The Framework for DIRECTED Online Learning Environments

The Framework for DIRECTEDOnline Learning Environments

Laurie P. DringusSteve Terrell

Nova Southeastern University, Ft. Lauderdale, FL, USA

A steady increase in the development and use of online instructional delivery systems in highereducation institutions is expected to occur over the next few years. Online learning environments(OLEs) will emerge to provide comprehensive support for the process of learning and instruction.Currently, educators and administrators are seeking guidance for conceptualizing and implement-ing OLEs. A framework is needed to represent the essential aspects of OLE development and use,and to address the complex nature of OLEs. This paper offers a definition for OLEs. Also, aframework is presented to support a `̀ directed'' approach to OLEs that provides a basis forplanning, designing, implementing and evaluating OLEs, and for online courses contained withinOLEs. The elements of the framework for DIRECTED OLEs, Delivery, Interaction, Resources,Evaluation, Culture, Technology, Education, and Design, are defined and issues concerning theelements are presented.

Introduction

Within a few short years the Internet has sparked the rapid growth of online learningdelivery systems used to form `̀ cyberschools,'' `̀ online campuses,'' and `̀ electronicclassrooms.'' This movement has driven higher education institutions in particular to theWorld Wide Web to attract students to institutions by offering online courses and degreeprograms. Online instruction is typically delivered via dedicated Web-based hypertextsystems used to store a variety of relevant course information such as syllabi, examplesof student work, class notes, announcements, tutorials, and other information. Suchpractice is quickly becoming a common model for online instruction in an attempt togive learners and faculty convenient access to information that has been traditionallyimparted through face-to-face contact. Along this theme, online instruction as a deliveryparadigm is beginning to be viewed as an alternative or supplement to traditionalclassroom instruction for occasions when physical classroom space may be limited(Dringus & Terrell, 1996). Also, online instruction is being recognized as a convenientmethod by which adult learners can pursue their educational goals without disengage-ment from job commitments or imposing on learners extensive travel to campus

Direct all correspondence to: Dr. Laurie P. Dringus, Nova Southeastern University, School of Computer and

Information Sciences, P.O. Box 290600, Fort Lauderdale, FL 33329-0600. E-mail: [email protected]

55

The Internet and Higher Education 2(1): 55± 67 ISSN: 1096-7516

Copyright D 1999 Elsevier Science Inc. All rights of reproduction in any form reserved.

facilities (Dringus & Terrell, 1996; Scigliano, Levin, & Horne, 1996; Benyon, Stone, &Woodroffe, 1997).

A steady increase of online instruction is expected to occur along with the emergenceof online learning environments (OLEs) that will provide comprehensive support for theprocess of learning and instruction. An OLE is the foundation upon which an effectivelearning environment is conveyed to learners, faculty, and other stakeholders. Thefoundation of an OLE rests on the notion of providing an environment that can bereached at anytime and from any location, and is conducive to supporting quality academiclearning and communication activities. Layered within OLEs are online courses andactivities facilitated by an integration of a variety of appropriate instructional andcommunication technology tools. Online courses become components of a distinct,legitimate, comprehensive and pedagogically meaningful learning environment (Dringus& Terrell, 1998).

Given foreseeable trends in this early era of online instruction, developing acomprehensive definition for OLEs is important. In addition, it is important to identifythe essential elements that comprise OLEs as well as consider the various issues thatpertain to OLE development and use. It is important also to evaluate how OLEs mayinfluence the overall process of online learning and instruction. In this paper, the authorsprovide a definition for OLEs and a framework that serves as a guide for recognizingseveral key elements of OLEs. The issues are explored in a framework, one thatsupports a `̀ directed'' approach to OLEs. The elements of the framework for DIREC-TED OLEs, Delivery, Interaction, Resources, Evaluation, Culture, Technology, Educa-tion, and Design, are defined and issues concerning the elements are presented. TheDIRECTED framework provides a basis for planning, designing, implementing andevaluating OLEs and for online courses contained within OLEs. The framework isintended to be used with existing instructional systems delivery models. The mainobjective of this article is to provide breadth about the range of foundational issuesconnected with OLEs.

