Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
This article was downloaded by: [University of Guelph]On: 06 November 2014, At: 00:00Publisher: RoutledgeInforma Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954Registered office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH,UK
Journal of Teaching in Travel &TourismPublication details, including instructions forauthors and subscription information:http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/wttt20
Creating a Virtual LearningCommunityChristine J. Clements a , James Bürgermeister b ,Joseph Holland c & Prema Monteiro da Department Chair , University of Wisconsin-Stout ,429 HE Building, Menomonie, WI, 54751, USAb University of Wisconsin-Stout , 440 HE Building,Menomonie, WI, 54751, USAc University of Wisconsin-Stout , 441 HE Building,Menomonie, WI, 54751, USAd University of Wisconsin-Stout , 355 HE Building,Menomonie, WI, 54751, USAPublished online: 14 Oct 2008.
To cite this article: Christine J. Clements , James Bürgermeister , Joseph Holland &Prema Monteiro (2001) Creating a Virtual Learning Community, Journal of Teaching inTravel & Tourism, 1:2-3, 73-89, DOI: 10.1300/J172v01n02_05
To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1300/J172v01n02_05
PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE
Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all theinformation (the “Content”) contained in the publications on our platform.However, Taylor & Francis, our agents, and our licensors make norepresentations or warranties whatsoever as to the accuracy, completeness,or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinions and viewsexpressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors, andare not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of theContent should not be relied upon and should be independently verified with
primary sources of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for anylosses, actions, claims, proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages,and other liabilities whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly orindirectly in connection with, in relation to or arising out of the use of theContent.
This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes.Any substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan,sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone isexpressly forbidden. Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found athttp://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Uni
vers
ity o
f G
uelp
h] a
t 00:
00 0
6 N
ovem
ber
2014
Creating a Virtual Learning Community
Christine J. Clements
James Buergermeister
Joseph Holland
Prema Monteiro
SUMMARY. Global learning is critical to world-class hospitality and
tourism programs. However, involvement in truly global learning com-
munities has not until recently been available to most learners. The
Internet has been the vehicle that has supported the creation of global
learning communities. UW-Stout has maximized distance technologies
to create learning opportunities for students around the world. This arti-
cle summarizes the evolution of the Master’s program, presents key as-
pects of the curriculum development, discusses technologies utilized to
support the learning environment, and shares evaluation information.
Lessons learned will also be shared to assist those beginning their jour-
ney into on-line learning in a global environment. [Article copies avail-able for a fee from The Haworth Document Delivery Service: 1-800-342-9678.
Christine J. Clements is Department Chair, University of Wisconsin-Stout, 429 HEBuilding, Menomonie, WI 54751 (E-mail: [email protected]).
James Buergermeister is Professor, University of Wisconsin-Stout, 440 HE Build-ing, Menomonie, WI 54751 (E-mail: [email protected]).
Joseph Holland is Professor, University of Wisconsin-Stout, 441 HE Building,Menomonie, WI 54751 (E-mail: [email protected]).
Prema Monteiro is Graduate Assistant, University of Wisconsin-Stout, 355 HEBuilding, Menomonie, WI 54751 (E-mail: [email protected]).
Address correspondence to Christine J. Clements.
[Haworth co-indexing entry note]: “Creating a Virtual Learning Community.” Clements, Christine J. et al.
Co-published simultaneously in Journal of Teaching in Travel & Tourism (The Haworth Hospitality Press, an
imprint of The Haworth Press, Inc.) Vol. 1, No. 2/3, 2001, pp. 73-89; and: The Internet and Travel and Tour-
ism Education (ed: Gary Williams, William Chernish, and Bob McKercher) The Haworth Hospitality Press,
an imprint of The Haworth Press, Inc., 2001, pp. 73-89. Single or multiple copies of this article are available
for a fee from The Haworth Document Delivery Service [1-800-342-9678, 9:00 a.m. - 5:00 p.m. (EST). E-mail
address: [email protected]].
2001 by The Haworth Press, Inc. All rights reserved. 73
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Uni
vers
ity o
f G
uelp
h] a
t 00:
00 0
6 N
ovem
ber
2014
E-mail address: <[email protected]> Website: <http://www.HaworthPress.
com> © 2001 by The Haworth Press, Inc. All rights reserved.]
KEYWORDS. Education, virtual community, Internet, international
partnership
INTRODUCTION
Global learning is critical to world-class hospitality and tourism pro-grams. However, involvement in truly global learning communities hasnot until recently been available to most learners. The Internet has beenthe vehicle that has made access to global communities possible. TheInternet and the World Wide Web provide the means of delivering in-struction and in doing so have prompted the creation of the concept ofasynchronous teaching and learning (Lian, 1997).
