Madison Dialogue

A few springs ago, the dean of a nearby Catholic college called and asked if I could take over a section of the school’s required freshman religion seminar. On paper it looked great: a twice-a-week seminar on such topics as the Trinity, the Eucharist, forgiveness, justice. It seemed like an interesting challenge, an opportunity to engage students in meaningful dialogue about faith, to stimulate mature consideration of the things of God.

I was wrong.

At the first meeting it was clear that these freshmen were neither prepared for nor interested in such a dialogue. They were parked in their chairs only because the course was required. Religion was barely on their radar screens. Most students had no experience of church, and those who did had very negative feelings about it.

So I did something that I had never done in 30 years of teaching: At the second class, I announced that I was throwing out the syllabus (anathema to a control freak like me). Instead, I made it up as we went along. We did a highlight reel of the Old Testament: Abraham, Moses, David. We read the Gospel of Luke together. We discussed essays by writers like Kathleen Norris and Anne Lamott.

I also threw out the term paper requirement; instead, I had the students write 100 words on a question I distributed at every class, and everyone would share their couple of paragraphs at the next class.

Oh, it was a struggle. Handing in the final grades was a relief. I was never happier to see a semester end. It was a sad and humbling experience.

I do not even know if any of the students got anything from the course. But looking back, I realized that those students had taught me a great deal about faith. I learned more from that course than from any earlier classroom experience–whether as a teacher or as a student. In fact, I was the student and they were my teachers. They taught me some hard but valuable lessons.

Welcome Before Dogma

Religion is not so much about believing as it is about belonging. These young adults were not as interested in dogma as in understanding.

I assigned a reflection paper on Luke’s Gospel: What parable of Jesus did you find most meaningful? I expected most essays to name the stories about the good Samaritan or the prodigal son, but more than half wrote about Jesus’ admonitions on not judging others, verses that barely registered in my consciousness. This generation can teach us a great deal about tolerance and understanding, acceptance and respect.

I also asked the students to design the “perfect” church setting. I steeled myself for demands for cooler art and entertainment. But what the students valued above all else was being welcomed, feeling that they had something valuable to contribute. They also wanted liturgy that engaged them, prayer that enabled them to participate. And they wanted sermons that made sense on Monday morning.

The class gave me a new appreciation for hospitality and the importance of celebrants and ministers to help people become fully engaged participants in prayer.

Being in Love With God

I used to think that believers first discover God in nature, what one theologian I read not long ago called “the footprint of God.” But we really cannot understand or encounter God until we fall in love.

Love calls us beyond ourselves, pulls us out of our self-centered orbit and into the orbit of another. We discover God in the joy of loving someone else, in the gratitude we feel in the assurance that we are loved–despite ourselves. As Thomas Merton writes in The New Man, we grow up only when we discover that we are not the center of the universe, that the world is bigger than we are.

The reality is that we have become so used to getting what we want when we want it that we cannot see beyond our own needs to the greater and more desperate needs of others. The students in my seminar were just beginning to find that out. They were beginning to realize the great technological irony of our time: that the Internet has not united us but has fractured us according to interests, skills, politics, values, gender and so on.

We can encounter God only once we move beyond ourselves. Once we realize our ability to love another and the complete joy of the experience, we can then begin to conceive the idea of God. Love is irrational, unreason-able–and irrational, unreasonable love is God. Many of these students could not relate to a theoretical concept of God. They helped me under-stand that God is not so much a noun as a verb–the verb to love. I will forever be grateful to these students for teaching me how to be a more compassionate teacher.

Most of these young people were working full-time jobs to pay for school. They did not have the grades in high school that win scholarships and merit grants. A few were trying to escape horrible family situations. It is sobering when a student apologizes for her term paper being late because the night before she had to run from her apartment because her abusive boyfriend started to hit her–again. Or an embarrassed student asks for a make-up assignment because she could not come up with $10 to see the movie I had assigned. They reminded me that I am not teaching a subject, I am teaching human beings.

In Luke’s Gospel, note how many times Jesus acts out of pure compassion: He feels someone’s hurt and pain and says or does the right thing. Even on his way to his own execution, Jesus exhibits compassion and extends forgiveness.

These students seek a faith, a spirituality that challenges them to embrace the values of Jesus. They want to be part of a church that speaks to their better angels. They take very seriously Jesus’ command: “Love one another.” It is not a suggestion, not a key to better living. It is “my commandment.”