Related Background

It is anticipated that OLEs will be used to augment traditional classroom pedagogicpractices and to provide extensibility to the use of educational institution-based Web sites(Dringus, 1995a; Terrell, 1997). While educators are anxious to test the waters of onlineinstruction, often the transition occurs with limited understanding of the unique aspectsthat exist in the online environment that may be different from the traditional classroomenvironment. As an example, the literature has cited case studies and experiences about thenew roles of faculty and learners that emerge in computer-mediated courses (Harasim,Hiltz, Teles, & Turoff, 1995; Neal, 1997, Shotsberger, 1997; McLellan, 1998). In addition,some online instruction practices may not be scalable from what has been practiced in thetraditional classroom paradigm. Some reported problems involving scale of deliveryinclude, for example, time management of learners and faculty (Harasim et al., 1995;Collis & Remmers, 1997), large class sizes (Harasim et al., 1995), courses that are largelylecture-based (Harasim et al., 1995), the use of traditional learning metaphors inonline classrooms (Harasim, Calvert, & Groeneboer, 1997) and the degree to which

DRINGUS AND TERRELL56

online learners are expected to interface with instructors and collaborate with peers(McLellan, 1998).

These problem areas indicate that much is unknown about online instruction as adelivery paradigm. The literature has provided limited theory or conceptual foundationfor distance education (Marsden, 1996), for technology-enhanced student-centeredlearning environments (Hannafin & Land, 1997), or for online instruction inparticular. Marsden noted that distance education as a field acks conceptual coherence,due to general ad hoc organization and mismanagement of distance education effortsand ill-defined problems that are difficult to control. A lack of conceptual coherencecan be associated with online instruction as well. Educators who are new to onlineinstruction are often conceptualizing what online instruction is while they areimplementing their courses. Without readily available literature devoted to theoryand conceptual foundations for online instruction, faculty and learners tend to rely oninformation that is largely limited to prescriptive discussions about the current use andadvantages of online instruction. The limited scope of available information lacksdepth and breadth when describing online instruction as a delivery paradigm. Theresult of a lack of theory or conceptual basis for online instruction may translate toless than optimal online learning experience for learners and faculty, particularlyduring trial and error stages of implementation.

Associated with the lack of conceptual coherence of the online instruction paradigmis the issue of what defines an OLE and how an OLE can be recognized. Generally,online courses have been perceived as `̀ electronic versions'' of traditional classroomcourses taught face-to-face in a physical meeting space (Marsden, 1996). In thetraditional classroom, the `̀ environment'' is recognized by the presence of the campusconsisting of buildings and walls. Courses are self-contained activities perceived tooccur within a structure of buildings and behind walls. What distinguishes an OLE apartfrom a physical structure? What is the structure of an OLE besides the obvious propertyof virtuality? Single online courses often do not support the perception of a distinctlearning environment. The notion of presence is missing in view of campus and/or othereducational entities (e.g., lecture halls, auditoriums, study rooms, etc.) that arerecognizable from the traditional metaphors of learning and instruction. Therefore, itremains unclear about what defines an OLE and how an OLE can be recognized as adistinct entity.

Some authors have offered descriptions of components and foundations for distanceeducation systems. Moore and Kearsley (1996) described a systems approach torecognize the interacting and interdependent set of components that define a distanceeducation system. These components included the variety of processes that containteaching, learning, communications and management in a distance education environ-ment. The authors presented a model of five components for distance education: sources,design, delivery, interaction and the learning environment. These components alsocontained subsystems that include issues of instructional design. Similarly, Hannafinand Land (1997) described five foundations for a technology-enhanced student-centeredlearning environment: psychological, pedagogical, technological, cultural and pragmatic.Hannafin and Land identified foundations and underlying assumptions common acrossstudent-centered designs. Computer-mediated learning environments were identified andincluded as an example of a student-centered design.

FRAMEWORK FOR DIRECTED OLES 57

A framework is needed also to represent the essential aspects of the development anduse of OLEs. Moore and Kearsley's (1996) systems approach is a start toward consideringessential components for developing distance education programs, but not OLE develop-ment specifically. Hannafin and Land (1997) proposed the need for student-centeredlearning systems that encourage divergent reasoning, problem solving and critical thinkingin learning activities. They presented a generic model that could be supported by a varietyof technology systems, including computer-mediated learning environments. Dringus andTerrell (1996; 1998) specifically discussed the need for a conceptual framework for thedevelopment and use of an OLE. They addressed the need for a framework that first mustsupport learning and teaching styles of learners and faculty, respectively, and meet thetechnical and instructional challenges of online instructional delivery.

