(1), 63–75. doi:10.1177/0001848189039002001
McLinden, M., McCall, S., Hinton, D., & Weston,
A. (2006). Participation in online problem-
based learning: Insights from post-graduate
teachers studying through open and distance
education. Distance Education, 27(3), 331–353.
doi:10.1080/01587910600940422
Merriam, S. B., & Caffarella, R. S. (1999). Learn-
ing in adulthood: A comprehensive guide (2nd
ed.). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Merriam, S. B., Caffarella, R. S., & Baumgart-
ner, L. M. (2007). Learning in adulthood: A
comprehensive guide (3rd ed.). San Francisco:
Jossey-Bass.
Mezirow, J. (1991). Transformative dimensions of
adult learning. San Francisco, CA: Jossey- Bass.
Mezirow, J. (2000). Learning as transformation:
Critical perspectives on a theory in progress. New
York: John Wiley and Sons.
Mitchell, B., & Geva-May, I. (2009). Attitudes
affecting online learning implementation in
higher education institutions. Journal of Distance
Education, 23(1), 71–88. Retrieved from http://
www.jofde.ca/index.php/jde/article/view/43/825.
Morstain, B. R., & Smart, J. C. (1977). Rea-
sons for participation in adult education
courses: A multivariate analysis of group
differences. Adult Education, 24(2), 83–98.
doi:10.1177/074171367402400201
Mulenga, M., & Liang, J. (2008). Motivations for
older adults’ participation in distance education: A
study at the National Open University of Taiwan.
International Journal of Lifelong Learning, 27,
289–314. doi:.doi:10.1080/02601370802047791
Barriers to Adult Education Participation, Distance Education, and Adult Learning
Neufeldt, H., & McGee, L. (1990). Education of
the African American adult: An historical overview
(Neufeldt, H., & McGee, L., Eds.). New York:
Greenwood Press.
Notess, M., & Lorenzen-Huber, L. (n.d.). Online
learning for seniors: Barriers and opportuni-
ties. eLearn Magazine. Retrieved from http://
www.elearnmag.org/ subpage.cfm?section=
research&article=7-1
Parsad, B. Lewis, L., & Westast. (2008). Distance
education at postsecondary institutions: 2006-
2007. First look. Washington DC: National Center
for Education Statistics.
Reder, S., & Strawn, C. (2001). Program participa-
tion and self-directed learning to improve basic
skills. Focus on Basics, 4, 14–17.
Silva, T., Cahalan, M., Lacierno-Paquet, N., &
Stowe, P. (1998). Decisions and barriers: Review
of conceptual frameworks and empirical studies.
Working Paper No. 98-10. Washington, DC: U.S.
Department of Education. National Center for
Education Statistics.
Sloan-Seale, A., & Kops, B. (2008). Older adults
in lifelong learning: Participation and successful
aging. Canadian Journal of University Continu-
ing Education, 34(1), 37–62. Retrieved from
http://www.extension.usask.ca/cjuce/articles/
v34pdf/3413.pdf.
Sloane-Seale, A., & Kops, B. (2007). Older adult
learners: A comparison of active and non-active
learners. Canadian Journal of University Con-
tinuing Education, 33(1), 17–34. Retrieved from
http://www.extension.usask.ca/cjuce/articles/
v33pdf/3311.pdf.
Stanley, L. D. (2003). Beyond access: Psychoso-
cial barriers to computer literacy. The Information
Society, 19, 407–416. .doi:10.1080/715720560
Stein, D., & Glazer, H. R. (2003). Mentoring
the adult learner in academic midlife at a dis-
tance education university. American Journal of
Distance Education, 17(1), 7–23. doi:10.1207/
S15389286AJDE1701_2
Stubblefield, H. W., & Keane, P. (1994). Adult
education in the American experience: From the
colonial period to the present. San Francisco:
Jossey-Bass.
Technical specifications. Boston: Hay Group. Re-
trieved from http://www.learningfromexperience.
com/images/uploads/Tech_spec_LSI.pdf
Terry, M. (2006). Self-directed learning by under-
educated adults. Educational Research Quarterly,
29(4), 29–39.
Whiteman, J. A. M. (2002). Supporting the adult
learner in an online environment. (ERIC Reproduc-
tion Service No. ED473265). Retrieved from http://
www.eric.ed.gov/ ERICDocs/data/ ericdocs2sql/
content_ storage_01/0000019b/80/1a/c8/19.pdf
Wlodkowski, R. J. (1999). Enhancing adult motiva-
tion to learn: A comprehensive guide for teaching
all adults (Rev. ed.). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-
Bass Publishers.
Wlodkowski, R. J. (2004). Creating motivating
learning environments . In Galbraith, M. W. (Ed.),
Adult learning methods: A guide for effective
instruction (3rd ed., pp. 141–164). Malabar, FL:
Krieger.
Yoon, S. (2003). In search of meaningful online
learning experiences. In S. R. Aragon (Ed.), Fa-
cilitating learning in an online environment (pp.
19-30). New Directions for Adult and Continuing
Education, No. 100. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Zirkle, C., Norris, C., Winegardner, A., & Frustaci,
E. (2006). Distance education programming barriers
in business education teacher preparation programs
in the United States. Career and Technical Educa-
tion Research, 31(2), 101–118.
1111
 Barriers to Adult Education Participation, Distance Education, and Adult Learning
KEY TERMS AND DEFINITIONS
Barrier: An “absolute blockage” (Darkenwald
& Valentine, 1990, p. 30) which prevents an adult
from participating in adult education.
Deterrent: A negative or positive force that
works in combination with other forces that
impact participation. (Darkenwald & Valentine,
1990, p. 30)
Distance Education: A learning situation
whereby a student and instructor are separated
physically or geographically. The “transmission
of instruction from one location to multiple loca-
1112
tions via telecommunication technology that is
either synchronous . . . or asynchronous.” (Zirkle,
Norris, Winegardner, &Frustaci, 2006, p. 103).
Immediacy: The psychological distance be-
tween a communicator and a receiver. (Aragon,
2003)
Fortitude: Mental and emotional strength in
facing difficulty, adversity, danger, or temptation
courageously.
Knowledge: Acquaintance with facts, truths,
or principles, as from study or investigation;
general erudition
 1113

Chapter 68
Using Principles of Andragogy
to Teach Writing to
Graduate Students Online
Beth Kania-Gosche
Lindenwood University, USA

ABSTRACT
While online courses may be more convenient and fulfilling for adult learners, they pose an additional
challenge because much of the communication between student and instructor is in writing. This is in
addition to more formal, traditional written assignments like research papers. The challenge multiplies
with graduate students, who may be years or even decades distant from their undergraduate writing
courses, while the expectations for their writing are higher. Many graduate programs culminate with a
final project, thesis, or dissertation, which often involves extensive research and writing. Many similarities
exist between the literature on teaching writing and teaching adult learners; however, teaching writing
within the contest of an online graduate course is an area of research that still needs to be expanded.

