Many colleges and universities are augmenting their distance-learning programs with telecommunications media. However, there is little guidance available on the mechanics of instructing in a virtual classroom. The objectives of this article are to briefly discuss the history and central issues of distance education, to describe my own experience in teaching an online virtual seminar, and to offer recommendations for future courses.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
BlackwoodH.TrentC. (1968). A comparison of the effectiveness of face-to-face and remote teaching in communicating educational information to adults (Report No. KUJ40615). Manhattan: Kansas State University, Cooperative Extension Service. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 028 324).
2.
BoswellJ. J.MockerD. W.HamlinW. C. (1968). Tele-lecture: An experiment in remote teaching. Adult Leadership, 16, 321–322.
3.
ChristopherG. R. (1982). The Air Force Institute of Technology—The Air Force reaches out through media: Update. In ParkerLOlgrenC. (Eds.), Teleconferencing and electronic communication (pp. 343–344). Madison: University of Wisconsin—Extension, Center for Interactive Programs.
4.
DavisD. J. (1984). Evaluation and comparison of teleconference training with face-to-race training and the effects on attitude and learning. Dissertation Abstracts International, 46. (University Microfilms No. AAC85–0579).
5.
First Class [Computer software]. (1996). Markham, Canada: SoftArc, Inc. Available http://www.softarc.com (phone: 1-800-SOFTARC).
6.
HiltzS. R.TuroffM. (1978). The network nation. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
7.
HoytD. P.FryeD. (1972). The effectiveness of telecommunications as an educational delivery system (Report No. 2G035). Manhattan: Kansas State University. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 070 318).
8.
JohnsonD. W.JohnsonR. T. (1989). Cooperation and competition: Theory and research. Edina, MN: Interaction Book.
9.
KruhJ. (1983). Student evaluation of instructional teleconferencing. In ParkerL.OlgrenC. (Eds.), Teleconferencing and electronic communication (pp. 293–301). Madison: University of Wisconsin—Extension, Center for Interactive Programs.
10.
MooreM. G.ThompsonM. M. (1996). The effects of distance learning: A summary of literature. (Research Monograph No. 2). Athens: Southeastern Ohio Telecommunications Consortium. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No, ED 330 321).
11.
OlaniranB. A. (1996). Group process satisfaction and decision quality in computer-mediated communication: An examination of contingent relations. In CathcartR. S.SamovarL. A.HenmanL. D. (Eds.), Small group communication: Theory & practice (7th ed., pp. 134–146). Dubuque, IA: Brown.
12.
PuzzuoliD. (1970). A study of teaching university extension classes by tele-lecture (Report No. ZJF95175). Morgantown: West Virginia University. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 042 961).
13.
RiceR. E.LoveG. (1987). Electronic emotion: Socioemotional content in a computer-mediated network. Communication Research, 14, 85–108.
14.
SiegelJ.DubrovskyV.KieslerS.McGuireT. W. (1986). Group processes in computer-mediated communication. Organizational Behavior and Human Processes, 37, 157–187.
15.
TullochJ. (1996). Seven principles of good practice in distance learning. In The Olympics of leadership: Overcoming obstacles, balancing skills, taking risks (Report No. JC960325). Phoenix, AZ: Proceedings of the Annual International Conference on the National Community College Chair Academy. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 394 590, pp. 415–420).
16.
ValacichJ. S.ParankaD.GeorgeJ. F.NunamakerJ. F.Jr. (1993). Communication concurrency and the new media: A new dimension for media richness. Communication Research, 20, 249–276.