A successful framework for OLEs requires several elements to be infused into theinstructional delivery systems lifecycle. The elements of the proposed framework forDIRECTED OLEs (Delivery, Interaction, Resources, Evaluation, Culture, Technology,Education and Design) are highly conceptual in nature. Conceptual as they are, theelements also need to be conveyed through the interface and through various actions ofstakeholders (i.e., faculty, administrators, staff and learners) to produce a comprehensivelearning and communication environment. Before fully exploring the framework forDIRECTED OLEs, a definition of an OLE is offered.

Defining an OLE

We define an OLE as a distinct, pedagogically meaningful and comprehensive online

learning environment by which learners and faculty can participate in the learning and

instructional process at anytime and any place. OLEs manifest a variety of technical tools

that support instructional delivery and communication in online formats. In addition,

dynamic delivery structures are embedded to enhance the instructional, learning and

communication processes taking place.

This definition supports the need for a composite view of an OLE. To explore thedefinition, distinguishing some primary differences between online courses and OLEs isimportant. Currently, online courses can be distinguished by the primary use of a variety oftechnology components or tools. Technology components or tools may include the use ofWeb-based hypertext menus to post course syllabi and other information. Electroniccommunication tools may be used to support electronic classroom meetings and activitiesthrough asynchronous and synchronous communication (e.g., E-mail, bulletin boards, chatsoftware, etc.). Other technology components or tools may include the use of electroniclibraries and research database systems and online tours of external sources of information(e.g., Internet-based businesses, government, educational sites, etc.). Online coursesemerge from the integration and use of one or more of these technology components ortools. Online courses are self-contained course presentations designed by individualinstructors who package typical course material (for example, course syllabi, assignmentsand announcements) in a prearranged computer-mediated format.

When technology components or tools are used separately or in combination, supportfor online instruction is possible. However, the presence of technology components ortools alone does not necessarily result in having established an effective OLE. Thestrategy for supporting self-contained online courses emphasizes the role of independent


or non-directed environments that can stand apart from or exist outside the learningsystem or environment at large. However, online courses are often designed without acomprehensive objective to achieve the design of a distinct and standalone learningenvironment for online instruction (Dringus & Terrell, 1996). Under such condition, theeffectiveness of online learning could be viewed as less than optimal (Dringus & Terrell,1998), particularly when given evidence of ad hoc organization (Marsden, 1996) andextemporaneous management of online courses.

Like typical online course components described above, OLEs manifest a variety oftechnical tools that support instructional delivery and communication in online formats.Yet, OLEs have an extended purpose of offering learners and faculty the ability to focus onthe educational process at large, by providing dynamic delivery structures that promote aneffective learning environment beyond the mere presence of an online course presentation.Dynamic delivery structures are contained within the OLE proper. Examples of deliverystructures may include an extensive set of metaphors that visually and conceptually matchmore traditional resources that reflect a physical campus such as a library, study hall,student discussion hall, orientation room, research lab and help center (Dringus & Terrell,1998). Other examples of delivery structures may include information resources, com-munication, collaborative activities, and other dynamics that learners may want to reach,participate in, or use (Dringus, 1995b). Resmer (1998) described the need for Internetarchitectures for learning in which there are `̀ readily accessible instructional objects thatcan be easily located, aggregated, and customized'' ( p. 105) in learning environments. TheInstructional Management Systems (IMS) project, sponsored by EDUCAUSE, is aimed topromote open specifications for facilitating online activities such as locating and usingeducational content, tracking learner progress, reporting learner performance, and ex-changing student records between administrative systems (Resmer, 1998). The considera-tions of the IMS project are similar to what we describe in this article as dynamic deliverystructures in an OLE. From the OLE, prearranged delivery structures can be drawn to beused in self-contained online courses as needed. Overall, the delivery structures integratedin the OLE are there to promote a deeper sense of awareness that an online campus exists.

Additionally, OLEs support a learner-centered paradigm that focuses on learners asactive players in the learning process. OLEs enable learners to become the center of thelearning experience with readily available support of peers, faculty and administration.The process of learning and communication in OLEs can occur anytime and from anylocation. The idea of classroom shifts an emphasis from perceiving the traditional physicalenvironment as a sole location for learning to occur, to an emphasis toward perceiving acommunication-enriched computing environment that encompasses the world of informa-tion at large.