INTRODUCTION are lacking, they may struggle in coursework

Teaching graduate students is both an honor and a
burden. The preparation and assignments are more
extensive, but often instructor and student form
lasting relationships because of shared interest
in the content of the course, smaller class sizes,
and the mentoring that comes with participation
on a thesis or dissertation committee. These cul-
minating projects involve complex, sophisticated
writing and research. If students’ writing skills
DOI: 10.4018/978-1-61692-906-0.ch068
and especially in completion of the final thesis
or dissertation. Many instructors of graduate
courses assume that students have the necessary
writing skills, and few universities offer support
for graduate students or instructors to improve
writing or writing instruction, although this is
gradually changing (Rose & McClafferty, 2001).
This is similar to the assumptions often made
about online courses. Universities may assume
that students have the necessary skills to succeed
in this environment and instructors have the neces-
sary training to support their success, while this
 Using Principles of Andragogy to Teach Writing to Graduate Students Online
may not always be the case, especially if training
has not been provided (Hewett & Ehman, 2004).
Teaching online and teaching writing are
closely linked. Online teaching presents new
challenges, as most communication between
instructor and student or student to student oc-
curs in writing, either through email, discussion
boards, instant messaging, wikis, or more formal
papers (Warnock, 2009). Again, if students lack
the necessary writing skills, they may struggle
with this type of course delivery. In a face to
face discussion, students must simply raise their
hands and express a thought verbally. Online,
students must compose a response in writing, a
much more complex and time consuming task.
“The OWcourse forces an environment that is not
just writing intensive but also writing exclusive”
(Warnock, p. xi). As online courses and programs
gain popularity, instructors must ensure that they
are providing appropriate support to students who
struggle to express themselves in writing. Thus,
instructors of an online course, or truly any gradu-
ate level course, must consider themselves teachers
of writing, even though that is not necessarily the
content of the course.
As many graduate students are working adults,
instructors should integrate adult learning prin-
ciples into their teaching, online or face to face.
Many of the best practices for adult learners
overlap with those for effectively teaching writ-
ing, although little literature exists that makes this
connection. Most research on graduate student
writing consists of firsthand accounts of graduate
classes (Belcher, 2009; Rose & McClafferty, 2001)
or writing centers created specifically to improve
writing skills (Alter & Adkins, 2001). Literature
on teaching writing to adults is often focused on
those who are learning to read and write for the
first time rather than graduate students who clearly
can read and write enough to function in society
but not necessarily thrive in the academic culture
of graduate school. Faculty often lament the lack
of writing skills students possess, especially those
in graduate school (Lovitts, 2007).
1114
In this chapter, the author compares the
principles of adult learning to those of teaching
writing. While many of these best practices work
effectively in all environments, specific recom-
mendations for online course instruction at the
graduate level are given, including creating and
assessing writing assignments. The author also
gives some recommendations for thesis and dis-
sertation committee advisors, as this is often a
requirement of graduate school faculty. Finally,
the author discusses emerging trends in these
fields of research, especially in online writing
instruction (OWI).
BACKGROUND TO BEST PRACTICE
OF TEACHING WRITING
“Until the 1970s, most writing pedagogy em-
phasized learning and assessing a sequence of
essential skills: forming letters, building vocabu-
lary, identifying parts of speech, diagramming
sentences, mastering grammar and punctuation,
and following paragraph types and genres of writ-
ing” (National Writing Project & Nagin, 2006,
p. 19). This focused mainly on the product of
writing rather than the process. Much of writing
instruction consisted of grammar and vocabulary
worksheets rather than actual writing. When writ-
ing was assigned, usually the teacher was in con-
trol. The teacher was responsible for developing
the assignment and the rubric or scoring guide.
The students completed the assignment, often
the night before it was due, and returned it to the
teacher. The teacher then handed the assignment
back with a grade and perhaps some comments.
In this model, everyone is working in isolation,
and the product is the focus of the assessment. If
the student receives a low enough grade, he or she
may be able to rewrite to improve the grade, but
the focus is on meeting the teacher’s demands.
This traditional model is popular but not effective.
The writing process approach, the method
for teaching writing encouraged by the National
Using Principles of Andragogy to Teach Writing to Graduate Students Online
Council of Teachers of English and the National
Writing Project (NWP), is much more interactive.
Students have a voice in choosing their topic and
ideally in the creation of the rubric or scoring guide
for the assessment. They are encouraged to use
prewriting techniques such as webbing, outlining,
freewriting, and journaling. When students are
thinking or talking about their writing, teachers
recognize this as a legitimate part of the writing
process. Feedback on drafts from both teachers and
peers is encouraged and even required. Rewriting
and revision are necessary parts of the writing
process. Editing, correcting spelling and gram-
mar, is left for the end. Students are encouraged
earlier in the process to write without regard for
mechanics and then later to go back and correct
mistakes. The teacher of writing realizes that
not all students will be in the same place in the
writing process at all times and that the process
is recursive. The final, but most neglected step
of the writing process is publication, where the
finished work is made available to more people
than just the teacher.
While the teacher may have a date for a final
draft, the students receive feedback from both
the teacher and other students on earlier drafts,
sometimes even on just ideas for a topic. In a book
titled Because Writing Matters, published by the
National Writing Project, two misapplications of
the writing process are identified. The first is that
the writing process is a set of steps (prewriting,
drafting, revising, editing, publishing) that must
be followed every time a piece is written, when
the reality is that the process is recursive, not
linear. Sometimes after feedback from peer or
instructor, the student starts the writing all over
from the beginning. The student may become
blocked at a certain point and need to use a pre-
writing technique, even though the draft is almost
complete. The second misapplication is “that ‘the
basics’—the mechanics and finer points of writ-
ing—did not matter; students could learn them on
their own” (NWP & Nagin, 2006, p. 36). In fact,
teachers of the writing process approach value
these skills and may even teach them explicitly
in class, but they recognize that the place for ad-
dressing them is after the student has a written
draft not when he or she is searching for ideas
about content or an organizational structure. In
a content area class, the instructor may not even
deal with mechanical issues but instead refer the
student to an appropriate place, such as a writing
center, that can help.
How does writing as a process translate to grad-
uate students? While many undergraduate students
may take one or more courses focused exclusively
on composition, most graduate programs do not
dedicate courses exclusively to writing. Faculty
may not have any training in teaching writing at
all, and even those in the field of English may
only have background in teaching composition to
traditional undergraduates rather than adult gradu-
ate students. As noted earlier, teaching writing has
shifted dramatically in the past three decades, and
the theory of writing as a process is the ideal, often
not the reality for students. “Most academic writ-
ers learned as undergraduates to write to deadline
and developed procrastination/binge habits that
prove deadly when they must write longer, more
sustained works” (Belcher, 2009, p.191). Unlike
traditional undergraduates, graduate students who
are working adults may feel isolated, as they may
not have time to socialize with their peers in class,
and may not live geographically close to each
other like traditional undergraduates who often
live in dorms on campus.
Despite the differences in student demograph-
ics, the writing process approach can work for
any age level. For graduate students, the writing
process approach is similar to that of writing a
dissertation or thesis or even of writing a paper for
scholarly publication. The student seeks feedback
from many different people and makes multiple
revisions. Often the thesis or dissertation begins
with an outline. “Adult students, however, often
function best when they have a sense of direction;
so they prepare flexible blueprints in the form
of outlines and proposals” (Mullen, 2006, p. 5).
1115
 Using Principles of Andragogy to Teach Writing to Graduate Students Online
Asking students to submit a proposal or outline
before beginning a writing assignment is an ef-
fective way for the student to receive feedback
early as well as ensure the student is working on
the assignment throughout the course, rather than
the night before it is due.
COMPARISONS OF TEACHING
WRITING AND ANDRAGOGY
Knowles himself recognize the limitations of the
traditional approach to teaching writing; he de-
scribed the differences in traditional undergraduate
coursework and adult learning, “In Composition
I the learners memorize the rules of grammar,
in ‘Writing Better Business Letters’ they write a
variety of business letters and, by critiquing them,
generate skills in grammatical writing” (1989, p.5).
In fact, Knowles’s approach to teaching writing
is aligned with writing process theory. The most
important of the aspect is actually writing rather
than worksheets and memorization of rules. “This
was a pedagogical view of writing not unlike the
idea that a young person could learn to drive a car
by memorizing state motoring laws and reading a
repair manual . . . knowledge is no substitute for
sitting behind the wheel and driving” (NWP &
Nagin, 2006, p. 20). A classroom using the writing
as a process approach or the andragogical model
may utilize direct instruction when appropriate
but also many other strategies and techniques
(Reif, 1992).
In this chapter, the teacher and students will be
referred to as such to avoid confusion. However,
in both the teaching of writing and in andragogy,
the relationship between teacher and student
should be respectful and caring, rather than one
having power over the other. The teacher learns
with and from the students (Knowles, Holton, &
Swanson, 1998). This attitude is critical from the
first moment of the class. If students expect from
the beginning of the course they will have to find
their own answers, then the process will hopefully
1116
be less frustrating for them, and they will not feel
as if the instructor is withholding vital information
from them. “Adults need to be prepared for a first
experience with self-directed learning through
an orientation experience before being plunged
into it” (Knowles, 1989, p. 4). Choice will be a
theme that is recurring throughout this chapter,
and the instructor must be comfortable with letting
students write about something he or she knows
little about and learning from the students rather
than expecting them to parrot back the instructor’s
own opinions and thoughts expressed in class.
Lifelong learning should be as important to
the teacher as it is to the students. Peter Elbow
in his book Writing Without Teachers refers to a
“teacherless writing class,” where the instructor
writes along with the students and meets the same
expectations. This is a founding belief of the
National Writing Project, a group that advocates
professional development about teaching writing
for teachers by teachers at all levels. “However,
much as in doctoring, learning to teach well is a
lifetime process, and lifetime professional devel-
opment is the key to successful practice. Students
deserve no less” (NCTE, 2008). Unfortunately,
professional development in effective teaching
of writing is often not even available, much less
required, for instructors in higher education,
especially not in graduate programs. Knowles et
al. (1998) stated, “Most beginning trainers are
not graduates of programs specifically designed
to train trainers. They are generally subject mat-
ter experts in their organizations and have good
communication skills” (p. 227). The same could
be said for new professors, who have a wealth of
knowledge about their content matter, but may
have little instruction in effective teaching tech-
niques especially for online instruction.
Peter Elbow’s (1977) book Writing Without
Teachers will be frequently referenced in this
chapter because it embodies the integration of
andragogy and the teaching of writing. Elbow’s
book is one of the first to offer specific strate-
gies for students at various stages in the writing
Using Principles of Andragogy to Teach Writing to Graduate Students Online
process . His audience is anyone who writes, not
necessarily teachers or students. Thus, this book
represents a turning point in the teaching of writing.
Elbow wrote, “In proposing the teacherless writing
class I am trying to deny something—something
that is often assumed: the necessary connection
between learning and teaching. The teacherless
writing class is a place where there is learning but
no teaching” (1973, p. ix). This sentiment echoes
those of Knowles (1977).
THE CLASSROOM CLIMATE
In andragogy, a safe environment is crucial, as
in any writing classroom. This begins with the
instructor caring about the students as people.
“An attitude of caring for the learner as a valu-
able, unique person and of helping the learner to
accomplish his or her educational goals, is es-
sential for an adult educator” (Henschke, 1998,
p. 12) and for any teacher. The students should
trust the teacher and their peers in the class, since
writing will be shared with all. Students often
regard their writing as deeply personal (even if no
personal information is revealed), which means
that the instructor must clearly model how to give
effective feedback, and students must learn to
use the feedback to improve their writing but not
stifle their own goals for the piece. “In a sense, a
writing workshop might strive toward becoming
a microcosm of the ideal scholarly community,
where colleagues thoughtfully respond to each
other’s work, and there is a press toward greater
articulation and understanding” (Rose & McClaf-
ferty, 2001, p. 30). Even better is if the instructor
shares some of his or her own writing for class
feedback (Reif, 1992). This establishes trust and
helps the teacher connect to the students on a
personal level.
In an ideal writing classroom, students and the
teacher share a draft of their work, or an excerpt
from it, with each other for feedback (NWP &
Nagin, 2006; Reif, 1992; Elbow, 1973).
The students distribute this work either within
small groups or to the workshop at large, read it
aloud and give their assessment of it, and then
engage in discussion with peers and the instruc-
tor about it. Such a structure requires that the
instructor create an atmosphere of reading and
response that is both rigorous and considerate,
calling on all students to respond to their peers’
work in thoughtful and useful ways. (Rose &
McClafferty, 2001, p. 28)
Online, the draft may be posted on discussion
board or wiki. In a thesis or dissertation writing
environment, the chair should be open to early
drafts or even outlines from the student, so that
serious errors can be fixed early in the process.
The dissertation chair and student must make
their expectations for feedback clear at the be-
ginning. For example, an early draft may have
errors in citation style, but the student may only
be interested in feedback on content rather than
formatting. The relationship between dissertation
chair and student is one of the most important
factors leading to dissertation completion. In
interviews with doctoral students in a variety of
fields, de Valero (2001) found “These comments
suggested that the departmental environment in
the high-completion departments were warm
and supportive, whereas the environment in the
low-completion departments was efficient and
professional” (p. 361). Although not technically
a classroom, the dissertation advisor and student
relationship is very much a learning environment
that should still embody andragogical principles
as well as the writing process.
In an online environment, a classroom environ-
ment can be more difficult to create and sustain.
Instructors must examine their responses to stu-
dents carefully, as meaning can be misconstrued
without body language and tone of voice. Hewett
and Ehmann (2004) recommend “greeting the
student, using his or her name, talking directly to
the student with words like ‘Okay’ or ‘I see what
you’re saying,’” (p. 72) as some strategies online
instructors can use. In some instances, students
1117
 Using Principles of Andragogy to Teach Writing to Graduate Students Online
may feel more comfortable in an online course, as
they do not have to worry about speaking in class
or being called on unexpectedly by the teacher.
Students may, in fact, share more about themselves
in an online course than a face to face. Many
people blog about their personal experiences on
publicly accessible websites. However, this type
of writing may not be appropriate for a graduate
course, but instructors must also be careful to
respect the experiences of the students and how
their experiences influence their learning.
Instructors must clearly delineate what lan-
guage is acceptable for more informal communica-
tion, such as email, and formal assignments, such
as papers. Some assignments, such as discussion
board postings, may be confusing for students if
they are unsure what type of language is expected.
Posting a sample or having the instructor post his
or her own response to the question would model
the expectations for the students. Informal writ-
ing, such as note-taking or reflections, are also
important scaffolding to more formal, structured
pieces. While teachers at the graduate level may
be reluctant to include note-taking strategies or
require reflections of reading assignments, these
assignments have two purposes. First, they encour-
age students to read their assignments! Second,
they improve writing skills, even when writing
phrases on a graphic organizer. This can be useful
for both online and face to face instructors and
can be accomplished electronically with even
more sophistication and polish than handwritten
graphic organizers.
Even for instructors of face to face courses,
electronic assignment submission may be more
convenient and green, as it conserves paper. In-
