Subject: Kathryn Williams' Comments and Question
From: Farhad Saba, Ph. D. (saba@cts.com)
Date: Tue 23 Nov 1999 - 22:26:03 MET
From: "Farhad Saba, Ph. D." <saba@cts.com> Subject: Kathryn Williams' Comments and Question Date: Tue, 23 Nov 1999 13:26:03 -0800
List address to send message to everyone: ifets-discuss@LISTSERV.READADP.COM
Details of current discussion: http://ifets.ieee.org/discussions/discuss.html
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Kathryn Williams wrote:
Looking back on my secondary school teaching, I wonder if all the students
wanted a reduction in transactional distance. Indeed there is a seed of
worry in my mind that by trying too hard to do the best for my students in
getting to know them and how they thought, I may not have taught some of
them in the way that suited them best.
I look forward to any comments on this, especially regarding differences in
transactional distance for different styles of learning, and for different
maturity levels.
===> Our study (Rick Shearer, senior instructional designer Penn State's
World Campus and I) conducted two years ago, clearly indicated that
transactional distance varies with subject matter. What is of importance
here is to realize that there is no inherent value in reducing or increasing
"transactional distance." Our study showed that it varies in every minute of
instruction. That is the time interval we chose, but had we chosen a smaller
time interval (e.g. 30 seconds) it would have shown fluctuation there too.
The other important point here is that transactional distance in a "dynamic"
(time-based) system is not pre-determined. It is negotiated between the
teacher and the learner as the course of the lesson progresses. In other
words, adjusting transactional distance is not a unilateral decision by the
teacher, the learner has a role in it too.
Furthermore, there is nothing wrong (or right) for teaching a segment of a
course with maximum distance. At the beginning of each session in a f2f or
online session, I usually set the agenda for the class, and ask students to
withhold their questions and comments until the agenda is set. Well, that
means maximum distance, but only for 5 or 10 minutes. We are time-based
creatures, yet we forget that time has something to do with everything we
do. Transactional distance is no exception. It varies with time for each
student, each subject matter, and myriad other variables (perhaps even what
the learner had for breakfast or didn't have, for that matter). The point is
that in teaching and learning being under the same roof is not a criterion
for good education or learning. Once you past that hurdle (my academic
senate is struggling with it as I write these lines), then the question
becomes what else is of importance. The only important point, hereafter, is
to be sensitive to the needs of the learner, but be responsible for s/he
must learn in order to be a good citizen.
Now, let me also say that research on transactional distance is miniscule.
We need many more studies to address important questions that your are
raising. Research is also time consuming and expensive. So, more systems
scientists are needed to carryout more experiments of transactional
distance, before any of these important questions can be addressed. I can
speculate on many issues, but my research partner and I have only taken a
"baby step" by running a few studies in the past few years. New studies are
needed to address the important issues you are have raised.
Thanks
Farhad Saba, Ph. D.
Editor
Distance Education Report
http://www.distance-educator.com
---------------------------------------------------------
Forum website: http://ifets.ieee.org/
Forum's contact person: kinshuk@massey.ac.nz
Info on Join/Leave List: http://ifets.ieee.org/maillist.html
---------------------------------------------------------
This archive was generated by hypermail 2a24 : Tue 23 Nov 1999 - 22:39:56 MET