Full text of DOI:10.1007/BF02504922

1
18
ETR&D, Vol. 49, No. 3
status. Hence the second question: Is it likely
that each individual residing in a third-world
country will be able to receive knowledge using
wireless technology in the very near future?
Robert Hayden is a doctoral student in Instructional
Technology at Utah State University. He is an
assistant professor at Brigham Young
University-Hawaii Campus and Department Head in
Information Technology.
Rod Rientjes, Wendi Ryder, and Ross Wall are
pursuing their master’s degrees in Industrial
Technology at Utah State University.
Can We Piggyback on Medical
Community Infrastructure?
References
Most importantly, and at the most basic level,
what are the implications of wireless technolo-
gies for knowledge seekers in developing coun-
tries? Knowledge seekers in third-world
countries will begin at the most basic level,
where illiteracy can be overcome. Once younger
knowledge seekers begin to see the importance
in understanding, a more advanced learning can
take place. Regardless of whether the knowl-
edge opportunities are communicated in
English or in the native tongue, there is a greater
literacy potential through wireless technologies
than through current hardwired infrastructures.
In many instances a native-language format has
been used successfully as a form of delivery for
third-world medical assistance. For example, the
World Association of Medical Editors (WAME)
uses the World Wide Web to assist editors in
developing countries and editors of small jour-
nals, who often face special obstacles such as dif-
ficulties obtaining high-quality manuscripts,
lack of formal training in editing, limited
finances, and limited access to publication
expertise. Thus the third question arises: Is it fea-
sible to exchange knowledge with third-world
citizens by piggybacking onto the medical com-
munity technology infrastructure already in
place?
Carty, W. (2000). [Accessed, April 19, 2001].
http://www.laspau.harvard.edu/aragon.htm.
Wright, C. (1997). Educational technology consulting
in developing countries. Techtrends, January/Febru-
ary, 35–40.
Participation in International
Teleconferences and Discussions:
Implicit Assumptions
by Elizabeth Anderson, Jacques du Plessis, and
Tom Nickel
Interest in distance learning is strong all over
the world. The debate underway in developing
nations and technologically advanced countries
alike concerns the role distance learning pro-
grams should play in the increasingly complex
task of educating a nation.
In the United States, the question can be
explored directly through thousands of projects
in industry, as well as in the universities. For
developing nations, this kind of hands-on learn-
ing about new instructional delivery methods
often is not a convenient option. The telecommu-
nications infrastructure may not be in place to
support it, or it may be prohibitively expensive
to use. A measure known as teledensity (tele-
phone lines per hundred people) tells the
story—among developing countries the
teledensity is 1.5, in Europe it is 45, and in the
United States it is 65 (Ivala, 1999).
Without having to hardwire developing
countries, political leaders and educators can
enhance knowledge opportunities through
wireless communication technologies. Efforts by
the various world communities can provide
both the structure and the opportunity for
knowledge sharing in developing countries. If
literacy levels in reading, writing, computing,
and telecommunications are raised, a confidence
level will be born that will extend a renewed
promise to all those who wish to communicate
either synchronously or asynchronously with
the world.
Until direct access is cheap and simple, stra-
tegic planning for institutions is much more dif-
ficult and demands greater creativity. In higher
education, dialogue with peers who have easier
access to technology can ever replace direct
experience, but it still might play a useful role in
planning for distance education in developing

INTERNATIONAL REVIEW
119
countries. Options for mediating such dialogue
through technology are proliferating, making
the process simpler and less expensive. With
integrated services digital network (ISDN) links
and the Internet, both teleconferencing and vari-
ous forms of computer-mediated conferencing
relationships. Professor Nick Eastmond of
USU’s Department of Instructional Technology
had spent a recent sabbatical at Border Tech-
nikon, developing a Center for Academic Devel-
opment. In addition, Wayne McKay, a graduate
of the department’s master’s program, was
working for this Center as an instructional tech-
nology specialist.
