Online Learning Has Come of Age: Four New Frames of Reference
ONLINE LEARNING HAS COME OF AGE: FOUR NEW FRAMES OF REFERENCE
John Sener Founder, Sener Learning Services Director of Special Initiatives, The Sloan Consortium Silver Spring, MD 20901 301-754-0688 john.sener@sloan-c.org
ABSTRACT
In developmental terms, online learning has recently “come of age,” entering the equivalent of a “young adulthood” phase. Applying insights from developmental psychology about the characteristic challenges of young adulthood yields several useful frames of reference for thinking about online learning‟s future development and its implications for practitioners in the field. Online learning practitioners would benefit from (1) focusing on issues related to maturation rather than legitimacy, including the continuous improvement, extensive adoption, and scalability of online learning; (2) envisioning a future where online learning, particularly in various „hybrid‟ or „blended‟ forms, is fully and seamlessly integrated into a continuum of learning delivery options; and (3) evaluating online learning on its own terms rather than compared to other delivery modes. Making progress on these issues will also enable online learning practitioners to re-frame the current online learning „story‟ as it is commonly told in the mainstream media so that it more accurately portrays the story as practitioners know it.
KEYWORDS: Online learning, hybrid learning, blended learning, online learning evaluation
I. INTRODUCTION
Thinking of online learning from a developmental perspective yields some useful frames of reference for thinking about online learning‟s future development and its implications for practitioners in the field. Most practitioners and observers seem to agree that online learning is no longer in its infancy; the explosive growth of online learning in the past several years has elevated it from a niche activity to one that is now entering the mainstream in higher education and corporate training. Similarly, there are few if any proponents of the viewpoint that online learning is fully mature. Most practitioners and observers also seem to agree online learning is still relatively new and far from having reached its full potential [e.g., 1, 2, 3] for a variety of reasons, such as relatively primitive technology [4]. In fact, the consensus seems to be that online learning is not only somewhere between infancy and full maturity, but that it has reached a turning point – or, in developmental terms, has come of age. While no one has held the equivalent of a „coming out‟ party or other „rite of passage‟ ritual to signify this change of status, various commentators have used the term “coming of age” to describe this signpost in the recent development and evolution of the field over the past few years. Claims that online learning was coming of age started appearing about three years ago [5, 6]. In the K-12 arena, one observer proclaimed two years ago that virtual learning was “no longer an experiment” and “was here to stay” [7]. Another practitioner asserted that online learning “officially” had its 21st birthday last year [8], while a more recent article title asserts: “No Longer a Novelty, Online Learning Comes of Age”[9].
1
Online Learning Has Come of Age: Four New Frames of Reference If these assertions are correct in some developmental sense, then online learning has recently entered its „young adulthood‟ phase. According to the psychologist Erik Erikson‟s well-known Eight Stages of Psychosocial Development [10, 11], the central conflict of the Young Adulthood stage (“intimacy vs. isolation”) and its most important psychosocial event (“love relationships”) involve developing the ability to relate to another on a deep, personal level based on a strong sense of identity and capacity for personal commitment. Arguably, there is a parallel here: the central conflict which online learning currently faces is its integration with the larger streams of education and training -- will educational institutions and corporations learn to love online learning and commit themselves to developing a strong relationship with it (and vice versa)? Or will they fail to embrace online learning, isolating it from their core missions? There is much evidence to support this characterization of online learning as having come of age. Arguably, using online technology is more of an expectation than a novelty for today‟s college students. There is abundant evidence, for instance, that the Internet has become an integral part of college education in terms of accessing learning resources, communicating with faculty or classmates, and overall usage [12, 13]. There is also ample evidence that online learning has entered the mainstream of American higher education: according to a recent Sloan-C report, 11% of all U.S. higher education students (over 1.6 million) took at least one online course during Fall 2002, of which over one-third of these students took all of their courses online. Nearly all (97%) of public higher education institutions in the U.S. offer at least one online or blended course, and over one third (34%) of all U.S. higher education institutions offer complete online degree programs [14]. Online learning is no longer a novelty for a sizable number of students. For instance, 76% of students currently enrolled (Fall 2003; n = 1002) in online courses at Florida State University have been enrolled in at least one FSU online course previously [15], while a multi-year longitudinal study of Rochester Institute of Technology distance learning students indicates that, after graduates are factored out, almost 90% of students continue with distance learning after their first year [16]. Likewise, recent training industry survey data indicate that online learning is used “often” or “always” for trainees: over three-fifths (63%) of all organizations use an internet/intranet/extranet as an instructional medium; close to one-half (44%) use self-study Web-based courses as an instructional method, and over one-fifth (21%) use a virtual classroom with (remotely-located) instructor; and around one-sixth (16%) of all training is delivered via computer or is remotely-located instructor-led [17]. Furthermore, the installed base of infrastructure investment in online learning makes it hard to imagine that online learning will regress to an earlier phase.
