We were very pleased to host a special seminar on the future of open and distance learning (ODL) from Professor Michael G. Moore, Ph.D., Distinguished Professor of Education at Penn State University and Editor of The American Journal of Distance Education (http://www.ed.psu.edu/educ/adult-education/faculty/michael-g-moore). As the Web replaces earlier forms of communication and itself mutates, and as teaching and learning also change with the evolution from the information age to the interactive, how might we expect to see change in the institutions set up to deliver distance education in the future? The presentation elaborates on a concept of a virtual network organization and gives some early examples.

1. May 24th 2012
Changing technology, pedagogies and organizations in ODL
Michael Grahame Moore
Distinguished Professor of Education
The Pennsylvania State University
U.S.A.
Editor:
The American Journal of Distance Education
mgmoore@psu.edu

2. ‘A society which is mobile, which is full of channels for the
distribution of a change occurring anywhere,
must see to it that its members are educated to
personal initiative and adaptability.
Otherwise, they will be overwhelmed by the changes in which
they are caught and whose significance or connections
they do not perceive.’
John Dewey (1916)*
•Acknowledgement to: M. Sharples, J.Taylor, G. Vavoula. (2005) A Theory of Learning for the
Mobile Age. Sage Publications

3. The Changing learning environment : expansion of DL
(USA)
% Higher Ed Online % K-12 Online
90 80
80 70
70 60
60 50
50 40
40 30
30 20
20 10
10 0
0 2006 2010
2005 2010 From 23% to 70% in 4 years
From 56% to 80% in 5 years
Business continuing education
% Community Colleges 2010 expenditure 2010
10%
15% Blended Neither $46 Billion
External
75% Online
$88 Billion
Internal

4. Technologies in higher education:
• 93 % - internet
• 50 % - podcasts
• 43 % - videoconferencing
• 36 % - blogs
• 28 % - listservs
• 2 % - satellite communications
• 3 % - videogames or simulations
SOURCE:
http://www.primaryresearch.com/view_product.php?report_id=113

5. Changing technology: social networking
Open accessibility
e.g. Wikepidea
Information management e.g. del.icio.us

6. Changing technology:
m-Learning and cloud-based services
2010: 7.5 billion devices
2015: 15.0 billion devices
(Cisco)

7. Changing Pedagogy
From information age to interactive age
knowledge source: from school to learners
learning environments: from predictive to adaptive
Teaching approach:
 From fail-safe to safe-fail
 from positive constraints to negative constraints
 from occasional evaluation to continuous monitoring
 from robustness to resilience
 from compliance and predictability to retrospective coherence
(Snowden 2010)

8. Changing teachers:
From performer to conductor!
managing and sifting information, giving structure
facilitating students’ searching – individually and collaboratively
linking and weaving ideas and information created by
students, summarizing, pulling together the threads, relating the
particular experience to general theory
from class as unit of instruction to individual!
develop student’s autonomy -- ability to decide what to learn, to
choose among methods, and from array of resources available online

9. Caution
What adult students tell us:
Social interaction is ok, but
course content is more important
Interaction with other learners is ok, but
interaction with an instructor is more important
Interaction is ok, but having structure is also important
Conclusion:
both types of learning, predictive and adaptive are of value.
Good teaching is good selection and good blending

10. So what’s the problem?
Educational institutions are still organized for traditional
pedagogies
The challenge is to change education from
a craft ……… to technology based system
This requires re-organizing human and capital resources

11. CHANGING POLICIES
From: past policy To: future policy
assumes learning must be on assumes learning takes place in a
an institution’s campus variety of environments
Resources are to support Resources are to distribute teaching
teachers in their classrooms to where the learners are
Resources are allocated on the Resources are allocated according to
basis of projected enrolments performance expectations
as a percentage change on the that specify outcomes pertinent to
previous year’s allocations the priorities of stakeholders
(based on RSA Telematics initiative)

12. Past Policy Future Policy
Faculty and staff
Faculty and staff establishments will :
establishments are:
provide teams that cut across vertical
based on permanent
divisions for specific projects and
positions, vertical divisions
allow for redeployment to reflect
and hierarchical
changing needs
relationships
Funds will be allocated:
Funds should be allocated:
for the heavy front-end investment in
for line items in a budget
designing technology based learning
fixed for specified
periods, usually 12 months
for amortisation of costs over the
lifetimes of programs -- usually more
than 12 months

13. Attempts at changing organizational structures
 Strategic alliances
 Virtual systems

14. Strategic Alliances in USA states EXAMPLES

15. Strategic Alliances in USA states EXAMPLES
Connecticut Distance Learning Consortium American Distance Education Consortium
Hispanic Educational Technology Services
One MBA