structors can use the comment and track changes
features on programs such as Microsoft Word
rather than writing on the page (Hewett & Ehmann,
2004). This actually may be better for students, as
they will no longer struggle to read the instructor’s
handwriting! Also, this allows the assignment to
be returned to the student when the instructor has
completed grading, rather than at the next class
1118
meeting. However, electronic communication
can occur at any hour, and the instructor must
make clear the expectations for returning assign-
ments and emails. Instructors must be cautious
of giving too much feedback and overwhelming
the student as well. This feedback also provides
an opportunity for the instructor to model good
writing (Hewett & Ehmann). For dissertation and
thesis advisors, electronic comments allow all
members of the committee to view the changes
made, and different colors can be used for each
member’s thoughts.
THEY NEED TO KNOW
Writing as a process, the approach to teaching
writing advocated by the National Council of
Teachers of English, may be an unfamiliar process
to students, and perhaps, even to the instructor.
“We are happy to talk about the content of our
writing, but we rarely discuss the process of get-
ting ideas down on a page and then shaping them”
(Belcher, 2009, p. 191). Before students will
participate in discussion or activities about their
writing, they must realize that their writing needs
improvement. Even broader, students may not re-
alize that the first time anyone writes anything, it
needs improvement; thus even for emails or other
informal communication, the student should take
a moment to reread and revise if necessary. Even
just taking a few minutes in class to ask students
how they are progressing on a complex writing
assignment demonstrates to the students that the
process is just as valuable as the product. In an
online environment, an email asking students to
report their progress on a complex project may be
all that is required. Although reading rough drafts
and individually giving feedback is time consum-
ing, the quality of the product is immensely more
satisfying for both teacher and student. The author
of this chapter has found that the time needed to
read the final drafts is much shorter and enjoyable
Using Principles of Andragogy to Teach Writing to Graduate Students Online
when she has read and discussed a rough draft
with the student first.
Students also need to recognize how they use
writing in their everyday lives, especially at their
place of employment. This is also important for
the instructor to know, as the scholarly writing
required in a graduate course may be very differ-
ent from the writing students do on a daily basis.
For example, the author had a student who always
used “we” in her writing instead of “I.” When
this was mentioned this to her, she said her boss
encouraged everyone to use “we” to encourage a
team atmosphere rather than one of competition.
Talking with her about this was more instructive
than if she had simply been required her to change
all of her “we” pronouns to “I” because it was
incorrect. Asking students what type of writing
they do at work and even asking them to bring in
a sample is a great activity for the first week or
two of class. This allows the instructor to see the
writing of the student before assigning anything.
The instructor could even ask about the context
of the piece of writing: how long did you have to
write this? Who were you writing this for? How
long did this take you to write? etc. This may also
alert the instructor and student to differences in
expectations of writing for the course and in the
student’s workplace.
THE LEARNER’S SELF-CONCEPT
“Writing is one of the primary sites where schol-
arly identity is formed and displayed” (Rose &
McClafferty, 2001, p. 30). In graduate courses
revolving around research, students may not yet
view themselves as “researchers” and therein lies
much of their struggle in writing about the research
they conducted. In her book Making the Implicit
Explicit,Lovitts (2007) interviewed hundreds of
graduate school faculty in varying fields about
their dissertation expectations and concluded “it is
not possible to be a good researcher if one is not a
good writer, because a researcher has to be able to
explain and communicate what he or she has done”
(p. 48). Sometimes students do not see themselves
as “writers” (Mullen, 2006) or their professors
(or dissertation chairs) as “teachers of writing.”
Students may have had past negative experiences
with writing teachers or with feedback about their
writing. “Some report that writing has always been
hard for them, they’ve never taken to it, and they
face it now with anxiety—and with a variety of
linguistic and rhetorical misconceptions” (Rose
& McClafferty, 2001, p. 28). Again, this is why
it is important to ask students about their previ-
ous experiences with writing both in the field of
study and in general (Reif, 1992). “Adults may
have developed habit patterns, preconceptions,
prejudices, and rigid ways of thinking that may
interfere with their learning. This danger can be
minimized by building into the learning designs
some mind-opening or ‘unfreezing’ activities”
(Knowles, 1989, p.7).
An instructor should take a few minutes to
ask students to reflect on “What feelings come
up when you think about writing?” (Belcher,
2009, p. 193) or even “What experiences have
you had with writing in other courses?” (Reif,
1992). This can be verbal rather than written
and useful in determining the student’s past ex-
periences and their expectations of the teacher.
Students may not have received much feedback
on their writing from other professors, or they
may still remember a teacher who “bled red ink”
over their papers. Reif wrote of her own experi-
ences teaching graduate students writing, “I was
not marking their assignments with letter grades,
but instead I was writing lengthy comments and
setting goals for their next writing” (p. 25). She
also described how carefully she would construct
these comments, focusing on one or two areas to
improve for the next assignment, which Hewett
and Ehmann (2004) also supported.
However, instructors must be cautious of pro-
viding too much feedback and overwhelming the
student. Hewett and Ehman (2004, pp. 76-85) offer
1119
 Using Principles of Andragogy to Teach Writing to Graduate Students Online
six steps for constructing efficient and appropriate
responses to online writing assignments.
1. Evaluate the purpose of the writer’s
submission.
2. Review the writer’s previous writing
submission/s.
3. Read the entire piece of writing before
commenting.
4. Consider the student’s requests for help.
5. Construct the response—‘overarching’ or
global comments.
6. Write, or embed, comments into a copy of
the student’s document.
These steps area also useful for dissertation
committee members. The student should make
clear his or her intent when submitting the draft for
feedback and what elements of the draft have been
revised since the previous submission. Reading
the entire piece before commenting may not be
practical for a long work such as a dissertation or
thesis, but electronic comments allow easy deletion
or copy and pasting if elements need to be moved
or questions are answered later in the paper.
WRITING AS INQUIRY
Writing gives teachers insight into the thought
processes the students use to solve problems. For
graduate students, writing as inquiry at the highest
level is conducting research, perhaps for a thesis
or dissertation. In the 1970s, research on writing
began to shift to focus on how students wrote and
what instructional approaches were most effective,
the inquiry method being one of the best (NWP
& Nagin, 2006, p. 23). The inquiry method of
teaching writing means that the student writes to
answer a question; through writing, the student
may discover answers and perhaps more questions.
Although not specific to writing, the andragogical
approach to teaching also emphasizes an inquiry
approach, “Learners need a situation-centered or
1120
problem-centered orientation to learning” (Hen-
schke, 1998, p. 12). Knowles et al. (1998) wrote
about the formation of “inquiry teams” when he
“decided to switch from being a teacher to being
a facilitator of learning” (p. 200).
Having students examine their own writing,
with the aid of the instructor or peers, to find a
“problem” area to strengthen can be an exercise
in inquiry. Like researchers, instructors can use
data to support their claims about weak areas of
writing, such as average number of words per
sentence, percent of passive verbs used, etc. For
the next assignment or revision, students can then
determine their improvement. While not all errors
can be calculated or measured quantitatively, this
allows the instructor to identify a reoccurring
error pattern without correcting every instance
of it in the paper. In this way, students can learn
to identify and correct their errors on their own.
Again, this strategy is also useful for dissertation
or thesis writing.
SELF-DIRECTEDNESS
The pedagogue not only is willing to accept de-
pendency, but feels so much more comfortable
teaching dependent personalities that the teacher
will tend to do everything one can to maintain
dependency on the part of the learner, whereas
the andragogue, while able to accept dependency
at a given time and moment, or time with a given
person, has a built-in sense of obligation to do
everything one can to help that person move from
dependency toward increasing self-directiveness.
(Knowles, 1977, p. 206)
The teacher of writing is not the pure peda-
gogue described here by Knowles; perhaps no
one can be classified as a “pure” andragogue or
pedagogue. Granted, not all teachers of writing
are able to strictly follow the tenants of teaching
writing as a process, but neither are all teachers of
adults able to strictly follow the six principles set
forth by Knowles all the time (1977). A writing
teacher’s main goal is to develop the student’s
Using Principles of Andragogy to Teach Writing to Graduate Students Online
writing process, not just for assignments in the
class but for any piece of writing the student
undertakes (Hewett & Ehmann, 2004).
In an online environment, self-directedness is
essential. “Online instructor commentary, there-
fore, can begin usefully with the student’s own
writing to focus on higher-level concerns (HLC),
(i.e. thesis statements, idea development, and
overall organization) and surface level features, or
lower-level concerns (LLC) (i.e. grammar, diction,
and mechanics” (Hewett & Ehmann, 2004, p. 73).
Students could then find resources and strategies,
beyond the course instructor, to strengthen the
identified area of weakness. Learning contracts
(Knowles, 1977) are one option to set goals for
writing improvement. This helps the student
become more self-directed and takes the focus
away from individual tutoring by the instructor
for each student’s writing needs. Improvement of
writing could be only one element of the learning
contract, which could incorporate all objectives
of the course.
SOCIAL INTERACTION
Peer feedback on student writing is an essential
element of the writing as a process approach.
“Self-directed learning does not mean learning
in isolation or learning without help. The most
effective self-directed learners are highly skill-
ful in getting help from peers, teachers, printed
materials . . .” (Knowles, 1989, p. 4). However, in-
structors must model appropriate and helpful peer
feedback with the class before expecting students
to be able to respond in such a manner. Another
way to scaffold appropriate feedback would be
to have a list of questions students can choose to
answer to promote peer response. In a graduate
course, this may not be necessary or may only be
appropriate for the first assignment, depending
where the students are in their academic careers.
Groups where students share their writing
was a common thread in many articles detailing
a course design specifically to improve graduate
students’ writing (Belcher, 2009; Rose & McClaf-
ferty, 2001; Reif, 1992). The writing groups are
one way the instructor scaffolds students’ writ-
ing. As students become better readers of others’
work, they become better writers themselves
(Rose & McClafferty,). When the instructor gives
feedback, the focus should be on the experience
of the reader, especially if the assignments are
geared toward real world activities. The experi-
ences of the writing group and the instructor are
then valued by the student and used to improve
the writing, rather than making corrections to
“make the teacher happy.”
Instructors do not necessarily need to build
peer response into class time for every assign-
ment in a face to face course; they could use an
online platform such as Blackboard to create a
discussion board where students can post their
papers and offer constructive feedback. This
allows students the time to read their partner or
group’s papers at their leisure. “[Students] become
co-instructors—guiding, prodding, pushing and
encouraging each other to write more effectively
and more authoritatively” (Rose & McClafferty,
2001, p. 30). In an ideal class, student may work to
meet deadlines so they will have writing to show
their peers, rather than work to fulfill a grade. In
this way, students’ drafts become another text
for the course. If every student in the course is
writing on a different topic, then students learn
when reading one another’s work.
As part of treatment for clients who struggled
with severe writer’s block, Boice observed, Writ-
ing, although typically an individual activity is
seemingly facilitated by social support. Engaging
the cooperation of the writer’s coworkers and sig-
nificant others seemed to help ensure undisturbed
writing times. Further social support was arranged
by having clients meet weekly with colleagues in
a support group where participants were expected
to display their graphs of writing productivity.
(Boice, 1982, p. 200)
1121
 Using Principles of Andragogy to Teach Writing to Graduate Students Online
While social interaction may be in a different
format in an online environment, it is no less
important than in a face to face course.
THE ROLE OF THE
LEARNER’S EXPERIENCE
Adult learners come to the classroom with a wealth
of experience, both from work and their life. This
experience should be valued by both the teacher
and the other students in the class. The students
may not agree with all of the reading assign-
ments or research in the field of study, as it may
contradict their own experience. Not all students
feel comfortable expressing this in a discussion
setting, but disagreeing professionally and logi-
cally, both verbally and in writing are skills all
students need.
Peter Elbow (1973), in describing his “teach-
erless class,” believed even the experience of
reading a student’s work is important and valued.
Rather than giving judgments, as many teachers
do when grading student writing, the students in
this “teacherless class” describe their experience
when reading each other’s work. This gives the
student ideas on how to fix the piece rather than
just identifying errors or weaknesses. For example,
active and passive voice is an issue often observed
in the writing of graduate students. Students write
something along the lines of “The decision was
made to end the weekly meetings because they
were unproductive.” Rather than simply writing
“passive” in the margin, the instructor could write
or ask the author, “Who made the decision to end
the weekly meetings? This is an important fact
the reader loses because of the passive voice.”
Perhaps this is intentional; the student does not
know who made the decision to end the meetings.
This discussion is important, especially the fact
that is a negotiation between reader and author
for meaning, not between teacher and student for
“correctness.”
1122
Undoubtedly, there are times when citations
or grammar is either right or wrong according
to the style guide of the discipline, and perhaps
a writing center is the place for these questions.
Some faculty have concerns that addressing is-
sues of writing take up class time that should
be devoted to content or is “remedial” (Rose &
McClafferty, 2001). However, each discipline has
its own accepted style and format, and sometimes
even particular journals or fields have their own
preferences. When discussing their own course
for writing at the graduate level, Rose and Mc-
Clafferty said, “Students often begin their own
self-critiques with questions about punctuation,
grammar, or word choice. But these conversations
almost always lead to or occur within the context
of a broader issue that is not remedial” (p. 29). By
responding as a reader and not as a teacher who
is “judging” the writing, the teacher can find out
why the student made the choices he or she did
when writing. Sometimes these are not necessar-
ily choices but habits that should be examined.
ORIENTATION TO LEARNING
The writing assignments the instructor requires
should be on topics that students need to know
(Reif, 1992). This often means that students
must have a choice in their topic so that they can
investigate something that truly interests them.
“An effective assignment does more than ask
students to write about what they have read or
experienced. It engages students in a series of
cognitive processes, such as reflection, analysis,
and synthesis” (NWP & Nagin, 2006, p. 47). While
this idea overlaps with the last principle of adult
learning, motivation, it is also important for the
instructor of the course to be flexible in the writing
assignment requirements (Reif, 1992). If a student
can integrate a course writing assignment into his
or her work, it will be even more authentic and
meaningful. Grant writing is an excellent example
of an assignment that clearly relates to the real
world. “An effective assignment goes beyond the
Using Principles of Andragogy to Teach Writing to Graduate Students Online
use of a ‘pretend’ audience and offers the student
a genuine opportunity to communicate to a real
audience” (NWP & Nagin, 2006, p. 48). That
“pretend” audience may in fact be the teacher. The
idea of publication as the last stage in the writing
process extends the assignment beyond the arti-
ficiality of the classroom. By requiring students
to actually submit their work for publication to a
wider audience, the instructor is demonstrating the
value of the course content, the assignment, and
the student’s work. Even better is if the instructor
also submits a piece of writing for publication and
shares the process with the students. Although the
idea of sharing possible rejections with students
may be intimidating for instructors, all writers
experience this.
MOTIVATION
“An adult learner will be brought from no mo-
tivation (amotivation) to motivation in regard to
learning something by making clear to her that the
learning is connected to goals she values and mak-
ing clear her ability to learn the material” (Houde,
2006, p. 92). Thus the student must have a goal to
write and improve that writing through revision.
This cannot be accomplished by completing the
paper the night before it is due. If the student is
interested in the topic and values the answer to
the inquiry question, then the writing will be of
use rather than an artificial exercise.
Many graduate courses have at least one long,
culminating paper, usually due at the end of the
semester. This may be intimidating for a student,
especially those who procrastinate and leave their