II. THREE NEW FRAMES OF REFERENCE
Now that online learning has come of age, what are some useful frames of reference for viewing this transition, and what are some of the implications for online learning practitioners? When adolescents become young adults, not everything changes overnight; there are, however, discernible shifts. Young adults act with greater degrees of autonomy in making major life choices; while others may question the appropriateness of the decisions they make, their right to make such decisions is seldom challenged. Young adults retain access to wide vistas of possibilities, but they also begin to define themselves in terms of concrete directions, specific choices and their consequences, figuring out their place in the world in the process. People start to see them as individuals and judge them on their own terms rather in terms of their parents or siblings. Applying these insights to the development of online learning yields three useful frames of reference:
Frame #1: Focus on issues related to maturation rather than legitimacy.
2
Online Learning Has Come of Age: Four New Frames of Reference While there are still periodic challenges to its legitimacy, online learning practitioners now also have a substantial body of practice from which to demonstrate online learning‟s capabilities. Online learning practitioners can now devote most of their energies to dealing with the questions that arise with a maturing field of practice. While there are many such questions, among the ones most specifically related to the maturation process are the following: How to increase the use of online delivery modes for teaching and learning purposes? The use of course management systems (CMSs) has clearly gained a foothold in higher education, as fully a quarter of all college courses use one [18]. However, they are often used solely as a communication or information transmission medium (e.g., to post syllabi and announcements, hold optional discussions, etc.). The next challenge remains to get more faculty to use the teaching and learning capabilities of CMSs [13] such as class discussions, collaborative projects, activities and assessments organized around embedded learning objects [19, 20], group critiques of student work [21], et al. One related issue is providing sufficient training for faculty to be able to take this next step. In the training sector, the use of learning management systems for synchronous delivery has gained a similar foothold, as 10% of all training is now delivered in this manner. However, while the use of self-paced Web-based courses is rising rapidly (61% of all computer-delivered courses vs. 48% in 2002), the use of asynchronous instructor-led online learning is apparently so small that it is not even tracked in surveys [17]. Thus a parallel challenge in the corporate sector is to get wider adoption of online training which incorporates instructor-learner, and even learner-learner, interaction in addition to learner-content interaction. How to assure that online teaching and learning keeps getting better? This involves two interrelated aspects: (1) incorporating what is known about effective learning into online learning design as a common practice, and (2) developing ways to exploit more fully the new capabilities and opportunities that online learning makes possible. There is still considerable value in successfully creating meaningful online learning experiences that are “comparable” to classroom ones, particularly when effective practices demonstrate that creating such learning experiences is possible, for instance with virtual science laboratories [22, 23, 24] or art and design education [21, 25]. However, too much effort is still being spent on trying to „replicate‟ the classroom course experience or effects in online courses. By contrast, there are many examples of effective practices that succeed in incorporating effective teaching and learning methodologies such as case studies [20, 26] and role plays [27], learner-led discussions [28], E-portfolios [29, 30], or experiential learning [31] in online learning courses. Some of these practices, such as the RealTime Case Method [26] or the Global Virtual Faculty [32], utilize online learning‟s special capabilities to enhance learning experiences in ways not previously possible. Other practices, such as providing online guest lecturers [21, 33], peer tutors [34], or remedial content [e.g., 35] greatly extend the reach of existing ways to enhance learning experiences. How to scale up online learning to meet needs and demands? Online learning has established a foothold in some market segments such as U.S. higher education and corporate training, but there is a huge need in many other areas – developing countries, other ages, informal/adult/lifelong learning [36], for instance – in which online learning has barely scratched the surface.
Frame #2: Envision online learning as fully integrated into a continuum of learning delivery options.
