AARL

Flexible delivery/flexible learning... does it make a difference?

Angela Bridgland and Patrick Blanchard

Abstract: Flexible learning is fast becoming an essential model for teaching and learning practices as its methods cater to the wide-ranging needs and hectic lifestyles of learners. While rapid developments in information and communications technologies have provided opportunities for flexible learning practices, the fundamental principle of flexible learning embraces a student-centred approach compared to the traditional teacher-led model.

This paper explores the theoretical principles of flexible learning including an examination of the social, pedagogical and practical issues, and highlights the realities of resourcing flexible delivery by presenting a case-study of the Percy Baxter Collaborative Learning Centre at the University of Melbourne.

The application of information and communication technologies (ICTs) for learning continues to grow. ICTs are becoming faster, easier to use and more widely accessible - on campuses, in libraries and learning centres, in workplaces, and in homes. Their seductive promise to improve the effectiveness and efficiency of learning is strengthening their appeal to bureaucrats, administrators, policy makers and teachers. As a consequence of these and other changes, technologies for learning are taking centre stage across all education sectors.

At the same time, learners' needs are changing in response to broad economic, social, political, and technological developments. Learners are demanding new learning approaches that reflect the demands of their work and lifestyle, as classroom-based learning becomes less appropriate and less relevant to their needs.[1] They not only require learning that is adaptable, portable and interactive,[2] they also require appropriate and relevant support services. That is, support services to help them adapt to the new roles and responsibilities that are being placed on them as they move from dependent, classroom-based learners to independent learners.[3] Teaching is changing from being teacher-led to learner-centred. With the pairing of technology and learner-centred teaching and learning models, flexible learning is born.

Along with theory comes practice. Flexible learning might be thought of as the theory-based partner to the more practical flexible delivery. As Barnet puts it: 'flexible learning is really the philosophy on which flexible delivery is based' and 'flexible delivery is a way of implementing flexible learning'.[4] The reality is that the terms 'flexible learning' and 'flexible delivery' are inextricably intertwined, but when taken together they describe the development and delivery of resources for learning that are focused on the needs of the learner.

This paper is in two parts: the first gives a theoretical overview of flexible learning and includes an examination of pedagogical and social issues as well as the practical considerations of offering flexible delivery in a campus-based educational environment. The second part illustrates how we are providing the resources for flexible delivery via a case study of the Percy Baxter Collaborative Learning Centre at the University of Melbourne.

A definition of flexible learning

The term flexible learning is ubiquitous, but a simple, concise definition remains elusive. In general terms, flexible learning places the learner at the centre - resources are adapted to suit the needs of the learner, rather than vice-versa. This becomes flexible learning in its 21st century incarnation chiefly by the inclusion of technology as the means to an end. It might be thought that the ubiquitous nature of the term would make the creation of a concise definition a simple task, but the term is difficult to pin down. The 'flexibility' of the definition might even be considered a virtue, allowing as it does the 'practitioners to interpret it any way they like'.[5]

Flexibility in terms of time and place is probably the most familiar aspect of flexibility. The web is open 24 hours a day, seven days a week. Resources can be accessed from a computing facility on a university campus, or an Internet café in Rotterdam. Unlike 'hard' resources, such as books and paper-based journals, that may be available to one person at a time, multiple learners can access digital resources simultaneously. The leisured nature of this access allows for flexibility in terms of pace. The ever present, ever accessible, nature of the resource assists the learner to set their own pace, rather than being subject to factors such as limited access to resources, a looming due date, or scarcity of physical resources in the first place. Characteristics of flexible learning include:

• student-centred teaching and learning
• a flexible approach to the development and delivery of programs
• enabling students to learn at different times, in different places and in different ways
• a recognition of the diversity of the student population
• an understanding of the many contexts in which teaching and learning occur
• a commitment to social justice and quality in teaching and learning; and
• a reliance on a variety of teaching and learning resources and media.[6]

As noted by Rickards, flexible learning is:

an educational approach using a variety of student-centred teaching and learning methods, resources and flexible administrative practices that responds to the needs of a diverse student population, enabling them to achieve vocational and professional qualifications and the goals of a university education.[7]

Flexible learning is a rich and multi-layered concept encompassing distance learning, interactivity, collaboration, and engagement. It involves creating and delivering resources that increase engagement and enjoyment and that enliven and enrich the process of learning. Technology features prominently, but it is not all about technology. It is about learning. It is just that technology has increased the opportunities and tools that may be taken and used in the pursuit of quality, flexible (and lifelong) learning.