Professor Eastmond was able to assemble a
select group from USU, which included appro-
priate University administrators (Provost’s
Office, Instructional Learning Resources Pro-
gram, Faculty Assistance Center for Technol-
ogy) and faculty members (Department of
Instructional Technology), as well as on-line
course developers and instructors. At the Border
Technikon site, administrators were also well
represented (Vice Chancellor, Rector, Principal),
as were a number of academic departments
(
CMC) have never been more conveniently
available.
It is generally acknowledged that the first use
of computers for discussions at a distance took
place in 1970 through a system developed by
Murray Turoff, of the New Jersey Institute of
Technology (Hrasim, 1990). Turoff thought that
education would be the key application for this
technology, but after 30 years of development,
CMC still is not a mainstream method of instruc-
tion or collaboration. As economic and technical
barriers are removed, what other kinds of obsta-
cles are still in place?
(
Education, Computer Studies, Broadcast Jour-
nalism) and services (End User Computing,
Human Services, IT Services, and more).
Collaboration Experiment
International collaboration among educators
around distance education issues certainly
seems to be a perfect topic for electronic con-
ferencing, using the tools of distance education
to discuss distance education—both implemen-
tation and pedagogical issues. That was the pre-
Teleconferences and Discussions
Shortly before the teleconference, a memo from
Border Technikon was forwarded to all of the
invited Utah participants. It included a short list
of very basic questions that would provide the
framework for the event:
vailing spirit during
a
recent satellite
teleconference that brought together partici-
pants from South Africa and the United States:
specifically, Border Technikon in East London,
and Utah State University (USU) in Logan, Utah.
How would distance learning support satel-
lite schools?
•
How should programs be produced and
delivered?
•
USU is a Carnegie I research institution with
an enrollment of approximately 20,000 students.
Border Technikon, in the Eastern Cape Province
of South Africa, is smallest and most recently
created of the 15 Technikons in South Africa. It
has a current enrollment of 4,200 (1999–2000)
and is somewhat equivalent to a community col-
lege in the United States (Eastmond, 1997). It
was established in 1990 under the apartheid sys-
tem to serve black students from the homeland
of Ciskei.
What about access and quality?
•
•
What about faculty resistance?
They were the right questions, but they were
also extremely complicated questions.
The depth and complexity of the issues raised
by Border Technikon suggested to participants
at USU that other forms of on-line collaboration
could be used in conjunction with the teleconfer-
ence. To them, it appeared that the live event
could be a good way to begin the conversation,
by providing a strong initial human connection,
and some preliminary discussion of the strategic
questions. Because both Border Technikon and
USU are connected over the Internet, deeper
Initiated at the request of Border Technikon,
the teleconference was funded through the Ter-
tiary Education Linkages Program (TELP) of the
United States Agency for International Develop-
ment (USAID), and drew on existing academic

1
20
ETR&D, Vol. 49, No. 3
interaction over a period of weeks could then
take place in a threaded discussion forum,
immediately following the teleconference.
tion out of instruction. Is that a legitimate
concern?
In light of the high costs, almost immediate
devaluation, ongoing maintenance expenses
and eventual obsolescence of most technol-
ogy, what sort of things do you do to help
minimize or defray those problems?
•
An excellent opportunity was emerging to
experiment informally with a new model for col-
laboration. The asynchronous nature of the on-
line discussion was seen as a way to enable at
least some of the people from both USU and Bor-
der Technikon to continue the interaction at
their own convenience. The idea would have to
be raised at the teleconference, at the beginning.
In this way, participants from USU would also
feel less pressured to address completely all the
questions and concerns presented. They would
merely be starting the conversation, rather than
trying to make the definitive statement on the
subject.
Several senior faculty members were
appointed to take the lead on each question;
then others were free to contribute. There were
no prerehearsed presentations. People spoke
without notes, making general points and sup-
porting them with an example or two. There
were a few rejoinders from the South Africans,
but not many. Overall, it was not a highly inter-
active conference. The points were addressed
very clearly and openly, but there was a sense of
being on a tight schedule that perhaps served to
inhibit more back and forth communication.