“The notion of community has been at the heart of the Internet sinceits inception” (Armstrong, 1996, p. 134). Scientists have used theInternet to share data and collaborate on research. In essence they areusing virtual communities. Virtual communities exist when individualsare allowed to come together electronically without the barriers of placeor time. These virtual communities exist to meet a variety of needs.Based on the needs they meet, they are referred to as communities of re-lationship, communities of fantasy, communities of transaction andcommunities of interest (Armstrong, 1996).
Those interested in expanding their learning opportunities will seekout learning communities. Learning communities are decentralizedlearners who are networked to form a community. They are less de-pendent upon common space and the old formula for public education(Ohler, 1991). Why do users look to nontraditional methods of learningsuch as Internet based learning and seek out these learning communi-ties? Ohler (1991) identified several reasons:
1. To overcome geographic isolation.2. To avoid or reinforce specific content.3. To avoid social influences.4. To experience or avoid certain learning dynamics.5. To overcome a disability.6. To avoid having to abandon a life-style or culture.7. To resolve a schedule conflict.
74 THE INTERNET AND TRAVEL AND TOURISM EDUCATION
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Uni
vers
ity o
f G
uelp
h] a
t 00:
00 0
6 N
ovem
ber
2014
8. To overcome low performance in traditional settings.9. To learn in a more global context.
10. The media is motivational.11. To take advantage of a world of experts and resources that only
media can provide.
Creating a learning community begins with an understanding of theusers. This paper will discuss the process of developing virtual learningcommunities, starting with identification of needs through communityimplementation. It will integrate the literature with lessons learnedthrough the launch of an entirely on-line master’s degree program.
BACKGROUND OF PROGRAM
The University of Wisconsin-Stout has maximized distance technol-ogies to create learning opportunities for students from around theworld. The Hospitality and Tourism department has developed coursesfor the last five years utilizing the Lotus Notes™ platform and an appli-cation called LearningSpace™. In the fall of 1999 the departmentlaunched an entirely on-line Master of Science degree in Global Hospi-tality Management.
This program was the result of a global partnership involving educa-tional institutions and industry leaders in the United Kingdom, Ger-many, and the United States. Partners were sought who would help toglobalize the program and who had demonstrated the vision to embracechange. The University of Wisconsin-Whitewater was selected becauseof their track record with an on-line Master of Business Administrationprogram. Oxford Brookes University, U.K. contributed an internationalreputation in hospitality and tourism education and experience inon-line delivery. The Nottingham Trent Business College has one of thebest Master of Business Administration programs in the United King-dom and had begun to work together with UW-Stout in designing andteaching on-line. Paderborn University in Germany was chosen as aneducational partner because of their technical expertise and for their in-terest in developing a successful model that could be transferred toother programs at other universities. Marriott Corporation Internationaland IBM were involved in the development as business partners. Thebusiness partners aided in the identification of core curriculum compo-nents and input into technology usage so that the needs of potential us-ers would be met.
Clements et al. 75
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Uni
vers
ity o
f G
uelp
h] a
t 00:
00 0
6 N
ovem
ber
2014
Partnership development was the first aspect of community building.Professors and administrators from the partner institutions needed tocome together to create the vision for the partnership. Each institutionneeded to think about how the program would enhance their existing of-ferings and how they could contribute to the partnership. This comingtogether was not automatic; rather it was an evolutionary process. Trustand relationships needed to be developed among the partners. Some ofthis relationship building occurred through in-person meetings andsome of it was developed through teleconferences, conference calls andelectronic mail.
Once core curriculum needs were developed the partnership identi-fied who would be responsible for which courses. The teams of learningfacilitators were identified for each course. Learning facilitator teamswere comprised of an U.S. and non-U.S. learning facilitator member.This was done to enhance the global perspective and to build human re-sources in a rapidly evolving arena.
All courses were developed on the Lotus Notes™ platform.LearningSpace™ is a set of templates that run on Lotus Domino™ es-pecially designed to enhance instructional delivery. The platform wasselected because of its GroupWare properties. LearningSpace™ sup-ports the vital role of the learning facilitator without demanding thatstudents meet traditional time requirements. LearningSpace™ allowsthe facilitator many design options and complements the teachingmethods already in use, enabling the learning facilitator to expand theirinfluence. LearningSpace™ may be used to enhance traditional courses,or to develop new courses that take place entirely on-line.
LearningSpace™ technology allows collaborative classroom activ-ity and individual study to take place at desktops located anywhere inthe world at times convenient to the user. Work time, family obligationsand education are no longer mutually exclusive activities. By removingthe time and place barriers, learners can participate in learning activitiesat their convenience.
