It seems straightforward enough, right? However, in my Foundations in
Distance Education course, we are exploring definitions of distance
education that vary widely. This difference in definition and
perception has profound implications on research and instructional
practices … if you aren’t talking about the same thing, how can you
compare results and recommendations? My “off the cuff” definition held
separation of the learner from the teacher as a key consideration. I
was not surprised to have others comment that synchronous real time
interactions (mediated by technology) can overcome that separation.
However, can it?
I agree that the availability of synchronous interaction does seem to make a
difference when trying to overcome the “separation” of the learner.
Separation then becomes more of an issue about the physical separation
versus the ability for real time interaction. Even with real time synchronous interaction, there is still
for me the nagging issue of not being physically present with the
teacher and peer learners (to continue a conversation over a cup of
coffee after class, to thumb through some books in the professor’s
office, to engage in informal “water cooler chats” in the hallway). To
me, as a student taking courses from hundreds of miles
from ODU, there is a difference in the educational experience from a
traditional face to face experience which I attribute to the physical
separation. In other words, due to my physical separation from my
teacher and peer learners, the educational experience is different
than if I were physically present. While synchronous interactions (mediated by technology) can overcome some of
this physical separation, there is still an informal human aspect
to the physical separation that I feel needs to be considered.