As Figures 1a-d illustrate, learning delivery options can be mapped on a continuum in terms of the degree of (a)synchronicity required. Until recently, learning delivery in higher education was generally either 3
Online Learning Has Come of Age: Four New Frames of Reference entirely synchronous or entirely asynchronous, with synchronous classroom courses being the predominant delivery option and asynchronous correspondence courses occupying a very small niche; very little learning was delivered using a combination of modes (Figure 1a). In recent years, other highly synchronous modes such as interactive television and audio conferencing have been added to the mix, while the advent of online learning not only expanded the range of available asynchronous options in the form of fully online “cybercourses,” but also expanded the range of courses (now commonly called „hybrid‟ or „blended‟) which utilize a combination of synchronous and asynchronous delivery (Figure 1b). At present, the array of delivery options spans the entire continuum, but the number of available options is relatively small in some areas (Figure 1c). As online learning matures, learners will eventually be able to choose from a full array of learning delivery options filling the entire continuum (Figure 1d).
The main driver for this will be the adoption of hybrid/blended models in various forms. “Online courses” (defined as >80% of learning delivered asynchronously [37]) will fill an important niche, comprising somewhere between 10-20% of all courses. Fully 100% asynchronous online courses will comprise an even smaller percentage of the total, likely to be reserved for special purposes (e.g., reaching new markets in other countries, serving learners with high needs for flexibility). The real gains will take place in the middle of the continuum, where hybrid/blended courses in various forms will most likely be the largest growth area, resulting in a relatively seamless continuum of learner delivery options. Several factors will contribute to this seamless integration: The pure classroom is becoming a thing of the past. Almost all classroom courses will be webfacilitated in some form or another [38]; fully 100% classroom courses are rapidly becoming obsolete and will eventually shrink to the status of filling certain appropriate niches, replaced by a more rich, diverse, and truly community-based model [39]. 4
Online Learning Has Come of Age: Four New Frames of Reference
„Best of both worlds.‟ Many educators and trainers, including some who are uncomfortable with fully online courses, embrace hybrid/blended models as a „best of both worlds‟ approach [e.g., 40, 41, 42, 43]. Hybrid/blended meets the need(s). A variety of hybrid/blended approaches are proving to be effective in meeting a diversity of specific needs, such as Michigan State University‟s “event-centered, onlinesupported” model (reaching new audiences by aligning learning experiences with organizations‟ professional development needs [44]), the Boston Architectural Center‟s “mixed media” approach (selecting appropriate delivery combinations to meet various instructional needs [25]), or the University of Phoenix‟s FlexNet (optimizing physical facilities utilization [45]). Putting the “S” in ALN: merging synchronicity and asynchronicity. Members of the ALN (Asynchronous Learning Networks) community are accustomed to thinking of online learning largely in terms of asynchronous delivery modes. However, there are now a variety of course management systems and other tools which support place-independent synchronous learning delivery. Another emerging set of hybrid/blended models involves using these tools in combination with asynchronous ones such as e-mail or discussion boards. Although the time-dependent nature of synchronous learning delivery generally restricts access, even this difficulty is possible to overcome in principle, and to some extent in practice; for example, one commercial vendor provides one-to-one online tutoring and academic support services up to 24 hours a day, seven days a week, in a variety of subjects [46].
Frame #3: Evaluate online learning on its own terms rather than in comparison to classroom or other delivery modes.
While the “no significant difference” compilation [47] and other comparative research studies [e.g., 48] have helped to establish the legitimacy of online learning, a far more productive focus at this point is on improving the practice of online learning by evaluating its effectiveness within its own frame of reference. Though this is not a brand-new idea [49], there are now a variety of alternative evaluation approaches available. Focusing on student characteristics, media attribute description/analysis, discourse analysis, application of quality standards or rubrics, or a combination of these can yield far more useful results. Collections of demonstrably effective practices by organizations such as EDUCAUSE, the Sloan Consortium, and the Western Collaborative on Educational Telecommunications also provide benchmarks for evaluating and/or improving practices [50], as illustrated by the numerous Sloan-C Effective Practices cited in this paper [19-32, 34-35, 44-46, 51-52]. Embrace description, avoid prescription. Other useful directions for evaluation and research include examining the interaction among key factors of online course and program design, and learning more about the specific conditions under which various designs, pedagogies, and support structures are most appropriate. For instance, one study of adult learners found that there appeared to be some tension between learners‟ desire for increased interaction opportunities and their need for flexibility to manage time constraints. Survey comments indicated that different learners in the same course had conflicting ideas about appropriate levels of interaction and flexibility; in fact, there was some indication that individual learners had conflicting ideas within themselves about this issue [51]. Such studies indicate the degree of complexity associated with some of the key issues related to improving online teaching and learning. Similarly, as more and more practitioners try new approaches, they are likely to discover effective practices that contradict the nascent „conventional wisdom‟ of online learning, for instance the
5
Online Learning Has Come of Age: Four New Frames of Reference notion that successful online courses always require a lot of lead development time [52]. Although descriptions of such results do not provide easy prescriptions, they offer very useful information about the issues that online learning will face as it matures.