The Framework for DIRECTED OLEs

By identifying differences between online courses and OLEs, a definition of an OLEhas been proposed. Next, a framework for OLEs is needed to bring together online coursesin a learner-centered environment. The motivation for the framework is derived from therecognition that the use of online communication and instructional tools alone (such asWeb pages, E-mail, conference chat rooms, electronic blackboards, etc.) does notnecessarily lead to a perception of learners and faculty that a distinct OLE exists that


supports learning and communication in an online course. In addition, emulating thetraditional classroom as an instructional paradigm in online form may be difficult toachieve. We view the problem as a lack of a systematic approach to conceptualizing andimplementing OLEs as unique and distinct learning environments.

One way to approach the problem is to recognize that online instruction withoutcareful attention to the broader OLE concepts (such as the elements of the DIRECTEDframework), results in a non-directed approach. It was mentioned earlier, in connectionwith online courses, that the non-directed approach is evident when there is a lack ofobjective to achieve an effective design of a distinct and standalone learning environmentfor online instruction. Non-directed OLEs lack specific purpose and consistency as theyonly promote online courses as independent products of individual faculty member'sefforts. Conversely, the directed approach takes on the overall goal of OLE Ð to offer aconceptual frame of several elements that form an effective and a distinct OLE.

The notion of direction is offered to explore a variety of learning and/or instructionalapproaches that would fit well into online learning scenarios. Direction can imply negativeconnotations in approach as well. For example, an emphasis on structure may be overlylimiting to offer choices about implementations. Instead, we offer the notion of direction,and the directed approach in particular, as a broad perspective to bring to the surface themany issues that port into successful OLEs.

Figure 1. Framework for DIRECTED OLEs


The framework for DIRECTED OLEs is shown in Fig. 1. The proposed framework isintended to identify several key elements that, when fully integrated, support an effectiveonline learner-centered paradigm. Fig. 1 presents a circle at which the OLE is the core ofthe framework. The OLE is essentially formed through successful integration of theelements. On the outer layer of the framework, the elements are presented as disparate andunique categories that also interact with other elements. The connecting line of eachelement to the inner circle indicates the total integration of the elements that represent theOLE proper. Through integration of the elements, the framework for DIRECTED OLEsdistills and defines the formation of the core, which is the OLE itself.

As noted in the introduction, the framework serves as a guide for recognizing severalkey elements of OLEs. The DIRECTED framework supports an iterative process ofplanning, designing, implementing and evaluating OLEs, and for online courses containedwithin OLEs. The framework itself is not an instructional delivery systems model, but is

Table 1. The Framework for DIRECTED OLEs: The Elements and their Definitions

Element Definition

Delivery A process of presenting and maintaining an Online Learning Environment. Delivery consists of acontinuum of instructional, managerial, and technical challenges that must be met to providelearners and faculty with a clear perception of the OLE structure or design and the conceptualmapping or elements of the OLE.

Interaction The embodiment of meaningful communication and collaboration between faculty and learners,with appropriate choices of communication modes and online tools that are best suited to match thelearning and teaching styles of learners and faculty, respectively.

Resources Human, information, learning, and technical dimensions that bring the OLE to life. Humanresources include faculty, administrative and technical staff, and learners. Information andlearning resources include internal and external information or activities that are presented,accessed, utilized or performed. Technical resources include computer-mediated tools that aresupport mechanisms for human communication and learning activity in OLEs.

Evaluation An iterative process for assessing the efficacy and validity of OLEs. Evaluation should take placefrom the conceptual stage of OLE development through the measurement of learning outcomes ofan online course. Accurate and ongoing assessments of the learner, the instructional process, thecourse content, and the OLE as an entity, will include a combination of formative and summativeevaluations for each of these components and their effectiveness as a unit.

Culture Identifying the new roles that learners and faculty take on in OLEs, as well as an understanding of ashift toward a learner-centered paradigm. A `̀ culture'' emerges in OLEs that supports the notion thatlearners and faculty are resources for each other, and that learners interface with the world ofinformation at large.

Technology Robust and activity-oriented mechanisms and tools that are interfaced by the computer-mediatedenvironment. Computing requirements must be established and will vary depending on the scaleto which online learning and communication is to be offered. Technology training and supportneed to be provided to OLE stakeholders. OLE technology tools provide the means to faculty andlearners to participate in learning and communication activities without time or place constraints.OLE technology tools enable the learning and instructional process to seamlessly flow online.

