There isn’t a valid one because the construct of “distance education” is meaningless. Sure, Keegan has a nice list of diagnostic characteristics. Kearsley avoids the question. The Commission on Colleges Southern Association of Colleges and Schools defines it “for the purposes of accreditation review, as a formal educational process in which the majority of the instruction occurs when student and instructor are not in the same place. Instruction may be synchronous or asynchronous. Distance education may employ correspondence study, or audio, video, or computer technologies (see Morehead’s statement).” But each of the definitions is flawed by one basic assumption — that there is a distinction between distance and non-distance education.
Pick a definition. Examine the parts. Each one is silly. Differentiation becomes an exercise in the arbitrary selection of media, channel, and message. We’ll continue to use the term Distance Education in the course and by that phrase, we’ll mean All Education. The key in designing educational experiences — and in helping students engage in productive learning — is understanding that the goal is independant of the means. I want you all to learn how learning and education relate to each other so that you can make effective technology choices and use good techniques in your teaching.
And while I’m on the subject of definitions
There is no such thing as distance learning. Learning is the process of assimilating a body of knowledge for application in a personal – or organizational – context. You learn by making things part of you. If it’s part of you, how can it be distant?
September 2nd, 2006 at 5:33 PM
Point well taken.
September 1st, 2007 at 9:04 AM
[...] I’ve been leading up to this for days. Even spilt the beans on somebody’s comment. Here’s my definition of Distance Ed. [...]
September 1st, 2007 at 10:21 AM
You make some interesting point Dr. Lowell! I guess diestance education is one of those things where you know what it is when you see it, but can’t explain it in words.
September 1st, 2007 at 12:39 PM
Hmm, interesting take on distance education. Like Jeff said, its hard to explain, if pressed, but it doesn’t matter where you are learning it still has to occur the same way. If you get it then, like Dr. Lowell said, it becomes a part of you.
September 1st, 2007 at 4:39 PM
I get it now.
September 1st, 2007 at 6:47 PM
I think I finally understand what you are trying to say. When you are being educated you are learning, but all learning takes place at a distance, so distance learning is the same as just learning itself. So we should change the name of what we are doing from “distance learning courses” to “learning courses”. Am I right??
September 2nd, 2007 at 7:49 AM
I like what Barbara said “All learning takes place at a distance,” and what Dr. Lowell said about learning is making things a part of you. When I did my definition of distance learning, I think that it was very limited based on my prior experience. My definition was more concrete, when really, learning experiences are very abstract. I feel that this course has increased my experience in “distance learning” tenfold. I am already applying the technology I have learned in creating lessons for my students.
September 2nd, 2007 at 8:48 AM
All *EDUCATION* happens at a distance. Education involves more than one person, and as soon as you try to communicate anything between people, you have distance involved.
NO learning happens at a distance because all learning is INSIDE you.
September 2nd, 2007 at 10:43 AM
I am beginning to see what you mean and I have to agree that all learning is just learning. I too have been thinking about it based on my experiences and my content. However, as I look at the example definition, I realize that in order to differentiate within my classroom, I use the majority of those methods of instruction while we are present in the classroom. So what is the difference? I have to agree that it is “all” education and we do what ever it takes to help our students learn.
September 3rd, 2007 at 9:10 AM
[...] September 3rd, 2007 Alright I must admit that I really liked the ending quote in Dr. Lowell’s blog “You learn by making things part of you. If it’s part of you, how can it be distant?” If we take an objective point of view of education and focus on the goals that teachers are to achieve, it does not matter how the learning takes place. [...]
September 3rd, 2007 at 11:43 PM
I believe I understand what you’re saying. Learning is learning and when it takes place, it makes no difference where the teacher is….the learning takes place within the individual. You know, something you said early on was that with this course, we would ALWAYS be in class. I have found that to be very true. I was thinking during church on Sunday……and a stream of thoughts was going through my mind. It struck me that distance learning is very old indeed and that communication, whether face to face or from a distance, is the key to a relationship and a relationship is key to transference of knowledge. One’s relationship to God depends on communication that comes from His word and through those who study His word. A person cannot know Him without communicating with him. While one cannot see Him, this communication keeps Him close and causes us to learn and experience the knowledge of Him. If a person chooses not to avail himself to the resources available, distance creeps in and there is silence. To keep the relationship strong and viable, one must continue to invest time and thought about the Word provided. While one cannot see or touch the teacher, the experience is there nontheless and the learning takes place within the individual. It is part of you and not distant.
Like I said, just thinking about things and making connections personally. Somehow, I think it relates very well.
August 30th, 2008 at 6:26 AM
[...] wrap up the week on Definition and History, here’s my take on the definition of distance ed: phaedrus » Blog Archive » Definition of Distance Ed There isn’t a valid one because the construct of “distance education” is meaningless. Sure, [...]
August 30th, 2008 at 7:32 AM
I think the difference here may be in the clarification on what we are trying to do. Are we trying to educate a student, or are we trying to help them learn. There is a difference between education and learning. Learning is a process and it may not be something that neccessarily can be delivered in a book, email, chat, podcast, whatever. Education, on the other hand, is a mass-produced effort to impart a particular set of terms and knowledge on a particular subject to a particular group. You can educate in many different ways, but learning may or may not take place. Rote stored knowledge is not the same as learning.
August 30th, 2008 at 8:40 AM
Yup.
That’s it exactly.
It’s why I differentiate between the terms Distance Education and Distance Learning. Many use the terms interchangeably but they mean different things.
Education is what’s done to a student.
Learning is what a learner does to him/herself.
September 9th, 2008 at 6:15 PM
Tim had a very good thought on this. Learning and education are definitely two different things. We can educate others but that doesn’t mean they are learning.