Academic Libraries & Others

Internet Learning Volume 2 Issue 2 Autumn 2013

Table of Contents

Academic(Libraries(&(Others:(Hunting(for(the(Overlooked(in(Online( Learning(( 1( Fred Stielow ! !

Current(Issues(with(Copyright(and(Higher(Education:(Lawsuits,(Legislation,( and(Looking(Forward( 4( Kay Cunningham( ! !

Virtually(Yours:(Online(Embedded(Librarianship(in(Higher(Education( 21( Denise Landry-Hyde, Laureen P. Cantwell! ! !

Continuous(Improvement(and(Embedded(Librarianship(in(Online(Learning( Environments:(A(Case(Study( 38( Jeneen LaSee-Willemssen, Lisa Reed

“MOOL”(in(a(MOOC:(Opportunities(for(Librarianship(in(the(Expanding( Galaxy(of(Massive(Open(Online(Course(Design(and(Execution( 47( Laureen P. Cantwell

MOOCs(for(LIS(Professional(Development:(Exploring(New(Transformative( Learning(Environments(and(Roles( 83( Michael Stephens

Efficiency,(Economy,(and(Social(Equity(in(Online(Education(at(America’s( Community(Colleges( 100( Marco Castillo

Mindful(Meditation(for(Online(Learning:(Lighting(the(Fire(by(Dimming(the( Lights:(Helping(College(Students(Relax(and(Focus(to(Prepare(for(Online( Learning( 111( Brenda Freshman, Carol A. Molinari

Curriculum(Design(for(Flexible(Delivery:(An(Assessment(of(EYLearning( Approaches( 121( Jayanath Ananda

Rethinking(Distance(in(an(Era(of(Online(Learning( 138( Jennifer Glennie, Tony Mays

Internet Learning––Volume 2––Number 2––Autumn 2013 Academic Libraries & Others: Hunting for the Overlooked in Online Learning Fred Stielow, Ph.D., M.L.S.1

igher education is ensconced in a Web skills to assist with such looming is- communication revolution and re- sues as: defnition. Despite a spate of rele- Hvant scholarship, an inherent fog continues t*OTUSVDUJPOJOOFXSFTFBSDIQBSBEJHNTBT to cloud understanding of online educa- tailored to individual disciplines. tion. On the pedagogical beat, literature de- t&OTVSJOHBQSPQFSJOKFDUJPOPGQFFSSF- constructs primarily as transitions from es- viewed/professional literature. tablished practice—albeit adapted for both t3FEVDJOHUIFDPTUTGPSDPVSTFNBUFSJBMT asynchronous and synchronous settings. and textbook dependency. Methods for lectures and media inclusion t.BJOUBJOJOHDVSSFODZJOUIFSBQJEMZ remain featured along with calls for em- changing Web environment. bellishing with new Internet applications. Measurement surfaces from the ether as About this Issue a yet unstandardized force for addressing the chimera of educational evaluation, as his issue of Internet Learning is di- well as proactive engagement to enhance vided into two sections. As suggested the classroom. MOOCs rapidly rise in dis- above, the frst embraces academ- turbing fashion to command the conversa- Tic libraries. It joins at a pivotal moment in tion, but remain in an unsure position. On the development of online education and the practical side, modes of delivery and prospects for library sustainability. Te con- intellectual property rear to prominence. tributions ofer a sample of current issues. Schools struggle to cope with textbook in- Most come from a call to the pens of dis- fation and look to OER (open educational tance education librarians—practitioners resource) substitutes. long consigned to the fringes of the main As displayed in this issue of Internet campus library, but now with an increasing- Learning, I take personal delight in helping ly pertinent narrative. Te second provides to stretch that impressive list of topics. In a sampler of pieces with diferent global and keeping with someone engaged by a fully institutional perspectives, but also surface online university, diferent and emergent as primary research and opinion pieces in types of educational institutions need to be preparation for hypothesis testing by future increasingly taken into account. From my investigators. position on the U.S. Commission to UNES- Reinventing Libraries for Online CO, globalization and cross-cultural values Education certainly must be considered. As a librarian Te section also was designed to provide and archivist, I feel especially compelled to counterpoint contemporaneous with the surface almost unconscionable oversights. release of my Reinventing Libraries for On- Te most traditional of academic support line Education by ALA Publishing. Tat units ofer tailored subject knowledge and book lends full scope to the preceding de-

1 APUS VP/Dean of Libraries, Electronic Course Materials & ePress, U.S. Commission to UNESCO

1 Internet Learning

bate. Its CRIS (Classroom/Research In- line public access catalog) frst introduced formation Services) approach argues for many college students to computers. Cita- a reversion to Sorbonne’s original model. tion analysis began to leave its mark as a Tis applied theory calls for the universi- metric. Libraries blazed related openings ty library to place a premium on actively on the Internet. Tey followed in the 1990s engaging and populating the classroom. with pioneering presences that remain as Librarians assert their unquestioned Web and subject-specialist skills to work in con- major treasure troves of trusted material on cert with the faculty. Tey combine unique the World Wide Web. knowledge of licensed and all-important Te web itself is wreaking funda- peer-reviewed literature out of the library mental change in libraries with direct im- with exceptional abilities to vet related plications for online education. Today’s resources, social networking, and meth- facilities extend to a look and feel unlike odological sources on the Open Web. Te anything in the past. Users are no longer results enhance the quality and curren- tied to a chain of physical engagement— cy of classroom readings, provide trusted dedicated visits, catalog/stack searches, launching pads for student research, and physical retrieval, and opening materials for lower costs for students. reading. Travel and parking have become Prelude to Academic Libraries optional. Hours of operation have vanished and library walls disappear before a virtu- bit of historical reminding may be al interface. By the early 21st century, the in order for the start of this issue. automated catalog has meshed with newly Robert Sorbonne led the way in digitized hordes of content. Search engines Athe mid-13th century. His lasting reforms have replaced the reference desk. Patrons created the faculty-driven institution. Tey anticipate anytime and anywhere access to also extended to the invention of a univer- full text on devices from desktop computers sity library. Tat creation was a socialis- to smart phones. tic operation in support of a higher good. While altered, the web did not ob- Te library was designed to alleviate costs viate the academic library. Tat institution for students, as well as serve the academic continues as intermediary to impact and community at large by sharing knowledge defne scholarly practice. 21st-century ac- with qualifed scholars. Tis model drifed ademics now need to master the intrica- somewhat in the afermath of Guttenberg. cies of library-accessed databases to engage It took renewed importance in the 19th their trade, but also to prepare their suc- century with the German “New Universi- cessors. Yet, such new skills appear largely ty” and American land-grant movement. underappreciated in the literature of online Te modern university library emerged as a education. Oversight is doubly so for pop- campus landmark—albeit with an enhance ulating online courses. OER proponents research mission in support of burgeoning and textbook afcionados have studiously bands of new PhDs and the purchase of avoided the obvious. How can one discuss their monographic and journal outputs. upper-division and graduate level online Although easily overlooked, the courses without active recourse to peer-re- modern research library led the way in viewed content? Why turn to commercial automating information resources and de- producers and electronic textbooks without veloping contemporary forms of scholarly exploring the full range of university ser- research. In the early 1980s, the OPAC (on- vices—and, not incidentally, looking to the 2 Academic Libraries & Others fnancial wellbeing of one’s students? More- Te Other over, who is better informed on the university’s holdings and more expert with the he second section holds a small pot- new medium than professional librarians? pourri of “Other” articles. Tese had Kay Cunningham begins such investiga- been scheduled before the librarian tions with “Current Issues with Copyright Ttopic elbowed its way into the production and Higher Education.” Intellectual prop- schedule, but ironically match the theme of erty issues and overlapping balance with overlooked prospects. For example, Marco handicapped accessibility have taken front Castillo suggests the importance and need- stage with the Web. To me, academic librar- ed research agendas for two-year institu- ies cannot escape engagement and have an tions with his “Efciency, Economy, and expanded role to play for their university Social Equity in Online Education at Amer- community. ica's Community Colleges.” Molinari goes Te parallel redefning of roles in the even further out-of-the-box with “Mindful Web Age is on display in the form of faculty Meditation for Online Learning: Lighting partnerships and information literacy spe- the Fire by Dimming the Lights: Helping cializations. Discussion unfolds within two College Students Relax and Focus to Pre- complimentary articles: Denise Landry- pare for Online Learning.” Hyde and Laureen P. Cantwell: “Virtually Global perspectives steps forward Yours: Online Embedded Librarianship in in the fnal two essays. Australia’s Jaya- Higher Education”; and, Jeneen LaSee-Wil- nath Ananda ofers “Curriculum Design lemssen and Lisa Reed: “Continuous Im- for Flexible Delivery: An Assessment of provement and Embedded Librarianship.” e-Learning Approaches,” which explores Library treatments close with MOOCs. In “tertiary educators” and the challenges of 2013, such facilities appear to have goaded designing e-learning course for business. an awakening of mainstream academic li- Finally, South Africa’s Jennifer Glennie and braries to the opportunities and challenges Tony Mays profer policy considerations of online learning. Hence, Laureen P. Can- and a long-term view for their country in twell responds with “ ‘MOOL’ in a MOOC: “Rethinking Distance in an Era of Online Opportunities for Librarianship in the Ex- Learning.” panding Galaxy of Massive Open Online Course Design and Execution.” Tat is followed by Michael Stephens’ treatment on educational needs with “MOOCs for LIS Professional Development: Exploring New Roles in Transformative Learning Environ- ments.”

3 Internet Learning Current Issues with Copyright and Higher Education: Lawsuits, Legislation, and Looking Forward Kay Cunningham

Electronic reserves, digitization, streaming videos, and frst sale were the topics of recent copyright lawsuits: respectively, Cambridge University Press v. Mark P. Becker (2012), Authors Guild Inc. v. HathiTrust (2012), the Association for Information Media v. the Regents of the University of California (2011), and Kirtsaeng v.Wiley (2013). Outcomes related to libraries are discussed in this essay, along with such amendments to the Copyright Act as the Tech- nology, Education and Copyright Harmonization Act (TEACH Act) and the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) and the possibility of revisions.

Keywords: copyright, digitization, electronic reserves, fair use, frst sale, education, lawsuits, libraries

Current Issues with Copyright and Historically, copyright infringement Higher Education: Lawsuits, Legis- cases were between two authors or lodged lation, and Looking Forward against commercial entities. Te Georgia State, HathiTrust, and UCLA cases were diferent, however, as they were fled against or years, academic librarians have educational, nonproft institutions. Te full counted the numbers of interlibrary case names are Cambridge University Press, loan articles by journal, and added et al., v. Mark P. Becker, et al.; Authors Guild Fand removed reserve articles by the score, in Inc., et al., v. HathiTrust, et al.; and the As- order to keep their libraries on the straight sociation for Information Media, et al., v. and narrow regarding fair use of copyright- the Regents of the University of California, ed material. Librarians have explained that et al. Each was important for issues involv- while faculty may be able to show a flm in ing fair use, academic libraries, and higher class, they cannot show the same flm to the education. campus unless a public performance fee has Te outcomes of the Georgia State been paid. On many campuses, librarians and HathiTrust cases—along with the dis- became the answerers of all things copy- missal of the suit against UCLA—amount- right—no matter how comfortable they felt ed to stunning afrmations of the fair use in the role that came their way by default principle and its importance for libraries and has grown increasingly more complex and educational institutions. Add Supap within an online environment. Now, librar- Kirtsaeng, d/b/a Bluechristine99, v. John ians arrange for login protocols for of-cam- Wiley & Sons, Inc. to round out the major pus use of their electronic resources. Tey copyright cases of recent years that were im- explain how to use direct linking in course portant for libraries. Along with Kirtsaeng’s management systems, and they wonder application of the frst-sale principle to im- what can be posted, digitized, and streamed ported works, these copyright infringement while avoiding copyright infringement. cases helped clarify what academic libraries

4 Current Issues with Copyright and Higher Education and educators can do with copyrighted nology, Education and Copyright Harmo- works in their collections, in electronic re- nization Act (TEACH Act) and the Digital serves and courseware, as digitization proj- Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) and ects, to stream online, for keyword index- the possibility of copyright reform. Due to ing, and to serve the visually impaired. Fair the recent nature of these cases, most of the use resided at the core of the decisions. literature reviewed has been drawn from Copyright is complex and likely legal documents, news, and commentary. to grow more so. Te copyright activities Moreover, as two of the cases may move to of multimedia conglomerates may seem courts of appeal, be aware that situations far removed from the academic arena, but described here may change at any time. their activities afect everyone involved with copyright in any manner. Copyright is Lawsuits pervasive; there is little it does not touch— or cannot be made to touch. Of all the in- Cambridge University Press, et al., tellectual property rights, it is the easiest to acquire. Consider this: virtually everything v. Mark P. Becker, et al. (2012) in the United States is copyrighted—at least everything in a fxed form created since n April 2008, Cambridge University 1978, excepting most government publi- Press, Oxford University Press, and Sage cations. Everyone is an author. Everyone Publications, with the support of the IAssociation of American Publishers (AAP) has copyright in something, such as a six- year-old kid’s drawing, a high-school term and the Copyright Clearance Centers paper, and photographs from that trip to (CCC), brought suit against administrators Pensacola. Furthermore, copyright lasts a at Georgia State University for copyright in- very long time—the life of the author plus fringement over the posting of their copy- 70 years. In short, if that artistic six-year- righted material in the school’s electron- old lives to be 99, the copyright on his re- ic reserve system. Georgia State claimed frigerator-mounted art will not expire for the use was acceptable under fair use. Te another 163 years. Except in parental eyes, publishers objected to the use of electronic most six-year-olds do not grow up to be the courseware and electronic library reserve next Picasso. Regardless, his yet-to-be-born systems, which involve scanning and online great-grandchildren can rest easy with the distribution of material. Indeed the AAP assurance that their rights to his eforts with held that electronic reserves, by their very the crayon will be protected. nature, were infringements of copyright law As copyright grows more expansive (McDermott, 2012). In addition, the pub- in its coverage, it has also become the right lishers alleged that the administrators used of choice for corporate interests to pursue, electronic reserves at Georgia State to en- defend, and litigate. Further, the nature of courage faculty in the systematic infringe- copyright is fuid; lawsuits and legislation ment of their publications (Pike, 2010). Te will continue to take note of this. Tis ar- case was heard in the United States District ticle aims to provide an overview of recent Court, Northern District of Georgia, Atlan- legal decisions related to copyright and li- ta Division, with Judge Orinda Evans pre- braries—the Georgia State, HathiTrust, siding. UCLA cases, and Kirtsaeng—as well as such additions to the Copyright Act as the Tech-

5 Internet Learning

Although prior decisions touched on issues However, when a decision was hand- being litigated in the Georgia State case, ed down in 2012, Judge Evans essentially those earlier cases had involved commer- sided with Georgia State. While the judge cial entities (Pike, 2010), not nonproft, ed- found the university at fault in fve specifc ucational ones. Te publishers wanted to instances, the remaining 94 claims were not connect the concept of photocopied course considered infringements on the grounds of packs to that of electronic reserves, claiming fair use. In her decision, described as “care- that both infringed in the same way (Smith, ful, even fastidious” (Smith, 2013a), Evans 2013a). While the production and selling provided 350 pages of detailed analysis of the of course packs are commercial activities, works under consideration. She evaluated an electronic reserves system—indeed the the use of each work against the four factors concept of reserves—is purely education- of fair use: character of the use, which was al; libraries do not proft from them. In the nonproft educational; nature of the work; Georgia State case, every aspect of copying amount of the work; and efect of the use for electronic reserves was for educational on the market (Cambridge v. Becker, 2012). use (Pike, 2010). A sample of Judge Evans’ reasoning follows: At stake in the Georgia State case As to the fourth fair use factor, efect on the was the defnition of fair use in the digital market, the Court frst looks to whether environment. A decision for the publishers Professor Whitten’s use of A World of Ba- could have had severe consequences for the bies afected the market for purchasing the university, if not all universities. Te pub- book as a whole. Students would not pay lishers were not merely seeking damages; $30.99 for the entire book (or $55.99 for they also wanted a permanent injunction the hardcover version) when only 23 pages against Georgia State that would afect all were required reading for Professor Whit- copying done on campus and severely reten’s course. Neither would a professor re- strict what could be used in teaching (Pike, quire students to purchase the entire book 2012; Smith, 2011). Requiring that Georgia in such an instance. Terefore, the court rejects any argument that the use of the ex- State’s administration keep extensive re- cerpt from A World of Babies had a nega- cords, the proposed injunction would have tive efect on the market for purchase of the given the publishers monitoring authori- book itself (Cambridge v. Becker, 2012). ty over not only Georgia State’s electronic reserves , but over individual faculty mem- In addition, she made assessments of the ber’s decisions regarding documents used acceptable amount of material that could in the course management system as well be used. Although the publishers had con- (Albanese, 2012c; Smith, 2011). Further- tended that each chapter should be treat- more, only 10% of any class readings could ed as a whole, the judge was fairly specif- have been acquired without permissions ic regarding the amount that constituted being paid, and the Copyright Clearance fair use: 10% of a book with fewer than 10 Center was the only source mentioned for chapters and one chapter out of a book with gaining those permissions. Te possibility more than 10 chapters (Pike, 2012). of such demands being granted was truly Te decision was a setback to the frightening to librarians and educators and plans of the publishers, who had hoped was described as “disastrous,” “a nightmare,” to use the Georgia State case “to lay the (Smith, 2011) and “catastrophic” (What's at groundwork … to stop or dramatically Stake?, 2011). limit the practice of unlicensed e-reserves

6 Current Issues with Copyright and Higher Education

on college campuses” (Albanese, 2012c). copies were then added to the HathiTrust Te judge distinguished between cost sav- collection. Pooling the collection among ings springing from use of technology and the libraries generated benefts, particular- cost savings through the avoidance of fees ly a simultaneous search interface and the (Pike, 2010). Most surprising was Judge ability to share storage. In September 2011, Evans’ order that the publishers pay Geor- the Authors Guild fled a suit in New York gia State’s legal cost, “a sharp rebuke,” ac- Southern District Court against HathiTrust cording to Albanese (Albanese, 2012c). and fve academic libraries, Cornell Uni- Cambridge University Press, Oxford versity and the presidents of the universi- University Press, and Sage Publications Inc. ties of Michigan, California, Wisconsin, have elected to appeal Judge Evans’ ruling, and Indiana, involved in the project (Ha- disagreeing with her interpretations of fair thiTrust Digital Library, 2013). Te initial use. Tey fled their appeal in January 2013, scanning, duplication of fles, and mirror objecting to Evans’ failure to equate course storage at HathiTrust involved copying packs with e-reserves, her evaluation of the books and were the grounds for infringe- 99 alleged infringements on a case-by-case ment (Authors Guild v. HathiTrust, 2012; basis rather than evaluating the overall im- Crews, 2011). pact, and her failure to recognize how e-re- In addition, the Authors Guild took serves harmed their market, and insisting issue with HathiTrust’s intention to include that the Guidelines of the Copyright Act of orphan works in the database. Orphan 1976 be interpreted strictly (Smith, 2013a). works are those works still under copyright Despite what appears to be a sound for which copyright holders cannot be afrmation of fair-use rights in higher ed- found. Orphan works are not commercial- ucation, the appeal of the Georgia State de- ly available and have little monetary value; cision suggests the role of fair use in elec- this does not mean that they lack value tronic reserves will continue to be debated for researchers. Te Google Books Project for years. Kevin Smith delivers a hopeful ran afoul of orphan works in its scanning estimation that the ruling will be upheld, eforts, but the nonproft institutions mak- considering the thoroughness of the judge’s ing up HathiTrust, in their Orphan Works analysis and the weakness of the appeal Project, thought they could avoid Google’s (Smith, 2013a). Librarians should be reas- problems, considering that their use of sured that the fair use of unlicensed ma- scanned orphan works would be noncom- terial in e-reserves remains an acceptable mercial and limited to on-campus usage practice (Albanese, 2012d). (Pike, 2011). Ultimately, HathiTrust elected to suspend the Orphan Works Project, Authors Guild Inc., et al., against leading the court to drop orphan works HathiTrust, et al. (2012) from the suit. Te case was heard in United States District Court, Southern District of New athiTrust was an outgrowth of the York, with Judge Harold Baer Jr. presiding. Google Books Project, wherein ac- His decision, handed down on October 10, ademic libraries allowed Google 2012, was a victory for HathiTrust and the Hto digitize books in their collections. Goo- principles of fair use, particularly regarding gle provided participating libraries with what libraries are allowed to do under fair copies of the digital book fles, and these use: making copies for preservation, mak-

7 Internet Learning ing copies for the visually impaired, retain- that HathiTrust’s mass digitization was ing scans for text searching, building data- permissible under the section of the Copy- bases for data-mining. According to Baer, right Law that deals with reproducing ma- all fell within the limits of fair use (Authors terial for the blind and disabled (Albanese, Guild v. HathiTrust, 2012; Crews, 2012). 2012a). Specifcs of the decision included a clarif- cation of whether an academic library had Te Association for Information the right to make copies of works for use Media and Equipment, et al., v. the by the visually impaired, which had been Regents of the University of Cali- unclear heretofore. Although there was no ruling on orphan works, the judge’s deci- fornia, et al. (2011) sion that keyword indexing was not a violation will enable those works to be includ- he California Board of Regents and ed in search engines. Using digital copies the University of California at Los to create a keyword-searchable index was Angeles were sued by the Associa- Ttion for Information and Media Equipment held to be “transformative enough to be a fair use, even … on a large scale” (Unlock- (AIME) over their project involving the dig- ing the Riches, 2013). Notably, the orphan ital conversion of videos owned by UCLA works were not singled out regarding dig- in order to stream the videos for classroom itization; instead the ruling applied to all use. Te project began in 2005. UCLA ini- books regardless of status (Grimmelmann, tiated its flm digitization project at a time 2012). Being able to search digital works when few streaming products were avail- serves scholarship, as does storage of digi- able. Tose that were available were bound tal works—even when entire works are be- by overly complicated licensing require- ing saved. Te decision cleared the path for ments and limited in what they delivered. more data-mining projects, especially in the Te actions that UCLA took seemed to be humanities (Unlocking the Riches, 2013). in line with the requirements of the Tech- Te HathiTrust ruling is important, nology, Education, and Copyright Harmo- and not just for HathiTrust libraries. Judge nization Act of 2002, otherwise known as Baer analyzes fair use in such a way that it the TEACH Act. Te posted videos were will be helpful in evaluating future digital password-protected on the university web- projects (Crews, 2012). James Grimmel- site, and copying and retention of the vid- mann says, “…this decision is a big deal,” eos was blocked. and it “could well become a landmark in Fair-use practices in the physical copyright” (2012). classroom have been established over time Te Authors Guild fled their appeal and are understood relatively well. Distance against the decision on November 8, 2012. education, however, has no classroom. Te Te Guild holds that Judge Baer’s ruling TEACH Act was Congress’s attempt to was in error on the following points: that bring the rights of the physical classroom HathiTrust’s Orphan Works Project was to its online equivalent and to balance the not subject to judicial scrutiny because prerogatives of the rights holders with ex- it had been suspended, that HathiTrust’s emptions for online and distance educa- mass digitization project with Google con- tion classes that fall more closely in line stituted fair use, that the Guild lacked the with the those historically exercised in the statutory standing to bring the suit, and traditional classroom. Te TEACH Act de-

8 Current Issues with Copyright and Higher Education scribes specifc actions an institution must argued that the rights of the classroom ex- take to be in compliance with the law. Tese tended to online classrooms. Te case came requirements go beyond the work of the li- before Judge Consuelo Marshall in Califor- brary and are related to the activities of in- nia’s Central District (AIME v. UCLA, 2011). stitutional ofcers, technology ofces, and AIME v. UCLA (2011) was dis- academic instructors (Nelson, 2009). Te missed on two grounds: frst, AIME lacked TEACH Act includes the following require- the legal standing to bring the suit, and ments: second, defendants had immunity in their roles as state ofcials. Because of this, no 1. Te institution must have a copyright particular judgment regarding fair use can policy. be drawn from the suit (McDermott, 2012). Despite the lack of a decision, an important 2. Copyright notices must be provided to point worth mentioning is Judge Marshall’s students regarding materials used in online assertion that she saw no diference in mar- courses. ket efect between streaming a flm and showing it in a classroom (Smith, 2012a). 3. Access to material must be controlled Also notable is the fact that the dismissal (that is, only students enrolled in a class only applied to the specifc defendants of can view material). the case; and while there can be no refling of charges against UCLA, other institutions 4. Unauthorized distribution of the materi- could be sued should a plaintif with accept- al must be prevented. able legal standing choose to do so (Smith, 2012a). 5. Tere can be no storage of material on the system. Supap Kirtsaeng, d/b/a Bluechris- tine99, Petitioner v. John Wiley & 6. Material can only be displayed as part of Sons, Inc. (2013) a class session overseen by the instructor.

7. Material must be related to the content he Kirtsaeng case did not deal with being taught. fair use but with another of the limitations of copyright, the frst-sale Tdoctrine. Student Supap Kirtsaeng was sued 8. Only governmental bodies or nonproft and accredited educational institutions are by publisher John Wiley & Sons, Inc. for his eligible to claim rights under the TEACH practice of buying foreign editions of Wiley Act (Nelson, 2009; TEACH Act, 2002). textbooks and reselling them in the United States. First-sale rights allow individuals In 2009, while the project was still or institutions that have legally purchased ongoing, UCLA was approached by a ven- copyrighted material to dispose of materi- dor ofering to sell streamed content. In al however they will, whether by selling it, the discussion, UCLA expressed interest in giving it away, throwing it away, etc. Wiley the product but mentioned their scanning objected because Kirstsaeng sold imported practices. Shortly thereafer, they were ap- editions of its works. Tese were less expen- proached by AIME regarding their alleged sive editions designed for other markets. At infringements (Dougherty, 2010). UCLA the core of the argument was the interpreta-

9 Internet Learning tion of particular wording in the Copyright might sell, resale, or use; museums that Act: “lawfully made under this title” (Copy- buy Picassos that now, under our last right Act of 1976, 17 U.S.C.). Wiley argued, case, receive American protection as and lower courts agreed, that this meant the soon as that Picasso comes to the United geographic area where the U.S. Copyright States, and they can’t display it without- getting permission from the fve heirs who Act held sway and so, frst sale did not ap- are disputing ownership of the Picasso ply to imported works. Found in violation copyrights . . . (Before the Court, 2012). of copyright by lower courts, Kirtsaeng ap- pealed his case to the Supreme Court (Kirt- With this far-reaching decision, li- saeng v. Wiley, 2013). Te case had the atten- braries need not worry about the origins of tion of the library community because of the material in their collections, nor need they troubling implications for libraries, among limit purchasing decisions based on the others, of that geographic interpretation: where materials were physically manufac- Libraries are arguably engaged in the dis- tured. Note that libraries are only one of the tribution of copyrighted works whenever benefciaries of the decision; it afects the they acquire materials for the collections work of bookstores and museums as well and permit patrons to check them out. as the activities of anyone who buys or sells Distributions are ofen a core function of copyrighted material. It truly has the poten- libraries, and many works in library collec- tial to afect everyone (Crews, 2013). tions are made outside U.S. borders. In fact, Of the four legal cases presented everyday life in the U.S. is rich with foreign before the courts, only Kirtsaeng v. Wiley made works that could be hamstrung by the decisions of the lower courts: Ameri- (2013) has been settled. Even in relation can novels outsourced for printing, foreign to Kirtsaeng, failure in the courts may lead movies on DVDs, letters mailed home from publishers to increase their reliance on li- Europe, sofware inside an iPod or mobile censing to control their publications or to phone, semiconductor code on computer lobby Congress to change laws related to chips, and even the computer programs international business and imports (Crews, embedded in the workings of a Honda, 2013). Regarding the other lawsuits and Toyota, Volkswagen, or other import- their impact on libraries, the outcomes ed car. Regardless of where the copyright were positive, to varying degrees, regard- work originated, the constraint applied if ing the posting of material on electronic the specifc copy had been produced out- reserves and course management systems, side American borders (Crews, 2013). digitization, database building, copying for In its decision on March 19, 2013, the blind and for preservation, and the on- the Supreme Court overturned the lower line streaming of videos. Most important- court ruling and held that frst sale applies ly, these three instances in which academ- to copyrighted works produced outside ic libraries were accused of infringement of the United States. Justice Breyer list- were all defended and decided to be fair ed even more items that could be impli- use (Smith, 2012a). Te courts have recog- cated had they supported the lower court: nized the importance of fair use in librar- . . . millions and millions of dollars’ worth ies and education. Commentator Kevin of items with copyrighted indications of Smith celebrated “a pretty convincing vic- some kind in them that we import ev- tory in the Georgia State e-reserves case, a ery year; libraries with 300 million books sweeping one in the HathiTrust case, and a bought from foreign publishers that they tepid afrmation of fair use (probably!) in

10 Current Issues with Copyright and Higher Education

this streamed video case” (Smith, 2012a). of rights: personal study and research— Andrew Albanese wrote that the “fair use whether by taking notes or photocopying— decision for the HathiTrust was emphatic” quoting from a work, selling or gifing pur- (Albanese, 2012b), and Karen Coyle said, chased books and recordings, reusing facts “Fair use . . . has been reafrmed, with some and ideas, and recording television shows eloquence, as a necessary social compact to watch later. Te growth of digital cul- to further the creation of new knowledge” ture has fueled corporate attitudes against (Unlocking the Riches, 2013). Te judiciary any free use of copyrighted products, fair continues to treat fair use as important. As or otherwise, hence licensing agreements of this writing, the judges of a federal ap- of all sorts, digital rights management sof- peals court had unanimously decreed that a ware, and more (Aufderheide & Jaszi, 2011). lower court had to consider whether Goo- Copyright law in the United States gle’s scans were such before allowing class has always encouraged the creation of new certifcation to a group of authors (DeSan- works by providing monopolies of limited tis, 2013). Fair use, however, has long been times to authors. Article I, Section 8 of the a target of corporate interests and will con- Constitution states, “Congress shall have tinue to be so. Power . . . To promote the Progress of Sci- ence and useful Arts, by securing for lim- Legislation ited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings long-standing principle in United and Discoveries” (Copyright Act of 1976, States law, fair use was articulated 17 U.S.C. ). Te limited time was only 14 and codifed with the Copyright years originally, with an option to extend AAct of 1976, which, with its amendments, for another 14 years. Authors’ interests remains the current law of the land. Fair were important, but the public interest was use in education is only one aspect of the vital as well, hence the limitation. Unend- principle. Tat aspect of fair use was under ing monopolies would have failed to pro- consideration in the Georgia State case. Al- mote progress because science and the use- though this aspect of fair use is the one most ful arts would have been locked down. Te familiar to librarians, classroom teachers creation and growth of culture is a public are not the only people who can take ad- good that requires encouragement. vantage of this limitation to copyright. Several problems exist with copy- As Aufderheide and Jaszi explain right law—problems that have been aggra- in Reclaiming Fair Use, unlicensed access vated by technology and time. Te Copy- to copyrighted work encourages new cre- right Act of 1976 was an attempt to bring ation by new creators, who “inevitably need copyright in line with technological devel- to access culture as they add to it” (p. 17). opments of its day, such as television, pho- For the public, there are two kinds of fair tocopiers, and recording devices. Reform use: private, personal, and (pre-Internet) was then driven by corporate interests, par- unmonitored use and reuse of material to ticularly those with large copyright hold- make something else (Aufderheide & Jaszi, ings. Taking efect in 1978, the revised law 2011). By and large, fair use has been tak- granted longer protection for works and en for granted by the majority of its users; stronger penalties for infringement. Works many are probably unaware of their rights were protected from the moment of their in this matter. Individuals have a variety creation; there was a single longer term 11 Internet Learning for all new works; renewal was no longer Excessive terms were accompanied a necessity; registration was no longer re- by excessive damages ranging from $750 quired; the copyright notice was no longer to $150,000 per work infringed. Material is required (Aufderheide & Jaszi, 2011). Some under copyright longer, requiring permis- of these changes may have seemed innocu- sions and the creating fear of infringement ous, but among their long-term efects have for longer periods of time. Te potential for been the creation of orphan works and all damages frightens most people from tak- problems related to them (McDermott, ing any risks involving copyrighted mate- 2012). Afer the law took efect, no efort rial, even when the material could be used was necessary to acquire copyright, un- fairly. Te number of people facing poten- like the trademark or patent process, both tial lawsuits is increasing as the number of of which ask the entity hoping to beneft copyrighted works increases. from the rights to do considerable work. Since 1976, there have been leg- Because of the eforts of educators and li- islative attempts to adjust copyright law braries, however, legislators recognized the to the digital world. Te aforementioned need to protect fair use and incorporated TEACH Act was one such patch, and the it into the law (Aufderheide & Jaszi, 2011). Digital Millennium Copyright Act of 1998 As copyright has expanded, it has (DMCA) another. Where the TEACH Act come to be viewed as a property right, es- was an efort to expand access through fair teemed more and more for its economic use, however, the intent of the DMCA was value alone. Never mind public culture; to limit access. Te DMCA made tampering property rights are absolute. From this per- with digital rights management sofware il- spective, limitations like fair use are akin to legal and criminalized the sale of circum- taxes or subsidies taken from the copyright vention technologies (McDermott, 2012). holder (Boyle, 2008). Copyrighted proper- DMCA forbade the circumvention of such ties also are inheritable. Terms can be so copyright protections as encryption or long that control over works will likely fall password protection and imposed limits on into the hands of grandchildren, who may what can be done with a fle once it has been not even have been alive when the works accessed—“the digital equivalent of barbed were created. A particular problem is that wire” (Boyle, 2008, p.86). While the act of heirs may choose to suppress works for any copying a fle may be legal according to fair reason, including the desire to protect a use, breaking through any digital rights forebear’s image in the case of controversial management technology that prevents that material, a dislike of the work, the belief copying is forbidden (McDermott, 2012). that they are the experts regarding the fam- Another 1998 amendment was the ily member, or the feeling that somehow Sonny Bono Copyright Extension Act, they are being cheated by someone. Some which established the copyright terms of art historians of the author’s acquaintance the life of the author plus seventy years, or have dealt with just such a situation. Tey ninety-fve years for works for hire (Copy- became the latest in a line of scholars at- right Extension Act, 1998). Even this is a tempting to study the work of a deceased simplifcation. See Cornell’s web-based 20th century American architect to fnd chart, “Copyright Term and the Public Do- themselves stymied by ofspring hoarding main in the United States,” for every pos- the parent’s papers in a garage. It is not a sible iteration of terms (Cornell Copyright climate-controlled garage either. Information Center, 2013).

12 Current Issues with Copyright and Higher Education

Protecting the interests of pub- of their employment. Other works for hire lishers has increased at the expense of the may be contracted works, provided the public domain and even many authors. contractor and the employer agree that the Te point should be made that those who work is for hire. Oxford University Press fght the hardest against fair use ofen try to (one of the plaintifs against Georgia State) garner sympathy for their cause by claim- has begun requiring that authors contributing they are only protecting authors. Cam- ing to their Handbooks sign a work-for-hire bridge, Oxford, and Sage did just that in agreement. All rights then defer to the pub- their appeal of the Georgia State decision lisher, with none at all for the person who (Howard, 2012). Copyright holders are of- actually put fngers to keyboard (Shaviro, ten corporations. Many authors sign their 2012). Typically, colleges and universities rights away. Some, such as academic au- have not claimed work-for-hire rights over thors facing a publish-or-perish situation, the scholarly output of their faculties, and do so knowingly, valuing publication in a they seem unlikely to risk inciting a fac- journal and the potential to be cited more ulty revolt by making such claims (Smith, than a monopoly on their work. Tis is un- 2012b). But with online instruction as a fortunate as “much scholarly work, work potential moneymaker, who knows what created for a social beneft and usually with cash-strapped educational institutions may costs underwritten by taxpayers, is turned decide to try. Just this year, a school board over gratis into the hands of commercial in Maryland attempted to “claim copyright entities. And those entities have proven on the original creations of students as well that they will not shrink from fundamental as teachers” at an elementary school (Sain- attacks on teaching and research in order er, 2013). Te hypothetical six-year-old art- to squeeze every penny they can from that ist is no joke. work” (Smith, 2013a). Examples of more traditional work Authors engaged in creative en- for hire are evidenced in Marvel Comics’ deavors also have fallen into untenable sit- Avengers. As a group, the Avengers have uations with publishers. A current situation appeared in comic books since 1963 with fnds the frst publisher going out of busi- a rotating membership that expands and ness and selling the contracts to a second contracts according to the need of the story. publisher. Te second publisher rewrites the Some of the characters pre-date the frst ap- newly purchased contracts, reserving 90% pearance of the Avengers, a few by decades; of the net sales for itself and 10% for the au- many others have been added over the half thors. Te catch is if too few of the bartered a century of the Avengers’ existence. Some authors agree to the new contract, the sec- of the characters also support stand-alone ond publisher will declare bankruptcy, thus series, but any and all of the characters, se- locking all the authors’ books into legal ries, and stories could interconnect at any limbo and preventing the authors from re- time. Some creators have agitated against printing, selling adaptation rights, or writ- the work-for-hire status with the publishing sequels to their works until the bank- ers, but the Avengers are a corporate prop- ruptcy is resolved (Foglio & Foglio, 2013). erty. Te Marvel Comics Universe, with its In addition, the whole work-for- editors, writers, artists, colorists, letterers, hire concept is an issue emerging from the inkers, gofers, and fans, was a crowdsourced Copyright Act of 1976. Most works for hire creation before people knew what crowd- are produced by employees in fulfllment sourcing was. With recent flm productions,

13 Internet Learning

add to that the work of performers, direc- Copyright law needs revision, but tors, special-efects artists, and flmmakers it needs wholesale revision, not just patch- of all sorts. All of the pieces are works for work. Te current law is not merely outdat- hire. Who is responsible for the creation of ed. It has grown unbalanced, supporting the Avengers? Better to ask, who profts? certain kinds of rights while abridging others that are just as valid. Te digital culture Looking Forward of reuse and remix has complicated matters. Take, for example, pinning, posting, liking, and sharing; in the pre-digital world, this hat brings comic book superhe- sort of behavior caused no concern. On roes into a discussion of copy- the open web, activities that had been pri- right issues in higher educa- vate and personal have become public and Wtion? Te reason is that any copyright laws could become actionable when copyrighted rewritten in the future will be written to material is involved. Tere is a need to rein protect the likes of the Avengers and their in “copyright laws to ensure that more of fellows. Librarians and educators should what we value doing with digital culture is never forget that as important as fair use is legal and to expand rights to reuse and re- for academics, it pales before the economic mix copyrighted works in non-commercial value of popular culture icons. Something contexts” (Karaganis, 2013). Copyright is like fair use is likely to be trampled to death out of control; it does not need strengthen- in the rush to lock in continued exclusive ing. As Barbara Fister says, “Tere is no lack rights to the world’s mightiest heroes, un- of copyright. Tere is, in fact, far too much less someone is willing to stand up for it. in the way of restrictions” (Unlocking the Compared to the copyrighted and trade- Riches, 2013). marked properties of Disney, Time Warner, Although recent attempts to address and other media giants, even the products specifc concepts such as orphan works of the scholarly publishers that loom large failed to garner enough support for Con- in the academic world are rather small. gress to pass legislation (Albanese, 2013), Fair use is already under assault. Da- there is some possibility for change in the vid Shulenberger considers the Georgia State future. Register of Copyrights Maria Pal- case just such an example, “part of an unde- lante has urged a total revision of copyright clared war on academic fair use” (What's at law (Pallante, 2013a; Pallante, 2013b). One Stake, 2011). Te large media companies, of her recommendations is a reduction in with the most valuable copyrighted content, term, but she also calls for stronger en- hold “that the very notion of private fair use forcement (Masnick, 2013b). In addition to disappears on the Internet” (Aufderheide the Pallante’s eforts, there have even been & Jaszi, 2011, p.19). Expect the assaults to some sparks of bipartisan interest regarding continue. Te courts seem willing to rule copyright reform (Goodlatte, 2013). for fair use, and as James Grimmelmann Unfortunately, copyright-watchers wrote regarding the HathiTrust decision, fear that Pallante’s interpretation of copy- the year was “a very good one for univer- right too ofen overlooks the public good sities putting copyrighted materials online and hews too closely to that of corporate infor their students” (2012). However, the job terests (Masnick, 2013b; Masnick, 2013c). of the courts is to apply the law as it exists. She is not alone. Industry lawyers and Laws can be changed. lobbyists supply government ofcials with

14 Current Issues with Copyright and Higher Education most of their information about copyright and global standardization of U.S. copyright (Smith, 2013a). Legislators on both sides of law by trade process, he views licensing and the aisle are likewise inclined to lean toward open access as the future battlegrounds, industry. Recent Congressional hearings on whether the battle comes in the courts or in copyright reform illustrate problems with Congress (2012). legislators misunderstanding the Consti- Overall, what do these cases and tution’s actual words about copyright and laws mean for academic librarians? Re- the promotion of progress, suggesting that garding the cases, librarians can feel more technology is the enemy of copyright and at ease when it comes to creating copies for emphasizing the needs of certain classes of the visually impaired and for preservation copyright holders (Masnick, 2013a). as well as when posting material in course- Laws designed to strengthen the ware and electronic reserves, as long as the rights of copyright holders have proceeded four elements of fair use have been applied. out of Congress without much excitement Te increasingly complicated copy- since the 1970s. Tat is, until the Stop On- right law has had greater impact on aca- line Piracy Act caused millions of agitated demic librarians. Because of it, librarians voters to call their representatives in protest, have defaulted to being the campus “de fac- bringing to an abrupt end any sort of legis- to copyright expert[s]” (McDermott, 2012, lation to strengthen copyright. Post-SOPA, p.11), whether trained as such or not. While legislators seemed hesitant to do much else, some university libraries may be large the fear of constituents having had its efect, enough to have a copyright librarian, most at least in 2012 (Lee, 2013). Likewise, con- are too small for such specialization. Even sumer resistance to digital rights manage- in large libraries, most copyright management has afected corporate behavior, but ment typically falls to the interlibrary loan “since so much of the pressure to limit per- staf or the reserves staf (Hansen, Cross, & sonal fair use comes from business practice, Edwards, 2013). Sadly, unless they are spe- the continued resistance of consumers to cialists, many academic librarians can be limiting their personal fair use will contin- far too passive when it comes to providing ue to be important” (Aufderheide & Jaszi, copyright information. Librarians comply 2011, p.19). with what the law requires by ensuring that Cambridge University Press v. Mark signs are up and notices are afxed, and they P. Becker, Authors Guild Inc. v. HathiTrust, may mount web pages that are typically a AIME v. UCLA, and Kirtsaeng v. Wiley were tedious collection of links and legalese. Ev- not the frst cases about copyright limita- ery library need not duplicate such sites as tions and copyright infringement, and they the one belonging to the Columbia Univer- will not be the last. Coming conficts over sity Library Science/Information Services access to copyrighted material are just as Copyright Advisory Ofce (http://copy- likely to revolve around licensing, trade, right.columbia.edu/copyright/), to name and technological monitoring. K. Matthew a particularly useful resource for keeping Dames actually takes a jaundiced view of up with news about copyright lawsuits and the future of copyright itself. Setting the re- other issues. What a library should do is cent court wins against the ability of licens- take into account the needs, degrees of unes to override copyright, the establishment derstanding, and purposes of its users and of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act, develop their pages accordingly. the growth of global media conglomerates,

15 Internet Learning

More aggressive educational eforts are cle/54748-authors-guild-appeals-loss-in- needed—librarians need to learn more, and, book-scanning-case.html possessed of knowledge, they need to provide more useful information to faculty and Albanese, A. (2012c, August 13). Final students. When faculty come to a library Order in GSU E-Reserves Case Is a Rebuke for an answer to a copyright question, the to Publishers. Publishers Weekly. Re- answer too ofen devolves into don’t. And trieved from http://www.publishersweekly. while don’t may be the correct answer in com/pw/by-topic/digital/copyright/arti- many cases, there also may be legal options cle/53543-fnal-order-in-gsu-e-reserves- that librarians fail to explain due to either a case-is-a-rebuke-to-publishers.html lack of knowledge or a fear of infringement, residing as they do in what Aufderheide and Albanese, A. (2012d, June 24). What’s the Jaszi call a “culture of fear and doubt” (2011, Impact of the GSU E-Reserve Decision? p. 1). ALA Panel Says None...Yet. Publishers It will become more necessary for Weekly. Retrieved from http://www.pub- librarians to explain infringement and fair lishersweekly.com/pw/by-topic/digital/ use to faculty and students because both copyright/article/52743-what-s-the-im- infringement and fair use are part of copy- pact-of-the-gsu-e-reserve-decision-ala- right. Being able to explain copyright law panel-says-none-yet.html and its challenges is also important because copyright afects faculty, students, and li- Albanese, A. (2013, March 8). Orphan brary patrons alike, both in their use of Works Legislation Appears Unlikely. copyrighted material and in their creation Publishers Weekly. Retrieved from http:// of copyrighted material. Not just users, they www.publishersweekly.com/pw/by-top- are makers and copyright holders them- ic/digital/copyright/article/56265-fol- selves, and they need information to man- lowing-copyright-ofce-inquiry-or- age their work and activities in this digital phan-works-legislation-appears-unlikely. world. html

References Association for Information Media & Equipment, et al., v. the Regents of the Albanese, A. (2012a, December 3). Appeal University of California, et al. (U.S. Dist. Filings Outline Authors Guild’s Objec- C.D. Cal. 2011). Retrieved from http:// tions to HathiTrust Opinion. Publish- newsroom.ucla.edu/portal/ucla/docu- ers Weekly. Retrieved from http://www. ment/UCLA_Streaming_Video_Ruling. publishersweekly.com/pw/by-topic/digital/ pdf copyright/article/54982-appeal-flings-outline-authors-guild-s-objections-to-hathi- Aufderheide, P., & Jaszi, P. (2011). Re- trust-opinion.html claiming Fair Use: How to Put Balance Back in Copyright. Chicago: University of Albanese, A. (2012b, November 14). Chicago Press. Authors Guild Appeals Loss in Book Scanning Case. Publishers Weekly. Re- trieved from http://www.publishersweekly. com/pw/by-topic/digital/copyright/arti-