Extensive training was provided for all learning facilitators. It wasdesigned to assist learning facilitators in making the transition from tra-ditional delivery mechanisms to the new on-line method. While somerefer to the development process as a conversion of teaching materials,this partnership found it to be a total re-design. Learning facilitatorsneeded to analyze the true needs of the users and then re-think the peda-gogical aspects of on-line learning. Training for learning facilitatorstook a variety of formats and covered a variety of topics from the adultlearner, to collaborative learning, to pedagogical issues. Technology
76 THE INTERNET AND TRAVEL AND TOURISM EDUCATION
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Uni
vers
ity o
f G
uelp
h] a
t 00:
00 0
6 N
ovem
ber
2014
was perceived as a medium to facilitate learning and thus was presentedlast.
The development process consisted of learning facilitators identify-ing objectives for each module of learning and then outlining the in-structional activities needed for the users to achieve the necessaryoutcomes. Evaluation activities were also identified for each module.Once the learning facilitator team had outlined the key aspects, teams ofgraduate students loaded the necessary components within LearningSpace. The on-line course development worksheet (Table 1) served as atemplate for the Graduate students who loaded each of the databases. Italso provided the learning facilitator with a good overview of the designof the course.
A university instructional designer was also part of the team. Basicdesign principles were identified by the partnership before developmentbegan. The overall philosophy of active learning was also endorsed bythe partnership.
Designing and developing courses for asynchronous delivery wherelearning is fostered among a community of learners requires a new ap-proach to instructional design. It requires knowledge of new media, un-derstanding of anytime-anywhere collaboration, and an understandingof how to utilize individual and team collaboration for different coursecontent. In order for the student to experience a virtual environment thatallows for an electronic personality to emerge, the following elementsmust manifest themselves:
The ability to carry on an internal dialogue to formulate responsesThe need for privacy in terms of space to communicateThe ability to deal with emotional issues in textual/written formThe ability to create a mental picture of a partner in the communi-cation processThe ability to create a sense of presence (Palloff & Pratt, 1999,p. 119-120)
Once the courses were developed the partnership was involved inevaluating the courses. Courses were evaluated for appropriate contentand for appropriate design. Faculties from the entire partnership wereasked to review the courses. Industry representatives were also asked toevaluate the courses so that the learners could achieve the competenciesneeded to advance in the industry. Graduate research assistants werealso utilized to pilot the courses and worked through each of the learn-ing modules to ensure that the materials and learning processes are
Clements et al. 77
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Uni
vers
ity o
f G
uelp
h] a
t 00:
00 0
6 N
ovem
ber
2014
TA
BLE
1.S
ampl
eO
n-Li
neC
ours
eD
evel
opm
entW
orks
heet
Issu
esC
ours
e6/
8/99
Mod
ule
Top
icO
bjec
tives
upon
com
plet
ion
the
stud
ents
will
beab
leto
:
Ass
ignm
ent
Met
hods
(How
stud
ents
will
mee
tobj
ectiv
es)
Eva
luat
ion/
Not
es
Tw
oT
heho
spita
lity
and
tour
ism
indu
stry
(Wee
kO
ne)
�D
iscu
sssi
ze,g
row
th,
geog
raph
icdi
strib
utio
n,an
dtr
avel
dete
rmin
ants
ofth
eto
uris
min
dust
ry.
�A
cces
ssi
tes
that
prov
ide
curr
entd
ata
onth
eto
uris
min
dust
ry.
Vis
iton
-line
site
s.
Art
icle
criti
que.
Exp
lore
Ebs
coho
stda
taba
se.
Pow
erP
oint
pres
enta
tion
with
audi
o.
Inte
rnet
links
:
htt
p:/
/ww
w.t
ia.o
rg/p
ress/f
astf
acts
8.s
tm
htt
p:/
/ww
w.t
rave
lwis
co
nsin
.co
m/
ag
en
cy/h
tm/w
ivis
ito
r.h
tm
Inte
rvie
ww
ithin
dust
ryre
p(s)
.
Indu
stry
inte
rvie
w
Per
sona
lDev
elop
men
tP
ortfo
lio–P
DP
:R
efle
cton
your
prop
erty
aspa
rtof
the
larg
erto
uris
msy
stem
.Wha
tre
latio
nshi
psor
influ
ence
son
your
orga
niza
tion
have
you
beco
me
awar
eof
?P
leas
epr
ovid
ean
exam
ple,
expl
ain
and
begi
nto
iden
tify
the
impl
icat
ions
.
Thr
ee
Glo
baliz
atio
n
(Wee
kT
wo)
�D
iscu
ssva
rious
pers
pect
ives
ongl
obal
izat
ion.
