Model and Implementation In Nursing of Distant Education
Distant Educational Models
Demographic Model
Statistics in the demographic model demonstrated that distance learners were more likely to have children, have higher incomes, and be in a higher year of their undergraduate program. Based on previous studies of distance learners noted earlier, this was a consistent finding (MacBrayne, 1995; Wallace, 1996).
The age of this group of students, both distance and on-campus, was younger than most previous studies of distance education: 42% of the students were ages 20 to 24, and 33.9% of the students were younger than 20. A shift in the demographics of current distance learners is distinct.
Inhibitory Model
Barriers to distance education were examined in the inhibitory model. Findings were consistent with previous educational studies (Cardenas, 2000; Hyatt, 1992; MacBrayne, 1995) and demonstrated that individual life situations, the dispositions of the learner, and institutional barriers such as location of the campus were of more concern to distance students than to on-campus students. Learning styles of the students within the two groups was not significant.
Motivational Model
It was in the motivational model that nonsense statistics were found. Variables within this model included acquire knowledge, personal gain, meet community goals, social reasons, escape a situation, fulfill obligations, personal fulfillment, and gain cultural knowledge (Qureshi et al., 2001).
A majority of the variables clearly supported differences between the distance and on-campus groups, supporting the idea that motivation is also different between the groups.
Although that finding is not questionable, what is surprisingly questionable is that the on-campus group appeared more highly motivated than the distance education group. This finding is in direct opposition to notions from previous studies (Parrott, 1995; Willis, 2002) and andragogical theory (Knowles, 1978) that distance learners were more motivated.
Implications of the Distant Educational Model In Nursing
Although the barriers and demographics of this current group were similar when compared to the existing framework of characteristics of distance learners, current distance education students were shown to be less motivated than their counterparts in previous studies and less motivated than their counterparts on campus. Several explanations for this surprising finding were put forward by the authors.
The proliferation of high technology within Web-based courses might make the courses appear easier and thus more appealing to less motivated learners (Qureshi et al., 2001). Learners with multiple conflicts between family, job, and education might choose the course that seems easier because achievement would be enhanced. Another explanation by the authors has to do with the value of peer-to-peer experience or the value of an audience for the on-campus learners.
Perhaps this characteristic of the classroom experience appeals less to the distance learner, who is typically independent and solitary. Thus, the distance learner wants to complete the course work as quickly as possible, feeling that doing it themselves is better than doing it with a group. This is indicative of low motivation or is simply an uncharted characteristic of newer distance learners is a subject for further research.
The varying studies about the differences in the demographics and motivation levels of distance education students perhaps pose more questions about motivation than they answer. A dichotomy appears to exist between distance learners of the past and current distance learners. Distance learners of the past were older and appeared to be more motivated than their counterparts on campus.
Today's distance learners seem to be younger and less motivated than their counterparts on campus. What is clear from an examination of both groups of learners is their willingness to engage in the process of education if they perceive a payoff in some form or another. This extrinsic motivation that Zull (2002) discusses does indeed lead to some of these learners becoming intrinsically motivated.
What remains unclear from an examination of these groups of learners is exactly what motivates them to continue the educational endeavor once they have started. Once you engage them, how do you keep them? But and this is the larger question-how do we accomplish that? Recent studies of varying types of distance learners provide some guidance.
Interaction and the Effectiveness of Distance Education
Holmberg (1983) and Moore (1989) postulated that interactions between learners and their peers and learners and their instructors could be possible predictors for motivation in distance learning. Holmberg's contention that students learn by engaging in guided didactic conversations with faculty members applied primarily to formal classroom instruction.
These conversations assisted in the development of a personal relationship between student and instructor that in turn created increased motivation in the students and enhanced learning outcomes (Holmberg, 1983). In 1995, Holmberg presented a theory of distance education that was based on his 1983 work on didactic conversations. Seven postulates were outlined:
1) feelings of personal relationships between the instructor and student to promote study pleasure and motivation
2) that such feelings would be supported by well-developed instructional materials and two-way communications
3) that study motivation was important for the achievement of study goals
4) that the atmosphere of friendly conversation favors feelings of personal relationship according to postulate 1
5) that communications within natural conversation are easily understood and remembered
6) that the conversation concept can be successfully translated for use by the media available to distance students
7) planning and guiding the curriculum were necessary for organized study at a distance. (Holmberg, 1995, p. 47)
Moore included with interactions multiple entities within the learning community in the distance education endeavor. Interactions were certainly between student and instructor, but also between students and other students and between students and the course content. Interactions within this model are multi directional and built on reciprocity among all participants and the course content (Moore, 1989).
This latter interaction between course content and learner include two subcategories: interaction between the learner and inanimate learning resources such as books, tapes, and articles; and interaction between the learner and the interface to the technology used to deliver the instruction (Hillman, Willis, & Gunawardena, 1994).
Learner-learner interactions are the traditional small-group discussions, group projects, and group presentations. As in previous distance education studies, some students found this learner-learner interaction crucial to their success, while others did not (Biner, Welsh, Barone, Summers, & Dean, 1997).
Kelsey and D'souza (2004) conducted a study looking at the interactions in these three areas vital to distance education. Their findings may guide us in keeping students motivated once they make the commitment to take a distance education course.
Give your opinion if have any.