D. Randy Garrison

VOL. 8, No. 2, 73-76

Through a series of "tales" this edited book explores issues of course development in distance education settings. According to the Editor, the "book is a collection of experiences where colleagues reflect on their work" (p. xii). The intended audiences are academics new to distance education, academics working with new academics in distance education, and academic administrators.

Each chapter provides a rich description of the idiosyncratic develop-mental process of creating packaged course material for distance education. The case studies are developed from the perspective of a variety of disciplines, the effective functioning of course development teams, the importance of administrative support and staff development, and the design of a virtual laboratory. In short, there are many aims and techniques described that may prove useful for those directly involved in the development of course packages. Although the description of particular techniques is the strength of the book, they could have been more effective with the increased use of examples of actual text layout.

However, there are some controversial issues raised in the first chapter, by John Sparks, which stand out in contrast to many of the subsequent descriptions of course development. Sparks addresses one of the key challenges of designing course materials for distance education; that is, facilitating conceptual change or understanding. The message in this chapter is that a variety of teaching methods, appropriate assessment methods, and two-way communication is crucial to facilitating deep understanding. At the same time, it is acknowledged that some fundamental changes in perspective may well be required before such an approach can be implemented. In some respects, this chapter is the most important and controversial; yet, the editor has not taken up and critically analyzed the implications of these and other issues.

In addition to the Spark's chapter, three chapters stand out because of their willingness to break with convention. They are by Nation and Walker, Evans and Nunan, and by Beauchamp, Haughey, and Jacknicke. The first example is an innovative and iconoclastic approach to course design. They have incorporated group processes, multimedia, and project-based learning. The authors suggest that this may have been made possible because the authors were both content experts and instructional designers - an issue worthy of further analysis but not developed further (Nunan, 1983). The second example concerns creating a graduate course on research as part of a Master of Distance Education. Their nonprescriptive and critical approach allowed for creative leaps of course design. In the third example, the authors committed themselves to a constructivist approach. One of several challenges they had to face was to make the content individually relevant when everything was prepared beforehand. Although students were encouraged to reflect upon course material, it must be appreciated that their interaction was largely confined to the course materials.

The major weakness of the book, however, is its lack of coherency. As many contributors note, the design process is complex and idiosyncratic. In this context, the editor states that it is difficult to find "common threads" and makes no apology that they do not emerge. This is consistent with his intent that the book be only "a collection of experiences." But if he cannot find the common threads, where does this leave the reader? Surely, because of this complexity, the reader needs a theoretical framework to make an informed judgement on how, and when, to incorporate particular techniques. An experienced distance education course developer may have the implicit framework to fully appreciate this book; however, such individuals were not intended to be the primary audience. Therefore, those familiar with distance education, and particularly with course development, will gain the most direct benefit from this book. For the novice, I believe that it can best be used in an educational context to precipitate discussion and critical dis-course regarding the design process.

Without a consistent theoretical framework, these case studies are somewhat disjointed and difficult to comprehend. To be fair, this is an inherent challenge with all edited books. However, a future edited book on course development in distance education would be improved if the case studies were selected around a particular and clearly espoused theoretical framework. Most importantly, the editor would introduce the framework and conclude by at least identifying the key issues and attempting to make some connections among the chapters. A theoretically coherent approach could address basic values and beliefs and provide a framework for interpreting and constructing a meaningful approach to course design.

Another weakness is what appears to be some confusion regarding its intent. The editor argues for the use of the term "open learning" in the title because it "reflects the future direction of course developers" (p. v). Furthermore, chapter authors were encouraged to include aspects of "collaboration between students and broad issues of communication" (p. viii). Unfortunately, the book does not adequately reflect the future of course development in distance education nor does it sufficiently address issues of collaboration and communication among students. With few exceptions, the implicit assumption is that students are self-directed and "communication" is largely, or entirely, with the course package.

Although the editor suggests that the "profession of course developer is at a critical state," we have only seen a flicker of what that future might be. The literature on instructional design is currently struggling with the implications of constructivism, situated cognition, and meaningful learning (Cooper, 1993; Jonassen, 1991; Kember, 1991; Young, 1993) as well as the effects of knowledge and text organization on learning outcomes (Mannes & Kintsch, 1987). Perhaps we in distance education need more discussion about how course development will evolve in the future. If distance education embraces a constructivist approach to course development, how does this change the nature and activities of a course developer? What are the learning outcomes (e.g., recall or transfer) of highly structured and directed text materials compared to those that are more flexible and ambiguous in their organization? These were issues raised, either explicitly or implicitly, in some of the chapters of this book. A reflection upon these and similar questions would have provided an appreciation of the "critical stage" of course development in open learning and distance education alluded to by the editor.

References

Cooper, P. A. (1993). Paradigm shifts in designed instruction: From behaviorism to cognitivism to constructivism. Educational Technology, 33(5), 12–19.

Jonassen, D. H. (1991). Objectivism versus constructivism: Do we need a new philosophical paradigm? Educational Technology Research and Development, 39(3), 5–14.

Kember, D. (1991). Instructional design for meaningful learning. Instructional Science, 20, 289–310.

Mannes, S. M., & Kintsch, W. (1987). Knowledge organization and text organization. Cognition and Instruction, 4(2), 91–115.

Nunan, T. (1983). Countering educational design. London: Croom Helm.

Young, M. F. (1993). Instructional design for situated learning. Educational Technology Research and Development, 41, 43–58.