Education The embodiment of learning and instructional processes directed toward supporting alearner-centered paradigm. Pedagogically meaningful OLEs support active learning andinstructional processes with the appropriate choice and implementation of learner-centeredmetaphors that match specific communication and learning objectives and tasks.

Design Included in the continuum of delivery challenges are critical areas of concern for design:instructional methods and online delivery methods, conceptual design and learning modalityissues, delivery logistics for faculty and staff, management of OLE activities and services, andtechnical tools and communication mechanisms to support OLE activities and services.


intended to be used with existing instructional delivery systems models. The mainobjective of the framework is to bring visibility to and organize the breadth of majorfoundational aspects of OLEs.

The eight elements are briefly introduced in this section and are more formallydefined in Table 1. Delivery deals with the process of presenting and maintaining an OLE.Interaction focuses on the issues of enabling communication and interaction amongfaculty, learners and other external information providers. The Resources elementaddresses issues of enabling information, technical, administrative, faculty and learnersupport in OLEs. Evaluation focuses on issues about evaluating learner performance,course content outcomes in OLEs, and assessing the validity of OLEs. Culture deals withthe social structure of the online classroom and the unique culture that emerges from theenvironment and activity within OLEs. Technology centers on issues of providing qualitycommunication and instructional tools and supporting synchronous and asynchronouslearning modes in OLEs. Education involves a range of essential pedagogical issues thatpertain to supporting the learning and instructional process in OLEs. Design concentrateson issues involved with designing components for online instruction and the visual andfunctional composition of OLEs.

For an OLE to be effective, there must be an integration of instructional, managerialand technical challenges that must be addressed in each element from the onset ofplanning for an OLE through the ongoing use of an OLE. Also, the elements of theframework for DIRECTED OLEs encompass the essential issues that go into theconceptualization, planning, design, implementation and evaluation process of OLEs,along with the considerations of culture, communication tools, interactions, instructionaldelivery, learning activities, technology components, pedagogy and resources that mustbe explored to offer sound online instruction. These elements taken separately areunique and encompass their own characteristics. Taken together the elements form adistinct and comprehensive OLE. Through integration, the elements are `̀ directed''toward achieving an effective OLE.

Table 1 presents the elements of the DIRECTED framework and definitions for eachelement. The definitions are intended to capture characteristics of each element.

The Integration of the DIRECTED OLE Elements

The elements and their issues inevitably integrate with other DIRECTED OLEelements. Integration is complex and requires some thoughtful attention to use theframework as a guide for the development and use of OLEs. A summary of how theelements are integrated or related is offered here. For example, ill-made decisions couldresult from the purchase of collaborative online communication tools (Technology) if thereis not a clear understanding of how effectively the tools would support communication in alearning context between faculty and students (Interaction and Education). Likewise,some early challenges must be met before subsequent challenges can be contended with.For example, to what extent would online instruction be used to deliver a course or courses(Delivery)? From that question arises a range of issues to be explored. For example, whatskills are needed by faculty to prepare and deliver online courses effectively (Resources)?Also, logistics must be identified and communicated for faculty and staff to manage theonline learning process. Such logistics may include class size, faculty loads, online


services, academic policies, and presentation of online information and materials (Delivery

and Education). In addition, decisions must be made related to integrating the best choiceonline tools that match the learning activity (Interaction, Technology and Design).

The Design and Delivery elements are related to how the design and composition of theOLE will convey to learners and faculty a sense of ongoing learning activity. Design andDelivery issues also involve how an OLE should be presented. In addition, the Design,Delivery, Technology and Interaction elements are related to issues that address theappropriate mix of technology and human intervention needed to convey the effectivenessof an OLE.

In addition, the Education and Culture elements address issues of changes ofphilosophy toward pedagogy in online settings. The Interaction and Culture elementsaddress issues related to recognizing learner and faculty communication protocols inOLEs. The Resources and Technology elements share issues related to determiningtechnical resources needed, including an Evaluation of requirements, costs, managementresources, etc. The Culture, Education and Resources elements share issues regardingchanges in roles and responsibilities of stakeholders in OLEs. There is also overlap ofEducation issues with issues that are relevant to the instructional challenges of Delivery.