16 Current Issues with Copyright and Higher Education

Authors Guild Inc., et al., against Hathi- Crews, K. (2013). Te Kirtsaeng Decision: Trust, et al. 902 F. Supp 2d 445, (S.D. N.Y. Copyright, Logic, and Libraries. Retrieved 2012). Retrieved from https://www.ef. May 30, 2013, from http://copyright. org/sites/default/fles/HathiTrust%20deci- columbia.edu/copyright/2012/10/11/court- sion%20copy%202.pdf rules-on-hathitrust-and-fair-use/

Before the Court in Kirtsaeng v. Wiley: Dames, K. M. (2012). Te Copyright Te Justices Weigh in on Copyright Law. Game Is Over. Information Today, 29(11), (2012). Supreme Court Debates, 15(9), 24-24. Retrieved from http://search.eb- 42-45. Retrieved from http://ezproxy. scohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&d- cbu.edu:9000/login?url=http://search. b=aph&AN=83776050&site=ehost-live&- ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&d- scope=site; b=aph&AN=83651251&site=ehost-live&- scope=site DeSantis, N. (2013, July 1). Court Blocks Authors’ Class Certifcation in Google Boyle, J. (2008). Te Public Domain: En- Book-Scanning Case [Web log post]. Mes- closing the Commons of the Mind. New sage posted to http://chronicle.com/blogs/ Haven & London: Yale University Press. ticker/court-blocks-authors-class-certifca- Cambridge University Press, et al., v. Mark tion-in-google-book-scanning-case/62407 P. Becker, et al. 863 F. Supp. 2d 1190, (N.D. Ga. 2012). Retrieved from http://blogs. Dougherty, W. C. (2010). Te Copyright library.duke.edu/scholcomm/fles/2012/08/ Quagmire. Journal of Academic Librarian- Order-for-relief-GSU.pdf ship, 36(4), 351-353. doi:10.1016/j.acal- ib.2010.05.020 Copyright Act of 1976, 17 U.S.C. Retrieved from http://www.copyright.gov/title17/ Foglio, P., & Foglio, K. (2013). Publish & Cornell Copyright Information Center. Perish. Girl Genius Adventures: Te Latest (2013). Copyright Term and the Public News from Phil & Kaja Foglio, 2013(April Domain in the United States, 1 Janau- 4), 4/16/13. Retrieved from http://girl- ry 2013. Retrieved March 8, 2013, from geniusadventures.com/2013/04/04/pub- http://copyright.cornell.edu/resources/ lish-perish/ docs/copyrightterm.pdf Goodlatte, B. (2013). Chairman Good- Crews, K. (2011). Authors, Copyright, latte Announces Comprehensive Review and HathiTrust. Retrieved June 7, 2013, of Copyright Law Retrieved June 15, from http://copyright.columbia.edu/ 2013, from http://judiciary.house.gov/ copyright/2011/09/13/authors-copy- news/2013/04242013_2.html right-and-hathitrust/ Grimmelmann, J. (2012, October 13). Crews, K. (2012). Court Rules on Hathi- HathiTrust: A Landmark Copyright Rul- Trust and Fair Use. Retrieved June 2, 2013, ing [Web log post]. Message posted to from http://copyright.columbia.edu/copy- http://blogs.publishersweekly.com/blogs/ right/2012/10/11/court-rules-on-hathi- PWxyz/2012/10/13/hathitrust-a-land- trust-and-fair-use/ mark-copyright-ruling/

17 Internet Learning

Hansen, D. R., Cross, W. M., & Edwards, P. posted to http://www.techdirt.com/arti- M. (2013). Copyright Policy and Practice in cles/20130315/14043322341/more-details- Electronic Reserves among ARL Libraries. copyright-ofces-suggestions-copyright-re- College & Research Libraries, 74(1), 69-84. form-some-good-some-bad.shtml Retrieved from http://crl.acrl.org/content/74/1/69.full.pdf+html Masnick, M. (2013c, March 18). More Details On Copyright Register Ma- HathiTrust Digital Library. (2013). Infor- ria Pallante's Call For Comprehensive, mation about the Authors Guild Lawsuit. 'Forward-Tinking, But Flexible' Copy- Retrieved June 20, 2013, from http://www. right Reform [Web log post]. Mes- hathitrust.org/authors_guild_lawsuit_in- sage posted to http://www.techdirt. formation com/articles/20130318/11114922368/ more-details-copyright-register-ma- Howard, J. (2012, September 10). Publish- ria-pallantes-call-comprehensive-for- ers Will Appeal E-ReservesDecision that ward-thinking-fexible-copyright-reform. Favored Georgia State U [Web log post]. shtml Message posted to http://chronicle.com/ blogs/wiredcampus/publishers-will-appeal- McDermott, A. J. (2012). Copyright: Regu- e-reserves-decision-that-favored-georgia- lation Out of Line with Our Digital Real- state-u/39732 ity? Information Technology & Libraries, 31(1), 7-20. Retrieved from http://search. Karaganis, J. (2013). Copyright For the ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&d- Internet Age. National Review, 65(3), b=aph&AN=76373083&site=ehost-live&- 20-22. Retrieved from http://search.eb- scope=site scohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&d- b=aph&AN=85336633&site=ehost-live&- Nelson, E. (2009). Copyright and Distance scope=site Education: Te Impact of the Technol- ogy, Education, and Copyright Harmo- Lee, T. B. (2013, Janaury 7). Still smarting nization Act. AACE Journal, 17(2), 83- from SOPA, Congress to shy away from 101. Retrieved from http://www.editlib. copyright in 2013 [Web log post]. Message org/p/27053 posted to http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2013/01/still-smarting-from-sopa-con- Pallante, M. A. (2013a). Te Next Great gress-to-shy-away-from-copyright-in-2013/ Copyright Act. Paper presented at the Twenty-Sixth Horace S. Manges Lecture, Masnick, M. (2013a, May 17). A Frame- Columbia University, Columbia Law work for Copyright Reform [Web log post]. School. Retrieved from http://www.copy- Message posted to http://www.techdirt. right.gov/docs/next_great_copyright_act. com/articles/20130516/15445423110/ pdf framework-copyright-reform.shtml Pallante, M.A. (2013b). Te Register's Call Masnick, M. (2013b, March 15). More for Updates to U.S. Copyright Law: Sub- Details On Copyright Ofce's Sugges- committee on Courts, Intellectual Property tions On Copyright Reform; Some Good, and the Internet, United States House of Some Bad [Web log post]. Message Representatives, 113th Congress, 1st Ses-

18 Current Issues with Copyright and Higher Education sion. Retrieved from http://www.copyright. Smith, K. (2012a, November 26). Another gov/regstat/2013/regstat03202013.html fair use victory for libraries [Web log post]. Message posted to http://blogs.library. Pike, G. H. (2010). Copyright: A Partial duke.edu/scholcomm/2012/11/26/anoth- Victory for Georgia State. Information er-fair-use-victory-for-libraries/ Today, 27(10), 1-14. Retrieved from http:// ezproxy.cbu.edu:9000/login?url=http:// Smith, K. (2012b, January 25). Who do you search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?di- work for, faculty author? [Web log post]. rect=true&db=aph&AN=55014488&site=e- Message posted to http://blogs.library. host-live&scope=site duke.edu/scholcomm/2012/01/25/who-do- you-work-for-faculty-author/ Pike, G. H. (2011, September 12). Orphan Works Project to Scan Library Books for Smith, K. (2013a, February 4). Law and Online Database. Newsbreaks, Information politics in the GSU case [Web log post]. Today. Retrieved from http://newsbreaks. Message posted to http://blogs.library. infotoday.com/NewsBreaks/Orphan- duke.edu/scholcomm/2013/02/04/law- Works-Project-to-Scan-Library-Books-for- and-politics-in-the-gsu-case/ Online-Database-77583.asp Smith, K. (2013b, May 29). Time for break- Pike, G. H. (2012). Te Verdict in the fast at the 11th Circuit [Web log post]. GSU Case. Information Today, 29(7), Message posted to http://blogs.library. 10-10. Retrieved from http://ezproxy. duke.edu/scholcomm/2013/05/29/time- cbu.edu:9000/login?url=http://search. for-breakfast-at-the-11th-circuit/ ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&d- b=aph&AN=77596768&site=ehost-live&- Sonny Bono Copyright Term Extension scope=site Act, Pub, L. No. 105-298, (1998). Retrieved from http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdque- Sainer, G. (2013, February 21). Prince ry/z?d105:S505: George's County Schools' Copyright Conundrum [Web log post]. Message Supap Kirtsaeng, d/b/a Bluechristine99, posted to http://watchdogwire.com/mary- Petitioner v. John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 133 land/2013/02/21/prince-georges-coun- S. Ct. 469 (2013). Retrieved from http:// ty-schools-copyright-conundrum/ www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/12pd- f/11-697_4g15.pdf Shaviro, S. (2012, January 22). Work for Hire update [Web log post]. Mes- Technology, Education, and Copyright sage posted to http://www.shaviro.com/ Harmonization, Pub. L. No. 107-273, Blog/?p=1030 (2002). Retrieved from http://thomas.loc. gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d107:H.R.2215: Smith, K. (2011, May 13). A nightmare scenario for higher education [Web log post]. Unlocking the Riches of HathiTrust. (2013, Message posted to http://blogs.library. January/February). American Libraries duke.edu/scholcomm/2011/05/13/a-night- Magazine. Retrieved from http://www. mare-scenario-for-higher-education/ americanlibrariesmagazine.org/article/unlocking-riches-hathitrust

19 Internet Learning

What's at Stake in the Georgia State Copy- right Case? - Te Chronicle Review. (2011, May 30). Chronicle of Higher Education. Retrieved from http://chronicle.com/ article/Whats-at-Stake-in-the-Geor- gia/127718/

20 Virtually Yours Virtually Yours: Online Embedded Librarianship in Higher Education Denise Landry-Hyde1, Laureen P. Cantwell2

While embedded librarianship has been in existence within higher education settings for quite some time, the proliferation of online learning opportunities and e-courseware products has generated an increase in options for librarian engagement in higher education coursework and course platforms. In online settings, faculty members, students, and librarians can engage in new ways, with exciting technologies, and using innovative strategies. Te literature review included here provides readers with a wealth of readings to increase their familiarity with this topic. Tis article discusses the process of “embedding” a librarian (individually and institutionally); best practices for the use of technology in embedded settings; the management, readiness assessment, marketing, promotion, and evaluation of embedded librarianship and its eforts; and the value of collaboration within this environment. Additionally, the authors share a variety of web-based tools suitable for embedded collaborations, broken into four categories: digital learning object repository tools, content management tools, remote storage and collaboration tools, and synchronous and asynchronous learning and engagement tools. A brief discussion on the future of embedded librarianship in higher education concludes this article.

Keywords: embedded librarianship; online learning; e-learning; distance learning; instructional technologies; higher education; open access; information literacy.

Virtually Yours: Online Embedded he focus of this paper is on librarians Librarianship in Higher Education embedding online. Tere are diferent defnitions of embeddedness— Tno one size fts all. Jezmynne Dene (2011) ncreasingly, academic librarians are succinctly defnes embedded librarianship teaching and supporting online students as “an integral part to the whole based on who they will never see face-to-face. As the geological defnition of an embedded Ia result, librarians must use technological element” (p. 225). David Shumaker’s defni- tools to reach those students in meaning- tion, as noted by Jenny Dale and Lynda Kel- ful ways and to create a presence virtually lam (2012), also captures the essence stating, when face-to-face encounters are not pos- “Embedded librarianship involves the de- sible. Use of web–based tools, including so- livery of highly customized and highly val- cial media, enables librarians to embed in ued information and knowledge services to e-learning communities. a customer group with well-defned needs” (p. 30). Te factors that defne embedded 1 Reference/Distributed Learning Librarian at Texas A&M University-Corpus Christi. Correspondence regarding this article should be directed to Denise at [email protected] or (361) 825-2608. 2 Instructional Services Librarian at the University of Memphis.

21 Internet Learning

librarianship, according to Shumaker ans who are embedded in course manage- (2012), are relationship, shared goals, and ment systems (CMSs) actively participate customized, high-value contributions (p. 6). in online classes. Tis can take a number Te diferences between traditional and em- of diferent forms, such as participating in bedded librarianship are anticipatory, in the discussion boards, providing LibGuides, case of embedded librarianship, as opposed instructional videos, assignments, and oth- to responsive in traditional librarianship; a er digital learning objects for use in class. team of collaborators versus the individual Tese materials can be linked to or embed- customer; customized versus standardized; ded in the CMS. ongoing projects versus single transactions; Embedded librarianship also has and partnership versus service. In short, li- roots in the healthcare feld of the 1960s brarians are in the midst of a redefnition of when librarians accompanied doctors and their relationships with their communities nurses on their hospital rounds (Shumak- and embedded librarianship is a name giv- er, 2012, p. xiii). Medical librarians lead the en to this change (Shumaker, 2012, p. 13). way and have done outstanding work in this area. David Shumaker, author of Te Background and Literature Review Embedded Librarian, Innovative Strategies for Taking Knowledge Where It’s Needed, ollaborations between a librari- spent more than three years studying em- an and a learning community are bedded librarianship programs on behalf unique. Te types of services pro- of the Special Libraries Association, from Cvided are customized and based on the which he received a grant to carry out his needs of the particular group. A communi- research. As Janice Lachance, CEO of the ty can be a class, an academic department Special Libraries Association, states in the or program, a student organization, and so Foreword to Shumaker’s book (2012), Shu- on. In higher education, embedded librar- maker makes a case for “a model of librarianship seems to have originated with liai- ianship based on community, fexibility, son librarians working with and supporting accountability, relevance, and responsi- subject- or discipline-specifc students and bility” (p. xiv). He visited a number of or- faculty (Dale & Kellam, 2012, p. 30). Te ganizations with embedded librarianship term “embedded librarian” was borrowed programs, conducted interviews and focus from the “embedded journalist” idea that groups with librarians and their user com- came into use during the invasion of Iraq munities, and made his own observations. (Dewey, 2004, p. 6). Embedded journal- Liaison librarians were frequently ists are deployed with troops; their goal is associated with specialized branch librar- to report on what they witness, not to take ies. Margaret Feetham (2006) dated the part in the events they observe. Embed- origins of subject specialist librarians to ded librarians, on the other hand, actively the University College London in the early engage with their user communities. Tey 1900s (p. 3-17). Within a few decades, these teach information literacy skills, frequent- librarians were well-established in Great ly geared to specifc assignments (Dale & Britain and the United States. Rudasill Kellam, 2012, p. 31) at the “need-to-know” (2010) noted that reference, instruction, time. Ofen, librarians are able to work with and cataloging, in addition to collection faculty in developing assignments or even development, were sometimes included in create assignments themselves. Librari- the duties of subject librarians (p. 83). 22 Virtually Yours

Te literature indicates that the pri- create syllabi together, design research as- mary focus of embedded librarianship at signments that include the use of informa- colleges and universities is the instruction tion literacy skills, share teaching respon- mission. In his book, Shumaker (2012) pro- sibilities, and even collaborate in grading vides, in table format, an extensive inven- papers. In other cases, the librarian is more tory of the embedded information literacy of an “addition” to the course, rather than instruction programs described in the En- a full partner. Tis might include teaching glish-language professional literature from one or more sessions, attending classes, and 2000 to 2011 (p. 49-50). Full citations to setting up consultations with students to those publications can be found in the Rec- help in their research. In other instances, in- ommended Reading list on his blog (http:// struction is delivered through standardized, www.embeddedlibrarian.com). self-paced modules (Shumaker, 2012, p. 51). Shank and Dewald (2003) talk about Strategically, librarians can partic- micro and macro embedded information ipate in university-level curriculum de- literacy instruction (p. 38-43). As discussed velopment teams and work with faculty to by Shumaker (2012), micro involves collab- identify the most appropriate places in the oration between librarians and faculty that curriculum in which to embed information results in customized instruction for each literacy instruction. course (p. 51). Macro involves the creation of a more or less standardized library web Best Practices in Embedded presence that can be linked to or embedded Instruction Technology in any course. Hemmig and Montet (2010) high- humaker (2012) makes the criti- light that interactivity is critical for a suc- cal recommendation that librarians cessful embedded librarian presence in should use the same technology that online teaching (p. 668). Tis includes in- Sinstructors and students are using for oth- teraction between librarians and online er course activities (p. 53). If librarians do learning staf, between librarians and fac- not use these same technologies, it is less ulty, and, in particular, between librarians likely that students or faculty will utilize and online students. librarians’ contributions. Course manage- For two-year community colleges, ment systems, for example, are being used the teaching mission of the institutions is increasingly in blended and face-to-face in- their focus. Te primary contributions of li- struction, as well as in distance learning. Li- brarians are in information literacy instruc- brarians must have a presence in this venue tion. However, in institutions that grant in order to be most efective in information bachelor’s degrees as well as graduate and literacy instruction. professional degrees, research and service are also expected. Te literature indicates, though, that teaching is the primary focus Management for embedded librarians at these institutions, also. Tere is a huge diversity of embedded ince embedded librarianship can information literacy instruction in high- quickly become a 24/7 proposition, it er education (Shumaker, 2012, p. 48-49). is essential that library management Sbe supportive of staf involvement in em- In some cases, librarians are full partners with subject faculty in that they bedded instruction and that librarians set

23 Internet Learning

parameters on when they will be available 118). Te top three contributions students to students and faculty. It is important to perceived were providing library resourc- recognize this from the very beginning. es, ofering instruction on using databases Staf may have to spend less time at the and indexes, and (tied for third) ofering in- service point or in other activities so that formation literacy development assistance more time can be allocated to a librarian’s and providing useful databases. Table 6 (p. research and consultation commitments. 121) indicates common areas of student Students in classes who have embedded li- difculty with information and resource brarians usually contact their “designated” use, as reported by surveyed faculty mem- or “assigned” librarian for assistance. bers. Overall, student lack of awareness as to what tools and resources should be uti- Collaboration with Faculty lized for their assignment was a signifcant, recurring, and telling concern on behalf of ofman and Ramin (2010), in par- faculty members. ticular, recognized the need for Additionally, Tomsett-Scott and active collaboration with facul- May’s surveying highlights several impacts Hty. Having a very clear understanding of upon students when they do not plan ahead the embedded librarian’s role in the class or take assignments seriously (p. 121). is critical to its success. At Texas A&M Among these reported issues are ill-timed University-Corpus Christi, the embed- interlibrary loan (ILL) or distance student ded librarian in select Nursing classes has item delivery requests; lack of time to pre- a BlackBoard-based “Library Corner” dis- pare, learn resources, and/or ask questions cussion board to which she can post recom- of their human resources. Surveying also mendations to students, as well as respond illuminated the fact that, when faculty are to their library and research-related ques- unaware of or feel unable to efectively uti- tions. At the University of Memphis, librar- lize critical library resources, their students ians embedded in University College senior are then at a disadvantage, as faculty may capstone courses have an “Ask the Librari- not be able to make appropriate or efec- an” discussion board. Tis posting area was tive recommendations at the point-of-need. initially placed at the bottom of the list of Tese critical library resources will include course discussion boards but, as of the Sum- ILL, chat, one-on-one research consul- mer 2012-2013 session, was relocated to the tations, library-developed online tutori- top of that list so that students would not als, and much more. Embedded librarians miss this valuable discussion board, which have key opportunities to view discussion is otherwise organized chronologically for boards, have their own virtual consultation course assignments and weekly discussions. space(s), and voice suggestions that take a Faculty members have substan- certain amount of pressure and stress of tial power to dictate the terms of librarian the shoulders of instructors while not inter- involvement in an online course. Tom- fering with course content. sett-Scott and May (2009) note this fact in When faculty members express stu- their article “How May We Help You? On- dent skill weaknesses or their own areas of line Education Faculty Tell Us What Tey unfamiliarity with library services, ask for Need from Libraries and Librarians.” Useful updates on holdings and research tools, library and librarian contributions to online and make inquiries as to how their online courses are listed in Table 3 of the article (p. course environment might be improved for 24 Virtually Yours

their students, librarians are presented with reviews and approvals until it grinds to a an opportunity to lend support and tailored halt” (p. 131). It is critical to have an or- services throughout an entire course or as- ganizational climate that encourages pilot signment. Without faculty voices in this dis- projects and reasonable, well-thought-out cussion, librarians can only hope students risk taking in getting eforts such as this un- will visit the libraries in person or virtually derway. and that the student can express the kind of assistance they need if and when they do Marketing and Promotion reach out to a librarian. he importance of word-of-mouth Readiness Assessment publicity cannot be overstated. If a few members of the user group are Treceptive to the idea of embedded librari- humaker (2012) notes that assessments of readiness must be done for the li- anship and appreciate what that service brarian and also for the organization can ofer, chances are those individuals will S(p. 128-131). Te two are not the same. El- communicate successes to peers. Present- ements of the librarian’s readiness include: ing at new employee orientations is another way to reach out to communities. Empha- t having the necessary skill sets; size the benefts of the service to potential t knowledge of the subject area of users; customers—the “What’s in it for me?” prin- t understanding the political and organi- ciple (Shumaker, 2012, p. 167). zational context; and Specifcally in regard to virtual li- t motivation in establishing strong, col- brarianship and embedded work, the au- laborative, working relationships with thors suggest reading Veal and Bennett’s user groups. (2009) “Te Virtual Library Liaison: A Case Study at an Online University,” where sever- On the other hand, elements of organiza- al key elements of librarian involvement in tional readiness include: the virtual classroom are addressed, including collaboration in the course development t support of executive champions, process, reference or research assistance t good mid-management relationships transactions, course content review, and between the library manager and the more. Not only are these important terms user-group managers, librarians can use when marketing oppor- t enthusiastic library users respected tunities and options to faculty, but these among their peers and managers (these are also key phrases that faculty can use in users can help light the spark for the word-of-mouth suggestions to other facul- program), and ty members— particularly in cases where t management culture that encourages a faculty member has indicated a need for innovation and experimentation and certain kinds of assistance or noted partic- that supports delegation and autonomy ular types of assignments. Another faculty at the middle and lower organizational member could easily suggest reaching out levels (Shumaker, 2012, p. 128). to and/or collaborating with a librarian to aid in their student outcomes and reten- A statement from Shumaker (2012) rings tion rates, and other course-related points true: “Innovation gets weighed down with of assessment. Tenure-track faculty might 25 Internet Learning

be especially interested in efcient and ef- tives to traditional forms of scholarly com- fective collaborations, to raise retention and munication. enhance evaluations. In the medical world, Kacy Allgood, E-mailing instructors before each an embedded librarian with Indiana Uni- term reminding them that embedded li- versity’s School of Medicine’s Department brarians are available and can assist stu- of Emergency Medicine, provides informa- dents in their research, teach information tion services to the Indianapolis Emergen- literacy skills, and help students in com- cy Medical Services (EMS). Known as the pleting assignments may spark interest. “ambulance riding librarian” (http://www. Timing of the message is crucial. When ambulanceridinglibrarian.com/), Allgood faculty are working on syllabi and planning exhibits the lengths to which librarians will their courses is the time to remind them go to support their communities of users, of embedded librarian services—not at the and her role highlights the resourcefulness beginning of the semester when things are and creativity institutions and organizations most hectic. can employ for the beneft of their constitu- encies and stakeholders. Delivery of Value-Added Services Another aspect of “value-added” ef- forts would beneft library science students. ccording to Shumaker (2012), the Faculty members of all disciplines should be defnition of “value-added” is con- cognizant of and perhaps sympathetic to the stantly changing, so librarians’ work need for experience among students within Amust change, as well. Management writers graduate schools. Institutions using adjuncts such as Tomas Friedman and Daniel Pink and PhD candidates as course instructors, have voiced similar concepts, as quoted by now legion, may fnd those groups of facul- Shumaker, “What can be automated, will be. ty members especially welcoming to library What can be outsourced or ‘ofshored’ will science students having (supervised or un- be” (p. 170). supervised) opportunities to instruct library Librarians must frst understand the sessions, especially at lower levels in the needs of their users, and then employ their curriculum or in general education required specialized skills to meet those needs. In courses. Lillard, Norwood, Wise, Brooks, higher education, diferent models of infor- and Kitts (2009) use this concept in their ar- mation literacy instruction have been used ticle “Embedded Librarians: MLS Students from highly customized classes to online, as Apprentice Librarians in Online Courses.” self-paced tutorials. Librarians have served Such opportunities provide the Master of Li- as team members on curriculum devel- brary Science (MLS) candidate with a num- opment committees and have been able to ber of marketable skills, including: critical infuence the incorporation of information “relationship management techniques” (p. literacy learning objectives and instruc- 12-13), experience with apprentice, mentor/ tion into the most appropriate areas of the mentee, and/or team-based instruction, and curriculum (Shumaker, 2012, p. 171). Li- real-world understanding of the real and brarians have also helped to establish data user-created barriers to student-librarian management plans in fulfllment of Nation- contact in embedded settings. Additionally, al Science Foundation (NSF) grant require- MLS candidates gain valuable wisdom about ments. Tey have helped spread the word what users feel would be useful to have and about open access publication and alterna- whether users use the requested service(s) 26 Virtually Yours

enough to substantiate adequate return on concerns are taken into account (Shumaker, investment. 2012, p. 189). Ten, develop an action plan Another strong point of the Lillard, with expected outcomes and completion Norwood, Wise, Brooks, and Kitts (2009) dates. article is the fact that this program has been Evaluation results must also be com- implemented several times, in several en- municated to stakeholders. All parties need vironments, at several institutions, with a to understand whether or not embedded li- variety of results. Tis holds importance for brarian programs are efective. If not, steps faculty and librarians because groups of stu- should be taken to see how the program dents difer, and thus users difer, instructors might be improved. Consistent communi- (and their goals) difer, and pedagogy and cation must take place in order for this to technology change over time. Continuous happen. experimentation and evaluation are key elements in developing, understanding, and Summary of Best Practices tweaking an embedded program or relationship, and in predicting what will best set up humaker (2012) quotes R. A. Cooper, an efort for success in the future. "'Every example of embedded librarianship relies on two key elements: Continuing Evaluation and Com- Srelationships and relevance'" (p. 323). Ad- munication of Evaluation Results ditionally, Shumaker (2012) provides a strong overview of best practices from sev- iferent measures may be used in eral authors, including: evaluating programs: counts of activities, such as numbers of refer- Heider (2010): Dence questions answered and numbers of documents delivered; anecdotes about the t Get buy-in from stakeholders. impact of services, and outcome and im- t Attend user-group meetings. pact metrics. If information literacy can be t Teach and serve as guest lecturers. shown to improve student academic perfor- t Publish and present with faculty. mance by, for example, raising the caliber of references in research papers, that measure Cooper (2010): shows impact of the program. More and more emphasis is being placed on account- t Read pertinent e-mail lists. ability in education generally, and in high- t Go where the action is—student er education particularly, so learning out- union, ofces, labs, studios, dorms, comes and impact metrics should be used. and so on. Course management systems keep track of t Be pro-active in response to the need the number of logins and the number of for current information—provide news postings made by each student in a course. alerts, for example. A university tracking system could be used to compare the academic performance of Dene (2011): students enrolled in courses with embedded librarians with that of students who are not t Start small and work up. Try a pilot enrolled in such courses, as long as privacy program.

27 Internet Learning

t Talk about library resources and ser- State University, is an excellent site and vices at orientation sessions. one of the frst of its kind. Rice University’s t Collaborate with other units, such as Connexions (http://cnx.org/) is an open re- IT, the Writing Center, the Distance pository of educational materials. YouTube Education Ofce, and faculty develop- (http://www.youtube.com/) is, of course, a ment centers. favorite source for videos and it even has t Assess. an education channel (http://www.youtube. com/education) that includes course lec- Miller (2011): tures from top teachers around the world, speeches, and inspirational videos. Te t Seek out conversations with user newly-launched Digital Public Library of groups. America, or DPLA (http://dp.la/), is a part- t Participate in department events (p. ner with HathiTrust Digital Library (http:// 60-61). www.hathitrust.org), itself “a partnership of major research universities and libraries Web-Based Tools working to ensure that the cultural record is preserved and accessible long into the plethora of web-based tools exist future” (HathiTrust, 2013). It contains mil- which can be used to enhance the lions of books and thousands of periodicals, educational experience. Tere are including public domain and copyrighted Aso many tools available that selecting the content from a variety of sources. right one to use in any given circumstance Te Library of Congress American can be overwhelming. Many of these tools Memory Project (http://memory.loc.gov/ can be divided into categories: digital learn- ammem/ index.html) provides access to a ing object repositories and tools, content wealth of historical material, including im- management tools, tools for remote storage ages and maps. Tere is a section for teach- and collaboration, and synchronous and ers and an “Ask a Librarian” service to get asynchronous/recordable learning environ- help from an expert. PBS LearningMedia ment tools. (http:// www.pbslearningmedia.org/) is a clearinghouse for accessing video, audio, Digital Learning Object documents, images, and interactive teaching/learning games for educational use. Repositories and Tools OER Commons (http:// www.oercommons. org/), an open educational resource, is a ducators do not have to reinvent the non-proft organization providing open- wheel. Tere are an increasing num- ly-licensed educational resources. And the ber of sites that provide videos, an- list goes on. Eimated tutorials, podcasts, presentations, and many other digital learning objects Content Management Tools which can be used freely for educational purposes as long as credit is given. Te ikis, blogs, journaling, discus- Multimedia Educational Resource for sion boards, and Google+ all of- Learning and Online Teaching, also known fer ways to share as MERLOT (http://www.merlot.org/mer- Wcontent. Bufy Hamilton’s curated “Em- lot/index.htm), developed by California bedded Librarianship” on Scoop.it! (http:// 28 Virtually Yours

www.scoop.it/ t/embedded-librarianship) dynamic collaborators in this environment is a great site for sharing ways in which li- with regard to problem solving, emerging brarians are embedding among their user technology awareness, and assisting stu- groups. She also has a useful presentation dents and instructors in accomplishing on SlideShare “Taking Embedded Librar- classroom goals while developing valuable ianship to the Next Level: Action Steps technological literacies. As institutions of and Practices” (http://www.slideshare.net/ higher education, as well as schools at the ALATechSource/ taking-embedded-librar- primary and secondary levels, choose to ianship-to-the-next-level). Hamilton made turn away from popular content manage- the presentation for the American Library ment systems such as Blackboard and De- Association’s TechSource Workshop. Both sire2Learn, the ways in which they host and are fne examples of content delivered via provide course content to users will also the Web. Wikis, such as Wikispaces Class- need to shif. room (http:// www.wikispaces.com/), are One common intersection of prob- particularly useful when collaboration is lem solving and librarianship ofen emerges needed. All parties can contribute to these in course assignments, particularly where wiki sites. Wikispaces also has room for research and research resources come into discussions. Google Drive (https://drive. play. Midler (2012) discusses a collaborative google.com/), formerly Google Docs, also efort using Google Docs, where an instruc- allows users to collaborate in creating tor shared editing privileges for class as- documents. An example using WordPress signment documents with Midler, a school (http://wordpress.org/), a blog tool, pub- librarian. Te documents were posted on lishing platform, and CMS, is the Research the class website, where students could then Coordination Network for Climate, Energy, not only access their assignments but their Environment, and Engagement in Semiar- assignments now included tailored instruc- id Regions (or RCN CE3SAR, see http:// tions from a librarian. Tis is an innovative sites.tdl.org/ southtexassustainability/), use of Google Docs in the sense that assign- an NSF-funded South Texas sustainability ment collaborations between instructors project. It collects, presents, and distributes and librarians are far less common than digital material related to or produced by other collaborative uses of Google Docs. RCN CE3SAR. Tis WordPress site is part Beyond documents, Google Drive has a of the Texas Digital Library (www.tdl.org), wealth of other tools useful for librarians, a state-wide repository. As part of the re- instructors, and students including a calen- search team, a project librarian adds infor- dar function, a presentation creation tool, mation to the project site. Google Sites (for free, easy web design), Google Vault (for archiving purposes), and Tools for Remote Storage and Google Moderator (for crowdsourcing and Collaboration idea submissions). Te calendar function could be employed for ofce hours, librarian appointments, and appointment remind- atives and non-natives of the dig- ers, while Google Moderator could permit ital information age will view and lecture customization, project/assignment understand remote storage difer- brainstorming, and more. For more infor- Nently. Tese two groups ofen intersect in mation on Google Docs and other Google classroom settings. Librarians can serve as Drive “apps” for education, interested read-

29 Internet Learning ers can explore http://www.google.com/ Other products are also enabling apps/intl/en-GB/edu/. Dropbox enhancements. VLC (formerly Dropbox (http://www.dropbox. standing for VideoLAN Client) and the com), similarly, is a remote storage tool use of fle transfer protocols (or FTPs) also allowing users to share folders and/or par- ofers users options for remote desktop ac- ticular items with collaborators. Innovative cess and networked fle transfers; OneNo- uses of Dropbox, courtesy of a Lifehacker te ofers a notebook sync with Dropbox to post from Te How-to Geek (2010), include: allow remote access to class notes and lectures. Dropbox alternatives worth investi- t the ability to encrypt fles using True- gating as productivity tools include Opera Crypt, (e.g., for course grade docu- Unite, Weave, Cheddar, and TagMyDoc. ments or other fles needing security); For those needing to provide re- t using shared folders for team-based mote storage, remote access, and net- projects such as student group work, worked learning to students and collabora- publication collaborators, and so on; tors using a variety of information formats t making useful information—shortcuts, (e.g., text, audio, images, and video), Ever- fact sheets, and even PDF e-books— note and Edmodo can also provide a use- mobile for the researcher(s) on the go; ful space to connect and engage. Te high- and er education edition of the EDUCAUSE t employing Dropbox as the equivalent Horizon Report (Johnson, Adams Becker, of your “My Documents” folder. Cummins, Estrada, Freeman, & Ludgate, 2013) envisions apps such as Edmodo and As a backup for fle storage, or a conve- Evernote will become more heavily used nient alternative to carrying a USB drive, in bring your own device (BYOD) and students and faculty alike will fnd Drop- multi-device scenarios, especially where box and its mobile app useful for accessing group work, note taking, and multiple for- important documents on the go. Readers mats are concerned. who have an interest in the discussion of Librarians can work with instruc- security, privacy, networked learning, and tors to create projects for students within fle encryption may want to read Mencha- these productivity and remote storage tools ca’s (2012) article in the Journal of Library that enhance student skills development, Administration. better prepare students for research and A particular boon of Dropbox stor- other course projects and expectations, age is the ability to access previous versions and provide useful and dynamic assistance of a fle through the web interface, in case to students at a distance. Popular library one needs to view a specifc, non-current “scavenger hunts” could be made more in- version of a fle. Tis would serve student teractive and technology-friendly by com- groups well, but also provides a powerful piling the strengths of these tools (especially editing and storage platform for publishers Evernote and Edmodo) to enable students working with an editor(s). Tis ofen oc- to capture and post examples of primary curs at a distance as edits are now common- resources for in-class or discussion board ly made to PDFs and sent electronically to conversation. Faculty may fnd they have a publishers, reviewers, and compositors, behind-the-scenes expert who can suggest and backup fles and versions may prove friendly amendments to assignment lan- critical during the course of such projects. guage within Google Docs, other Google

30 Virtually Yours

Drive for Education apps, and Dropbox. librarian and librarian, librarian and Tis could enable students to better under- student, expert and student, or student stand the task at hand, might encapsulate and student. It is the perfect vehicle general frequently asked questions (FAQs) for creating conversations for learn- and assignment-specifc content from the ing as an embedded librarian” (p. 8). library’s perspective, and should provide For more details about the free and other useful insights into the assignment’s fee-based features of Skype, see http:// description and constructions, such as de- www.skype.com/features; for addition- veloping information literacy learning out- al information on Skype and distance comes. education, see http://education.skype. com/projects/1783-distance-learning- Synchronous and Asynchronous/ with-skype. Recordable Learning Environment t Google+ Hangouts: Google+ com- Tools prises an individual’s profle, circles, communities, photos, Hangouts, and mobile Google+; connects individuals nstructors and librarians alike must across computers, devices, and operat- communicate and assist students with- ing systems; enables use of photos and in synchronous and asynchronous “emoji” (akin to emoticons) in a Hang- Icourse environments, as well as in blend- out to create a fun, visually engaging ed or hybrid contexts where courses are environment; free video calls with up not taught exclusively online or in-person. to ten individuals/locations; the ar- While Google Moderator (see the Tools chived, YouTube-accessible “Hangouts for Remote Storage and Collaboration On Air” recording of a Hangout, useful section above) provides strengths for the for webinars and collaborating (see student, instructor, or librarian working Pamela Vaughan’s HubSpot blog post on a presentation, additional products ex- here: http://blog.hubspot.com/blog/ ist to assist in engaging students in their tabid/6307/bid/32751/ Google-Launch- learning environment. Here are a few: es-Hangouts-on-Air-to-the-Masses- What-Marketers-Need-to-Know.aspx); t Skype: free video and voice calls with publicly accessible schedule for public anyone else on Skype; free voicemail viewing of a Hangout to support and/ service; low rates for calling worldwide or enhance course content. Students mobile and landline numbers; fee- watching a scheduled Hangout On Air based group video calls, call forward- featuring museum curators as part of a ing, and text messaging; available for museum studies or art history course, desktop, mobile, tablet, TV, and home or viewing a gene patenting discussion phone use; fle sharing and screen for a medical ethics course, would have sharing capabilities; integration with an opportunity to interact with experts Facebook contacts and chat. Diane in relevant felds, engage with a global Cordell (2012) discusses the distinct learning community, and gain insights benefts of Skype in the education- into educational content delivery meth- al environment, stating that “Skype ods. See http://www.google.com/+/ allows for a rich diversity of interac- learnmore/hangouts for additional tion: between teacher and librarian, details.

31 Internet Learning t Pearson’s Open Class: Create/manage PC World (http://www.pcworld.com/ courses; add/manage content; a so- article/239419/business_videoconfer- cial learning environment with user encing_showdown_meet_face_to_face. profles, statuses, and networks; study html), Adobe (http://www.getconnect. group creation options; Google tool com/resources/ competitiveprod- integration for document creation/ compare/), Knecht and Reid’s 2009 sharing/editing; conversation and article “Modularizing Information discussion enabled with Google Chat Literacy Training via the Blackboard and Skype features for organic, col- eCommunity” (see References), and laborative engagement; use of Open the Elearning Experts WordPress blog Educational Resources (OER) through (http://elearningexperts.wordpress. platforms like Ted-Ed, Khan Academy, com/2012/07/05/ choosing-a-webi- YouTube EDU, and other resources nar-solution/ and http://elearningex- using Creative Commons licensing. See perts.wordpress.com/2012/08/09/ http://www.openclass.com/open/home/ choosing-a-webinar-provider-part-2/). what for more information, and see Tose interested in bringing these tools their blog (http://www.openclass.com/ into their online instruction should blog) for news and developments, such consult with their institution’s IT as the Open Course Library, complete department. Faculty may also wish to 11-week courses featuring completely discuss content development with their OER content. librarian(s) to explore the creation of t Cisco WebEx, Adobe Connect, Citrix information literacy goals, learning GoToMeeting, and Blackboard Collab- outcomes, and remote (a)synchronous orate: ofer synchronous and asynchro- library sessions to best suit and ben- nous options; WebEx, Connect, and eft the students in an online learning Collaborate ofen involve institutional environment. licenses, but individual licenses may be t Massive Open Online Courses (or afordable; they ofen have fee struc- MOOCs): a currently popular style tures and may have limited free use; of online instruction, using many of Blackboard Collaborate is the platform the tools and resources developed for of choice for the international Library blended, online, and distance learning 2.0, Global Education, and Global over the past several decades; popular STEMx conferences for live and ar- platforms include Coursera, Udemy, chived presentations; Adobe Connect is Khan Academy, Udacity, and EdX; Flash based; these platforms may have platforms may be for proft, not-for- features such as limits on number of proft, or institutionally-based; certif- attendees, screen sharing, document icates have gained in popularity and sharing, whiteboard capabilities, limits the for-credit MOOC is under intense on numbers of simultaneously shared development at the corporate organiza- screens, recording, audio, and attend- tion and institutional levels; primarily ee chat features, and logo branding asynchronous learning through videos options. Overviews of these and other with embedded quiz elements, read- similar products to help you bring ings, quizzes, peer review assignments, online-based learning to online learn- and discussion boards; synchronous ers can be found through articles at options include Google+, Twitter, and

32 Virtually Yours

Facebook connections with classmates delivery and creation, as with “crowdsourc- and instructors (thus creating potential ing,” digital archives, gamifcation, and for “live tweeting” and Google+ Hang- more. Showers (2012) quotes a senior editor out discussions) as well as occasional from Te Atlantic who stated, “the library coordinated gatherings using MeetUps sees its users as collaborators in improv- (http://www.meetup.com). For more ing the collections the library already has.” information on MOOCs and work- Showers (2012) continues, writing: ing with librarians in them, refer to Libraries and staf sufer from their per- these two documents created by EDU- ceived lack of value within the informa- CAUSE: “7 Tings You Should Know tion supply chain and the continuing About MOOCs” (http://net.educause. devaluing of librarianship as a profes- edu/ir/library/pdf/ ELI7078.pdf) and sion—the same disintermediation and “What Campus Leaders Need to Know de-professionalization as other indus- About MOOCs” (http:// net.educause. tries such as music, media, and publish- edu/ir/library/pdf/PUB4005.pdf), as ing. Yet, libraries have been able to utilize well as Cantwell’s article “MOOL in a their staf as passionate advocates for in- MOOC”—also featured in this issue of novation and user needs, as well as real- Internet Learning. izing the potential of their location within their communities and public spaces. Tis list of tools is not exhaustive and Using these synchronous, asynchronous, there may be more exciting or better-suit- storage and collaboration tools, as well as ed options for your institution, your course, the digital learning object repository re- or your goals in particular. When work- sources, and content management systems ing to engage students in the online envi- featured in this article should aid faculty ronment, it is worth getting creative and in better understanding and innovating interactive, and embracing technology; in the online learning environment. Tese the digitally native students will appreci- resources should also enable faculty to feel ate the efort and those who are not digi- confdent in approaching their librarians tal natives may have an opportunity to and information technology profession- experience the “new” styles, pedagogies, als to pursue these technologies, options, and means of education that have devel- and opportunities for creative and engag- oped alongside the rest of the online world. ing content development and delivery. In an early 2012 article in Library Jour- Sodt and Pederson Summey (2009) wrote nal, Ben Showers highlights the concept of on using Web 2.0 tools to enhance the in- “the academic library as a model of change teraction between libraries, librarians, and management” in that it must adapt to new their patrons and, for those interested in technologies, and serve ever-changing and approaching librarians regarding opportu- -shifing communities (and the expectations nities to embed in online and other course of those patrons), while under ever-tight- environments, their article may provide ad- ening budgets and engaging in activist ditional suggestions as to tools and strate- conversations related to open access, open gies to embed successfully. education, copyright, intellectual freedom, As Showers indicates, librarians are and freedom of speech. Libraries have of- “passionate advocates for innovation and ten been on the forefront of developing and user needs” and, in the world of online edu- harnessing new methods of and for content cation, there is still ample room for further

33 Internet Learning

development and deeper librarian engage- rate behavior is teamwork –embedded li- ment to better meet the needs of its faculty brarians must not stand apart; they must and students. place themselves into teams as ‘integral parts to the whole’” (p. 197). Te interper- What Lies Ahead? sonal, institutional, and technological resources and tools discussed in this article hopefully encourage faculty to assist librar- e are in the midst of the greatest ians in becoming part of the course team, as upheaval in the way informa- a mediator and an advocate for both faculty tion is handled in our society standards and expectations and for student Wsince the age of Gutenberg. We have rev- needs and concerns. olutionized the way we create, store, manage, distribute, and consume information. Tis change has come about because of the References Internet and the Web. Libraries no longer have a monopoly on information. Digital Ball, S. J. (2013). What do war and em- information and communication is ubiq- bedded librarianship have in common? uitous—in homes, ofces, schools, dorms, AALL Spectrum Online, 17(7). Retrieved everywhere. Librarians must be where their from http://www.aallnet.org/main-menu/ users are. Te traditional modes of library Publications/spectrum/ Spectrum-Online/ service are insufcient. Librarians must stay war-and-embedded-librarianship.html abreast of rapidly changing technologies, and develop new ways of organizing and Bartnik, L., Farmer, K., Ireland, A., Mur- new management techniques. Most impor- ray, L., & Robinson, J. (2010). We will be tantly, we must build new relationships with assimilated: Five experiences in embedded our information users. We must focus on librarianship. Public Services Quarterly, 6, the needs and priorities of those we serve 150-164. doi:10.1080/15228959.2010.4987 and determine how we can best address 72 those needs. Several areas in which librarians can Carlson, J., & Kneale, R. (2011). Embed- take an active role are in MOOCs, mobile ded librarianship in the research context: learning, gaming, Google+ Hangouts, in es- Navigating new waters. College & Research tablishing data management plans to satisfy Libraries News, 72(3), 167-70. NSF grant requirements, and in open ac- Cooper, R. A. (2010). Architects in the cess publication and curating institutional mist: Embedding the librarian in a culture repositories. As Stephen Covey would say of design. Public Services Quarterly, 6, (1990), “We must begin with the end in 323-329. mind.” And in the words of Alan Kay (1989), “Te best way to predict the future is to in- Cordell, D. (2012). Skype and the embed- vent it” (p. 1). Great changes bring about ded librarian. Library Technology Reports, great opportunities. We are in an informa- 48(2), 8-11. tion and knowledge-based global economy, so the information skills of librarians are at Covey, S. (1990). Te 7 habits of highly a premium. Shumaker (2012) states, “Te efective people. New York: Free Press. dominant form of community and corpo- Covone, N., & Lamm, M. (2010). Just be there: Campus, department, classroom…

34 Virtually Yours and kitchen? Public Services Quarterly, 6, Matthews (Eds.) Subject librarians: Engag- 198-207. doi:10.1080/15228959.2010.4987 ing with the learning and teaching environ- 68 ment (3-17). Burlington, VT: Ashgate.