writing to the last minute. In a study about new pro-
fessors and their use of time, Boice (1989) found
that “new professors doing writing in brief daily
sessions, especially when they allowed external
prods to motivate them, were far more produc-
tive as writers than were their colleagues who
continued to write on more traditional schedules”
(p. 611). Boice wrote about how many professors
believed they needed large blocks of uninterrupted
time to write effectively, although they rarely had
this luxury in their schedules. The new professors
actually produced more writing when they wrote
in small chunks, like 30 minutes. This was easier
to sustain than “binges” where much writing was
taking place to meet a deadline. After the deadline,
writing ceases.
Teachers can apply this concept to their stu-
dents. Even just asking for an update on students’
progress toward completing a complex assignment
demonstrates how important it is to work well
before the deadline. In a dissertation or thesis
writing situation, the teacher could ask the student
to chart his or her time writing and page output.
This was one of the strategies Boice (1981, 1989)
used with his clients who were having difficulties
producing writing. However, the teacher must also
keep in mind that some of the writing process
occurs mentally or verbally. While written pages
are a concrete demonstration of progress, revis-
ing and thinking are just as valuable. Sometimes
authors need to take a step back from their work
and examine it again after a period of time has
passed to gain perspective.
Smaller assignments that scaffold to longer,
more complex ones give students more confidence.
First, the smaller assignments serve as formative
assessments for both instructor and student. The
teacher sees where the students are struggling, and
the student sees how the rubric is applied or the
assignment is graded. The smaller assignments
may be as simple as an annotated bibliography, so
students have already read some of the research
they need for a final paper. Smaller assignments
let students take risks in their thoughts without
feeling that they are sacrificing their entire grade
for the semester (Aronson, 2009). “First, I see
it as a short pieces of writing that can stand on
its own and supply the ‘seed’ for the ‘plant,’ the
larger paper. . . Second the small assignment is
a tool for managing a larger work by identifying
its distinct parts” (Mullen, 2006, p. 4). Smaller
assignments that scaffold to a larger one also help
students avoid procrastination. Requiring rough
1123
 Using Principles of Andragogy to Teach Writing to Graduate Students Online
or first drafts (even outlines or prewriting) is also
an exercise to help combat procrastination. In an
asynchronous online environment especially, this
extra scaffolding may be necessary, as success in
these courses often depends upon the student’s
self-directiveness. Without a set time and place
for a class meeting, students have to make their
own time for class.
In an online environment, smaller assignments
are necessary, as almost every communication
to the rest of the class requires writing. The
teacher should explain and model what tone is
appropriate for these more informal assignments
and communication as opposed to more formal
and traditional forms of writing, such as research
papers. “Instructors need to figure out what their
online persona will be. Will be it be formal? (‘Dear
members of English 101’)? Or chummy? (‘Hi ev-
eryone’)? How about the use of slang and instant
messaging shortcuts (LOL, IMHO)?” (Aronson,
2009, p. 19). In formal, academic writing, this
may be inappropriate, but if the instructor wishes
to establish a classroom climate of caring, a more
informal tone for emails or discussion board post-
ings may work better.
If the classroom environment is warm and
welcoming, the student will be motivated to read
the work of others and share his or her own. “By
presenting their work to each other on a regular
basis, students are faced with an audience that sits
across the tables, ready to respond, question, and
advise immediately” (Rose & McClaren, 2001,
p. 30). Thus even if the rough draft is a participa-
tion grade, the deadlines help students determine
their inquiry question early so they can dedicate
the necessary time to write the piece. This begins
at the draft stage or even earlier; sometimes it is
helpful for students to talk with each other or with
the teacher about an idea for a piece of writing.
Shorter pieces are easier to read and comment
on simply because of the length of time required
for reading. Shorter pieces or excerpts also work
well for modeling.
1124
However, when students have invested their
time in providing feedback to a peer, they often
want to read the final product, even if this is after
the semester has ended. The last step of the writ-
ing process is publishing, and this means more
than turning in a final draft for a grade. Teachers
should provide a place where students can make
their work accessible at the very least to others in
the class, and preferably to others outside of the
classroom walls. This may mean submitting what
started as a class assignment for publication. In
an online class, the instructor or the student can
usually publish a piece easily, making the final
draft accessible to the rest of the class.
MODELING
In both andragogy (Henschke, 1998; Knowles
et al., 1998) and the teaching of writing (NWP
& Nagin, 2006), modeling is key. Students need
models both of good writing and of writing that
needs improvement. If they only see the best
writing, they may think it is beyond their ability.
“Students at research institutions develop a mis-
taken idea of what publishable quality is, having
little experience of the ordinary journal article”
(Belcher, 2009, p. 191). While many graduate stu-
dents are required to find and perhaps summarize
or evaluate articles on a particular topic, the focus
is often not on the actual writing or organization
of the document or on the process of submitting
an article for publication.
A frequent complain about student writing in
secondary and postsecondary classes focuses on
argument and the persuasive mode of writing .
. . Most students need models and some direct
instruction to gain facility in this kind of writing.
They also need the kind of scaffolding in their as-
signments that gives them both an organizational
scheme and guidelines for using inquiry strategies.
(NWP & Nagin, 2006, p. 23)
In addition to using previous or current student
work as models, using a teacher’s own writing
(especially an early draft) is a powerful way to dem-
Using Principles of Andragogy to Teach Writing to Graduate Students Online
onstrate how revision is necessary for everyone
and how helpful feedback can be. “Many scholars
are unpublished not because they have bad ideas
but because they have never learned to represent
their ideas properly” (Belcher, 2009, p. 192). After
all, scholarship is a part of a professor’s job: why
not let students take part by giving feedback on
the teacher’s writing? “Instructors can help by
modeling authentic discourse in class—for ex-
ample, by revealing personal vulnerabilities with
respect to writing” (Mullen, 2006, p. 3). Although
this idea can be intimidating for instructors, it is
no less than what they are expecting from their
students. The work can be short or an excerpt,
and the feedback may indeed be valuable, as most
professors unfortunately have little time to read
and comment on their peers’ work.
FUTURE TRENDS
Research continues to examine the most effec-
tive type of course delivery for different types of
students, even as face to face courses implement
more technology and rely heavily on electronic
methods of communication.
The literature is brimming with reports on
specific courses in specific subject areas at spe-
cific universities, so much so that advocates of
distance education can cite any number of articles
supporting their position, but then so too can their
opponents. (Worley, 2000, p. 95)
One example focused specifically on writing
outside of a composition course, Sauers and Walker
(2001) found that over 200 students in both hybrid
and face to face courses improved their writing in
a business communication class. However, “Team
building, group communication, and more active
learning practices generally occurred at a much
higher rate of frequency” using the online course
management system Blackboard in the hybrid
course (p. 435). These practices were occurring
using writing as a means of communication rather
than speech as they might in a face to face class.
While this study is only one example, research
in all content fields on effective online teach-
ing must continue to take place, especially for
graduate courses. Writing is an often overlooked
component in online writing instruction in any
field. However, journals such as Computers in
Composition are beginning to focus specifically
on this topic.
“Research that attempts to compare technol-
ogy-based teaching methods with ‘traditional
methods is not asking the right question. Such
research assumes that traditional teaching methods
are somehow a uniformly successful and proven
standard” (Worley, 2000, p. 98). Whether teaching
online or face to face, instructors should always
strive to improve their practice, and much of com-
munication between instructor and student takes
place in writing, as informal as it may be through
a medium such as email. Even instructors of face
to face courses are incorporating aspects of online
learning. “Technology is increasingly becoming a
given in instructional design—the question is not
if, but how teachers will use it” (Warnock, 2009,
p. x). Instructors must continue to investigate
best practices both in their own fields and oth-
ers and collect data, whether for publication or
improvement of their own teaching effectiveness.
Technology continually changes, and instructors
must also continually improve their instruction
by effectively incorporating new technology as
appropriate.
CONCLUSION
Instructors of any content field, undergraduate or
graduate, would benefit from reading research into
best practice for teaching writing online. Books
such as and Teaching Writing Online: How &
Why (Warnock, 2009) and Virtual Peer Review:
Teaching and Writing about Writing in Online
Environments (Breuch, 2004) offer practical tips
for professors transitioning to online teaching.
Preparing Educators for Online Writing Instruc-
1125
 Using Principles of Andragogy to Teach Writing to Graduate Students Online
tion (Hewett & Ehmann, 2004) demonstrates
how to train educators to teach online, using in
part the theories of Knowles (p. xv). Many of the
practices in these books can be adapted to any
online instruction, even in other content fields.
The Conference on College Composition and
Communication (2009), a constituent organization
of the National Council of Teachers of English,
posts on their website a bibliography of best prac-
tices for online writing instruction and is currently
researching this topic with a committee. However,
much of the research in this bibliography is focused
on undergraduate courses, especially composition,
demonstrating the need for more work in this field.
Research about graduate student writing continues
to focus on dissertation completion rather than the
teaching of writing in coursework and is often
separate from composition theory or andragogy.
Researchers and teachers in all of these fields
should read each other’s work to improve their
own practice and writing, which will hopefully
lead to improvement in student writing and in
attitude toward approaching writing in general.
Teaching and training online is the future, and
the skills needed to succeed in this environment
center around writing. Writing is an essential skill
for effective communication with others and even
with ourselves.
Many people are now trying to become less
helpless, both personally and politically: trying
to claim more control over their own lives. One
of the ways people most lack control over their
own lives is through lacking control over words.
Especially written words. Words come at you on
a piece of paper and you often feel helpless before
them. And when you want to put some words of
your own back on another piece of paper, you
often feel even more helpless. (Elbow, 1973, p. vii)
Instructors of all levels should examine their
own writing processes and try to improve, which
will in turn make their own teaching of writing
more effective. By sharing their own struggles in
academic writing, instructors can help students
realize that they are not alone or helpless. For
1126
many university professors, writing and publishing
is one of the biggest challenges; yet, they seldom
discuss this with anyone else, much less their stu-
dents. For graduate students especially, sharing the
experience of creating, finishing, and submitting
a manuscript is invaluable and inspirational. All
university professors should examine their own
attitudes and practices when writing and then
compare them to what they expect from their
students. By becoming better writers ourselves,
we will become better teachers of writing.
REFERENCES
Aronson, D. (2009). Online writing instruction: no
longer a novelty. Council Chronicle, 19(2), 18–21.
Atler, C., & Adkins, C. (2001). Improving the
writing skills of social work students. Journal of
Social Work, 37(3), 493–505.
Belcher, W. L. (2009). Reflections on ten years of
teaching writing for publication to graduate students
and junior faculty. Journal of Scholarly Publication,
40(2), 184–200. doi:10.3138/jsp.40.2.184
Boice, R. (1982). Increasing the writing productiv-
ity of “blocked” academicians. Behaviour Research
and Therapy, 20(3), 197–207. doi:10.1016/0005-
7967(82)90138-3
Boice, R. (1989). Procrastination, busyness, and
bingeing. Behaviour Research and Therapy, 27(6),
605–611. doi:10.1016/0005-7967(89)90144-7
Bruech, L. K. (2004). Virtual peer review: Teaching
and learning about writing in online environments.
New York: State University of New York Press.
Conference on College Composition and Commu-
nication. (2009). Annotated bibliography: CCCC
committee on best practices in online writing
instruction. Retrieved from http://www.ncte.org/
library/NCTEFiles/Groups/CCCC/Committees/
OWIAnnotatedBib.p df
Using Principles of Andragogy to Teach Writing to Graduate Students Online
De Valero, Y. F. (2001). Departmental factors
affecting time-to-degree and completion rates
of doctoral students at one land-grant research
institution. The Journal of Higher Education,
72(3), 341–367. doi:10.2307/2649335
Elbow, P. (1973). Writing without teachers. New
York: Oxford University Press.
Henschke, J. A. (1998). Modeling the preparation
of adult educators. Adult Learning, 9(3), 11–13.
Hewett, B., & Ehmann, C. (2004). Preparing
educators for online writing instruction. Urbana,
IL: National Council of Teachers of English.
Houde, J. (2006). Andragogy and motivation:
An examination of the principles of andragogy
through two motivation theories. East Lansing,
MI: National Center for Research on Teacher
Learning. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service
No. ED492652)
Knowles, M. S. (1977). Adult learning pro-
cesses: Pedagogy and andragogy. Religious
Education (Chicago, Ill.), 72(2), 202–211.
doi:10.1080/0034408770720210
Knowles, M. S. (1989). Adult learning: Theory
& practice. In L. Nadler & Z. Nadler (Eds.), The
handbook of human resource development (2nd
ed.). New York: John Wiley & Sons. Accessed from
http://www.umsl.edu/~henschkej/andragogy.htm
Knowles, M. S., Holton, E. F., & Swanson, R. A.
(1998). The adult learner (5th ed.). Houston, TX:
Gulf Publishing.
Lovitts, B. E. (2007). Making the implicit explicit:
Creating performance expectations for the dis-
sertation. Sterling, VA: Stylus.
Mullen, C. (2006). Best writing practices for
graduate students: reducing the discomfort of the
blank screen. The Connexions Project. Retrieved
from http://cnx.org/content/m14054/1.2/
National Writing Project & Nagin. C. (2006).
Because writing matters: Improving student writ-
ing in our schools. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Reif, M. (1992). The personal touch: Improving
writing instruction for nontraditional graduate
students. Adult Learning, 3, 25–26.
Rose, M., & McClafferty, K. A. (2001). A call
for the teaching of writing in graduate educa-
tion. Educational Researcher, 30(2), 27–33.
doi:10.3102/0013189X030002027
Sauers, D., & Walker, R. C. (2004). A comparison
of traditional and technology-assisted instruc-
tional methods in the business communication
classroom. Business Communication Quarterly,
67(4), 430–442. doi:10.1177/1080569904271030
Warnock, B. (2009). Teaching writing online:
How and why. Urbana, IL: National Council of
Teachers of English.
Worley, R. B. (2001). The medium is not the mes-
sage. Business Communication Quarterly, 63(3),
93–103. doi:10.1177/108056990006300311
KEY TERMS AND DEFINITIONS
National Writing Project: The National Writ-
ing Project (NWP) is a professional development
network dedicated to improving student writing
and learning . . . NWP sites use a teacher-teaching-
teachers model that draws on the knowledge,
expertise, and leadership of successful classroom
teachers to serve more than one hundred thousand
teachers annually, grades K-16, in all disciplines.
(NWP & Nagin, 2006, p. xi)
Peer Revision: A classroom technique de-
signed to help the student develop editing skills
and a sense of authentic audience. The teacher
first models a process of supportive critique that
sets the tone for positive and useful comments.
Students then read and review one another’s work
in pairs or groups. (NWP & Nagin, 2006, p. 27)
1127
 Using Principles of Andragogy to Teach Writing to Graduate Students Online
Prewriting: “Any planning activity that helps
the writer invent content and generate ideas, im-
ages, viewpoints, and so on, to be developed into
a piece of writing” (NWP & Nagin, 2006, p. 26).
Revision: “In revising, a writer approaches a
rough draft with an editorial eye, identifying and
deleting extraneous subject matter, focusing the
material, determining what needs to be ampli-
fied and what needs to be cut” (NWP & Nagin,
2006, p. 26).
Teacherless Writing Class: [The teacher-
less writing class] is a class of seven to twelve
people. It meets at least once a week. Everyone
reads everyone else’s writing. Everyone tries to
give each writer a sense of how his words were
experienced. The goal is for the writer to come
as close as possible to being able to see and ex-
perience his own words through seven or more
people. That’s all. (Elbow, 1973, p. 77)
1128
Writing as Inquiry: A writing curriculum that
incorporates inquiry strategies (collecting and
evaluating evidence, comparing and contrasting
cases to infer similarities and differences, explain-
ing how evidence supports or does not support a
claim, creating a hypothetical example to clarify
an idea, imagining a situation from a perspective
other than one’s own, and so on). . . (NWP &
Nagin, 2006, p. 23)
Writing Process: Any of the activities or
thinking strategies used to compose a piece of
writing. These are sometimes described as cycles
of planning (generating ideas, setting goals, and
organizing), translating (putting a plan into writ-
ing) and reviewing (evaluating and revising); or
they can be categorized into activities such as
prewriting, drafting, revising, and editing. (NWP
& Nagin, 2006, p. 26)
 1