The Event
In addition to senior faculty and administra-
tors, a group of on-line course developers from
USU was able to address a number of the ques-
tions from a front-line perspective. Having a
variety of faculty representatives and instruc-
tional technologists in the group made for a
richer presentation that kept moving rapidly
down the list:
The teleconference was scheduled to begin at
9
:00 a.m., Monday, May 15, 2000. The eight-hour
time difference between Utah and the eastern
coast of South Africa creates less than ideal cir-
cumstances. People were leaving work in South
Africa at 5 p.m. as the USU participants were
starting their day at 9 a.m. in the mountain time
zone. The teleconference was to last 90 minutes,
with brief video presentations from each side at
the beginning.
To a large extent our lecturers, which I
•
assume is typical most anywhere, are reluc-
tant to embrace the idea that technology can
enhance instruction. What has been your
experience with this?
During the actual event, technical difficulties
right from the start decreased the available time.
Video worked, but audio did not. By the time a
good connection was made, there was only an
hour left. Wayne McKay made a few introduc-
tory remarks from South Africa. Nick Eastmond
responded from Utah, and also presented the
idea of the follow-up discussion to be conducted
on-line. The Border Technikon contingent
seemed receptive to the plan, and with that,
speakers from USU began addressing the ques-
tions:
Given the Border Technikon’s low-tech,
•
robust classroom environment, growing
number of educationally disadvantaged stu-
dents, and possible need to consolidate at the
tertiary level . . . how can we: improve lec-
turer productivity? improve learner produc-
tivity? enhance exit skill levels?
With a little orchestration, the USU speakers
were able to complete what was felt to be a “first
round,” just as the teleconference transmission
came to its abrupt end. Although it was techni-
cally bumpy at first and less interactive than
might have been anticipated, the USU partici-
pants had a generally positive feeling about the
event. A few telephone conversations confirmed
that Border Technikon people felt the same way.
How and to what extent are technology and
•
technology enhanced classrooms being utilized
in the design, development and delivery of
instruction at USU?
Many people are concerned that technology
is driving the vital element of human interac-
•

INTERNATIONAL REVIEW
121
The Non-Event
were informed and provided with a brief ratio-
nale for the change of venue.
The follow-up on-line discussion was launched
within a week by a group at USU. Names and e-
mail addresses were gathered from all of the
teleconference participants. Forums were set up
using the discussion tool, which is a part of
WebCT, one of the on-line course management
products used at USU. Three separate areas
were established based on the questions and
concerns introduced in the live event:
The results, however, scarcely changed. A
few messages from USU were distributed
through the new mechanism, with one exchange
from Border Technikon. Other hindrances were
of a technical nature. There were technical diffi-
culties involved in using the Internet as an on-
going
collaborative
tool
at
Border
Technikon—including occasional brown-outs,
unreliable e-mail servers, and a one-week period
during which the overall system was being
upgraded and access was not available at all.
Yet, the question remains whether these issues
mentioned were enough to explain the total lack
of interaction.
1
2
3
. The Technology-Enhanced Classroom
. Distance Education
. Faculty Development
User IDs and passwords were created for
What was the missing ingredient? Would it
be helpful to identify one key individual at Bor-
der Technikon who could catalyze the process
there? Wayne McKay, who had been very
involved in the teleconference, was near the end
of his stay and was not in a position to help stim-
ulate the discussion. In order to get some idea of
how things looked from South Africa, Professor
Eastmond contacted Peet Roets, a former col-
league and Director of End-User Computing at
Border Technikon, who was also a participant in
the teleconference. Roets responded the next
day, optimistic about the possibility of some
interaction.
everyone. Detailed instructions were produced
and e-mailed. Moderators from USU posed the
initial questions in the different forums, and
then sat back and waited for the exchange to
begin. But it never did. Several USU faculty
members made initial posts, including Professor
Eastmond. No one from Border Technikon
posted a comment.
The group at USU attempting to lead the dis-
cussion reasoned that the format itself might be
an inhibiting factor. To participate in an on-line
threaded discussion, one must have the time to
log on, get to the forum, make a post—but first,
and most difficult of all—one must remember to do
all this. It was end-of-semester grading period at
Border Technikon, one of the ultimate academic
distractions. In addition, on-line discussions are
apparently not a routine matter among Border
Technikon faculty and administrators, whereas
at USU this mediated form of communication is
used more frequently.