III. CONCLUSION: A FOURTH FRAME OF REFERENCE
To the extent that young adults succeed in making their way in the world, they are able to create and tell their own story in their own terms rather than have their story defined by others. As their field matures, online learning practitioners face a similar challenge: to re-frame the story of online learning as it is currently told in the mainstream and trade media so that it portrays more completely and accurately the story as practitioners know it. Such a storytelling, for example, would focus much less on the technology aspects or past illusions of technodazzlingly-produced riches; it would not only reveal that online learning works well but that the need for interaction and “human touch” in effective online learning is natural and logical rather than ironic [53]; and the story would reflect the results of focusing on issues of maturation, integration, and continuous improvement informed by ongoing self-assessment.
IV. REFERENCES
1. Nixon, T., Mike Lambert (DETC) on Online Learning, Online with Thomas Nixon Newsletter, July 6, 2003. Retrieved October 30, 2003 from: http://www.tomnixon.net/newsletter151522.htm. 2. Scalise, K., Technology Venture to Help Merced Students, Forefront, Spring 2002. Retrieved October 30, 2003 from: http://www.coe.berkeley.edu/EPA/forefront/sp02/merced.html. 3. Lafee, S., Q&A with Xerox's John Seely Brown, The School Administrator Web Edition, October 2001. Retrieved October 30, 2003 from: http://www.aasa.org/publications/sa/2001_10/lafee_brown.htm 4. Daniel, J., The Future of Online Learning, Executive Briefing, Toronto, November 2000. Retrieved October 30, 2003 from: http://www.open.ac.uk/vcs-speeches/Toronto.htm 5. Jones Knowledge.com, “Distributed Learning Evolves to Meet Needs of Lifelong Learners,” eeducation advisor, Fall 2000, 1(1). Retrieved October 24, 2003 from: http://216.239.37.104/search?q=cache:bSHN24D7CJ8J:jonesknowledge.com/pdf/fall2000.pdf+% 22online+learning+comes+of+age%22&hl=en&ie=UTF-8 6. Grebb, M., Online Learning Coming of Age, HealthLeaders, July 2000. Retrieved October 30, 2003 from: http://www.healthleaders.com/magazine/2000/jul/feature1.php?year=2000&month=jul&contentid =34773&categoryid=155&CE_Session=0c6ce8ea058f754914cb2893e3075508 7. Vail, K., Online Learning Grows Up, electronic-school.com, October 2001. Retrieved October 30, 2003 from: http://www.electronic-school.com/2001/09/0901f1.html 8. Clarke, P., in Online Learning Comes of Age, Online Learning, September 8, 2002. Retrieved October 30, 2003 from: http://www.onlinelearning.co.za/news_archive/international/Sept02_int/10.09.02d.htm 9. Maeroff, G., No Longer a Novelty, Online Learning Comes of Age, The College Board Review, Winter 2003. 10. Erikson, E., Childhood and Society. New York: Norton, 1950.