The Evaluation element involves issues that permeate across all other elements in thatthe entire system (learner, instructor, curricular material, instructional methods, technologyuse, design and delivery system, etc.) should be assessed and reviewed as an integral partof the development of an effective OLE. Each element involves several issues that lead toeither formative or summative evaluation of the issues.

A Preview of Issues Concerning the Elements

Describing the essentials of each element in detail is beyond the scope of this overviewarticle. However, definitions alone (Table 1) do not show the range of issues that spans eachelement. Potential research questions and issues that may be explored in the future for eachelement are given in this section. Future articles discussing the DIRECTED frameworkshould explore, in-depth, the elements and those issues subsumed under the elements.

For example, a good deal of effort made by planning committees is geared towardDelivery issues. How should an OLE be presented? What is an OLE for an institution'sspecific purpose? What is the appropriate mix of technology and human interventionneeded? Distinguishing differences between delivering information and delivering learn-ing is also important (Bork & Britton, 1998). Future exploration is needed to provideintervention strategies for an extensive range of instructional, managerial and technicalchallenges that span the Delivery element. One example of an intervention strategy wasnoted by Cravener (1998) in which integrated distributed learning environments (IDLEs)are being explored to support interactive learning on the Web.

Interaction is an element that is not well understood within the confines of onlineenvironments because there is a limited understanding of essential dimensions ofinteraction and how the dimensions come into play in online settings. For example, onedimension of interaction is feedback. Naidu (1994) reported that feedback in distancelearning settings is essential to the learning process. Yet, the extent to which thiscomponent is understood has not been researched in online courses or online settings.Further, Interaction as an element must be understood as to appropriate choices of


communication modes such as asynchronous and synchronous interaction (Harasim et al.,1995), and the online tools that are best suited to match the learning and teaching styles oflearners and faculty. Berge (1999) recommended that we distinguish differences betweenthe necessity for students to interact with course content cognitively (intrapersonalinteraction) and the importance of students interacting with one another and theirinstructors about content (interpersonal interaction). In addition, as OLEs steadily emerge,recognizing interaction within its own context as a critical construct of the onlineexperience is important.

Initiatives directed toward the development of OLEs must include a substantialanalysis and review of a variety of Resources needed to produce an OLE (Dringus, 1999).Attention is often given to technical resources. Other resources include human resources,information resources and learning resources. Each of these `̀ resources'' categoriescontain their own unique set of requirements and considerations. However, each`̀ resources'' category cannot be viewed only within its own structure. Resources-baseddecisions account for influences or consequences of decisions connected to and balancedamong the variety of resources being considered. The interplay of resources may beevaluated as to the support and infrastructure needed to provide a functional andefficient OLE.

OLEs are anticipated to assume a more prominent role as a medium for instruction inthe future. Teaching methodologies applied to OLEs will call for new and different waysof assessing learners, instructional methods, and the instructional process as a whole(Ravitz, 1997; Terrell, 1997). Not to adequately evaluate these components in OLEs couldresult in the risk of not ensuring the highest degree of learning effectiveness possible inonline settings. The Evaluation element needs to be explored more fully in this context.

The Culture element needs to be more fully explored as to comprehending the rolesthat learners and faculty assume for a learner-centered paradigm (Barr & Tagg, 1995) inonline settings. Comprehending a culture that emerges from an acceptance of a learningparadigm is essential to expand the scope of learning activities in OLEs that have beenhistorically classroom or laboratory managed. Future research is needed in this context.

One of the fastest areas of Internet growth is the application of online learning deliverysystems. The Technology element addresses issues associated with determining whatonline learning technologies enable faculty and designers the ability to create a customizededucation system that also facilitates ease of use for both faculty and learners. TheTechnology element also addresses the need to provide embedded tools to support a varietyof structured or unstructured online activities. A structured set of online tools to expandcourse content in OLEs is essential to the success of online degree programs. The technicalenvironment and computing platform must support a variety of academic disciplines andcourseware formats. Robust tools need to be developed to enable learning activities that arecollaborative and knowledge building oriented. Efficient administrative tools are needed tofacilitate the efficient management and maintenance of the OLE. Computing requirementsand policies for use must be established (Riddle, Nott, & Pearce, 1996).