Dale, J., & Kellam, L. (2012). Te incredible Freiburger, G., & Kramer, S. (2009). Em- embeddable librarian. Library Media Con- bedded librarians: One library's model for nection, 30(4), 30-31, 51. decentralized service. Journal of the Med- ical Library Association, 97(2), 139-142. Dene, J. (2011). Embedded librarianship doi:10.3163/1536-5050.97.2.013 at the Claremont colleges. In C. Kvenild & K. Calkins (Eds.) Embedded librarians: Hamilton, B. J. (2012). Case profle: Ellen Moving beyond the one-shot instruction Hampton Filgo. Library Technology Re- (219-228). Chicago: Association of College ports, 48(2), 16-20. & Research Libraries. Hamilton, B. J. (2012). Conclusion: Best Dewey, B. (2004). Te embedded librarian: tools and practices. Library Technology Strategic campus collaborations. Resource Reports, 48(2), 27-54. Sharing & Information Networks, 17(1/2), 5-17. HathiTrust. (2013). HathiTrust Digital Li- brary. Retrieved http://www.hathitrust.org/. Drewes, K., & Hofman, N. (2010). Aca- demic embedded librarianship: An intro- Haycock, L., & Howe, A. (2011). Collabo- duction. Public Services Quarterly, 6(2/3), rating with library course pages and Face- 75-82. doi:10.1080/15228959.2010.498773 book: Exploring new opportunities. Collab- orative Librarianship, 3(3), 157-162. EDUCAUSE. (2012). What Campus Lead- ers Need to Know About MOOCs. Re- Heider, K. L. (2010). Ten tips for imple- trieved from http://net.educause.edu/ir/ menting a successful embedded librarian library/pdf/PUB4005.pdf program. Public Services Quarterly, 6, 110- 121. EDUCAUSE Learning Initiative. (2011). 7 Tings You Should Know About MOOCs. Hemmig, W., & Montet, M. (2010). Te Retrieved from http://net.educause.edu/ir/ ‘just for me’ virtual library: Enhancing an library/pdf/ELI7078.pdf embedded eBrarian program. Journal of Library Administration, 50(5/6), 657-669. Edwards, M., Kumar, S., & Ochoa, M. doi:10.1080/01930826.2010.488943 (2010). Assessing the value of embedded librarians in an online graduate educational Hicks, A., & Sinkinson, C. (2011). Situat- technology course. Public Services Quar- ed questions and answers responding to terly, 6, 271-291. doi:10.1080/15228959.201 library users with QR codes. Reference & 0.497447 User Services Quarterly, 51(1), 60-69.

Feetham, M. (2006). Te subject special- Hofman, S. (2011). Embedded academic ist in higher education—A review of the librarian experiences in online courses: literature. In P. Dale, M. Holland, & M. Roles, faculty collaboration, and opinion.

35 Internet Learning

Library Management, 32(6/7), 444-456. Library Administration, 49(1-2), 11-22. doi: doi:10.1108/01435121111158583 10.1080/01930820802310544

Hofman, S., & Ramin, L. (2010). Best Matos, M. A., Matsuoka-Motley, N., & practices for librarians embedded in online Mayer, W. (2010). Te embedded librarian courses. Public Services Quarterly, 6(2/3), online or face-to-face: American Universi- 292-305. doi:10.1080/15228959.2010.4977 ty’s experiences. Public Services Quarterly, 43 6, 130-139. doi:10.1080/15228959.2010.49 7907 Te How-to Geek. (2010, April 29). Te cleverest ways to use Dropbox that you’re Menchaca, F. (2012). Te future is in doubt: not using. Lifehacker. Retrieved from http:// Librarians, publishers, and networked lifehacker.com/5527055/ the-cleverest- learning in the 21st century. Journal of ways-to-use-dropbox-that-youre-not-using Library Administration, 52(5), 396-410. doi :10.1080/01930826.2012.700804 Johnson, L., Adams Becker, S., Cummins, M., Estrada, V., Freeman, A., & Ludgate, H. Midler, Z. (2012). Case profle: Zoe Mid- (2013). NMC horizon report: 2013 higher ler and Google Docs. Library Technology education edition. Austin, Texas: Te New Reports, 48(2), 12-15. Media Consortium. Retrieved from http:// net.educause.edu/ir/library/pdf/HR2013. Miller, C. (2011). Embedded and embodied: pdf. Dance librarianship within the academic department. In C. Kvenild & K. Calkins Kay, A. C. (1989). “Predicting the Future.” (Eds.) Embedded librarianship: Moving Stanford Engineering, 1, 1-6. http://www. beyond one-shot instruction (47-63). Chi- ecotopia.com/webpress/futures.htm. Orig- cago: Association of College and Research inally presented as an Address before the Libraries. 20th Annual Meeting of the Stanford Com- puter Forum. Montgomery, S. E. (2010). Online webinars! Interactive learning where our users are: Kesselman, M. A., & Watstein, S. B. (2009). Te future of embedded librarianship. Pub- Creating opportunities: Embedded librari- lic Services Quarterly, 6(2/3), 306-311. doi:1 ans. Journal of Library Administration, 49, 0.1080/15228959.2010.497467 383-400. doi:10.1080/01930820902832538 Muir, G., & Heller-Ross, H. (2010). Is em- Knecht, M., & Reid, K. (2009). Modular- bedded librarianship right for your insti- izing Information Literacy Training via tution? Public Services Quarterly, 6(2/3), the Blackboard eCommunity. Journal 92-109. doi:10.1080/15228959.2010.497464 of Library Administration, 49(1-2), 1-9, doi:10.1080/01930820802310502 Rudasill, L. M. (2010). Beyond subject specialization: Te creation of embedded Lillard, L. L., Norwood, S., Wise, K., librarians. Public Services Quarterly, 6, 83- Brooks, J., & Kitts, R. (2009). Embedded 91. doi:10.1080/15228959.2010.494577 Librarians: MLS Students as Apprentice Librarians in Online Courses. Journal of

36 Virtually Yours

Rudin, P. (2008). No fxed address: Tomsett-Scott, B. & May, F. (2009). Te evolution of outreach library ser- How may we help you? Online educa- vices on university campuses. Te tion faculty tell us what they need from Reference Librarian, 49(1), 55-75. libraries and librarians. Journal of Library doi:10.1080/02763870802103761 Administration, 49(1-2), 111-135. doi: 10.1080/01930820802312888 Shank, J. D., & Bell, S. (2011). Blended librarianship: [Re]envisioning the role of Tumbleson, B. E., & Burke, J. J. (2010). Em- librarian as educator in the digital informa- bedded librarianship is job one: Building tion age. Reference & User Services Quar- on instructional synergies. Public Services terly, 51(2), 105-110. Quarterly, 6(2/3), 225-236. doi:10.1080/152 28959.2010.497457 Shank, J. D., and N. H. Dewald. 2003. Es- tablishing our presence in courseware: Tumbleson, B. E., & Burke, J. J. (2010). When life hands you lemons: Overcoming Adding library services to the virtual class- obstacles to expand services in an embed- room. ITAL: Information Technology and ded librarian program. Journal of Library Libraries 22 (1): 38–43. Administration, 50, 972-988. doi:10.1080/0 1930826.2010.489002 Showers, B. (2012, January 6). Backtalk: Te constant innovator: Te academic Veal, R., & Bennett, E. (2009). Te vir- library as a model of change management. tual library liaison: A case study at an Library Journal Academic Newswire. Re- online university. Journal of Library trieved from http://lj.libraryjournal.com Administration, 49(1/2), 161-170. doi:10.1080/01930820802312938 Shumaker, D. (2009). Who let the librarians out? Embedded librarianship and the York, A. C., & Vance, J. M. (2009). Taking library manager. Reference & User Services library instruction into the online class- Quarterly, 48(3), 239-242. room: Best practices for embedded librarians. Journal of Library Administration, 49, Shumaker, D. (2012). Te embedded 197-209. doi:10.1080/01930820802312995 librarian: Innovative strategies for taking knowledge where it’s needed. Medford, NJ.: Information Today, Inc.

Sodt, J. M., & Pedersen Summey, T. (2009). Beyond the Library's Walls: Using Library 2.0 Tools to Reach Out to All Users. Jour- nal of Library Administration, 49(1-2), 97-109. doi:10.1080/01930820802312854

Tomas, E. A., Bird, N., & Moniz Jr., R. J. (2012). Informationists in a small university library. Reference & User Services Quarterly, 51(3), 223-225.

37 Internet Learning Continuous Improvement and Embedded Librarianship in Online Learning Environments: A Case Study Jeneen LaSee-Willemssen and Lisa Reed1

Tis case study describes how a college business instructor and an academic librarian collaborated, using the tenants of Continuous Improvement (CI) and embedded librarianship, to help improve student writing and information literacy skills in an online course. Te authors detail their personal experiences, the challenges they faced, and the practices they developed. Data related to the successful results of the collaboration are shared, as are sample materials used in the course: a screencast video, email, and discussion post.

Keywords: Continuous Improvement; embedded librarianship; online teaching and learning; business education; case study

ontinuous Improvement (CI) strat- Librarian and Instructor Partnerships egies are well known in the manufacturing world. Drawing on the ne frequent type of partnership CJapanese principle of kaizen, CI is a “pro- that has developed over time is that cess of continuous incremental improve- between librarians and instructors. ment” with the end goal of more efectively OUsually, the partnership develops in order providing a better product for the custom- to help students develop and strengthen in- er (Singh & Singh, 2013, p. 32). One of the formation literacy skills so that they may main tenets of CI is to provide value to the become better consumers and users of in- customer. formation, and thus more informed future When applied in the educational professionals. Partnering between instruc- environment, this might mean providing tor and librarian can take the form of one- not only content, but also the skills that shot-workshops, collaborative assignment surround the content (writing, reading, development, and shared grading—just to researching, citing, etc.). In addition, be- name a few examples. A more recent meth- cause content-area experts are frequent- od of partnering, embedded librarianship, ly not trained in teaching these general where the librarian strives to be “there education skills, partnering with gener- with the user at the point of need, rather al education staf in order to provide this than waiting passively… [in] the library,” is learning is an optimal method of helping growing in popularity in higher education students, the customers, obtain their goals. (Smith & Sutton, 2010, p.1). Finally, in order to apply CI in an educational setting, instructors must be willing to learn from their mistakes and make constant improvements to their processes and methodologies (Sayer & Williams, 2007).

1 Rasmussen College

38 Continuous Improvement and Embedded Librarianship in Online Learning Environments

Embedded Librarianship ments. Additionally, I am a parent with all the training and coaching opportunities he practice of embedding in a brick this particular role involves. As someone and mortar setting can prove dif- who had recently embarked on a second fcult because both instructional career on the shady side of 50, I was ter- Tpartners must have time to meet and plan, rifed that I might not be able to adjust to and the content instructor must substitute the challenges a career in education might some content time for general education demand. skills. Embedding in an online, asynchro- I resolved that determination and nous environment, however, removes many extensive preparation would compensate of the obstacles found in a synchronous for the actual teaching experience I lacked. setting. CI principles used in an embed- I told myself I was prepared to thoughtfully ded librarianship partnership can produce and patiently lead students through their excellent results. Online embedding can business course material. I would under- help provide students, instructors, and li- stand but be frm with those students who brarians with an optimal learning environ- fell behind or lacked the proper motivation ment: instructors can teach subject matter to succeed in college. I would be fexible content, librarians can share information with my schedule to make myself available literacy skills, students can be successful whenever a student needed to contact me. learners, and content can be adjusted and I spent long hours agonizing over lesson changed continuously to meet the needs of plans and homework assignments, obsess- all involved. ing over which case studies would be most In this article, the authors seek to relevant to my students. share the process of learning to partner I eagerly anticipated reading the and embed, using CI principles. We are submissions for that frst written assign- very aware that we are describing a work ment. Tis assignment asked students to in progress. We continue to learn from our share why they had chosen to study busi- eforts, our mistakes, and most of all from ness and what career they hoped to pur- our students. Te goal of this process is to sue afer graduation. Te goal of this as- provide the very best student experience signment was for me to get to know my possible in an environment of constant students and for the students to refect on change. their career choices. As I read the initial submissions from my students, there were Case Study several that contained statements like the following: “i [sic] want to study business Te Business Instructor’s Perspective: because i [sic] need a job.” My preconceived notions died with Lisa Reed a barely audible whimper. How could I teach business to students who were not am a latecomer to the feld of educa- willing or prepared to write at the level I tion. Previously, I had spent 21 years in was expecting? Were my standards too the world of manufacturing manage- high? Was I not being clear in my instruc- Iment and had provided extensive training tions? I told myself this might have been a for employees both in formal classroom unique group of students, and that I would settings and in informal coaching environ- double my eforts with this group. Surely in

39 Internet Learning the next term I would have students who t ćF XPSME PG TPDJBM NFEJB JT OPX FWFS were ready for and understood the chal- present. Te writing skills needed to post to lenges of college. Te next term a similar social media technologies are far diferent pattern repeated itself and I found that than the skills required for crafing a per- my entry-level college students were again suasive argument or efective essay. While struggling with academic-level writing. texting may or may not destroy the writing To stave of panic, I conferred with skills of the nation (Crystal, 2008), my stu- my colleagues. Tey had similar experi- dents were including text such as “gr8” and ences. What was going on? I asked the li- “imho” in their papers. brarian to help me with some research. We discovered that issues with writing were t.BOZTUVEFOUTBSFUBLJOHUIFJSĕSTUDPMMFHF not unique to my students. In fact, arti- courses online and not residentially. While cles bemoaning the poor writing skills of Rasmussen College provides an abundance college graduates, much less new college of support resources for our online stu- students, were rampant. A research study dents, those resources might be in a new by the College Board and the National and unfamiliar online format for students, Commission on Writing (2004) indicated and they might not take advantage of them. that even though writing is considered an essential skill when hiring and promoting It has been noted that when people employees, businesses are spending “as are faced with difcult situations they revert much as $3.1 billion annually to remediate back to their original training and back- their employees’ writing defciencies” (p.4). ground. A doctor will naturally speak of Further, Quible and Grifn (2007) point- diagnosing the problem, the engineer will ed to changes in the teaching of writing consider how to analyze the situation, and at the high school level due to high-stakes an information technology specialist might testing as possible parts of the problem. be most comfortable creating a fow chart to Similarly, the National Center for Educa- address an issue. My background includes tion Statistics (2012) noted that in tests of many hours spent working on Continuous writing skills, 74% of high school seniors Improvement projects. So it is probably no were found to be less than profcient writ- surprise that in an act of desperation I chose ers. Various other research studies unveiled to apply some CI concepts to this situation. additional contributing factors that were Te frst and most important tenet impacting the writing skills of students: of CI is to provide value to your customer (Sayer & Williams, 2007). In this case, my t"OJODSFBTJOHOVNCFSPGDPMMFHFTUVEFOUT customers were my students, and the value, are nontraditional and coming from a work or outcome, they were seeking was a college environment rather than straight out of high education. Professionals who work with school. Tis is not a new trend. Te Nation- CI will tell you that you do not get to se- al Center for Education Statistics indicates lect your customer, you have to adjust your that 37% of college students are enrolled product or service to provide value to your part time, 32% are working full time, and customer. Terefore, in addition to teaching 38% are over the age of 25 (Hess, 2011). For business concepts to students, it is essential these students, writing a paper was a thing to provide instruction on how to write a of the past; several years may have passed paper. Similarly, while we might be more since they wrote their last academic paper. experienced with providing assistance to

40 Continuous Improvement and Embedded Librarianship in Online Learning Environments

students in a face-to-face residential class, ness to the information literacy curriculum our students were frequently choosing the provided by instructional librarians with- online platform for their classes. Hence, out a required class. the task became how to teach business and As an example, early in our partner- writing to new college students in an online ship, Lisa’s Introduction to Business courses environment. were taught on campus rather than online, Another important tenet of CI is to and we worked together to ensure that I consider input of all involved stakeholders regularly presented a variety of information (Sayer & Williams, 2007). Tis turned out literacy topics to students in the classroom. to be a huge beneft for me because it en- Topics included how to use specifc resourc- couraged me to continue to share my chal- es for research, develop a thesis statement, lenges with our campus librarian. She had and cite sources according to the Publica- seen this scenario play itself out in many tion Manual of the American Psychological areas beyond the school of business. As the Association (APA). Te sessions were help- campus librarian, she had heard students ful to students, but this format required Lisa share their frustration with a process that to take time away from her business content required them to learn their subject course to allow time for the information literacy material, learn how to write a paper, and content, that we both be in the class at the learn how to navigate online classes and re- same time, and that the students had to wait sources simultaneously. until afer class to practice what I presented. In short, there was room for improvement. Te Librarian’s Perspective: When Lisa’s courses moved online, Jeneen LaSee-Willemssen the transfer presented an incredible opportunity. We realized that I could become a isa’s plight was not new to me at all— member of the course in the mode of “lurk- in fact, I could list a variety of skills ing librarian,” an “observer who monitors in which students needed help. As a course discussion and initiates communica- Llibrarian, I work with students on a wide tion in response to perceived needs” (York range of issues: computer use, course sof- and Vance as cited by Smith and Sutton, ware navigation, Internet navigation, writ- 2010, p. 6). As lurking librarian, I could ing skills, editing skills, the ability to fnd share more content than I had previously, and use quality information, and citing but without taking away from Lisa’s business skills. Te aforementioned skills are collec- content. In addition, because the course was tively known as information literacy. asynchronous (not in real time), Lisa and I Much of my time is spent helping did not need to match schedules; therefore students minimize information literacy I could post guidance and feedback in the gaps—either one-on-one or in workshops course based on my schedule availability. and webinars. Because not all students are Finally, the content I had been providing in required to attend workshops, I am not able one or two workshops in the past could now to co-teach in all classes, and not all students be spread out throughout the whole course are inclined to come in for one-on-one help, and presented exactly when the students my information literacy instruction reaches needed it. It was a win-win-win situation. only a limited number of students and only We began our adventure by enroll- at certain points in their education. Tus, ing me as a teaching assistant in Lisa’s on- there is a lack of consistency and complete- line Introduction to Business course. Lisa

41 Internet Learning introduced me to the whole class, and to- Lisa and I also worked towards lad- gether we explained what I would be doing: dering the way my content was introduced (1) perusing the assignments and readings, and assessed. We used CI principles in my (2) reading student discussion posts, and instruction methodology. For example, I in- (3) providing advice and guidance to introduced APA style at the beginning of the dividuals as teachable moments presented course, but only had students learn and use themselves. Once introduced, I logged in certain components of it early on. In this to the course every Monday and Turs- way, mastery of APA style was not expect- day and emailed students with suggestions ed until the end of the course, and students and advice as needed, based on what I was had a safe environment in which to practice reading in their discussion posts. Lisa and I their new skills. Lisa graded the citation as- agreed that I would limit my comments to pects of student papers accordingly. information literacy-related areas and skills During the frst several rounds of and that she would address content. As we embedding I was not sure if I was having grew more comfortable with the collabo- a substantial impact. I wanted to help stu- ration, I also began proactively presenting dents become better consumers and users of information to the class as a whole via class information. I could see that some students announcements and discussion posts. For were taking my advice, using the resources example, if the students needed to fnd un- I had recommended and trying to cite the employment statistics related to their state way I had modeled. Few, however, actual- or county for a given module, the day the ly chose to contact me or ask me questions module opened I might introduce them all directly; and I could only see the discussion to the Bureau of Labor Statistics website posts, not the papers. Lisa, however, reas- and provide an explanation of not only how sured me that the presence of the lurking to best search it but also how to cite it using librarian was making a positive impact in APA style. If students used “txt” language in student papers as well as discussion posts. their discussion posts, I might guide them Te positive impact combined with lack of away from that. See Figures 1, 2, and 3 for student interaction with me, the librarian, illustrations of content provided to all stu- matches research by Tumbleson and Burke dents. (2010), who note that even with students who found embedded librarians in their Figure 1. Lurking Librarian Video for online courses helpful, only 27% reached Module 3 Written Assignment out to that librarian with questions or for advice.

Results

fer several quarters of embedding and lurking, an opportunity presented itself to prove that the ini- Atiatives were working. In the fall quarter of 2012, Lisa had two online sections of Intro- duction to Business rather than one. Jeneen lurked in one, and the other section became the control group. Te class the authors part- 42 Continuous Improvement and Embedded Librarianship in Online Learning Environments

Figure 2. Sample Email for Module 6 Assignment

Figure 3. Discussion Post Prompt for Module 9 Assignment

43 Internet Learning nered in was weaker academically. Tese One could simply open the fle and copy students had more difculties writing and and paste the content into the appropriate researching while the control group seemed module of the online course and upload it. better prepared. Tis assessment was made Te content was utilized with and without in part because the control group was writ- a lurking librarian in the following quar- ing more substantial posts and taking initial ters with mixed success. Most quarters the attempts to cite sources. By the end of the lurking librarian content seemed to prove quarter, however, the section with a lurk- helpful to the students because, unlike past ing librarian had become more successful quarters, students would use quality re- researchers and writers than the control sources, integrate sources into their writing, group. In specifc, the students in the lurk- and attempt citing in APA style. ing group were integrating quality sourc- CI principles came into play again es such as Bureau of Labors Statistics web during the winter quarter of 2013. Lisa had pages into their writing, while students in one section of Introduction to Business in the control group were still frequently pick- which a handful of students seemed to re- ing sources that were lacking in authority if sent the fact that they were being asked to do they were fnding backup sources at all. Te things they felt were outside of the content lurking group had started to understand of the course, namely to write clearly, pro- the idea of backing up their points with vide researched backup to their statements, outside evidence, while the control group and cite their sources in their discussion still wanted to cite random concepts or to posts. Tey seemed to feel that discussion simply use personal experiences as substan- board writing was much more casual than tiation. Finally, the lurking group students we did. At frst, we worried that we were were starting to grasp the logic and details failing these students. Why couldn’t they of APA formatting, while the control group understand how important clear, persuasive students were still struggling with format- writing with basic documentation was? We ting issues like matching in-text citations to decided that that even though some of these reference items. Tese results match what students were expressing frustration at be- is available in the literature. For example, ing assessed on their writing and citing, that Tumbleson and Burke (2010) point out that that very frustration indicated a developing “sixty-seven percent [of students who had awareness of the importance of professional taken an online course with an embedded communication. Tat developing awareness librarian] agreed or strongly agreed that it is something we can continue working with. was helpful” (p. 979). Enamored by our success, we gath- Current and Future Endeavors ered the information Jeneen had provided to the students and created a fle of an- e are moving forward in three nouncements, discussion post starters, and veins. First, we are sharing the course emails that could be reused in other wealth of information. Jeneen sections of the same course, with or with- Wshared her fle of cumulated discussion out an actual lurking librarian. Te fle, a posts, emails, video links, and announce- Word document, was structured chrono- ments she had used not only with Lisa, but logically to match the course. Each type also with the Rasmussen College librarian of information was identifed by a header: team so they could lurk with their own In- email, announcement, discussion post, etc. troduction to Business instructors. It is our 44 Continuous Improvement and Embedded Librarianship in Online Learning Environments hope that this fle will also be distributed to References other business instructors, so that they may use the content. College Board, & National Commission Second, we aim to leverage our own on Writing. (2004, September). Writing a success by continuing to apply CI concepts, ticket to work...or a ticket out: A survey specifcally implementing stable processes of business leaders. Retrieved from http:// and minimizing their variability so we can www.collegeboard.com/prod_downloads/ manage by exception. Accordingly, we hope writingcom/writing-ticket-to-work.pdf to edit, modify, and use Jeneen’s fle of lurking librarian content to supplement future Crystal, D. (2008). Txtng: Te Gr8 Db8. online Introduction to Business courses. Oxford: Oxford University Press. One adjustment we will make in the near future is to address the frustration exhibited Hess, F. (2011, September 28). Old school: by some of the students in our winter 2013 College’s most important trend is the rise section of Introduction to Business. We will of the adult student. Te Atlantic. Re- be editing the lurking librarian content to trieved from http://www.theatlantic.com/ help make it more obvious to the students business/archive/2011/09/old-school-col- that the writing, research, and citing skills leges-most-important-trend-is-the-rise-of- we are sharing are essential to their devel- the-adult-student/245823/ opment as future professionals and that assessment in this area now is to their beneft. National Center for Education Statistics. Using this newly edited content will also al- (2012, September). Te nation's report low us to spend more time focusing on pro- card: Writing 2011: Executive summary. viding individual feedback and support to Retrieved from http://nces.ed.gov/nation- students who need more help than already sreportcard/pubs/main2011/2012470.asp provided. Finally, we couldn’t help but notice Quible, Z. K., & Grifn, F. (2007). Are writ- that much of the lurking librarian material, ing defciencies creating a lost generation lessons in formatting and structuring aca- of business writers? Journal of Education demic papers, searching databases, select- for Business, 83(1), 32-36. Retrieved from ing quality resources, and citing sources, http://www.taylorandfrancisgroup.com/ was general in nature. All of these instructional materials could be introduced into Sayer, N., & Williams, B. (2007). Lean for any introductory online course with rela- dummies. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley. tively minor adjustments to ft specifc assignments and/or disciplinary diferences. Singh, J., & Singh, H. (2013). Continuous Tus, it is our hope that other instructors improvement strategies: An overview. IUP and librarians will seek opportunities to col- Journal of Operations Management, 12(1), laborate and partner with one another, use 32-57. Retrieved from http://www.iupin- the embedded librarian idea, implement CI dia.in/ concepts to keep improving, and share the results with world. Smith, S. S., & Sutton, L. (2010). Te embedded academic librarian. [White paper]. Retrieved from WakeSpace website: http:// hdl.handle.net/10339/37676

45 Internet Learning

Tumbleson, B. E., & Burke, J. J. (2010). When life hands you lemons: Overcoming obstacles to expand services in an embedded librarian program. Journal of Library Administration, 50(7/8), 972-988. doi:10.1 080/01930826.2010.489002

York, A. C., & Vance, J. M. (2009). Tak- ing library instruction into the online classroom: Best practices for embedded librarians. Journal of Library Administration, 49(1/2), 197-209. doi:10.1080/01930820802312995

46 “MOOL” in a MOOC “MOOL” in a MOOC: Opportunities for Librarianship in the Expanding Galaxy of Massive Open Online Course Design and Execution Laureen P. Cantwell1

Te discussion around, and analysis of, massive open online courses (or MOOCs) continues to grow and develop. Educators unfamiliar with MOOCs, their hosts, structures, benefts, and challenges will fnd this article helpful for gaining understanding of this on-trend form of distance learning and course delivery. Furthermore, the author proposes that the potential for librarianship within MOOCs should also be considered. Much of the relevant literature from the felds of education, librarianship, information science, and academia at large, reviewed here, have not delved too deeply into the concept of librarianship within this setting (yet). In an efort to discover MOOC faculty opinions, challenges, and incentives for MOOC creation and participation, as well as their thoughts on librarians in MOOCs, the author developed a survey. Tis survey aimed to assess: (1) the costs and benefts experienced by faculty teaching MOOCs; (2) perceived/anticipated student and learning environment successfulness within MOOCs; and (3) the extent faculty engage with their institution’s librarians. Additionally, the survey approached MOOC faculty regarding whether they envision a future for librarians within MOOCs and what that future might look like. Tis article closes with discussion on survey fndings, suggestions for future research, hypotheses regarding the future of MOOCs, and opportunities for a “MOOL” in a MOOC.

Keywords: MOOCs; massive open online courses; nontraditional education programs; open source education programs; online learning; distance learning; information literacy; media literacy; instructional technologies; higher education; e-learning; librarianship; copyright; open access.

ithin the last two years or so, the contentious, the emergence of the massive landscape of education and of open online course, or MOOC, serves as the instruction delivery has shif- origin of this transition. Wed. While this shif has not been entirely Te EDUCAUSE Library (2013) de- new—online instruction and distance ed- fnes the MOOC very simply as “a model ucation have been around for decades—it for delivering learning content online to any has generated substantial buzz in terms of person who wants to take a course, with no openness, access and accessibility, aford- limits on attendance.” Tough this brief ex- ability, successfulness, and complications. planation may not come across as ground- Broad and afordable, yet complicated and breaking, the MOOC environment, and the

1 Instructional Services Librarian at the University of Memphis. For questions, comments, or other follow-up regarding this article, please contact her at [email protected] or 901-678-8209.

47 Internet Learning benefts and opportunities it presents, of- Relevant literature, survey respons- fers a unique new look at how we approach es, and additional resources from the education in general, distance learning, feld of librarianship led to the vision of and distance instruction and content de- a “MOOL” in a MOOC—that is, the con- livery. (See Figures 1 and 2 at the end of cept of massive open online librarianship, this article for two multimedia presenta- or (with less jargon) acting as a librarian tions. Figure 1 is an MP4 of a presentation and/or providing library resources in the by the author called “What Teachers Can MOOC setting. Resource creation, course Learn as Students in MOOCs,” delivered at content design and delivery, and issues of the Global Education Conference in No- copyright and access constitute the three vember 2012. Figure 2 is a Prezi entitled major foci of this section. In the fnal sec- “MOOCs: What Are Tey and How Do tion, the author recommends several areas Tey Work?” created July 2013 by the au- for future research, including the impact of thor for this publication.) the MOOC on copyright issues and access Literature on teaching and learning, shifs on the side of publishers. as well as about librarianship, abounds— yet the felds do not always comingle in Review of Relevant Literature their discussions as much as they could. A literature review opens up this educa- Teaching and Learning: A Few Highlights tion and librarianship discussion with the intention to lead into establishing the t the heart of the MOOC lies the de- connections between these felds. Ten, bate about whether such a course is current literature on MOOCs will provide or can be an efective means of in- background on the MOOC environment Astruction delivery, on the behalf of its facul- and the idea of “place” in the online atmo- ty members, and of education, on behalf of sphere, followed by the MOOC as a con- those enrolled. College and university fac- sumer and provider of access, content, and ulty and administrators, as well as govern- resources. Lastly, the literature review ad- ment and other organizations, have placed dresses prognostications for the future of importance upon the study of data gather- MOOCs and the engagement (and poten- ing about the experience of teaching and tial for engagement) with librarians. learning. A substantial study, conducted by A survey was conducted to explore Lawrence M. Aleamoni (1999), addresses MOOC faculty feelings, impressions, and student ratings (and the myths surrounding realities with regard to delivering instruc- their course and instruction evaluations) tion and content in this setting. Te study and research-supported facts with support- purpose, demographics, methods, results, ing evidence spanning from 1924 to 1998. and lessons learned are detailed, followed Critically, these myths highlight the dis- by a discussion of the survey and its results. connect between faculty and administrator Te underlying hope for the survey was to fippancy regarding student opinions (e.g. create refection upon MOOC faculty as “it’s a popularity contest,” students are im- to their expectations, their observations, mature/inexperienced/capricious, students their experience of costs and benefts, and need hindsight to evaluate “accurately,” ma- their understanding of the twenty-frst jors versus nonmajors signifcance, course century academic library and the skillsets grade versus course rating correlation sus- of its librarians. picions, and so on) and faculty opinions of 48 “MOOL” in a MOOC the usefulness and validity of student eval- ment, as well as the use of modern techno- uations (e.g., unreliable; invalid; impacts of logical aids. Further supporting Aleamoni’s class size; faculty–student gender impacts; research, Scarboro also fnds that faculty class time impacts; requirement versus elec- rank “seems unrelated to student learning,” tive; course level impacts; instructor rank; and that gender and national origin did not existence of rating rubric diferences by dis- seem to have an impact either whereas fac- cipline). Te fnal myth, especially import- tors like reliability, the use of technology, ant here, speaks to whether student ratings and engagement in their feld or discipline can be meaningfully applied toward im- to be of far greater interest to students and proving instruction—Aleamoni indicates have an impact upon their learning. that, by consulting with students, instruc- Te world of blended learning con- tors can indeed improve their instruction, tinues to shapeshif, as described in Wang, and their ratings. Shen, Novak, and Pan’s (2009) article on Following Aleamoni’s discussion, mobile learning, or m-learning. Where Scarboro (2012) conducted a survey of more both “individual fexible learning” and than 13,000 students in Istanbul, seeking “extended classrooms” have become more information on how to improve pedagogy popular, students can transform from pas- and how to promote student learning while sive learners in traditional classroom en- also providing an actual learning task for vironments into engaged learners who are students in his undergraduate Sociology re- behaviorally, intellectually, and emotional- search methods course. Teir primary ques- ly involved in their learning task (p. 674). tion (“What do university students perceive But mobile learning and technologies in- as the teaching strategies, environments, tegrated into course delivery are only part and tools that promote their learning?”) of the battle to demonstrate value in educa- takes Aleamoni’s work a step further, be- tion, though they certainly seem like daz- yond student evaluation-related evidence. zling components for driving student par- Scarboro writes, “We were further interested ticipation. Additional current and recent to discover if gender, student residence (at discussions of value include those about: home, in a dormitory, or in an apartment), integrating competencies into the under- academic achievement, discipline of study, graduate curriculum (Scaramozzino, 2010), national or international student status, faculty members and administrators engag- year in school, and other factors shaped stu- ing with students in new contexts and en- dent preferences for teaching and learning vironments (Haden, 2013), the concept of approaches” and includes the English ver- quality control in higher education settings sion of the questionnaire in the article’s ap- (Hazelkorn, 2013), freshman research skills pendices (p. 52). Of Scarboro’s conclusions, and overconfdence (Gustavson & Nall, we fnd that students “perceive their faculty 2011), accomplishing library services and as very important in their success as learn- education in transnational educational set- ers,” and that faculty research interests and tings (Green, 2013; Mangan, 2011), and the activities enhance student learning (p. 55). need to reinvent teaching while monitoring In the world of MOOCs, we can apply the costs and/or sufering budget cuts (New, favorable student perceptions of peer-to- 2013; Rivard, 2013). peer information sharing (e.g., they much Refecting on these topics and the prefer study groups to group assignments) world of MOOCs, many MOOCs and their and an internationally diverse environ- hosts (e.g., Coursera) integrate learning

49 Internet Learning

outcomes, instructional technology, and of the critical components of academic li- pre- and post-course evaluations, and high- brary success lies in the role of librarian as light faculty expertise and research inter- information consultant—an individual who ests in a new environment. Tese features “cultivates active partnerships with students ofen exist automatically in the very design and scholars, collaborating on the design and presentation of the MOOC. Other el- of meaningful learning experiences for stu- ements, like student research and critical dents and providing relevant value-added thinking skills (as well as cost monitoring), information […] Delivering the right in- are not so simply accomplished in this envi- formation to the right people at the right ronment. Tere are issues, such as publisher time underscored the value of librarians and database restrictions and embargoes, and libraries” (p. 90). Tey believe that in as well as faculty human resource or hu- embracing the concept and opportunity of man capital costs (e.g., course releases or librarian-as-information-consultant, the re- graduate assistant(s) usage), institutional lationship is more about collaboration than funding and/or grant funding, technolo- mere cooperation, where goals are defned gy costs, and opportunity costs (e.g., What together and, hopefully, achieved together are faculty not doing so that they may take (p. 92). on MOOC-related responsibilities?). Te While subject specialization has survey conducted for this article aims to been a part of librarianship in the Unit- better understand these aspects of MOOC ed States and Great Britain since just afer instruction and delivery, as well as the rela- World War II, the concept of “embedded li- tionships institutions have or are cultivating brarianship” has altered not so much what with their MOOC instructors. Tese arti- librarians do as it has how librarians pro- cles and the concepts detailed here set the vide what they do to their patrons and users stage for moving into the literature regard- (Rudasill, 2010). Te concept of “holistic” or ing librarianship and librarian engagement “comprehensive” librarianship entails: ref- with online instruction and learning. erence service and instruction (ofentimes now termed “research and instructional ser- Librarians in Online Instruction and vices”), collection development (e.g., pur- Learning chasing, weeding, recommending, and usage tracking), and at times even cataloging ne fnding from the Scarboro article work for a specifc subject area. Tis may be suggests that when students deem the traditional understanding of the job of university library collections insuf- an academic librarian, and yet librarianship Ofcient, they perceive libraries to be a det- has also changed with the tremendous leaps riment to their learning (p. 57). He states, of technology that we have seen in the new “strong libraries and helpful librarians, ease millennium. of access to electronic journals, strong com- Numerous job functions have been puter laboratories and well-equipped sci- added and these are, in a sense, part of what ence laboratories were all seen as vital to may fall under “other duties as assigned” in their learning” (p. 60). But what defnes a a librarian’s job description (Rudasill, 2010). “helpful” librarian in the twenty-frst cen- Te work of an embedded librarian may fall tury academic environment and to the into this area. Tese “other duties” unfortu- Millennial-generation student? Frank, Ra- nately mask (internally and externally) the schke, Wood, and Yang (2001) believe one closeness, the liveliness, and the enterprising

50 “MOOL” in a MOOC nature of being “embedded.” Rudasill writes, Despite Rudasill’s wide-ranging “Embeddedness implies that the librarian is concept of embedded librarianship, per- sharing in the life of the department or pro- haps one of the most efcient and popular gram, understanding the dynamics of rela- environments for embedded librarianship tionships between individuals within the is the online course environment. Tis par- department as well as relationships between ticular environment enables librarians to departments or departments and higher serve a community that ofen does not have administrators” (p. 84). Included here may easy in-person access to librarians and just be outreach to teachers outside the college/ as ofen does not understand the nature and university, teaching credit-bearing cours- nuances of their access to library resources. es, department meeting attendance, grant Librarians can be “intense[ly] integrat[ed]” writing collaborations, being on-site (phys- into the course, where the best implemen- ically or remotely) to better cover for users’ tations of this efort include transformative points of need, and much more (Rudasill, information literacy components (Lloyd, 2010; Rudin, 2008; Cordell, 2012). Covone 2004) and “multiple opportunities for rich and Lamm (2010) note that, “Embracing a interactions with the librarian” (Edwards, proactive approach to library service is nec- Kumar, & Ochoa, 2010). Because online essary in order to be successful and relevant courses are not traditional learning envi- in the academic environment” and they urge ronments and librarians do not always have librarians to become a part of the “global the extensive history of providing assistance campus environment” (p. 198-199). in that setting (Piper & Tag, 2011, p. 320- Why is embedded librarianship a 321), these courses in particular require the developing new realm of the work of li- librarian to be fexible and innovative. Ed- brarians? Rudasill (2010) found four com- wards, Kumar, and Ochoa’s (2010) article mon factors at the helm: innovation, access, includes a section on “Embedded Librarians budgets, and pedagogy (p. 85). Rudasill also in Online Courses” which highlights much notes that opportunities for embedding li- of the relevant literature and discussion of brarians are limited, regardless of how ex- a variety of implementations (p. 277-278). citing they can be as drivers of change; the Furthermore, Wang, Shen, Novak, and Pan library, as a place, must still be provided for (2009) assert that “distance learning with and it may not be necessary or even possible no interactivity reinforced the negative ef- to embed a librarian in every department or fects of passive nonparticipatory learning” course at an institution. Rudasill is not alone (p. 675). While Lai, Chang, Li, Fan, and Wu in stressing the importance of new forms of (2013) focus on outdoor education in their librarianship. In an article about embedded article for the British Journal of Education- librarianship, Hofman (2011) highlights a al Technology, several of their points apply concern from a 2003 article by John Shank to instruction taking place outside of tra- and Nancy Dewald, where the authors felt ditional classroom environments, in gen- “librarians should become involved in dis- eral: the teaching and learning that occurs tance education at the course level or they outside the classroom facility has diferent would ‘risk being bypassed by technology values and qualities which must be con- and losing relevance to students and facul- sidered; teachers must consistently explore ty’” (p. 445). ways to create dynamic content for that atmosphere, including “meaningful contextual experiences”; and that the experiences of

51 Internet Learning this environment should “complement and occurs, where instructional designers may expand classroom instruction” (p. E57). As not (yet) be present at an academic library such, it is then critical that librarians and but where librarians have the technological faculty in the online course environment and pedagogical skills to serve, in a limited work to create dynamic content to engage fashion, in the kind of “blended librarian” and support students. Librarians and facul- role Shank describes. Additionally, Shank ty may need to seek out professional devel- and Bell (2011) declare that “[b]lended li- opment within and beyond their institution brarianship is intentionally not library cen- to develop the skills and know-how regard- tric […] but, rather, it is librarian centric ing online content delivery options. (i.e., focused on people’s skill, knowledge Te librarianship workforce has they have to ofer, and relationships they grown to not only include embedded li- build)” (p. 106). It is, therefore, the inte- brarians but also “blended librarians.” Like gration of the librarian, more than only embedded librarians, these librarians also the library, that should make for the most have much in common with “traditional” engaging, dynamic, and critical resource librarians (reference, instruction, collection in the collaboration between a course and development), but “blended” librarians also a library—the human resources driving to- take on instructional design responsibilities ward student success within both environ- and have a wealth of knowledge, training, ments, the course and the library, are its and afection for instructional technology. most powerful components. Tese librarians are, at least in part, sought As Pritchard (2010) writes, embed- out as a result of the challenges and op- ded librarians begin engaging in elements portunities technology has brought to the of instructional design alongside the faculty ways libraries handle the storage, collec- member(s) of a particular course, serving as tion, spread, and use of information and re- a collaborator in the entire course process sources. Shank (2006) includes tables of fre- rather than in a session or two of the course, quently required qualifcations (p. 519) and or just in the content management system frequently desired qualifcations (p. 520), as (CMS) element (e.g., Blackboard or Desire- well as primary responsibilities (p. 521), in 2Learn). Pritchard lists attitude, visibility, the role of an instructional design librari- and professional expertise as the most im- an that may help the reader better under- portant factors in establishing this kind of stand the demands of such a position. Top team-teaching efort with a faculty member requirements include web/multimedia ap- (p. 387-388). Montgomery (2010) writes, plication experience (e.g., Adobe), commu- “Social networking tools provide [college nication and interpersonal skills, and orga- students] with an interactive online experi- nizational skills; top desired qualifcations ence. Academic libraries and librarians need include project management experience, to provide the same experience” (p. 307). completed coursework in instructional de- Instructional webcasts (e.g., YouTube vid- sign and technology, and online courseware eos), Facebook pages for academic librar- experience; and top responsibilities include ies, Skype interactions, and other virtual creating online tools and resources (e.g., services aimed at increasing library/librar- modules, tutorials, or guides), current and ian visibility to students and online-based emerging technological skills and experi- professional expertise for librarians all echo ence, and library instruction (p. 519-521). and heighten the presence of courses and And we may fnd that further “blending” other institutional services in similar for-

52 “MOOL” in a MOOC mats. Embedded librarianship has become century learning skills, to collaborate with well-known enough that best practices members of the learning community (not have been researched and delineated, such necessarily limited to faculty and/or stu- as those found by York and Vance (2009), dents), and to implement inquiry-based and these will likely grow and change over learning approaches regarding the informa- time as the role of librarians engaged with tion search process (p. 41). instruction and technology continues to Mackey and Jacobson (2011) broad- evolve and as faculty awareness and appre- en the concept of information literacy involv- ciation for what librarians can contribute to ing a variety of formats into the concept of their course, and to student success, contin- “metaliteracies”—the “overarching, self-ref- ues to grow. erential, and comprehensive framework that Gustavson and Nall (2011) highlight informs other literacy types”—which “pro- one such example where faculty members vides an integrated and all-inclusive core for ofen bemoan the lack of “real” research engaging with individuals and ideas in digi- skills in their students, ofen specifcally tal information environments” (p. 70). Tese with regard to a major or discipline. Librar- authors argue that an information literate in- ians are uniquely poised to monitor, make dividual “[applies] information knowledge suggestions to, and consult with students gained from a wide range of verbal, print, and to remedy defcient skills. (Pickard and media, and online sources and continuous- Logan (2013) also elaborate on student un- ly [refnes] skills over time. Tis constitutes derstanding (or lack thereof) regarding the a practice of critical engagement with one’s research process and the library.) Librari- world as active and participatory learners” ans do this, most critically, without altering (p. 70). With these quotes in mind, one can or stepping on course content and without readily see overlap between the MOOC’s taking time away from course content in- opportunity to provide global learning en- struction by the faculty member, but they vironments and the kindred opportunity work alongside the instructor to drive stu- for librarians to investigate and incorpo- dent engagement in research and learning rate metaliteracies into the MOOC curric- and change or update the way students view ulum in collaboration with MOOC faculty. the library as a resource (Kuh & Gonyea, While not specifcally focused on li- 2003). Rof (2011) calls attention to the brarianship, Hopper (2012) takes a valuable comingling of librarianship training with approach to the concept and growing feld museum studies training, such that librar- of instructional design, creating a conver- ians may be able to use their knowledge of sation between an institution’s instructional information literacy in combination with designer (“Dave”) and Buddha (aka “Sid”), their understanding of exhibitions (script- who is about to teach “PHIL5001—Special ing, press releases, and so on) in order to Topic—Toward Nothing.” Tose reading the deliver an information literacy course with article should note the instructional design- historical, and visual, primary source ma- er (who could be a librarian or could be a terials. Montiel-Overall and Grimes (2013) faculty member in another department en- point to AASL’s Standards for the 21st Cen- tirely) sees his role as that of a consultant— tury Learner Guidelines (specifcally pages assessing faculty needs, informing them of 13, 20, and 25), stating that librarians must standards and regulations, ofering solu- be sure to target their information literacy tions, recommendations, and assistance. Es- instruction toward essential twenty-frst sentially, the instructional designer focuses

