HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: Tony Bates <tonyb@ola.bc.ca>
Subject: Planning: getting started
Originator: banpln-m@udevdiv.unibase.sk.ca
Reply-To: <banpln-m@udevdiv.unibase.sk.ca>
Organization: Unibase Telecom Ltd.
Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1992 18:29:40 GMT

Well, here we go. I feel like someone standing on the top of a mountain
and shouting, without knowing if anyone is listening! (or even if
the message will carry).

First, welcome and thank you for your interest. I see my job as getting
discussion going, rather than instructing, although I will of course
be happy to pass on any information/guidance that I may have,with
regard to specific issues.

I'm going to start by asking you to follow some very simple but 
essential procedures/habits. You will note I started with a
subject title, which has two parts: Planning, so people will
know which of the six conferences they are in; and Getting
Started, which is really the topic within Planning. It will
help everyone if you can all follow that format for the subject
title.

Second, please send only those messages through this conference
that you want to share with everyone; the first time you send
a conference message, please indicate very briefly who you are
and where you work/study/etc. I would like to know more about
you, and will be happy to talk 'one-on-one' about issues, but
if you want to do that and not share, please send me an e-mail
(address: tonyb@ola.bc.ca) rather than post it in the conference.
It would be useful to include your own e-mail address when you
send a conference message, because some people may prefer to
address the issue with you 'one-on-one', rather than as part of
the conference.

Lastly, keep your messages short! Break them up into different
messages with appropriate subject titles. For this reason, I am
stopping now, and will start on the topic itself in my next
message. In the meantime, if you would like to introduce yourself
to me, please send me an e-mail. OK, now let's get started.
Newsgroups: alt.education.bangkok.planning
From: anderson@acs.ucalgary.ca (Terry Anderson)
Subject: test
Originator: banpln-m@udevdiv.unibase.sk.ca
Reply-To: <banpln-m@udevdiv.unibase.sk.ca>
Organization: Unibase Telecom Ltd.
Date: Tue, 6 Oct 1992 21:53:35 GMT

this is a test 
-- 
Terry Anderson
Dept. of Educational Psychology                     Ph 403-284-0922
University of Calgary                              Fax 403-289-4471    
Calgary, AB. Canada T2N 1N4              InterNet ANDERSON@ACS.UCALGARY.CA
Newsgroups: alt.education.bangkok.planning
From: Tony Bates <tonyb@ola.bc.ca>
Subject: Planning: Process
Originator: banpln-m@udevdiv.unibase.sk.ca
Reply-To: <banpln-m@udevdiv.unibase.sk.ca>
Organization: Unibase Telecom Ltd.
Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1992 19:14:25 GMT

Thanks to John Rugo, of the New England Academic and Research Network,
for pointing out that I had missed a very important stage of the
strategicv planning process: stakeholder analysis - who cares (or
should care) about what we do? Do they care about the same thing or
different things.
When we did our stakeholder analysis for the first time, we
covered a whole wallchart with different stakeholders. Again,
we found ourselves having to prioritize. One of the concerns
I had was how easily our students/viewers tended to be swamped
by other stakeholders with different interests. This can be a very
useful technique for re-focusing an institution's activities,
to ensure that the main stakeholders are being served.
A colleague at University of Victoria, Kate Seaborne, has used
stakeholder analysis to defuse a highly controversial issue
around a distance education course for aboriginals. 

Incidentally, I am hoping for more comments, questions or
wisdom - if you are out there 'lurking', and hesitant
to participate publicly, why not send me an e-mail,
so I know that you are there!
e-mail address: tonyb@ola.bc.ca
Newsgroups: alt.education.bangkok.planning
From: tonyb@ola.bc.ca (Tony Bates)
Newsgroups: alt.education.bangkok.planning
Subject: Planning: issues
Date: 17 Oct 92 00:12:56 GMT
Reply-To: <banpln-m@udevdiv.unibase.sk.ca>
Organization: Unibase Telecom Ltd.
Originator: banpln-m@udevdiv.unibase.sk.ca

Thanks, Katy, and good to hear from Alberta. Two questions/comments:
does the University of Alberta have a strategic plan for the University
as a whole? If so, has it adressed the issue of distance education,
widening access, non-conventional learners, etc? If it does have
a plan, and a planning process, but it hasn't addressed these
issues, then a means to do this needs to be found.

