• A Vision
• The Design of EDIT 611
• Insights: More Students Found a Voice
• Insights: More Powerful Learning
• Insights: Complex Optimization
• Analysis of the Discussion Forum
• Evolution of Distributed Learning
• References
• Printable Text of Article

© Copyright 1998-99 by Chris Dede (cdede@gmu.edu) and Audrey L. Kremer (kremer@mitretek.org) .  The right to make additional exact copies, including this notice, for personal and classroom use, is hereby granted. All other forms of distribution and copying require permission of the author.

Section Four:
Insights: More Powerful Learning

An extensive research literature has repeatedly documented "no significant differences" between various instructional media (e.g., videoconferencing vs. face-to-face instruction); for details, see http://teleeducation.nb.ca/nosignificantdifference/. However, all of these studies are limited in that the average performance of a group is compared for one single-mode-of-delivery versus another. This research does not recognize that, for each medium utilized, some students are empowered, others disenfranchised, and the net impact averages out.

In contrast, well-designed courses using several instructional media with differing characteristics (e.g., synchronous vs. asynchronous, high-bandwidth vs. low bandwidth, contextualized vs. decontextualized) enable all students to utilize their most effective ways of learning. For example, a text-based virtual world provides a low-bandwidth, contextualized setting, while videoconferencing enables high-bandwidth, decontextualized interaction. Mixed-media courses potentially enable better learning outcomes for every student than comparable courses taught via any single medium—including solely face-to-face instruction. While six interactive media is likely overkill for most types of learning experiences, in every course we believe that at least one synchronous virtual and one asynchronous medium should be used, plus (if possible) face-to-face interaction.

In addition to each learner finding a ""voice," students in Chris’s course found that their learning was richer and more profound than in comparable conventional classes because:

• They could readily communicate with each other to share resources for learning, without all interactions facilitated by the instructor in a limited-time classroom setting or occurring in difficult-to-arrange face-to-face small group meetings
• Extensive, deep discussions were enabled by asynchronous interaction

Some students spent many hours communicating asynchronously, having a much richer dialogue than could have been possible via the best face-to-face facilitation. (Because Chris’s students were experienced professionals with varied backgrounds, they had a lot to share with each other. The impact of student-to-student learning would have been less had the course population been novices in the course topic and similar in background.)

Historically, learning across distance has often been limited by low affective/social stimulation and purely presentational pedagogy, seen as intrinsically inferior to face-to-face teaching.. Now, the situation is reversed; face-to-face instruction alone cannot provide the range of resources and the empowerment of expression enabled by complementary interactive media. Within a decade, we doubt the terms "distance education" or "face-to-face instruction" will be used; all education will be distributed learning with varying balances of different media depending on the pedagogical situation.

Next Section: Insights: Optimizing Motivation

Previous Section: Insights: More Students Found a Voice