The Education element is broadly defined as the embodiment of learning andinstructional processes directed toward supporting a learner-centered paradigm. Essen-tially, the learner-centered paradigm requires a shift in thinking of all stakeholders Ðlearners, instructors and administrators Ð from one of providing instruction to one ofproducing learning (Barr & Tagg, 1995). This philosophy can then be connected to the


development of pedagogically meaningful OLEs. The issues involved with implementingand achieving this paradigm are extensive. Research is needed to learn more about thecritical challenges that faculty and learners must contend with, along with strategies foraction that faculty and learners need to enable instruction and learning in OLEs. Kroder,Suess, and Sachs (1998) recommended that faculty are provided sufficient lead, prepara-tion time and training to develop an online course. They also discussed the importance ofproviding ongoing training to learners and faculty to use online tools appropriately. Thereare many issues associated with the Education element. It may be necessary that theEducation element includes its own iterative development lifecycle process to workthrough the many stages of development and use of OLEs from the variety of instructional,pedagogical and learning perspectives involved.

The Design element involves issues related to the ways in which technology useshould be structured in visual and interactive ways to optimize learning in an OLE. Thiselement involves providing interactive mechanisms for learners to connect to and tocomplete a variety of specific tasks such as conducting research, communicating withothers, locating information, and other tasks (Dringus & Terrell, 1998; Resmer, 1998).Design issues also involve attention to the resources Ð human, technical, information andlearning resources Ð needed to create a visual and coherent OLE. Interface design andhuman±computer interaction issues need to be explored more fully in context of theDesign element.

Conclusion

The framework for DIRECTED OLEs is introduced as a guide that can be used to distilland define the essential foundational aspects involved in achieving a comprehensive andan effective OLE. The eight disparate elements contain several categories of issues thatneed to be addressed, as appropriate, through an iterative development lifecycle. The OLEdevelopment lifecycle involves the stages of planning, design, implementation andevaluation. Through this iterative process, when several key elements are examined andintegrated to form an OLE, the possibility increases to support a learner-centered paradigmin an online format.

The authors introduce the need for a more formal approach to conceptualizing andimplementing OLEs as distinct learning environments. The literature is scant in providingformal models or frameworks for the development and use of OLEs. The context of thisarticle is mainly geared toward providing a framework that can be used to begin theprocess of extracting issues and concerns that need to be organized and contained within acomprehensive structure. The framework for DIRECTED OLEs is a guide educators coulduse to recognize and address the scope of complex concerns that are significant to theprocess of online instructional delivery. In addition, the authors provide a definition for anOLE, a definition for each element of the DIRECTED framework, and a summary of howelements are integrated.

An OLE is defined in this article by describing the elements of the framework forDIRECTED OLEs, yet there is much work to be done to examine each element as aunique component that interacts with other elements. The DIRECTED approach isproposed to provide context to the need for having a `̀ directed'' orientation to promotecareful attention to critical OLE concepts and issues. Marsden (1996) noted that learning


to teach at a distance usually develops in an ad hoc manner. Overall, the non-directedapproach is viewed as an ad hoc orientation to online course or OLE development anddelivery. In this article, the authors look to promote online learning by stating that adirected approach is a frame of reference from which the design of a distinct andstand-alone learning environment for online instruction can be achieved. The frame-work for DIRECTED OLEs is offered to give educators a systematic approach toconceptualizing and implementing OLEs; one that requires thoughtful attention toissues of pedagogy, culture, technology, resources, etc., throughout an iterativedevelopment lifecycle. Overall, the framework for DIRECTED OLEs advocates theneed for structure over ad hoc planning and implementation of online courses or OLEs.

An extensive exploration of the elements is needed to more fully comprehend how thecore of online instruction, the OLE, affords the engagement of quality instruction andcommunication in a computer-mediated format. Taken separately the elements are uniqueand encompass their own characteristics. While all elements are unique, they requireintegration with each other to form an effective OLE. However, research is needed to morefully explore each element.

Presently, the building blocks for developing and implementing effective OLEs aresketchy. It is possible that OLEs are being developed on the basis of ad hoc decisions orconvenience of availability of technology tools. Instead, sound theory and formal methodsshould be followed to plan and implement OLEs. Future development is needed of modelsor frameworks that can be used to support the development of OLEs. In conjunction,research is needed to study quality and effectiveness of what is being carried out in OLEs.