Second, strategic planning for new units/departments is much more
difficult than for more established units, but much more
essential, too. It's more difficult, because there are so many
options open in some ways, yet so many restrictions in others;
more essential, because a good strategic plan can be a powerful
means of legitimizing the activity within a broader system.

I'd like to get your response!
Newsgroups: alt.education.bangkok.planning
From: anderson@acs.ucalgary.ca (Terry Anderson)
Subject: test3a
Originator: banpln-m@udevdiv.unibase.sk.ca
Reply-To: <banpln-m@udevdiv.unibase.sk.ca>
Organization: Unibase Telecom Ltd.
Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1992 00:39:11 GMT

test3a
-- 
Terry Anderson
Dept. of Educational Psychology                     Ph 403-284-0922
University of Calgary                              Fax 403-289-4471    
Calgary, AB. Canada T2N 1N4              InterNet ANDERSON@ACS.UCALGARY.CA
From: leigh@unibase.Unibase.SK.CA (Leigh Calnek)
Newsgroups: alt.education.bangkok.theory
Subject: Intro to DE Theory Discussion
Date: 14 Oct 92 23:36:38 GMT
Organization: Unibase Telecom Ltd.

(Forwarded from BANTHY-M)

Bangkok CMC Discussion

Topic: Theory of Distance Education

Welcome to the discussion on Emerging Theories and Philosophy of
Distance Education. Dr. Michael Moore will lead this discussion and 
serve as the online expert. I will be hosting and moderating the 
discussion. I am re-posting the topic for discussion posted earlier by 
Terry Anderson and an introduction to Dr. Moore in separate 
messages. When you participate in the discussions,  please 
introduce yourself briefly and identify your institution so that we get 
a sense of our online community.  In order to make this discussion 
easy to follow, we would like to encourage you to use the subject line 
when responding. Please state "Theory" in the subject line to identify 
the topic.  Michael will further clarify the topic and address your 
reactions.  I will summarize the responses at the end of every week 
and will try to weave the ideas together at the conclusion of this 
discussion. 

A few words about myself.  I am an assistant professor in 
instructional technology and distance education at the Division of 
Innovative Programs in Education, College of Education, University of 
New Mexico, Albuquerque, New Mexico, U.S.A.  I currently teach 
graduate courses in distance education (DE), including the theory and 
practice of DE, instructional design for DE, multicultural and 
international applications of DE, the adult learner, instructional 
television, telecomputing and teleconferencing.  My current research 
interests center on examining the interaction of learning styles and 
media, methods of instruction and group functioning in DE, and 
collaborative learning and group dynamics in computer 
conferencing.  I received a B.A. in English from the University of Sri 
Lanka;  a Ph.D. in instructional technology from the University of 
Kansas,  and was a Kellogg Post-doctoral Research Fellow at the 
University of Oklahoma. 

If you have any concerns regarding this discussion or would like to 
give me feedback, please send me a private e-mail message.  

We look forward to the opportunity to share ideas globally and learn 
from your experiences.  We hope you will enjoy this discussion and 
look forward to your participation. 

