Distance learners: Connected, mobile and resourceful individuals

Abstract

In recent years the student experience of higher education in general and distance education in particular has been strongly influenced by the wide scale uptake of Internet based learning approaches and an expanding distance education market, amongst many other trends. As competition within the sector increases because of access to the WWW and other in-country socio-political influences, the push to attract and retain students is becoming a key issue for institutions. Understanding the distance student's voice in relation to these trends and developing appropriate responses to ensure a satisfactory learning experience is of critical importance. This paper reports on a recently completed study that explored the distance learners' experience at one dual-mode Australian institution. The paper outlines a rationale for investigating the student voice to meet the unique needs of the distance learner. It describes the approaches that were adopted to undertake the research and discusses some of the main themes that emerged from the study -individualness, connectedness, quality, mobility, and resourcefulness. The paper concludes with considerations for policy and practice in relation to utilising the distance learners' voice in enhancing distance leaners' experiences.

Digital Literacy in Higher Education: The Rhetoric and the Reality

“…Educational resources provided in a digital form underpinned by a digital pedagogy provide students with positive learning experiences, enabling them to study when and where it is convenient to them (Andrews & Tynan, 2012). This flexibility minimises the need to attend scheduled face-to-face lectures and tutorials.…”

“…A further complication in assuming that first year students are homogeneous groups (Prensky, 2001), is that little attention is given to the needs of mature-age or other marginalised groups within these cohorts. Indeed, the Australian context and experience contradicts this assumption of homogeneity, with first year students being represented by diverse demographic and socioeconomic characteristics (Andrews & Tynan, 2012;Conole, 2008;Fitzgerald & Steele, 2008;Kennedy et al, 2009;Wood & Dodd, 2010).…”

“…Andrews and Tynan (2012) argued that the promised improvements to communication and interaction are yet to be achieved. There is a minimal uptake of technologies by lecturers and a general lack of understanding by educators of the potential of digital education technologies in supporting pedagogy (Apperley & Walsh, 2012;Margaryan et al, 2011).…”

“…Without this, students will potentially become disengaged and a barrier between the lecturer and student may be created. Similarly, ensuring that academic staff are provided with appropriate staff development opportunities and incentives to support online learning are imperative to addressing the gap between rhetoric and practice (Andrews & Tynan, 2012). It is envisaged that ongoing professional development in this area will enable educators to gain confidence in using technologies that students find more engaging and relevant (Dahlstrom et al, 2011).…”

Listening to student voices through scenario design: Aligning learning.futures

“…al., 2011) by investing in innovative on-campus learning spaces and by diversifying courses. However, in Australia, students themselves have not been widely consulted in planning for the future of higher education (Romenska et al, 2011) despite the fact that an understanding of the preferred learning futures of students-what Andrews and Tynan (2012) refer to as 'investigating the human voice' (p. 565)-is key to planning for the integration of new technologies into higher education learning and teaching.…”