Revealing the Unseen God

The group’s most enthusiastic response to any of the things we did was to Martin Doblmeier’s film “The Power of Forgiveness,” stories of people who forgave and were forgiven under most extraordinary circumstances. The students were stunned by the very idea that people could forgive so completely and so generously, that it was possible to rebuild the train wrecks of their lives and find happiness and fulfillment, meaning and joy in forgiving with such outrageous selflessness. That was a new idea for most of them–that religion could be joyful, that church could be affirming, that faith could be humble without being self-denigrating.

That is our challenge as a church. M. Craig Barnes put it beautifully in his book The Pastor as Minor Poet: whether we are pastors, teachers, ministers or congregants, we are called to point to the God who “is always present but not usually apparent.” Any preacher can go on and on about how terrible things are; any homilist can point to the evil in our midst–that is easy. The harder challenge is to find good in the midst of evil, to point to God’s presence when God seems to be totally absent. We are called to witness as John the Baptist does in the beginning of John’s Gospel, “There–there is the Lamb of God!” John calls us to behold Christ’s presence in every act of generosity that challenges selfishness and injustice, in love offered unconditionally in response to anger and hatred, in hope that perseveres despite fear and despair.

It was a hard semester. And frankly, I would not want to go through it again. But in these students I had the chance to see the future church. It will be a humbler and more welcoming church, a more engaged and engaging church and, as a result, a more faithful and faith-filled church. Whether we realize it or not, that future church begins in our own church–now, here, today.

JAY CORMIER teaches communications and humanities at St. Anselm College and edits the homiletics resource Connections. His latest book, Table Talk: Beginning the Conversation on the Gospel of Mark, will be published this fall by New City Press.

INTRODUCTION

Theory-building and rigor are undoubtedly a concern for the field of distance education research, especially as online learning becomes more pervasive (Simonson, 2006). In a review of the research studies and articles related to distance education published in The American Journal of Distance Education and Distance Education, Anglin and Morrison (2000) stated much of the research examined was not theory-based. They concluded there was a significant need for theories specific to the field for successful development of the knowledge base in distance education. Tallent-Runnells et al. (2006) also noted that research should be driven by the development of theoretical foundations appropriate to the field of online teaching and learning. They suggested distance education theories focus on communication, social interaction, and student motivation and learning. It has been argued that despite the existence of certain theories developed for the field of distance education, there is still no comprehensive theory to guide conductors of research, instructional designers, and the like, thereby presenting a “critical weakness of the field” (Simonson, 2009, p. vii).

The first American theory developed as an all-encompassing theory to define the field of distance education in terms of pedagogy was the theory of transactional distance, as it came to be known in 1980 (Moore, 2007). Since its inception, the theory has been both accepted and disputed by scholars–and never fully adopted. In order to obtain a current assessment of transactional distance theory, this article will explore the theory’s components, importance of testing the theory, scholars’ perceptions, and new directions in research.

BACKGROUND

A theoretical framework that encompassed all aspects of distance education, transactional distance theory was developed by Michael G. Moore, a professor at The Pennsylvania State University and the founder of The American Journal for Distance Education, (“Michael G. Moore,” 2012; Moore, 2007). Moore claimed the significance of his theory was that it met the needs of teaching and learning that went on outside of the traditional classroom setting (Moore, 2007). Instead of considering the distance between teachers and learners only in terms of geography, Moore described the distance as a psychological separation influenced by three pedagogical components: structure, dialogue, and autonomy. Moore claimed his theory was flexible in that it supported all programs that have separation as a distinctive characteristic, no matter what the degree of structure, dialogue, and autonomy. He asserted his theory of transactional distance allowed “the generation of an almost infinite number of hypotheses for research into the interactions between course structures, dialogue between teachers and learners, and the student’s propensity to exercise control of the learning process” (Moore, 2007, p. 101).

THEORY COMPONENTS

Five major concepts and terms are related to the theory of transactional distance and have been defined as follows. Distance education is “all planned learning that normally occurs in a different place from teaching, requiring special techniques of course design and instruction, communication through various technologies, and special organization and administrative arrangements” (Moore & Kearsley, 2005, p. 2). As defined by Moore and Kearsley (2005), in the sphere of distance education, transactional distance is “the gap of understanding and communication between the teachers and learners caused by geographic distance that must be bridged through distinctive procedures in instructional design and the facilitation of interaction” (p. 223). Moore (1993) defined the three components of transactional distance theory in this way:

1. Dialogue is developed by teachers and learners in the course of [positive] interactions that occur when one gives instruction and the others respond…. Each party in a dialogue is a respectful and active listener; each is a contributor, and builds on the contributions of the other party or parties (p. 24).