6
Online Learning Has Come of Age: Four New Frames of Reference 11. Anderson, M., et al., Erik Erikson‟s 8 Stages of Psychosocial Development. Retrieved October 30, 2003, from: http://web.cortland.edu/andersmd/ERIK/stage6.HTML. 12. Jones, S. The Internet Goes to College: How Students Are Living in the Future with Today‟s Technology. Pew Internet & American Life Project. September 15, 2002. http://www.pewinternet.org/reports/toc.asp?Report=71 13. Sener, J., Improving Access to Online Learning: Current Issues, Practices, and Directions. In: Bourne, J., and Moore, J. (Eds.), Elements of Quality Online Education: Practice and Direction. Sloan-C, Needham, MA, 2003. 14. Allen, I.E., and Seaman, J., Sizing the Opportunity: The Quality and Extent of Online Education in the United States, 2002 and 2003. Sloan-C, Needham, MA, 2003. 15. Hayes, C. Personal communication, October 27, 2003. 16. Vignare, K., Longitudinal Success Measures for Online Learning Students at the Rochester Institute of Technology. In: Bourne, J., and Moore, J. (Eds.), Elements of Quality Online Education: Practice and Direction. Sloan-C, Needham, MA, 2003. 17. Galvin, T., The (22nd Annual) 2003 Industry Report, Training, 40(9), October 2003, pp.19-45. 18. Green, K. C. The 2001 Campus Computing Survey Summary. http://www.campuscomputing.net/. 19. Online Access to Learning Resources and Activities via Project Synergy. Retrieved October 30, 2003 from: http://www.sloan-c.org/effective/details2.asp?ACC_ID=15. 20. Repurposeable Learning Objects: the TALON Learning Object System. Retrieved October 30, 2003 from: http://www.aln.org/effective/details3.asp?LE_ID=37. 21. Re-Creating the Studio-Based Model Online for Art and Design Education. Retrieved October 30, 2003 http://www.sloan-c.org/effective/details2.asp?ACC_ID=36 22. Virtual Electronics Laboratories. Retrieved October 30, 2003 from: http://www.sloanc.org/effective/details2.asp?ACC_ID=43 23. Anywhere Anytime Chemistry Experience. Retrieved October 30, 2003 from: http://www.sloanc.org/effective/details2.asp?ACC_ID=25. 24. Virtual ChemLab. Retrieved October 30, 2003 from: http://www.sloanc.org/effective/details2.asp?ACC_ID=44. 25. Professional Design Education and Opt-in Hybrid Course Migration Model. Retrieved October 30, 2003 from: http://www.sloan-c.org/effective/details2.asp?ACC_ID=40. 26. The Real-Time Case Method: Access to Real-Time, Real-World Cases. Retrieved October 30, 2003 from: http://www.sloan-c.org/effective/details2.asp?ACC_ID=32 and http://www.aln.org/effective/details1.asp?SS_ID=105 27. Online Case-Based Role Play: The Doctor‟s Dilemma. Retrieved October 30, 2003 from: http://www.sloan-c.org/effective/details2.asp?ACC_ID=50. 28. Student-Led Discussion Builds Complex Understanding of Psychology Concepts. Retrieved October 30, 2003 from: http://www.aln.org/effective/details3.asp?LE_ID=36. 29. Electronic Portfolios in a Teaching Credential Program. Retrieved October 30, 2003 from: http://www.sloan-c.org/effective/details2.asp?ACC_ID=46. 30. Penn State E-Portfolio. Retrieved October 30, 2003 from: http://www.aln.org/effective/details1.asp?SS_ID=110. 31. Modeling Experiential Learning and Exemplary Standards. Retrieved October 30, 2003 at http://www.sloan-c.org/effective/details2.asp?ACC_ID=37. 32. Creating Skilled Lifelong Global Learners: Fairleigh Dickinson‟s Distance Learning Initiative. Retrieved October 30, 2003 from: http://www.sloan-c.org/effective/details2.asp?acc_ID=54. 7
Online Learning Has Come of Age: Four New Frames of Reference 33. Kumari, D.S. Connecting Graduate Students To Virtual Guests Through Asynchronous Discussions - Analysis of an Experience. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks. 5 (2), September 2001. 34. Course Wizards: Successful Students as Tutors, Facilitators, and Role Models. Retrieved October 30, 2003 from: http://www.aln.org/effective/details2.asp?ACC_ID=24. 35. Courselets: Improving Learning Resource Access. Retrieved October 30, 2003 from: http://www.aln.org/effective/details2.asp?ACC_ID=13. 36. Bork, A., Attaining Education for All. Retrieved October 30, 2003 from: http://www.ics.uci.edu/~bork/efa.htm. 37. Based on the definition used in the “Sizing the Opportunity” report – see Footnote 14. This is an arbitrary but reasonable demarcation of this part of the continuum. 38. The “Sizing the Opportunity” report defines “web-facilitated” classroom courses as essentially face-to-face courses for which 1-29% of the content is delivered online. Such courses could also be considered as another form of hybrid learning delivery. 