53 Internet Learning

on making the most of the online environ- and “Future Research” sections below, these ment for the students while adhering to fac- are only conversations and only time will tell ulty desires, skills, and plans. where MOOCs and the scholarly research Librarians take their role in the around them will go. development of lifelong learners and the But researchers will not hunger for information literate very seriously. Educa- inspiration. Te “literature” in Appendix tors curious about working with librarians A consists of a mix of more popular items in online or other settings for instruction, (blog, non-scholarly journal, and Chronicle embedded collaborations, and creating of Higher Education articles), multimedia meaningful student–librarian interactions resources to explore, and several scholarly may beneft from exploring the freely ac- publications. Tese inclusions will demon- cessible “Analyzing Your Instructional En- strate the wealth of ways in which librarians vironment: A Workbook” (IS Management are involved in, engaged with, and ready to & Leadership Committee, 2010). Whether assist MOOCs. approached individually or with a librar- Te survey conducted in preparation ian, this resource should provide a wealth for this article also seeks to illuminate areas of concepts and ideas for future discussion of real and potential involvement of libraries and, perhaps, implementation. and librarians with MOOCs. Later sections continue this discussion using survey fnd- MOOCs, Teir Future, and Librarianship ings related to the future of MOOCs and where librarians may ft within that scope. ittle scholarly research regarding the future of MOOCs with direct refer- Survey of Coursera MOOC ence to librarians and libraries exists, Instructors Land with good reason. MOOCs are new enough that research into MOOCs and their Purpose of the Study needs in order to achieve success (for a variety of defnitions of success) are still very n considering the potential for librarians much in an emergent stage. Institutions in the instructional and educational en- engaging in discussion, planning, develop- vironment of the massively open online ment, and augmentation of their MOOCs Icourse, we must also assess whether and to will conduct and participate in research what extent faculty teaching MOOCs see pertaining to those aspects of MOOCs. a place for librarians in that atmosphere. As the prevalence of institutionally hosted With that in mind, the author decided that platforms and credit-bearing MOOCs con- a survey of MOOC faculty could accom- tinues to grow and transform, that will also plish several goals, including the primary serve as a burgeoning area of MOOC re- area of research interest: gauging MOOC search. MOOCs also have, and will continue faculty interest in and conceptualization of to have, an impact on the world of copyright librarians in MOOCs. Additional goals of clearance, open access, and creative com- the survey as stated in the Institutional Re- mons licensing. While some up-to-the-min- view Board (IRB) form were: ute conversations on those topics are shared in the “Survey Comments, Feedback, and tUPEJTDPWFSWBSJBUJPOTJOGBDVMUZTUBUVT Lessons Learned,” “Further Survey Discus- among MOOC faculty; sion: A Vision of ‘MOOLing’ in a MOOC,”

54 “MOOL” in a MOOC

tXIFUIFS.00$GBDVMUZIBWFFTUBCMJTIFE instructors for the MOOC. Tis database relationships with the library and/or librar- provided the author with an opportunity to ians at their home institution; understand the distribution of MOOC sub- tXIFUIFS.00$GBDVMUZBUUFNQUUPJODPS- ject areas, engagement of international fac- porate information literacy outcomes into ulty members, extent of team-teaching used their MOOC through learning objectives for MOOCs, and the average workload a or other means; Coursera MOOC student might anticipate tXIFUIFSMJCSBSJBOTBUUIFIPNFJOTUJUVUJPO doing in order to complete a MOOC. Tis of the MOOC faculty member have played resource also enabled the author to gauge a part in the MOOC course development the number of courses with “TBA” instruc- process; and tors, instructors outside of traditional high- tUPHBJOJOTJHIUTSFHBSEJOHJOTUJUVUJPOBM PS er education institutions, and potential other) incentives for MOOC faculty, which survey participants who may or may not may illuminate both barriers to and oppor- speak (fuent if any) English. Data from the tunities for librarians in MOOCs. Access database dates to May 15, 2013 and thus courses created in Coursera since then Tis survey was not designed to were not included in the survey. be exhaustive, but to be exploratory. Data Afer building the Access database gained from responses shared a common and much internet searching to discover level of importance with qualitative replies MOOC faculty email addresses, the author from survey participants. built a survey using Qualtrics through an institutional license. Tis sofware was cho- Methods sen as it allows the survey designer to route participants based on responses, allows for s the author focused on MOOC fac- a record of informed consent from partic- ulty solely within the Coursera site ipants, permits relatively quick and easy (http://www.coursera.org), a Mi- emailing of potential survey participants Acrosof Access database was built contain- (for initial contact and reminders), and ing information from each MOOC home automates “thank you” messages to survey page (all 367 of them, as of May 15, 2013) respondents. Questions in the survey were within Coursera, regardless of whether the multiple choice, “choose all that apply,” or course was complete, in-progress, or up- written responses (most ofen used where coming. Tis database contains a unique ID the author sought elaboration or thoughts for each course title, course titles, the pri- related to a particular question or response). mary instructor’s name and email address Te complete survey is available in its en- (gathered from web searching), course cat- tirety in the appendix of this article. Te au- egory/subject areas, course duration, course thor generated a report based on survey re- estimated workload (in hours), whether sponses on July 7, 2013 for the purposes of a “signature track” was available for that this article. Any responses completed afer course (and, if so, at what cost), the home that date will not be included in this article. institution of the primary instructor of the MOOC, the location of the home institution (country), the language of the MOOC, the names of up to three additional instructors, and the total number of non-primary

55 Internet Learning

Access Database Demographics t4JYUZTFWFO PGUIFVOJRVF Information MOOC faculty members surveyed were female (Note: those listed as the primary rior to and during the survey (see instructor for multiple MOOCs on Cour- Question 7), several points of data sera were not counted more than once). were gathered or requested regarding t'PVSUFFODPVSTFT BOUJDJQBUFETUV- Psurvey participants, both real and poten- dent workload would be a minimum tial. As described in the Methods section, of 10 hours per week, 50 courses (14%) the Access database created to support this anticipated coursework would consume research project can establish a number of up to 10 hours per week, and 109 courses valuable points of data. Tables 1–3 of the (30%) anticipated between 1 and 5 hours of present article display the most prominent coursework each week for students. Coursera host institutions within the Unit- t&MFWFO.00$TPO$PVSTFSBIBEB4JH- ed States, the most prominent Coursera host nature Track available for enrolled students countries outside the United States, and the (fees per Signature Track course ranged distribution of Coursera courses by sole or from $39.00–$79.00). primary subject area/category, respectively. Consider the following addition- Te details extrapolated from this al Coursera-specifc MOOC details database do not provide any conclusive in- gleaned from the author’s database: formation regarding MOOCs, but they do give readers an impression of what MOOC t'JWF.00$TMJTUFEXPVMECFUBVHIUJO students have to choose from in terms of Chinese, eight in French, one in Italian, subject area and workload, broadly who is one in German, and 10 in Spanish—this involved in MOOC hosting and instruction group (25 courses, or 7%) would be sur- (countries, institutions, and individuals), veyed, but participation levels may be low, and what options are being explored on the depending on primary instructor’s fuency Coursera for-proft platform (e.g., course in English. lengths, workloads, and free versus fee- t/JOFUFFODPVSTFT XFSFOPUIPTUFE based courses). by traditional institutions of higher education (e.g., the American Museum of Natu- Survey Demographics ral History or Exploratorium). t*OTUJUVUJPOTPVUTJEFUIF6OJUFE4UBUFT ne additional piece of very valuable host 101 MOOCs (28%) on Coursera—the demographic information was gath- Commonwealth Education Trust (United ered using the Qualtrics survey. Of Kingdom), the University of Copenhagen Othose who responded, approximately 18% of (Denmark), and the University of Toronto those contacted (335 unique MOOC facul- (Canada) were each hosting eight MOOCs ty members) completed the survey, though (2% each, or together hosting 6%–7% of 80 individuals (24% of those contacted) the 367 MOOCs on Coursera). began the survey. Questions 7 and 8 of the t0GUIF.00$DBUFHPSJFT PSTVCKFDU survey sought information as to the status, areas, used by the Coursera site, 194 (53%) faculty and otherwise, of MOOC primary were listed for more than one category— instructors on Coursera. A full 70% (61) of this may or may not indicate interdisciplin- those responding to Question 7 indicated ary collaboration between MOOC faculty. that they are tenured faculty at their home

56 “MOOL” in a MOOC

institutions; 11% indicated that they are ad- sign and Librarianship) and a director at the juncts, instructors, or “other.” Tose who Copyright Clearance Center (CCC) have in- responded with a status of “Instructor/Ad- dicated interest in the survey results and ex- junct/Non-tenure track” (11 respondents) ploring the data and subject matter further. were asked to elaborate on their status in If this survey were to be repeated in Question 8. Two individuals elaborated that the future, the author would apply several of they are research faculty at an institution, the suggestions of and feedback from those rather than tenured or tenure-track facul- contacted about the survey including, per- ty, and only occasionally teach. Tese two haps, diferent surveys entirely for those who questions become important when consid- have not yet taught, those who have fnished ering the community of MOOC faculty on teaching, and those who are currently in the Coursera, what habits and responsibilities midst of teaching their MOOC(s); stating a they may have at their home institution, and response deadline; including a brief descrip- other survey fndings from the Survey Dis- tion of “information literacy” (rather than a cussion that follows. link to a defnition); and strengthening the “permission to quote” section of the survey Survey Comments, Feedback, and Lessons with clearer options that the respondent can Learned select for how their responses may be handled in publication. his survey was by no means “perfect” though it did accomplish at least two Survey Discussion: A Vision of important goals of the author, one “MOOLing” in a MOOC Tprimary and another an underlying hope. Te frst goal, to approach MOOC faculty he concept of a MOOL in a MOOC about their role in MOOCs, their engage- was foreign to some MOOC faculty ment with their institution’s library/librar- on Coursera but, when loosely de- ies/librarians, and their thoughts on wheth- Tfned, was somewhat in use by or favorably er librarians have a place in MOOCs (and imagined by many who responded to the what that place might look like), was front Qualtrics survey. Several respondents made and center within the survey. Te underlying common suggestions or shared similar hope of the author, however, was to create a thoughts. Additionally, the author consult- thought-provoking survey that would gen- ed with a director at the CCC (Tim Bowen), erate further discussion among MOOC fac- an Instructional Design and Technology ulty, among faculty in general, and among faculty member at the University of Mem- faculty and librarians about what roles we phis (Dr. Trey Martindale), and an Instruc- can all play in the MOOC setting and how tional Design Librarian from Pennsylvania those interested in supporting, rather than State University’s Berks campus (John D. instructing, a MOOC might best be able to Shank) for further thoughts on MOOCs and assist MOOC faculty. MOOLs. Both survey results and valuable Afer completing the survey, three thoughts from those conversations are used faculty members approached the author for in this section to discuss current uses and additional discussion on the topic as well as future opportunities and options for librari- possible future collaboration. Five faculty ans interested in involvement with MOOCs. members (three from survey participants and two from the felds of Instructional De-

57 Internet Learning

While there may not be much that a Resource Creation MOOC faculty member may want a librarian to develop, it is still critical that faculty number of survey responses to members are at least aware that librarians questions 31 and 32 indicated the may very well be interested in engaging need for close conversation with with their home institution’s MOOCs. Ad- Athe librarians of their home institutions in ditionally, faculty members also need to order to hone in on the best ways in which have some understanding of what their li- librarians could become engaged in their brarians may be able to contribute—they MOOCs. Comments and perceptions were need not aim to incorporate every librarian quite mixed: “I'm not sure what role an strength, tool, resource, and ace-up-the- academic librarian could play in a course sleeve, but it is a lot easier to pick the proper where the students aren't afliated with the tool in a toolbox if you know what they do. institution,” “Most of the functions of a li- Within the survey, Question 25 brarian can now be automated,” “On line (“Have you ever had a librarian embedded education is in a state of a rapid evolution. into your courses at your institution?”), Who knows what will happen...,” “Not easy Question 28 (“Please describe the involve- to see what they can do that they don't al- ment of the library and/or librarians in your ready do for regular courses,” and “Librar- MOOC(s)”), and Question 31 (“Do you en- ians could be key players in a connectivist vision a future where librarians can/will be MOOC.” a part of the MOOC course environment?” Overall, MOOC faculty indicated and its “Please elaborate” follow-up prompt, the most interest in librarians serving as Question 32) were particularly informative experts in managing digital assets, suggest- with regard to perceived usefulness of li- ing additional readings to students, citing brarians in a variety of settings, as well as sources, discovering and using informa- how MOOC faculty are accustomed to us- tion, and evaluating resources. Question ing librarians at their home institution. 28, which asks respondents to elaborate on Despite the low number of respons- how librarians are involved in their MOOC, es for the survey, in terms of signifcance, received a few comments that indicate to the repetition of a number of comments, the author that some MOOC faculty are especially in the questions noted above, already harnessing these identifed skills leads the author to believe that there are at of librarians for their MOOC. Responses least a few common understandings of the included: “I asked a librarian to flm two role librarians can serve and whether and videos about how to locate information how that may be applicable to the MOOC. and do online research and the diference Tese trends include librarians as resource [between] peer reviewed and popular lit- creators, librarians as experts or support for erature,” “locating open access material,” course content design and delivery, and li- “establishing learning outcomes,” and “We brarians as hubs for knowledge and negoti- incorporated materials developed by our ation of copyright and access. librarians for research assistance, evaluating sources, other tasks. I think all were re- purposed from previously prepared library skills teaching materials.” Tese comments suggest that, even in small ways, librarian skills and resources can be mounted into

58 “MOOL” in a MOOC

MOOCs to provide additional support, person involved in mounting and/or adapt- content, and learning objects for the global ing their course. Te estimates here are not MOOC community. necessarily given at the individual level, yet Librarians—especially those en- they are no less telling. gaged in digital preservation, instruction, With regard to Question 25 in par- emerging technologies, and instructional ticular, of the 14 respondents (23%) stating design—enjoy working with and showcas- that they had used embedded librarians ing technology and resources. Some MOOC before at their home institution, there were faculty are very aware of these skills and inno stated disadvantages of that collabora- terests and have started taking advantage of tion when they responded to the follow-up them; other faculty have not yet had suf- (Question 26). Two respondents comment- cient discussion at the local or institutional ed “all advantages” and “no disadvantages” level to know what collaborative opportu- explicitly in their reply. Tis would indi- nities may best suit their MOOC. Addition- cate to the author that, at least for these ally, other MOOC faculty are aware of the 14 MOOC faculty, the concept of an in- fact that their particular MOOC—ofen in stitutionally embedded librarian of some the sciences—may not be suited to this kind sort would be favorably received in the of partnership. As with on-campus collabo- MOOC setting. Coincidentally, 14 respon- rations, librarians engaged in resource cre- dents also indicated that they had involved ation (and/or even some MOOC instruction librarians from their institution in their through videos) for use in a course must ft MOOC (Question 27). While it is not clear the course, its needs, and its population. that these responses come from the same 14 faculty members, it could indicate that Course Content Design and Delivery those more accustomed to collaborating with librarians at their institution may be OOC faculty ofen spend signif- more open to collaborating with librarians icant amounts of time adapting in their MOOC. content to and creating con- Mtent for the MOOC setting (see questions Copyright and Access 18–21). Responses to the author’s inquiry as to the amount of time spent adapting ibrarians frequently engage in discus- their course to the MOOC platform ranged sions about and in activities involv- from estimates given in hours, days, weeks, ing copyright, open access, fair use, months, and even years. Faculty hour es- Lcreative commons, and many other terms timates ranged from a lower end of 30–60 and arguments regarding these concepts. hours to a high end approximating thou- Tey may be the institutional liaison to the sands of hours of efort. As many faculty CCC; they may be instructing students on indicated that teaching assistants, gradu- plagiarism and fair use; and they may be ate assistants, student workers, and other discussing the frustrations with and/or im- forms of human resource capital had at portance of obtaining copyright clearance, times been made available to them, ofen or what open access is, or many other nu- perceived as a form of incentive (survey ances of the publishing world as it relates questions 10 and 11), the high estimates to education. Librarians are, therefore, part for adaptation time will likely be due to of the voice regarding copyright and access. MOOC faculty factoring in the efort per

59 Internet Learning

Furthermore, librarians are part of Tis meeting engaged librarians in the actions involved in copyright adher- discussion as to whether we felt this would ence and advising. Tey ofen arrange for be a viable option moving forward and electronic and print reserve items, may ad- whether we had additional ideas or con- minister or post cleared PDFs to an insti- cerns about this plan—which they hope to tutional CMS (e.g. Blackboard), may assist unveil in the next few months. Librarians student and faculty members with print- have long had a strong voice in the argu- ing or scanning at the libraries, and may ment for information access and freedom instruct users on how to access e-books of speech, and now librarians are clearly (and e-book limitations and copyright seen as an important community to consult stipulations). Given the wealth of direct in the confuent discussion of copyright, and indirect copyright-related activities in access, and open education. Yet, the open which librarians engage, it seems a natural access movement will provide compelling ft that faculty instructing MOOCs would opportunities for MOOC content in the approach librarians about course content sciences in particular as major industrial- concerns, issues, availability, and negotia- ized countries, like the United States and tion. Furthermore, as the MOOC grows in the United Kingdom, pursue making pub- a credit-bearing direction, librarians will licly funded research freely accessible to the be an important institutional resource. public (Rushby, 2012). Te medicine, tech- At the American Library Associ- nology, and science subject areas account ation 2013 Annual Conference (June 27– for approximately 50% of the MOOCs July 1, 2013), the CCC hosted a Product available through Coursera (see Table 3) Advisory Session for College and Univer- and increased use of scholarship from open sity Librarians (June 28, 2013). Te frst access avenues should be expected. item on the agenda was “MOOCs Licens- ing” and was led by Tim Bowen, the Direc- Additional Feedback on Librarians and tor of Academic Products and Services at MOOCs CCC. In Spring 2013, the CCC piloted a partnership with the Stanford Intellectual nly 13 respondents (22%) felt they Property Exchange (SIPX) with a Stanford would take advantage of a Cour- course ofered on Coursera. Te goal was sera-provided librarian if one was to create the equivalent of a “course pack” Oto be ofered to them for use in their course where, if they wanted to, students enrolled (Question 33); the majority of respondents in that MOOC could pay to have access to here (29, or 48%) answered “maybe.” Based course materials—as one-ofs, if there were on participant responses in the follow-up only certain items or sections in which they prompt (Question 34) and to questions 31 were interested, or the option to purchase and 32 (discussed earlier), there are sever- it all—and if they did not, would still have al reasons why faculty may be unsure. Te access to all the lectures, quizzes, and so degree to which a MOOC involves infor- forth. Bowen stated that roughly 4,000 stu- mation literacy components and/or is “in- dents “completed” the MOOC, and approx- formation-oriented” were noted variables. imately 1,200–1,300 of them purchased the Several participants voiced wariness about “course packs” at $98 for the full array of Coursera providing such a resource. Com- content. ments related to that include: “I think a local contact is better,” “I'd prefer to make

60 “MOOL” in a MOOC one of our institution's librarians a partner “I believe that overall the issue of librar- in our course and deliver library services I ianship has so far received insufcient have confdence in,” and “Coursera is a for attention in the discussion on MOOCs. proft company. Frankly, their goals are en- Tere is an unfounded belief that the brave tirely diferent than those of an instructor.” new world of online learning relegates libraries to a secondary position. Tis is, Tat last remark indicates awareness on the in my view, wrong. Libraries remain in- part of MOOC faculty members that their dispensable and we have been extremely goals and the goals of the platform may be grateful for the support we have received somewhat at odds. Faculty interest in “local” from the Royal Library of Denmark.” collaborators and desire for “confdence” in their resources may further indicate that li- Tese statements indicate several brarians do have a place in the future of the areas of collaboration that had not been MOOC, especially where support for course recognized previously by the author—es- design and content delivery are concerned. sentially, this is a wonderful thing, as the di- Within Question 35, participant alogue of collaboration should involve the responses to this question indicated a few sharing of ideas. Te survey was intended other areas librarians may want to delve to generate discussion, rather than establish into when vying to be part of MOOCs: frm answers, on the topic of librarians in MOOCs. Te fact that a number of MOOC “Two-thirds of the academic work in- faculty did take the time to address their volves the on-line questions, which you own fresh thoughts on potential collabora- did not ask about. […] Te issues are tion between MOOC faculty and librarians identifying suitable questions, decid- ing the format of the questions, entering does indicate at least some amount of suc- questions, and testing questions. In my cess in developing additional conversation. subject, and I think in most others, good questions, well formulated, are hard to Future Research fnd. I wonder if there might be a lot of expertise among the community of li- Predictability: Library Use and brarians that might be brought to bear.” MOOCbrarians “MOOCs could certainly beneft from knowledge management teams—several hile the survey detailed in this NGOs that are involved in continuing ed- article did aim to unveil ele- ucation frame this in the context of knowl- ments of that information, the edge management, program learning and Wresponse rate (18% of all individuals sur- the like and an expanded defnition of veyed) was not high enough that any clear a 'librarian' certainly is valuable there” conclusions could be drawn (Instruction- al Assessment Resources, 2011). Tus, no “I just participated in a virtual panel conclusions can be drawn with regard to a on MOOCs, organized by the Associa- relationship between MOOC faculty use of tion of College and Research Libraries their library for their non-MOOC courses (ACRL). It confrmed my opinion that librarians are way ahead of most aca- and research and whether they feel there demics when it comes to the transforma- is a place for librarians within the MOOC tive power of information technology.” environment. Te author would suggest further research into whether MOOC faculty members who are regular users of 61 Internet Learning

their institutional libraries and librarians important in terms of: (1) the completion more or less predictably have an interest in rate of these courses, (2) how MOOC fac- bringing librarians into their MOOC envi- ulty respond to these fees, (3) how students ronment. As institutionally run and credit respond to these fees, and (4) whether stu- bearing MOOCs become more and more dents and faculty work to circumvent or oth- popular and prevalent, the author expects erwise avoid these barriers to access (which that institutional libraries and their librar- may be fnancial, but which may also be ians will become more and more involved. impacted by international copyright regu- Additionally, it may be easier to survey in lations, faculty interest in/intention to pro- that circumstance, institution by institu- vide open education, publisher agreements, tion, rather than approaching all Coursera and more). Te OCLC conference at the MOOC faculty, as was done here. University of Pennsylvania in March 2013 Additionally, the author predicts also raises the question of whether tuition that, as humanities MOOCs continue to translates to productivity, which the author develop and become more popular (cur- believes raises a fair point—one with which rently more MOOCs are ofered for the educators will be familiar from more tradi- physical, biological, and social sciences), tional instruction settings. No matter the the special collections and archives of insti- type of institution, or the cost of your course, tutional libraries and other relevant library students will always span the spectrum . collections, academic institution-based or Te author urges faculty to continue not, will become more involved in MOOCs placing a premium on providing open ed- as well. Future research could be conducted ucation regardless of fnancial or other re- regarding whether this relationship devel- sources. She also urges researchers, MOOC ops, as predicted here, or not. platforms, and host institutions to consider and analyze the international impacts of Copyright and Access Regulation Shifs these regulations, the prohibitive and ex- clusionary nature of such fees for non-cred- iven the fact that the CCC ap- it bearing work, and the good intentions of proached the largest conference an open education resource and the oppor- of librarians in the United States tunity for self-improvement in a world of G(ALA Annual, 2013) for advice and opin- people who may otherwise not have access ions on copyright, access, and the direc- to such options, let alone to courses taught tions the CCC is planning to head regard- by such “experts” as those teaching and sup- ing MOOCs, this will not be the end of the porting MOOCs and their development. discussion but is merely a tributary new Survey questions 21, 22, 24, and 28 channel in the fow of conversation between engaged participants in refection on spe- copyright providers and copyright naviga- cial permissions from publishers and/or tors. If the CCC and SIPX follow through vendors, obtaining those special permis- on expanding their pilot with Stanford and sions, how MOOC faculty use their home Coursera from Spring 2013, and ofer that institution library (or libraries), and how option to all MOOCs, research into the im- librarians have been involved in MOOCs pacts of that relationship and that option with survey participants thus far. will be important. Future research regarding the impacts of these partnerships will be most

62 “MOOL” in a MOOC

Delivery and Success of MOOC the advantage of having experimented in Learning Outcomes these learning environments already. Tese faculty members will have delivered video esearch on these topics has already lectures with embedded quizzes, created commenced, but it will continue. weekly (or bi-weekly) quizzes with honor Many diferent communities have an codes, created mass assignments, used peer Rinterest in the percentages of stick-with-it review options in this setting, and more. ED- students and “dropouts,” issues of plagia- UCAUSE (2012) notes the MOOC business rism, accomplishments of MOOC learning model opportunities that institutions may outcomes, assessments and measurability, consider pursuing: data mining, the cross- academic integrity, user privacy and au- or up-sell, advertising and course sponsor- thenticity, and the MOOC “honor code(s),” ship, tuition-based models, and/or the spin to name just a few areas of curiosity regard- of/licensed content model (p. 2). Slate’s ing the successfulness (or unsuccessfulness) Will Oremus (2013) suggests that MOOCs of the MOOC. T. Hugh Crawford’s article should not act as a supplement to teach- for CHE (2013) states that, “to MOOC or ers and classrooms, but that “MOOC-style not to MOOC [is] not really the question. video lectures and online features [should Te real issues [is] how brick-and-mortar be used] as course materials in actual, nor- institutions could embrace MOOCs while mal-size college classes” utilizing blend- continuing to build on the strengths of lo- ed and fipped classroom strategies. Tus, cal, capital-intensive pedagogical practic- there is not a complete transformation of es—actual in-the-fesh pedagogy in a world the education delivery system afer all, but of Coursera.” And so, at the most basic instructors are just taking advantage of new- level, the resources devoted to the delivery er content delivery methods and bringing and success of any MOOC should supple- them back home to institutions. Tis may ment the attention an institution devotes also be a useful way for MOOC-ing institu- to its paying customers, its students. Te tions to make better use of MOOC content capital-intensive investments of human for their on-ground or otherwise enrolled resources, programming, technology, and students paying for the enhanced version of support systems at brick-and-mortar insti- a course—with library materials, guided re- tutions should drive the ability to create, search, and more traditional “perks.” hone, and sustain global education eforts If the MOOC is to live on, and the and achievements. Crawford does not en- author believes it will do so in a variety of courage institutions to turn a blind eye to permutations, then we will need to contin- the opportunities beyond their doorstep, ue developing ways to strengthen the level merely to keep in mind that home is where of engagement students have in the MOOC, the heart is and there is much we can do, al- the accountability and ethics of those tak- ways, to better how we educate the students ing the MOOC, and the technological el- who pay us for the privilege. ements within the MOOC (e.g., in-video Yet there may be ways to meet in quizzing, closed-captioning in non-English the middle. For those looking to create in- languages) especially as they relate to and stitutional platforms (whether for-credit or increase the chances of students completing free), whichever institutional faculty mem- the course and the ability of adaptive in- bers have already used MOOCs hosted by struction to increase skills development and for-proft entities (e.g., Coursera) will have knowledge retention. Research deeper into

63 Internet Learning these features and how they support learn- department. Sharon Weiner (2009), Dean ing outcomes, knowledge building, infor- of Library Services at the University of Mas- mation retention, and student engagement sachusetts Dartmouth, notes “[t]here is a will be critical to the proftable development growing consensus that the library should of MOOCs, as well as the experience of the be recognized as a partner with other enti- non-paying student. ties in the university in supporting the insti- Librarians engaged in instruction- tutional mission, resulting in increased inte- al design and information literacy, includ- gration of the library” (p. 4). If an institution ing media and technology literacies, will be chooses to ofer MOOCs as a way to engage looking out for research on MOOCs and with the global learning community and (like the author of this article) conduct- increase access to their resources, including their own research (e.g., participating ing human (faculty) resources, then a shif in MOOCs) to understand how learning has occurred in the institutional goals and outcomes and course competencies are priorities, and libraries must pursue (and achieved in this educational environment be pursued regarding) opportunities for and, more generally, what it takes to run engagement with this community and their and support a MOOC. Especially by taking potential needs. Most specifcally, scholarly MOOCs hosted by their home institution, communication models development, cur- librarians will have the frst-hand knowl- ricula development, and student learning edge necessary to give strategic feedback integration are all areas where the libraries and suggestions to MOOC faculty, and per- might engage in boundary spanning eforts haps better understand specifc scenarios in within their institution (Weiner, 2009, p. 9). which they can contribute their skills as a librarian into the MOOC. Te author sug- Hypotheses? gests collaborative research between MOOC faculty and librarians to gauge the complex- hat might the future hold ities, necessities, challenges, and benefts of for MOOCs? Te author collaborative work between MOOC faculty suggests a few hypotheses. and “MOOCbrarians”—or “MOOLs in a W MOOC.” (1) Many students will still pursue the full Lastly, the author suggests that extent of open education (free of barriers special collections, archival, and outreach to entry), without the intent to seek certif- librarians also keep an eye on these devel- cation or other credit for the course. Tese opments and the MOOCs that they may students will resist requests to pay for a be able to support—whether at their home MOOC or its contents and seek the access institution or not. Libraries will always seek to opportunity rather than academic credit ways to better demonstrate and highlight or otherwise attaining some sort of ofcial their value. Bringing 2,000–10,000 unique achievement. users to your digitized collections over the course of one MOOC (which might run as (2) We will fnd those who are willing to pay few as three weeks), from all over the globe, because they seek credit for completing the would be a coup, internally and institution- course—and those for whom such fees will ally, and statistics would not be terribly dif- continue to prevent their access to educa- cult to gather as well, with tracking support tional opportunities. from a systems or information technology

64 “MOOL” in a MOOC

(3) Tere will be ramifcations to the educa- himer (2013) knows that, many times, the tional community, which has already begun student with the spark is his motivator for transforming in response to the MOOC. For “walk[ing] into class every day with a smile example, Harvard requires students take an on [his] face and a sense of anticipation”— introductory level economics MOOC with MOOC students with “the spark” deserve Brigham Young University, rather than tak- a chance to make a MOOC professor’s day, ing the course with Harvard’s own faculty. As and MOOC faculty deserve the opportuni- the Tennessee Board of Regents begins a re- ty to engage that spark. lationship with Coursera, it will be interesting to see the impact of MOOCs at the state Many in education who hope for consortium level (University of Tennessee the redefnition of “return on investment” Media Resources, 2013). Among those who will want that return to be a smarter, more could very likely sufer are community col- curious global community with access to leges and their faculty, where students may opportunities for personal betterment and be able to replace for-credit courses there achievement, regardless of whether they (ofen used for placement and transfer into live on Long Island or on Micronesia. Such four-year schools and programs) with the opportunities might require not a form of burgeoning for-credit MOOCs, thus ofer- tender from students but a desire to learn ing the already-strained budgets of commu- and a willingness to try, and hands and nity colleges an opportunity to cut faculty minds that want to be part of such an ad- numbers (and diminish the budget lines venture—to keep it growing and improving, that accompany them). yes, but also to keep it free.

References (4) Te educational sphere will need to work to create an open education system Aleamoni, L. M. (1999). Student rating that stays open, perhaps still relying on myths versus research facts from 1924 to venture capitalism but also perhaps fnd- 1998. Journal of Personnel Evaluation in ing venture capitalists that are more in- Education, 13(2), 153-166. doi: 10.1007/ terested in the adventure and the benefts BF00143282 to humanity than in the capitalism. John Daniel (2012) states, “While the hype about Association of College and Research Li- MOOCs is presaging revolution in higher braries. Working Group on Intersections of education has refocused on their scale, the Scholarly Communication and Information real revolution is that universities with scar- Literacy. (2013). Intersections of scholarly city at the heart of their business models communication and information litera- are embracing openness” (p. 1). Regarding cy: Creating strategic collaborations for a the pursuit of MOOCs for fnancial gain, changing academic environment. Chicago, Ed Techie (2013) writes, “So what about IL: Association of College and Research MOOCs, you know, those free open cours- Libraries. es? Is this the end of them? No, I don’t think so, but maybe they can now become what Booth, C. (2011). Refective teaching, we always wanted them to be, focused on efective learning. Chicago, IL: American access and experimentation, not hype and Library Association. commercialism.” Where Charles Rine-

65 Internet Learning

Chen, J. C. C. (2013, August). Opportuni- EDUCAUSE Learning Initiative. (2011). ties and challenges of MOOCs: Perspectives 7 things you should know about MOOCs. from Asia. Paper presented at IFLA World EDUCAUSE. Retrieved from http://net. Library and Information Congress, Singa- educause.edu/ir/library/pdf/ELI7078.pdf pore. EDUCAUSE Learning Initiative. (2013). Cordell, D. (2012). Skype and the Embed- Initiatives: Content anchors. Retrieved ded librarian.” Library Technology Reports, from http://www.educause.edu/eli/pro- 48(2), 8-11. grams/seeking-evidence-impact/content-anchors Covone, N., & Lamm, M. (2010). Just be there: Campus, department, classroom … EDUCAUSE Library. (2013). Massive Open and kitchen?” Public Services Quarterly, 6, Online Course (MOOC). Retrieved from 198-207. doi:10.1080/15228959.2010.4987 www.educause.edu/library/massive-open- 68 online-course-mooc

Crawford, H. T. (2013, April 29). Rediscov- Edwards, M., Kumar, S., & Ochoa, M. ering the material world.” Te Chronicle of (2010). Assessing the value of embedded Higher Education. Retrieved from http:// librarians in an online graduate educational chronicle.com technology course. Public Services Quar- terly, 6, 271-291. doi:10.1080/15228959.201 Daniel, J. (2012). Making sense of MOOCs: 0.497447 Musings in a maze of myth, paradox and possibility. Journal of Interactive Media in Essig, L. (2013, March 25). Te conver- Education, 3. Retrieved from http://www- sation: It’s MOOAs, not MOOCs, that jime.open.ac.uk/jime/article/viewArti- will transform education [Web log post]. cle/2012-18/html Retrieved from http://chronicle.com/blogs/ conversation/2013/03/25/its-mooas-not- Denlinger, K. (2013, May 10). ZSRx: Te moocs-that-will-transform-higher-educa- MOOC that wasn’t a MOOC [Web log tion/ post]. Retrieved from http://cloud.lib. wfu.edu/blog/gazette/2013/05/10/zsrx-li- Evans, B. (2013, March 23). OCLC research brary-mooc/ presents MOOCs and libraries: Massive opportunity or overwhelming challenge? Dill, E. (2012, August 14). MOOCs: Where [Web log post]. Retrieved from http:// are the librarians? [Web Log post]. Re- bclibsconf.wordpress.com/2013/03/23/ trieved from http://hastac.org/blogs/eliza- oclc_moocs_and_libraries_2012_03_18/ beth-dill/2012/08/14/moocs-where-are-librarians Fischman, J. (2011, May 8). Te digital campus 2011: Te rise of teaching ma- EDUCAUSE. (2012). What campus leaders chines. Te Chronicle of Higher Education. need to know about MOOCs. EDUCAUSE. Retrieved from http://chronicle.com Retrieved from http://net.educause.edu/ir/ library/pdf/PUB4005.pdf

66 “MOOL” in a MOOC

Frank, D. G., Raschke, G. K., Wood, J., & Hopper, K. B. (2012). Te Buddha’s dis- Yang, J. Z.. (2001). Information consulting: tance learning consult. British Journal of Te key to success in academic libraries. Educational Technology, 43(4), 534-539. Journal of Academic Librarianship, 27(2), doi:10.1111/j.1467-8535.2011.01227.x 90-96. Howard, J. (2011, May 8). Te digital cam- Green, H. (2013). Libraries across land and pus: Tomorrow’s academic libraries: Maybe sea: Academic library aervices on interna- even some books. Te Chronicle of Higher tional branch campuses. College & Re- Education.Retrieved from http://chronicle. search Libraries, 74(1), 9-23. com

Gustavson, A., & Nall, H. C. (2011). Fresh- Instructional Assessment Resources. man overconfdence and library research (2011). Assess teaching: Response rates. skills: A troubling relationship? College & Retrieved from www.utexas.edu/academic/ Undergraduate Libraries, 18(4), 291-306. ctl/assessment/iar/teaching/gather/method/ doi:10.1080/10691316.2011.624953 survey-Response.php

Haden, P. C. (2013, May 13). People: It’s no IS Management & Leadership Commit- act: Athletic director tries out a new role. tee. (2010). Analyzing your instructional Te Chronicle of Higher Education. Re- environment: A workbook. Chicago, IL: trieved from http://chronicle.com Association of College and Research Li- braries Instruction Section & the American Hazelkorn, E. (2013, May 23). Has high- Library Association. Retrieved from http:// er education lost control over quality? www.ala.org/ [Web log post]. Retrieved from http:// chronicle.com/blogs/worldwise/has-high- Jones, L. D., P. Regan, & C. E. Mitra. (2011). er-education-lost-control-over-quali- Mainstreaming information literacy skills ty/32321?cid=wb&utm_source=wb&utm_ into a social enterprise environment. Col- medium=en lege & Undergraduate Libraries, 18(4), 391- 398. doi:10.1080/10691316.2011.624947 Hofman, S. (2011). Embedded academic librarian experiences in online courses: Koller, D. (2012, August 1). What we're Roles, faculty collaboration, and opinion. learning from online education [Video fle]. Library Management, 32(6/7), 444-456. TED Talks. Retrieved from http://www.ted. doi:10.1108/01435121111158583 com/talks/daphne_koller_what_we_re_ learning_from_online_education.html Holdaway, X., & Hawtin, N. (2013, April 29). Te digital campus 2013: Major players Kolowich, S. (2013, April 23). Why some in the MOOC universe. Te Chronicle of colleges are saying no to MOOC deals, at Higher Education. Retrieved from http:// least for now. Te Chronicle of Higher Edu- chronicle.com cation. Retrieved from http://chronicle.com

Kolowich, S. (2013, May 9). As MOOC debate simmers at San Jose State, Ameri- can U. calls a halt. Te Chronicle of Higher

67 Internet Learning

Education. Retrieved from http://chronicle. Refereed papers from the 3rd International comKolowich, S. (2013, May 21). MOOC Lifelong Learning Conference. Yeppoon, professors claim no responsibility for how Central Queensland, Australia (pp.218- courses are used [Web log post]. Retrieved 224). from http://chronicle.com/blogs/wiredcampus/mooc-professors-claim-no-re- Lloyd, A. (2010). Information literacy land- sponsibility-for-how-cours- scapes: Information literacy in education, es-are-used/43881?cid=megamenu workplace, and everyday contexts. Oxford: Chandos Publishing. Kolowich, S. (2013, May 24). Harvard professors call for greater oversight of MOOCs Mackey, T. P., & Jacobson, T. E. (2011). [Web log post]. Retrieved from http:// Reframing information literacy as a metalit- chronicle.com/blogs/wiredcampus/har- eracy. College & Research Libraries, 72(1), vard-professors-call-for-greater-oversight- 62-78. Retrieved from http://crl.acrl.org of-moocs/43953 Mangan, K. (2011, May 8). A seminar con- Kolowich, S. (2013, May 28). Outsourced nects law students around the world. Te lectures raise concerns about academic Chronicle of Higher Education. Retrieved freedom. Te Chronicle of Higher Educa- from http://chronicle.com tion.Retrieved from http://chronicle.com Montgomery, S. E. (2010). Online webinars! Kuh, G. D., & Gonyea, R. M. (2003). Te Interactive learning where our users are: role of the academic library in promoting Te future of embedded librarianship. Pub- student engagement in learning. College & lic Services Quarterly, 6(2/3), 306-311. doi:1 Research Libraries, 64(4), 256-282. 0.1080/15228959.2010.497467

Lai, H.C., Chang, C. Y., Wen-Shiane, L., Montiel-Overall, P., & Grimes, K. (2012). Fan, Y. L., & Wu, Y. T. (2013). Te im- Teachers and librarians collaborating on plementation of mobile learning in out- inquiry-based science instruction: A longi- door education: Application of QR codes. tudinal study. Library & Information Sci- British Journal of Educational Technol- ence Research, 35(1), 41-53. doi:10.1016/j. ogy, 44(2), E57-E62. doi:10.1111/j.1467- lisr.2012.08.002 8535.2012.01343.x New, J. (2013, April 29). Fighting to reinvent Lee, Y., Choi., J., & Kim, T. (2012). Dis- teaching and keep costs down. Te Chron- criminating factors between completers of icle of Higher Education. Retrieved from and dropouts from online learning courses. http://chronicle.com British Journal of Educational Technol- ogy, 44(2), 328-337. doi:10.1111/j.1467- OCLCResearch. (2013, April 5). MOOCs 8535.2012.01306.x and libraries: New opportunities for librarians [Video fle]. Retrieved from http://www. Lloyd, A. (2004). Working (in)formation: youtube.com/watch?v=3ebkaSjXtmk Conceptualizing information literacy in the workplace. Lifelong learning: Whose re- sponsibilty and what is your contribution?:

68 “MOOL” in a MOOC

OCLCResearch. (2013a, April 9). MOOCs Pritchard, P. A. (2010). Te embedded and libraries: Copyright, licensing, and open science librarian: Partner in curricu- access [Video fle]. Retrieved from http:// lum design and delivery. Journal of Li- www.youtube.com/watch?v=7FvR4K3eddU brary Administration, 50(4), 373-396. doi:10.1080/01930821003667054 OCLCResearch. (2013b, April 9). MOOCs and libraries: Welcome from the Univer- Rinehimer, C. (2013, May 28). Commentary: sity of Pennsylvania libraries [Video fle]. Te student and the spark [Web log post]. Retrieved from http://www.youtube.com/ Retrieved from http://chronicle.com/article/ watch?v=fU8Mle0Tar8 Te-Studentthe-Spark/139459/?cid=w- b&utm_source=wb&utm_medium=en OCLCResearch. (2013c, April 9). MOOCs and Libraries: Who are the masses? A view Rivard, R. (2013, May 14). Georgia Tech of the audience [Video fle]. Retrieved from and Udacity roll out massive new low-cost http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6u- degree program. Inside Higher Ed. Retrieved MO1hMKSxc. from http://www.insidehighered.com/ news/2013/05/14/georgia-tech-and-udacity- OCLCResearch. (2013d, April 9). MOOCs roll-out-massive-new-low-cost-degree-pro- and libraries: Why MOOCs? Why Penn? gram Why now? [Video fle]. Retrieved from http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=guQy- Rof, S. (2011). Visualizing history: Using TudlFCI. museum skills to teach information literacy to undergraduates. College & Undergraduate Open Education Database. (2013, May 16). Libraries,I 4), 350-358. doi:10.1080/1069131 Librarians: Your most valuable MOOC 6.2011.624958 supporters [Web log post]. Retrived from http://oedb.org/library/features/librari- Rudasill, L.M. (2010). Beyond subject spe- ans-your-most-valuable-mooc-supporters/ cialization: Te creation of embedded librar- Oremus, W. (2013, September 18). Free on- ians. Public Services Quarterly, 6, 83-91. doi: line classes are an unsustainable gimmick: 10.1080/15228959.2010.494577 Here’s a better idea. Slate. Retrieved from www.slate.com Rudin, P. (2008). No fxed address: Te evolution of outreach library ser- Pickard, E., & Logan, F. (2013). Te re- vices on university campuses. Te search process and the library: First-gener- Reference Librarian, 49(1), 55-75. ation college seniors vs. freshmen.” College doi:10.1080/02763870802103761 & Research Libraries. Retrieved from http://crl.acrl.org Rushby, N. (2013). Editorial: Open access. British Journal of Educational Technology, Piper, P., & Tag, S. (2011). Teme-based 44(2), 179-182. doi:10.1111/bjet.12027 information literacy instruction. College & Scaramozzino, J. M. (2010). Integrating Undergraduate Libraries, 18(4), 319-332. STEM information competencies into doi:10.1080/10691316.2011.624956 an undergraduate curriculum. Journal of Library Administration, 50(4), 315-333. doi:10.1080/01930821003666981

69 Internet Learning

Scarboro, A. (2012). Student perception good_reason/2013/05/you-can-stop-wor- of good teaching. International Journal of rying-about-moocs-now.html New Trends in Arts, Sports & Science Ed- ucation, 1(1), 49-66. Retrieved from http:// Te Ed Techie. (2013, June 26). What www.ijtase.net/ quality measures apply to MOOCs? [Web log post]. Te Ed Techie. Retrieved from Schwartz, M. (2013, May 10). Massive open http://nogoodreason.typepad.co.uk/no_ opportunity: Supporting MOOCs in public good_reason/2013/06/what-quality-mea- and academic libraries. Library Journal Ac- sures-apply-to-moocs.html ademic Newswire. Retrieved from http:// lj.libraryjournal.com University of Pennsylvania Libraries. (2013).Coursera and MOOCS: Copy- Shank, J. D. (2006). Te blended librarian: right resources to support publishing A job announcement analysis of the newly and teaching. Retrieve from http:// emerging position of instructional design guides.library.upenn.edu/content. librarian. College & Research Libraries, php?pid=244413&sid=3375306 67(6), 514-524. Retrieved from http://crl. acrl.org University of Tennessee Media Resources. (2013). UT, TBR partner with Coursera to Shank, J. D. (2013). Goodbye cybrarians, pilot technology for courses [press release]. hello moocbrarians: Envisioning the role of Retrieved from http://www.tennessee.edu/ librarians in MOOCs [Powerpoint slides]. media/releases/053013_coursera.html Retrieved from http://www.slideshare.net Valibrarian. (2013, February 19). ACRL Shank, J. D.,& Bell, S. (2011). Blended VWIG Panel: MOOCs and Librarians librarianship: [Re]envisioning the role of [Video fle]. Retrieved from http://www. librarian as educator in the digital informa- youtube.com/watch?v=SinXCiMF_Cs&fea- tion age. Reference & User Services Quar- ture=youtu.be terly. 51(2), 105-110. Verpoorten, D., Westera, W., & Specht, Showers, B. (2012, January 6). Te constant M. (2012). Using refection triggers innovator: Te academic library as a model while learning in an online course. Brit- of change management [Web log post]. ish Journal of Educational Technology, Library Journal Academic Newswire. Re- 43(6), 1030-1040. doi:10.1111/j.1467- trieved from http://lj.libraryjournal.com 8535.2011.01257.x

Sull, E. C. (2013, January 31). Student Wang, M., Shen, R., Novak, D., & Pan X. engagement in the online classroom. Te (2009). Te impact of mobile learning on Chronicle of Higher Education. Retrieved students’ learning behaviours and per- from http://chronicle.com formance: Report from a large blended classroom. British Journal of Educational Te Ed Techie. (2013, May 30). You can Technology, 40(4), 673-695. doi:10.1111/ stop worrying about MOOCs now [Web j.1467-8535.2008.00846.x log post]. Te Ed Techie. Retrieved from http://nogoodreason.typepad.co.uk/no_

70 “MOOL” in a MOOC

Weiner, S. (2008). Te contribution of the library to the reputation of a university. Journal of Academic Librarianship, 35(1), 3-13.