�A
naly
zeho
wgl
obal
izat
ion
impa
cts
thei
ror
gani
zatio
n.
�E
xam
ine
the
impa
cts
glob
aliz
atio
nha
son
hosp
italit
yor
gani
zatio
ns.
�In
terp
rett
hedi
ffere
ntcu
ltura
land
inst
itutio
nala
ttrib
utes
ofgl
obal
mar
kets
.
Stu
dyin
tern
etlin
kson
glob
aliz
atio
n.
http
://w
ww
.hot
el-
onlin
e.c
om
/Neo/T
rends/A
nders
en/
glo
ba
l.h
tml(H
ospi
talit
y&
glob
aliz
atio
n***
****
***)
htt
p:/
/ww
w.g
lob
aliz
e.o
rg/
Cou
rser
oom
disc
ussi
on.
Pow
erP
oint
Pre
sent
atio
nw
ithA
udio
.
Exp
lore
Inte
rnet
site
s.
Rev
iew
Que
stio
ns.
PD
P–
Ref
lect
onne
win
sigh
tsyo
uha
vega
ined
rega
rdin
gth
eim
pact
ofgl
obal
izat
ion
onyo
u,yo
uror
gani
zatio
nan
dth
ein
dust
ry.
78
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Uni
vers
ity o
f G
uelp
h] a
t 00:
00 0
6 N
ovem
ber
2014
user friendly and that the material aided students in achieving the neces-sary outcomes.
The first cohort group of on-line Master’s students started in the fallof 1999. It consisted of working hospitality and tourism professionalsfrom the United States. It is hoped through expanded marketing effortsthat future cohort groups will be more global in their composition. Thefirst cohort group consisted of 15 individuals who were all currentlyworking in industry. The learners had anywhere from 5 to 15 years ofindustry experience. Two members of the group were educators cur-rently working in two-year hospitality management programs. The re-maining group worked in a variety of jobs from foodservice operations,hotels and group incentive travel. Most of the learners held a bachelor’sdegree in hospitality and tourism management. The students progressthrough the courses as a cohort group. Each course is weighted at threecredits and is six weeks in duration. Courses are separated by afour-week break to allow the students to maintain balance in their workenvironment.
CREATING COMMUNITY
Much of the research discusses the technological aspects of on-linelearning, but there is little information on the learning experience itself.Critical to effective on-line learning is the ability to create a sense ofcommunity. Traditionally, community was place-based; it included thetown or neighborhood where you lived. Adherence to the norms of thatcommunity sustained membership to that community. Cyberspace haschanged this definition of community (Palloff & Pratt, 1999).
Creating a sense of community is critical to the development of a richlearning environment where there is interaction among students, learn-ing facilitators, and learning resources. Carolyn Shaffer and KristinAnundsen (1993) talk about our human yearning for a sense of belong-ing, kinship, and connection to a greater purpose. They define commu-nity as a dynamic whole that emerges when a group of people sharecommon practices, are interdependent, make decisions jointly, identifythemselves with something larger than the sum of their individual rela-tionships, and make a commitment to well-being.
Collaboration is key to maximizing the learning that occurs in alearning community. Students work together to solve problems and ex-plore concepts. For many students this transition is very difficult. Theycannot separate collaborative activities from individual activities such
Clements et al. 79
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Uni
vers
ity o
f G
uelp
h] a
t 00:
00 0
6 N
ovem
ber
2014
as assessments. Students also have trouble collaborating asynchron-ously. They can understand getting together as a group and discussingcourse material, but find it difficult to participate in an asynchronousenvironment. Overall, students cite the technological features of theircourses as distracters from satisfaction; students must come to view thedelivery mechanisms as ways to ensure convenience and interaction.This also implies design considerations for the learning facilitator. Theymust create environments where students can develop collaborativeskills and where they are rewarded for collaborative activities. The utili-zation of synchronous activities into the asynchronous delivery mayalso be critical to overcoming these potential barriers. Anecdotal obser-vations suggest this is a key component of the Asynchronous LearningNetwork (ALN) environment.
Asynchronous learning when designed appropriately can result in aninteractive learning environment, which may be more effective than thetraditional classroom. In a traditional class, where the students are faceto face with the instructor, many of the learning tools are passive. Whena student is presented with a handout or an instructor indicates resourcesfor research, during the “teachable moment” the tool is passive. The in-structor expects the student to look up the resource or browse the weboutside of class to continue class discussion. Many times this does notoccur because other classes or activities interfere. In an asynchronouscourse, these resources can be imbedded into the delivery activity andthe student experiences them at a critical time in their learning.