39. Downes, S. The Future of Online Learning, July 1998. Retrieved October 30, 2003 from: http://www.atl.ualberta.ca/downes/future/home.html. 40. deFreitas, S., e-Learning or Hybrid Learning, BBK Newsletter. Retrieved October 30, 2003 from: http://www.bbk.ac.uk/ccs/elearn/article/. 41. Bersin, J., What Works in Blended Learning, Learning Circuits, July 28, 2003. Retrieved October 30, 2003 from: http://www.learningcircuits.org/2003/jul2003/bersin.htm 42. Brown, D., Hybrid Courses Are Best, Syllabus: New Dimensions in Education Technology, August 2001. Retrieved October 30, 2003 from: http://www.wfu.edu/%7Ebrown/Syllabus%20Articles/SylHybrid%20Courses.htm. 43. Young, J., „Hybrid‟ Teaching Seeks to End the Divide between Traditional and Online Instruction, Chronicle of Higher Education, March 22, 2002. Retrieved October 30, 2003 from: http://chronicle.com/free/v48/i28/28a03301.htm 44. Event-Centered, Online-Supported Delivery Model. Retrieved October 30, 2003 from: http://www.sloan-c.org/effective/details2.asp?ACC_ID=48. 45. FlexNet: Improving Access by Maximizing Utilization of Physical Facilities. Retrieved October 30, 2003 from: http://www.sloan-c.org/effective/details2.asp?ACC_ID=45. 46. Anywhere, Anytime Tutoring in Real Time. Retrieved October 30, 2003 from: http://www.sloan-c.org/effective/details2.asp?acc_ID=49. 47. TeleEducation NB, The 'No Significant Difference Phenomenon.' Retrieved October 30, 2003, from: http://teleeducation.nb.ca/nosignificantdifference/ (Includes both 'no significant difference' and 'significant difference' studies.) 48. ALN WebCenter for Learning Effectiveness Research. Published ALN research studies. Retrieved October 30, 2003, from http://www.alnresearch.org/Html/ published_aln_research_studies.htm 49. Brown, G., & Wack, M. The difference frenzy and matching buckshot with buckshot. The Technology Source, May 1999. Retrieved October 30, 2003, from http://www.horizon.unc.edu/TS/default.asp-show=article&id=459 50. Sener, J., Escaping the Comparison Trap: Evaluating the Effectiveness of Online Learning on Its Own Terms. In press; to be published by The Technology Source. 51. Instructor-Led Online Learning for Adult Voluntary Learners. Retrieved October 30, 2003 from: http://www.sloan-c.org/effective/edit2.asp?acc_ID=12.
8
Online Learning Has Come of Age: Four New Frames of Reference 52. Converting „On-the-Fly‟ from Classroom to Online Format for Residential Learners. Retrieved October 30, 2003 from: http://www.sloan-c.org/effective/details2.asp?ACC_ID=47. 53. Boser, U., Working on What Works Best, USNews & World Report, October 20, 2003, pp. 58-62.
ABOUT THE AUTHOR
John Sener is a consultant whose private practice (Sener Learning Services) focuses on supporting the evolution of on-line and other learning environments in higher education institutions and consortia, government agencies, and non-profit organizations. As Director of Special Initiatives for the Sloan Consortium, he is involved in a wide variety of Sloan-C activities and initiatives. He is currently the Sloan-C Effective Practices Editor for Access and also coordinates the Sloan-C Speakers and Consultants Bureau. He has been an Associate Editor for the Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks since its inception and is on the editorial board of the monthly on-line learning newsletter Educational Pathways. Mr. Sener‟s other consulting activities span a wide variety of areas including strategic planning, evaluation, program development, instructional design support and development, workshop delivery, and grant writing. During his seven years at Northern Virginia Community College's Extended Learning Institute, Mr. Sener directed development of associate degrees in engineering, information systems technology, public management, and business management, available through home study and on-line distance education. Mr. Sener's career in education and training over the past twenty-four years includes directing a number of foundation and federally funded projects; he has also been a trainer, teacher, administrator, instructional designer, and tutor in the areas of adult literacy, basic skills, information systems, and English as a Second Language. He holds a M.S. degree in Education from Johns Hopkins University and a B.A. in Psychology from Oberlin College.
9