York, A. C., & Vance, J. M. (2009). Taking library instruction into the online classroom: best practices for embedded librarians. Journal of Library Administration, 49, 197-209. doi:10.1080/01930820802312995

Young, J. R. (2013, May 20). What professors can learn from ‘Hard Core’ MOOC students. Te Chronicle of Higher Educa- tion. Retrieved from http://chronicle.com

71 Internet Learning

Appendices es that colleges and universities face, and they certainly won’t take the place of a col- Appendix A: Additional Resources lege education.” However, he notes the critical components of online student success, which MOOC instructors may then wish to here are a number of blog entries bring into their courses and course design. and multimedia resources of inter- Of these six keys, three overlap quite nice- est regarding MOOCs and librari- ly with librarianship: intensive support, the Tans. Te following list constitutes a num- personal touch, and fexibility. ber of valuable articles and other resources: t ćF &E 5FDIJF IBT UXP JNQPSUBOU QPTUT “You Can Stop Worrying About MOOCs t 5&% UBMLT OPU POMZ GPSN WBMVBCMF FMF- Now” (May 30, 2013) and “What Quali- ments of MOOC content; the TEDtalks ty Measures Apply to MOOCs?” (June 26, website (http://www.ted.com/talks) also 2013), of interest. Te former suggests criti- contains a TEDtalk from Daphne Koller, cal issues looming regarding MOOCs, ven- the co-founder of Coursera. (Her TEDtalk ture capitalists, return on investment (ROI), can be accessed here: http://www.ted.com/ and commercial versus social enterprise talks/daphne_koller_what_we_re_learn- goals within MOOCs. Ed Techie notes that ing_from_online_education.html.) Anoth- for MOOC providers to consider “MOOC er TEDtalk of interest will be “Peter Nor- based learning on campus” we still just have vig: Te 100,000-Student Classroom” (Link: blended learning (with which librarians http://www.ted.com/talks/peter_norvig_ and course instructors alike have experi- the_100_000_student_classroom.html). ence) stating, “If you take the MOO out of t &MJ[BCFUI %JMM QPTUFE i.00$T 8IFSF the MOOC you’re lef with just a C, and no Are the Librarians?” on the Humanities, one’s interested in just a C.” Te latter post Arts, Science, and Technology Alliance and states that those participating in MOOCs Collaboratory Scholars blog (HASTAC. are “very diferent” and, perhaps strangely org) on August 14, 2013. In her post, she for some readers, pleas for MOOCs to be writes, “I fnd it hard to believe that in all free of the “quality demands we have placed of the MOOC furor no one is considering on higher education” so that experimenta- a crucial part of education: the research tion through this unique, free relationship component, the research component.” With between student and educator may remain perhaps an understandable bias, Dill—a li- open. Librarians, too, may wish to have an brarian—equates librarians in the MOOC open feld for collaboration with MOOC setting as a benchmark necessary to achieve faculty and experimentation with literacy and uphold educational standards. content development and delivery. (Te Ed tćFBTTPDJBUFWJDFQSFTJEFOUTGPSPVUSFBDI Techie’s assertion of the “diferentness” of at Penn State University, and executive the MOOC student is also explored by Jef- director of their World Campus, Wayne frey R. Young in his article for Chronicle of Smutz—like Elizabeth Dill—sees potential Higher Education (May 20, 2013), entitled in MOOCs and knows they will not stand “What Professors Can Learn From ‘Hard as the be-all, end-all solution for education Core’ MOOC Students,” where he under- that the hype can ofen make them out to scores the hugely important role that curi- be. He states, “MOOCs aren’t likely to solve osity and passion play in student drive to the fundamental student learning challeng- participate in MOOCs.)

72 “MOOL” in a MOOC t*O.BSDI UIF0OMJOF$PNQVUFS-J- Tube on this topic called “MOOCs and braryCenter, or OCLC, (OCLCResearch Librarians”: http://www.youtube.com/ 2013a; OCLC Research 2013b; OCLCRe- watch?v=SinXCiMF_Cs&feature=youtu.be. search 2013c; OCLCResearch 2013d) host- t5XPBSUJDMFTQVCMJTIFECZ-JCSBSZ+PVSOBM ed a two-and-a-half-day conference, titled are also worth reading: Ben Showers’s “Te “MOOCs and Libraries: Massive Opportu- Constant Innovator: Te Academic Library nity or Overwhelming Challenge,” hosted at as a Model of Change Management” (http:// the University of Pennsylvania. Video con- lj.libraryjournal.com/2012/01/opinion/ tent was posted on YouTube dated April 9, backtalk/the-constant-innovator-the-aca- 2013. (See Table 1. Penn State is tied for the demic-library-as-a-model-of-change-man- most number of MOOCs hosted by a single agement-backtalk/) and Meredith Schwartz’s institution on Coursera.) Valuable resourc- “Massive Open Opportunity: Supporting es available in the afermath of that con- MOOCs in Public and Academic Librar- ference include a blog post from Brooklyn ies” (http://lj.libraryjournal.com/2013/05/ College librarians (Evans, 2013). See Panel library-services/massive-open-opportuni- 4, in particular. Recorded videos from the ty-supporting-moocs/). conference can be found on YouTube from t ćF 0QFO &EVDBUJPO %BUBCBTF IUUQ the conference sessions: www.oedb.org) published an article on May 16, 2013 entitled “Librarians: Your Most o Te “MOOCs and Libraries” wel- Valuable MOOC Supporters” and states, come speech from H. Carton Rogers III— “Libraries are a major part of universities, the Vice Provost and Director of Libraries but they’re almost entirely missing from the at the University of Pennsylvania: http:// MOOC conversation. Tat’s a big mistake.” www.youtube.com/watch?v=fU8Mle0Tar8. Staf writers go on to describe the wealth of o “Why MOOCs? Why Penn? Why ways that librarians can participate in, con- now?” is a 23-minute talk led by Professor tribute to, and help support MOOCs. Ed Rock of Penn Law: http://www.youtube. com/watch?v=guQyTudlFCI Chronicle of Higher Education (CHE) arti- o A panel of academics from several institu- cles worth review: tions, along with a representative from the Association of Research Libraries, led an t +PTI 'JTDINBO EJTDVTTFT UIF i3JTF PG hour-long session on copyright, licensing, Teaching Machines” in his 2011 article for and open access: http://www.youtube.com/ CHE’s Digital Campus—exploring adap- watch?v=7FvR4K3eddU. tive-learning technologies and their impact o A second hour-long presentation on student motivations, as well as noting re- from librarians and instructional designers, sources engaged with these strategies, such titled “MOOCs and Libraries: New Op- as Knewton, Carnegie Mellon University’s portunities for Librarians,” is also extreme- Open Learning Initiative, and Wake Forest ly relevant to the content in and context University’s “BioBook” project. More studies of this article: http://www.youtube.com/ are needed on the outcomes of implementing watch?v=3ebkaSjXtmk. this avenue of learning and content delivery, particularly for students in the community tćF"TTPDJBUJPOPG$PMMFHFBOE3FTFBSDI college environment. One may suspect that Libraries’ Virtual World Interest Group the concept of “teaching machines” outright (VWIG) also posted a short video on You- replacing teachers is akin to the concept of

73 Internet Learning computers replacing librarians. in the MOOC environment. As humanities t 4UFWF ,PMPXJDI IBT B OVNCFS PG and social science courses grow, the genera- thought-provoking and informative articles tion of visually appealing, and educational, from 2013 regarding the complex debates customized materials for the MOOC set- over MOOC efcacy and host institution ting—to help students “visualize history”— administration and return on investment seems very appealing. available through the Chronicle of Higher t7FSQPPSUFO 8FTUFSB BOE4QFDIUTi6TJOH Education, including: Refection Triggers While Learning in an o “Why Some Colleges Are Saying Online Class” (2012) discusses refection No to MOOC Deals, At Least for Now”; triggers (RTs), which are used to provide op- o “As MOOC Debate Simmers at San portunities for learners to contemplate and Jose State, American U. Calls a Halt”; assess their learning. Rather than propagat- o “Wired Campus: MOOC Pro- ing the belief that refection should occur at fessors Claim No Responsibility for How the end of a course or project, such as part Courses Are Used”; of a portfolio, these authors advocate for re- o “Wired Campus: Harvard Profes- fection during the learning process, not as sors Call for Greater Oversight of MOOCs”; part of the afermath (p. 1031). Within the and context of online learning, technology has o “Outsourced Lectures Raise Con- enabled opportunities for adaptive learn- cerns About Academic Freedom.” ing and MOOCs would likely beneft from adopting adaptive learning strategies into t"EEJUJPOBM$)&BSUJDMFTPGSFMFWBODF the scafolding of their courses. here are: t +PZDF $IBPDIFO $IFOT i0QQPSUVOJUJFT o Jennifer Howard’s “Tomorrow's and Challenges of MOOCs: Perspectives Academic Libraries: Maybe Even Some From Asia” (2013) explores issues of open Books”; and access, archiving, and open educational re- o Laurie Essig’s “It’s MOOAs, Not sources, as well as multimedia instruction- MOOCs, Tat Will Transform Higher Edu- al resources in use for “technology-based cation.” instruction” such as iTunesU, YouTubeE- DU, and others. Librarians are ofen a great Relevant scholarly articles, while not source for relevant resource suggestions, for always directly about MOOCs and librarian- faculty and students, and certainly working ship, can provide for inspiration, refection, with a librarian to locate and mount such re- and collaborative brainstorming. Readers sources in a MOOC would be an appropri- may want to pursue: ate collaboration. Also important in Chen’s research is comparative data on locations of t4BOESB3PČTi7JTVBMJ[JOH)JTUPSZ6TJOH their MOOC students (p. 3), major MOOC Museum Skills to Teach Information Liter- developments in Asia (p. 5), highlighted op- acy to Undergraduates” (2011), published portunities that MOOCs provide (p. 6-8), in College & Undergraduate Libraries, may cultural themes and diferences (p. 9), and enlighten educators about creative eforts challenges and important competencies for of librarians for traditional, credit-bearing MOOC teachers (p. 10-13). courses and may provide a necessary spark t +POFT 3FHBO BOE .JUSB DPOTJEFS to try new methods of engagement with “information literacy beyond the library” their home institution’s students as well as within the context of social enterprise and

74 “MOOL” in a MOOC workforce development. When discussing Yes (1) open education, we must note the criti- No (2) cal opportunity for personal development t*G/P*T4FMFDUFE ćFO4LJQ5P&OEPG4VS- and enrichment presented for MOOC stu- vey dents—“the marriage of concepts of information literacy and social enterprise pro- Q2 Permission to Quote duces opportunities that clearly represent a unique value-added proposition in the world By selecting "Yes" below, you give the In- of workforce development, education, and vestigator permission to quote from your training for low-income workers” (p. 392). responses. Please note that Permission to t :PVOHKV -FF +BFIP $IPJ BOE 5BFIZVO Quote is NOT a requirement to participate in Kim’s “Discriminating Factors Between this survey. If you select "No" your respons- Completers of and Dropouts From Online es will ONLY be presented in aggregate and Learning Courses” (2013) focuses on online any quotes will NOT include any identifying course completion, and barriers to it. Sug- information. If you have any questions or gestions and knowledge herein may be ap- concerns, please contact the Investigator: plicable to MOOCs and their estimated 10% Laureen Cantwell, Instructional Services Li- completion rate. brarian, University of Memphis (email: lcnt- [email protected]). Tank you. Appendix B: MOOCs, MOOC In- struction, and Librarianship Survey Yes, you have my permission to quote from my reply. (1) Q1 Informed Consent No, you do not have my permission to quote Tis survey is about Massive Open Online from my responses. Please only use my en- Courses (MOOCs)—but also about librari- tries for aggregate data and do not include anship. Your participation is completely vol- any identifying information in any quotes untary, and you may leave blank any items used. (2) that you do not feel comfortable answering. We sincerely appreciate your participation Q3 Tank you for choosing to complete this in this research efort. All data from this survey. You should anticipate it will take survey will be presented in aggregate and about 10–20 minutes to complete, depend- any quotes will not include any identifying ing on the fow of your responses. information, unless your express permission is granted on the next screen ("Permis- Q4 Your email address. (Tis information sion to Quote"). If you have any questions will be used to pair you with data gathered regarding this survey, please contact the In- from your Coursera course page. Your con- vestigator: Laureen Cantwell, Instructional tact information will not be published.) Services Librarian, University of Memphis (email: [email protected]). By flling Q5 Title(s) of courses taught through Cour- out this survey, you indicate that you have sera (past, present, upcoming). (Tis infor- read, understand, and agree to these terms. mation will be used to pair you with data Tank you for time and assistance! By se- gathered from your Coursera course page. lecting "Yes" below, you accept the Informed Tis information will be used within aggre- Consent details as outlined above. gate data. If you gave permission to quote on 75 Internet Learning

the previous screen, your course title(s) may Yes, one. (1) be included in the quote information.) Yes, several. (2) No, my MOOC is fnished. (3) Q6 Your institution. (Tis information will No, my MOOC is upcoming. (4) be used to pair you with data gathered from your Coursera course page. Tis informa- t "OTXFS *G "SF ZPV DVSSFOUMZ UFBDIJOH B tion will be used within aggregate data. If MOOC (or MOOCs)? Yes, one. Is Select- you gave permission to quote on the previ- ed Or Are you currently teaching a MOOC ous screen, your institution's name may be (or MOOCs)? Yes, several. Is Selected Or included in the quote information.) Are you currently teaching a MOOC (or MOOCs)? No, my MOOC is fnished. Is Se- Q7 Your faculty status lected: Emeritus/Retired (1) Tenured (2) Q10 # of students enrolled in your MOOC(s). Tenure-track (3) (If you teach/have taught more than 1 Instructor/Adjunct/Non-tenure track (4) MOOC, please state fnal enrollment #s for Other (5) each with the name(s) of the course(s).)

t"OTXFS*G:PVSGBDVMUZTUBUVT0UIFS*T4F- t "OTXFS *G "SF ZPV DVSSFOUMZ UFBDIJOH B lected: MOOC (or MOOCs)? No, my MOOC is fnished. Is Selected: Q8 If you selected "Other" please describe your position as an instructor within your Q11 # of students earning a Certifcate in institution. your MOOC(s). (If you teach/have taught more than 1 MOOC, please state #s for Q9 Did/Will you receive any amount of each course along with the name(s) of the course release for your role as Instructor of a course(s).) MOOC on Coursera? If so, how much? t "OTXFS *G "SF ZPV DVSSFOUMZ UFBDIJOH B Q31 Did/Will you receive any pay from your MOOC (or MOOCs)? Yes, several. Is Select- institution for your role as Instructor in a ed: MOOC on Coursera? Yes (1) Q15 How many MOOCs are you teaching No (2) currently?

Q32 Other than pay and/or course release, Q13 How would you describe the level of have you been ofered any other incentives your MOOC? from your institution to instruct/develop a Introductory—no prior knowledge/study MOOC? necessary (1) Yes (1) Intermediate—some experience will be No (2) helpful (2) t21MFBTFEFTDSJCFUIFTFJODFOUJWFT Advanced—prior experience highly recommended (3) Q14 Are you currently teaching a MOOC Various levels—I teach several MOOCs (4) (or MOOCs)?

76 “MOOL” in a MOOC

t*G7BSJPVTMFWFMT*UFBDITF*T/PU4FMFDU- Yes (1) ed, Ten Skip To How many hours of curric- No (2) ulum design a...(Continue at Q16) t *G /P *T 4FMFDUFE ćFO 4LJQ 5P &OE PG t"OTXFS*G)PXXPVMEZPVEFTDSJCFUIFMFW- Block el of your MOOC? Various levels—I teach several MOOCs Is Selected: t"OTXFS*G)BWFZPVHPUUFOBOZTQFDJBMQFS- Q34 What levels would you assign to the missions from publishers (... Yes Is Selected: MOOCs you are teaching? Q30 How did you obtain this permission? (E.g., what ofces were involved?) Q16 How many hours of curriculum design and course content preparation have gone t"OTXFS*G)BWFZPVHPUUFOBOZTQFDJBMQFS- into your MOOC(s)? missions from publishers (... Yes Is Selected:

Q17 Have you also taught your MOOC(s) Q39 Did your institution incur a cost to ac- as in-person/online/non-MOOC course(s) complish access to the resource(s)? If there at your institution? was a cost involved, what was it? (Estimates Yes (1) are fne) No (2) Yes (1) No (2) t*G/P*T4FMFDUFE ćFO4LJQ5P)BWFZPV gotten any special permission...(Continue at Q12 Does your institution have a library (or Q29) libraries)? Yes (1) t"OTXFS*G)BWFZPVUBVHIUZPVS.00$ T No (2) as in-person/online/non-MOOC... Yes Is Selected: t *G /P *T 4FMFDUFE ćFO 4LJQ 5P &OE PG Block (Continue at Q24) Q18 How did you adapt your course(s) to for the Coursera/MOOC environment? t"OTXFS*G%PFTZPVSJOTUJUVUJPOIBWFBMJ- brary (or libraries)? Yes Is Selected: Q29 Have you gotten any special permissions from publishers (or others) to use Q19 Do you use your institution's librarians copyright protected information in your and/or library/libraries for any of the follow- MOOC(s)? (E.g., a book chapter, scholar- ing services? (Please check all that apply.) ly article, for use as a course material at no MOOL in a MOOC 1 charge to enrolled Coursera students)

Purchasing Locating Research Assistance Assistance Developin Copyright Information materials resources at instruction developing with g learning clearance literacy other in my course emerging outcomes for course instruction institutions courses curricula technology for materials in my courses courses I use my Library for: I use my Librarian(s) for:

Internet Learning

Q20 Have you ever had a librarian embed- Q24 Do you feel students in your MOOC(s) ded into your courses at your institution? can/do/will learn your course content? (NOT within your MOOC(s).) ("Embedded Yes (1) librarians" can serve for in-person, blended, Maybe/Not sure yet (2) and/or completely online courses; they may No (3) provide instruction, research consultations, writing/bibliographic reviewing assistance, t21MFBTFFMBCPSBUFPOZPVSBOTXFS or other kinds of assistance. Another defnition and explanation can be found: http:// Q40 Do you feel students in your MOOC(s) library.uncg.edu/info/distance_education/ can/do/will become more information lit- embedded_librarian.aspx) erate as a result of your course? (You can Yes. (1) view the American Library Association's No. (2) Association of College & Research Librar- ies (ACRL) Information Literacy Standards, t*G/P*T4FMFDUFE ćFO4LJQ5P2)BWF Performance Indicators, and Outcomes here you involved your institution's ... (www.ala.org/acrl/standards/information- literacycompetency#stan—link will open in t"OTXFS*G)BWFZPVFWFSIBEBMJCSBSJBO a new window.) embedded into your courses ... Yes. Is Select- Yes (1) ed: No (2)

Q21 Please describe any advantages and/ Q27 Do you envision a future where librar- or disadvantages of having an embedded li- ians can/will be a part of the MOOC course brarian in your course(s). environment? Yes (1) Q22 Have you involved your institution's li- Maybe/Not sure yet (2) brary and/or librarians in your MOOC(s)? No (3) Yes. (1) No. (2) t21MFBTFFMBCPSBUFPOZPVSBOTXFS t"OTXFS*G)BWFZPVJOWPMWFEZPVSJOTUJUV- Q36 If Coursera made a librarian available tion's library and/or libra... Yes. Is Selected: to your course, can you see yourself making use of the librarian? Q23 Please describe the involvement of the Yes (1) library and/or librarians in your MOOC(s). Maybe (2) (Tis might involve: obtaining copyright No (3) clearance for course materials, working with publishers to create special access permis- t21MFBTFFMBCPSBUFPOZPVSBOTXFS sions for articles/book chapters, establishing information literacy components and/or Q35 Please use this space to provide any ad- learning outcomes, curricula development, ditional thoughts about MOOCs, librarian- course/instruction design, use of technolo- ship, instructing in MOOCs, etc., here. gy, and more.)

78 “MOOL” in a MOOC

Figure 1. Cantwell, L. P. (November 2012). Global Education Conference: What Teachers Can Learn as Students in MOOCs. (See also the archived copy of this presentation via this link: http://www.screencast.com/users/LaureenHome/folders/Default/media/c31e218b- a4d2-401d-968e-88387cc2cfa8/embed).

Figure 2. MOOCs: What are they and how do they work? Tis fgure is an embedded Prezi created by the author. It discusses MOOC basics, excitement and value, concerns, business and management of MOOCs (e.g., return on investment), and readiness assessment for MOOC hosting, with links to source material. (Tis Prezi and the survey used for this article are available on the author’s website accessible through this link: http://prezi.com/ embed/88b5f819f595f286fe64551a9d62fe9ba5ae88af/)

79 Internet Learning MOOL in a MOOC 1 Table 1 Most prominent Coursera host institutions within the United States

Institution # of courses % of Coursera hosted by courses hosted by institution based institution based within the United within the United States States

Stanford University 22 6%

University of Pennsylvania 22 6%

University of Washington 14 3.8%

Georgia Institute of Technology 13 3.5%

Johns Hopkins University 13 3.5%

Duke University 11 3%

Princeton University 10 2.7%

University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign 10 2.7%

Total courses hosted by these institutions 115 31%

Note. Data current as of May 15, 2013.

80 MOOL in a MOOC 1

Table 2 “MOOL” in a MOOC

MostTable promi 2nent Coursera host countries based outside the United States Most prominent Coursera host countries based outside the United States Country # of courses % of Coursera hosted by country courses hosted by other than the country other than United States the United States

United Kingdom 18 5%

Canada 13 3.5%

China & Hong Kong 11 3%

France 7 2%

Mexico 7 2%

Total courses hosted by these countries 56 15.5%

Total courses hosted outside U.S. 101 28%

Note.Note Data. Data current current as as ofof May 15, 15, 2013 2013..

81 MOOL in a MOOC 1

Internet Learning Table 3 Table 3 DistributionDistribution of Courseraof Coursera courses courses by bysole sole or orprimary primary subject subject area/category area/category

Course Subject Area/Category # of courses with % of Coursera particular sole or courses with primary subject particular sole or area or category primary subject area or category

Art 10 3%

Biology and Life Sciences 41 11%

Business and Management 28 8%

Computer Science categories (Artificial 67 18% Intelligence, Software Engineering, Systems and Security, and Theory)

Economics and Finance 17 5%

Education 35 10%

Health and Society 18 5%

Humanities 45 12%

Music, Film, and Audio 12 3%

Physics 11 3%

Total courses in these subject areas/categories 284 78%

Note.Note Data. Data current current as as of of May May 15, 2013 2013..

82 Internet Learning MOOCs for LIS Professional Development: Exploring New Transformative Learning Environments and Roles Michael Stephens1

Tanks to SJSU SLIS student Margaret Jean Campbell for her invaluable assistance editing and formatting this piece. Tanks to Kyle Jones, PhD student at the University of Wiscon- sin-Madison's School of Library and Information Studies and SJSU SLIS lecturer, for his incredible work designing the site architecture and for co-istructing the Hyperlinked Library MOOC.

Te rapid development of emerging disruptive technologies is a driving force behind the evolution of the library and information science (LIS) profession and is causing a redesign of the traditional approaches to LIS professional development. Historically fairly static, LIS environments have evolved into dynamic refections of the enormous societal changes occurring as a result of open communications and access throughout the Web. In addition, 21st century LIS professionals must consider and prepare for the new roles they might play in network-enabled, large-scale learning environments. Several decades of research on self-directed learning (SDL) have shown the social, non-linear, and serendipitous process to be transformational. LIS professionals, who once relied upon yearly conferences, employer-provided seminars and workshops, and association newsletters in order to update their knowledge, have embraced SDL opportunities to expand their understandings and skill sets. Te frst wave of SDL and networked platforms for LIS professional development (Learning 2.0) may have been precursors to the connectivist learning environments designed into the free, not-for-credit, massive open online courses (MOOCs). Because these new environments of participatory and transformative learning ofer the potential for LIS professionals to test emerging technologies, experiment and play with new roles, and self-select teams for collaborative artifact creation, the author has adapted his existing online graduate course, called the Hyperlinked Library, at San Jose State University’s School of Library and Information Science (SJSU SLIS) in order to explore how LIS professionals can use emerging technologies and participatory practices to serve their communities. Launched in September 2013, the Hyperlinked Li- brary MOOC pilot (#hyperlibMOOC) provides a sandbox in which LIS professionals and students can play the roles of learner, connector, and collaborator in a self-directed yet social learning experience. Results from the pilot course will contribute to a better understanding of how the not-for-credit MOOC can serve as a transformative environment for professional development.

1 San Jose State University School of Library & Information Science

83 MOOCs for LIS Professional Development

Key Words LIS, professional development, information science, MOOC, connectivism, connectivist, collaboration, participatory learning, transformative learning, self-directed learning, collaborative learning, connected learning, SDL, andragogy, L2.0, learning 2.0

Introduction supporting learners, specifcally librarians. What roles will and should they play in future isruptive technologies continue to large-scale virtual communities and learn- force the evolution of tried and true ing programs? When learning resources are systems. Nowhere is this more ev- openly available on the Web and organized Dident than in the realm of education. Te within a MOOC, are librarians needed to infux of technologies to connect learners manage the resources and facilitate access? to instructors and course material remote- With the opportunities for global ly has changed the very fabric of higher online learning come some considerations. education, as well as continuing education Tis article explores emerging thought con- and professional development. Dialing in, cerning MOOCs within a framework of the modem-based systems have given way to roles the library and information science Internet-connected online learning envi- (LIS) professional can play as learner, con- ronments, which in turn have evolved into nector, and collaborator in large scale cours- experience-rich learning landscapes. es. In addition, this article presents a new At the same time, those who sup- initiative to ofer a large-scale, open course port educational pursuits—librarians and for librarians globally as a mechanism for information professionals—are faced with professional development and continuous their own evolutionary transition. Disrup- learning. tive technologies and trends impact library services as well. Recent library literature Methodology has featured coverage of e-book issues, the changing behaviors of information seek- he methodology used for this article ers, and the evolution of a profession once is based on “futures research” (Glenn, charged primarily with being the gatekeep- 2003) and blends the methods of en- ers of collections into a profession that will Tvironmental scanning, trend research, and include managing virtual communities for scenario planning. “Te purpose of futures learning and research. methodology is to systematically explore, At the cutting edge of this horizon is create, and test both possible and desirable the massive open online course (MOOC). futures to improve decisions,” notes Glenn MOOCs are touted by some as a means to (2003, p. 3), and it “provides a framework to transform teaching and learning for the 21st better understand the present and expand century, presenting an opportunity for glob- mental horizons” (p. 3). Futures research al, open participation. Learners can access “includes analysis of how those conditions an educational opportunity from anywhere might change as a result of the implemen- with peers from all over the world. tation of policies and actions, and the con- Te emergence of network-enabled sequences of these policies and actions” 24/7 learning presents challenges for those (Glenn, p.3).

84 Internet Learning

By combining a literature review Self-Directed Learning (SDL) with the qualitative methodologies of envi- ronmental scanning and trend research in Candy’s (1991) model of SDL included such this paper, we can outline various scenarios defning characteristics as learner-created, and the potential roles for LIS professionals learner-managed, and learning-motivat- in evolving and expanding learning envi- ed explorations. SDL is a key assumption ronments. of andragogy, a learning model that pro- Library service provider OCLC used vides an alternative set of assumptions to such methodology in the 2003 OCLC Envi- the pedagogical models that focus on in- ronmental Scan: Pattern Recognition report structor dependency. Andragogy assumes to its membership to identify and describe that adult learners prefer a self-directed emerging trends that were impacting librar- environment where they can draw upon ies (De Rosa, Dempsey, & Wilson, 2003). their reservoirs of experience to explore Reports and research from OCLC on the task- and problem-oriented, real-world sit- impact of social media, sharing and trust in uations (Knowles, 1980). Some theories a networked society, and the transformative suggest that the ability to engage in SDL is power of libraries also use this methodology situational (Grow, 1991), and the theory of (De Rosa et al., 2003). transformative learning (TL) argues that Scenario planning is a process of an instructor functioning as a facilitator presenting and discussing multiple combi- and provocateur can infuence learners and nations of ideas as a way of quickly coming groups toward greater SDL (Mezirow, 1997). to a collection of plausible possibilities for SDL, as a component of both andragogy and the future (Johnson, Adams Becker, Cum- TL, provides a theoretical framework for mins, Estrada, Freeman, & Ludgate, 2013). exploring the potential of MOOCs. Can- Scenario planning allows us to identify po- dy (1991) summarizes several decades of tential roles that LIS professionals might fndings concerning SDL that include a so- play based on current trends and scanning cial component or interaction with others: as well as on insights from the literature. t4%-GFBUVSFTJOUFSBDUJPOXJUIPUIFSQFP- Literature Review ple as a motivating factor. t4%-JTOPOMJOFBSJOOBUVSF Self-Directed Learning (SDL), Professional t4%-SFMJFTPOTFSFOEJQJUZ Development, Learning 2.0, and MOOCs t4%-JTSBSFMZBTPMJUBSZBDUJWJUZJUJTPęFO social in nature. (p. 199) A brief literature review of pertinent topics provides a foundation to explore the poten- Later acknowledging more fndings, Candy tial roles of LIS professionals in networked, (2004) argued that a better descriptor for participatory learning environments. Tese SDL would be “learner control,” in which include roles in SDL, professional devel- learners “take control over a narrow range of opment, Learning 2.0, and the emerging choices” (p. 50). Candy (2004) also encour- MOOC environments. aged online education endeavors to allow the learner to explore beyond the range of choices in specifed course material.

85 MOOCs for LIS Professional Development

Professional Development for Library Staf Varlejs (1999) found that more than 75% of American Library Association mem- Te literature focused on professional-de- bers participated in SDL over more formal velopment (PD) activities in libraries in- PD opportunities and noted for librarians an cludes how-to style manuals for creating eagerness to learn is “an attribute central to training programs as well as studies of the one’s professional life” (p. 194). Almost ff- various ways library staf may participate in teen years later, the opportunities for library and beneft from PD. Emphasis is placed on professionals to learn online have grown ex- concepts such as support of management, ponentially. encouraging environments, employee circumstance, and quality of formal PD ofer- Learning 2.0 ings (Chan & Auster, 2003; Havener & Stolt, 1994). Topics for learning in the library set- e could draw some interesting ting over the years included the reference parallels between the develop- interview, collection development, and the ment of Learning 2.0 (L2.0) pro- reader advisory. With the advent of technol- Wgrams and MOOCs as large-scale online ogy in libraries, the emphasis for PD cours- learning programs. L2.0 programs, created es shifed, as did the delivery mechanisms. in 2006 to include all library staf at the Pub- Tese include conferences, workshops, staf lic Library of Charlotte Mecklenburg Coun- development days, and invited speakers. ty in a learning activity and available for Emerging technology also empha- replication via a Creative Commons license, sized the need for LIS professionals to con- have been reported by practitioners as a tinue to learn and engage with new formats, successful way to engage staf with emerg- mechanisms for delivery, and communica- ing technology use in libraries (Stephens & tion tools. Sayers (2007) concluded that ac- Cheetham, 2012b). A globally ofered L2.0 ademic libraries should maintain a positive program, hosted by School Library Journal emphasis on continuing support for PD to and facilitated by the author of this article, retain and recruit academic librarians. was intended to bring teacher librarians to- Broadbent and Grosser (1987) sur- gether in an atmosphere of exploration and veyed special librarians and information chaos (Bromberg, 2008). center managers in Melbourne to gauge the Delivered via a blog site or wiki, the efectiveness and challenges of PD activi- self-directed and ofen replicated program ties. Results included suggestions to focus of online learning modules has been lauded on teaching librarians to be learners in early as transformational (Abram, 2008) and cel- coursework, to involve various institutions ebrated for its ability to bring staf together and associations in ongoing PD activities, in a common goal: learning emerging tech- and to increase institutional resources to nologies. “Te Learning 2.0 program had a support PD. Ultimately, however, it is ad- great impact on staf, who now know they ministrative policy for PD that is needed for are capable of learning new technologies,” successful advancement of librarians’ learn- noted Lewis (2008) in a case study of an ing, argued Chan and Auster (2003). Teir early program, and Gross and Leslie (2008) study also reported that a supportive man- reported success in an academic library set- ager and an environment that fosters learn- ting. A later, expanded case study by Gross ing are necessary for positive results (Chan and Leslie (2010) detailed the program’s im- & Auster, 2003). plementation and ofered insights to make

86 Internet Learning

Table 1. Professional Development (PD) ______Traditional · How-to training program design manuals approaches · Examples and studies of PD effectiveness · Emphasis on concepts: management support, work environments, employee circumstance · Topical focus: reference interview, collection management, reader advisory · Delivery: conferences, workshops, staff development days, invited speakers ______Learning 2.0 (L2.0) · Online learning modules · Self-directed learning (SDL) · Learner created and managed, self-motivated · Open educational resources (OER) · Creative Commons license ______MOOCs and new · Online (blogs, wikis), participatory, connected SDL culture of learning · Usually no cost and not-for-credit · Open educational resources (OER) · Interaction through forums, study groups, peer review · Automatic assessments ______

MOOCs for LIS Professional Development

it more efective. Stephens and Cheetham that 79% of MOOC instructors believe (2011, 2012a, 2012b) mounted a large-scale MOOCs are “worth the hype” (Kolowich, study of L2.0 in Australia and detailed the 2013). Daniel (2012), in “Making Sense of benefts of the program for library staf and MOOCs: Musings in a Maze of Myth, Par- library service. adox and Possibility,” explores emerging issues that educators should consider and A Brief History of MOOCs scholars should research: technology platforms, for-proft versus not-for-proft mod- he term MOOC was frst used in els, efective pedagogy, and student success 2008 by George Siemens and Stephen within large learning environments. A scan Downes to describe a free, online of recent research includes assessments of Tcourse taught at the University of Manitoba the experiences of students and professors for 2,300 students (Educause, 2011). Since in MOOC environments and evaluations then, a growing number of educational in- of various MOOC platforms and their im- stitutions have been experimenting with pact on student learning. Clearly, evaluating MOOCs, and an increasing number of in- MOOC environments is an area ripe for ex- dividuals across the globe are enrolling in ploration. MOOCs. One reason for this growing inter- We can trace a thread of cohesion est is that MOOCS make content and learn- from SDL concepts woven into professional ing more accessible and afordable. Many development opportunities for library staf MOOCs are ofered at no cost to students, to Web-based learning programs replicat- who receive no course credit. Typically, they ed and ofered to thousands of library staf. include open educational resources, easily Te next frontier blends these concepts and accessible course sites (e.g., a blog or wiki), can be exemplifed in the development of a and interaction with other students via on- MOOC designed to enable social learning line forums, study groups, and peer review and ofer a professional development oppor- of assignments. In some MOOCs, student tunity. performance is automatically assessed via tools such as online quizzes. New Environments for Learning: Several new companies, including Hyperlinked, Connected, and Coursera, EdX, and Udacity, recently start- Transformative ed ofering for-credit MOOCs that are not free. Te New York Times reported that in fall 2012, Harvard University and the Mas- Te Hyperlinked Library MOOC sachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) enrolled 370,000 students in MOOCs, while odels persisting in LIS research Coursera reached more than 1.7 million stu- indicate that the exploration and dents (Pappano, 2012). use of new information technolo- Mgies has a benefcial impact on the profession Although educators and scholars are debating the advantages and downsides of and on library service. Clyde (2004) called MOOCs, with many asserting that MOOCs for librarians to adopt emerging tools, such have the potential to provide new insight reas blogs, because they could prove useful for garding online learning, research regarding their mission. And long before there were MOOCs is in its infancy. A recent study by blogs or Facebook, Buckland (1992) noted Te Chronicle of Higher Education found that computing tools could be used for more

88 Internet Learning than traditional tasks and urged librarians It explores how libraries are using emerging to learn to use the new tools to further their technologies to serve their communities. mission and improve library services. De- Tis MOOC site was built using the livering services to the end user—wherev- open-source content management system er they happen to be—was a goal Buckland WordPress along with a comprehensive (1992) ofered, forecasting the onslaught of suite of plug-ins, called BuddyPress, that mobile and handheld devices that now ofer provides the social experience. It was de- always and anywhere access. signed by Kyle Jones, one of the MOOC’s Te author has worked for sever- co-instructors, and is powered by a number al years researching and refning a model of additional plugins and themes to provide of future library service called the Hyper- advanced functionality. Jones supervised linked Library. Tis model is synthesized a team of SJSU SLIS students during sum- from data collected on emerging societal mer 2013 to build the site architecture and trends, scholarly and socio-technical publi- design the badge system. During the fall cations, and burgeoning technologies used 2013 pilot, up to 400 MOOC students have in library service. Te methodology used the opportunity to explore the Hyperlinked to build the always-evolving, always-in-be- Library model through recorded presenta- ta model and also used as a framework for tions and other content, as well as through this article is futures research (Glenn, 2003). practical assignments that encourage stu- In an article for Serials Re- dents to apply what they are learning. Badg- view, Stephens and Collins (2007) de- es are awarded as students move through fned the Hyperlinked Library model as: the course, culminating with a certifcate of . . . an open, participatory institution that completion. welcomes user input and creativity. It is built on human connections and conver- Teoretical Framework for MOOCs sations. Te organizational chart is fatter and team-based. Te collections grow and onnectivist learning theories of- thrive via user involvement. Librarians are fer a theoretical framework to ap- tapped in to user spaces and places online proach learning experiences with- to interact, have presence, and point the Cin open online networks. Kop (2011) way. (p. 255) reported on one of the frst studies of a In September 2013, the San Jose MOOC as a connectivist learning endeav- State University’s School of Library and In- or and defnes connectivist learning as formation Science (SJSU SLIS) launched its enhanced by four major types of activity: frst open online course, the Hyperlinked Library MOOC (#hyperlibMOOC). It is 1) aggregation – access to and collection of adapted from the existing online graduate a wide variety of resources to read, watch, course ofered to SJSU students enrolled in or play; the Master of Library and Information Sci- 2) relation – afer reading, watching, or ence (MLIS) program and is intended to listening to some content, the learner might serve as a professional development oppor- refect and relate it to what he or she al- tunity for librarians, library staf, and profes- ready knows or to earlier experiences; sionals who work in archives and other types 3) creation – afer this refection and of information centers. Te SLIS MOOC is sense-making process, learners might free and is not ofered for academic credit. create something of their own (e.g., a blog

89 MOOCs for LIS Professional Development

Figure 1

Welcome to the Hyperlinked Library http://mooc.hyperlib.sjsu.edu/blog/welcome-to-module-1/

Internet Learning

post, an account with a social bookmarking will bring his or her unique paradigm, the site, a new entry in a Moodle discussion) goal of looking forward is shared across all using any service on the Internet, such as of those participating. Flickr, Second Life, Yahoo Groups, Face- book, YouTube, iGoogle, NetVibes, etc.; Production Centered: MOOC stu- 4) sharing – learners might share their dents will collaboratively create a series of work with others on the network. Tis artifacts indicative of their learning that can participation in activities is seen as vital to be used in their libraries and information learning. (Connectivism section, para. 2) centers. Tese include emerging technology planning guides and briefs relating to new Connected Learning service initiatives. Artifacts might be text- based or be shared via video, still image, in- OOCs have their foundations fographic, etc. based on the pedagogical assumptions in connectivist learn- Openly Networked: As noted above, Ming theory, which recognizes that knowl- the Hyperlinked Library functions as a edge exists in dynamic relationships and WordPress- and BuddyPress-enabled com- external connections and expands with in- munity site accessible by anyone with creased access to networks of people, ma- a connection to the Web. terials, and tools (Clarà & Barberà, 2013). Jenkins (2012) uses the term “connected Transformative Learning learning” to describe emerging methods of connected participation in online learning: he MOOC will also incorporate con- “It’s social. It’s hands-on. It’s active. It’s net- cepts from TL. Mezirow (1997) de- worked. It’s personal. It’s efective. Trough scribes a learning process that grows a new vision of learning, it holds out the Tin quality as a result of critical refection possibility for productive and broad-based on experience: “Transformative learners educational change” (para. 24). Connected move toward a frame of reference that is learning includes three important compo- more inclusive, discriminating, self-refec- nents: a shared purpose, a production-cen- tive, and integrative of experience” (p. 5). tered approach, and an openly networked In other words, as learners encounter new environment. Clarà & Barberà (2013) pro- ideas, new approaches—and in the MOOC, pose that MOOCs that encourage connect- new technologies—they constantly update ed participation in joint activities, in envi- and broaden their knowledge and under- ronments facilitated by experts, ofer the standing of the world around them. Apply- best opportunity for internalization and ing this theory to new models of learning transformation. Te Hyperlinked Library about information technologies provides a includes all three of the connected learning useful framework for understanding how components as a foundation for the course: information professionals and library staf integrate new tools into library service. Shared Purpose: MOOC students Te act of blogging refections by will explore the Hyperlinked Library model MOOC students supports this concept. as a means of studying emerging technol- Tomas and Brown (2011) noted this in A ogies and emerging thought related to fu- New Culture of Learning: ture libraries. Although each individual

91 MOOCs for LIS Professional Development

Blogging is also a personally transforma- and opportunities to explore new technol- tive experience. Because a person’s blog ogies into a unique, self-directed yet social, is subject to change and revision by others, and connected learning experience. the infuence of the collective can power- Tis will be replicated within the fully and meaningfully shape the blogger’s MOOC. Weekly modules covering concepts view of the world, just as the blogger, such as community engagement, transpar- at the same time, can shape the collective. (p. 66) ency, privacy, and user experience will provide MOOC participants the opportunity Transformation, then, potentially to explore, experiment, and refect on the occurs as individuals encounter new para- ideas and challenges associated with these digms and as groups encounter each other’s topics. Te potential is present for learners shifing paradigms. to “play” with the ideas and potential solu- tions to problems encountered in their own MOOC Meets Learning 2.0 information environments via refection and the creation of course artifacts. Con- he parallels between the MOOC currently, the instructors expect partici- movement, connectivism, and L2.0 pants to critically refect on their own prac- programs merit consideration. tice within this new learning environment. TMight we argue that L2.0 programs, ofered in hundreds of organizations since 2006, Scenarios for Future Roles are connectivist precursors to the evolving, open, and large-scale learning landscapes DL encompasses the idea that learning we’re experiencing now? can be situational and that people may Te Hyperlinked Library will in- behave diferently in a range of learn- corporate certain emphases culled from Sing environments and in relation to diferent the author’s L2.0 research. Te L2.0 model subject matter (Grow, 1991). Leadership in has an emphasis on play, experimentation, online learning environments may involve and social interaction with other learners as fuidly transitioning through many roles part of the programs. Te group becomes in relation to users and participants. Ac- the learning collective. Tomas and Brown cording to Grow (1991), one can expect to (2011) note that a collective is “a communi- fuctuate from dependency through self-di- ty of similarly minded people who [help an rection as a learner to coaching through individual] learn and meet the very partic- consultancy as a leader. In addition, con- ular set of needs that [s/he has]” (p. 21). nectivist and connected learning approach- A focus on play, innovation, and es that purposefully challenge participants experimentation is needed for 21st century to play learner, connector, and collaborator learning success, argue Tomas and Brown in sustained, shared activities are being ex- (2011). Jenkins, Purushotma, Clinton, Wei- plored as optimum MOOC environments gel, and Robison (2006) defned play as (Clarà & Barberà, 2013; Jenkins, 2012). “the capacity to experiment with one’s sur- Tis section explores the roles the LIS pro- roundings as a form of problem-solving” fessional can play in large-scale courses as (p.4) and argued that play is one of the most learner, connector, and collaborator—roles important emerging social literacies and that may prove valuable beyond MOOCs to valued skills for the changing landscape of other places, virtual and physical, where LIS education. Te L2.0 model combines play professionals practice. Tere must also be

92 Internet Learning

consideration for students in LIS programs Connector to gain experience with these roles and environments. he LIS professional may also fnd the role of connector to be a prominent Learner part of future duties. A connector is Tsomeone who can facilitate a group to make he frst role an LIS professional connections between learning, ideas, and should play in these new learning practice. Also, this person is a leader of sorts environments is that of learner. Tis who connects people within organizations Trole is grounded in the “now” of these sce- and lets those connections grow. narios. As Jenkins (2012) notes, taking an Because MOOC content is typically active role in learning is part of the con- free and open on the Web, the role of librar- nected learning approach. Reading current ians seems nullifed in this environment. In- news and articles about MOOCs might give stead of locating and sharing resources, LIS librarians background knowledge, but ac- professionals working actively within large tively participating has the potential to pro- learning environments may help learners vide more depth of experience. Burkhardt locate and connect with others in the com- (2012) writing for his library-focused blog munity who may share similar or discordant argued, “Tere are a lot of good reasons ideas. Tis person may also connect groups though for librarians to sign up for a MOOC to ideas and resources to further their con- themselves” (para. 1). His reasons include versations. exploring innovations in higher education In the Hyperlinked Library, groups and planning for future scenarios by up- of MOOC participants will self-select into dating skills, learning from great teachers, “tribes” of people interested in the same top- and allowing librarians to do something for ic, avenue of librarianship, or service pop- themselves (para. 2). ulation. Te moniker was chosen to relate Tis interest in continuous learning to Godin’s concepts of groups and leaders. should be instilled in future LIS profession- Godin (2008) posits that a tribe is simply als from the moment they enter graduate “a group of people connected to one an- school. Tomas and Brown (2011) note, “In other, connected to a leader, and connected the new culture we describe, learning thus to an idea…a group needs only two things becomes a lifelong interest that is renewed to be a tribe: a shared interest and a way to and redefned on a continual basis” (p. 32). communicate” (p. 1). In the MOOC, SJSU Moving forward, an LIS professional might SLIS students, who are not participating in continue to utilize MOOCs as a means to the MOOC, serve as participatory learning keep current with emerging ideas and is- guides (PLGs), who keep an eye on the shar- sues in librarianship as well as specifc sub- ing, connected learning, and joint activities ject areas of interest. within assigned groups of participants. PLGs Te Hyperlinked Library MOOC also submit periodic critical refections on may be the beginnings of a model that MOOC efectiveness and participant prog- evolves into a rich set of learning commu- ress. We might also call PLGs “connectors.” nities ofering lifelong learning for LIS pro- Te role of connector, then, is one fessionals. Future research will gauge the that encourages participation, sharing, and efectiveness of the model. the furthering of connectivity and joint action in a group. Godin (2008) shares an illu-

93 MOOCs for LIS Professional Development

Table 2. Professional Development (PD) in a MOOC Environment ______Roles that LIS professionals may play ______Learner · Active participation as a learner brings more depth of experience than passive reading · Technological skills automatically exercised and updated through participation · Access to wide variety of mentors and teachers · Self-directed exploration available 24/7 ______Connector · Locating, curating, and sharing information is social and participatory—anyone can be the leader or connector on any topic or number of topics · Discordant ideas and perspectives have new possibilities for interaction through active and open connectors · Unrestricted opportunity to follow a passion, share, create, participate in, and lead groups or “tribes” ______Collaborator · Working together to solve problems, sharing expertise with technologies, building artifacts, organizing connected experiences · Working with outside-MOOC entities · MOOC participatory learning guides and interactive tools function as collaborators with learners · Creating participatory learning tools is acting as a collaborator ______

Internet Learning

minating example that inspired this concept or instruct learners on various technologies in the MOOC: that might assist them in fulflling course In the spring of 2008, I announced a requirements. Tey might also collaborate paid summer internship for students. with other entities on campus, in the com- More than 130 well-educated students munity, or in other information settings to from all over the world applied. As an further the goals of the course. In the Hyper- experiment, I set up a private Facebook linked Library MOOC, the PLGs will also group for the applicants and invited perform the role of collaborator. A summer each on to participate. Sixty of them class of SJSU SLIS students worked to build joined immediately. No tribe existed resources for MOOC participants to utilize yet—just sixty strangers in an online together as they navigate the course site. forum. Within hours, a few had taken Tis is a notable trend. From a re- the lead, posting topics, starting dis- cent policy brief on the future of American cussions, leaning in and leading. Tey libraries from the American Library Associ- called on their peers to contribute and ation, Hendrix (2010) sees the confuence of participate. And the rest? Tey lurked. two major trends, a focus on user and library Tey sat and they watched. Tey were adoption of popular emerging technologies hiding, afraid of something that wasn’t and an emphasis on human relationships: likely to happen. Whom would you Combining these two schools of hire? (p. 57) thought yields a fundamental and increasingly popular prediction about Te same could be said for LIS professionals. the future of libraries: collaboration How they encourage and facilitate a com- will become a common and import- munity’s interaction might be a primary fac- ant focus. Te concept of collaboration tor in future hiring decisions. Te work of arises in almost all conversations con- Skokie Public Library in Illinois to facilitate cerning the future direction of Amer- and connect the community is indicative of ican libraries. Libraries and librarians this set of skills (Buhmann, Greenwalt, Ja- are expected to partner with many cobsen, & Roehm, 2009). SkokieNet evolved types of institutions, organizations, from a static HTML site in 1995 to a Drupal and individual users to provide both platform that supports several websites and traditional and cutting-edge services a community portal and information net- and fexible, usable physical and online work. Te development of an environment environments. (p. 15) for vibrant online community interactions, supported by the library, happened through Bitter-Rijpkema, Verjans, and Bruijnzeels the eforts of far-sighted library directors (2012) survey the impact of emerging, dis- and the collaboration of a consortium of ruptive technologies on library learning and area libraries. note the job description of the public librarian is moving “from information to knowl- Collaborator edge worker with a focus on innovative co-creation of meaning” (p. 39). Libraries of he role of collaborator within learn- all kinds are adding digital creation labs and ing environments is the third sce- makerspaces. Te skills of the collaborator nario for librarians. Te collaborator and co-creator will be necessary for these Tmight work with learners to create an artifact environments.