Features of effective flexible/online learning

Jonassen and Peck[8] describe teaching and learning as active, constructive, collaborative, intentional, conversational, contextual and reflective and these qualities are inherent in a number of theories that guide the design of web-based learning environments. Reeves and Reeves[9] suggest that design of online environments be aligned to ten pedagogical dimensions: learning theory, goal orientation, task orientation, source of motivation, teacher role, metacognitive support, collaborative learning, cultural sensitivity, and structural sensitivity. Each of these dimensions can be presented as a continuum from effective design to ineffective design, and they provide useful indicators for instructional designers. Three of these dimensions, namely learning theory, collaborative learning and cultural sensitivity, require further elaboration in light of their pivotal role in effective flexible learning.

Learning theory and collaborative learning

People learn from each other in teams and communities and engage in dialogue and different communicative activities. This redefinition of learning as 'conversation' has led educators to new educational frameworks, based on social constructivism to guide the adoption of appropriate learning activities.[10] Various interpretations of constructivism are characterised by principles relating to how knowledge is created and how individuals develop understanding.[11] Socio-cultural theory, originating with the writings of Vygotsky,[12] emphasises that learning is a form of enculturation, in which the individual is socialised through gradual participation in tasks, until full competence is attained. Lave and Wenger[13] also view learning as a social phenomenon that results naturally from becoming part of a community where active participation becomes part of the learning experience, so that 'learning, thinking and knowing are relations among people engaged in activity'. With the ascendancy of social constructivist theories during the last 20 years, the culture of teaching has also undergone transformation. Teachers have been urged to adopt more collaborative structures for learning, which have been shown to be effective in terms of learning outcomes.[14]

It is also clear from the literature that students who learn in an environment where multiple and diverse perspectives are fostered and appreciated become better critical thinkers, better communicators, better problem-solvers and better team players.15 As studies of online global networking show, teaching approaches that promote the notion of online communities are adequately preparing all their students for a changing world.[16] In an international world a student's knowledge and experience of multiple perspectives is an asset to thinking skills and enhances career prospects. Substantial evidence from a number of studies shows that organisations employing and encouraging diverse work groups tend to be more innovative and flexible.17 Studies also show that such groups make better decisions because they draw from a wider base of experience.[18]

Cultural sensitivity/inclusivity

It has been argued that one of the essential foundations of student-centred learning environments is cultural inclusivity,[19] with a focus on enabling learners to access learning resources in a manner that is congruent with their values, beliefs and styles of learning. Web-based technologies enable greater access to information and learning resources and offer the potential of many-to-many communication, exposing students to many ideas and issues.[20]

Teaching for cultural diversity means giving learners expertise and practice in multiple ways of constructing knowledge, bringing benefits to the entire student population and reflecting good teaching practice. Effective cross-cultural pedagogy would require that teachers consider and reflect on these questions to inform pedagogy:

1. What kind of learning environment is most familiar to my students?
2. How do I support transition to an online environment?
3. How does the cultural background of the learner influence their view of learning tasks?
4. How do students conceive of their role and that of the teacher?
5. What kinds of assessment tasks best support the learning process?
6. What forms of feedback will be most motivating for these students?
7. How can the technology support communication and dialogue that is supportive of diverse learning needs?

Cole and Engestrom21 describe technology as a 'cultural amplifier' signifying that while it transforms the nature of human productivity it can also change approaches to learning and expectations of the teacher's role. For example, in response to a global economy, software developers are meeting demands by developing groupware to enable people to talk, think and learn together.[22] Many forms of groupware are currently used to support learning, and enable learners to enter an extended classroom where they can communicate their ideas to a global audience. In view of these developments, the portability of software and educational resources has become the subject of inquiry as web-based delivery opens up broader global markets.[23] Portability or cross-cultural use of educational resources refers to the capacity to use resources in multiple settings, different from those in which they were originally developed. The motivation for portability may be economic, educational or strategic. Larger markets for educational products reduce cost and increase profit. Educational motivations are related to the desire to apply student-centred approaches to design and to ensure that materials are relevant to learners and cater for diversity. Strategic motivations refer to the issue of ensuring equity of access to learners who are enrolled, regardless of their geographic location. For teachers who are new to online delivery, there is also a pedagogic imperative: learning how to teach effectively online to a multi-cultural group of learners.