2. Structure expresses the rigidity or flexibility of the programme’s educational objectives, teaching strategies, and evaluation methods. It describes the extent to which an educational programme can accommodate or be responsive to each learner’s individual needs (p. 26).

3. Learner autonomy is the extent to which in the teaching/learning relationship, it is the learner rather than the teacher who determines the goals, the learning experiences, and the evaluation decisions of the learning program (p. 31).

STRUCTURE AND DIALOGUE

In course and program design, structuring the content according to teaching strategies, objectives, methods of assessment, and learners’ needs all require a level of communication between the instructor and the learners (Moore, 2007). Therefore, dialogue is necessary in determining that structure. Conversely, dialogue may also be determined by the structure of the course. The amount or degree of structure and dialogue varies for different courses when factors such as technology, teaching philosophy, abilities of the learners, and subject matter come into play. Thus, transactional distance becomes a function of the interaction between dialogue and structure: “as dialogue increases, transactional distance decreases [and] as structure increases, transactional distance also increases” (Moore, 2007, p. 94).

DIALOGUE AND AUTONOMY

Dialogue is affected by degrees of autonomy (Moore, 2007). Learners who are more autonomous are able to handle any degree of dialogue, while learners who are not as skilled in self-regulation need a higher degree of dialogue to be successful. Moore (2007) stated “the level of autonomy required of the learner increases as the transactional distance decreases” (p. 96). He hypothesized that students with more autonomy would be comfortable in courses with greater transactional distance (Anderson, 2007). Furthermore, learners who preferred less self-regulation would experience a decreased level of transactional distance in courses that combined structure and dialogue.

WHY RESEARCH THE THEORY?

Gorsky and Caspi (2005) are arguably the most noted critics of transactional distance theory. In their landmark analysis, they identified three reasons to explain the importance of testing and exploring the theory. The first was that researchers saw the theory as the framework for analyzing systems of distance education. The authors quoted two researchers of transactional distance theory: Garrison (2000), who stated theories were important in directing the practice of distance education, and Jung (as cited by Gorsky & Capsi, 2005), who claimed theories provided a guiding framework for producing operational definitions and conducting quality research. The second reason Gorsky and Caspi (2005) argued transactional distance theory should be researched and tested was that researchers had cited the need for a reduction in transactional distance in distance education programs. The third reason was the theory, perceived as a valid one by some researchers, was already being taught in higher education courses.

SCHOLARS’ PERCEPTIONS OF THE THEORY

Moore (2007) stated that early support for his theory of transactional distance came from Keegan (1980), a founder of the journal Distance Education, and Rumble (1986), a specialist in the administration of institutions of distance education. Keegan cited Moore’s theory as a defining concept of distance education, while Rumble promoted the use of the phrase “transactional distance” as a representation of the distance occurring between teachers and learners in distance education. In 2003, Tait (2003), the Dean of Education at The Open University (UK), claimed the theory remained valid and upheld its use as a tool to evaluate distance education programs. Additionally, Saba (2005), widely-known for his research in the expansion of transactional distance theory, argued that a precise understanding of transactional distance is necessary for the field of distance education to grow into the future and Moore’s theory aids in that understanding.

The most recent support for transactional distance theory came from Peters (2007) in his description of distance education theory as “the most industrialized form of teaching and learning” (p. 57). Peters defended Moore’s theory as a mainly descriptive one, which did not advocate a particular model of instructing or learning at a distance. Peters noted that the stress on the three components as necessary elements of distance education solidified the intent of the theory to improve traditional and newer forms of distance education to eliminate deficiencies in dialogue and autonomy. Peters thus argued the theory also appeared as prescriptive with the ability to advance the work of those involved in the field. Peters ultimately supported the theory for its original approach and relatability to all aspects of distance education.