95 MOOCs for LIS Professional Development

Conclusion Bromberg, P. (2008, July 21). All together now. SLJ’s 2.0 program begins today, July tilizing literature, scanning the 21 [Web log post]. Retrieved from http:// current environment of higher librarygarden.net/2008/07/21/all-togeth- education in fux, and developing er-now-sljs-2-0-program-begins-today-ju- Uscenario-based roles of future information ly-21/ professional work within large-scale learning environments are some ways to under- Buckland, M. (1992). Redesigning library stand the sweeping changes disruptive tech- services: A manifesto. American Library nologies have brought to our landscape. Association. Retrieved from http://sunsite. As we go forward, research centered berkeley.edu/Literature/Library/Redesign- on the Hyperlinked Library MOOC in ing/html.html fall 2013 will contribute to a better understanding regarding how free, not-for-credit Buhmann, M., Greenwalt, T., Jacobsen, M., MOOCs can serve as professional develop- & Roehm, F. (2009). On the ground, in the ment tools as well as test some of the un- cloud. Library Journal, 134(12), 35-37. derlying theory and models the MOOC is based on. Tere is an eagerness to evaluate Burkhardt, A. (2012, August 13). 4 reasons the SLIS MOOC, identify areas where the librarians should join a MOOC [Web log model is efective, and provide recommen- post. Retrieved from http://andyburkhardt. dations regarding how to improve the de- com/2012/08/13/4-reasons-librarians- sign of MOOCs in the future. should-join-a-mooc/

References Candy, P. C. (1991). Self-direction for lifelong learning: a comprehensive guide to Abram, S. (2008). Te 23 things - Learning theory and practice. San Francisco: Jossey- 2.0. Stephen’s Lighthouse. Retrieved from Bass. http://stephenslighthouse.com/2008/02/05/ the-23-things-learning-2-0/ Candy, P. C. (2004). Linking thinking: Self-directed learning in the digital age. Bitter-Rijpkema, M. E., Verjans, S., & Canberra, ACT: Department of Education, Bruijnzeels, R. (2012). Te Library School: Science and Training. Empowering the sustainable innovation capacity of new librarians. Library Man- Chan, D. C., & Auster, E. (2003). Fac- agement, 33(1/2), 36-49. tors contributing to the professional development of reference librarians. Broadbent, M., & Grosser, K. (1987). Library & Information Science Research Continuing professional development of (07408188), 25(3), 265. doi:10.1016/S0740- special library and information center 8188(03)00030-6 managers. Journal of Education for Library and Information Science, 28(2), 99-115. Clarà, M., & Barberà, E. (2013). Learn- Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/sta- ing online: massive open online courses ble/40323621 (MOOCs), connectivism, and cultural psychology. Distance Education, 34(1), 129- 136. doi:10.1080/01587919.2013.770428

96 Internet Learning

Clyde, L. A. (2004). Weblogs and libraries. Gross, J., & Leslie, L. (2010). Learning Oxford: Chandos Publishing. 2.0: A catalyst for library organisational change. Te Electronic Library, 28(5), Daniel, J. (2012). Making sense of MOOCs: 657-668. Retrieved from ECU Publications Musings in a maze of myth, paradox and Pre. 2011 http://works.bepress.com/ju- possibility. Journal of Interactive Media lia_gross/9 in Education (JIME). Retrieved from http://www-jime.open.ac.uk/jime/article/ Grow, G. (1991). Teaching learners to be view/2012-18 self-directed: A stage approach. Adult Education Quarterly 44(2): 109 - 114. De Rosa, C., Dempsey, L., & Wilson, A. Retrieved from http://www.longleaf.net/ (2003). Te 2003 OCLC environmen- ggrow/SSDL/Model.html#SituationalLead- tal scan: Pattern recognition (Executive ership Summary). A. Wilson (Ed.). Dublin, OH: OCLC Online Computer Library Center, Havener, W., & Stolt, W. A. (1994). Te Inc. Retrieved from http://www.oclc.org/ professional development activities of content/dam/oclc/reports/escan/down- academic librarians: Does institutional loads/escansummary_en.pdf support make.... College & Research Li- braries, 55(1), 25. Retrieved from https:// Educause. (2011). 7 things you should www.ideals.illinois.edu/bitstream/han- know about MOOCs. Educause Learning dle/2142/41730/crl_55_01_25_opt.pdf?se- Initiative. Retrieved from http://net.edu- quence=2 cause.edu/ir/library/pdf/ELI7078.pdf Hendrix, J. C. (2010, February). Checking Glenn, J. C. (2003). Introduction to the out the future. Perspectives from the li- futures research methods series. In J. brary community on information technol- C. Glenn & T. J. Gordon (Eds.), Futures ogy and 21st-century libraries (Policy Brief research methodology, V2.0 (pp. 1-61). No. 2). ALA Ofce for Information Tech- AC/UNU Millennium Project, American nology Policy. Retrieved from http://www. Council for the United Nations University. ala.org/ofces/sites/ala.org.ofces/fles/ Available from Te Millennium Project content/oitp/publications/policybriefs/ website: http://www.millennium-project. ala_checking_out_the.pdf org/millennium/FRM-v2.html Jenkins, H. (2012, March 1). Connect- Godin, S. (2008). Tribes: We need you to ed learning: A new paradigm [Web log lead us. New York: Penguin Group (USA) post]. Retrieved from http://henryjenkins. Inc. org/2012/03/connected_learning_a_new_ parad.html Gross, J., & Leslie, L. (2008). Twen- ty-three steps to learning Web 2.0 tech- Jenkins, H., Purushotma, R., Clinton, K., nologies in an academic library. Te Weigel, M., & Robison, A. (2006). Con- Electronic Library, 26(6), 790-802. doi: fronting the challenges of participatory 10.1108/02640470810921583 culture: Media education for the 21st century. Chicago, IL: Te MacArthur Founda- tion

97 MOOCs for LIS Professional Development

Johnson, L., Adams Becker, S., Cummins, Pappano, L. (2012, November 2). Te year M., Estrada, V., Freeman, A., & Ludgate, of the MOOC. Education Life. New York H. (2013). NMC Horizon Report: 2013 Times. Retrieved from Higher Education Edition. Austin, TX: Te http://www.nytimes.com/2012/11/04/ New Media Consortium. Retrieved from education/edlife/massive-open-online- http://www.nmc.org/pdf/2013-horizon-re- courses-are-multiplying-at-a-rapid-pace. port-HE.pdf html?_r=0

Knowles, M. S. (1980). My farewell ad- Sayers, R. (2007). Te right staf from x to dress...andragogy – no panacea, no ideolo- y: Generational change and professional gy. Training & Development Journal, 34(8), development in future academic libraries. 48. CAVAL Research and Advocacy. Library Management, 28(8/9), 474-487. Retrieved Kolowich, S. (2013, March 18). Te pro- from http://www.lib.cuhk.edu.hk/confer- fessors who make the MOOCs. Te Minds ence/aldp2007/programme/aldp2007_full_ Behind the MOOCs. Te Chronicle of paper/RichardSayers.pdf Higher Education. Retrieved from http:// chronicle.com/article/Te-Professors-Be- Stephens, M., & Cheetham, W. (2011). Te hind-the-MOOC/137905/?cid=wb&utm_ impact and efect of learning 2.0 programs source=wb&utm_medium=en#id=over- in Australian academic libraries. New view Review of Academic Librarianship, 17(1), 31-63. Kop, R. (2011). Te challenges to connectivist learning on open online networks: Stephens, M., & Cheetham, W. (2012a). Learning experiences during a massive Benefts and results of learning 2.0: A case open online course. Te International study of CityLibrariesLearning – discov- Review of Research in Open and Distance er*play*connect. Australian Library Jour- Learning, 12(3), 19-38. Retrieved from nal, 61(1), 6-15. http://www.irrodl.org/index.php/irrodl/ article/view/882/1689 Stephens, M., & Cheetham, W. (2012b). Te impact and efect of learning 2.0 Lewis, L. (2008, February 5). Library 2.0: programs in Australian public libraries. Taking it to the street. Paper presentation Evidence Based Library and Information from VALA 2008 Conference & Exhibi- Practice, 7(1), 53-64. tion. Melbourne, Australia. Retrieved from http://www.valaconf.org.au/vala2008/pa- Stephens, M., & Collins, M. (2007). Web pers2008/35_Lewis_Final.pdf 2.0, library 2.0, and the hyperlinked library. Serials Review, 33(4), 253. Mezirow, J. (1997). Transformative learning: Teory to practice. New Directions Tomas, D., & Brown, J. S. (2011). A new for Adult and Continuing Education, culture of learning: Cultivating the imag- 1997(74), 5-12. Retrieved from http://www. ination for a world of constant change. ecolas.eu/content/images/Mezirow%20 Lexington, KY: CreateSpace. Transformative%20Learning.pdf

98 Internet Learning

Varlejs, J. (1999). On their own: Librari- ans' self-directed, work-related learning. Te Library Quarterly, 69(2), 173-201. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/4309298

99 Efciency, Economy, and Social Equity in Online Education at America's Community College Efciency, Economy, and Social Equity in Online Education at America's Community Colleges Marco Castillo

In this paper, I utilize social equity as a guiding administrative value to assess the implications of the expansion of online education in America’s community colleges. Online education holds promise for our nation’s community colleges and can serve as a useful tool for state and local governments seeking to reduce costs while expanding educational oferings to traditional and non-traditional students. Nevertheless, while the traditional administrative values of efciency and economy are served by the use of this pedagogical approach, there remain a variety of open questions regarding the social equity implications of an expansion of this instructional modality.

n response to the rapid pace of change by the expansion of this pedagogical ap- in the economy, more people are enter- proach, there remain questions regarding ing or returning to college to develop the social equity implications of expanding Ithe skills necessary to remain competitive online education at America’s community in today’s workforce (Merrick & Turow, colleges. In this paper, I highlight two ma- 2009). While an increasing demand for jor problems with the expansion of online education may be seen as a positive devel- education at community colleges that seem opment for society, this demand is testing to counter the value of social equity. First, the capacity of our nation’s publicly funded I address questions regarding the quality community colleges. Tis growing demand of online education, noting both theoreti- has prompted community colleges to fnd cal and empirical evidence that community new ways to expand their capacity and edu- college students may in some instances be cational oferings in the face of stagnant or receiving a product that is not of sufciently shrinking budgets. One way they have done high quality when compared to traditional this is through the expansion of online ed- instruction. Second, I focus upon issues of ucation. proper “ft” between community college In this paper, I utilize social equi- students and the online education product, ty as a guiding administrative value to as- noting that vast segments of the community sess the implications of the expansion of college population may not be well suited online education in America’s community for online education, regardless of product colleges. I highlight that online education quality. Taken together, these problems raise holds promise for our nation’s community serious questions regarding the wisdom and colleges and can serve as a useful tool for social equity implications of implementing state and local governments seeking to re- online education in a wholesale fashion at duce costs while expanding educational the community college level. I follow with oferings to traditional and non-tradition- a discussion on ways that online education al students (Stumpf, McCrimon, & Davis, may be implemented in a fashion that min- 2005). While the traditional administrative imizes these problems, thus refecting the values of efciency and economy are served values of social equity to a greater extent.

100 Internet Learning

While it seems clear that online education verging forces and factors was the forma- holds promise for bringing new efcien- tion and expansion of America’s communi- cies and added value to community col- ty colleges. leges, such benefts are dependent on prop- Community colleges continued er program implementation that takes the to grow in size and scope throughout the aforementioned factors into consideration. twentieth century and were bolstered by Suboptimal implementation that overlooks other key developments. Community col- questions of instructional quality and stu- leges experienced a boost in enrollment dent ft may result in the opposite of the in- during the Great Depression as they extended efects, increasing costs for state and panded their educational mission to in- local governments as well as community clude more applied job training programs college students, hampering student prog- to ease the efects of unemployment. Afer ress through increased course failures and World War II, the passage of the Service- higher attrition rates, and other unintended men’s Readjustment Act (i.e., the GI Bill) negative efects (Feenberg, 1999). further aided in the expansion of community colleges as many veterans opted for Te History and Mission of the shorter, applied, and community-based Community Colleges program of study they ofered. Te Tru- man administration boosted the legitimacy of America’s community colleges through merica’s community colleges are in its formation of Truman’s Commission on large part products of early twen- Higher Education for American Democ- tieth century progressivism. Along racy; the commission released the Truman Awith other social and educational institu- Commission Report which extolled the tions that arose during the Progressive Era, value of what would come to be known as community colleges developed as organi- a community college education. Te com- zations intended to promote social equality munity colleges would receive yet anoth- and social mobility through the expansion er boost in the 1960s, as the baby boomer of access to higher education (Vaughan, generation increased the demand for all 2006). Community colleges (then termed forms of postsecondary education. Te re- “junior colleges”) benefted from an over- sulting passage of the Higher Education Act all increase in public spending in education in 1965 provided additional fnancial sup- during this era, as greater investments in port for all higher education institutions, K-12 education later resulted in a growing including community colleges (Commu- demand for accessible forms of post-sec- nity Colleges: Te History of Community ondary education for the growing number Colleges). Toward the end of the twentieth of graduates from America’s high schools century, it was clear that community col- (Cohen, 2003, p. 6). Tis growing demand leges had grown to become an essential part was reinforced by a move on the part of re- of higher education. While they remained search universities to shed the task of teach- committed to their mission of providing the ing college freshmen and sophomores to frst two years of a liberal arts postsecond- a new type of educational institution that ary education, they would go on to expand would occupy a space between the K-12 their oferings to include professional edu- schools and traditional four-year colleges cation, workforce retraining, and commu- (Cohen, 2003, p. 6). Te result of these con- nity development (Vaughan, 2006, p. 26).

101 Efciency, Economy, and Social Equity in Online Education at America's Community College

Te beginning of the twenty-frst Higher Education, Katrina A. Meyer of the century brought with it a host of economic University of Memphis notes that online challenges that placed increasing stresses on education can allow for three cost-saving federal, state, and local governments that af- economic substitutions—capital for labor, fected their ability to fund necessary public lower-cost labor for higher-cost labor, and services. Treats of terrorism, the exporta- capital for capital. With the substitution tion of America’s manufacturing base, and of capital for labor, technology can be uti- the bursting of the housing bubble among lized to leverage the work of higher-cost, other factors have placed severe budget- full-time faculty over a broader population ary stresses on both federal and state gov- of students, creating economies of scale. ernments. Public services across the board Trough collaborations between full-time have sufered and higher education is no faculty and lower-cost part-time faculty exception to this rule. Yet, the demand for and teaching assistants, these eforts can be community college services is still expand- even further leveraged in the online setting. ing, prompting elected ofcials and admin- Capital for capital substitution allows col- istrators to fnd ways to do more with less. leges to shif resources from traditional cap- One way states and localities have sought ital expenditures such as buildings and new to expand the availability of community classrooms to technological expenditures, college education in the face of budgetary such as the computer servers, sofware, and crisis is through the expansion of online ed- class management systems, which many ar- ucation. gue are more cost-efective (Meyer, 2006). Te potential cost savings for com- Te Promise of Online Education munity colleges and students are substantial. A Pew Charitable Trust study found that t is increasingly evident that a broad by redesigning courses to take advantage array of students is interested in on- of online technologies, institutions could line education. One reason for this is reduce course-related costs by an average Ithat online education holds the potential of 37% (Meyer, 2008, p. 60). Te potential to increase the convenience of pursuing benefts from online education are many. education, especially for non-traditional However, as with all innovations, there are students. Non-traditional students, broadly some potential shortcomings to this educa- defned as fnancially independent working tional approach that should be noted. students outside of the 18–23-year-old age bracket, may particularly beneft from on- Online Education and Social Equi- line education due to the scheduling fexi- ty bilities made possible by this option. Online education may also help non-traditional learly, there is a host of benefts that students with jobs minimize their potential- can be brought to colleges as a result ly greater opportunity costs, as their pursuit of the expansion of online educa- of an education may require them to forgo Ction. However, we should note that these a substantial income. Online education can benefts are primarily related to efciency also bring fnancial benefts to colleges by and economy in the delivery of education. allowing them to utilize their current cap- While efciency and economy are import- ital and labor resources more efectively. In ant factors to consider, they are not the only her report titled Cost Efciencies in Online 102 Internet Learning important or relevant ones. Indeed, it is duce cost savings for schools and states, we easy to make this oversight, particularly in must ask ourselves—is expanding online an age of fscal austerity in the public sector. education in the best interest of community Public administration scholar George Fred- college students? Is online education a ben- erickson (2010) observed this tendency and efcial product for the community college proposed adding a third equally important student population? Does online education value—social equity—into the study and primarily beneft the budgets of commu- practice of administering public organiza- nity colleges and their funding states and tions. He notes: localities more so than community college Social equity values have to do with students themselves? In fact, do these eco- the fairness of the organization, its nomic benefts to schools and states come at management, and its delivery of public the expense of some segments of the com- services. Social equity asks these ques- munity college student population? tions: For whom is the organization well-managed? For whom is the orga- Teoretical Dilemmas nization efcient? For whom is the organization economical? For whom are will frst highlight the theoretical con- our public services more or less fairly ficts that may exist between online edu- delivered . . . In the pursuit of efcien- cation as an instructional modality and cy, public ofcials will try to make the Ithe major theories of learning. Learning entire organization and its delivery of theory is a diverse feld, and it is impossible public services efcient or economical, to review the totality of this feld in a single assuming that all of the public served research article. Nevertheless, for the pur- by the organization will beneft, more poses of this article, I will summarize the or less in equal measure, from great- main learning theories with the aim of not- er efciency or economy. [However], ing their implications for online learning [i]t is clearly evident that the public at community colleges. Learning theories is highly varied—rich and poor, old seek to provide us with a variety of views and young, fortunate and unfortunate, regarding how learning takes place in the urban and suburban—and that while individual (Harasim, 2012). While a variety public services may, in a general sense, of learning theories abound, they can be ba- be more efcient or economical, in the sically categorized into three major schools specifc sense, these public services of thought: behaviorism, cognitivism, and will almost certainly be efcient and most recently constructivism. Each of these economical for some more than others schools takes a diferent perspective on how ( p. xv). learning occurs and thus each may have important implications for the quality of in- In the case of the expansion of online edu- struction delivered via online models. cation at America’s community colleges, it Behaviorism. Te earliest school of is critical that policymakers consider how thought in learning theory was behaviorism. this pedagogical approach will specifcally Behaviorism as a learning theory was de- afect the diverse community college stu- rived from the broader psychological school dent population. While online education of behaviorism developed by psychologist may be a product that is demanded by an B.F. Skinner. It emphasized that all human increasing number of students and can pro- actions and activity, both external actions as 103 Efciency, Economy, and Social Equity in Online Education at America's Community College well as internal processes, should be regard- interpretation is the foundation of learned as behaviors; as such, they can be best ing. Te external world is observed, data is modifed by fnding a way to alter individual processed and interpreted, and then the in- behavior patterns or changing the environ- dividual forms his or her understanding of ment in order to change behavior patterns this data which becomes personal knowl- (Anderson, 2008, p. 6). Learning would be edge. Learners learn best when new infor- considered a change in observable behavior mation can be placed in the context of what under this model, caused by external stimuli learners already know and can be applied in in the environment (Skinner, 2011). While a real-world setting so that this data acquires this school of thought was infuential, critics a personal context and meaning for the indi- noted that there were many forms of learn- vidual (Anderson, 2008, p. 7). ing that were not observable through human It is important for us to note that as behavior. As such behaviorist learning theo- in other academic areas, there are competing ry gradually gave way to cognitivist theories schools of thought about educational theory of learning. and no single one should be understood as Cognitivist Teories. Cognitivist having the fnal word on how individuals theories of learning arose in response to learn. Te important point to note for our the shortcomings of behaviorist schools of purposes is that proponents of online edu- thought. In response to the criticism that cation posit that none of these theories are behaviorism had become too dependent on inherently incompatible with online learn- external incidences of behavior to explain ing. Behaviorist, cognitivist, and construc- learning, cognitivists developed a new the- tivist schools of thought can all be refect- ory emphasizing the internal components ed in properly structured online learning of learning. Cognitive theories posit that models. In fact, some have highlighted how learning involves the use of memory, mo- online learning strategies can be tailored tivation, and thinking and refection (An- to address specifc aspects of each of these derson, 2008, p. 7). Cognitivists emphasized frameworks. For instance, online learning that learning was an internal process rath- can utilize behaviorist strategies by empha- er than an external behavior and that one’s sizing the teaching of facts in the online en- ability to learn is dependent on factors such vironment. Cognitive learning theory can as the capacity of the learner, the intensity be refected in online models by devising of efort exerted during the learning process, assignments and strategies that emphasize and the prior knowledge of the learner. For critical thinking and learning processes. Fi- cognitive theorists, learning is an internal nally, constructivist learning theory can be mental process and pedagogy needs to be refected in the online learning environment developed around this process. through the use of assignments that teach Constructivism. More recently, ed- higher-order thinking that emphasize “why” ucators have moved toward constructivism questions and help students devise new as a theory of learning and guiding pedago- knowledge that is relevant to them (Janicki gy. Constructivist learning theory empha- & Liegle, 2001). sizes that learning is a process by which the Yet, critics argue that that online individual builds new ideas based on prior learning is not nearly as compatible with knowledge and experience. Under con- traditional learning theories. For instance, structivist models, learners interpret data behaviorists hold that responding to and al- according to their personal reality and this tering the behaviors of learners is essential to

104 Internet Learning

the learning process and that online learn- cation may actually be superior in quality to ing makes this process cumbersome. Te face-to-face instruction. In 2010, the United lack of a physical presence and a personal States Department of Education conducted relationship between students and instruc- a meta-analysis of research studies compar- tors makes it difcult to provide feedback to ing the efectiveness of online learning to students, hampering the instructor’s ability face-to-face instruction. While most of the to modify student behaviors in the way nec- studies found no signifcant diference be- essary for learning to occur (Stephenson, tween these modes of instruction, the study 2001). Other well established learning the- did note that when there was a diference, ories, such as Lev Vygotsky’s social develop- it tended to be positive and in favor of on- ment theory, emphasize the need for expert line education. Tese fndings stand along- guidance and social interaction in the learn- side other broad based studies presenting a ing process, both of which may be hindered positive outlook for online education. For in the online learning environment. Finally, instance, online education advocacy organi- new learning theories that have been de- zations such as the Sloan Foundation have veloped to support online learning, such as released a variety of studies illustrating the connectivism, have been derided by some as growth of online education, the difusion having weak theoretical foundations and be- of this instructional method, the relatively ing insufcient substitutes for the traditional high levels of student satisfaction, with this learning theories used to justify pedagogical learning modality, and the general sense of innovations (Kop & Hill, 2008). enthusiasm expressed for online education on the part of college administrators (Allen Online Education Quality & Seaman, 2011). Despite these generally positive reports, there are some fndings within these e should also consider the social same studies that give us reason for pause. equity implications of deliver- While the fndings of the 2010 meta-anal- ing an educational product that ysis of online education conducted by the Wmay be of lower quality than traditional in- United States Department of Education struction to community college students. were generally positive, the authors accept Proponents of online learning point toward that multiple explanations may be given the generally positive fndings among broad for these efects (Means et al., 2009, p. xiv). based studies addressing the quality of online Te authors noted that higher levels of stu- education. One of the earliest of such stud- dent achievement in online classes may be a ies presented in Tomas L. Russell’s book product of several factors, including great- Te No Signifcant Diference Phenomenon er attention given to course design, greater shows that there were no signifcant difer- time-on-task for students enrolled in hybrid ences in student outcomes between online classes (which combine face-to-face and on- education and education delivered in per- line components), and other pedagogically son (Russell & IDECC Organization, 2001). innovative techniques utilized in, but not While Russell’s research generally does not exclusive to, online settings. Tere are also fnd advantages to online learning, it sup- basic methodological shortcomings in this ports the thesis that online learning is no study that qualify its fndings. Te authors worse than traditional instruction. Other of the study note that, “[A]lthough the types studies go further, noting that online edu- of research designs used by the studies in the

105 Efciency, Economy, and Social Equity in Online Education at America's Community College

meta-analysis were strong (i.e. experimental education. Even if online education can be or controlled quasi-experimental), many of shown to be of similar quality to tradition- the studies sufered from weaknesses such al face-to-face education, the question reas small sample sizes, failure to report remains as to whether this form of learning tention rates for students in the conditions is suitable for the community college stu- being contrasted, and, in many cases, po- dent population. Recent demographic data tential bias stemming from the authors’ shows us that community colleges have an dual roles as experimenters and instructors” increasingly diverse student population. (Means et al., 2009, p.xviii). Likewise, the Among this population are a growing num- Sloan Consortium’s 2011 study titled Go- ber of adult learners—students who have ing the Distance: Online Education in the already operated successfully in their vari- United States, while championing the vir- ous career paths and are seeking education- tues of online education, does include some al opportunities to advance in these paths problematic fndings. For instance, while or to shif into others (Chen, 2009). Adult the number of online programs and courses learners, defned as those age 25 or older, has grown at colleges nationwide, the accep- have a set of characteristics that distinguish tance of online learning by faculty has been them from traditional age students. Tey fat since it was frst measured in 2003. Te are more likely to work full time, support report notes that less than one-third of chief a family, and take longer to complete their academic ofcers believe that their faculty degree requirements than their young- accept the value and legitimacy of online ed- er counterparts (American Association of ucation. Tis is virtually the same percent- Community Colleges). Moreover, adult age as when this statistic was frst collected learners in community colleges are more in 2003. Moreover, the report also fnds that likely to perform well on their coursework academic leaders at private for-proft insti- than their younger counterparts (Knowles, tutions perceive a higher faculty acceptance Holton, & Swanson, 2012). It may be rea- rate while traditional nonproft colleges have sonable to posit that these adult learners the lowest, supporting the possibility that may be better prepared for the independent some of the support for online education is form of learning required in online instruc- driven by the fnancial pressures at smaller tion. Tese learners may be more responsi- private colleges (Allen & Seaman, 2011, p. ble, more academically prepared, and more 13). While these statistics may simply be a resilient, allowing them to beneft from the product of reactionary opposition to online fexibilities of the online educational mo- learning, it is possible that these gaps in sup- dality. port may be indicative of real problems in Yet, this very same diversity poses a risk for the substance and/or the implementation of another growing subset of the community online instruction. college student demographic. Community colleges have long had diverse student pop- Student Fit ulations in terms of race and socioeconomic status. But recent trends show us that that n addition to these theory- and re- the socioeconomic and racial composition search-based criticisms, there are ques- of America's community colleges is becom- tions about the aptness of community ing more heavily skewed toward minority Icollege students for the highly independent students, with the majority of black and form of learning that is required in online Hispanic undergraduate students attend- 106 Internet Learning ing these colleges (American Association quality stand at the forefront. Online educa- of Community Colleges). Moreover, the tion is still at an early (and some might even community college population is chang- say experimental) stage of development and ing in terms of socioeconomic status, with research suggests that there are still serious community colleges having a shrinking questions about the quality of online edu- population of students from the highest cation as a whole. Moreover, even if proper socioeconomic quarter and a growing pop- quality can be established, there are still se- ulation of those from the poorest quarter rious questions about the ft of community (Kahlenberg, 2010). Finally, community college students for online education, par- colleges still serve a signifcant number of ticularly given the diversity of the commu- traditional age students with academic de- nity college student population. Te degree fciencies and in need of developmental ed- to which online education contributes to ucation (Mullin, 2012). Taken together, it the advancement of social equity in the pro- is clear that community colleges educate a vision of community college education will signifcant number of students with various depend on the care with which these pol- educational risk factors and needs that may icies are implemented at the ground level. not be met in the online setting. In the forthcoming section, I propose a set We need to take into consideration the bi- of propositions that can be utilized to help furcated nature of the community college us develop information enabling us to form student population as we consider expand- policies that expand online education in a ing this educational modality. Tere is rea- more socially equitable fashion. son to believe that online education can be highly valuable and helpful for adult learn- Propositions and Policy ers and better prepared community college Implementation students. But community colleges are also responsible for educating a large subset of he key social-equity-based argument students who have graduated from lower against the expansion of online ed- performing public schools. Tese students ucation in community colleges is may enter community colleges with a set Tthe proposition that community college of educational defcits that may make them students will do worse in online classes vulnerable in the online environment. Te than they would in traditional face-to-face efect of this harm may be compounded classes. If this is true, online education be- when we consider the generally limited f- comes a socially inequitable endeavor that nancial resources community college stu- inherently harms the most vulnerable of dents have to spend on education. Taking the higher education student population. these factors into consideration could help Terefore, I ofer the following proposition us form an online education policy that will for future investigation: beneft students who are good candidates for this modality while protecting commu- Proposition 1: Academically at-risk community college students with greater educa- nity college students of low socioeconomic tional risk factors and needs. status will have a higher course failure rate Tus, there are a variety of factors that need in wholly online classes than in traditional to be taken into consideration as we seek face-to-face classes. to implement online education at Ameri- ca's community colleges. Issues of product 107 Efciency, Economy, and Social Equity in Online Education at America's Community College

Establishing this proposition as true Proposition 3: Academically at-risk commu- would require us to seriously reconsider any nity college students of low socioeconomic wholesale move toward this instructional status will perform better in hybrid classes approach at the community college level. than in traditional face-to-face classes and Nevertheless, as I stated previously, there wholly online classes. are subpopulations within the community college student body that may beneft from A positive fnding for this propo- this instructional approach. Terefore, I sition would have important and positive ofer the following proposition to help us implications for public ofcials, commu- learn more about the nuances of the efect nity college administrators, and students of this instructional approach: interested in expanding online education. Hybrid education could reduce overhead Proposition 2: Non-traditional community costs and improve economies of scale for college students will perform as well in online community colleges, allowing them to actu- classes as in traditional face-to-face classes. alize at least some of the potential cost efciencies. Tis could be accomplished while If this proposition can be estab- improving the student learning experience lished as true, it would change the practical due to the utilization of online technologies implications of the prior proposition. While and the increased focus on course redesign wholesale moves toward online education eforts. may result in socially inequitable outcomes, targeted moves that focus on the needs of a Conclusion smaller subset of community college learners may achieve some of the cost efciencies ommunity colleges have a rich his- desired by administrators while bringing tory of serving the public. Since new conveniences and fexibilities to non- their inception in the early part of traditional community college students. Cthe twentieth century, community colleges Nontraditional community college students have pursued their mission of bringing edu- may be able to beneft from online educa- cation and its benefts to the poor and work- tion without sufering the academic harm ing class, thus advancing the value of social that traditional community college students equity in America. While originally focused may experience, resulting in a net positive on providing a more general form of edu- beneft for all parties. cation, community colleges have since ex- Finally, while the evidence suggests panded as organizations, now providing a that wholly online instruction may not be traditional education along with training efcient and/or efective for all community for a host of specifc jobs and technical ca- college students, there is evidence that tech- reers. Community colleges have grown as nology can be utilized to achieve some of organizations and as institutions and they the aforementioned efciency and economy are now a critical avenue by which the poor benefts while maintaining or even improv- and working class can gain access to high- ing the quality of instruction. Terefore, I er education and advance socially and eco- ofer the following proposition: nomically in society. Community colleges play an important role in American society, but like many other public institutions, their ability 108 Internet Learning to fulfll their role is threatened by modern Community colleges: Te history of com- fscal restraints. Clearly, technological ad- munity colleges, the junior college, and the vancements can help bring new efciencies research university. (n.d.). Stateuniversity. to community colleges, and it appears that com. Retrieved from http://education. online education can help community col- stateuniversity.com/pages/1873/Communi- leges meet the growing demand for higher ty-Colleges.html education. But there is equal evidence that this technological and pedagogical inno- Feenberg, A. (1999). Distance learning: vation needs to be handled carefully in or- Promise or threat? Education at a Distance, der for it to deliver on its promise. Tose 12(1). Retrieved from http://www.usdla. charged with implementing online educa- org/html/journal/DEC99_Issue/dl.htm tion need to be cognizant of the proper use Frederickson, H. G. (2010). Social equity and the limits of this new instructional ap- and public administration: Origins, devel- proach, lest they fnd themselves harming opments, and applications. Armonk, NY: the very population they intend to help and M.E. Sharpe. protect. Harasim, L. M. (2012). Learning theory and References online technologies. New York: Routledge. Janicki, T., & Liegle, J. O. (2001). Develop- Allen, I. E., & Seaman, J. (2011). Going the ment and evaluation of a framework for distance: Online education in the United creating Web-based learning modules: A States, 2011. Sloan Consortium. Retrieved pedagogical and systems perspective. Jour- from http://www.eric.ed.gov/ERICWeb- nal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, Portal/contentdelivery/servlet/ERICServ- 5(1), 58-84. let?accno=ED529948 Kahlenberg, R. (2010). Te community American Association of Community Col- college summit: Innovations. Te Chronicle leges. (n.d.). Students at community col- of Higher Education. Retrieved from http:// leges. American Association of Community chronicle.com/blogs/innovations/the-com- Colleges. Retrieved from http://www.aacc. munity-college-summit/27361 nche.edu/AboutCC/Trends/Pages/student- satcommunitycolleges.aspx Knowles, M. S., Holton, E. F., & Swanson, Anderson, T. (2008). Te theory and R. A. (2012). Te adult learner: Te defn- practice of online learning. Edmonton: AU itive classic in adult education and human Press. resource development. London: Routledge.

Chen, G. (2009). Changing student demo- Kop, R., & Hill, A. (2008). Connectivism: graphics: Rising number of professional Learning theory of the future or vestige students. Community College Review. of the past? Te International Review of Retrieved from http://www.communitycol- Research in Open and Distance Learning, legereview.com/articles/75 9(3), 1-13.

Cohen, A. (2003). Te American commu- Means, B., SRI International Center for nity college (4th ed.). San Francisco: Jossey- Technology in Learning, & United States Bass. Department of Education. Policy and

109 Efciency, Economy, and Social Equity in Online Education at America's Community College

Program Studies Service. (2009). Evalua- Vaughan, G. B. (2006). Te community col- tion of evidence-based practices in online lege story. American Association of Com- learning: A meta-analysis and review of munity Colleges. online learning studies. Retrieved from http://www2.ed.gov/rschstat/eval/tech/evidence-based-practices/fnalreport.pdf

Merrick, A., & Turow, R. (2009). Te job- less go back to school and, they hope, work. Te Wall Street Journal, p. A14.

Meyer, K. (2008). If higher education is a right, and distance education is the answer, then who will pay? Journal of Asynchro- nous Learning Networks, 12(1), 45-68.

Meyer, K. A. (2006). Cost-efciencies in online learning. New York: Wiley/Jossey- Bass.

Mullin, C. (2012). Why access matters: Te community college student body (No. 2012-01PBL). Washington, D.C.: American Association of Community Colleges.

Russell, T. L., & IDECC Organization. (2001). Te no signifcant diference phenomenon: A comparative research annotat- ed bibliography on technology for distance education: As reported in 355 research reports, summaries and papers. [S.l.]: IDECC.

Skinner, B. F. (2011). About Behaviorism. New York: Random House Digital. Stephenson, J. (Ed.). (2001). Teaching & learning online: New pedagogies for new technologies. London: Routledge.

Stumpf, A. D., McCrimon, E., & Davis, J. E. (2005). Carpe diem: Overcome misconceptions in community-college distance learning. Community College Journal of Research and Practice, 29(5), 357. doi:10.1080/10668920590921552

110 Internet Learning Mindful Meditation for Online Learning: Lighting the fre by dimming the lights: Helping college students relax and focus to prepare for online learning Brenda Freshman, Carol A. Molinari

As more college courses are delivered online to adapt to students’ busy schedules, instructors are challenged to fnd creative ways to promote online learning. Tis paper explores the use of meditation to prepare college students for online learning by examining whether and how meditation increases students’ focus and concentration. A structured meditation exercise was administered to an undergraduate and graduate online course at a public university. Student refections and comments suggest personal and cognitive benefts of meditation for online instruction. Ways to integrate meditation into online courses are discussed to encourage instructors to include meditation in their instruction methodology. Tis pilot intends to inspire future study and debate regarding the value of meditation for promoting online learning.

Key words: student focus, stress reduction, pedagogy, self-directed learning, self-awareness.

Introduction & Hasselbalch, 2012; Koraza et al., 2012; Hussain & Bhushan, 2010; Van den Hurk, s more college students work while Giommi, Gielen, Speckens, & Barendregt, they take courses, college educa- 2010). Second, meditation is also a person- tors are increasingly challenged to al relaxation activity that helps clear away Adesign courses that meet the demands of other external stimuli while it increases at- school and work. Not surprisingly, more tention and improves clarity and quality of and more courses are being ofered online thought (Sears, Kraus, Carlogh, & Treat, and in hybrid formats (Allen & Seaman, 2011). Tis paper will discuss the rationale, 2010). Tese delivery changes require in- methods, preliminary results, and recom- structors to re-think ways to design and mendations of this meditation pilot study manage their courses to promote learning, to help prepare the student cognitively and especially in the online environment. To- emotionally for online learning. day’s thoughtful educator asks, "How can I help students mentally prepare themselves Literature Survey so that they are ready for online learning?" Tis paper examines the use of med- Online Learning and Meditation itation as a way to prepare busy college students for online learning. Meditation was elping students focus, interact, and selected for two main reasons. First, med- engage with each other are efective itation promotes cognitive activities that ways to promote learning. Tese include concentration, focus, understand- Hare activities which require intellectual and ing, and recall (Jenson, Vangkilde, Frokjaer, 111 Mindful Meditation for Online Learning personal growth (Bain, 2004). Most higher of online students’ meditation experience is education faculty understand ways to de- profered as a preliminary thread of new in- velop students’ thinking through reasoning, quiry. analysis of evidence, use of abstract ideas, and applied problem solving. However, the Meditation: Variations and Descriptions promotion of self-awareness and personal responsibility is less understood and evi- consistent meditation practice dent in higher education. Yet such personal as part of one’s daily routine has development appears to be critical in online documented benefts both for the learning. In an overview of student abilities Amind and body. Although there are many necessary for efective distance learning, varieties of meditation practice, three spe- Cunningham (2010) states that "self-direct- cifc types appear to be most prevalent in ed learning is key to successful on-line dis- the academic literature: 1) visualization; 2) tance education" (p.1). He also highlights transcendental; and 3) mindfulness. While the value of self-awareness and self-disci- there might be some overlap to the prac- pline. Te literature base in this area further tice and impact of each of these meditation supports the importance of self-regulation styles, there are clear distinctions of meth- (Allen et al., 2004; Fahme, 2011; Radovan, od and focus which will be very briefy out- 2011; Sutton & Nora, 2008), active partici- lined. With visualization or guided imagery, pation (Conaway, Easton, & Schmidt, 2005; an individual will be guided either by sug- Hacker & Niederhouse, 2000), and cog- gested visual cues (recorded, in person or nitive development (Sutton & Nora, 2008; written) or mental ones (i.e. take a journey Yang, Huna-Yuan, & Lin,2009) in online in the mind’s eye). education. Conversely, impediments such Transcendental meditation (TM) as anxiety and stress have been shown has roots in the ancient Vedic traditions of to constrict task performance (Eysenck, India. About 50 years ago, the Maharishi Payne, & Derakshan, 2005) and to reduce promoted and taught the TM technique to satisfaction and learning in online courses US audiences and other peoples through- (Sun, Tsai, Finger, Chen & Yeh, 2008). out the globe (www.tm.org). Tis practice Meditation was selected as an ac- involves sitting comfortably in a chair and tivity to promote online learning based on practicing a technique of mantra-based evidence that the practice reduces stress mental relaxation. Teachers of TM adhere and increases self-efcacy. Previous stud- to sacred and proven traditions; in turn, in- ies have consistently found meditation to dividuals learn this technique by becoming be efective in anxiety and stress reduction a student of a trained TM instructor. (Chu, 2010; Davis & Hayes, 2011; Jenson et According to Dwividi (2000), the al., 2012), improving focus and attention construct of "mindfulness" dates back to (Koraza et al., 2012; Ray, Baker, & Plow- the 6th century Buddhist term in the Pali man, 2011; Tang et al., 2007), and devel- language "Sati." In this context Sati (as oping emotional regulation (Holzel et al., described in the Satipathan Sutta) is com- 2011; Zautra et al., 2008). While these bene- prised of 4 aspects: 1) awareness of func- fts of meditation relate to family, work, and tions and parts of the body, 2) awareness personal settings, there was little evidence of feelings and sensations, 3) awareness in the literature of its benefts in academic of cognitions, and 4) awareness of men- settings. Terefore, this qualitative analysis tal impediments. Recently, Holzel et al.

112 Internet Learning

(2011) reviewed the literature that related mediators have indicated improved atten- to the efects of mindfulness meditation. tion (Ray et al., 2011; Shapiro, Schwartz, Te categories of: a) attention regulation, & Bonner, 1998; Tang et al., 2007; Van den b) body awareness, c) emotional regula- Hurk et al., 2010), stress reduction, and tion, and d) change in perceptions of self emotional regulation (Afanas & Goloshey- are strikingly similar to early Buddhist kin, 2005; Chu, 2010; Jenson et al., 2012). principles. Te goal of mindfulness med- Many studies have been conducted itation "is to maintain attention to current in clinical settings with patients sufering internal and external experiences with a from mental and physical maladies. Tese nonjudgmental stance, manifesting accep- investigations demonstrated stress reduc- tance, curiosity and openness." (p.549). tion efects (Carlson, Speca, Faris, & Patel, Jon Kabat-Zinn (1990) developed 2007) and emotion and pain regulation the meditation technique termed mindful- (Zautra et al., 2008) as positive correlates ness-based stress reduction (MBSR). Tis to meditation practice. Other studies re- MBSR intervention is comprised of three ported the following benefts of meditation: elements, 1) video presentation of didac- increases in well-being (Carmody & Baer, tic information on mindfulness, stress and 2008; Chiesa & Serretti, 2009) and im- pain management and everyday implemen- proved cognitive functioning (Sears et al., tation of the MBSR technique to alleviate 2011). While not all studies support the ad- these challenges, 2) mindfulness exercises, vantages of the practice—for example, King and 3) refective discussion and sharing. and Coney (2006) found no signifcant Kabat-Zinn’s video and exercises served as diferences in cognitive function between the online meditation activity used in this experienced meditators and non-medita- study and will be discussed in the methods tors—nonetheless, the growing research section. supports the positive value of meditation in a variety of settings. Meditation: Evidence of Benefts Methods lthough much of the current research on mindfulness meditation structured meditation exercise was has occurred in clinical settings for piloted in two online courses at the Apatients with anxiety or pain, some research undergraduate and graduate lev- has taken place in work and school environ- Aels ofered in a Healthcare Management ments. Ho's (2011) investigation of med- program during Fall 2011. Te purpose of itation experience and relationships with the exercise was to assess whether and how self-directed learning (SDL), organizational meditation infuenced students’ learning innovation (OI), and organizational perfor- and personal growth. Students responses mance (OP) has particular relevance to this and refections about the activity provided study. Survey results of Taiwanese technol- the data used in this qualitative analysis. ogy managers found that meditation expe- Te meditation exercise included rience promoted the openness to challenge, viewing the You Tube video of a talk by inquisitive nature, and self-understanding Jon Kabat-Zinn (1990) from the University factors of SDL. Other studies that involved of Massachusetts Medical School that was non-clinical populations such as college sponsored by Google. It discusses the scien- students, administrators, employees, and tifc evidence of mindfulness practices and 113 Mindful Meditation for Online Learning behaviors as they relate to stress reduction Student Sample and healing. Students were given instructions to guide them in a brief meditation his meditation exercise was conduct- followed by several open-ended questions ed in two online professional courses that related to their personal experience of in Healthcare Management: one un- meditation and any perceived benefts. Te Tdergraduate and one graduate. Tere were 31 following describes the instructions given students in each course with 19 women and to students: 12 men in the graduate course; and 29 women and 2 men in the undergraduate course. Both You will review two web sites that will pro- classes were racially and ethnically diverse vide background and research the efects and refective of the racial and ethnic charac- of meditation on health, stress reduction, teristics of the selected public university and and healing. academic program. Two thirds of the grad- http://www.4mindfulnessmeditation.com/ uate and undergraduate students were non- will provide a brief overview of mindful- white; with an estimated 25% international ness meditation. students from Africa, Asia, and Middle East.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r- Plan of Analysis SU8fmmhmw he open-ended questions were sys- Tis is a 1 hour and 14 minute You Tube tematically analyzed to identify video of a talk by Jon Kabat-Zinn from common student responses related the University of Massachusetts Medical Tto their meditation experience. Responses School that was sponsored by Google. were listed and categorized to refect com- Practice and Refection: mon themes. A count of responses for each In a quiet place where you will not be in- category was tallied and sorted by class (un- terrupted, sit comfortably, up right in a dergraduate vs. graduate) and for graduate chair with legs uncrossed, or in a yoga lo- students by gender. Initially, gender was tus position on the foor. Make sure your examined among graduate students only as back can remain straight. Have a watch or undergraduates were overwhelmingly fe- clock nearby and practice just breathing male; however, no signifcant diferences and watching your thoughts for 3-5 min- were found between male and female gradu- utes. Before you begin, notice how your ate responses and thus fndings are reported body and mind feel. Try to go as long as only by class. Due to the small number of possible. Ten respond to the following questions - keep responses to each 200-250 students in this pilot, signifcant tests were words: not performed. However, the following tables describe their responses. 1. Did you notice a change in how your body and mind felt afer the meditation Results was complete? If so, describe this change. 2. Discuss two benefts you experienced he following tables summarize re- afer meditating. 3. Discuss two potential problems of sponses for graduate and undergrad- meditation. uate students regarding their medita- Ttion experience and perceived benefts and problems. 114 Internet Learning

Table 1. Did you notice a change in how your body and mind felt after the meditation was complete? If so describe.