16. Strategic Alliances: International
16

17. The AVU collaborating partners include:
•African Ministries of Education
•African Union
•Association of African Universities
•UNESCO IIEP
•UNESCO BREDA
•UNESCO Teacher Training Program in Sub-
Saharan Africa
•Association of Universities and Colleges of
Canada
•Open University of UK- TESSA
•Universit� Laval Canada
•University of Ottawa Canada
•Memorial University of Newfoundland Canada
•Curtin University Australia
•Indiana University in Pennsylvania, USA
•Maestro, Washington DC, USA
•International Development and Research
Centre, Canada
•Partnership for Higher Education in Africa
•MIT Open Courseware
•Merlot African Network
Strategic Alliances: African Virtual University •South African Institute for Distance Learning
•Commonwealth of Learning
•Global Text Project

18. COMMONWEALTH OF LEARNING: strategic alliances
• STAMP 2000: 140 course writers, 8 Southern African countries training school teachers
• Teacher Education in Sub-Saharan Africa (TESSA) Consortium
• Commonwealth Computer Navigator’s Certificate : India, New Zealand, South
Africa, West Indies, USA and Canada.
• Virtual University for Small States of the Commonwealth. 32 countries.
― It is not enough for success to simply link traditional institutions. A
more revolutionary form of organizational structure is called for.”
Kanwar, Kodhandaraman, and Umar The American Journal of Distance Education (2010)

19. A new (disaggregation) model
 A system that designs and delivers learning programs by
commissioning the component processes and services from all
available agencies.
 The general principle is that a state or nation - can draw on the
best resources wherever they are located to build a network of
— content experts, instructional designers, the full range of
communications technologies, group facilitators and a learner
support system
— and configure whatever mixture is needed for a particular
program or project on a flexible, open, "mix and match" basis.

20. Vertical disaggregation (virtual system) model
INTERNAL EXTERNAL
scans DIRECTORATE advisory
environment committee
course/program
planning
design unit
project evaluation
unit
proposals content
specialists
technology
unit
Software
training learner development
unit support
unit Learner
support
Regional
STUDY GROUPS
Co-ord unit
Instructors
trainees

22. PROFORMACAO
An example of virtual system:
Brazil’s teacher education program
1. The Brazil problem
2. The virtual system solution
16% of 2.4 million schoolteachers without legally-required years of schooling
in the North, Northeast and Midwest regions (four grades of elementary
education) –
Number of enrollments .......... 11,770,292
Teaching Positions ........... 456,095
Unqualified Teachers ....... 72,522
source : MEC/INEP/SEEC

23. Brazil’s teacher training network
Management unit Funder Advisory ctee
Course design unit
UNIVERSITY 1 Production & distribution unit
UNIVERSITY 2 Platform
UNIVERSITY 3 Video producers 1, 2 etc
Etc software 1, 2 etc
publisher 1, 2 etc
S tutors
Study center State coordinators
T
U tutors Study center State monitoring
and training teams
D State UNIVERSITY 1
E tutors Study center State UNIVERSITY 2
State UNIVERSITY 3
N Etc
T tutors Study center
S

24. Conditions for success
TECHNOLOGY:
APPROPRIATE TO TRAINEES’ CONDITIONS; HIGH TECH AT CENTRAL
AND REGIONAL LEVELS, LOW TECH AT VILLAGE LEVEL
DESIGN:
WORLD CLASS CONTENT, SOFTWARE, INSTRUCTIONAL DESIGN
SPECIALISTS
DELIVERY SYSTEM:
WELL INTEGRATED LEARNER SUPPORT, TRAINING AND TUTORIAL
SYSTEM
FINANCIAL :
MAJOR INVESTMENT (FUNDING FROM WORLD BANK)
POLITICAL :

25. network system in Norway
Studiesenteret.no :
43 study centres in 74 municipalities and 7 university
campuses

26. Norwegian Lifelong Learning Network
Funder
advisory group
UNIT coordinator
course design &
C
production specialists E
University 1 N
University 2 T
University 3 Web producers Online R
etc Video – audio producers delivery A
publishers platform L
S
T teachers Study centre regional
U monitoring
and training
D teachers Study centre
E Local college 1 L
teachers O
N Study centre Local college 2
C
T Local college 3 A
teachers Study centre etc
S L

27. Concluding thoughts, discussion.
Having new technology --
Knowing how to use it pedagogically -- Is insufficient
without changing organizational structures
Technology: Social networking technologies have added minimally to
quality and access to distance education.
Pedagogy: Attention to social networking technologies has been
counter-productive by distracting from training in, and study
of, fundamentals of distance teaching, especially systematic course
design, including high production-value video presentations.
Attention to social networking technologies has been counter-
productive by reinforcing traditional classroom methodology and
especially by distracting attention from individualized independent
study. (See Dewey, above!)

28. Organizational structures: Attention to social networking
technologies has been counter-productive by distracting from
evolving new organizational structures.
In all cases where advanced virtual systems models have been
attempted, they have been
restricted or stifled by opposition from established institutions
Examples: Brazil, South Africa, USA (OU Mid
America, Wisconsin, Florida), Norway (?)
To effect super -institutional organization --- with benefits of
specialization, economies and quality, --- national policies, most
likely externally imposed are necessary
Governments and policy makers are intimidated or distracted by
institutional interests

29. Thank you for your attention
Comments?
Questions?
mgmoore@psu.edu