Current practice in web-based delivery of IT courses
Celia T Romm
Central Queensland University, Rockhampton, Qld 4702, Australia
c.romm@cqu.edu.au
David Jones
Central Queensland University, Rockhampton, Qld 4702, Australia
d.jones@cqu.edu.au
Abstract
Distance education students have often been considered to be at a significant disadvantage as compared with their on-campus counterparts - for many reasons. These include the lack of access to the on-campus lectures and tutorial sessions; the difficulty of access to other resources, such as staff members’ time, library stocks, etc; the delays caused by the physical transmission of assignments and other course resources; and the expense of connecting to the Web for long periods. For these and other reasons, the development of appropriate web-based models of course delivery is of the utmost importance.
In [7], four models of web-based delivery were described in detail. Each of the four models is in current use for the delivery of one or more courses within the fields of Information Technology, Information Systems, or Electronic Commerce at Central Queensland University (CQU), an Australian institution at the forefront of "flexible delivery" – that is, the delivery of quality education by means other than simply face-to-face lectures and tutorials.
The current paper briefly summarises the four models described earlier - (1) the naïve model, (2) the standard model, (3) the evolutionary model, and (4) the radical model – and expands on the advantages and disadvantages of each approach. It then goes on to recommend the circumstances under which each should be considered as the preferred model
The current authors hope that practitioners at other institutions seeking to move their courses online for the first time, and those seeking to improve their web-based teaching techniques, will be able to adapt various aspects of the models described here so as to provide the best possible learning environments for their students.
1. Introduction
This paper presents four models of online teaching currently in use within the Faculty of Informatics and Communication at Central Queensland University (CQU), a multi-campus, regional university, with seven campuses in Australia and a further three overseas, and a large number of external students.
The four models of on-line teaching presented here may be described as the naïve model, the standard model, the evolutionary model, and the radical model. All have been described in more detail in [7] .
1.1 The naïve model
The naïve model may be characterised as "putting the lecture notes on the Web". No extra facilities are provided, and the notes used in live face-to-face lectures are transformed with minimal alteration into a web-based format accessible by a standard browser (such as Internet Explorer or Netscape Communicator).
The point has often been made (eg [1]) that using the internet to support learning and teaching requires a culture change for both the teaching staff and the students. It is not surprising, therefore, that this minimalist model is widely-used by those wary of embarking on such a change.
1.2 The standard model
The standard model attempts to actively utilise the advantages provided by the technology to allow a significant degree of communication and interaction between students and staff. Features of the standard model include the following:-
1.3 The evolutionary model
The evolutionary model takes the standard model as a basis and supplements it with many other features to enhance both the teaching and learning environment. Aspects that distinguish the evolutionary model include:
1.4. The radical model
Whereas all three previous models attempt, to differing extents, to adapt the traditional face-to-face lecture delivery method to a more suitable web-based format, the radical model dispenses with lectures entirely. Instead, students are formed into groups, and learn by interacting amongst themselves and using the vast amount of existing Web-based resources, with the instructor providing guidance as and when required.
Distinguishing features of the radical model include:
The students’ final marks are based on a combination of their group work throughout the semester, and their performance in a closed-book end-of-semester examination.
2. Advantages and disadvantages of the four models
This section attempts to summarise the primary advantages and disadvantages inherent in each of the four models described in section 1.
2.1 The naïve model
The naïve model has been widely disparaged in the literature. Nevertheless, the naïve model
Disadvantages of the naïve model may not be numerous, but they are substantial. They would include
2.2 The standard model
The standard model provides many advantages as compared with the naïve model. Amongst these are
These advantages come at a cost. In particular may be noted the following:
2.3 The evolutionary model
The evolutionary model has many advantages over and above those implicit in the standard model. Those worthy of mention include:
Disadvantages of the evolutionary model would include
2.4 The radical model
Amongst many real advantages of the radical model may be listed
Amongst the most-commonly expressed disadvantages are that
3. Choice of preferred model
It must be reiterated that the four models have been described as though they were discrete alternative options. In reality, of course, these represent points in a continuous multi-dimensional spectrum; aspects of one model may be quite successfully combined with aspects of another. Therefore, any suggestion to choose a particular model under particular circumstances is to a certain extent necessarily artificial.
Nevertheless, it is apparent that the choice of model will depend on the context within which it is to be applied. The following is therefore intended as a guide.
3.1 The naïve model
The naïve model should generally be preferred only in contexts where
In most cases it is to be expected that none of these three conditions will apply, and a more sophisticated model can be selected.
3.2 The standard model
The standard model is preferred in circumstances where
3.3 The evolutionary model
The evolutionary model has many more features designed to enhance web-based learning, and is recommended whenever circumstances allow – in particular where
3.4 The radical model
The radical model should be preferred in cases where
4. Summary
Four different models of online teaching have been presented, all in current use at Central Queensland University; their advanatges and disadvantages have been listed, and guidance provided as to the most suitable model given differing contexts.
In all cases, it is of vital importance that the students be made fully aware from the commencement of the course as to the model to be employed, and its inherent limitations.
As the Web gradually expands to cover the globe, everyone in every country becomes a potential student of every university. The great majority of such potential students will expect the new medium to be used to its fullest extent, rather than acting purely as an electronic repository of old techniques designed for other circumstances. Institutions and courses will be selected according to how well they have adapted to the new medium.
In summary, it is essential that new models continue to be developed and refined which make the best use of this still comparatively-new technology. Hopefully the four models described here will assist online developers throughout the world to push forward the boundaries of current practice.
5. References
[1] Jefferies P and Hussain F (1998), Using the Internet as a Teaching Resource, Education and Training 40(8): pp359-365.
[2] Jones D (1996a), Solving Some Problems of University Education: A Case Study, in Debreceny R & Ellis A (eds), Proceedings of AusWeb’96, pp243-252, Lismore, NSW.
[3] Jones D (1996b), Computing by Distance Education: Problems and Solutions, Proceedings of the First Integrating Technology into Computer Science Education Conference, pp 139-146, Association for Computing Machinery, Barcelona, Spain.
[4] Jones D (1999a), Solving Some Problems of University Education, Part II: A Case Study, in Proceedings of AusWeb’99, Balina, NSW.
[5] Jones D (1999b), Webfuse: An Integrated, Eclectic Web Authoring Tool, in Collis B & Oliver R (eds), Proceedings of EdMedia'99, pp1799-1800, Seattle, Washington.
[6]
Jones D and Jamieson B (1997), Three Generations of Online Assignment Management, in R. Kevill, R. Oliver & R. Phillips (Eds.), What Works and Why, Proceedings of ASCILITE'97, pp 317-323.[7] Roberts T, Jones D, and Romm C T (2000), Four Models of Online Education, Proceedings of TEND 2000, Abu Dhabi, UAE.
[
8] Romm C T and Taylor W (2000), Thinking Creatively About On-line Education,IRMA, Anchorage, Alaska (forthcoming).[9] Svensson L, Andersson R, Gadd M, and Johnson A, (1999), Course-Barometer: Compensating for the Loss of Informal Feedback in Distance Education, in Collis B & Oliver R (eds), Proceedings of EdMedia ’99, pp1612-1613, Seattle, Washington..