Index

A Adult Education university-based programs

Accessibility 963,╇ 964,╇ 970
Action Research (AR) 730,╇ 732
Action Research (AR) methodologies 730
activity-based courses 943
activity-based cyber organization 913
activity-based learning 805
Activity Structure 911,╇ 924
Activity Structure System (ASS) 911, 913
Activity Structure System (ASS) model 911
Activity Theory 701,╇ 706
Actor-Network Theory (ANT) 735,╇ 739
Actor-Network Theory (ANT) contribution 735
ADA-Compliant 875
ADDIE 470,╇ 474,╇ 476,╇ 477,╇ 482,╇ 483,╇ 484
ADDIE design model 912
ADDIE model 913,╇ 914,╇ 918,╇ 919,╇ 920
adjunct community 824
adult development 177,╇ 183,╇ 779,╇ 787,╇ 789,╇
790,╇ 792
adult education 17,╇ 18,╇ 19,╇ 20,╇ 21,╇ 22,╇ 25,╇
27,╇ 29,╇ 30,╇ 31,╇ 33,╇ 34,╇ 35,╇ 36,╇ 118,╇
119,╇ 120,╇ 121,╇ 122,╇ 124,╇ 125,╇ 126,╇
129,╇ 130,╇ 131,╇ 132,╇ 133,╇ 134,╇ 824,╇
825,╇ 826,╇ 830,╇ 831,╇ 833,╇ 835,╇ 836,╇
1050,╇ 1051,╇ 1052,╇ 1053,╇ 1054,╇ 1055,╇
1056,╇ 1057,╇ 1058,╇ 1059,╇ 1060,╇ 1061,╇
1062,╇ 1063,╇ 1064,╇ 1065,╇ 1085,╇ 1086,╇
1087,╇ 1088,╇ 1091,╇ 1092,╇ 1094,╇ 1096,╇
1097,╇ 1098,╇ 1100,╇ 1101,╇ 1102,╇ 1103,╇
1105,╇ 1107,╇ 1108,╇ 1109,╇ 1110,╇ 1112
adult education methods
1067,╇ 1068,╇ 1076,╇ 1078,╇ 1081
Adult Education Research Conference (AERC)
1053
1053
adult educators 154,╇ 155,╇ 158,╇ 159,╇ 161,╇
163,╇ 165,╇ 166,╇ 1032,╇ 1047, 1070,
1074, 1080
Adult ESL 1053,╇ 1058,╇ 1060
Adulthood 1085
adult learner engagement 971
adult learners 242, 244, 247, 248, 255, 256,
769,╇ 770,╇ 897,╇ 1050,╇ 1051,╇ 1052,╇
1053,╇ 1056,╇ 1059,╇ 1060,╇ 1063,╇ 1065,╇
1066,╇ 1069,╇ 1070,╇ 1073,╇ 1074,╇ 1076,╇
1079,╇ 1101,╇ 1102,╇ 1103,╇ 1104,╇ 1105,╇
1107,╇ 1109,╇ 1110,╇ 1111
adult learning 1,╇ 2,╇ 3,╇ 4,╇ 5,╇ 6,╇ 7,╇ 12,╇ 14,╇
16,╇ 17,╇ 18,╇ 22,╇ 23,╇ 24,╇ 26,╇ 27,╇ 31,╇
32,╇ 33,╇ 34,╇ 37,╇ 38,╇ 40,╇ 49,╇ 69,╇ 70,╇
73,╇ 78,╇ 79,╇ 80,╇ 81,╇ 838,╇ 839,╇ 840,╇
841,╇ 842,╇ 847,╇ 853,╇ 854,╇ 855,╇ 1100,╇
1102,╇ 1103,╇ 1110
adult learning activities 1100,╇ 1102,╇ 1103
adult learning principles
474,╇ 475,╇ 476,╇ 480,╇ 483
adult learning professionals 1050,╇ 1051,╇ 1065
advanced distributed learning (ADL) 292
advances learning and immersive virtual envi-
ronment (ALIVE) 700
affective domain 192,╇ 194,╇ 195,╇ 203
affordance 261,╇ 262,╇ 273
afrocentric perspective 813
agnostic 257,╇ 258,╇ 259,╇ 273
alienation 818,╇ 823
alternate input device 970
alternative communication (AAC) 867
Alt Text 970
 Index

American Association for Adult and Continuing asynchronous learning environments 972
Education (AAACE) 1053 asynchronous learning tools 286,╇ 291
American Recovery and Reinvestment Act atomistic 274
(ARRA) 152 attention deficit disorder (ADD) 866
American Society of Training and Development audio sharing 1020,╇ 1030
(ASTD) 772 authentication 970
Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) 859 authoring tool 272,╇ 273
analysis, design, development, implementation, autodidactic 84,╇ 97,╇ 100
evaluation (ADDIE) 911 autonomous 560,╇ 576
Analysis, design, development, implementa- autonomy 770
tion, evaluation (ADDIE) design model Avatar 856
911
andragogical 68,╇ 69,╇ 70,╇ 71,╇ 72,╇ 73,╇ 74,╇ B
75,╇ 76,╇ 77,╇ 78,╇ 79,╇ 81,╇ 82 baby boomers 309,╇ 311,╇ 313,╇ 320,╇ 321
andragogical approach 138,╇ 152 back channel 633,╇ 641
andragogy 19,╇ 34,╇ 36,╇ 52,╇ 53,╇ 68,╇ 70,╇ 71,╇ barrier 1112
72,╇ 73,╇ 76,╇ 78,╇ 80,╇ 81,╇ 131,╇ 133,╇ behavioral learning 186,╇ 203
323,╇ 324,╇ 330,╇ 331,╇ 334,╇ 336,╇ 453,╇ behaviorism 68,╇ 69,╇ 70,╇ 71,╇ 74,╇ 77,╇ 78,╇
460,╇ 466,╇ 468,╇ 576,╇ 610,╇ 624,╇ 841,╇ 79,╇ 81
842,╇ 1008, 1012 benchmarking 1099
aperture 615,╇ 617,╇ 624 beneficial social venue 1021
a posteriori 89,╇ 100 binary-system 1090
application programming interface (API) 273 blackboard 248,╇ 252,╇ 253,╇ 256,╇ 322,╇ 336,╇
appreciative culture 739 337,╇ 338,╇ 346,╇ 359,╇ 755,╇ 757,╇ 759,╇
appreciative facilitation 449 767,╇ 946,╇ 948,╇ 975,╇ 976,╇ 977,╇ 978,╇
appreciative inquiry (AI) 723,╇ 724, 731,╇ 733 1014,╇ 1023
appreciative reflection 723,╇ 727,╇ 730,╇ 739 blackboard learning system (BLS) 896,╇ 910
appreciative stewardship 445,╇ 447,╇ 449 blackboard tools 896,╇ 898
architecture of participation blame culture 739
437,╇ 441,╇ 442,╇ 447,╇ 449 blended courses 336
artificial intelligence (AI) 564,╇ 566,╇ 567,╇ 576 blended e-learning 1071
assessment 332,╇ 334,╇ 336,╇ 539,╇ 540,╇ 541,╇ blended learning (BL) 284,╇ 291,╇ 521,╇ 522,╇
542,╇ 543,╇ 544,╇ 545,╇ 546,╇ 547,╇ 548,╇ 523,╇ 524,╇ 525,╇ 526,╇ 527,╇ 528,╇ 529,╇
549,╇ 550,╇ 551,╇ 552,╇ 553,╇ 554,╇ 555,╇ 530,╇ 531,╇ 532,╇ 533,╇ 534,╇ 535,╇ 536,╇
556 537,╇ 538, 795, 796
assessment strategy 856 blended models 157
assessment system 909 blendedness 809
assistive technology 970 blended shore 118,╇ 119,╇ 120,╇ 125,╇ 126,╇
ASS model 913,╇ 914,╇ 920 129,╇ 131,╇ 132,╇ 133
asynchronous 51,╇ 507,╇ 509,╇ 510,╇ 517,╇ 520,╇ blended shore education 126,╇ 131,╇ 132,╇ 133
657,╇ 658,╇ 664,╇ 666,╇ 671,╇ 672,╇ 673 blended technology 337,╇ 338,╇ 339,╇ 348,╇
asynchronous 778,╇ 872,╇ 875,╇ 1083 351,╇ 352,╇ 358
asynchronous communication 909, 914 blogs 58, 59, 64, 66, 67, 102,╇ 103,╇ 106,╇
asynchronous e-learning course 971 107,╇ 108,╇ 109,╇ 110,╇ 115,╇ 117,╇ 249,╇
asynchronous interactions 769,╇ 775 251,╇ 256,╇ 311,╇ 312,╇ 313,╇ 314,╇ 321,
asynchronous learning 791,╇ 792,╇ 793,╇ 794 1074, 1084

2
Index

borderland 930,╇ 934,╇ 935,╇ 936,╇ 940 collaboratory 895

boundary 931,╇ 936,╇ 940 collective frameworks 1087
boundary-management resource 929 college community
boundary object 1013,╇ 1015,╇ 1016,╇ 1017,╇ 1018
927,╇ 931,╇ 935,╇ 936,╇ 937,╇ 940 co-located interactions 885
boundary object 940 comfort zone 146,╇ 152,╇ 153
bracketing 342,╇ 345,╇ 359 commercial off-the-shelf (COTS)
branching logic 565,╇ 576 687,╇ 690,╇ 691
Bretton-Woods institutional system 1089 commercial off-the-shelf (COTS) game
687,╇ 691
C Commission on International Adult Education
CADE model 785,╇ 786,╇ 787,╇ 788,╇ 789 [CIAE] 1032,╇ 1039
California State University Long Beach communal collaborative spaces 880
(CSULB) 898 communication design 924
campus environment 945 communication technology
capital transformation, 1087 1067,╇ 1068,╇ 1073,╇ 1084
career and technical education (CTE) 1053 communication tools 900,╇ 903
case-Based learning 984 communities of design practice (CDPs) 879
case-based lectures 972 communities of interest 877
case-based method 971,╇ 982 communities of practice (CoP) 1,╇ 3,╇ 9,╇ 12,╇
case conference 984 16,╇ 797, 877,╇ 883,╇ 886,╇ 890,╇ 892,╇
cash cow 752,╇ 1066 893,╇ 894,╇ 895
civic development 1086 community activity platform 918
classroom data 183 community building 156
classroom environment 1117,╇ 1124 community design 913,╇ 918,╇ 919,╇ 920,╇ 922
cloud computing 895 community development 1056,╇ 1061
cognitive presence community informatics
708,╇ 709,╇ 712,╇ 713,╇ 720,╇ 722 361,╇ 365,╇ 366,╇ 375,╇ 376
cognitivism 524,╇ 525,╇ 535,╇ 538 community of inquiry (CoI) 707, 708, 709, 712,
cohort 337,╇ 338,╇ 339,╇ 340,╇ 341,╇ 342,╇ 343,╇ 713, 719, 722
344,╇ 345,╇ 347,╇ 349,╇ 351,╇ 352,╇ 353,╇ community of inquiry (CoI) model 708
354,╇ 356,╇ 359 community of practice 178,╇ 180,╇ 181,╇ 183,╇
coincident boundaries 931 240,╇ 629,╇ 641, 809, 940
collaboration 54,╇ 56,╇ 57,╇ 58,╇ 60,╇ 67,╇ 268,╇ community service learning 643,╇ 645,╇ 646,╇
270,╇ 273,╇ 631,╇ 635,╇ 637,╇ 641, 711, 649,╇ 650,╇ 651,╇ 652,╇ 655
717, 722 community structure 924
collaborative knowledge building comparative learnology 1099
707,╇ 708,╇ 711,╇ 712,╇ 716,╇ 718 compatibility 266,╇ 273
collaborative knowledge-building process Competency Assessment of Distribute Educa-
707,╇ 709,╇ 710,╇ 712,╇ 719 tion (CADE) 790
collaborative knowledge generation 985 Competency Assessment of Distribute Educa-
collaborative learning 214,╇ 224,╇ 225,╇ 411 tion (CADE) model 790
collaborative modes 1106 complex course management 1075
collaborative virtual networks 225 compressed interactive video (CIV) 337,╇ 338,╇
collaborative websites 256 346,╇ 347,╇ 348,╇ 351,╇ 353,╇ 358
collaborative work 988 computer-based learning 840