Lani Gunawardena
Internet: Lani@bootes.unm.edu
Bitnet: Lani@unmb 



-- 

Leigh Calnek
Internet: leigh@unibase.unibase.sk.ca
voice: 306/789-9007
Newsgroups: alt.education.bangkok.theory
From: leigh@unibase.Unibase.SK.CA (Leigh Calnek)
Subject: Theory--Michael Moore (fwd)
Organization: Unibase Telecom Ltd.
Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1992 21:35:00 GMT

(Forwarded from BANTHY-M)

From: anderson@acs.ucalgary.ca (Terry Anderson)
Message-Id: <9210141436.AA37753@acs1.acs.ucalgary.ca>
Subject: Theory--Michael Moore (fwd)
To: banthy-m@acs.ucalgary.ca
Date: Wed, 14 Oct 92 8:36:46 MDT
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.3 PL11s]
Status: RO

Forwarded message:
Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1992 21:33 MST
From: ANNI@BOOTES.UNM.EDU
Subject: Theory--Michael Moore
To: anderson@acs.ucalgary.ca
Message-Id: <01GPVJL9BIK08X0O2R@BOOTES.UNM.EDU>
X-Vms-To: IN%"anderson@acs.ucalgary.ca"
X-Vms-Cc: ANNI

In response to the question: What do we want in a theory?, we submit that a
theory is a statement concerning the relationships among factors which has
predictive power.

C. Garcia
E. Littell
D. Mackin

University of New Mexico


-- 

Leigh Calnek
Internet: leigh@unibase.unibase.sk.ca
voice: 306/789-9007
Newsgroups: alt.education.bangkok.theory
From: leigh@unibase.Unibase.SK.CA (Leigh Calnek)
Subject: Re: Moore; Dist Ed Theory
Organization: Unibase Telecom Ltd.
Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1992 21:36:53 GMT

(Forwarded from BANTHY-M)

From: <KWB107@PSUVM.PSU.EDU>
Subject: Re: Moore;dist.ed.theory
To: banthy-m@acs.ucalgary.ca
Message-Id: <92Oct14.164243edt.9239@ugw.utcs.utoronto.ca>
Status: RO


  - - The original note follows - -

Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1992 22:50 EST
From: "William D. Graziadei" <GRAZIAWD@SNYPLAVA.BITNET>
Subject: Re: Moore;dist.ed.theory
To: DEOS-L@PSUVM.BITNET
Re: BANGKOK PROJECT: BANTHY; DEOS-L POSTING #04.

> "BARBARA JENNINGS VOICE PHONE: (505) 845-8554 USERID: BJJENNI NODES REACHABLE
> ON: BOOTES.UNM.EDU, AND SANDIA.GOV."
> <BJJENNI@BOOTES.UNM.EDU>
>
>The following is a response to Michael Moore's topic abstract concerning
>the question of theory in Distance Education:
>
>        We would like to acknowledge a distinction between a scientific
>        definition of theory and those found in education. An educational
>        theory is looser in its definition, and might include:
>                - explanation of phenomenon
>                - a position
>                - a philosophical construct
>                - a model
>                - proposed guidelines
>        rather than an hypothesis to be proven right or wrong.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ah, but what is the objective(s) in an "educational theory". Please elaborate
on your perceived differences between the two since I would ask how do these
differ from the following:

- Problem  <-------------|
- Question               |
- Experimental Design    |
- Methods                |
- Results                |
- Conclusion ------------

   Regards,

      Bill

         _____________________________________________________________________
        / William D. Graziadei, Ph.D. /  Department of Biological Sciences   /|
       /=============================/======================================/_/
      /         US Mail             /              EMail                    G /
     /  BEAUMONT HALL 444          / GRAZIAWD (Local)                     ___/
    /  SUNY PLATTSBURGH           / SPLAVA::GRAZIAWD (Decnet)            / /
   /  PLATTSBURGH, NEW YORK 12901/ GRAZIAWD@SNYPLAVA.BITNET (Bitnet)    / /
  /  TEL (518) 564-5165         / Internet:                            / /
 /  FAX (518) 564-7827         / GRAZIAWD@SPLAVA.CC.PLATTSBURGH.EDU   / /
/_____________________________/______________________________________/ /
|____________________________/\______________________________________|/

