Dr. Martha Cleveland-Innes

This inaugural blog is created through a post, or near-to-post, sabbatical fog. It is 24 days, 12 hours and 23 minutes until I am officially back at work, but who’s counting? This blog is an attempt to defrag my cognitive disc drive as I tidy up the artifacts of many sabbatical activities, and get myself mentally ready to return to the structured life of a distance education researcher. At the same time, I hope to present a vision of the life of a distance education researcher ……. Some of you may be thinking of becoming one.

My sabbatical goal was to create endings of some, and beginnings of other, research plans and projects. One of the dangers of being a researcher in an innovative, dynamic and engaging field such as distance education is getting involved in too many projects …. a common problem for me and, dare I say it, other researchers in my professional network.

 Disciplinary Differences in Online Education

My network of research colleagues expanded exponentially during this past year. To culminate phase I of my research on Disciplinary Differences in Online Education, I visited Empire State College of SUNY in Saratoga Springs, New York. Dean of the college Dr. Meg Benke and her group graciously invited me to lead a two-day professional development session on research in distance education. Then we spent a morning talking about strategies for joint research projects. Articles based on phase I data will be out this Fall and an article by Arbaugh, Bangert & Cleveland-Innes on the Community of Inquiry and disciplinary applications will be out in the next year.

Measuring the Online Community of Inquiry (CoI) Model

Ben Arbaugh and I are part of a multi-researcher, multi-institutional “Online Community of Inquiry” research group, designed initially to create measurement tools for the existence of ‘presence,’ in multiple forms, online. While wrapping up a SSHRC-funded study on the online student experience, Randy Garrison and I worked with a group of distance education scholars to design and test an instrument that measures concepts in online community of inquiry model proposed by Garrison, Anderson & Archer (2000). Results have been published in numerous places. See, for example, http://www.e-mentor.edu.pl/artykul_v2.php?numer=24&id=543. For a full review of all research being done on the CoI, see http://www.communityofinquiry.com/.

Emotional Presence in Online Learning Environments

 While collecting this data for the CoI instrument, we added a few extra data collection segments to our part of the project. We created six test items on Emotional Presence and added them to the instrument. Results demonstrate that these items load appropriately within teaching, cognitive and social presence, and increase reliability scores. More on this in forthcoming articles and presentations. In addition, we interviewed students and instructors about the Community of Inquiry and Emotional Presence – at Athabasca University and the Open University of Catalonia. The opportunity to examine this model, with validated instrumentation and from the point of view of students and teachers, added tremendous depth to our understanding of the complexities of online learning. See http://cde.athabascau.ca/DET/2008/presentations/cleveland_russel/cleveland_russel_files/frame.htm for a presentation on our preliminary findings.

Learner-Centred Curriculum in Higher Education

 This discussion with instructors led me back to data from 2006 that still offered further examination. My previous work on a Learner Centred Curriculum for higher education was published with friend and colleague Claudia Emes (see http://www.ingentaconnect.com/content/csshe/cjhe/2003/00000033/00000003/art00003 http://www.ingentaconnect.com/content/csshe/cjhe/2005/00000035/00000004/art00004) We have interview data from 20 senior faculty members at two public universities. Interviews focused on the need for, and the transition to, increased focus on lifelong learning for the 21st century. A distinct split between the two institutions emerged; faculty from a traditional bricks-and-mortar institution were far more skeptical about high levels of responsibility and engagement for learners than faculty from Canada’s Open and Distance institution – where the relationship between tutor and learner requires student self-direction. Analysis is now complete and writing is underway.

Leadership in Distance Education

 The need for leadership was a central theme in the discussions we had with faculty while doing the above research. The unanimous call is for leaders to create visionary pathways that may be walked with practical feet! No one is denying the need for change, but there is little agreement on the direction of required change nor on the strategies for moving change into the now. I was enthralled. Seven years of university study on human social behavior – I wanted to know more about the inertia of leadership in higher education suggested by our respondents. Much reading, thinking, discussing and consternation ensued. In the final decision, I started with Open Universities – there are 49 Open Universities on the globe – where I surmised that leadership would be more dynamic. I spent January of 2008 visiting Open and Distance higher education institutions in Europe. In sum – challenges abound, but leadership and change was in evidence in many places! More on this experience in my next blog in September.

Photo above is me with Otto Peters, former Rector of FernUniversitat in Hagen – Germany’s Open University.

If you are still listening, this article is a must read for graduate research students: http://print.achuth.googlepages.com/OnBecomingaResearcherv42007First18Pa.pdf

Stay tuned for more information on a new book, pulling together the traditions and innovations of distance education - coming next year: Cleveland-Innes, M. & Garrison, D.R., Eds. (in press). An introduction to distance education: Understanding teaching and learning in a new era. New York: Routledge, Inc.