Removal of barriers to learning

The flexible delivery of resources for learning has the potential to break down a number of the barriers to traditional learning such as the tyranny imposed by distance and time, the difficulties in arranging a course of study around a full-time occupation, and restrictions imposed by formal learning programs.

Flexible delivery of resources for learning can also impose barriers in its own right. Among the barriers to effective online learning as reported by Collis, Parisi and Ligorio[24] are :

• problems of culture and environment
• teaching style differences
• problems relating to different educational values and cultures
• problems of language and semantics; and, last but not least
• technical problems relating to platforms, operating systems and lack of standard interfaces.

Development challenges/practical delivery issues

From a staff perspective, the effective use of technology is both time-consuming and a somewhat elusive goal, not least because the constant upgrading of both hardware and software results in a constant need for retraining and re-skilling. Commonly voiced workload issues for academics include:

• Development of materials incorporating the use of educational technology is much more time intensive than the preparation of traditional teaching material, not to mention the requisite skills development (learning new versions of software tools, etc.).
• Constant monitoring of the social and cultural components of the higher education environment in which the students work. For instance, how many students are holding a part time job? How many students enrolled in a subject come from a non-English speaking background?
• Intellectual property issues - the new copyright legislation and the Telecommunications Act require both students and academics to be ever vigilant to avoid breaches of the law while working in an online environment.

The ease of access to information that technology permits has resulted in a challenge to traditional learning models and has resulted in a change in student expectations. Hearnshaw,[25] in discussing the technical feasibility of introducing video material to collaborative environments for students, notes that they would be dissatisfied with anything less, brought up as they are on a diet of multimedia and fast and furious information flow. Graphics and sounds would be simply too pedestrian. The idea of the teacher as a major conduit of information has changed - technology has enabled information literate learners to access to a wealth of information beyond the lecture theatre or shelves of the library. Where teachers once disseminated information, now they must provide guidance also in the creation of knowledge from a diverse range of information sources. Information and communications technology provides unprecedented opportunities to embrace innovation and interactivity in the development of resources that promote deep learning and participation. In transforming teachers from fonts to facilitators of knowledge, sophisticated resources must be developed to meet the expectations of increasingly autonomous learners.

Specific needs of academics at the University of Melbourne

In a review of Virtual Learning Environments (VLEs) undertaken by the Teaching, Learning and Research Support Department of the University of Melbourne, academics were asked about their requirements and visions for online learning and teaching as well as their level of use of online systems and tools. The review also aimed to improve our understanding for teaching and learning within faculties, and to develop a framework of requirements for online teaching and learning.[26]

Among the feedback received was the need for the 'conceptual redesign of subject materials to exploit new technologies'. Information and communications technologies were seen as 'a medium of delivery, distinct from the content'. It may be that technologies such as the web can be regarded as effective and flexible ways to convey content to learners, but their power to shape that content should perhaps be acknowledged. ICT-based tools for the creation of interactive and multimedia resources, and environments for online collaboration, have the potential to significantly change the nature of content. Concern was expressed that the commitment to ICT should 'not be used as a means of reducing face-to-face contact'. This theme of using ICT to enhance contact, rather than reduce it, also surfaced in comments relating to enhanced access to lecturers and support staff, enabling the use of lectures to provide a 'big picture' overview and to 'enthuse' about a subject. The 'Multiple modes of communication' that VLEs offered were seen have the virtues of 'encouraging communication' and 'complementing face to face'. It was noted that ICT was seen as just one tool in the broader task of teaching and learning.[27]

In terms of personal impact, the lack of time and the need to address issues of conflicting academic priorities were identified as most significant. It was noted that time was required to 'undertake research, develop materials, learn about the possibilities, keep materials up-to-date, provide feedback to students' and that further commitment to ICT cost people in terms of time and effort and had 'serious impact on limited tutoring budgets'. Many academics who responded felt they lacked the necessary skills and there was an emphasis on the need for tools with simple 'entry points', as well as IT support to avoid the feeling of being left to their own devices.

Flexible learning in a campus-based context

The University of Melbourne is placing major strategic emphasis on the quality of the overall 'Melbourne Experience' for students, recognising that the value of campus-based learning is under challenge worldwide from less costly on-line alternatives. The university is committed to being a campus-based learning community.