-- 

Leigh Calnek
Internet: leigh@unibase.unibase.sk.ca
voice: 306/789-9007
From: KWB107@PSUVM.PSU.EDU
Newsgroups: alt.education.bangkok.theory
Subject: Re: Re: Moore;dist.ed.theory
Date: 16 Oct 92 19:36:43 GMT
Reply-To: <banthy-m@udevdiv.unibase.sk.ca>
Organization: Unibase Telecom Ltd.
Originator: banthy-m@udevdiv.unibase.sk.ca


  - - The original note follows - -

Date: Fri, 16 Oct 92 08:58 EDT
From: Theodore_E_STONE@umail.umd.edu (ts65)
Subject: Re: Re: Moore;dist.ed.theory

Dear Colleagues:

I couldn't resist but to throw in my opinion on the questions of scientific
vs. educational theories (if such a distinction can legitimately be made.)
Consider the following:

1)  Some us in the field of distance education make an assumption that
learning theory in distance ed is different than learning theory in
conventional ed (my opinion on this changes about twice per year ... this
month I believe that there's not a whole lot of difference between the two.)

2)  If we accept that distance ed and conventional ed are fairly much the
same from a theoretical foundation point of view, then we have oodles of
quantitative research to support practice in distance ed.

3)  The trend in educational research (at least in the U.S.,) has been
heavily biased toward qualitative research at the expense of quantitative
research.  I suggest that this is not a terrible trend, and this is why:

        -- In quantitative research, the tendency is to generalize an
outcome to a population, based on the predictive power of a theory.  This
works nicely with behaviorally-grounded theories, but less so with other
theories.

        -- In qualitative research, the tendency is to generalize to a
theory, not to a population, thus finding (or not finding) support for the
explanation of the phenomenon.

With either research approach, the veracity of theories are explored and
guidance for educational practice is promoted.

4)  And finally, as with most human endeavors, the practice of education
(distance and otherwise,) is an art as it is a science.  Thus theory
provides as much as a reference point for reflection of practice by the
practitioner as it does for prescribing new interventions.

Thank you for the opportunity to share my thoughts.


--Theo Stone
Theodore_E_STONE@umail.umd.edu
Newsgroups: alt.education.bangkok.theory
From: N0G@PSUVM.PSU.EDU
Newsgroups: alt.education.bangkok.theory
Subject: Re: Moore;dist.ed.theory
Date: 15 Oct 92 00:15:04 GMT
Reply-To: <banthy-m@udevdiv.unibase.sk.ca>
Organization: Unibase Telecom Ltd.
Originator: banthy-m@udevdiv.unibase.sk.ca

You ask "elaborate on your perceived differences between the two" and I
think you mean by "the two" the educational theory as opposed to what you
call a scientific theory... I dont accept, for the moment, the proposition
that educational theory should be "looser" than some other kind of theory
called "Scientific". Should be.. I said.. I recognize that at present most
educational theories are less well grounded in empirical data. It is a chicken
and egg problem isnt it... We have no well accepted summaries of knowledge
about distance learning and teaching. Therefore people gather information
that is a-theoretical... it neither refutes or confirms any theory.. some
distance teaching universities sweep up mountains of facts that do little
to advance knowledge in general... they know how many men or women there are
in each region, how old they are, their grades, etc.. all useful to plan the
system, but of no contribution to development of basic understanding about
how people learn and teach... So we have theories with weak foundations in
fact, and facts unrelated to theories.... I hope this discussion will help
break us out of this circle... ... we can be more scientific, without yet
reaching the stage of being able to test hypotheses in experimental design..I
personally think the experimental method is an important and the most
sophisticated form or research.. and I also like qualitative, ethnographic
and other inductive research... I dont think we are ready yet for much
hypothetico-deductive research... but we should aspire to it.. in other words
we might be "looser" and not what you call scientific now... but we can get
less loose if we applied discipline in our qualitative methods, aspire and
seek ways of testing by experiment... and build research from our theories..
and seek to developo them in light of the information we discover... I dont
know if this is answering your question... anyway I am more interested in
hearing what other people think... I would like to get some consensus views
on these issues to take forward to Bangkok... so let's hear from you....
Michael Moore.
ntific
Newsgroups: alt.education.bangkok.theory
From: leigh@unibase.Unibase.SK.CA (Leigh Calnek)
Subject: Re: Theory--Michael Moore (fwd)
Organization: Unibase Telecom Ltd.
Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1992 21:36:00 GMT