The social-psychological literature also describes group develop-ment. The development of community follows a similar process. Thestages are typically referred as forming, norming, storming, and per-forming (Tuckman, 1965). These become important concepts as com-munities are developed in a virtual environment. It means that attentionneeds to be paid to developing a sense of community within the group ofparticipants in order for the learning process to be successful. The learn-ing community becomes the vehicle through which learning occurs on-line. Without the support and participation of the learning community,there is no on-line course.
The UW-Stout program laid the foundation for this sense of commu-nity through an in-person orientation. Not all programs require aface-to-face meeting. Shaffer and Anundsen (1993) indicate that a com-munity can create its norms entirely on-line and that by putting them inprint may serve a better foundation than norms established through anin-person meeting. In-person norm establishment is sometimes basedon oral discussions and assumptions by participants, which may not re-
80 THE INTERNET AND TRAVEL AND TOURISM EDUCATION
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Uni
vers
ity o
f G
uelp
h] a
t 00:
00 0
6 N
ovem
ber
2014
flect reality. Despite this the UW-Stout team felt that an orientation wascritical to the success of the learners. Following the recommendationsof Schweizer (1999) the UW-Stout team held an on-site meeting. Stu-dents came to the campus for an introductory face-to-face meeting be-fore they started meeting on-line (1999). Data also shows the successrate of those who attended the in-person orientation is greater than thosewho did not.
The initial in-person orientation consisted of a three-day program. Thesession began with team building activities. The group activities were de-signed to help the learners get to know each other and to begin to build alevel of trust and group commitment. The activities included icebreakers,which gave participants the opportunity to introduce themselves, andthen ropes-based activities that encouraged group interdependence.
As the group consisted of non-traditional adult learners, a portion ofthe program was also devoted to “return to learning” activities. This ses-sion was designed to help the learners reacquaint themselves with aca-demic learning.
A mentoring program was designed whereby students selected indi-viduals to serve as mentors. The group identified the importance andneed for an on-going relationship between the students and learning fa-cilitator. The students had lunch with their mentors during the in-personorientation. The mentors also contact the students on a regular basis tohelp them feel connected to the university.
While it was essential to creating a sense of community for students,it was also critical to create a learning community among the partner-ship. This is an evolving process that has included in-person meetings,teleconferences, and electronic mail. Another Lotus Notes™ applica-tion called Espresso™ is being used to allow the group to communicatemore effectively and to more openly share learning resources.
Shared Responsibility, Roles and Participation
The on-line learning environment requires a sharing of the responsi-bilities related to learning. The faculties become designers and facilita-tors of learning environments. The learners become self-motivated andacknowledge commitment to their learning as well as the learning ofothers.
The strength of the UW-Stout program is that courses are teamtaught, utilizing one U.S. professor and one non-U.S. professor. For ex-ample the first course was team taught by UW-Stout and by Ox-ford-Brookes University in the U.K. The team teaching approach adds a
Clements et al. 81
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Uni
vers
ity o
f G
uelp
h] a
t 00:
00 0
6 N
ovem
ber
2014
global perspective to the course. The interchange between learning fa-cilitators as they design courses has also been a very healthy process,one in which the quality of courses has improved significantly. None-theless, team teaching is not an innate skill for most professors. Manyprofessors are used to developing and teaching autonomously. Thus,collaboration has been a skill that the team continues to develop.
The role of learning facilitator and learners are also changing. Thischange requires skills different to those of traditional delivery modes.As Kettner-Polley (1999) pointed out, an effective classroom professoris not necessarily a good on-line professor. It takes a different set of in-terpersonal skills. Thus, success in traditional teaching environmentsdoes not guarantee success on-line.
Further, the on-line learning facilitator plays a greater role in the pro-vision of services to students. The on-line students will not have thesame access to student services as the on-campus students. Thus, theon-line learning facilitators will find themselves assisting students witha wide array of issues. They will make referrals to financial aid, reviewprocedures for textbooks or remote library access. While these activi-ties are time consuming, in many cases it enhances the relationship withthe students. It shows that the learning facilitator is committed to thestudents overall success.
The UW-Stout program has provided extensive training to the part-nership learning facilitators. It has focused on the needs of the users andhow course design can help the learners meet their goals. On-line facili-tation is also discussed. Learning facilitator confidence in on-line learn-ing is growing. However, the challenge of providing support servicesfor on-line learners remains. University infrastructure must providesupport for learners away from campus. This includes delivery infra-structure and a seamless system to support activities such as library ac-cess, financial aid, and student registration.