Within this campus-based context, the challenge for academics and those who support them is to provide students with a learning environment that is stimulating, supportive and responsive and/or flexible. If technology is used to achieve this, first we need to address the concerns expressed by academics. We also need to examine the assumptions that learners are sufficiently skilled to access programs and services and that they have the capacity to learn through technology-based learning approaches.

The University of Melbourne has recently adopted a set of graduate attributes. Graduates are expected to be capable of critically reflective thinking, have developed problem-solving skills, have good communication skills, and a sound working knowledge of their discipline. From learning theories[28] it is evident that the skills of the lifelong learner can be summarised as to encompass all of these things as well as the ability to increase their knowledge, both in memory and reproduction, to apply and understand what they have learnt, and have the ability to see and appreciate things in a new way.

If learners are to participate effectively in the socio-economic milieu that will characterise the 21st century, they will need to be 'able, motivated and actively encouraged to learn throughout life'.[29] They will need more than skills and competencies relevant to today's context; they will need broadly based and transferable skills that allow them to adapt positively to constantly changing requirements. Such a framework would be built on the following principles:

• Learning is a lifelong process that requires continuous support to stimulate and empower individuals to acquire knowledge, values and skills.
• Learning support depends on the particular needs of each individual learner.

Learning support focuses on a range of key areas:

• learning-to-learn skills
• personal mastery (motivation, self-esteem, confidence as a learner, capacity to deal with change)
• interpersonal effectiveness (learning in teams, group problem solving skills)
• information literacy.

Learning technologies should be used, when appropriate, to support personalised learning by encouraging participation and facilitating learner control of their learning processes and outcomes. At the University of Melbourne, efforts are being made to integrate learning to learn/information literacy skills (including IT competencies) into subjects and programs of study. It is intended that acquisition of these skills will enable students to engage more confidently in flexible learning and in programs delivered in non-traditional ways.

Resources for flexible delivery - Case study of the Percy Baxter Collaborative Learning Centre

This section looks at how resources for flexible delivery may be offered and discusses some of the issues encountered in managing these resources effectively. This is done in the context of a case study, the example for the provision of such resources being the Percy Baxter Collaborative Learning Centre, which is one of a number of collaborative learning spaces at the University of Melbourne.

The Percy Baxter Collaborative Learning Centre (PBCLC) was established in 2000 to provide a range of flexible teaching and learning resources for students and staff. Part of the Teaching, Learning and Research Support Department of the Information Division, the PBCLC is designed to help the Information Division deliver on its vision, which is:

That all members of the University will be able to use sophisticated information easily and well.30

This is a far-reaching vision, encompassing a commitment to both computer and information literacy and the development of skills for lifelong learning. The provision of learner-centred and flexible resources is a major element in the realisation of this vision. The key to the effective use of these resources is the provision of support for learners as they use information and communications technology to assist, enhance and extend their learning activities.

The PBCLC offers skills development sessions and provides a space where those skills can be consolidated in an environment in which it is safe to experiment and innovate. The Centre is always staffed and in the provision of assistance, the approach taken is one of taking the time to show where a user may have gone astray, suggesting different approaches and explaining principles, rather than simply fixing a problem or providing a brief answer to a question.

The Centre facilitates flexible and constructivist approaches to learning through the provision of resources for:

• collaborative learning
• online collaboration (asynchronous/synchronous)
• access to online learning environments and resources
• access to paper-based resources (the centre is located in the library).

There is an element of the 'one-stop-shop' concept. Resources and tools required by a student to undertake a particular learning activity are available in one place. To that end, there are also resources and tools for digitising information, manipulating graphics and multimedia, creating web pages, printing, CD 'burning', etc.

Learning spaces

The environment is a very flexible one, consisting of several learning spaces containing computers and hardware equipped with multimedia, animation and web development tools, digitisation hardware and software, full access to electronic journals and the Web, as well as Microsoft Office programs.

There are two large learning spaces equipped with projection facilities, and wired for sound. These spaces are used for traditional instructor-led sessions, workshops, seminars or group work. The rooms have electronic walls that can be rolled back to make these spaces part of the open area of the Centre. In addition, there is a room with multimedia workstation, whiteboard, and connectivity to the Internet that may be used for small group, problem-based learning activities. The open area contains workstations for group and individual work. Tables are provided, both with and without workstations, for collaborative work. The Centre has had installed a 'wireless' network which has made possible the flexible use of these tables, free from the constraints of cabling. Two especially equipped rooms are available for use by students with disabilities. In addition to workstations, they offer adjustable furniture and a range of tools for enhanced access such as speech-to-text and text-to-speech software.