(Forwarded from BANTHY-M)

From: <N0G@PSUVM.PSU.EDU>
Subject: Re: Theory--Michael Moore (fwd)
To: anderson@acs.ucalgary.ca
Cc: banthy-m@acs.ucalgary.ca
Message-Id: <92Oct14.151837edt.9235@ugw.utcs.utoronto.ca>
Status: RO

how nice to hear from you in New Mexico.... I like your straightforward
definition... now lets consider, what are the "factors" in distance education
that we want to make a statement about.... then we can look at relationships
and then at predictability.... What are the factors....?? hope to hear some
more ideas.... Michael Moore......

-- 

Leigh Calnek
Internet: leigh@unibase.unibase.sk.ca
voice: 306/789-9007
From: leigh@unibase.Unibase.SK.CA (Leigh Calnek)
Newsgroups: alt.education.bangkok.theory
Subject: Introduction to DE Theory Discussion
Date: 14 Oct 92 23:30:41 GMT
Organization: Unibase Telecom Ltd.

(Forwarded from BANTHY-M)

thanks to KWB107 for starting the ball rolling....I feel more comfortable with
some of your suggestions than others... I feel fairly comfortable with
---explanation of phenomenon
--a model
not so sure about Philosophical construct
less comfortable with proposed guidelines or "a position"
perhaps you could explain what you mean by some of these, especially the last
  two. I have taken the view that a theory is essentially a parsimonious, i.e.
as simple as possible, (hard for academics and other pedants) description of
what is known about a phenomenon at any given time. As such it is of course
constantly changing as new knowledge becomes available and also suggests where
new knowledge is needed. The ideal theory to me is a map in a geography book.
A map of , lets say the planet Mars, tells us simply what is known, what is
blank nad is updated as we discover more.... a theory in education should be
the phenomena of teaching and learning and the organization of those, reduced
to simple terms, or lines, or figures, or....???? is this too simple an idea?
is it not big enough to accomodate for example what you call "a position"?
Write  me... Michael Moore.

-- 

Leigh Calnek
Internet: leigh@unibase.unibase.sk.ca
voice: 306/789-9007
From: leigh@unibase.Unibase.SK.CA (Leigh Calnek)
Newsgroups: alt.education.bangkok.theory
Subject: Re: Moore; Dist Ed Theory
Date: 14 Oct 92 23:39:57 GMT
Organization: Unibase Telecom Ltd.

(Forwarded from BANTHY-M)

Date: 	Wed, 14 Oct 1992 19:27:00 -0400
From: <N0G@PSUVM.PSU.EDU>
Subject: Re: Moore;dist.ed.theory
To: KWB107@PSUVM.PSU.EDU
Cc: banthy-m@acs.ucalgary.ca
Message-Id: <92Oct14.192902edt.9223@ugw.utcs.utoronto.ca>
Status: RO