Just as the role of learning facilitator has changed with on-line learn-ing, so too has the role of the learners. White and Weight (2000) help usto better understand on-line learners. They are typically characterizedas:
1. Individuals who take command of their learning and master morethings than those who rely on being taught.
2. Working adults who learn differently than children. They have adifferent sense of what’s worth learning.
3. Learners who look to tailor learning for themselves, not just acceptsomething that is ready-made.
82 THE INTERNET AND TRAVEL AND TOURISM EDUCATION
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Uni
vers
ity o
f G
uelp
h] a
t 00:
00 0
6 N
ovem
ber
2014
4. Adult learners whose life–work, leisure, personal relationships,community activities–has the power to enhance the learning expe-rience.
Thus, it became apparent to the UW Stout team that a key character-istic of a successful on-line learner is “taking responsibility for learn-ing.” Many of the learners are typically adults who are returning toeducation to qualify for a promotion or to prepare for a new job. Theseadult learners have busy lives and are typically juggling work and per-sonal responsibilities. They will be looking for “value-added” learningthat builds on their knowledge and skill base. On-line learning will pro-vide a learning opportunity for those who do not have access to the tra-ditional classroom experience. It is not easier than the traditionalenvironment; rather, it involves a higher level of commitment.
The asynchronous learning network relies on collaborative learning.Students work together to solve problems and explore concepts. Formany students this is a difficult transition. They cannot separate collab-orative activities from individual activities such as assessments. Stu-dents may also have trouble collaborating asynchronously. They canunderstand getting together as a group and discussing course material,but find it difficult to participate in an asynchronous environment.Nonetheless, the interactive learning potential is critical to on-linelearning. The learner can actively engage in their learning. Resourcescan be embedded into the delivery activity and the student experiencesthem at a critical time in their learning.
Communication–The Core of the Learning Community
Central to creating sound relationships is effective communication.Communication and facilitation of the classroom or work groups is a bitdifferent on-line than it is in a traditional setting. In some ways facilita-tion may be more effective on-line (White & Weight, 2000).
In a traditional setting preconceived notions may influence a discus-sion. In an on-line environment it is not possible to judge someone ontheir accent, race or the way they dress. This is a benefit for those whowere previously not heard from in the classroom.
However, discussion does not occur unless the course is well de-signed. Appropriate discussion questions need to be utilized to foster aninterchange among students. The learning facilitator also needs to beprepared with probing questions or additional resources if the conceptsare not clear. Incentives for group discussion also foster participation by
Clements et al. 83
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Uni
vers
ity o
f G
uelp
h] a
t 00:
00 0
6 N
ovem
ber
2014
all learners. For example, most courses award points for participation incourse discussions. Points are assigned based on the quantity and qual-ity of participation.
The UW-Stout program in-person orientation has also been found tohave a significant impact on course discussion. The orientation creates asense of team and thus the students feel a responsibility to each other.This results in participants wanting to contribute as well as classmateswilling to pressure others into sharing their ideas.
Asynchronous dialogue allows students to think about and even re-search a response before submitting it to a public discussion. This is es-pecially appealing to the introverted student who may not share theirideas in a traditional classroom. The problem of one student dominatingthe discussion does not typically occur in an on-line discussion. Further,students cannot say, “I didn’t get a chance to speak.” All students cancomment on the topic.
Like a traditional setting, the facilitator is responsible for setting themood or climate for the program. The facilitator that shares personal in-formation in an on-line profile is setting a casual tone. The atmosphereestablished at the initiation of the course typically flows through the en-tire course. As a learning facilitator may want to tell a joke in a tradi-tional class, so too will they want to break the ice with the students andlet them know that humor is acceptable.
Additionally, the learning facilitator is responsible for the establish-ment of purpose. The learning facilitator needs to outline the purpose ofthe course and the activities within. Clear communication and an oppor-tunity to ask questions for clarification are essential. Ultimately, thelearners and the learning facilitator need to join together to meet thelearning objectives. The entire community will be learning together.
The UW-Stout program provides students with a variety of commu-nication tools. First, at the initiation of a course, students are asked todevelop an on-line profile. This is where the student shares as much in-formation as they would like about themselves. They may include:background, education, work experience, name, contact informationand other personal data. Students may also include a photo of them-selves. In some cases, students select a nickname so as not to revealtheir true identity. This request for privacy is supported.
The program also recognizes the need for the learners to discussnon-course related topics. For example, they may want to discuss a newjob offer or the addition of a family member. UW-Stout has created aseparate database within the LearningSpace platform where students
84 THE INTERNET AND TRAVEL AND TOURISM EDUCATION
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Uni
vers
ity o
f G
uelp
h] a
t 00:
00 0
6 N
ovem
ber
2014
can do just that. Instructors are not allowed access to this area. It is simi-lar to the on-campus student center.