Clear- Relaxed/Cal Better Memory Aware of minded m physical environment Graduates (n=31) 52% 36% 26% 20% Undergraduates 33% 34% 48% 25% ((n=31)

Table 2. Discuss two benefits of meditation.

Lower Clear More Improved Helped to stress focus emotional concentration process stability information Graduates (n=31) 43% 35% 40% 33% 24% Undergraduates 40% 37% 10% 23% 15% (n=31)

Table 3. Discuss two potential problems of meditation.

Time Managin Acceptan Less Clash with g self- ce by productivity cultural/religiou awarene others s beliefs ss Graduates (n=31) 47% 35% 25% 28% 15% Undergraduates 45% 24% 14% 21% 7% (n=31)

115 Mindful Meditation for Online Learning

Discussion Graduate students

Patterns or re-occurring themes observed t ćJT JT NZ ĕSTU TFNFTUFS JO HSBE TDIPPM afer meditation. and my frst online class ever. As you can imagine, I was nervous and somewhat in- raduate students were most likely to timidated, especially since I did not know report being clear-minded and un- what to expect. Tat is the main reason why dergraduates were most likely to re- I started meditating. Gport better memory following meditation. t)BWFUPQSBDUJDFJU EPJUNPSFUIBOPODF Both groups reported feeling relaxed and to get the beneft there is a learning curve to peaceful and aware of their physical envi- mindfulness meditation. ronment. t%VSJOHUIFFYFSDJTF *GFMUNZNVTDMFTSF- lax and my head felt lighter, as if everything Perceived benefts derived from medita- was warm and melting away. In my mind, I tion. felt in tune with my body. I was able to focus and think more clearly in daily situations. ower stress and gaining a clear focus I even noticed I was more able to pick up were consistently reported in both on smaller details. Also, my thoughts were, classes as a beneft of meditation. how can I express this, like an early 1920’s LGraduates were more likely than under- silent movie where everything is moving graduates to report gaining emotional sta- fast, and the words are showing the next bility, improved concentration, and infor- slide. What I am trying to say is that even mation processing as benefts. Perceived though, my thoughts were racing, I was able potential problems from meditation. to clearly process and interpret the content Time required to meditate was con- of each thought. sistently reported as a potential problem by all students. Tis relates to the lower pro- Undergraduate students ductivity reported by graduate students and undergraduate women. Graduate students tćFSFJTBGFFMJOHPGJOTQJSBUJPO IFBMUIPG were more likely to report problems related the body, and circles of empowerment. In to managing difcult feelings that emerge general, the afermath of meditation pres- from heightened self-awareness than un- ents the body with some form of awareness dergraduates. Several graduate and under- concerning your soul and energy. graduate students noted that meditation tćFSFJTNPSFSFTQPOTJCJMJUZUPEJSFDUPVS- could clash with an individual’s cultural and selves in online courses. Meditation can religious beliefs and thus lead to some lev- greatly beneft us in these online courses by el of intrapersonal confict. Given the racial clearing our minds to gain a mental focus. and ethnic diversity of both classes this is an t 0OMJOF MFBSOJOH JT UJNF DPOTVNJOH BOE important point to consider. very demanding but can be very interesting and become a learning opportunity if one is General Comments able to take things one at a time and become very discipline to time management. Tat is Te following are examples of general com- the strength of meditation. ments from students related to the meditation

116 Internet Learning

Recommendations to Apply problems, and ways to improve the exer- Lessons Learned cise. Tese can provide insightful feedback in terms of whether and how the meditation exercise helped students relax, focus, man- tudents’ feedback and refections indi- age their time, and engage with others in cate that meditation promotes relax- the online learning environment. ation, reduces stress, and thus fosters Sreadiness to learn. With these benefts in mind, the following are suggested ways to Limitations and Future Studies integrate meditation into an online course: here were several limitations to this 1. Start an online course with a meditation pilot investigation and these will be exercise. Tis can provide the opportuni- discussed together with suggestions ty for students to relax and mentally focus Tfor further study. First, the study was lim- on the course content and instruction. Te ited to one program in a single university. meditation exercise can also serve as an It is important to examine a broad sample ice-breaker to help learners focus and share of online students from undergraduate and personal experiences. Some ways to set up graduate programs in a variety of univer- this exercise include posting student re- sities to assess whether perceived benefts sponses to a discussion board or conference of meditation are similar, diferent, or not to help students to get acquainted with each present among other students. Another other in a non-threatening and personal point to consider is to select programs with way. culturally diverse students since percep- 2. Place the meditation exercise at the mid- tions about meditation are likely to be infu- dle or end of the course as a stress reducer enced by cultural beliefs and values. Tus, to help students relax and focus, especial- examining meditation across a broad array ly before tests or other busy times in the of online programs with diverse students course. would provide a student sample that can be 3. Be clear with students regarding the pur- examined across key demographic factors pose of meditation to online learning. It is to assess their efects on perceptions and important to explain how meditation pro- benefts of meditation. motes relaxation and attention, otherwise Second, this pilot used subjective re- the students may feel distracted or confused sponses to open-ended questions following by the meditation exercise, which may im- the meditation without any pre-assessment. pede learning. A pre- and post-design to evaluate the ef- 4. Ofer credit for completion of the assign- fects of meditation such as mindfulness, ment to increase student participation in self-awareness, self-regulation, and stress the meditation exercise. Linking a reward can strengthen the validity of these pre- for this activity will encourage students to liminary results. Additionally, using estab- seriously consider and complete the medi- lished quantitative tools vs. the qualitative tation exercise. ones used in this pilot can also minimize some internal validity threats. For example, Review student comments and refections using the Kentucky Inventory of Mindful- about the meditation; check for feedback ness Skills (Baer, Smith, & Allen, 2004) or especially related to perceived benefts, the Langer Mindfulness/Mindlessness Scale (Haigh, Moore, Kashdan, & Fresco, 2011), as 117 Mindful Meditation for Online Learning

well as validated emotional intelligence in- doi:10.1080/00207450590897969 ventories or stress assessments can provide Allen, M., Mabry, E., Mattrey, M., Bourhis, appropriate tools for this type of inquiry. J., Titsworth, S., & Burrell, N. (2004). Evalu- Tird, this study did not look at the ating the efectiveness of distance learning: impact of meditation on learning of course A comparison using meta-analysis. Journal content. Future investigations may examine of Communication, 54(3), 402-420. the relationships between meditation and student grades for online courses to assess Allen, I. E., & Seaman, J. S. (2007). Chang- if meditation can improve student online ing the landscape: more institutions pursue learning and grades. It is important to apply online oferings. On Te Horizon, 15(3), some or all of these for future studies to en- 130-138. hance their rigor and validity. Baer, R. A., Smith, G. T., & Allen, K. B. Conclusion (2004). Assessment of mindfulness by self-report: Te Kentucky Inventory of his study sought to promote dia- Mindfulness Skills. Assessment, 11(3), 191- logue and initiate inquiry focused on 206. the function and benefts of medita- Ttion to prepare students for online instruc- Bain, K. (2004). What the best college tion and learning. As more college courses teachers do. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Uni- are being delivered online, it is increasingly versity Press. important for the academic community to assess student learning processes related to Carlson, L. E., Speca, M., Faris, P., & Patel, online instruction. Tis pilot used medi- K.D. (2007). One year pre–post interven- tation as an innovative process to prepare tion follow-up of psychological, immune, online learners by helping them to relax, endocrine and blood pressure outcomes focus, and engage with fellow learners and of mindfulness-based stress reduction the instructor in course activities. Te cur- (MBSR) in breast and prostate cancer out- rent investigators want to encourage others patients. Brain, Behavior, and Immunity, to build on these preliminary steps by us- 21(8), 1038-1049. ing pre- and post-evaluation designs, established quantitative measures, and larger Carmody, J., & Baer, R. A. (2009). How long sample sizes with the intent to build a stu- does a mindfulness-based stress reduction dent data base that can inform future dia- program need to be? A review of class con- logue and study regarding the value of med- tact hours and efect sizes for psychological itation for online learning. distress. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 65, 627–638. doi: 10.1002/jclp.20555 References Chiesa, A., & Serretti, A. (2009). Mind- fulness-Based Stress Reduction for stress Afanas, L., & Golosheykin, S. (2005). management in healthy people: A review Impact of regular mediation practice and meta-analysis. Journal Of Alternative & on EEG Activity and During Evoked Complementary Medicine, 15(5), 593-600. Negative Emotions. International Jour- doi:10.1089/acm.2008.0495 nal Of Neuroscience, 115(6), 893-909.

118 Internet Learning

Chu, L. (2010). Te benefts of meditation Scale. Assessment, 18(1), 11-26. vis-à-vis emotional intelligence, perceived stress and negative mental health. Journal Ho, L. (2011). Meditation, learning, orga- of the International Society for the Investi- nizational innovation and performance. gation of Stress, 26(2), 169-180. Industrial Management & Data Systems, 111(1), 113-131. Conaway, R. N., Easton, S. S., & Schmidt, W. V. (2005). Strategies for enhancing stu- Hölzel, B. K., Lazar, S. W., Gard, T., dent interaction and immediacy in online Schuman-Olivier, Z., Vago, D. R., & Ott, U. courses. Business Communication Quarter- (2011). How does mindfulness meditation ly, 68(1), 25-35. work? Proposing mechanisms of action from a conceptual and neural perspective. Cunningham, J. (2010). Self-direction: A Perspectives On Psychological Science,6(6), critical tool in distance learning. Common 537-559. doi:10.1177/1745691611419671 Ground Journal, 7(2), 89-100. Hussain, D., & Bhushan, B. (2010). Psychol- Davis, D., & Hayes, J. (2011) What are the ogy of meditation and health: Present status benefts of mindfulness? A practice review and future directions. International Journal of psychotherapy-related research. Psycho- of Psychology & Psychological Terapy, therapy, 48(2), 198-208. 10(3), 439-451.

Dwivedi, K. N. (2000). Mindfulness in Jensen, C. G., Vangkilde, S., Frokjaer, V., mental health. Psychiatry Online. Retrieved & Hasselbalch, S. G. (2012). Mindfulness from www.priory.com/psych/mindfulness. training afects attention—Or is it atten- htm tional efort? Journal of Experimental Psychology, 141(1), 106-123. Eysenck, M., Payne, S., & Derakshan, N. (2005). Trait anxiety, visuospatial process- Kabat-Zinn, J. (1990). Full catastrophe ing and working memory. Cognition & living: Using the wisdom of your body and Emotion, 19(8). 1214-1228. mind to face stress, pain, and illness. New York: Bantam. Fahme, D. (2011). Analysis of communication barriers to distance education. Online King, G., & Coney, J. (2006). Short term Journal of Communication and Media efects of meditation versus relaxation on Technologies, 1(1), 1-15. cognitive functioning. Journal Of Transper- sonal Psychology, 38(2), 200-215. Hacker, D. J., & Niederhauser, D. S. (2000). Promoting deep and durable learning in Koraza, E. H., Sato, J. R., Lacerda, S. S., the online classroom. New Directions for Barreiros, M. A., Radvany, J., Russell, T. A., Teaching and Learning, 2000(84), 53-63. Sanches, L. G., Mello, L. E., & Amaro, E. (2012). Meditation training increases brain Haigh, E. A. P., Moore, M. T., Kashdan, T. efciency in an attention task. NeuroImage, B., & Fresco, D. M. (2011). Examination of 59(1), 745-749. the factor structure and concurrent validity of the Langer Mindfulness/Mindlessness

119 Mindful Meditation for Online Learning

Radovan (2011). Te relation between Van den Hurk, P. A., Giommi, F., Gielen, distance students' motivation, their use of S. C., Speckens, A. E., & Barendregt, H. P. learning strategies, and academic success, (2010). Greater efciency in attention pro- Turkish Online Journal of Educational cessing related to mindfulness meditation. Technology, 10(1), 21-222. Te Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 63(6), 1168-1180. Ray, J. L., Baker, L. T., & Plowman, D. A. (2011). Organizational mindfulness in Yang, J. F., Huna-Yuan, L., & Lin, N. C. business schools. Academy of Management (2009). Modes of delivery and learning ob- Learning and Education, 10(2), 188-203. jectives in distance education. International Journal of Instructional Media, 36(1), 55- Sears, S. R., Kraus, S., Carlough, K., & Treat, 71. E. (2011). Perceived benefts and doubts of participants in a weekly meditation study. Zautra, A. J., Davis, M. C., Reich, J. W., Mindfulness, 2(3), 167-174. Nicassario, P., Tennen, H., Finan, P., & Irwin, M. R. (2008). Comparison of cogni- Shapiro, S. L., Schwartz, G. E., & Bonner, G. tive behavioral and mindfulness meditation (1998). Efects of Mindfulness-Based Stress interventions on adaptation to rheumatoid Reduction on medical and premedical arthritis for patients with and without students. Journal of Behavioral Medicine, history of recurrent depression. Journal Of 21(6), 581-599. Consulting And Clinical Psychology, 76(3), 408-421. Sun, P., Tsai, R. J., Finger, G. Chen, Y., & Yeh, D. (2008). What drives a successful e-learning? An empirical investigation of the critical factors infuencing learner satisfaction. Computers & Education, 50, 1183-1202.

Sutton, S. C., & Nora, A. (2008). An exploration of college persistence for students enrolled in web-enhanced courses: A multivariate analytic approach. Journal of College Student Retention, 10(1), 21-37.

Tang, Y., Ma, Y., Wang, J., Fan, Y., Feng, S., Lu, Q., Yu, Q., Sui, D., Rothbart, M. K., Fan, M., & Posner, M. (2007). Short-term meditation training improves attention and self-regulation. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 104(43), 17152-17156.

120 Internet Learning Curriculum design for fexible delivery: an assessment of e-learning approaches Jayanath Ananda1

Technological advancements have pushed the boundaries of tertiary education design and delivery across the globe. Flexible teaching and learning delivery approaches have proliferated in recent times without much attention to pedagogically-driven learning designs. Tis paper reviews various pedagogical designs used as part of e-learning and blended learning models in business education. It also maps the tenets of learning theories to selected e-learning designs. Tertiary educators face several challenges when implementing e-learning designs in business education. Tey include a traditional structured approach to learning, difculties in catering to diverse student cohorts equitably, and choosing efective technologies that underpin a particular e-learning pedagogy.

Keywords: learning theories, business education, online pedagogies, e-learning, conversational framework, web 2.0, fexible learning

1. Introduction technical content, inadequate application of knowledge and generic skills such as group urriculum design for fexible deliv- work, communication, problem-solving, ery is at the forefront of a teaching critical thinking and leadership (Albrecht & and learning renewal of tertiary ed- Sach, 2001; Carr & Mathews, 2002). On the Cucation, particularly in business education. other hand, today, tertiary education insti- Flexible delivery of teaching and learning tutions ofering business programmes face covers a wide array of approaches including increased competition and chronic fund- online teaching and e-learning, block-mode ing challenges (Hunter et al., 2010) forcing teaching delivery and distance education. them to introduce fexible and innovative Hunter et al. (2010) stress that if continu- courses as a marketing strategy to bolster ous improvements have not been made to student enrolment. business education, the society will lose Technological advancements have signifcant economic contributions made pushed the boundaries of tertiary education by business graduates. On the one hand, institutions towards new forms of knowl- there is a growing awareness in business edge construction and social interaction. education that the traditional approach to Te emergence of Web 2.0 based learning teaching and learning fails to meet industry tools, which can augment superior com- demands (van Over & Stover, 1994; West- putational and communication capabilities erbeck, 2004) and lags behind in equipping and foster collaboration and social interac- business students with skills to leverage tion, have provided an impetus for a grow- the use of networks, optimal links and in- ing body of work on curriculum design for formation (Hughes, 2006). Te most com- e-learning (Bower et al., 2009). Web 2.0 can mon pitfalls include the strong emphasis on be broadly defned as a second generation

1 School of Economics, La Trobe University

121 Curriculum Design for Flexible Delivery

or more personalised communicative form Te Joint Information Systems of the World Wide Web that emphasises Committee (JISC) defnes e-learning3 as active participation, connectivity, collabo- ‘learning facilitated and supported through ration and sharing of knowledge and ideas the use of information and communica- among users (Lee & McLoughlin, 2011). tion technologies’ (Beetham, 2004, p.1). Web 2.0 is ofen associated with the use E-learning has also been presented as a and practice of social sofware where mul- continuum of face-to-face learning, which tiple users can collaborate with one anoth- contains no e-learning, to distance educa- er, micro-contents such as blog posts, text- tion which can be fully e-learning (Bates & chats, video-clips, open web tools and other Poole, 2003). Blended learning which com- sophisticated web interfaces (Bower et al., bines both face-to-face learning and forms 2009; Dabbagh & Reo, 2011). Tapscott and of e-learning is placed in the middle of Williams (2010) state that “universities are this continuum. Commonly cited reasons losing their grip on higher learning as the for incorporating e-learning into curricu- internet is, inexorably, becoming the dom- la include increased fexibility of learning inant infrastructure for knowledge—both environments, improvement of quality by as a container and as a global platform increased access to information, reduced for knowledge exchange between people” cognition load and authentic learning, (p.18). ability to tap into the global market, wid- Te rapid spread of globalization ening access, competition and strategic and enormous developments in informa- reasons (Normand & Littlejohn, 2006). tion technology (IT) have also led to dra- Despite the initial enthusiasm, matic changes in the business environment e-learning has not lived up to its expecta- and business courses need to be responsive tions in both the university and corporate to these changes (Mohamed, 2009). Burdett sectors (Driscoll, 2008; Granić et al., 2009). (2003) highlights the importance of incor- Past evidence of technology introduction to porating strategies such as group work into teaching and learning indicates that ofen business teaching pedagogy2 to ensure deep such technology has been embraced with learning outcomes. It is also envisaged that naïve enthusiasm only to be later discard- a blend of technical and interpersonal skills ed (Lowerison et al., 2008). It is also clear are required to navigate and succeed in the that the predicted decline in face-to-face modern working place (Hunter et al., 2010). teaching, due to the introduction of online New models and novel approaches to busi- teaching technologies, has not occurred ness education have been called for, which (Beetham, 2004). However, the potential of include the interests of industry, students online technologies has not yet been fully and academia (Anderson and Rask, 2008). harnessed for learning. One of the approaches that has received at- Pedagogical problems, organiza- tention in business education reforms is the tional barriers, technical issues and f- use of e-learning and blended learning ap- nancial problems have been cited as the proaches. main impediments of e-learning development (Driscoll, 2008). A diverse array of

3 Although the meaning is relatively uncontest- 2 Although the term pedagogy is ofen regarded ed, there is no universally accepted defnition for as the art and science of teaching, it is not without e-learning. Online learning is regarded as more critics (Beetham & Sharpe, 2007). narrow in scope than e-learning (Beetham, 2004).

122 Internet Learning theoretical perspectives which is alien and 2. Overview of learning theories overwhelming to academics outside the feld of education is another factor contrib- heories of learning outline three uting to the lack of applications in peda- broad traditions to learning: be- gogically-driven e-learning designs (Mc- haviourism, cognitivism and con- Naught, 2003). Te mere presentation of Tstructivism (Mayer, 2003). Tese traditions subject matter using multimedia does not, are derived from broader felds, not just of itself, lead to better learning (Mayes & education, and are regarded as historical Freitas, 2004). Central to the issue is the stages of enquiry into knowledge. Te be- mapping of sound pedagogical principles as havioural approach to learning posits that outlined by Biggs (2000) into the e-learning knowing is the result of objective experience curriculum design. Biggs (1996) empha- whereas the cognitive approach purports sised that learners use their own activities knowing as the mental processing of infor- to construct knowledge and the teaching mation. Te behavioural approach places a design should specify the desired levels of high emphasis on prescriptive instructions understanding and activities that they need on well-defned learning objectives and perform. Tere is little evidence of various rewarding learners as they progress incre- learning theories being applied to efective mentally toward larger learning goals (Low- pedagogically driven e-learning (Beetham erison et al., 2008). Te constructivist ap- et al., 2001; Clegg et al., 2003; Conole et al., proach subscribes to the view that learning 2004). Tere is also a need for studies that is a subjective construction of knowledge. examine the extent to which the emergent Te basic premise is that meaning is not im- technologies such as Web 2.0 support the posed or transmitted by direct instruction, educational process and to identify ways in but is created by students’ learning activities which they can enhance student learning (Biggs & Tang, 2007). (Oskoz & Elola, 2011). Anderson and Krathwohl (2001) Tis paper focuses on e-learning in provide a taxonomy of learning which in- business education and how it can be adapt- corporates a knowledge dimension and a ed to diverse contexts including multi-cam- cognitive process dimension. Te knowl- pus teaching delivery. Te paper reviews edge dimension relates to the subject the specifc pedagogical principles that can matter contents and incorporates factual be used in designing business subjects for knowledge (discrete pieces of elementa- fexible delivery predominantly based on ry information), conceptual knowledge online technologies. Te remainder of this (interrelated representations of more paper is organised as follows. An overview complex knowledge forms), procedural of learning theory is presented in the next knowledge (the skills to perform process- section. Ten the tenets of learning theory es) and metacognitive knowledge which are mapped to e-learning pedagogy. In the is the knowledge and awareness of one’s next section, some challenges and potential cognition as well as that of others. Te applications of e-learning to business edu- cognitive process dimension includes re- cation are discussed with special reference membering, understanding, applying, an- to multi-campus and fexible delivery. Some alysing, evaluating and creating. Tese concluding comments are provided in the levels represent a continuum from lower fnal section. order thinking skills to higher order thinking skills (Anderson & Krathwol, 2001). 123 Curriculum Design for Flexible Delivery

Various interpretations of the three setting in which the learning occurs. One learning theory traditions described above branch of situative learning emphasises the have been discussed in the literature. For ex- importance of context-dependent learn- ample, Greeno et al. (1996) highlight three ing5 where every efort is made to make the broad perspectives which make vastly dif- learning activity authentic to the social con- ferent assumptions about what is crucial for text (Mayes & de Freitas, 2004). understanding learning – the associationist Biggs (1999) emphasised the impor- perspective (learning as an activity); the tance of consistency between the curricu- cognitive perspective (learning as achiev- lum, teaching methods, the learning envi- ing understanding); and the situative per- ronment and the assessment procedures spective (learning as social practice). Tese when designing curricula. Accordingly, a three perspective (associationsist, cognitive, good pedagogical design is one with com- and situative) correspond to behaviourism, plete consistency of the above elements. Te cognitivism, and constructivism in learning logical process should align the intended theory traditions, respectively. Te asso- learning outcomes with learning and teach- ciationist perspective, which encompasses ing activities and then design assessment the research traditions behavioural theory tasks which will genuinely test whether the and neural networks4 (Mayes & de Freitas, outcomes have been reached (Mayes & de 2004), contends that knowledge is organ- Freitas, 2004). Albeit simple in theory, the ised accumulation of associations and skill application of Biggs’ approach to curric- components. Moreover, not only are the ulum design is not straightforward. Biggs formation, strengthening and adjustment (2009) advocates a constructivist approach of association pivotal to learning but so is prompting the designer to always focus on the reinforcement of connections through what the learner is actually doing. Hence, feedback. Albeit controversial, the associ- the guiding assumption about learning ationist view also assumes that knowledge upon which various teaching methods and and skills need to be taught from the bot- learning activities are built is constructivist tom up where smaller units are mastered as theory. a prerequisite for more complex units. Te Given the numerous interpretations cognitive perspective emphasises underly- of learning traditions and online pedago- ing processes of interpreting and construct- gies, applying learning theories to curricu- ing meaning and focuses on schema theory, lum design becomes a non-trivial task. Te information processing theories, the level of core question for the curriculum designer processing in memory, mental models and is which learning theory and which per- metacognitive processes. In sharp contrast spective is useful for a specifc teaching and to the associationist perspective, the cog- learning context. Essentially, the task in- nitive perspective places a strong emphasis volves unpacking various online pedagogies on the structures of understanding when so that their learning tradition roots can be acquiring new knowledge. Te situative uncovered. Te next section applies these perspective advocates that learning must be learning theories to selected online pedago- personally meaningful and always subject gies. to infuences from the social and cultural

4 Neural networks posit knowledge states as patterns of activation in a network of elementary units (Mayes and de Freitas, 2004). 5 For example, Problem-based Learning (PBL).

124 Internet Learning

3. Applying learning theories to nature of the task. Online pedagogies that online pedagogies subscribe to a behavioural tradition include most current e-learning tools, e-training modules and some intelligent tutoring mod- he core research question addressed els. Certain business courses by nature are in this paper concerns the pedagog- interdisciplinary and thus pedagogical ap- ical approaches to e-learning design proaches that enhance learning through as- Tin business courses with diverse student co- sociation and reinforcement, whilst building horts. Te focus is on what questions practi- advanced complex tasks in a step-by-step tioners should ask when making e-learning manner, are useful. When catering to stu- design decisions. Tis invariably involves dent groups with difering backgrounds and refecting on the intended learning out- circumstances (e.g. full-time student versus comes, the assumptions about the role of part-time student who is employed), peda- technology, the learning context and teach- gogies that subscribe to cognitive traditions ing modes. Contextual elements (Kember, can be highly relevant. Under this learning 1997), in particular, appear to have diferent theory tradition, several online pedagogies levels of infuence on teaching and learning including Laurillard’s conversational model (Gonzalez, 2009). Salmon (2002) contends and Salomon’s distributed cognition mod- that “there are no e-learning models per se el are described. Among the plethora of but only e-enhancements where technology pedagogies that draw from constructivism, is used to achieve better learning outcomes,” several relevant to business courses are dis- or a more cost-efcient way of bringing the cussed. learning environment to learners (Mayes & Pedagogies based on a behavioural de Freitas, 2004). When applying theory to perspective include instruction-based online pedagogies, it is also important to e-training models through which simula- take into consideration the contextual fac- tion of a process is carried out and problems tors including diverse student cohorts and or routines that have been carefully sorted teaching delivery modes and how they en- according to the difculty level are present- able non-specialists to engage in efective ed. Tese pedagogies are based on the prem- e-learning curriculum design. Terefore, ise that behavioural modifcations are possi- mapping learning theory onto various ped- ble via stimulus-response pairs and trial and agogical approaches is the logical precursor error learning. Instructional approaches are to any attempt to identify pedagogies that considered to be more appropriate when are best suited for a particular teaching and students have not yet formed an understand- learning context. ing about a particular topic (Magliaro et al., Table 1 summarises selected online 2005). Most current e-learning development pedagogies, their learning theory founda- models which use digital media such as tions and the relevance to fexible curric- podcasting, Lectopia, lecture presentation, ulum design. My intention here is to apply quizzes and web-based self-assessment sub- learning theory to a few chosen pedagogies scribe to behaviourism. Intelligent Tutoring that are relevant to diverse student needs or Systems (ITS) (Anderson & Reiser, 1985) cohorts. Te diverse needs include consid- and learning objects models (Wiley, 2000) eration of academic year (whether under- also align with the behavioural theory as graduate or postgraduate), learning con- they essentially follow an instructivist ap- text (type of group, relationship) and the proach (Mayes & de Freitas, 2004). Howev-

125 Curriculum Design for Flexible Delivery

Table 1: Selected e-learning pedagogies and their learning theory traditions (primary) theory Learning Constructivi Cognitivism Behaviourism

(secondary) Learning theory Constructivist Cognitive tivist Cognitive/Construc Design (ISD) Systems ional Associanist/Instruct Behaviourism

Main features activities oriented towards design and discovery. Focuses on a oriented pedagogical focus. Favours hands Learning as subjective construction of knowledge with a task solving communication, through information with a pedagogical focus on processing and transmission of Learning as transformation in internal cognitive structures adding coordination to the whole structure. by step from simpler units of knowledge and skill, finally The competence in advanced and complex tasks is built step response adaptive focus on a pedagogical with reinforcement and trial and error learning. Learning through association and problem through frameworks, existing already of foundations the dialogue and collaboration. New knowledge must be built on Learning is understood as achieving understanding through Behaviour

- solving activity and feedback activity and solving can be modified through stimulus through modified be can

inference and problem problem and inference

on, - response pairs response self - directed -

e enable constructivist principles Toolkits and other support systems that Intelligent Learning Systems Learning Intelligent Salomon’s distributed cognition Dialogic pedagogies Laurillard’s Conversational Model intelligent E assessment Lectopia, li Lecture presentations, Podcasting, Most current e - - learning pedagogy/ tools pedagogy/ learning training, learning objects, some some objects, learning training, tutoring models tutoring brary resources, quizzes, self

- learning development; development; learning

- research question research Possible application to driven by The use of toolkit is largely application of concepts. and understanding their in differ may groups learner as concrete) or (abstract and group groups student different to Highly relevant in catering process. stepwise a from built be can tasks complex in competence where cohorts for courses multi designing inter when Relevant facts. new concepts, theories and Useful when introducing the subject content subject the - specific tasks - disciplinary - student student

References Conole et al. (2004) Papert (1986; 1991); Salomon Salomon (1993) Bower et al. (2009) (2004) Mayes & de Freitas Laurillard (2002) (2004) Mayes & de Freitas

126 Internet Learning

Table 1(Cont'd) ivist mediated/Construct Socially Experiential Activity Co learning Socially situated perspective/ P Co ractice mmuni - constructivist

- / -

based S ty of of ty ituative ituative

offered by a moderator. summary, A contributions. other’s to participants take place through cross posting and responding among Interactions contributions. post individuals A stimulus is given in the form of an online activity where experience of transforming skillsattitudes. as a Reflection means and Learning as the transformation of experience into knowledge, in isolation achieved have could they what beyond extend to The Zone of Proximal Development (ZPD) and structures of activities. Influenced relationships involving imitation and modelling and imitation involving relationships Learning as social participation emphasising interpersonal Learning as developing social practice by activity theory and focuses on an activity system system activity an on focuses and theory activity by

feedback or critique is critique or feedback

– Allows students students Allows

reflection archives offer increased opportunities for not time Asynchronous communication which is project) a on project (e.g. collaborating Wiki A Students on a networked learning Dialogic pedagogy Salmon’s e Peer CSALT networked learning moderation model - assisted dialogic pedagogies

- bound and communication

- tivities or Salmon e Salmon or tivities

model -

course course

Discussion forums tools as such communication Asynchronous work team generic embed skills such as activities and projects can Collaborative group curriculum design curriculum greater relevance to educational setting has a organisational context and The emphasis on process. engagement student provides five logical steps of designing process as it Useful in framing the course

Vygotsky (1978) (2000) Jonassen Salmon Salmon (2004) Salmon (2002) Ko Vygotsky (1978) (2004) Mayes & de Freitas Greeno et al. (2000); Goodyear (2001); lb (1984) lb

127 Curriculum Design for Flexible Delivery er, pedagogies of behavioural origins ofen itly drawing on diferent skills from spoken do not take advantage of the benefts derived communication. Te ability to record these from more socio-constructivist learning de- dialogues for later refection is an added signs where the active engagement of stu- advantage. However, demand for prompt dents and socially constructed meanings are responses in synchronous communicative sought (Bower et al., 2009). tasks can be a burden for the learner. An approach which draws on both A third approach that draws on both constructivist and cognitive theories is Lau- constructivist and Communities of Practice rillard’s (2002) conversational framework. principles (Mayes & de Freitas, 2004) is the Te conversational framework emphasises CSALT (Centre for Studies in Advanced the importance of discursive or conversa- Learning Technology) networked learning tional fows to enable higher learning. It has model (Goodyear, 2001). It emphasises the been very infuential in the development of distinction between the tasks designed by e-learning in the UK. In this model, learn- the tutor and the activities carried out by ing is understood as achieving understand- the learner. Te model disaggregates the im- ing through dialogue and collaboration. plied pedagogy into a hierarchy comprising Te framework contends that learners form four levels: pedagogical tactics (the lowest thorough understanding by apprehend- level), pedagogical strategy, high level ped- ing the structure of discourse, interpreting agogy, and philosophy (the highest level). forms of representation, acting on descrip- Te upper levels of pedagogy are considered tions of the world, applying feedback, and conceptual while the lower levels are regard- refecting upon the goal-action-feedback ed as procedural or operational. Interest- cycle (Bower et al., 2009). Te conversation- ingly, the CSALT model, whilst integrating al framework highlights fve diferent mean element of the systems approach, places dia types to guide course designs: narrative; an emphasis on the organisational context productive; interactive; communicative; and asserts its importance, particularly productive, and adaptive (Laurillard, 2002). in the education setting. Te pedagogical Table 2 describes these media types and re- framework and the educational setting are lated e-learning tools. contained within the organisational con- One of the main criticisms of the text. An educational setting is comprised of Laurillard framework is whether it is able to educator-designed tasks, student activities, sustain the individual/group dialogue to en- and the ‘learning environment’6 including hance generic skills (Goodyear, 2002; Mayes educational technology. With a strong foot- & de Freitas, 2004). From a learning context ing in collaborative learning, the CSALT point of view, narrative media types have the model demonstrates that learning outcomes advantage of allowing the learner to access can be linked with specifc learner groups information at a time and in a place suitable and their activities (Mayes & de Freitas, for the learner. Since information is present- 2004). Goodyear (2001) also emphasises the ed in more than one medium, the frame- transformational and personal development work can overcome physical/sensory access aspects of networked learning (Mayes & problems. However, information overload de Freitas, 2004). Considering the merits and the need for a wider repertoire of infor- 6 mation skills can be potential downsides. In Tis can include the Personal Learning Environ- ment (PLE) which can be a knowledge network, communicative media types, learners have a cognitive space or technology associated with to communicate and take turns more explic- individual learning.

128 Internet Learning

Table 2: Laurillard media type and e-learning tools

Media type Description e-learning tools

Narrative Since formal learning depends more on interaction On-screen text, image, video files,

with representations than with the ‘real world,’ PowerPoint slides, DVDs, web pages,

learners should produce representations of their animations

own (notes, mind maps, class presentations and Multimedia authoring tools, word and

answers to comprehension questions) image processing tools

Electronic whiteboards, wikis, blogs,

shared write/draw systems

Productive Supports skills of analysis and application allowing Spreadsheets and other statistical tools,

learners to manipulate data consciously and databases, qualitative analysis tools,

explicitly, using their own parameters and protocols online calculators

Interactive Supports developing information skills and Quizzes, search engines, gateways and

supporting research tasks. A special category of portals, interactive maps

interactive tools are quizzes with feedback.

Communicative Asynchronous communication between individuals Asynchronous: Email, text, discussion

and groups can be used to promote reflective forums, mailing lists, wikis, video and

learning and allow ideas to be built collaboratively audio messages

whereas synchronous communication has the

benefits of immediacy and high motivation. Synchronous: Online chat, video

conferencing, instant messaging, mobile

phones

Adaptive Supports tasks that depend on continuous Simulations, virtual worlds, models,

adaptation to user input where learners receive computer games, interactive tutorials

intrinsic feedback to their actions. Valuable in

embedding experimental learning and higher order

learning skills (e.g. problem solving, evaluation,

research, etc.)

Source: Modified from Sharpe and Oliver (2007).

129 Curriculum Design for Flexible Delivery of each learning stage and activity, Bower 4. Challenges, contextual infuenc- et al. (2009) developed an online pedago- es and potential applications to gy framework that focuses on four gener- business education al learning design principles: transmissive; dialogic; co-constructive; and collaborative. Tis framework allows the learning design raditional approaches to business to be driven by the cognitive and collab- education ofen fail to harness the orative requirements rather than the ev- full power of information technol- Togy and they support the notion that the er-changing technology (Bower et al., 2009). Salmon's (2004) e-moderating mod- individual is ‘a lone seeker of knowledge’ el of course design splits student engage- (Kilpatrick et al., 2003). Ofen, technolo- ment into fve stages: access and motivation, gy is a simple ‘add on’ to the course. Tis online socialisation, information exchange, idea stems from the notion that teaching is knowledge construction, and development. a highly structured and prescriptive form Tis model describes the stages of progress- of instruction whereby learning objectives ing towards successful online learning both and activities are defned in a more concrete for students and e-moderators (Mayes & de format. Such traditional didactic approach- Freitas, 2004). Te model has been widely es tend to result in surface learning (Rams- used as a way of sequencing activities in den, 2002) where the emphasis is on cov- courses that rely on collaborative comput- erage of content and the assessment system er-mediated discussions (Sharpe & Oliver, which tests and rewards low-level outcomes 2007). Although the model does not align in the classroom (Hunter et al., 2010). Such with a learning theory directly, it implies a surface learning approaches fail to meet the commitment to constructivist tasks and the general market expectations for business greatest possible degree of dialogue. graduates (Jackson, 2009). Whilst descriptions of forms of To address some of these pressing learning settings that support quality learn- issues, universities are exploring ways in ing outcomes are common in the literature, which information and communication detailed descriptions about learning pro- technologies can: (a) enhance students’ cesses in forms that can be easily applied learning, (b) address issues of multi-cam- by teachers are less available (Oliver et al., pus and fexible delivery, and (c) implement 2007). In this section, an attempt was made pedagogically-sound methods (Design for to examine the learning theory traditions of Learning, La Trobe University, 2009). To- selected e-learning pedagogies. Te inten- day, most business subjects ofered in Aus- tion here was not to provide an exhaustive tralian universities have an online compo- discussion of various online pedagogies but nent delivered through various Learning to hand pick a few online pedagogies that Management Systems (LMS) such as Moo- may be relevant to business curriculum dle and Blackboard. Tese subjects can be design targeted at diverse student cohorts. regarded as web-supplemented rather than Te next section discusses some of the main e-learning which is fully online. Current- challenges of applying e-learning pedago- ly, many universities are moving towards gies to curriculum design from a business blended learning approaches where a com- education perspective. bination of face-to-face learning and forms of e-learning is used. Te majority of subject oferings with a web presence follow

130 Internet Learning

an instructional design pedagogy and be- To incorporate technology success- havioural theory. Providing lecture presen- fully into the curriculum requires the pur- tations, tutorial material, podcasting, audio pose of the course to be negotiated and made lectures using Lectopia and library resourc- explicit (Sharpe & Oliver, 2007). According es are common elements of web-supple- to this premise, ‘one of’ rational course de- mented business subjects. What is less sign processes have been problematic. Inte- clear in current oferings is how web-sup- grating technology into curriculum requires plemented elements enshrine and support careful consideration on what it attempts to such stated graduate capabilities as writing support. For example, it is the type of activity skills, creative problem-solving skills, and or collaborative task and thinking processes critical thinking skills. in which students engage that determines the Tere is evidence that much of the quality of learning and technology is simply technology incorporation into curricula the mediator for the task or collaboration is prompted by practical challenges such (Bower et al., 2009). Laurillard (2009) asks as catering to large classes (Davies et al., the question: how do we ensure that peda- 2005). However, diferent types of problems gogy exploits the technology and not vice are inherent to the concurrent delivery of a versa? Without a strong theoretical under- subject in several campuses7. Te concur- standing about the nature of formal learning, rent delivery or multi-campus delivery of technology is at risk of being merely used to subjects is not uncommon in most business enhance conventional learning designs. courses in Australia. In such circumstances, From the discussion presented in all students must have satisfactory access to section 3, it is apparent that one single ped- subject resources whether they are metro- agogical approach may not satisfy both the politan or regional, full-time or part-time. theoretical and practical considerations Blended learning approaches such as block- in fexible delivery curriculum design in mode delivery have become popular in re- business courses. Each e-learning peda- cent times as they cater to diferent learning gogy contains both positive and negative styles and time challenges faced by part- features when embedding technology into time students. Te main advantage of such curricula. Out of the e-learning pedagogies an approach is the accessibility of material reviewed, Laurillard’s (2002) conversational for part-time students who are unable to framework ofers much promise for busi- make a time commitment during normal ness curriculum design. Drawing from both teaching hours. Block-mode delivery tends constructivist and cognitive learning theo- to contain intensive sessions with a heavy ry traditions, the framework ofers a logical content focus. Te obvious downside of process highlighting appropriate e-learning such an approach is there is little time for media types to guide course designs. How- classroom discussion and refection due ever, in multi-campus delivery contexts, it is to intense time pressures. Block-mode de- important to be cognisant of the limitations livery combined with e-learning or online imposed by the use of multiple media forms learning can bring about new possibilities because the IT infrastructure and accessibil- of extended interaction (Bretag & Hannon, ity may not be uniform across various cam- 2007). puses of the same university. Salmon’s (2002) 7 Ocak (2010) highlights the practical problems and e-moderation model is particularly useful in impediments of blended learning from a faculty framing the course designing process as it point of view. ofers logical steps of student engagement.

131 Curriculum Design for Flexible Delivery

E-learning activities need to be in- Implementing fexible learning approaches tegrated into assessment in order to be reg- involves a diferent set of challenges. Tech- ularly used by students (Sharpe & Oliver, nology issues are the most common chal- 2007). Tis is consistent with Biggs’ (1999) lenge in many e-learning contexts. Tey constructive alignment notion. Lowerison include the learning infrastructure (hard- et al. (2008) argue that learning theories ware, sofware, delivery mechanisms, and have to be adjusted to the realities of online processes that deliver and manage learning teaching. Previous reviews of e-learning programmes), which is pivotal to e-learning models have emphasised the need to refne success. As mentioned earlier, the learning the methodological frameworks that posi- infrastructure of all campuses of the univer- tion various e-learning models in the ped- sity may not have the same quality or capac- agogical space (Mayes & de Freitas, 2004). ity. Tis is highly relevant in multi-campus Conole and Oliver's (2002) approach re- delivery of subjects. Learning infrastructure quires practitioners to describe their own contributes to the complexity of e-learn- uses of technology and then formalise this ing in several ways. Key factors contrib- to help them decide whether they are using uting to the complexity of the technology the appropriate technology. infrastructure include technology depen- Emerging web technologies present dencies8, customisation issues, integration new opportunities and challenges for both challenges, and learner volumes (Shank et students and educators. Tey include Web al., 2008). Multi-campus settings with dif- 2.0 tools such as social bookmarking, Wikis, fering IT capabilities exacerbate these infra- shared document creation, blogs, microb- structure challenges. In fully-online deliv- logging, presentation tools, image creation ery, certain student cohorts may not be able and editing, podcasting, video editing and to access ‘bandwidth-hungry’ applications. sharing, screen recording, mindmapping Web 2.0 tools and the changing needs of the and digital storytelling. Although most new learners, especially those who have grown technologies are not designed specifcal- up with the internet and a plethora of so- ly for educational purposes, educators and cial media networks, also provide unique students can leverage these tools to enhance challenges to educators. Te abundance the learning experience. New technologies of choice and content creates anxiety for are prompting many educators to rethink both students and teachers. Change from pedagogy and current teaching and learn- the top-down instructional approaches ing models. Conole (2007) argues that the that have dominated business education to gap between the potential of technologies more fexible ones that focus on the learner to support learning and the reality of how is needed. they are actually being used may be due to a lack of understanding about how technologies can be used to harness specifc learning advantages. She presents a taxonomy that characterises components of a learning activity—context, pedagogy, and task (p. 8 Te implementation requires the full support and 85)—and these could be used to support expertise of the IT department to ensure the chosen practitioners to make informed choices in applications run efciently within the organisation’s their designing for learning. existing platforms, client workstations and computer networks, disk space, and bandwidth support (Shank et al., 2008).