And that is where the on-line discussion
phase of the dialogue ended.
Approaching On-line Collaboration
No one assumes that the dialogue has ended for-
ever. It stopped where it did because that was as
far as Border Technikon participants wanted or
needed to go at that time. The vastly different
levels of opportunity for direct experience with
instructional technologies create equally differ-
ent attitudes and expectations about on-line con-
ferences and discussions. In fact, the aspects of
the teleconference that active on-line instructors
at USU saw as most limiting were precisely
what made it attractive to Border Technikon.
According to Roets, “The people involved may
have felt only a commitment to the video confer-
ence and may have been poorly prepared for on-
A variant on the initial discussion format was
tried as a way to help overcome these potential
obstacles. All participants were contacted via e-
mail and told to expect daily discussion activity
delivered directly to them. In an e-mail discus-
sion group, there is no need to remember to go
to a particular uniform resource locator (URL).
The discussion comes right to the participants,
rather than the other way around. Respond to
anything from the group and it automatically
goes out to everyone. The new e-mail group was
created using
a
free on-line service
(
http://www.egroups.com). All participants

1
22
ETR&D, Vol. 49, No. 3
going dialogue” (personal e-mail communi- cat-
ion, June 15, 2000).
national cultures, South Africa ranks moder-
ately high on his masculinity index, a measure of
the dominance of “male values” and the lack of
overlapping gender roles in the culture.
Although his data are from Whites only, drawn
from studies of IBM employees—with the
exception of one faculty member, the Border
Technikon teleconference participants were also
White. Masculine values in the workplace
include accomplishment and advancement,
while feminine values focus more on the quality
of relationships. In a society with a lower mascu-
linity index, people might have been more likely
to participate in an on-line discussion simply for
the sake of building professional relationships.
In South Africa, unless something productive
would obviously come of it, there would be less
inclination to engage in a collaborative activity.
Teleconferences are more casual and less rig-
orous than well-moderated on-line discussions.
Discussions permit, and might even require, a
much deeper and more serious interaction.
Without exception, the Border Technikon partic-
ipants were neither interested in nor prepared
for a deep and serious collaborative exchange.
They planned a casual and less rigorous event in
the first place, not because they value deeper
interaction any less, but simply because that is
what was appropriate for their current state of
technology implementation.
A good on-line discussion requires commit-
ment. Border Technikon was seeking a one-time
exchange, which could lead to more substantive
collaboration in time. From their perspective, it
was important to stage an event that specifically
required minimal commitment. That way, indi-
viduals could attend and begin to identify them-
selves as supporters more easily. The
teleconference served this function perfectly.
An immediately productive outcome was
unlikely for several reasons, but the most obvi-
ous was a temporary moratorium on the expan-
sion of university distance education programs
in South Africa put in place about that time by
the government. Increasing private sector
involvement in higher education through on-
line programs is being stopped by the morato-
rium, “while government officials develop a
blueprint for a wide-ranging reorganization of
higher education in South Africa” (Vergnani,
June, 2000). While it is difficult to imagine such a
moratorium being imposed in the United States,
the entry of commercial education service pro-
viders into the global marketplace for learning is
affecting every country in the world. In South
Africa, this development has provoked a gov-
ernmental response that has inhibited discus-
sion of distance education by limiting real world
activity on the topic.
Why was there no stampede toward the dis-
cussion, just to see what the experience would
be like? Probably because that kind of casual
experimentation is a luxury that is not easy to
afford at Border Technikon and many institu-
tions of higher education on the other side of the
global digital divide. Had anyone at Border
Technikon felt a sense of urgency, something
different might have happened. It is also worth
remembering that the threaded discussion was a
suggestion initiated at USU, on the day of the
event.
Studies in educational settings indicate that
emphasizing the relevance of computer con-
ferencing has a positive impact on participation
(
Cifuentes & Murphy, 1997). For some of the
USU participants the collaborative model itself,
teleconference and discussion among educators
in different stages of technological development,
was not only relevant, but full of tremendous
potential for convenient, rich, and low-cost
interaction. However, for a number of reasons,
distance education itself was not sufficiently rel-
evant at that time to the participants from Bor-
der Technikon to stimulate the kind of
commitment needed.