In his research on critical challenges for distance education, Garrison (2000) claimed that theory was scarce in current research of the practice. He particularly criticized Moore’s theory of transactional distance, stating:

the exact nature of the interrelationships among structure, dialog and autonomy is not clear. There is confusion around whether structure and dialogue are variables, clusters or dimensions. Unfortunately, Moore has used different terms (i.e., variables, clusters, dimensions) at various times. (Garrison, 2000, p. 9)

While Garrison agreed that Moore’s theory was most well-known and appealing in the field of distance education, the author argued more theoretical work at the macro level was needed. This work might include a focus on the association among dialogue, structure, and autonomy and the development of a visual model to clearly understand the relationship among the components. Despite Garrison’s criticism, however, it should be noted that Moore (2007) appeared to clarify this association among the constructs with added, descriptive explanations of the interactions and two visual representations that showed: (a) the relationship of dialogue, structure, and transactional distance and (b) the relationship of autonomy and transactional distance.

Gorsky and Caspi (2005), in research aimed at assessing transactional distance theory based on empirical evidence, found fault with Moore’s theory after their review of six studies that tested the key constructs of the theory for validity and correlations among them; they came to two unexpected conclusions. The first finding was that data derived from three of the studies (Bischoff, Bisconer, Kooker, & Woods, 1996; Bunker, Gayol, Nti, & Reidell, 1996; Saba & Shearer, 1994) supported the theory but lacked construct validity.

The other three studies (Chen, 2001a, 2001b; Chen & Willits, 1998) examined by Gorsky and Caspi (2005) offered only limited support for transactional distance the ory. One of these studies, by Chen and Willits (1998), is worth noting as it was also a review of the first studies to use transactional distance as a theoretical framework (Bischoff et al., 1996; Bunker et al., 1996; Saba & Shearer, 1994). Prior to the discussion of results of their study on videoconferencing, Chen and Willits (1998) found support for the existence of associations among the theory’s three elements, therefore substantiating Moore’s assertion that dialogue and structure worked together to affect transactional distance. However, all three of the studies reviewed by Chen and Willits (1998) failed to identify learner autonomy’s effect on transactional distance. In addition, they found two of the studies did not contain information on dialogue as it related to asynchronous communication as a form of interaction. The studies also did not examine the effects of teacher-learner characteristics on transactional distance nor did they assess how student learning was affected by transactional distance, dialogue, and structure.

Gorsky and Caspi (2005) were critical of Chen and Willits’ (1998) research, claiming the perceptions learners had of learning outcomes and transactional distance were measured only once and were not compared with real values. As Chen and Willits’ support was limited for the theory, Gorsky and Caspi (2005) suggested further research be conducted in applying the revised path model to broaden analysis and test other distance learning environments.

Overall, in the six studies examined in their review, Gorsky and Caspi (2005) claimed construct validity was compromised in that Moore did not develop operational definitions for the theory’s concepts and, as a consequence, researchers used varied, rather than formal, definitions. The authors also concluded that transactional distance theory could be reduced to a single proposition which may be interpreted as a tautology. They claimed the independent variables of structure, dialogue, and autonomy are hierarchical, in which one variable determined the extent of the other. Ultimately, the authors claimed that transactional distance theory was not a valid, scientific theory, but merely a prescriptive, philosophical approach, particularly because of its definition of dialogue. The authors argued that Moore’s theory explains what dialogue should look like, but fails to show how real dialogues work.

Despite Gorsky and Caspi’s (2005) extensive criticism of Moore’s theory, it should be stressed that their evaluation of transactional distance theory was based on only six studies ranging from 1993-2001. Three of those studies were conducted by the same researcher: Chen. Therefore, it can be stated that Gorsky and Caspi’s (2005) research represented the views of only 12 authors in the field of distance education. Further review may be necessary to obtain a reliable assessment of transactional distance theory.

NEW DIRECTIONS IN RESEARCH

RECONSIDERING DIALOGUE

In an examination of the effect of group size on asynchronous, nonmandatory discussion, Caspi, Gorsky, and Chajut (2003) presented a restructured model of transactional distance that focused on interactions. This model included three of Moore’s (1989) definitions of types of dialogue and a fourth type attributed to Fulford and Zhang (1993). Altogether, the model recognized the following kinds of dialogue: instructor-learner, learner-learner, learner-subject matter, and vicarious interaction (Caspi et al., 2003). Among the discoveries in the study, the authors stated “that as group size increased, the proportion of learner-instructor interaction decreased while the portion of learner-learner interaction increased” (Caspi et al., 2003, p. 237). The authors claimed this particular finding supported the new model.