References

Barr, R., & Tagg, J. (1995). From teaching to learning Ð a new paradigm for undergraduate education.

Change, 13 ± 25.

Benyon, D., Stone, D., & Woodroffe, M. (1997). Experience with developing multimedia courseware for the

World Wide Web: The need for better tools and clear pedagogy. International Journal of Human±Com-

puter Studies, 47(1). Available at http://ijhcs.open.ac.uk/benyon/benyon-nf.html.

Berge, Z. L. (1999). Interaction in post-secondary web-based learning. Educational Technology, 5 ± 11.

Bork, A., & Britton, D. R. (1998). The web is not suitable for learning. IEEE Computer, 115 ± 116.

Collis, B., & Remmers, E. (1997). The world wide web in education: Issues related to cross-cultural commu-

nication and interaction. In B. Kahn (Ed.), Web-based instruction ( pp. 85 ± 92). Englewood Cliffs, NJ:

Educational Technology Publications.

Cravener, P. (1998). Education on the web: a rejoinder. IEEE Computer, 107 ± 108.

Dringus, L. P. (1995a). Interface issues associated with using the Internet as a link to online courses. Journal of

Interactive Instruction Development, 8(2), 16 ± 20.

Dringus, L. P. (1995b). An interactive usability evaluation procedure for interactive online courses. Journal of

Interactive Instruction Development, 7(4), 10 ± 14.

Dringus, L. (1999). Connecting resources in online learning environments. Online Journal of Distance Learning

Administration. [Online] http://www.westga.edu/~distance/.

Dringus, L., & Terrell, S. (1996). Technical and instructional challenges of delivering online distance learning

courses. Paper presented at the International Multimedia 96 Conference (SALT), Arlington, VA.

Dringus, L., & Terrell, S. (1998). Awareness as a metaphor in online learning environments. Paper presented at the

International Conference on Technology and Education (ICTE), March 8 ±11, 1998. Santa Fe, New Mexico.

Hannafin, M. J., & Land, S. M. (1997). The foundations and assumptions of technology-enhanced student-centered

learning environments. Instructional Science, 25, 167 ± 202.

Harasim, L., Hiltz, S. R., Teles, L., & Turoff, M. (1995). Learning networks. A field guide to teaching and

learning online. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.


Harasim, L., Calvert, T., & Groeneboer, C. (1997). Virtual U: A Web-based system to support collaborative

learning. In B. Kahn (Ed.), Web-based instruction149±158 ( pp. 149±158). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Educa-

tional Technology Publications.

Kroder, S. L., Suess, J., & Sachs, D. (1998). Lessons in launching Web-based courses. Technological Horizons in

Education (T.H.E. Journal), 66 ± 69.

Marsden, R. (1996). Time, space, and distance education. Distance Education, 17(1), 222 ± 246.

McLellan, H. (1998). The internet as a virtual learning community. Journal of Computing in Higher Education,9(2), 92 ± 112.

Moore, M. G., & Kearsley, G. (1996). Distance education: A systems view. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.

Naidu, S. (1994). Applying learning and instructional strategies in open learning. Distance Education,15(1), 23 ± 41.

Neal, L. (1997). Virtual classrooms and communities. Paper presented at ACM Group 97, Phoenix, AZ, published

by Association for Computing Machinery.

Ravitz, J. (1997). An ISD model for building online communities. Furthering the dialog. Paper presented

at National Convention of the Association for Educational Communications and Technology.

Albuquerque, NM.

Resmer, M. (1998). Internet architectures for learning. IEEE Computer, 105 ± 106.

Riddle, M. D., Nott, N. W., & Pearce, J. M. (1996). Online learning environments for teaching science. [Online]

http://www.science.unimelb.edu.au/SMTU/edmedia96.html.

Scigliano, J., Levin, J., & Horne, G. (1996). Using HTML for organizing student projects through the internet.

Technological Horizons in Education ( T.H.E. Journal), 51 ± 56.

Shotsberger, P. G. (1997). Emerging roles for instructors and learners in the Web-based instruction class-

room. In B. Kahn (Ed.), Web-based instruction ( pp. 101±106). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Educational

Technology Publications.

Terrell, S. (1997). Assessment in distance education: A case study. FASCD Policy Review, 5(2), 14 ± 19.


Documents

The Framework for DIRECTED Online Learning Environments