3
 Index

computer-based technologies critical reflection 2,╇ 5,╇ 6,╇ 14,╇ 16,╇ 724,╇ 726,╇
942,╇ 943,╇ 1068,╇ 1077 727,╇ 729,╇ 730,╇ 731,╇ 732,╇ 733
computer hardware 861,╇ 862 critical theory 359
computer literacy 493,╇ 503,╇ 504 critical-thinking 411
computer-mediated communications (CMC) cross-cultural learning 293,╇ 294,╇ 295,╇ 296,╇
876, 1022 297,╇ 298,╇ 299,╇ 300,╇ 301,╇ 302,╇ 307
computer-mediated communications tools 876 cross-disciplinary 225
computer-related knowledge 758 cross-functional teams 876,╇ 880,╇ 889
computer self-efficacy 578,╇ 579,╇ 583,╇ 584,╇ cross-national 1087,╇ 1088,╇ 1090,╇ 1091
585,╇ 588,╇ 589,╇ 590,╇ 591,╇ 592,╇ 593,╇ crowdsourcing 445,╇ 449
594, 767 cultural intelligence (CQ) 296,╇ 307
computers in composition 1125 culturally mediated constructivism 823
computer supported collaborative work cultural meanings 958
(CSCW) 877 cultural nature 1086
computer training 578,╇ 579,╇ 583,╇ 584,╇ 585,╇ cultural neutrality 858
587,╇ 593,╇ 594 cultural norms 929
connected knowing 722 curriculum 1056,╇ 1058,╇ 1059,╇ 1060,╇ 1066
connecting to collaborate 992,╇ 998 cyber charter 285,╇ 291
connectivism 206,╇ 209,╇ 214,╇ 215,╇ 224,╇ 468 cyber charter school 291
constitutive phenomenology 133 cyber learning 772,╇ 778
constructive-developmental pedagogy 171,╇ 183 cyberspace 741,╇ 743,╇ 747,╇ 750,╇ 752
constructivism 73,╇ 79,╇ 80,╇ 81,╇ 186,╇ 197,╇
203,╇ 454,╇ 461,╇ 468,╇ 524,╇ 535,╇ 538 D
constructivist 837 data-based research 953
content creation 51 decision-making processes 728
contextualized knowledge 186,╇ 203 decision styles 451,╇ 452,╇ 454,╇ 459,╇ 462,╇ 468
contract grading 322,╇ 324,╇ 326,╇ 327,╇ 329,╇ decision support systems 1032,╇ 1036,╇ 1037
330,╇ 331,╇ 333,╇ 334,╇ 336 defamation 970
contract learning 322,╇ 324,╇ 325,╇ 326,╇ 327,╇ Delphi method 1039
328,╇ 329,╇ 330,╇ 331,╇ 332,╇ 333,╇ 334,╇ democratization 598,╇ 605,╇ 607
335,╇ 336 design principle 434
conventional online teaching vs. andragogical design template 434
teaching 740 determinism model 756
conversation theory 524,╇ 525,╇ 527,╇ 535,╇ 538 deterrent 1112
cooperative learning 405,╇ 409,╇ 410,╇ 411 dialogical process 1037
cooperative learning environment 985 dialogical relationship 1037
corporate university 284,╇ 290,╇ 291 digital access 963
correspondence Eeducation 752 digital competence
course buddies 952,╇ 953,╇ 956 205,╇ 207,╇ 208,╇ 217,╇ 221,╇ 225
course management systems (CMS) 269, 273, digital contents 960,╇ 964,╇ 965,╇ 966,╇ 967,╇ 968
274, 757, 767, 809 digital divide 17,╇ 26,╇ 30,╇ 31,╇ 36
course-related content 757 digital drop box 898,╇ 900
courseware 389,╇ 390,╇ 394 digital equipment (DEC) 1067
creative commons 55,╇ 56,╇ 67 digital information 883,╇ 884,╇ 885,╇ 895
creative thinking 739 digital library 259,╇ 273, 1073
critical incident 739 digitally-based information 1022

4
Index

digital media tools 226,╇ 230,╇ 231,╇ 235,╇ 240 e-learning 136,╇ 145,╇ 147,╇ 148,╇ 149,╇ 152,╇
digital natives 36,╇ 116 390,╇ 393,╇ 394,╇ 506,╇ 513,╇ 514,╇ 515,╇
digital repositories 876,╇ 877,╇ 878,╇ 884 516,╇ 517,╇ 518,╇ 520,╇ 522,╇ 523,╇ 530,╇
digital version 966 534,╇ 535,╇ 536,╇ 537,╇ 538
direct assessment 680,╇ 681,╇ 682,╇ 683,╇ 686 e-learning course 1073
disability 970 e-learning environment 959,╇ 963,╇ 972
disclaimer 969,╇ 970 e-learning opportunities 1073
discovery learning 557,╇ 558,╇ 560,╇ 571,╇ 576 e-learning strategies 1071
distance education 154,╇ 155,╇ 156,╇ 157,╇ 158,╇ electronic access 1069
159,╇ 160,╇ 161,╇ 162,╇ 163,╇ 164,╇ 165,╇ Electronic Bulletin Board (EBB) 897,╇ 901
166,╇ 167,╇ 168,╇ 377,╇ 389,╇ 390,╇ 393,╇ electronic communication 1118
394,╇ 656,╇ 657,╇ 661,╇ 664,╇ 665,╇ 666,╇ electronic component 1079
667,╇ 669,╇ 670,╇ 673,╇ 785, 791, 792, electronic learning environments 1073
794, 838,╇ 850,╇ 855, 1104, 1111, 1112 electronic social networking 1073
distance learning 37,╇ 38,╇ 39,╇ 40,╇ 41,╇ 44,╇ electronic translation programmes 1070
45,╇ 48,╇ 50,╇ 51,╇ 322,╇ 323,╇ 333,╇ 336,╇ emerging society 1086
337,╇ 339,╇ 346,╇ 347,╇ 351,╇ 356,╇ 357,╇ emotional intelligence (EI) 1005,╇ 1006, 1012
358,╇ 359,╇ 999,╇ 1000,╇ 1002,╇ 1003,╇ empiricist 837
1004,╇ 1005,╇ 1006,╇ 1007,╇ 1008,╇ 1010,╇ empowerment 392,╇ 394
1011,╇ 1012 encapsulation 274
distance learning organizations 1053 enclosure 598,╇ 608
distributed cognition 234,╇ 240 engineering-based games 695
diversity 470,╇ 471,╇ 472,╇ 476,╇ 477,╇ 480,╇ English as a second language (ESL) 102,╇ 103,╇
481,╇ 483 104,╇ 105,╇ 106,╇ 107,╇ 108,╇ 109,╇ 110,╇
double-loop learning 725,╇ 726 111,╇ 112,╇ 113,╇ 114,╇ 115,╇ 116
drill-and-practice 411 e-portfolios 1071,╇ 1072,╇ 1074
dual-edged sword 929 equity 506,╇ 507,╇ 508,╇ 515,╇ 516,╇ 517,╇ 518,╇
dual-mode institution 291 519,╇ 520, 864, 870, 875
dynamic process 787 ethical 1049
ethics 962,╇ 970
E exemplary lifelong learners 1039
eco-feminist view 812 existence of an educational semantic web
eCollege 1014,╇ 1023 (ESW) 1076
economy 1050,╇ 1052 expectancy-value theory 139,╇ 152
educational dimension 1094 experiential approaches 971,╇ 972
educational management system (EMS) 157 experiential education 655
educational technology 17,╇ 18,╇ 25,╇ 36 experiential learning 294,╇ 296,╇ 297,╇ 298,╇
eduction 133 300,╇ 305,╇ 307,╇ 611,╇ 612,╇ 613,╇ 620,╇
e-educator 451,╇ 452,╇ 454,╇ 456,╇ 457,╇ 459,╇ 621,╇ 624,╇ 625
460,╇ 461,╇ 462,╇ 464,╇ 465,╇ 468 exponential learning 610,╇ 625
effective teaching 740 external stimuli 186,╇ 203
egames 687,╇ 690,╇ 694,╇ 695,╇ 706
F
e-learner 451,╇ 452,╇ 453,╇ 454,╇ 456,╇ 457,╇
458,╇ 459,╇ 460,╇ 461,╇ 462,╇ 463,╇ 464,╇ Facebook 102,╇ 103,╇ 108,╇ 113,╇ 115,╇ 116,╇ 117
465,╇ 468 face-to-face 942,╇ 944,╇ 945,╇ 946,╇ 947,╇ 948,╇
951,╇ 952,╇ 955

5
 Index

Face-to-face class formats 946 Global Educational Policies 1099

face-to-face classroom 945, 972 global e-learning
face-to-face component 1012 958,╇ 959,╇ 962,╇ 964,╇ 965,╇ 968
face-to-face course 981, 942 global infrastructure 1089
face-to-face discussion 1073 globalists 1088
face-to-face environments 945 globalization 32,╇ 33,╇ 36,╇ 391,╇ 392,╇ 394,╇
face-to-face (F2F) 492,╇ 504,╇ 795, 898,╇ 903 1085,╇ 1086,╇ 1087,╇ 1088,╇ 1089,╇ 1091,╇
face-to-face format 982 1092,╇ 1093,╇ 1094,╇ 1095,╇ 1096,╇ 1097,╇
face-to-face instruction 693,╇ 946 1098,╇ 1099
face-to-face interaction 764, 889 global marketplace 863
face-to-face lab 948,╇ 951 global realm 963
face-to-face lecture 948 global virtual teams 876, 895
face-to-face meeting 980 globaphobics 1088
face-to-face orientation 978 golden bullet solution 1068
face-to-face teaching 945 Google Groups 1020,╇ 1023,╇ 1024,╇ 1030
feedback cycle 169,╇ 170,╇ 171,╇ 172,╇ 173,╇ GPS machines 1075
174,╇ 175,╇ 177,╇ 183 granularity 274
feminism 362,╇ 364,╇ 366,╇ 375,╇ 376 grassroots 362,╇ 363,╇ 366,╇ 376
file-exchange systems 899,╇ 900 group cohesiveness 411
flexibility 322,╇ 323,╇ 324,╇ 331,╇ 333,╇ 334
flexible learning 522,╇ 523,╇ 535,╇ 536,╇ 538 H
flowchart 434 health professional shortage areas (HPSAs) 944
folksonomies 1020,╇ 1030 health promotion 942,╇ 943,╇ 944,╇ 946,╇ 947,╇
forage 559,╇ 576 951,╇ 952,╇ 954,╇ 955,╇ 956,╇ 957
formal learning 228,╇ 229,╇ 237,╇ 240 health-related disciplines 944,╇ 945,╇ 953,╇ 954
formative 568,╇ 576 health-related education 943
formative assessment 678,╇ 686 help-seeking 559,╇ 563,╇ 565,╇ 576
formative evaluation 837 hermeneutics 340,╇ 359
fortitude 1112 heutagogy 466,╇ 468
furlough 1066 higher-level concerns (HLC) 1121
futurology 1067 historical pedagogy 1008
holistic approaches 788,╇ 790
G
home-based telework 928,╇ 939
GameBrix 701 human-based research 965
gender equity 394 humanism 68,╇ 69,╇ 70,╇ 71,╇ 73,╇ 76,╇ 78,╇ 81,╇
gender rules 1000 82
General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade hybrid courses 504
(GATT) 1089 hybrid learning systems 1099
generational attitude 313,╇ 321 hybrid manner 752
generational styles 451,╇ 452,╇ 454,╇ 459,╇ 460,╇ hybrid or blended courses 1012
461,╇ 462,╇ 468 hyperlink 899,╇ 910
GenXer 319,╇ 321 hypertext 910
global context 1032
global development 1094 I
global development agenda 1094 ICT applications 1071
global economic downturn 1069 ICT based learning strategies 1071

6
Index
ID3 tags 607,╇ 608
ideology 1002,╇ 1012
immediacy 657,╇ 658,╇ 660,╇ 661,╇ 663,╇ 664,╇
667,╇ 668,╇ 669,╇ 670,╇ 673, 1104, 1112
immersive education 706
impersonation 970
incidental learning 226,╇ 227,╇ 228,╇ 229,╇ 238,╇
239,╇ 240
independent learning contract system (ILCS)
327
indicator system 1039,╇ 1040,╇ 1048
indirect assessment 680,╇ 682,╇ 683,╇ 686
individual context 1070
individualized 577
Individualized Education Program (IEP) 858
individual learning 411
individual learning spaces 146,╇ 152
inductive approach 962
industrializing societies 1087
informal learning 226,╇ 228,╇ 229,╇ 237,╇ 240,╇
241,╇ 242,╇ 244,╇ 250,╇ 251,╇ 254,╇
256,╇ 360,╇ 361,╇ 365,╇ 371,╇ 838,╇ 839,╇
840,╇ 841,╇ 842,╇ 843,╇ 844,╇ 845,╇ 847,╇
848,╇ 849,╇ 850,╇ 851,╇ 852,╇ 853,╇ 854,╇
855,╇ 1100,╇ 1103
informal learning model 838,╇ 853
informal teacher 100
Information and Communication Technology
(ICT) 754, 767, 838, 1022, 1085
information architecture 434
information commons 494,╇ 503,╇ 504
information ecosystem 52,╇ 53,╇ 55,╇ 63,╇ 67
information literacy 184,╇ 185,╇ 186,╇ 187,╇
188,╇ 189,╇ 190,╇ 194,╇ 196,╇ 197,╇ 199,╇
200,╇ 201,╇ 203,╇ 485,╇ 487,╇ 490,╇ 491,╇
492,╇ 494,╇ 495,╇ 497,╇ 498,╇ 499,╇ 500,╇
501,╇ 503,╇ 504,╇ 505
information processing theory 185,╇ 203
information technology design (ITD) 911,╇ 913
information technology design (ITD) integra-
tion model 911
infrastructure 752
in-person orientation 1013,╇ 1014,╇ 1024,╇ 1026
input-process-output (IPO) 1039
input-process-output (IPO) model 1039
inquiry-based course 712
inquiry-based discussions 985
instant messaging (IM) 688, 1021, 1022
institutionalization 1088,╇ 1090,╇ 1098
instructional design 18,╇ 27,╇ 29,╇ 34,╇ 36,╇ 69,╇
70,╇ 72,╇ 74,╇ 78,╇ 82,╇ 382,╇ 383,╇ 394
instructional design mindset 768
instructional methods 469,╇ 470,╇ 471,╇ 473,╇
476,╇ 477,╇ 483
instructional strategies 471,╇ 476,╇ 484
instructivist learning model 879
integrated learning 157
integrated library system (ILS) 504
integrating technology 740,╇ 741,╇ 742,╇ 744,╇
745,╇ 746,╇ 747,╇ 748
integrating theory 1056
integration 744,╇ 750,╇ 752
integration model 911,╇ 922
intellectual property (IP) 398, 48, 51, 55, 67,
895, 963, 964, 970
intellectual reluctance 1105
intelligent tutor agents 567
intentionality 594
interaction 656,╇ 657,╇ 658,╇ 659,╇ 660,╇ 661,╇
662,╇ 663,╇ 664,╇ 665,╇ 666,╇ 667,╇ 669,╇
670,╇ 671,╇ 672,╇ 673
interactive 1049
interactive learning 339,╇ 359
interactive learning experiences 770
intercultural communication competence
294,╇ 303,╇ 306,╇ 307
intercultural competence 293,╇ 294,╇ 295,╇ 296,╇
297,╇ 298,╇ 299,╇ 300,╇ 301,╇ 302,╇ 304,╇
305,╇ 307
intercultural effectiveness competencies
295,╇ 307
interdependent 17,╇ 36,╇ 184,╇ 185,╇ 196,╇ 203
inter-governmental organizations (INGOs)
1089
international inter-dependency 1086,╇ 1090
international society for technology in educa-
tion (ISTE) 795,╇ 807
international standards organization (ISO)
611,╇ 615,╇ 617,╇ 625
Internet technologies 103,╇ 116
Interpretive flexibility 820,╇ 823
interpretive research 342,╇ 343,╇ 345,╇ 359
7
 Index

