E-Learning and ITFS: The NASBE Report "Any Time, Any Place, Any Path, Any Pace

NIA-2002 Conference Presentation

Thank you for inviting me to share our work with you. NASBE began its study of e-learning from the vantage point from which most people begin with this topic – a little bit of knowledge and a great deal of hope.

Each one of you works daily with technology and I’m sure see many opportunities and much potential for the expansion of technology in education. For those of us who are not professionally involved with technology the topic is or can appear vast and intimidating Perhaps this is one reason why policymakers are sometimes hesitant to engage in debating the uses and applications of technology. We are mostly learners ourselves and not yet confident about the direction in which we should lead.

However, our public investment continues to grow rapidly as well as public reliance on all that technology can offer. It is the responsibility of professionals like yourselves and policymakers to work together to explore and define e-learning in the market place. We welcome the considerable contribution the private sector has made in moving adoption of technology forward so rapidly. However, we now need to work as partners to ensure that E-learning continues to spread rapidly and equitably, is used well, and strengthens the education system.

Our study involved participants from many areas of the country. Each member brought a different philosophical perspective on education and E-learning. Our ex-officio members:

• U.S. Department of Education
• National School Board Association
• Council of Chief State School Officers
• Florida Learning Alliance

Who shared with us their title of Any Time, any Place, Any Path, and Any Pace, were invaluable to the process. They were particularly engaged in this study because none of their organizations had yet begun this policy/E-learning work either.

Each one of you could add to this page your own e-learning words. I share these lists to illustrate the range of understanding or lack of it for e-learning. The list which begins with expensive learning is one which may be heard in some state legislatures when lawmakers are discussing commitment and investment in e-learning. It illustrates why participation from professionals like yourselves is so valuable. The need to inform debate is critical. Legislators often have little first hand experience with E-learning. When placed against social welfare needs it may be difficult to convince lawmakers that such investments will bring future gains.

The role of e-learning is demonstrated daily in the work you do. The value of E-learning is recognized by those who use it. For too many students however accessing e-learning’s value is still an elusive goal.

In its report on Web Based Education, the Department of Education states "the question is no longer if the Internet can be used to transform learning in new and powerful ways. The Commission has found that it can. It is now time we collectively move the power of the Internet for learning from promise to practice."

Moving from promise to practice doesn’t happen easily. E-learning is a "disruptive technology" in the same way the steam engine "disrupted" sea transportation. The shipping industry never reaped the true benefits of steam power until its ships were totally redesigned, different hulls, no sails, and built of steel, also reluctant sailors had to be retrained. We are now in that transitioning stage. David Thornburgh of the Thornburgh Center has observed "there are many aspects of education for which computers are very poor substitutes for existing methods." On the other hand no book can contain an interactive multimedia program, and no pencil can be used to build a student simulation of an eco-system. The key idea is to keep in mind that the true power of educational technology comes not from replacing things that can be done in other ways but when it is used to do things that couldn’t be done without it.

The change is coming and can be observed in many different ways.

The challenge for the study group was to identify the critical issues to drive discussion to a productive end.

Read each one and comment

An example of these access points is in the questions we ask. Rather than questioning how computers can improve schools, we should ask, how can new technologies enhance learning wherever it happens? Not how can online courses be made to fit within the school schedule and calendar? But how can education leaders assure that students have access to every learning opportunity they need?

Our core message is a simple one, one which I hope you share (slide statement)

The substance of the work has four areas of focus

• Rethinking governance
• Assuring equity
• Delivering services to learners
• Assuring instructional quality

The questions flow from those statements.

In answering the first two questions, we would suggest that all learners will need to be served – that E-learning is about more than K-16 classrooms and that the basic unit is the student. For all students to benefit we need to examine state and local standards to be sure they include "information literacy" and the higher order thinking skills needed to prepare for ubiquitous computing and communication technologies, and an economy based on knowledge and services.

All students need the following e-learning strategies

• They must know how to search for Information
• Determine the information’s creditability and accuracy
• Analyze, organize, and communicate the results

State and local policies need revision to assure that they don’t inhibit E-learning. Seat time requirements, attendance policies and mandated student teacher ratios can impede on-line courses. Age and grade distinctions may also become outdated.