132 Internet Learning

5. Conclusion References

echnological advancements and Albrecht, W. S., & Sach, R. J. (2001). Te changing student needs have trans- perilous future of accounting education. formed teaching and learning world- Te CPA Journal, 71(3), 16-23. Twide. Business courses, in particular are forced to respond to some unique challeng- Anderson, L., & Krathwohl, D. (2001). A es in the face of educational reform and cur- taxonomy for learning, teaching and assess- riculum renewal in the tertiary sector. Tis ing: A revision of Bloom’s taxonomy of edu- paper reviewed the literature on e-learning cational objectives. New York: Longman. pedagogies that have been used as part of blended learning and fexible delivery. An Andersen, P. H., & Rask, M. (2008). Taking attempt has been made to link the e-learn- action: new forms of student and manager ing pedagogies with their underpinning involvement in business education. Market- learning theories. Te literature on online ing Intelligence & Planning, 26(2),145-165. pedagogies is voluminous. Each pedagogy emphasises a diferent aspect of learning Anderson, J. R., & Reiser, B. J. (1985). Te and most pedagogies ofen draw from more LISP tutor. Byte, 10, 159-175. than one learning theory tradition. Tis Atkinson, R. (2006). Web 2.0: Next-g, s se- paper draws together and presents the key quel, or more of the same? HERDSA News, pedagogies for e-learning in business edu- 29(2), 20-22. cation in a coherent form. Adapting e-learning to business ed- Bates, A. W., & Poole, G. (2003). Efective ucation contexts requires careful consider- teaching with technology in higher educa- ation to what the subject wants to achieve, tion: Foundations for success. San Francis- namely deep learning outcomes. On the co: Jossey-Bass. one hand, new web technologies expand the opportunities to design subjects informed Beetham, H., Jones, S., & Gornall, L. by sound pedagogies that will instil grad- (2001). Career development of learning uate attributes and deliver deep learning technology staf: Scoping study fnal report, outcomes. Tey also prompt educators to JISC Committee for Awareness, Liaison and rethink current teaching and learning ped- Training Programme. Retrieved fromhttp:// agogies. Particularly, pedagogical principles www.jisc.ac.uk/publications/reports/2001/ strongly support collaborative learning that cdssfnalreport.aspx emanates from a constructivist paradigm. On the other hand, institutional context, Beetham, H. (2004). Review: Developing organisational structures and infrastruc- e-Learning models for the JISC practitioner ture issues can hamper e-learning success. communities. JISC Pedagogies for e-learn- E-learning in business education is still ing programme: Initial review. Retrieved evolving and more research is needed to from http://www.jisc.ac.uk/whatwedo/pro- better understand how technology can be grammes/elearningpedagogy/outcomes used to harness specifc learning advantages. Beetham, H., & Sharpe, R. (2007). An introduction to rethinking pedagogy for a digital age. In H. & R. Sharpe (Eds.) Re-

133 Curriculum Design for Flexible Delivery thinking pedagogy for a digital age: De- Burdett, J. (2003). Making groups work: signing and delivering e-learning (pp.1-25). University students’ perceptions, Interna- London: Routledge.. tional Education Journal, 4(3),177–191. Carr, S., & Mathews, M. R. (2002). Ac- Biggs, J. B. (1996). Western misconceptions counting curriculum change: Is it a rational of the Confucian-heritage learning culture. academic exercise? Working Paper, Charles In D. A. Watkins & J. B. Biggs (Eds.), Te Sturt University, Bathurst, NSW. Chinese learner: Cultural, psychological, and contextual infuences (pp. 45-68). Clegg, S., Hudson, A., & Steele, J. (2003). Hong Kong; Melbourne, Australia: Com- Te emperor’s new clothes: Globalisation parative Education Research Centre; Aus- and e-learning in higher education. British tralia Council for Educational Research. Journal of Sociology of Education, 24(1), 39-53. Biggs, J. (1999). Teaching for quality learning at university: What the student does. Conole, G. (2007). Describing learning Buckingham: Te Society for Research into activities: tools and resources to guide Higher Education and Open University practice. In H. Beetham & R. Sharpe Press. (Eds.), Rethinking pedagogy for a digital age: Designing and delivering e-learning Biggs, J. B. (2000). Teaching for quality (pp.81-91). Oxford: RoutledgeFalmer. learning at university, SRHE & Open Uni- versity, Buckingham. Conole, G., Dyke, M., Oliver, M., & Seale, J. (2004). Mapping pedagogy and tools for Biggs, J. B., & Tang, C. (2007). Teaching for efective learning design. Computers & quality learning at university: What the stu- Education 43, 17-33. dent does (3rd ed.). Berkshire: Society for Research into Higher Education and Open Conole, G., & Oliver, M. (2002). Em- University Press. bedding theory into learning technology practice with toolkits. Journal of Interac- Bower, M., Hedberg, J., & Kuswara, A. tive Educational Media, 8. Retrieved from (2009). Conceptualising Web 2.0 enabled http://www.jime-open.ac.uk/ learning designs. In Same places, diferent spaces. Proceedings ascilite 2009 Auckland Dabbagh, N., & Reo, R. (2011). Back to the (pp.1153-1162). Retrieved from http:// future: Tracing the roots and learning af- www.ascilite.org.au/conferences/auck- fordances of social sofware. In M.J.W. Lee land09/procs/bower.pdf & C. McLoughlin (Eds.), Web 2.0-based e-learning: Applying social informatics for Bretag, T., & Hannon, J. (2007). Online tertiary learning (pp. 1-20). Hershey, PA: close and personal: Developing a commu- Information Science Reference. nity of inquiry using computer mediated communication. In M. Hellsten & A. Reid (Eds.), Researching international pedagogies for teaching and learning, Netherlands: Springer.

134 Internet Learning

Davies, A., Ramsay, J., Lindfeld, H., & Hunter, J. D., Vickery, J., & Smyth, R. Couperthwaite, J. (2005). A blended (2010). Enhancing learning outcomes approach to learning: Added value and through group work in an internationalised lesson learnt from students’ use of comput- undergraduate business education context. er-based materials for neurological analy- Journal of Management & Organization, sis. British Journal of Educational Technol- 16, 700-714. ogy, 36(5), 839-49. Jackson, D. (2009). Undergraduate man- Design for Learning (2009). Design for agement education: It’s place, purpose and learning: Curriculum review and renewal. eforts to bridge the skills gap. Journal of Melbourne: La Trobe University. Management and Organization, I(2), 206- 223. Gonzalez, C. (2009). Conceptions of, and approaches to, teaching online: A study of Kembler, D. (1997). A reconceptualisation lecturers teaching postgraduate distance of the research into university academics’ courses. Higher Education, 57, 299-314, conceptions of teaching. Instructional Sci- ence, 7(3), 255-275. Goodyear, P. (2001). Efective networked learning in higher education: Notes and Kilpatriack, S. I., Barrett, M. S., & Jones, guidelines (Deliverable 9). Bristol: Joint T. (2003). Defning learning communities. Information Systems Committee (JISC). International Education Research Confer- Retrieved from http://csalt.lancs.ac.uk/jisc/ ence, Auckland, New Zealand. docs/Guidelines_fnal.doc Kolb, D. (1984). Experiential learning: Goodyear, P. (2002). Psychological founda- Experience as the source of learning and tions for networked learning, Chapter 4. In development. Englewood Clifs, NJ: Pren- C. Steeples & C. Jones (Eds.), Networked tice-Hall. learning: perspectives and issues (pp. 49- 75). Berlin: Springer Verlag. Laurillard, D. (2002). Rethinking university teaching: A framework for the efective use Granić, A., Mifsud, C., & Ćukušić, M. of learning technologies (2nd ed.). Oxford: (2009). Design, implementation and valida- RoutledgeFalmer. tion of a Europe-wide pedagogical framework for e-learning. Computers & Educa- Laurillard, D. (2009). Te pedagogical chal- tion, 53, 1052-1081. lenges to collaborative technologies. Inter- national Journal of Computer-Supported Greeno, J. G., Collins, A. M., & Resnick, Collaborative Learning, 4(1), 5-20. L. (1996). Cognition and learning. In D.C. Berliner& R.C. Calfee (Eds.), Handbook of Lee, M. J. W., & McLoughlin, C. (2011). educational psychology (pp.15-46). New Web 2.0-based e-learning: Applying social York: Simon & Schuster Macmillan. informatics to tertiary teaching. Hershey, PA: Information Science Reference (IGI Hughes, G. D. (2006). How business educa- Global). tion must change. MIT Sloan Management Review, 47(3), 88.

135 Curriculum Design for Flexible Delivery

Lowerison, G., Cote, R., Abrami, P. C., Ocak, M. A. (2010). Why are faculty & Lavoie, M. (2008). Revisiting learning members not teaching blended courses? theory for e-learning. In S. Carliner & P. Insights from faculty members. Computers Shank (eds.), Te e-leaning handbook: & Education, 56(3), 689-699. Past promises and present challenges. San Francisco: John Wiley. Oliver, B., Jones, S., Ferns, S., & Tucker, B. (2007). Mapping curricula: Ensuring work- Magliaro, S. G., Lockee, B. B., & Burton, ready graduates by mapping course learn- J. K. (2005). Direct instruction revisited: ing outcomes and higher order thinking A key model for instructional technology. skills. Evaluations and Assessment Confer- Educational Technology Research & Devel- ence, Brisbane. opment, 53(4), 41-55. Oskoz, A., & Elola, I. (2011). Meeting at Mayer, R. E. (2003). Learning and in- the wiki: Te new arena for collaborative struction. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Merrill writing in foreign language courses. In Prentice-Hall. M.J.W. Lee & C. McLoughlin (Eds.), Web 2.0-based e-learning: Applying social Mayes, T., & de Freitas, S. (2004). Stage 2: informatics to tertiary teaching (pp. 209- Review of e-learning theories, frameworks 227). Hershey, PA: Information Science and models. JISC e-Learning Models Reference (IGI Global). Desk Study. Retrieved from http://www. jisc.ac.uk/whatwedo/programmes/elearn- Papert, S. (1986). Constructionism: A new ingpedagogy/outcomes opportunity for elementary science education. Unpublished proposal to the National McNaught, C. (2003). Identifying the Science Foundation. complexity of factors in the sharing and reuse of resources. In A. Littlejohn (Ed.), Papert, S., & Harel, I. (1991). Situating con- Reusing online resources: A sustainable structionism. In S. Papert & I. Harel (Eds.), approach to e-learning (pp. 199-211). Lon- Constructionism (pp. 1-11). Norwood, NJ: don: Kogan Page. Ablex Publisihng Corporation.

Mohamed, E. K. A. (2009). Optimizing Ramsden, P. (2002). Learning to lead in business education: a strategic response to higher education. London: Routledge. global challenges. Education, Business and Society: Contemporary Middle Eastern Salmon, G. (2002). E-tivities: Te key to Issues, 2(4), 299-311. active online learning. London: Kogan Page. Normand, C., & Littlejohn, A. (2006). Flexible delivery: A model of analysis and Salmon, G. (2004). E-moderating: Te key implementation of fexible programme to teaching and learning online. (2nd ed.). delivery. Enhancing Practice, Te Quality London: RoutledgeFarmer. Assurance Agency for Higher Education. Retrieved from www.enhancementthemes. ac.uk

136 Internet Learning

Salomon, G. (1993). No distribution without individuals' cognition. In G. Salomon (Ed.), Distributed cognitions: Psychological and educational considerations (pp. 111- 138). New York: Cambridge University Press.

Shank, P., Precht, L. W., Singh, H., Everidge, J., & Bozarth, J. (2008). Infrastructure for learning: Options for today or screw-ups for tomorrow. In S. Carliner & P. Shank (Eds.), Te e-learning handbook: Past problems, present challenges (pp. 109-166). San Francisco, CA: John Wiley & Sons.

Sharpe, R., & Oliver, M. (2007). Design- ing courses for e-learning. In H. Beetham & R. Sharpe (eds.), Rethinking pedagogy for a digital age: Designing and delivering e-learning (pp.41-51). London: Routledge.

Tapscott, D., & Williams, A. (2007). Wiki- nomics: How mass collaboration changes everything, Atlantic Books.

Van Over, D., & Stover, D.L. (1994). Ob- ject-oriented design: A new approach to curriculum development. Journal of Infor- mation Systems Education, 6, 22-26.

Vygotsky, L.S. (1978). Mind in society. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Westerbeck, T. (2004). Brave new world, bold new b-school. BizEd, July/August, 36-40.

Wiley, D. A. (2000). Connecting learning objects to instructional design theory: A defnition, a metaphor and a taxonomy. Retrieved from http://www.elearning-reviews.org/topics/technology/learning-objects/2001-wiley-learning-objects-instructional-design-theory.pdf

137 Rethinking Distance in an Era of Online Learning Rethinking Distance in an Era of Online Learning Jennifer Glennie1, Tony Mays2

Tis paper explores the ways in which technology in general, and online provision in particular, has contributed to a blurring of boundaries between diferent modes of educational provision, but makes a case for the retention of the notion of “distance” and how the challenges of distance may be overcome through conscious decisions made and budgeted for at the programme design stage. Te argument made here results from an ongoing discussion within the South African Institute for Distance Education (SAIDE) in refection on work at institutional, national and cross-border levels. It proposes a model for mapping diferent forms of provision within a funding framework in South Africa that looks set to continue a distinction between distance and non-distance forms of provision. Te paper suggests a hierarchy of issues that should be addressed in the quality assurance and accreditation of distance programmes with varying degrees of ICT integration.

Key words: technology; online; distance education; SAIDE; quality assurance; accreditation

Te Context for students, savings on costs of residence and travel). For these reasons, national pol- here is need to expand the capacity icy in South Africa foresees and encourages and efectiveness of the post-school- expansion in provision of high quality dis- ing system in many countries in tance education. TAfrica generally, and in South Africa in Although distance education can of- particular. However, most traditional confer a way of breaking out of ‘the iron triangle tact-based institutions have already reached defned by the vectors of access, quality and their capacity to support full-time students. cost’ (Daniel & Kanwar, 2006, p.7) by increas- In addition, there is increasing demand ing access, improving quality and cutting for more fexible provision of learning op- costs, it is also true that ofen distance edu- portunities which allow lifelong learning cation is not properly planned, does not de- to take place alongside other life commit- liver what it promises, and is not cost-efec- ments such as work, family and commu- tive. Tis is because it is complicated to plan nity engagements. Tere is evidence that and manage, and because the mistakes are designed and implemented well, distance less easy to conceal and/or overcome with a provision can reach larger numbers and ca- large, dispersed student body. Systemic eval- ter for more diverse student needs; and do uations of distance provision have provided so in ways that maintain or improve qual- evidence that much provision is far from ide- ity while achieving some cost-per-student al (CHE 2004). In addition, there seems to savings through economies of scale (and be a widespread assumption that education

1 Director: South African Institute for Distance Education (SAIDE) 2 Senior Programme Specialist – HE: SAIDE

138 Internet Learning delivered by means of ICT integration can form in which ICT is integral to the design improve the quality of educational provision of the programme. All institutions will likely in developing countries, not least in institu- need to use a variety of ICT to maintain and tions of higher learning. Governments and improve communications, for example, but higher education institutions in such coun- whether or not to use the afordances of ICT tries are spending enormous sums of mon- for a highly interactive form of engagement ey in this regard. Te “roll-out” of ICTs into during the teaching process will have pro- schools, higher education institutions and found implications both for cost of provision community learning centres, together with and for the access and competences required more provision of on-line distance educa- of both students and staf. Institutions need tion courses, are increasingly advocated as to select appropriate technologies to use the means to increase access to education in appropriate ways, taking into account and improve the quality of its delivery. Te their difering contexts of provision: a one- suggestion is that, particularly in countries size-fts-all approach will not be possible. which face serious educational shortcom- Te rapid pace of technological ings and whose educational institutions change and increasing globalization have remain underdeveloped, Information and resulted in an exponential increase in access Communication Technologies (ICTs) can to sources of information, which means that make the diference. teachers, whether contact or distance-based, However, even accepting the as- can no longer be expected to be the sole sumption that ICT integration can make an content authority for the teaching-learning important contribution, the question of the interaction. Te roles and responsibilities of quality of educational delivery and support the lecturer, learner, and support services using ICTs requires much deeper analysis. may be signifcantly changed in the online Simply “throwing computers at higher ed- environment in particular as described by ucation institutions” is not enough. While many research studies (Yang & Cornelious, issues of the provision of ICT hardware, 2005; Oliver, 1999). Digital technologies the improvement of connectivity, and the open up many possibilities for a more in- upgrading of communications and general teractive engagement, but whether the af- technology infrastructure are clearly im- fordances of ICT are used in this way must portant, it is only when actual issues of the be a conscious design decision: ICT can be improvement of teaching and learning are used simply to transmit content more ef- addressed that claims made for the educa- ciently. However, in institutions which con- tional potential of ICTs can be confrmed or sciously seek to use ICT to teach diferently, refuted. In South Africa, we are increasingly the role of the lecturer is changing to that of at this juncture. facilitator, learning environment designer, Institutions now have a much wid- co-learner, and may also include content cu- er range of possibilities to consider about ration (Plomp, 1999). Te role of the learner what content to use, how to mediate it and in such institutions and programmes is then how to assess learning. Depending on the also changing, moving towards more self-di- learning context, the nature of their target rected, independent study and greater col- learners and their vision and mission, insti- laboration and engagement both with peers tutions might opt for a minimal engagement inside the institution and others outside the with ICT in which the ICT supports other walls of the classroom or lecture hall (Berge, forms of teaching or, at the other extreme, a 2000; Kahn, 2012; Richardson). Burbules

139 Rethinking Distance in an Era of Online Learning

and Callister (1996) observe in particular that "hypertexts actively invite and facilitate t 1st generation: correspondence—em- multiple, alternative readings of the same phasis on mailing systems material"; they suggest that "more than just a t 2nd generation: specially prepared self- new way of organizing information, hyper- study material—emphases on materials text infuences the information it organizes development, storage, dispatch . . . Form and content become interdepen- t 3rd generation: print + multi-media dent.” However, they also recognize that and two-way communication—intro- these potential new learning possibilities duced importance of teams/ learner need form and content within which they support can be realized—if engagement with hyper- t 4th generation: ICTs and two-way text is not, as we put it earlier, subordinated interaction—added concerns for social to disciplinary inquiry, then the activity it learning/multi-skilling produces will dissolve in intellectual chaos, t 5th generation: communities of learn- arbitrariness and “a limitless bricolage of ing—highlights multi-skilling/decen- fragments” (as cited in SAIDE, 2006). tralised decision-making: Learning Migration to an ICT-supported ap- Management Systems/Personal Learn- proach, whether for contact or distance or ing Environments (extrapolated from blended provision, should therefore be con- Heydenrich and Prinsloo, 2010). sidered carefully and be undertaken within the context of the institutional environment While in North America, distance as a whole. education seems to have become almost Te key point to be made here is that synonymous with video-based and/or on- the way in which we use technology models line learning, in sub-Saharan Africa the particular values and uses for our students traditional model for distance provision has and places particular kinds of demands both been print-based correspondence or print- on them and on their teachers. Terefore, we based and contact supported. However, need to make conscious choices to use ap- with growing access to ICT facilities by staf propriate technologies in appropriate ways, and students and increasingly available and taking cognizance of both our learning pur- afordable connectivity, this is changing. poses and the technology profle of our tar- It should be noted that small scale get learners and staf (Mays, 2011). In our virtual learning environments with high view, technology needs to support the teach- levels of interactivity are usually not af- ing and learning process and not drive it. fordable for scaled provision. At the other end of the scale, (largely) unmediated Distance education provision and MOOCs generally have too low retention technology use and throughput to be an efective model for DE provision for which institutions receive subsidy and students pay fees. Efective istance Education (DE) providers technology supported DE delivery for for- have traditionally been early adopt- mal studies must rather take into account ers of new technology, and difer- the needs, capacities and costs to students Dent generations of DE provision have em- and staf and provide the necessary support phasised diferent systems and technologies for success. Tus the efective integration issues, for example: of ICTs must involve a careful analysis of

140 Internet Learning

learning and teaching needs and contexts approaches might be needed by diferent so that the most appropriate use can be students at diferent stages in their learn- made of the most appropriate technologies ing journey, the overall trend is towards fa- (including print) to support the learning vouring practices towards the right of the process. table. Tis has profound implications for Recently within South Africa’s ded- the ways in which learning programmes are icated distance provider, the University of designed, supported and assessed and con- South Africa - Unisa, there has been recog- sequently also for the expectations of stu- nition of the need to think and plan more dents and staf. holistically in terms of the ‘student walk’ For the purpose of highlighting through the institution (Louw, 2007) and quality issues that are involved in ICT-sup- the ft or lack thereof between student and ported distance education, it is necessary to institution expectations, preparedness and provide conceptual clarity on what consti- responsiveness at each key step of the walk tutes distance education. (Prinsloo, 2009). Key steps in the student walk have been identifed as follows: mar- Concept of distance education keting and orientation; the process of application (and the need for guidance and coun- urrently distance education students selling so that prospective students make in South and Southern Africa rare- informed choices); registration (including ly, if ever, have the opportunity to RPL); teaching and learning (including Cengage directly with their teachers or peers orientation to the process); formative as- as contact sessions are ofen few and far sessment; consolidation and summative between. ICT can be used to address this assessment; second assessment opportunity but, as noted previously, this calls for a con- and fnally graduation and alumni manage- scious design decision with consequences ment. Diferent combinations of ICT might for how such programmes are resourced. be used in diferent ways in diferent steps Distance education focuses on the teaching, of this process (Mays, 2011). learning, support, assessment, technology, and learning management systems design How do assumptions about that aim to provide educational opportuni- learning shape how ICT is used? ties to students who are not physically “on site”. In distance education, learners are sep- t is suggested that both the selection and arated from the instructional base or teach- the manner in which resources and tech- er, either in space or time, for a signifcant nology are used to support learning are portion of their learning (ADEA Working Iinfuenced by explicit or implicit assump- Group on Distance Education and Open tions about the nature and purpose of teach- Learning). As an approach, distance edu- ing and learning. Tis is illustrated in Table 1. cation does not preclude some face-to-face Te table suggests that assumptions contact, but such learning opportunities do about the nature and purpose of teaching not necessarily take place at school or in the and learning, whether or not made explic- presence of a teacher; neither do they have it, will infuence the choices teachers make to be based on a “group structured” pro- about the selection and use of both re- gramme. Tere is greater freedom of space sources and technology. Although diferent and time, and there is also much learner fexibility in the learning process. 141 Rethinking Distance in an Era of Online Learning

Whereas online learning opportu- of participants). So when Evans and Paul- nities may be ofered both to campus-based ing (2010) rightfully question whether the and remote students, distance education is notion of “distance education” is still rele- premised on a very diverse and geographi- vant, we would argue that it remains use- cally distributed student body, a high level ful at the programme design stage to think of independent learning and decentralised about where prospective students will like- support for students who may never attend ly be located. We believe that “geographic the central campus. So in our opinion, on- distance” can still exacerbate “transactional line provision and distance provision can- distance” (Moore, 1993, 1996) in an online not be confated: though the former can environment, and activities and support be designed specifcally to meet the needs strategies need to be designed accordingly. of the latter. Designing a programme for Distance education can thus be a target audience who can be assumed to construed as a collection of methods (in- have access to computer labs or a wif net- cluding but not limited to online) for the work on a central campus raises diferent provision of structured learning as well as requirements from the design of a pro- a mode of delivery that avoids the need gramme for distributed students who may for learners to discover the curriculum by not have that access. Even if registration attending classes frequently and for long requirements stipulate that students must periods. Distance provision aims to create have specifc ICT devices and specifc levels a quality learning environment using an of connectivity, there is need to think about appropriate combination of diferent learn- how distributed students can gain access to ing resources, tutorial support, peer group technical support (for example an online discussion, and practical sessions (real or support centre; a call centre). virtual or a combination of both). Litera- Where registration requirements ture shows that some of the key aspects that are clear and a technical support struc- constitute an efective learning environ- ture is in place, the design of the learning ment, whether it is in face-to-face or in dis- programme itself usually makes certain tance education settings are that learners assumptions about what students already should be encouraged to engage with the know or can do: designing a programme content, to collaborate and interact during for local students studying on a fexible learning, to refect on what they learn and study basis, or students distributed across to relate it to practice (CHE 2007; Strydom a province, or students distributed across a and Mentz 2010). In distance education, whole country or region, or students any- creating an efective learning environment where in the world, raises important design entails designing activities that promote questions about what examples to use; what mastery of knowledge/concepts by learn- resources to refer to; the type of language ers; mastery of skills through doing; inter- that might be appropriate; how a large and acting with peers and the environment to distributed student population might be di- gain deeper insights; and refecting on what vided into smaller groups for collaborative is learnt to gain wisdom without necessar- assignments (perhaps deliberately pairing ily requiring teachers and learners to be in students from diferent environments); the same place at the same time. Students and what learning styles and strategies do not necessarily need to be “online” to do might be appropriate (perhaps a greater some of these things. range of options for a more diverse range

142 Internet Learning

143 Rethinking Distance in an Era of Online Learning

Distance versus technology- on the two continua of spatial distance on mediated conventional education: one hand and technology use on the other. the narrowing gap Figure 1 illustrates various delivery permutations based on the two variables. In addition to the spatial and tech- s noted by SAIDE in an earlier nological dimensions illustrated in Figure report: 1, a third (human) dimension needs to be considered across all forms of provision. ATechnologies can be applied in a range of Tis is the underpinning educational ap- ways, to support an almost limitless com- proach and the extent to which this is ft for bination of teaching and learning strate- its purpose in terms of the target audience, gies, and it is essential to keep options as open as possible. Tis fexibility should the purpose and level of the course being form the cornerstone of all planning pro- ofered, as well as the extent to which an cesses. (SAIDE, 2000: iv ) equivalent learning experience is ofered across diferent contexts of learning and Te wealth of possibilities ofered by mixed- practice. A diverse range of ICTs are now mode learning is increasingly being realised available to enable this, including more in- by educational institutions. Tus, due to informal social networking, but they need to creased use of technology the distinction be- be selected and utilised purposefully for tween distance education and face-to-face this potential to be realised. In an insight- delivery is increasingly becoming blurred as ful paper on emergent learning and the af- is the distinction between distance learning fordances of learning ecologies in Web 2.0, and elearning. At the same time, the advent Wiliams, Karousou and Mackness (2011) of information and communication tech- caution: nology and its increasing ubiquity is making it more and more feasible to interact with a although social networking media increase the potential range and scope for course facilitator and with peer learners at emergent learning exponentially, con- a distance, both synchronously and asyn- siderable efort is required to ensure an chronously. Distance education providers efective balance between openness and are increasingly harnessing the afordances constraint. It is possible to manage the of this technology to enhance their teach- relationship between prescriptive and ing and learning processes. So on the one emergent learning, both of which need to hand we have a blurring of boundaries, but be part of an integrated learning ecology. on the other we have a funding and policy (p.39) framework in South Africa that looks set to Notwithstanding the growing mix of modes continue to maintain a distinction for some and methods, the realities of funding in time to come. Te challenge then is where, South Africa in the short to medium term on the continuum of endless possibilities, to as well as a concern to diferentiate provi- draw a line between what constitutes tech- sion in order to address relevant quality nology-mediated contact provision and issues mean that the regulatory framework distance education. SAIDE acknowledges in South Africa will continue to distinguish the complexity at the interface of distance between ‘contact’ and ‘distance’ provision education and technology-supported learn- for the foreseeable future. Tis in turn calls ing, and has developed a grid that serves to for the adoption of a single simple defni- illustrate a number of delivery modes lying tion of ‘distance education’ that will apply

144 Internet Learning

Figure 1: Mapping diferent examples of provision

145 Rethinking Distance in an Era of Online Learning across all statutory and regulatory bodies. learner is that of adjusting to the online Taking cognizance of the fnding from the communication medium, be it used syn- South African Survey of Student Engage- chronously or asynchronously. Tis in- ment (Strydom & Mentz, 2010) that, on cludes concepts and practice surrounding average, undergraduate students in contact teaching and learning interaction, engage- programmes in South Africa spend 40% ment, and facilitation. of their time involved in scheduled cam- Programme design needs to be pus-based activities, for the purposes of this guided by an upfront decision concerning discussion, the term ‘distance education’ the level of mediation that is to be employed therefore refers to all modes of provision, in- in the online component of the course by cluding blended and technology-supported the responsible academic. In addition, large learning provision, in which students spend student numbers would indicate the em- 30% or less of the stated Notional Learning ployment of tutors to manage small virtu- Hours in undergraduate courses at NQF al group online interaction. In the frst in- Levels 5 and 6, and 25% or less in cours- stance, interactions would typically be tutor es at NQF Level 7 and initial post-gradu- to learner, and learner to learner. Howev- ate courses at NQF Level 8, in staf-led and er, the online environment ofers greater conventional face-to-face, campus-based potential for an expanded environment, structured learning activities. including with expertise residing outside Within this framework, “distance of the institution. Figure 2 illustrates one education” therefore refers to practices to- model of the many possible interactions. wards the right-hand side of the grid in Fig- Not all aspects of Anderson’s mod- ure 1 in which it is assumed that students el above will necessarily feature in all pro- will rarely, if ever, be in the same time and gramme designs. For example, the de- place as their teacher. Tis has profoundly velopment of simulations and games or diferent implications for student and staf virtual labs is time-consuming and may roles and also for what facilities need to be not be appropriate to all contexts. Howev- put in place and maintained at the extremes er, it does seem to make sense for all pro- of practice, notwithstanding that there may grammes to create opportunities for greater be some programmes converging towards a student-content interaction (through the blended mode of provision. Critical for the design of meaningful activities with auto- current discussion is a consideration of how mated feedback for example); opportunities ICTs are utilised to facilitate active student for student-teacher interaction outside of engagement with the curriculum, to pro- normal ofce hours by email and through vide a wide range of learning support strat- online fora; as well as student-student inter- egies and to enable reliable assessment that action as students can ofen support one an- is consistent with the overall purpose of the other in the learning process and an online programme, without necessarily requiring community of learning can help overcome teachers and students to be in the same the sense of isolation that ofen characteriz- place at the same time. We are thus looking es distance provision. to uses of technology that involve far more Although perhaps more extreme in than simply providing “print behind glass.” Sub-Saharan Africa for a host of historical Probably the most important and perhaps and current reasons, similar challenges re- the most difcult transition to the online/ garding how to teach efectively are evident blended mode for both the instructor and elsewhere as society adapts to the increas-

146 Internet Learning ing availability of and demand for informa- A growing body of literature pro- tion enabled by the ubiquitous availability vides insight into the possible advantages of technology. Laurillard (2002, 2006) sug- and the minimum requirements for inte- gests that there is consequently a need to grating ICTs into learning provision more rethink the way we teach in the new knowl- generally (Simonson, Smaldino, Albright, & edge society including adopting a more pro- Zvacek, 2003) and on the unique opportu- fessional research-based teaching approach nities provided by the online environment in that parallels the professional approach the particular (Anderson & Elloumi, 2004). Te sector has always adopted towards research; literature suggests the need to recognize the placing a greater emphasis on the develop- increased diversity of the potential learners ment of the long-term high-level cognitive and to design with diferent learning needs skills of scholarship and utilising technolo- in mind from the outset (Ehlers, 2004; Da- gy to promote meaningful interaction and vis, 2007; as cited in Moore, 2007), including engagement. the need to address issues of cultural diversi- Expansion of distance education ty (Gunawardena & LaPointe, 2007; as cited provision in higher education is increasing- in Moore, 2007) and make the necessary in- ly being associated with more use of educa- vestment in appropriate curriculum design tional technology for these kinds of reasons. ahead of marketing and registration (Butch- In South Africa, although there is currently er, 2001). It is then necessary to create aware- only one dedicated distance education insti- ness of the nature and demands of distance tution, there has been considerable increase and technology mediated learning prior to in the number of students studying on dis- registration (Simpson, 2004; Davis, 2007; as tance education programmes at predomi- cited in Moore, 2007) and give attention to nantly contact institutions, a process that is the ways in which both tutors and learners supported by evolving policy guidelines for are prepared, monitored and supported in post-schooling provision generally. Te in- an online or technology mediated learning creasing use of ICTs for teaching and learn- environment (McPherson & Nunes, 2004) ing has made it possible for more providers throughout the learning process. Te design to engage students that are not in the same of the learning process may usefully be in- place at the same time, i.e. reach students ‘at formed by an understanding of adult and a distance’. Tis has meant that many insti- possibly self-learning theory (Davis, 2007; tutions/programme that would characterise as cited in Moore, 2007; Hase and Kenyon themselves as contact/face-to-face are of- 2001) and the changing expectations and ten moving into distance provision without preferred learning styles of students (Dede, necessarily making a conscious decision to Dieterle, Clarke, Ketelhut, & Nelson, 2007; as do so. Stakeholder submissions to the re- cited in Moore, 2007) and in particular the search process for the Council on Higher need for interaction, customization and reci- Education report submitted in 2009 empha- procity in learning partnerships (Beldarrain, sised that face-to-face institutions could not 2006). Caplan, Tiessen, and Ambrock (as ignore the wealth of possibilities ofered by cited in Anderson & Elloumi, 2004) point to mixed-mode or blended e-learning (Coun- the need for multi-disciplined teams to de- cil on Higher Education, (2009: 9-14)). Tis velop these kinds of programmes which will was seen to be essential in terms of opening obviously have implications for project man- access and increasing graduate output. agement, time and cost and in turn models a particular form of professional practice.

147 Rethinking Distance in an Era of Online Learning

Figure 2: A model for online learning (Anderson, 2008,61)

148 Internet Learning

Welch, Drew, and Randall (2010) addressed through appropriate use of tech- report on a SAIDE engagement with an nology, but only if the integration of tech- on-line learning process to explore how to nology is designed for the purpose and the train tutors to support distance learning impact on students, staf and systems taken on-line. Tey noted the usefulness of Salm- into account and provided for. on’s (2004) model for structuring a learning Te prominent quality assurer in programme on-line overall and Gunawar- higher education, David Woodhouse (2009) dena et al.’s (2006) Wiscom model for de- identifes key characteristics of distance ed- signing particular learning activities. Tey ucation that ofen pose quality challenges to conclude that, designed appropriately, an providers: on-line course can result in greater engagement and interaction but indicate that the tNPSFTUBLFIPMEFSTPSTJUFTJOWPMWFEJOUIF approach needs to be thought about very creation and delivery of a course or pro- carefully if large-scale provision is required. gramme; Te recruitment, selection, training, moni- tMPOHFSDIBJOTPGDPNNVOJDBUJPO toring and ongoing support of tutors work- tPęFOMBSHFSTDBMF ing with sub-groups of the student popula- tNPSFTFQBSBUFBDUJWJUJFTBOESPMFTUPCFDP- tion becomes a management task in its own ordinated; right and has implications for the ways in tHSFBUFSBENJOJTUSBUJWFOFFET TVDIBTSF- which learning management systems are cord keeping); constructed. Tus a meaningful migration tNPSFEFMFHBUJPOPGBTTFTTNFOUJODPNQF- towards ICT integration involves much tency testing; more than simply making resources avail- t BDIJFWJOH DPOTJTUFODZ PG QSBDUJDF PWFS B able on line. distributed organisation or a collaboratively delivered programme or course; Accreditation of technology- tBEJČFSFOUJOUFSQSFUBUJPOPGXIBUDPOTUJ- enhanced distance education: tutes teaching (for example, in the separa- an international perspective tion of roles in providing learning content and support); tBNPSFDBSFGVMBOEEFMJCFSBUFQSPDFTTPG hilst distance education is gain- planning and development of courses and ing prominence in higher ed- systems than is common for conventional ucation, many challenges are delivery; Wfaced in terms of enhancing the quality of tHSFBUFSJTTVFTPGDSFEJCJMJUZ delivery. Key challenges of distance learn- tDPNQMJDBUJPOTSBJTFECZBUSBOTJUJPOGSPN ers to be addressed by a provider include a largely correspondence-based ODL pro- overcoming the difculty of students shar- gramme to an increasingly on-line system; ing their experiences with other students; t2"QSPDFTTFTUIBUBSFBDDFQUFEBTJOUFHSBM providing opportunities to interact with to the ODL programme provide models for teachers outside of normal hours; providing the assessment of quality in campus-based appropriate and timely interactive learning programmes. materials; making available expert guidance and support in order to derive maxi- mum beneft out of the learning materials. Many of these traditional challenges can be

149 Rethinking Distance in an Era of Online Learning

Implications for the review of elements could be incorporated where ap- distance provision propriate. However, careful consideration should be paid to the pedagogical purpose (the primary driver) of any MM learning n understanding mode of delivery, con- object – this should always be supported by sideration needs to be given not only to the appropriate use of ICTs. the extent of temporal or spatial sepa- When redeveloping materials for Iration of teacher and learner, but also the online delivery, it should not be assumed extent to which digital technology is used to that the activities, assignments and assess- support the teaching and learning in a pro- ment would necessarily be scheduled to gramme. Te fexibility of the temporal di- take place online. Te potential of the new mension in technology-supported teaching environment should be exploited only if and learning provides a great pedagogical and when it is deemed to be relevant and strength. Interaction can either be synchro- appropriate. Te instructions and guidance nous (at the same time) or asynchronous for each activity should be entirely explicit, (with delays). Te asynchronous nature of as this environment will form the learner’s many of the communication and collabo- primary source of reference for their en- ration technologies currently available al- gagement with the course. lows learners to refect and contribute more With regard to online assessment, meaningfully in an online dialogue, thus there are a variety of assignment and ques- developing and improving their critical tion types that are typically supported by thinking skills. virtual learning environments (VLE/LMS). In fully online programmes all in- However, it is important to note that the teractions with staf and students, educa- usual considerations around the validity tional content, learning activities, assess- and security of assessment apply. Te de- ment and support services are integrated ployment of automated online assessment and delivered online. Blended programmes can be used more easily for formative rather with some elements of online participation than summative assessment, unless a proc- could also be digitally supported ofine tored examination venue is utilized, and a e.g. by use of CD/DVDs. In the context of variety of appropriately structured and val- a developing economy, this could alleviate id assessment forms are designed. excessive and expensive downloading of When engaging in a mediated on- multimedia materials. line course, the teacher’s presence is of par- When designing or transforming a amount importance. Learners should also course for online delivery, the presence of be given the opportunity at the beginning the learning pathway becomes more im- of a course to establish their own online portant than ever and needs to be carefully presence and acknowledge other learners as designed and implemented, so that the nav- part of their group embarking on this learn- igation framework for the course is entirely ing experience together. Again, this should clear. be explicitly built in at the design stage. Te potential of the digital medi- Taking into account the fexible na- um should be exploited to the full within ture of materials presentation in an online the constraints of the target teaching and environment, the layout and layering of the learning environment, ICT infrastructure various pedagogical elements requires par- and available budget. Multimedia (MM) ticular attention. Te layering refers to the

150 Internet Learning

information that the student frst sees on are expected to engage, and importantly, the online course landing page; what course an orientation to the pedagogical purpose elements are then available via a hyperlink, within their course. and how they are presented; what activities and assessment are designed to support learning; how these are supported by ICTs; Lecturers/Tutors: should be equipped with and how the learners are to be engaged with the skills to facilitate the course online in the materials, their instructor and each oth- a manner that supports and engages the er, all to be accomplished through making learner in the changed environment. the most of opportunities aforded by the online environment. Te elements of each Extended support team: it should be made section of a landing page would typically explicitly clear to lecturers/tutors and learn- include: the title of the sub-topic; some tex- ers who is available to support them, when tual narrative explaining what the section is those people are available, and what kind about; a clear indication of what the learn- of support can be expected from them, and er is expected to undertake in this section; how they should be contacted. Tis infor- and how they should go about it. In order to mation should be embedded in the start-up keep the landing page uncluttered, the de- information for each programme. In order tail of any resources and activities is avail- to achieve this, good inclusive relationships able via a link. should be developed within the institution between academic and support staf in their People considerations quest to provide an efective online teaching and learning environment. hen embarking on a new mode of delivery for a particular Towards a hierarchy of review course, there are a number of Wadditional elements to be considered in here is a hierarchy in evaluation im- order to promote the success of an online/ plied by the discussion in this sec- blended programme. Ttion: Learners: computer literacy skills should be t'JSTU XFOFFEUPMPPLGPSBDVSSJDVMVNEF- ascertained and any remediation deemed sign that models good teaching and helps necessary should be undertaken prior to students develop the necessary competenc- their engagement with the online course. es for success, regardless of the mode of Of primary importance is the verifcation provision. that each learner has reasonable access to t4FDPOE XFOFFEUPMPPLGPSMFBSOJOHQBUI- the online environment. Tis would in- ways and learning activities that model the clude provision for their device that is to desired approaches to knowledge, learners be used to access their course, as well as and technology usage within a distance regular internet access at a reasonable cost. context of diverse and geographically dis- Tey should also be provided with a brief tributed students. orientation to their online environment tćJSE XFUIFOOFFEUPFTUBCMJTIXIFUIFS that would include a training session in the most appropriate technologies are used order for them to explore the features and in the ways most appropriate to the learning functions of the sofware with which they intention, taking cognizance of the technol- 151 Rethinking Distance in an Era of Online Learning

ogy profle of the leaners, their teachers, development guide. Retrieved from http:// and their contexts of practice. www.saide.org.za/unesco/unit%2010.htm. Council on Higher Education (CHE). Acknowledgements (2007). Higher education monitor No. 6: A case for improving teaching and learning in he ideas explored here have been South African higher education. Pretoria: the subject of ongoing debate with- CHE. in SAIDE. Te authors acknowledge Twith thanks the contributions of our col- CHEA. (2002). Accreditation and assuring leagues to these discussions and this paper: quality in distance education. Washington, Alice Barlow-Zambodla, Maryla Bialo- DC: CHEA. brzceska, Sheila Drew, Grieg Krull, Jenny Louw, Brenda Mallinson, Ephraim Mhlan- Davis, J.D. (2007). Developing text for web- ga, Catherine Ngugi, Rebecca Pursell, and based instruction. In M.G. Moore (Ed.), Tessa Welch. Handbook of distance education (2nd ed.) (pp. 285-294). New Jersey & London: Law- References rence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers..

Anderson, T. (2008). Te theory and prac- Dede, C., Dieterle, E., Clarke, J., Ketelhut, tice of online learning (2nd ed.). Athabasca: D. J., & Nelson, B. (2007). Media-based Athabasca University Press. learning styles. In M. G. Moore (Ed.), Handbook of distance education (2nd ed.) Anderson, T., & Elloumi, F. (Eds.). (2004). (pp. 339-352). New Jersey & London: Law- Teory and practice of online learning. rence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers. Athabasca: Athabasca University. Evans, T., & Pauling, B. (2010). Te future Beldarrain, Y. (2006). Distance education of distance education: Reformed, scrapped trends: Integrating new technologies to fos- or recycled in Cleveland-Innes. In M. F. & ter student interaction and collaboration. D.R. Garrison, (Eds). An introduction to Distance Education, 22(2), 139-153. distance education: Understanding teaching and learning in a new era. Abingdon Berge, Z. (2000). New roles for learners and New York: Routledge. and teachers in online higher education. Baltimore: University of Maryland System, Gunawardena, C.N., Oretgano-Layne, L., UMBC. Retrieved from its.fvtc.edu/langan/ Carabajal, K., Frechette, C., Lindemann, BB6/BergeZane2000.pdf. K., & Jennings, B. (2006). New model, new strategies: Instructional design for build- Burbules, N.C., & Callister, T.A. (1996). ing online wisdom communities. Distance Knowledge at the crossroads: some alterna- Education, 27(2), 217-232. tive futures of hypertext learning environments. Educational Teory. 1, 23-50. Gunawardena, C.N., & LaPointe, D. (2007). Cultural dynamics of online learning. In Butcher, N. (2001). Online learning: Possi- M.G. Moore (Ed.), Handbook of distance bilities and pitfalls in unit 10: Developing education (2nd ed.). New Jersey & London: online materials. UNICCO online course Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers. 152 Internet Learning

Hase, S. & Kenyon, C. (2001. From an- Oliver, R. (1999). On-line teaching and dragogy to heutagogy. Retrieved from learning: New roles for participants. Re- http://www.psy.gla.ac.uk/~steve/pr/Heut- trieved from http://www.monash.edu.au/ agogy.html. groups/ft/1999/online.html

Khan, S. (2012). Te one world school Plomp, T. (1999). Higher education for the house: Education reimagined. London: 21st century and the potential of ICT. In Hodder & Stoughton Ltd. H.W. Maltha J.F. Gerrissen, and W. Veen (Eds.). Te means and the ends: ICT and Laurillard, D. (2007). Rethinking univer- third world education. Amsterdam: Nufc. sity teaching: A conversational framework for the efective use of learning technolo- Richardson, W.U.D. (2013). Why school? gies (2nd ed.). London: Routledge Falmer. New York: TED Books.

Laurillard, D. (2006). E-learning in higher Salmon, G. (2004). Te fve stage model education. In P. Ashwin (Ed.) Changing (2nd ed.). London: Routledge. Retrieved Higher Education: Te Development of from http://www.atimod.com/e-moderat- Learning and Teaching. (pp. 1-12). Lon- ing/5stage.shtml don: Routledge. SAIDE. 2006. Appendix 2. Quality assur- Mays, T. (2004). From policy to practice: ance and e-learning project. Te learning an evaluation of the Unisa National Pro- promise of ICTs in the academy: A litera- fessional Diploma in Education from the ture review. Johannesburg: SAIDE. perspective of social critical theory. (Un- published MEd dissertation) Unisa, South SAIDE. (2012). Considering mode of deliv- Africa. ery. Retrieved from http://www.oerafrica. org/design-guide/. Mays, T. (2011). Developing practice: Teaching teachers today for tomorrow. Simpson, O. (2004). Access, retention and US-China Education Review, 1(7). course choice in online, open and distance McPherson, M., & Nunes, M.B. (2004). Te learning. 3rd EDEN Research Conference. role of tutors as an integral part of online Oldenberg. learning support. 3rd EDEN Research Conference, Oldenberg. Strydom, J. F., & Mentz, M. (2010). South African survey of student engagement: Moore, M.G. (1993). Teory of transac- Focusing the student experience on success tional distance. In D. Keegan (Ed.) Te- through student engagement. Pretoria: oretical principles of distance education. CHE. London: Routledge. University of Idaho. (1985). Distance edu- Moore, M.G., & Kearsley, G. (1996). Dis- cation: An overview. Retrieved from http:// tance education: A systems view. Belmont, www.uidaho.edu/eo CA: Wadsworth.

153 Rethinking Distance in an Era of Online Learning

Welch, T., Drew, S., & Randall, C. (2010). What makes the diference? A case study examining online tutoring and tutoring in conventional distance education. (Draf discussion document). Johannesburg: SAIDE.

Williams, R., Karousou, R., and Mackness, J. (2011). Emergent learning and learning ecologies in Web 2.0. International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learn- ing, 12(3), pp.39-58.

Woodhouse, D. (2009). QA for distance and e-learning. Presentation made in Abu Dhab.

154