The spaces are used for skills development sessions based around creating technology-enhanced resources for learning. Sessions are offered to academics and postgraduate students that feature:

• web communication/collaboration
• preparing material for the WWW
• interactivity/self-assessment tools in web pages
• sound, pictures and movies in lectures, presentations and web content
• using web cameras
• scanning images
• archiving/transporting information
• capturing/editing sound and video
• manipulating digital images
• creating animations.

Managing the learning environment

There is a commitment to certain specific strategic goals; among them to flexible learning, to collaborative learning, to providing services where staff and students can access the fruits of technology-enhanced teaching. This results in a very dynamic environment and raises issues of resource management. For example, a workstation, made available for access to online learning environments, web publishing and multimedia creation, also is used to read e-mail on Hotmail, or as a very expensive typewriter. Appropriate use of resources is the issue here, not a philosophical view that e-mail or typing is evil or wrong. In fact, e-mail is a flexible, widely available tool for asynchronous collaboration. The issue is the use of high-end computers for e-mail when other, low-end computers are widely available. One has to be pragmatic.

There is a need for authentication of users. The dictates of copyright law and of various contracts that the university is signatory to, require that material only be made available to staff or students of the institution. It becomes a legal imperative to avoid the use of the facilities by members of the public. If material is made available online (ie communicated) for educational purposes, the Copyright Amendment (Digital Agenda) Act 2000, requires that all reasonable steps are taken:

to ensure that the communication can only be received or accessed by persons entitled to receive or access it (for example, teachers or persons receiving educational instruction or other assistance provided by the relevant institution.31

Observation seems to indicate that authentication has discouraged inappropriate use of the facilities - it appears that users of the facility are less likely to access recreational and non-education based resources when they are required to identify themselves through an authentication process. This has reduced the need for access control systems or regular policing.

Various methods of authentication are available, and several were considered. The method adopted makes use of the move to campus-wide authentication of staff and students using Windows 2000. As most of the workstations in the Centre use Windows 2000, this method was straightforward to implement with minimal impact on users. An attractive feature is that the authentication information is administered and maintained centrally.

Another challenge is to provide protection for the hardware and software that resides on workstations in the learning centre - from users with malicious intent, an urge to experiment or a less than perfect grasp of the use of the tools available. A product called Hard Disk Sheriff™ is used to protect computer configurations. Users may mutilate the operating system and programs on the computers (deliberately or otherwise), but when a computer is rebooted, the workstation is reset to its original state.

The deployment of software can be problematic. High-level multimedia software products are expensive and resources are not infinite. Installing expensive software on particular computers lacks flexibility - the software may remain unused while it is required elsewhere. Far better is a system whereby users indicate their need for particular software, and it is made available to them, on their workstation of choice. Such a dynamic environment soon tests the limitations of paper-based systems for reserving resources. Deploying software 'by request' is desirable, as it represents flexibility, but modern software packages are large and take some time (and several reboots) to install conventionally. Staff time and the patience of users would be strained using this method. Instead, a tool called Picture Taker™ is used. This tool allows software to be deployed (via the Web, network or other methods) and installed in minutes, without requiring reboots. This system works particularly well with Hard Disk Sheriff™ as this product removes changes after a reboot - reboot the computer and the software is available for another user.

Also needed is a sophisticated software system to manage user access to the facilities. This software system should manage access to a dynamic and flexible environment and it must also:

• manage booking
• enforce different scales of timed access
• manage user waiting
• provide override facilities for non-staff or students.

A number of software solutions to this are being explored.

Conclusion

It can be said that flexible learning and flexible delivery does make a difference. It makes a difference to academics, to students, to the management of the learning environment and to teaching and learning processes. The particular attributes of an online learning environment provide teachers with powerful new ways to represent knowledge that are not available in a print environment. However, these different ways of representing knowledge place different information processing demands on learners. In designing and delivering courses using ICTs, the information processing demands on the learner need to be considered carefully. Technology may be advancing but humans still have the same information processing capabilities and limitations. Academics need to ask 'will it improve the learning experience of the learner?' and 'what needs to be done to support the learner in those cases where additional processing demands are made of the learner?' Given that so many of our students, whether studying full time or part time, are in paid employment, the issue of flexible delivery,[32] even in a campus-based context, is recognised as a means of meeting student needs and increasing their access to learning. Many of our students appreciate being able to engage in learning at times and places that suit them in addition to the formal opportunities afforded by lectures and tutorials. The use of technology for technology's sake is not to be recommended.