What is the responsibility of the public education system to offer or provide choices to students? Some of us may envision a future in which students are provided with a wide range of educational choices within traditional schools and without. Custom tailored instruction could be delivered by any number of providers. Before such possibilities can be realized there are many interim steps. A few of the policy questions for today’s education systems are:

1. Should school districts grant credit and pay for online courses?
2. ho makes the final decision as to which online courses a school will pay for? The state, the principal, the student?
3. an a diploma be granted for a successful completion of an education program delivered entirely on-line? And by whom?

Additionally, E-learning allows education opportunities across state and national borders, but state and federal policies may create barriers. Some type of nationwide credentialing system may be useful. A system of nationwide accreditation could facilitate quality assurance for Internet based courses and programs. States could collaborate on using common criteria for instructional design, teacher qualifications, student teacher interaction, technical support, assessment, and course evaluation. Some of these discussions have begun. For example, the Southern Regional Education Board uses North Carolina’s quality criteria to review instructional materials. The American Association of School Administrators and the Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development also offers assessments of educational materials.

I would be very interested on your views on these issues and hope you will share your knowledge during the discussion.

Equity has many facets in the arena. We must focus resources on assuring that learners are taught by well-prepared teachers. Issues of teacher preparation and licensure must address standards for technology and knowledge. Future teachers need content based courses in which technology is integrated into the course content. An example of how rapidly technology has expanded is the way broadband is discussed as an equity issue when a moment ago 56K to each school building was considered a good connectivity. Federal E-rate policy has clearly been essential in moving toward equity of access but more needs to be done. The National Center for Education Statistics shows that wealthier schools have 82% of their classrooms connected to the Internet, while high poverty schools (75% or more free and reduced lunch) have only a 60% connection rate.

Communities also need to find ways to provide access to technology during non-school hours for all students and community members. Students with special needs (disability, language, poverty) need specific consideration in planning access and equity for E-learning. Adopting Universal Design for Learning principles for all educational materials, providing for language minority students, and assuring access can prevent the digital divide from growing wider.

As society considers how to deliver E-learning to all learners, we will wrestle with these issues. In addition, to the question about on-line courses we must determine how to expand the availability of a wide range of high quality e-learning resources such as enrichment lessons or units rather than entire courses. Online libraries, access to museum holdings, historical documents and newspaper records are among the resources which students will want to access.

However, with all of these developments no one’s goal is a total dependency on technology

Assuring Instructional Quality demands that we keep these questions consistently in mind. (Restate questions from slide)

Each of these reports is a valuable resource (restate quotes from each) for those who are engaged in these debates.

Our report asks questions rather than providing answers. We suggest directions, but do not feel that there are predetermined solutions. One of the core challenges we all face has been well reported in the local press for the past few days. Arizona, like many states, is facing a budget shortfall. Consequently, funding for higher education is being held at current or reduced levels.

Yesterday’s Arizona Republic reported three areas of direct impact; areas which bear closely on the issues that I have been presenting.

1. Education courses needed to addresses Arizona’s critical teacher shortages are being curtailed.
2. A new degree program in applied computing will not be developed.
3. Technology upgrades to prepare all students for increasingly sophisticated workforce requirements are not taking place. None of this is unique to Arizona.

Critical to expanded E-learning is legislative support. There is no evidence that E-learning can be presented as a cost saving proposition. To be a successful investment is essential – both in infrastructure and in people.

There is no question that E-learning can rapidly and successfully expand access to learning for a wide range of students. However its success relies upon several key elements:

1. Greater attention to national standards of accreditation.
2. Equitable access to broadband technology
3. Availability of trained personnel to create and deploy E-learning.

Lawmakers will invest when they can be assured that access will be broad and equitable and that the material delivered is of value.

There is a role for each one of us to play to stimulate the required policy to make E-learning the success we al believe it can be.

I will close with a quote from Robert Tinker of the Concord Consortium, "We are helping write the script opening scenes of the most dramatic play educators have ever witnessed. Our grand-children will write the final scene and their children will enjoy its impact."