In a dissertation on facilitation and community in asynchronous online education courses, Kuskis (2006) claimed it has not been demonstrated that learner-learner dialogue reduces transactional distance. Kuskis argued that the effects of learner-learner dialogue should be further considered in the theory of transactional distance, in addition to instructor-learner dialogue, especially where adult learners are concerned. The author proposed that because both types of interactions may reduce transactional distance, the role of learner-learner interaction needs to be taken into account in future research.

NEW AND REVISED MODELS

In a study in the United Kingdom in which the engagement of doctoral students as part of an academic community was examined, Wikeley and Muschamp (2004) used transactional distance theory to create a model to deliver education to students at a distance that involved tutoring, which they claimed enabled students to develop a sense of community that assisted in the process of academic writing. They observed a problem when tutors and students saw themselves in separate roles rather than as fellow researchers. Consequently, the new model involved strategies to improve the relationship between tutors and doctoral students where tutors viewed students as newcomers to professional practice whom they should assist in developing the skills to become part of the academic community. Wikeley and Muschamp argued that although their model was not innovative in the context of e-learning, it utilized traditional pedagogical practices in an online environment, making it possible for students to develop relationships with those already involved in the research community of which students would soon be a part. In this sense, students gained different perspectives and a shared understanding of the professional community that resulted in a decrease in transactional distance.

Andrade and Bunker (2009) argued, in a study on course design of distance language learning, that there is not a comprehensive model to act as a theoretical framework to assess self-regulated learning and autonomy. They proposed a new model that included six areas of learning not included in Moore’s theory. They claimed the six dimensions–method, motive, physical environment, time, social environment, and performance–demonstrate learners’ interaction with structure and dialogue in the development of autonomous learning skills in distance language learning. The authors concluded that this model could improve success in distance education and provide a new framework for future research that would enable educators, designers, and researchers to measure how self-regulation affects learning thereby leading to higher levels of autonomy and success.

Falloon (2011) used Moore’s theory of transactional distance to examine the use of virtual classroom software to explore how synchronous communication affected learner autonomy and dialogue in the course. The author claimed that while Moore’s theory was useful in analyzing online learning, it needed revision in order to match the move toward synchronous communication as a tool in distance education. Falloon found that students working in a synchronous environment felt they did not have sufficient time to engage in meaningful dialogue and therefore became reluctant to participate. The author argued that the definition of the theory and the way structural elements are viewed, as well as the effect of synchronicity on learner autonomy, should all be revisited.

A GLOBAL THEORY

Garrison (2000) stated “the ultimate theoretical challenge … is to achieve a synthesis of perspectives and theories (i.e., global theory) that reflects the complete continuum and is inclusive of a full range of practices” (p. 12). Gokool-Ramdoo (2008) had a similar opinion with the proposed extension of the applications of transactional distance theory in order for the theory to be accepted as a global one to further advances in the field of distance education. These extensions go beyond structure and dialogue to include policy making and quality assurance. Gokool-Ramdoo argued that not much has been done to expand upon distance education theory since Saba and Shearer’s (1994) work, but many theorists of distance education are converging toward a new synthesis which validates transactional distance theory as a global theory. This synthesis combines Deschenes’ (2006) strands of student persistence with transactional distance theory. These strands are cognitive, affective, and meta-cognitive. Gokool-Ramdoo claimed that when these strands are braided with Moore’s theory, it will help researchers organize the understanding of student persistence and will ultimately lead to complete, learner autonomy. The author argued further research is necessary to assess and validate the new synergy of transactional distance theory as it applies to informing policy development and quality assurance in the field of distance education.

SUMMARY

Moore’s theory has been supported and criticized as the defining theory of distance education. In the literature, relationships among the constructs of the theory are both defined and disputed. New models and instruments have been adapted from the theory and innovative directions and approaches in research related to the theory have been explored. While some researchers have argued for a more comprehensive theory of distance education, others stated Moore’s theory of transactional distance could be adapted to the future challenges of distance education faced by instructional technologists, course designers, researchers, and educators by revising the theory components based on emerging technologies and types of communication.

Several researchers made a case for a global theory to guide future research in distance education. Such a theory would include a fusion of perspectives and learning theories (Garrison, 2000) and extensions such as quality assurance and policy making (Gokool-Ramdoo, 2008). Whether transactional distance theory is accepted, modified, or applied as part of a global theory, the literature suggests there is still work to be done. Therefore, the conclusion can be made that transactional distance theory is here to stay.

