Editorial

The fifth issue of the Journal of Distance Education is one of which we are proud. It reflects the kinds and quality of content we had hoped for when the Journal began in 1986. It also reflects an active, productive, and thoughtful audience, as evidenced in the steadily-growing number of submissions received and the range of ideas appearing in them. I will comment briefly on the contents of this issue, but first, some news.

The Editorship for this issue, as you may have noticed, is shared by June Sturrock and me. The next issue (Spring 1989) will be June's responsibility as our new Editor. She has most generously agreed to take over following my resignation from Simon Fraser University to accept a faculty position at University of Victoria. In fact, we have enjoyed our work together so much that we have decided to continue the relationship in reverse: I will continue in the role of Associate Editor. I leave the Editorship with a great deal of satisfaction, knowing that the Journal will flourish and grow with June's professionalism and academic rigor behind it

Next, I would like to welcome a new addition to the Journal's Editorial Board. Joan Collinge, of the Centre for Distance Education, SFU, has assumed the ongoing responsibility of Editorial Assistant as of this issue. Joan's contribution has been extremely valuable during the transition we have experienced in the past several months; without her, this issue could not have been produced this fall.

The third piece of news is announced with less pleasure, but with the best of wishes. We are losing Judith Tobin as Associate Editor, as she has decided to do some work internationally. Judith has been a key player in the development of this publication, and happily she will stay on as a Contributing Editor.

Finally, we have formed a new Editorial Board as of this issue, with many of the previous board remaining for a second term with us. We extend our thanks to those who have not continued, and welcome a number of new Consulting Editors.

As for the contents of this issue, we begin with a discussion of the role of educational developers, by Mavis Kelly of University of Queensland, in Australia. In her paper, Kelly takes a careful look at both positive and negative aspects of educational developers' roles in relation to the academics with whom they work. While defending the importance of high quality, innovative instructional design, she argues for a reassessment of the approach typically taken by developers and of their place within the context of the institutional traditions and constraints that typically exist.

The second article, by Jeanpierre Masson, presents an analysis of the relation-ship between current means of assessing student satisfaction with distance education courses and their actual behavior in terms of continuing or dropping out of distance education courses and programs. The author calls for a new and more valid approach to evaluating student satisfaction.

In the third paper, Lynn Davie presents a case study of the use of computer conferencing to enhance the instructional value and the interpersonal exchange in graduate level distance education. His example, taken from the Ontario Institute for Studies in Education (O.I.S.E.), may serve as a useful model for the other program developers concerned with maintaining high quality instructional interaction at a distance.

In the next paper, Williams, Eiserman, and Quinn provide quite a comprehensive review of the literature and the "state of the art" of distance education for K-12 in the U.S. This is a part of distance education that is not the focus of much published literature or widespread discussion. Its unique features and its effectiveness demand careful scrutiny, given the importance and varied purposes of schooling at elementary and secondary levels in all societies.

The quantity, diversity, and effectiveness of print-based activities designed to facilitate knowledge acquisition in distance education courses are discussed in the final paper, written by Deschênes, Bourdages, Lebel, and Michaud of Téluniversité in Quebec.

The Dialogue that was begun last issue by Dan Coldeway and colleagues at Athabasca is continued in this issue with, I believe, two very interesting papers. In response to Liz Burge's paper in our last issue, Randy Garrison addresses the notions of andragogy and learner- centredness in distance education. He points to the importance of maintaining a balance between andragogy and pedagogy, giving due credit to the instructional and content area expertise of the teacher in any educational transaction. David Kirby then presents an opener for public debate around the issue of graduate education at a distance. Given that we have one example of this type of educational program described in the Davie paper, this is a timely discussion. Kirby lays the groundwork for the debate by addressing the primary contentions relating to the issue, as reported in a survey of Canadian universities. He also summarizes the level of existing programming at the graduate level, both nationally and internationally.

An additional piece of dialogue that has been included in this issue is a Letter to the Editor. This is a form of reader response which will be assigned space in the Journal from time to time, as we receive letters that may be of general interest. Letters to the Editor normally will be published in the language in which we receive them.

I won't address directly the papers in For Your Information or In Review. Readers will enjoy discovering these for themselves. As an overall comment on

this issue, though, we are pleased to be able to increase our Canadian, and especially our Francophone Canadian, content. We will look forward to more articles in French, including contributions to Dialogue. Our aim in this respect is eventually to offer a truly balanced journal in both languages. On that positive note, I heartily welcome June to this challenging and rewarding Editor's chair.