You ask "elaborate on your perceived differences between the two" and I
think you mean by "the two" the educational theory as opposed to what you
call a scientific theory... I dont accept, for the moment, the proposition
that educational theory should be "looser" than some other kind of theory
called "Scientific". Should be.. I said.. I recognize that at present most
educational theories are less well grounded in empirical data. It is a chicken
and egg problem isnt it... We have no well accepted summaries of knowledge
about distance learning and teaching. Therefore people gather information
that is a-theoretical... it neither refutes or confirms any theory.. some
distance teaching universities sweep up mountains of facts that do little
to advance knowledge in general... they know how many men or women there are
in each region, how old they are, their grades, etc.. all useful to plan the
system, but of no contribution to development of basic understanding about
how people learn and teach... So we have theories with weak foundations in
fact, and facts unrelated to theories.... I hope this discussion will help
break us out of this circle... ... we can be more scientific, without yet
reaching the stage of being able to test hypotheses in experimental design..I
personally think the experimental method is an important and the most
sophisticated form or research.. and I also like qualitative, ethnographic
and other inductive research... I dont think we are ready yet for much
hypothetico-deductive research... but we should aspire to it.. in other words
we might be "looser" and not what you call scientific now... but we can get
less loose if we applied discipline in our qualitative methods, aspire and
seek ways of testing by experiment... and build research from our theories..
and seek to developo them in light of the information we discover... I dont
know if this is answering your question... anyway I am more interested in
hearing what other people think... I would like to get some consensus views
on these issues to take forward to Bangkok... so let's hear from you....
Michael Moore.
ntific

-- 

Leigh Calnek
Internet: leigh@unibase.unibase.sk.ca
voice: 306/789-9007
From: colette@morgan.ucs.mun.ca (Colette Goodyear)
Newsgroups: alt.education.distance
Subject: Competency-Based Education--Distance Education
Keywords: Early Childhood Education
Date: 16 Oct 92 12:25:01 GMT
Organization: Memorial University of Newfoundland

We're developing a programme to help early childhood educators (daycare
workers) upgrade their credentials before the government brings in 
legislation that will classify daycare workers according to their 
credentials and education and require certain positions in a daycare
centre to have a particular amount of formal training.
In many cases daycare workers in this
province do not have any formal training whatsoever because the necessary
courses were not available in this province although they have taken
seminars and workshops when the occasion arose.

As these people now have jobs, families and in many cases run their own
daycare centres, we cannot ask them to leave their communities and
come into St. John's for what, on-campus, is a two-year course. We have
decided to offer the course by distance education (mainly print
and video-based) with two three-week practicums in the summer.  The
course will also be competency-based.

We are looking for any similiar programmes, preferably in Canada or
the United States.  We would like to hear of your experiences with
distance ed./competency-based learning, problems/successes in 
developing and delivering the programme etc. and any other information
you feel may be of interest.

Please e-mail replies to sevans@admin.cabot.nf.ca or 
colette@morgan.ucs.mun.ca.  Thanks!

Colette Goodyear
Cabot Institute
posting from
colette@morgan.ucs.mun.ca
Memorial University

    
Newsgroups: alt.education.distance
From: dubie@tnpubs.enet.dec.com ("I, Dubious: TAY2-2/M7, DTN 227-3709  12-Oct-1992 1157")
Subject: University of Maryland Distance Learning?
Date: Mon, 12 Oct 92 09:03:34 PDT
X-Received: by usenet.pa.dec.com; id AA19332; Mon, 12 Oct 92 09:04:49 -0700
X-Received: by enet-gw.pa.dec.com; id AA12933; Mon, 12 Oct 92 09:03:13 -0700
X-Received: from tnpubs.enet; by decwrl.enet; Mon, 12 Oct 92 09:03:33 PDT
X-To: disted@tnpubs.enet.dec.com
X-Cc: dubie@tnpubs.enet.dec.com
X-Apparently-To: alt.education.distance.usenet

CNBC recently had a spot on the University of Maryland's 
distance-learning program that uses satellite video as well as 
computer conferencing.

Would anyone have any more information regarding the program, 
such as whom to contact?

Thanks!
Bill Dubie

dubie@tnpubs.enet.dec.com
Digital Equipment Corporation,
Littleton, Mass.

Standard disclaimer: These views don't necessarily
reflect those of Digital Equipment Corporation.

Newsgroups: alt.dcom.telecom