(Several excellent observations and comments by Joan removed for space)
>Hello guys...Bruce, I don't quite understand what you mean by your statement
>that the "talking head model of distance education will never be cheaper
>than regular lectures".
Basically what I meant by that somewhat flip comment is that if an
organization pursues the model of distance education where the sole
methodology is to point a camera at a faculty person from the back of a
live classroom, they are never going to see any cost savings. All of the
reoccurring costs involved with a regular lecture class are still there,
the not trivial costs of broadcasting the material are added in
(technicians, broadcast equipment, receiving equipment, sites, switching,
etc.) and the only real gain is a minor decrease in the "place-bound"
restrictions of a normal class (since most of these classes are live
broadcast, there is not much of a "time-bound" benefit, although students
could videotape the broadcasts). All of the bad baggage of lecture
presentation is carried along with virtually no added benefit.
I am much more in favor of, and a somewhat battered champion of the model
that Joan goes on to describe in her note where upfront design and initial
investments in a product result in a stand-alone that has limited ongoing
costs to support validated, rigorous instruction. That's the way to make
the technology pay off. Unfortunately, a vast majority of faculty (at
least here) are soundly opposed to this model.
-- Bruce Carter, Instructional Software Designer (208)385-1851@voice Boise State University, Boise, ID 83725 (208)385-1856@fax http://mentor.idbsu.edu/BruceCarter/home.html bcarter@mentor.idbsu.edu