Informal communication is also encouraged among the students andlearning facilitators. It is common for a learning facilitator to call a stu-dent just to see how things are going. Students will also on occasioncome and visit the learning facilitators. In one situation, a student wascritiquing an article and realized that he could e-mail the author of thearticle to gain a more in-depth understanding of the issue. The studentwas so excited with his success that he picked up the telephone andcalled the instructor. His excitement was communicated by the tone ofhis voice.
There is no doubt, however, that on-line communication needs to bearticulate. Due dates and specific instructions need to be identifiedclearly. Course reviewers of UW-Stout courses analyze directions andcourse content to ensure that the audience will comprehend them. Theinstructor does not have the opportunity to re-word or provide an exam-ple if the student doesn’t understand.
Feedback–Ensuring Effective Communication
A critical component of communication is feedback. Students in anon-line learning environment need to have feedback from the instructor.Just as the learning facilitator does not have body language andnon-verbal language to evaluate satisfaction or dissatisfaction, nor dothe learners. Frequent and consistent feedback to the class and to indi-viduals is important. Feedback may include asking questions, suggest-ing alternative perspectives or extending a learner’s ideas. Hughes andHewson conclude that “the specifics of online learning interaction is anissue often neglected in the rush to embrace the Internet for learning,and therefore, improving upon currently available communication toolsis imperative if the online learning experience is to become a seriousproposition” (p. 54, 1998).
On-line discussions may move along quickly, thus feedback needs tobe timely. The feedback guides the students and shows them that the fa-cilitator is interested in the student as an individual. In the early phasesof a course many student questions center on technical aspects of thecourse. It is imperative that students are given prompt answers to theirtechnical problems.
UW-Stout has established a policy that learning facilitators will getback to the learner in 24 working hours. This policy is effective, butdoes not totally answer the issue of students who may be working on the
Clements et al. 85
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Uni
vers
ity o
f G
uelp
h] a
t 00:
00 0
6 N
ovem
ber
2014
weekends. Technical support from sources other than the learning facil-itator is important. Access to on-line or a telephone support desk is es-sential.
All learning modules conclude with review questions. In some casesthese are objective questions whereby the student is asked to self-assesstheir understanding. Software programs like Question Mark are utilizedso that the learners can evaluate their progress upon completing a prac-tice and review session. The technology provides immediate feedbackto the student. The feedback includes a rationale for the correct answerand an explanation as to why answers are incorrect. Students can thenindependently review material they did not understand.
Another feedback tool is the Personal Development Portfolio (PDP),which is utilized for most courses. The learning facilitator directs thePDP by placing a probing question at the conclusion of each module.The question may ask the learner to apply the information to their workenvironment or to apply the content to the big picture. Sometimes thestudent will be asked to reflect on their achievement of the module ob-jectives. If the objectives were not attained, the learner is asked to thinkof ways to achieve them. Thus, the PDP provides the student with an op-portunity to evaluate their learning and also provides the learning facili-tator with a barometer of the student’s progress. The PDP can beutilized to expand an on-line discussion or to ask students to review aconcept that may not have been understood.
LEARNING FROM THE PAST . . .MOVING INTO THE FUTURE
Exploration of the world of ALN has certainly been a journey, but inmany ways the journey is far from over. Many issues need to be ex-plored further and systems need to be developed to make ALN sustain-able long-term. These issues will be summarized by analyzing thelearner and learning facilitator perspectives.
This sustainable system will consist of several key components.First, knowledge needs to be gained through the learning experience.Questions to ask will include is the learning meaningful and can it beapplied to the work environment. This may be referred to as actionlearning. In order to achieve this learning facilitators will need to stay intouch with the needs of the users. Feedback will need to be monitoredon a regular basis. Learning facilitators will also need to continue tobuild and develop their skills in course design that will foster the needed
86 THE INTERNET AND TRAVEL AND TOURISM EDUCATION
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Uni
vers
ity o
f G
uelp
h] a
t 00:
00 0
6 N
ovem
ber
2014
action learning. The electronic environment is very conducive to re-ceiving feedback on a continual basis. Learning facilitators will need tolearn how to use the feature and to integrate results into course design.
Second learners need to feel a part of the learning environment. Theyneed to take responsibility for their learning. This can be supported by acourse design that is non-threatening, highly supportive and encourageslearners to take risks and to be creative. These well-designed interactivelearning environments have powerful and positive effects on self-es-teem and can foster a collaborative environment. Further, relationshipscan be built through orientation meetings and the use of mentors whowill support the learners on their learning journey.