However, technology can be used advantageously in the provision of learning support. In summary it can provide:

• real time interaction which helps to focus group energies and talents, and promotes collaboration, information sharing, and problem solving thereby contributing to the motivation of learners
• group cohesion which contributes to the sense of the learner being part of a broader learning community
• meaningful feedback - synchronous systems allow learners to test ideas, discuss concepts, and debate issues and they support group problem solving and decision making
• pacing - synchronous events encourage learners to keep up-to-date with their courses
• flexibility - access to learning materials can take place at any time from many locations
• time to reflect - asynchronous learning allows learners the opportunity to reflect on ideas and discussion, refer to resources, and check back to previous messages before responding to queries or participating in discussions
• situated learning - asynchronous technologies can allow access to information from home or work thus enabling the learner to integrate learning concepts with the working environment. The learner can also access resources as required on-the-job.

If technology-supported learning programs include a focus on learner motivation, building self-esteem and confidence, and encouraging self-direction and personal empowerment, then the longer-term outcomes for learners are significantly enhanced. That is, to meet the possibilities of the future, learners need to be lifelong learners, involved in an ongoing process of discovery and self-discovery. And for the teachers? At the University of Melbourne, academics who are embracing ICTs to deliver flexible learning are excited to discover that the technology can be used as a tool to relieve them of tedious subject administration tasks and to re-create the immediacy of the teaching environment that the ever-growing class sizes and ever-increasing teaching commitments took from them. All they ask is that appropriate support be provided in the form of staff development and training, educational design support for a flexible, online environment, technologies which are simple to use and easy to understand, and troubleshooting support when needed. This is the challenge for us in the Teaching Learning and Research Support Department, and our colleagues in the Information Division.