Implicit Assumptions
New tools for on-line collaboration, such as
threaded discussions and e-mail discussion
groups, carry implicit assumptions about the
users. In a collaboration, selecting the right vehi-
cle for communication means recognizing those
assumptions and evaluating the fit for all parties
who are potentially to be involved. A threaded
discussion may well be a perfect vehicle for in-
According to Hofstede’s (1997) studies on

INTERNATIONAL REVIEW
123
depth strategic consulting between universities
in different stages of technological development,
but only if the reasons for participation warrant
the usage of the medium and the tool.
45(3), 122–124.
Harasim, L.M. (Ed.). (1990). Online education: Perspec-
tives on a new environment. New York: Praeger Pub-
lishers.
Hofstede, G. (1997). Cultures and organizations. New
York: McGraw-Hill.
Ivala, E. (1999, August). The Internet and distance educa-
tion. Paper presented at the First National
NADEOSA Conference. Available:
http://www.saide.org.za/nadeosa/confer-
ence1999/ivala.htm.
It is becoming increasingly straightforward
to assemble the requisite complement of hard-
ware and software. But the more elusive dimen-
sion in a multistage on-line collaboration such as
the USU-Border Technikon effort is the estab-
lishment of a clear commitment from the outset
by both parties.
Vergnani, L. (2000, June 23). South African universi-
ties grapple with the growth of distance learning.
The Chronicle of Higher Education, A44–A47.
From the USU side, it was easy to make
assumptions, because the idea of a discussion
following a teleconference seemed like such a
good collaborative vehicle.Those assumptions
were far reaching, largely unconscious, and in
most cases incorrect. The technological assump-
tions involved convenient access to the Internet.
The educational system assumptions involved
timeliness and the ability to implement new
technology now. But perhaps most important
was the assumption that interaction among col-
leagues in an on-line discussion would be seen
as valuable regardless of a tangible outcome.
There were technical and possibly social
deterrents in South Africa, which were largely
overlooked in Utah when the threaded discus-
sion concept was presented. These factors
directly affected participation in the on-line dis-
cussion. Without a broad, shared consensus, the
overall experience was almost certainly destined
to be, at best, only a partial success.
Distance Education in South Africa
by M. David Merrill
In February 2001, it was my privilege to
travel to Pretoria, South Africa, where I was the
guest of the Foundation of Tertiary Institutions
of the Northern Metropolis (FOTIM). I pre-
sented a three-day workshop on “First Princi-
1
ples of Instruction” to 135 distance educators
from 16 institutions of higher education. Follow-
ing this workshop many of these educators
requested that I visit their universities or Tech-
nikons (universities that stress practical applica-
tion of skills learned). During the following
week I visited 6 institutions: (a) UNISA (Univer-
sity of South Africa), (b) Technikon South Africa,
(
c) Potchefstroom University, (d) University of
Pretoria, (e) RAU (Rand Afrikaans University),
and (f) Technikon Pretoria. was most
I
Elizabeth Anderson is a master’s student in
Instructional Technology at Utah State University
and is working on a grant with the department.
Jacques du Plessis is a doctoral student in
Instructional Technology at Utah State University,
and a researcher with the Center for On-line
Education there.
impressed with the dedicated devotion of the
educators there to helping provide education to
the entire population of South Africa.
Apartheid was officially ended early in the
1
990s. In the wake of this important political
event the problems of insufficient education,
poverty, and crime became increasingly appar-
ent. We were warned that South African cities
were dangerous to visit. We were told not to
carry or wear any valuables when on the street
because of the possibility of mugging. Walls,
grills, and other devices to reduce burglary pro-
Tom Nickel is a doctoral student in Instructional
Technology at Utah State University, and an
instructor within the department.
References
Cifuentes, L. & Murphy, K. (1997). Design considera-
tions for computer conferences. Journal of Research
on Computing in Education, 30, 177–202.
Eastmond, N. (1997). Background on South Africa.
Educational Technology Research and Development,
1
. Information on this workshop is available on my Web site
at http://www.id2.usu.edu under the heading, Does Your
Instruction Rate 5 Stars?