Third, access to learning needs to be convenient and hassle-free.Learners need to be able to communicate easily within the learningcommunity. This means that institutions will need to stay in touch withthe latest technologies and maintain sufficient network infrastructure.Further, systems will need to be developed and maintained to meet rap-idly changing customer needs. Experience shows that providing an effi-cient delivery system is as critical to success as course content. And ofcourse this needs to be cost effective to the learner. The learner needs toperceive the savings in time and money in these on-line learning oppor-tunities. Thus, efficient delivery of learning will continue to be a criticaldesign factor.
The learners are obviously key to successful learning communities,however, the perspective of the learning facilitator must also be analyzedin developing these long term systems. Communication, in-person con-tact, human resource development and supporting compensation struc-tures are all key to this discussion. Sustaining the community and itssystems require that learning facilitators are part of a healthy environ-ment supported by their institutions.
Communication among learning facilitators is critical. Several meet-ings have been held to develop strong relationships among key person-nel. The group is now introducing software called Espresso™, wherebyresources can be shared and learning facilitators can have access to anasynchronous chat room. Thus, learning facilitators will be expandingtheir learning opportunities and can build on the experiences of others.
While the technology can support relationships, in-person contact isalso needed. Meetings among learning facilitators are now scheduledon an annual basis. The purpose of the meetings is to evaluate programstrategies and to update and modify future directions. The in-personmeetings are also key to building trust and to foster collaborative prob-lem solving in the world of distance learning.
Clements et al. 87
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Uni
vers
ity o
f G
uelp
h] a
t 00:
00 0
6 N
ovem
ber
2014
Challenges that the partnership is currently dealing with are in thearea of human resource development. It is a challenge for many tradi-tional professors to make the paradigm shift from a disseminator of in-formation to a facilitator and coordinator of learning. The partnershiphas provided a foundation where a strong rapport exists among learningfacilitators so that egos can be put aside and old perspectives and barri-ers to learning can be overcome. Team teaching has aided in overcom-ing these barriers, however that challenge has not been totally solved.Some learning facilitators still prefer to divide the course in half andeach provide leadership on their part. The program continues to conductresearch and provide learning opportunities so that courses can be de-veloped collaboratively and so that learners benefit from the globalknowledge and expertise of more than one learning facilitator. It is how-ever, perceived that compensation structures will need to reinforce theconcept of team teaching before true buy-in takes place.
The adjustment of compensation structures to reward team teachingis only one of the many institutional barriers that need to be addressed.Policies or guidelines need to be developed to address workload issues.Those involved in on-line course delivery are dedicating a significantamount of time into making this transition, yet current workload modelsand retention/promotion models do not give individuals credit for in-vesting in these new forms of learning. Further, internal systems need tobe modified to support the learners engaged in learning on-line. On-lineregistration, financial aid issues, technological support and access to in-structional resources are systems that need to be redesigned in order forthese virtual learning communities to continue to thrive.
Yes, the traditional university learning situation is changing. Globalchange is impacting higher education so that learning is now accessiblefrom any part of the world. Access is greater and it is not just for a selectfew. Higher education however, can only meet the increasing demandthrough collaboration and utilization of effective technologies, whichsupport sustainable learning communities, which are needed for thelearners of today and tomorrow.
REFERENCES
Armstrong, A. (1996). The real value of on-line communities. Harvard Business Re-view, 74 (3), 134-137.
Hughes, C. and Hewson, L. (1998) Online Interactions: Developing a Neglected As-pect of the Virtual Classroom, Educational Technology July-August, 38 (4).
88 THE INTERNET AND TRAVEL AND TOURISM EDUCATION
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Uni
vers
ity o
f G
uelp
h] a
t 00:
00 0
6 N
ovem
ber
2014
Kettner-Polley, R. B. (1999). The making of a virtual professor. ALN Magazine, July1999, 3 (1).
Lian, C. M. (1997). Developing online instruction: One model. Focus on Autism andOther Developmental Disabilities 12 (3), 159-165.
Ohler, J. (1991) Why distance education? Annals of the American Academy of Politi-cal and Social Science 514, 13-22.
Palloff, R. & Pratt, K. (1999). Building learning communities in cyberspace. San Fran-cisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers.
Schweizer, H. (1999). Designing and Teaching An On-line Course. Needham Heights,Ma, Allyn & Bacon.
Shaffer, C. & Anundsen, K. (1993). Creating community anywhere. New York:Jeremy P. Tarcher/Peugee Books.
Tuckman, B. W. (1965). Developmental sequence in small groups. Psychological Bul-letin, June 1965, 384-399.
White, K. W. & Weight, B. H. (2000). The Online Teaching Guide. Needham Heights:Allyn and Bacon.
Clements et al. 89
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Uni
vers
ity o
f G
uelp
h] a
t 00:
00 0
6 N
ovem
ber
2014