intersubjective 344,╇ 359 learning / course management systems (L/

intimacy 657,╇ 663,╇ 664,╇ 667,╇ 673 CMSes) 876,╇ 877
ISD 469,╇ 470,╇ 477,╇ 478,╇ 480,╇ 482,╇ 483,╇ 484 learning environment 770,╇ 774,╇ 796,╇ 797,╇
ITD model 914 798,╇ 800,╇ 805,╇ 824,╇ 831,╇ 832,╇ 835,╇
837,╇ 972,╇ 973,╇ 982,╇ 1103,╇ 1104,╇
J 1105,╇ 1106,╇ 1107
Jesuit Distance Education Network (JesuitNET) learning facilitator (LF) 642
785,╇ 791 learning interdependence 778
JRCPF 655 learning management system (LMS) 809, 910
Jurisdiction 970 learning objects 25,╇ 32,╇ 36
learning online 743
K learning outcome 681,╇ 686
learning perspective 724
knowing perspective 724
learning policies 1085,╇ 1091,╇ 1092,╇ 1094,╇
knowledge 1101,╇ 1112
1095,╇ 1096,╇ 1097,╇ 1098
knowledge-based economy 839, 1085
learning process 205,╇ 206,╇ 207,╇ 210,╇ 213,╇
knowledge building 985,╇ 986,╇ 987,╇ 988,╇
215,╇ 222,╇ 225
989,╇ 990,╇ 991,╇ 992,╇ 994,╇ 995,╇ 997
learning resources 743
knowledge-building community 998
learning styles 451,╇ 452,╇ 454,╇ 455,╇ 456,╇
knowledge-building framework 989,╇ 995
458,╇ 459,╇ 460,╇ 461,╇ 462,╇ 463,╇ 465,╇
knowledge-building process
468
985,╇ 987,╇ 989,╇ 991,╇ 995,╇ 996
learning transfer 137,╇ 153
knowledge-centered point of view 724
learning web 52,╇ 63
knowledge generation 985,╇ 988
lecture-based cases 972
knowledge management 894,╇ 895, 1020
Liability 970
knowledge society 1091,╇ 1097
library anxiety 485,╇ 495,╇ 496,╇ 503,╇ 504
L Lib X 500,╇ 504
life-age stages 1085
LCW process online 971,╇ 978,╇ 980 lifelong education 1087,╇ 1088,╇ 1091
LCW technique 972,╇ 981 lifelong learning 360,╇ 361,╇ 362,╇ 364,╇ 368,╇
learned dependence 577 369,╇ 371,╇ 373,╇ 376,╇ 1085,╇ 1086,╇
learned technological helplessness 84,╇ 85,╇ 1088,╇ 1091,╇ 1092,╇ 1093,╇ 1094,╇ 1095,╇
87,╇ 88,╇ 93,╇ 94,╇ 95,╇ 98,╇ 100 1096,╇ 1097,╇ 1098,╇ 1099
learner case writing (LCW) 971, 972, 974, 975, lifelong learning institution 1036,╇ 1037
976, 977, 984 life-projects 1085
learner-centered 1092 life-wide learning 1091
learner-centered pedagogy 174,╇ 177,╇ 183, 809 LMS interface 977
learner-friendliness 1037 local virtual teaming 895
learners’ control 1100 logic model 852,╇ 856
learner-to-learner interaction 975,╇ 982 logistic prediction model 911
learning activities management systems logistic regression 917,╇ 924
(LAMS) 795,╇ 800 low status 1066
learning audit 1105
learning commons 504 M
learning community 6,╇ 10,╇ 13,╇ 16,╇ 643,╇
management systems 778
655,╇ 663,╇ 664,╇ 665,╇ 666,╇ 667,╇ 673
mathematical markup language (MathML) 693

8
Index

mature learners 1050,╇ 1051,╇ 1065 nonprofit organizations 361,╇ 363,╇ 374,╇ 376
measurable performance indicators (MPI) non-traditional population 947,╇ 1031
1032,╇ 1044 nontraditional student 556
media release 970 non-work 927,╇ 928,╇ 929,╇ 930,╇ 931,╇ 932,╇
mediating artefact 940 933,╇ 934,╇ 935,╇ 936,╇ 938,╇ 939,╇ 940
member-checking 90,╇ 101
memorandums of agreement (MOAs) 964 O
memorandums of understanding (MOUs) 964 ocial development 1021
mental modeling 879 omnipotent 507,╇ 508,╇ 517,╇ 520
mentorship 830,╇ 837 onboarding 1013,╇ 1015,╇ 1030
MERLOT 166,╇ 167,╇ 168 one-logic model 1095
metacognition 200,╇ 203,╇ 244,╇ 245,╇ 256,╇ one-on-one meeting 1022
453,╇ 454,╇ 457,╇ 459,╇ 461,╇ 462,╇ 464,╇ on-line adult education 1071
465,╇ 468 online asynchronous course environment 971
metadata 617,╇ 625 online classroom 540,╇ 543,╇ 544,╇ 554,╇ 556
metagogy 120,╇ 127,╇ 129,╇ 131,╇ 133 online communities 911,╇ 912,╇ 913,╇ 914,╇
microtization 153, 776, 778 915,╇ 918,╇ 920,╇ 922,╇ 923
millennial generation 251,╇ 256 online community 911,╇ 912,╇ 913,╇ 914,╇ 915,╇
millennials 309,╇ 311,╇ 319,╇ 321,╇ 380,╇ 381,╇ 917,╇ 918,╇ 919,╇ 920,╇ 921,╇ 922,╇ 923,╇
388,╇ 389,╇ 393,╇ 395 925,╇ 926
mixed-reality collaborative spaces 876,╇ 877 on-line course 1001,╇ 1002,╇ 1004,╇ 1005,╇
mobile ICT 927,╇ 929,╇ 931,╇ 933,╇ 934,╇ 935,╇ 1006,╇ 1008,╇ 1012
936,╇ 937,╇ 938,╇ 940,╇ 941 online course development 786,╇ 788,╇ 790
mobile ICT 927,╇ 931,╇ 933,╇ 935,╇ 937,╇ 941 online courses 1113,╇ 1114
mobile learning (M-Learning) 706 on-line delivery 1071
mobile learning technologies 1012 online education 779,╇ 780,╇ 781,╇ 782,╇ 783,╇
mobile learning technology 999 786,╇ 788,╇ 789,╇ 790,╇ 794
Moodle 1014 online environment 753,╇ 754,╇ 764,╇ 776,╇
multimedia 522,╇ 535,╇ 536,╇ 537,╇ 538 863,╇ 864,╇ 866,╇ 868,╇ 869,╇ 870,╇ 872,╇
multimedia educational resource for learning 1117,╇ 1118,╇ 1121,╇ 1122,╇ 1124
and online teaching (MERLOT) 952 on-line grading 1001
multi-scale 895 online graduate communities
911,╇ 912,╇ 913,╇ 914,╇ 918,╇ 921
N
online instruction
national educational systems 1087,╇ 1099 753,╇ 758,╇ 759,╇ 761,╇ 766,╇ 767, 942,
National Joint Committee on Learning Disabili- 943, 944, 945, 946, 947
ties (NJCLD) 860 online instruction self-efficacy 758,╇ 767
National Service-Learning Clearinghouse online instructors 857,╇ 862,╇ 867,╇ 869
(NSLC) 655 online learning 322, 331, 656,╇ 657,╇ 658,╇
National Writing Project (NWP) 1114, 1115, 661,╇ 662,╇ 663,╇ 664,╇ 665,╇ 666,╇
1116, 1127 667,╇ 668,╇ 669,╇ 671,╇ 672,╇ 673,╇ 753,╇
neo-comparative education 1091 754,╇ 755,╇ 757,╇ 758,╇ 759,╇ 760,╇ 761,╇
neo-liberalism 1089 762,╇ 763,╇ 768,╇ 769,╇ 770,╇ 772,╇ 773,╇
nomadism 941 774,╇ 776,╇ 777,╇ 807, 971,╇ 972,╇ 974,╇
non-formal learning 852 975,╇ 978,╇ 981,╇ 983,╇ 984
non-neutral 812 online learning courses 37,╇ 44,╇ 48

9
 Index

online learning environment 993 pedagogy 170,╇ 171,╇ 174,╇ 175,╇ 176,╇ 177,╇
online learning opportunities 857 178,╇ 179,╇ 181,╇ 182,╇ 183,╇ 323,╇ 335,╇
online network directory 1020 336,╇ 434,╇ 1012, 1114
online professional development 794 peer commentary (formal) 984
online social networks site (OSNs) 1020 peer commentary (informal) 984
online teaching 68,╇ 69,╇ 70,╇ 72,╇ 73,╇ 74,╇ 75,╇ peer review 824,╇ 828,╇ 831,╇ 832, 837
76,╇ 77,╇ 78,╇ 79,╇ 81,╇ 779,╇ 783,╇ 784,╇ peer revision 1127
785,╇ 788,╇ 789,╇ 791,╇ 792,╇ 793 peers-accepted 1034
online technical skills 980 people-centered 1037,╇ 1038
online writing instruction (OWI) 1114 performance assessment 361
open access 500,╇ 504 performance indicators (PI) 1036
open method of coordination (OMC) 1095 performance support 524,╇ 525,╇ 530,╇ 531,╇
open university 278,╇ 291 535,╇ 536,╇ 538
operational system 1037 personal digital assistant (PDA) 929
organizational administrators 1051 personal learning 1031,╇ 1032,╇ 1041,╇ 1042
organizational learning concept (OL) 725 personal learning network (PLN) 226,╇ 227,╇
organizational learning (OL) 727 228,╇ 229,╇ 230,╇ 231,╇ 233,╇ 234,╇ 235,╇
organizational structure 1115 236,╇ 237,╇ 240
organization for the economic cooperation and phenomenology 89,╇ 101,╇ 132,╇ 133,╇ 337,╇
development (OECD) 1089 340,╇ 341,╇ 351,╇ 356,╇ 359
outcome expectancy 594 philosophy 1056
outcomes-based education 675,╇ 686 physical-digital tabletops 876,╇ 877
overarching frameworks 1032,╇ 1036 physiological phenomena 185,╇ 203
Pillar 1049
P plagiarism 1070,╇ 1072,╇ 1075
PAAR 435,╇ 442,╇ 443,╇ 445,╇ 447,╇ 448,╇ 450 podcast 51, 103, 104, 107, 111, 112, 117, 1020,
PAAR approach 723,╇ 724,╇ 736 1030
panic zone 146,╇ 153 policy-making processes 1095,╇ 1096
paper-based resources 1069 political science 1056
paradigmatic assumption 133 post-binary educational system 1091
participation 436,╇ 437,╇ 438,╇ 439,╇ 440,╇ 441,╇ post-binary system 1091
442,╇ 443,╇ 444,╇ 445,╇ 446,╇ 447,╇ 448,╇ postsecondary environments 1053
449, 709, 717, 720, 986, 998 PowerPoint 701
participatory action research (PAR) 723,╇ 732 premise reflection 726,╇ 727
participatory and appreciative action and reflec- pre-orientation 1030
tion (PAAR) 723,╇ 724,╇ 730 prewriting 1128
participatory culture 226,╇ 227,╇ 231,╇ 233,╇ proactive 1035,╇ 1049
234,╇ 236,╇ 237,╇ 238,╇ 240 problem-based 972,╇ 973,╇ 974,╇ 982,╇ 983
particular participatory action research (PAR) problem-based learning approaches 972
724 Problem based learning (PBL) 972, 973, 982,
patent 964,╇ 970 1071
pedagogical 68,╇ 70,╇ 71,╇ 72,╇ 73,╇ 74,╇ 77,╇ problem-based learning process 897
78,╇ 79,╇ 82 problem-centered orientation 1120
pedagogical approaches 1071 problem-solving 725,╇ 735,╇ 973,╇ 974,╇ 983
pedagogical knowledge 790 problem solving virtual communities (PSVC)
pedagogical training 787,╇ 788,╇ 789 560

