Table 1
Models of Distance Education - A Conceptual Framework (Taylor 2001, p. 3)
| Characteristics of Delivery Technologies | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Models of Distance Education and Associated Delivery Technologies | Flexibility | Highly Refined Materials | Advanced Interactive Delivery | Institutional Variable Costs Approaching Zero | ||
| Time | Place | Pace | ||||
| FIRST GENERATION The Correspondence Model | ||||||
| Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | No | No | |
| SECOND GENERATION The Multimedia Model | ||||||
| Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | No | No | |
| • Audiotape | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | No | No |
| • Videotape | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | No | No |
| • Computer-based learning (e.g. CML/CAL/IMM) | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | No |
| • Interactive video (disk and tape) | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | No |
| THIRD GENERATION The Telelearning Model | ||||||
| • Audio tele-conferencing | No | No | No | No | Yes | No |
| • Video-conferencing | No | No | No | No | Yes | No |
| • Audiographic Communication | No | No | No | Yes | Yes | No |
| • Broadcast TV/Radio and audio-teleconferencing | No | No | No | Yes | Yes | No |
| FOURTH GENERATION The Flexible Learning Model | ||||||
| • Interactive multimedia (IMM) online | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| • Internet-based access to WWW resources | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| • Computer-mediated communication | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | No |
| FIFTH GENERATION The Intelligent Flexible Learning Model | ||||||
| • Interactive multimedia (IMM) online | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| • Internet-based access to WWW resources | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| • Computer-mediated communication, using automated response systems | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| • Campus portal access to institutional processes and resources | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes |
Table 2
Progression of e-functionalities at the OUSL
| Division | Automated functionalities | Progression of e-functionalities |
|---|---|---|
| IT Division | e-Information repositories |
|
| e-Applications |
| |
| e-Administration |
| |
| e-Teaching and learning |
| |
| Library | e-Information repositories/e-administration |
|
| CETMe | e-Information repositories |
|
| e-Teaching and learning |
| |
| e-Interface |
|
Table 3
Some of the quotations for either successful or hindered strategies for mitigation
| Challenge | Successful mitigation strategies | Strategies hindered mitigation |
|---|---|---|
| Leadership | … strong skills of persuasion, and the stabilization of the regional centre network in the 1990s was a major step forward (Raheem, 2010, p. 26). | … OUSL did not have the foresight to carry out this experiment that would have been cost-effective and also would have provided some lessons … (Vidanapathirana & Abeysekera 2010, p. 122). |
| Governance | There were very clear objectives why the OUSL was established … But due to various pressures, desires, comforts, and conveniences, people modified to suit the consensus … Key features of this university must be maintained … (Interview with Former Vice-Chancellor). | … dissatisfaction at the lack of additional institutional support for those who work beyond their routine duties (Ariadurai & Manohanthan 2008 p. 5) |
| Staff commitment | … those who were committed to online conversion continuously improve their products with new changes, additions and improvements… (Liyanagama, Kulasekera & Vidanapathirana, 2015, p. 10) | … encourage the young inexperienced programmers to adopt appropriate team working practices … the regular departure of team members to better paid jobs in the private sector … (Johnson & Johnson, 1999, p. 39). |
| Sustainability of the interventions | Model 2 proved to be a more efficient and sustainable model … since the ET Division’s knowledge base continues to grow … (Jayasooriya et al., 2008). | non-inclusion of the relevant staff during the project and just handing over the tasks at the end of the project to a division with inexperienced staff without any training and technical facilities (Senior Administrative staff 2) |
Table 4:
Proposed Mitigation Strategies for future technological interventions
| Challenge | Proposed Mitigation Strategies for future interventions | |
|---|---|---|
| 1. | Lack of infrastructure facilities and physical resources |
|
| 2. | Lack of expertise |
|
| 3 | Visionary Leadership |
|
| 4 | Good Governance |
|
| 5 | Staff Readiness/commitment |
|
| 6 | Organizational culture |
|
| 7 | Adoption of Technology |
|
| 8 | Sustainability of the interventions/ innovative practices beyond the project period |
|