Notes

1. A Levine and J Cureton 'Collegiate Life: An Obituary' Change vol 30 no 3 1998
2. R Mason 'Evaluating Technology-Based Learning' in B Collis and G Davies (eds) Innovative Adult Learning with Innovative Technologies Berlin Springer-Verlag 1995
3. R Oliver and J Herrington 'Developing Effective Hypermedia Instructional Materials' Australian Journal of Education Technology vol 11 no 2 1995 pp8-22
4. L Barnet Flexible Learning and Flexible Delivery Graduate School of Education The University of Queensland 1999 http://www.ems.uq.edu.au/projects/gce/ED501M8.htmls[accessed 14 September 2001]
5. A Van Vuren and J Henning 'User Education in a Flexible Learning Environment - an Opportunity to Stay Relevant in the 21st Century' in IAUTL Conference proceedings The Challenge to be Relevant in the 21st Century Pretoria 1-5 June 1998 http://educate2.lib.chalmers.se/IATUL/proceedcontents/pretpap/vuren.htmls[accessed 26 June 2001]
6. University of South Australia 'Technical Glossary' http://www.unisanet.unisa.edu.au/flc/PS/flcgloss.asps[accessed 26 June 2001]
7. J Rickards 'Flexible Learning Developments' in ALIA Conference proceedings Capitalising on Knowledge: the Information Profession in the 21st Century Canberra 24-26 October 2000 http://archive.alia.org.au/conferences/alia2000/proceedings/janice.rickards.htmls[accessed 26 June 2001]
8. D H Jonassen and K L Peck Learning with Technology: A Constructivist Perspective Upper Saddle River, NJ Merrill 1999
9. T Reeves and P Reeves 'Effective Dimensions of Interactive Learning on the World Wide Web' in B Khan (ed) Web-based Instruction Englewood Cliffs, NJ Educational Technology Publications pp59-66
10. D Laurillard Rethinking University Teaching: A framework for the Effective Use of Educational Technology London Routledge 1993
11. Jonassen and Peck 1999 op cit
12. L Vygotsky Mind in Society: The Development of Higher Psychological Processes Cambridge, MA Harvard University Press 1935
13. J Lave and E Wenger Situated Learning: Legitimate Peripheral Participation Cambridge Cambridge University Press 1991
14. D McConnell Implementing Computer Supported Cooperative Learning London Kogan Page 2000; I McAlpine 'Collaborative Learning Online' Distance Education vol 21 no 1 2000 pp66-80; C McLoughlin and R Oliver 'Maximising the Language and Learning Link in Computer Learning Environments' British Journal of Educational Technology vol 29 no 2 1998 pp125-136
15. W A Sugar and C J Bonk 'Student Role-play in the World Forum: Analyses of an Arctic Adventure Learning Apprenticeship' in C J Bonk and K S King (eds) Electronic Collaborators Mawah, NJ Lawrence Erlbaum 1998 pp131-157
16. L Harasim (ed) Online Education: Perspectives on a New Environment New York Praeger 1990; L Harasim (ed) Global Networks: Computers and International Communication Cambridge, MA MIT Press 1994; M Riel 'Global Education through Learning Circles' in L M Harasim (ed) Global Networks Cambridge, MA MIT Press 1993 pp221-236
17. L Schrum 'Online Professional Education: A Case Study of an MBA Program through its Transition to an Online Model' Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks vol 4 no 1 2000 http://www.aln.org/alnweb/journal/jaln-vol4issue1.htms[accessed 26 June 2001]
18. McConnell 2000 op cit
19. A Chen, A Mashadi, D Ang and N Harkrider 'Cultural Issues in the Design of Technology Enhanced Learning Systems' British Journal of Educational Technology vol 30 no 3 1999 pp231-245
20. L Teles 'Cognitive Apprenticeship through Global Networks' in LM Harasim (ed) Global Networks Cambridge, MA MIT Press 1993 pp271-282; C McLoughlin 'Culturally Inclusive Learning on the Web' in K Martin and N Stanley (eds) Teaching in the Disciplines, Learning in Context Perth The University of Western Australia 1999 pp272-277
21. M Cole and Y Engestrom 'A Cultural-historical Approach to Distributed Cognition' in G Salomon (ed) Cambridge Cambridge University Press 1993 pp1-45
22. O Marjanovic 'Learning and Teaching in a Synchronous Collaborative Environment' Journal of Computer Assisted Learning vol 15 no 2 1999 pp129-138
23. J E Joo 'Cultural Issues of the Internet Classrooms' British Journal of Educational Technology vol 30 no 3 1999 pp245-250; G Kearsley 'Designing Educational Software for International Use' Journal of Research on Computing in Education vol 23 no 2 1990 pp243-250; M Korpela 'Traditional Culture or Political Economy' Information Technology for Development vol 7 no 1 1996 pp29-41
24. B Collis, D Parisi and M B Ligorio 'Adaptation of Courses for Trans-European Tele-learning' Journal of Computer Assisted Learning vol 12 no 2 pp47-62
25. D Hearnshaw 'Effective Desktop Videoconferencing with Minimal Network Demands' British Journal of Educational Technology vol 31 no 3 pp221-228
26. P Fritze Review of Academic Requirements for a Virtual Learning Environment Department of Teaching, Learning and Research Support University of Melbourne 2001 http://linuxdev.meu.unimelb.edu.au/occa/vle/main.htms[accessed 26 June 2001]
27. ibid
28. F Marton, G Dall'Alba and E Beaty 'Conceptions of Learning' International Journal of Educational Research vol 19 no 3 1993 pp277-300; C Bruce The Seven Faces of Information Literacy Adelaide Auslib Press 1997
29. Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) Lifelong Learning for ALL. Report of the meeting of the Education Committee at Ministerial Level 16-17 January Paris OECD 1996
30. Information Division Information Division Strategic Directions Melbourne University of Melbourne 2001
31. Commonwealth Government of Australia Copyright Amendment (Digital Agenda) Act 2000 Commonwealth Government of Australia 2001 http://www.digital.org.au/issue/dafinal.rfts[accessed 14 September 2001]
32. C McInnis 'Signs of Disengagement?: the Changing Undergraduate Experience in Australian Universities' Inaugural Professorial Lecture Melbourne Centre for the Study of Higher Education Faculty of Education University of Melbourne 13 August 2001

Dr Angela Bridgland, director, Department of Teaching, Learning and Research Support, Information Division, University of Melbourne, Victoria 3010. E-mail: a.bridgland@unimelb.edu.au.nospam (please remove the '.nospam' from the address).

Patrick Blanchard, head, Flexible Learning Delivery Services, Department of Teaching, Learning and Research Support, Information Division, University of Melbourne, Victoria 3010. E-mail: p.blanchard@unimelb.edu.au.nospam (please remove the '.nospam' from the address).