LEVITT@UKCC.BITNET (Steve Levitt) (03/08/88)
Earlier, William Joel wrote about students trying to evaluate Connect Ed using traditional models of college life. I think it is very important to remember that programs such as Connect Ed which are using the computer communications of conferencing, mail, and bulletin boards (as well as many other distance education programs using various audio, audiographic, and video configurations) often serve in applications where access to traditional instructional methods are non-existent. Typical applications include: 1) delivery of higher education and continuing adult education to professionals and other adults who, due to financial, occupational, and/or family restrictions cannot take up residency at a college or university; 2) cooperative business and university programs (such as National Technological University --NTU) which provide opportunities for technical updates and earning of graduate degrees without the necessity of leaving the workplace; 3) "electronic collapsing" of school districts and delivery of specialized courses to rural schools without competent instructors in a particular field, or with enrollments too low to justify offering a particular course. Few would argue that *some* traditional, in-class, face-to-face instruction is preferable. However, if these programs are viewed as mechanisms to bring educational opportunities to those who *otherwise would not have access*, then the *evaluation* of programs must take on a different meaning. It is not, therefore, a matter of comparing the process or product (learning outcome) to more traditional methods. Rather, it is a matter of comparing it to the alternative: which is often no access at all. The key, then, is to formulate processes and evaluation criteria which promote maximum effectiveness of the electronic methods that *are* available for learners to exploit. Let us also not forget that these computer communications can be and are being used to *supplement* classroom discussions and facilitate student-student and student-faculty access at traditional colleges and universities. After using E-mail and bulletin boards in particular, and realizing the flexibility it gives me in carrying on extended discussions on topics outside class time, my own opinion is that we are approaching an environment where integration of telecommunications technologies will become increasingly routine. How, then, will we define "traditional" college life? A good starting point for review of numerous projects in distance education and evaluation issues are the proceedings of meetings sponsored by the Center for Interactive Programs, University of Wisconsin-Extension. Citations: *Teleconferencing and electronic communications IV: Applications, technologies, and human factors.* Madison, WI: Center for Interactive Programs, 1985. *Teleconferencing and electronic communications V: Applications, technologies, and human factors.* Madison, WI: Center for Interactive Programs, 1986. Steve R. Levitt University of Kentucky