10
Index
professional development 783,╇ 794
programmatic assessment 674,╇ 677,╇ 679,╇ 686
programmed instruction 69,╇ 70,╇ 78,╇ 81
progressive discourse 998
prototype 425,╇ 434
provenance 970
psychological distance 1104,╇ 1112
psychology 1056
psychosocial obstacles 1102
Q self-directedness 973,╇ 1121
qualitative research 101,╇ 338,╇ 339,╇ 353,╇
354,╇ 356,╇ 357,╇ 358,╇ 359
R 95,╇ 97,╇ 99,╇ 101,╇ 578,╇ 579,╇ 580,╇ 581,╇
race 999,╇ 1002,╇ 1009,╇ 1011,╇ 1012
racism 1012
R&D (Research and Development) 970
readiness to participate in a discussion 998
real-time text-based communication 910
real time two-way communication 778
recognition of prior learning (RPL) 1038
reflection 645,╇ 648,╇ 655
reflexive-oriented society 1091
reframing 734,╇ 739
regional occupational programs (ROP) 1051
re-orientation 1031,╇ 1049
research and development (R&D) 883,╇ 889
research and development (R&D) potential 883
research-based papers 1059
research literature 877
resource centres
362,╇ 363,╇ 369,╇ 371,╇ 374,╇ 376
resourced-based learning 1071
robust virtual environment (RVE) 839, 849
role-playing games (RPG) 688, 706
RSS (real simple syndication) 1020
S situated cognition flexibility 185,╇ 203
safe harbors 968
safe space 739
science and technology studies (S&TS) 813
screen capture 434
second language acquisition 117
self-agency 1037
self-analysis 73,╇ 81
self assessment 574,╇ 577, 809
self-concept 1102
self-determination 947,╇ 955
self-directed environment 758
self-directed learner 246,╇ 256
self-directed learning (SDL) 226,╇ 227,╇ 229,╇
230,╇ 231,╇ 235,╇ 236,╇ 237,╇ 240, 322,
323, 326, 331, 334, 336, 842, 847, 855,
1037
self-directed orientation 1017
self-direction 52,╇ 53
self-efficacy 83,╇ 84,╇ 87,╇ 88,╇ 89,╇ 90,╇ 91,╇ 94,╇
582,╇ 583,╇ 584,╇ 585,╇ 586,╇ 587,╇ 588,╇
589,╇ 590,╇ 591,╇ 592,╇ 593,╇ 594,╇ 753,╇
754,╇ 755,╇ 756,╇ 757,╇ 758,╇ 759,╇ 760,╇
761,╇ 762,╇ 763,╇ 764,╇ 765,╇ 766,╇ 767,╇
947,╇ 948,╇ 956, 1012
self empowerment 153
self-estrangement 818
self-explanatory 1050
self-organization 725
self-regulation 586,╇ 590,╇ 594
self-service support 1016
semi-structured interviews 101
service-learning project 1025
sharable content object reference model
(SCORM) 282,╇ 287,╇ 291,╇ 292
shared knowledge 17,╇ 20
shared knowledge construction 17,╇ 20
shared understanding 712,╇ 718,╇ 722,╇ 994,╇ 998
simulation 838,╇ 839,╇ 845,╇ 846,╇ 848,╇ 849,╇
853,╇ 856
simulation games
687,╇ 688,╇ 693,╇ 694,╇ 695,╇ 705
single-loop learning 725
situated learning 240
skill-based labs 948
Skype 914,╇ 1020,╇ 1022,╇ 1023,╇ 1030
slander 970
small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs)
1086
social activities 930
11
 Index

social adjustment 1013 socio-constructivist learning 1070

social bookmarking 1020 socio-constructivist model 1071
social capital 212,╇ 216,╇ 225 sociocultural 102,╇ 105,╇ 116,╇ 117
social cognitive theory (SCT) 579, 582, 583, sociocultural issues 867
588, 591, 592, 594, 753, 754, 755, 756, socioeconomic 861,╇ 863
763, 764, 766 socioeconomic barriers 857,╇ 862,╇ 865,╇ 869
social construction 1000,╇ 1002,╇ 1010,╇ 1012 socio-economic conditions 1088
social constructivism 524,╇ 535,╇ 538 socio-economic inequalities 1086
social context 1070,╇ 1084 socioeconomic status 1002,╇ 1005
social integration 1013,╇ 1015,╇ 1016,╇ 1019 sociology 1056
social interaction 1014,╇ 1020,╇ 1022,╇ 1122 socio-technical 259,╇ 261,╇ 262,╇ 263,╇ 264,╇ 26
social isolation 818 7,╇ 274
socialization 385,╇ 386,╇ 387,╇ 395,╇ 812,╇ 823,╇ socio-technical systems 881,╇ 883
1017,╇ 1018,╇ 1019,╇ 1020,╇ 1021 standardised forms 931
social justice 958,╇ 959,╇ 962 static information delivery system 910
social media 605,╇ 606,╇ 608 storyboard 434
social network 227,╇ 234,╇ 235,╇ 236,╇ 238,╇ 240 stretch zone 146,╇ 152
social networking 103,╇ 104,╇ 106,╇ 107,╇ 108,╇ structure of society 1002
113,╇ 117,╇ 1020,╇ 1024,╇ 1030 student achievement 981
social networking sites 6, 7, 9, 12, 16, 614, 625, student-centered strategies 784,╇ 789
1015, 1021 student-conducted research 1059
social positions 932 student learning journals 1105
social practice 927,╇ 930,╇ 932,╇ 935,╇ 936,╇ student ratings 837
940,╇ 941 student-student interaction 780
social presence 656,╇ 657,╇ 658,╇ 659,╇ 660,╇ stylebook 422,╇ 423,╇ 434
661,╇ 663,╇ 664,╇ 665,╇ 666,╇ 667,╇ 668,╇ subject matter experts (SMEs) 959
669,╇ 670,╇ 671,╇ 672,╇ 673,╇ 708,╇ 709,╇ sub-system 1087,╇ 1090
712,╇ 713,╇ 714,╇ 715,╇ 716,╇ 721,╇ 722,╇ summative assessment 679,╇ 686
1104,╇ 1105,╇ 1108 summative evaluation 837
social reproduction 930,╇ 932 supra-national continental level 1088
social scholarship 311,╇ 321 synchronous 507,╇ 509,╇ 517,╇ 520
social science context 1002 synchronous 773,╇ 778,╇ 1084
social sciences 1086 synchronous communication 910, 914
social situation 1087 synchronous learning 51,╇ 773, 794
social skills 849 synchronous learning tools 292
social software 204,╇ 205,╇ 206,╇ 208,╇ 209,╇ synch- synchronization 608
211,╇ 212,╇ 213,╇ 214,╇ 215,╇ 216,╇ 221,╇ synthetic worlds 876,╇ 877
224,╇ 225 systemic hybridizing 1093,╇ 1095,╇ 1096
social styles 451,╇ 452,╇ 454,╇ 456,╇ 457,╇ 459,╇
460,╇ 461,╇ 462,╇ 467,╇ 468 T
social tagging 1020 talking heads 642
social theory of learning 879 task-based learning 1071
social work students 897,╇ 909 taxonomies 878
socio-constructive learning 1074,╇ 1076,╇ 1079 taxonomy 81,╇ 82
socio-constructive pedagogy 1078 teacher-centered 788,╇ 789
socio-constructivist learning 1071 teacher-centered strategies 788

12
Index

teacherless writing class 1128 U

teaching adult learners 1113
teaching and learning cycle (TLC) ubiquity 17
896,╇ 898,╇ 899,╇ 910 ultralab 629,╇ 631,╇ 642
teaching portfolio 833,╇ 837 ultraversity 626,╇ 627,╇ 629,╇ 630,╇ 631,╇ 632,╇
teaching presence 633,╇ 634,╇ 635,╇ 636,╇ 637,╇ 638,╇ 639,╇
708,╇ 709,╇ 712,╇ 715,╇ 719,╇ 722 640,╇ 642
technological developments United Nations Education, Scientific and
1067,╇ 1078,╇ 1079,╇ 1080 Cultural Organization (UNESCO)
technological helplessness 84,╇ 85,╇ 86,╇ 87,╇ 1032,╇ 1046
88,╇ 93,╇ 94,╇ 95,╇ 98,╇ 100 universal design 970
technological self-efficacy user-centered 1020
83,╇ 84,╇ 87,╇ 88,╇ 90,╇ 94,╇ 101 user-controlled 1020
technology-based health promotion 943 user-generated 1020
technology-based pedagogical tools 897 V
technology-enhanced learning 17,╇ 24
technology literacy 36,╇ 186,╇ 196,╇ 197,╇ 199,╇ vicarious helplessness 86,╇ 101
203,╇ 485,╇ 493,╇ 494,╇ 495,╇ 497,╇ 505 videocassettes 797
technophobia 491,╇ 505 video-conference 51, 797, 1077
telepresence 895 video recording session 963
template 434 virtools 701
Tennessee Online Instructional Scale© (TOIS) virtual 838,╇ 839,╇ 840,╇ 841,╇ 842,╇ 844,╇ 845,╇
753, 754, 759, 761 846,╇ 847,╇ 848,╇ 849,╇ 850,╇ 851,╇ 852,╇
text-based computer conferencing environ- 853,╇ 854,╇ 855,╇ 856
ments 708 virtual chat 896,╇ 902,╇ 903,╇ 904
text equivalent 970 virtual collaboration 877,╇ 879,╇ 882,╇ 883,╇
text reader 970 884,╇ 885,╇ 886,╇ 887,╇ 888,╇ 890,╇ 893,╇
threaded discussion 1030 895
timeshifting 608 virtual community 437,╇ 441,╇ 450, 877, 878,
t-learning 1077 879, 883, 886, 892, 895
TOIS instrument 761 virtual education 225
traditional-aged student 1030 virtual environment 552, 556, 838, 839, 840,
traditional classroom 540,╇ 542,╇ 543,╇ 545,╇ 556 841, 842, 844, 845, 846, 848, 849, 850,
traditional lecture-driven format 788 851, 852, 853, 855, 856
traditional pedagogy 1087 virtual high schools 285,╇ 292
transformational theory 139,╇ 153 virtualization 895
transformative learning 5,╇ 14,╇ 15,╇ 16,╇ 294,╇ virtual learning 154,╇ 155,╇ 158,╇ 159,╇ 160,╇
296,╇ 298,╇ 299,╇ 300,╇ 306,╇ 307,╇ 615,╇ 161,╇ 162,╇ 163,╇ 164,╇ 165,╇ 166,╇ 167,╇
625 168
transitional learning 1091,╇ 1097 virtual learning environment (VLE) 155, 158,
transition theory 1018, 1057 159, 160, 161, 163, 164, 165, 166, 168,
trans-national character 1088 450, 800, 809, 897,╇ 903
Twitter 103,╇ 108,╇ 112,╇ 113,╇ 115,╇ 116,╇ 117,╇ virtual networks 221,╇ 225
249,╇ 256,╇ 1020,╇ 1024,╇ 1025,╇ 1030 virtual organizations 845
virtual orientation 1015,╇ 1024
virtual reality 155,╇ 158,╇ 159,╇ 162,╇ 168

13
 Index

virtual work 879 web conferencing 876,╇ 877,╇ 885

virtual worlds 706 WebCT 322,╇ 329,╇ 333,╇ 336,╇ 757,╇ 759,╇
visual effects 772 767,╇ 975
visual literacy 624 web design 1020
vocational skill development 1075 web-enhanced course 757
web-enhanced instruction 754,╇ 757
W web-enhanced instructional courses 759
Web 2.0 2,╇ 7,╇ 8,╇ 9,╇ 13,╇ 14,╇ 15,╇ 16,╇ 17,╇ 24,╇ Webinar 752
25,╇ 26,╇ 32,╇ 34,╇ 36,╇ 42,╇ 51,╇ 52,╇ 53,╇ web laboratories 876,╇ 877
54,╇ 55,╇ 56,╇ 57,╇ 58,╇ 59,╇ 62,╇ 63,╇ 64,╇ weblogs 1020,╇ 1030
67,╇ 102,╇ 103,╇ 104,╇ 105,╇ 106,╇ 107,╇ wiki 57,╇ 58,╇ 59,╇ 60,╇ 61,╇ 64,╇ 67,╇ 256, 582,
108,╇ 114,╇ 115,╇ 116,╇ 117,╇ 189,╇ 197,╇ 594
202,╇ 203,╇ 226,╇ 227,╇ 233,╇ 235,╇ 236,╇ wikis 102,╇ 103,╇ 106,╇ 107,╇ 110,╇ 111,╇ 115,╇
239,╇ 240,╇ 308,╇ 309,╇ 310,╇ 311,╇ 312,╇ 117,╇ 310,╇ 311,╇ 312,╇ 313,╇ 314,╇ 315,╇
313,╇ 314,╇ 315,╇ 319,╇ 320,╇ 321,╇ 392,╇ 316,╇ 318,╇ 319,╇ 321,╇ 1020,╇ 1030
395,╇ 595,╇ 596,╇ 597,╇ 598,╇ 599,╇ 601,╇ wireless access 929
608,╇ 1013,╇ 1014,╇ 1018,╇ 1019,╇ 1020,╇ wireless communication technology 928
1023,╇ 1024,╇ 1025,╇ 1026,╇ 1027,╇ 1030 wireless technology 1073,╇ 1077
Web 2.0 technologies 740,╇ 742,╇ 743,╇ 744,╇ work environment 958
745,╇ 747,╇ 749,╇ 750,╇ 1013,╇ 1014,╇ work extension 929
1018,╇ 1019,╇ 1020,╇ 1025,╇ 1026,╇ 1030 world-culture theories 1089
Web 2.0 tools 17 world’s net-sourced literature 1072
web-based course design software 896 world-society 1089
web-based course management 757 world-systemic perspectives 1089
web-based education 780,╇ 794, 942, 952, 953, world-wide society 1089
954 World Wide Web technology 1020
web-based instruction 582,╇ 589,╇ 590,╇ 594, writing as inquiry 1128
754, 757 writing better business letters 1116
web-based learning 943,╇ 944,╇ 945 writing process 1128
web-based programs 946
X
web-based resources 779
web-based technologies 154 XML Script 608

14
FILE NOT FOUND (CFIIV)