REFERENCES

Anderson, B. (2007). Independent learning. In M. G. Moore (Ed.), Handbook of distance education (pp. 109-122). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

Andrade, M. S., & Bunker, E. L. (2009). A model for self-regulated distance language learning. Distance Education, 30(1), 47-61.

Anglin, G. J., & Morrison, G. R. (2000). An analysis of distance education research: Implications for the instructional technologist. Quarterly Review of Distance Education, 1(3), 189-194.

Bischoff, W. R., Bisconer, S. W., Kooker, B. M., & Woods, L. C. (1996). Transactional distance and interactive television in the distance education of health professionals. The American Journal of Distance Education, 10(3), 4-19.

Bunker, E., Gayol, Y., Nti, N., & Reidell, P. (1996). A study of transactional distance in an international audioconferencing course. Technology and Teacher Education Annual, 40-44. Phoenix, AZ: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education.

Caspi, A., Gorsky, P, & Chajut, E. (2003). The influence of group size on non-mandatory asynchronous instructional discussion groups. The Internet and Higher Education, 6(3), 227-240.

Chen, Y. J. (2001a). Transactional distance in World Wide Web learning environments. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 38(4), 327-338.

Chen, Y. J. (2001b). Dimensions of transactional distance in World Wide Web learning environments: A factor analysis. British Journal of Educational Technology, 32(4), 459-470.

Chen, Y., & Willits, F. (1998). A path analysis of the concepts in Moore’s theory of transactional distance in a videoconferencing learning environment. Journal of Distance Education, 13(2), 51-65.

Deschenes, A. J., & Maltais, M. (2006). Formation a distance et accessibilite. Sainte Foy, PQ : TeleUniversite.

Falloon, G. (2011). Making the connection: Moore’s theory of transactional distance and its relevance to the use of a virtual classroom in postgraduate online teacher education. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 43(3), 187-209.

Fulford, C. P., & Zhang, S. (1993). Perceptions of interaction: The critical predictor in distance education. The American Journal of Distance Education, 7(3), 8-21.

Garrison, R. (2000). Theoretical challenges for distance education in the 21st century: A shift from structural to transactional issues. International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 1(1), 1-17.

Gokool-Ramdoo, S. (2008). Beyond the theoretical impasse: Extending the applications of transactional distance theory. International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 9(3), 2-17.

Gorsky, P., & Caspi, A. (2005). A critical analysis of transactional distance theory. Quarterly Review of Distance Education, 6(1), 1-11.

Keegan, D. (1980). On defining distance education. Distance Education, 1(1), 13-35.

Kuskis, O. A. (2006). Facilitation and community in asynchronous online courses: Views and practices of expert practitioners (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of Toronto, Ontario, Canada.

Moore, M. G. (1989). Three types of interaction. The American Journal of Distance Education, 3(2), 1-6.

Moore, M. G. (1993). Theory of transactional distance. In D. Keegan (Ed.), Theoretical principles of distance education (pp. 22-38). London, England: Routledge.

Moore, M. G. (Ed.). (2007). The theory of transactional distance. In Handbook of distance education (pp. 89-105). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

Moore, M. G. (2012). Penn State College of Education. Retrieved from http://www.ed.psu .edu/educ/adult-education/faculty/ michael-g-moore

Moore, M. G., & Kearsley, G. (2005). Distance education: A systems view. Belmont, CA: Thomson Wadsworth.

Peters, O. (2007). The most industrialized form of education. In M. G. Moore (Ed.), Handbook of distance education (pp. 57-68). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

Rumble, G. (1986). The planning and management of distance education. New York, NY: St. Martin’s Press.

Saba, F. (2005, August). Is distance education losing its identity? Or what should we call our field these days: Paper presented at the 22nd annual conference on Distance Teaching and Learning, University of Wisconsin-Madison, August. Retrieved from http://www.uwex .edu/disted/conference/Resource_library/ proceedings/05_1662.pdf

Saba, F., & Shearer, R. (1994). Verifying key theoretical concepts in a dynamic model of distance education. The American Journal of Distance Education, 8(1), 36-57.

Simonson, M. (2006). Teaching courses online: A challenge for the field. Quarterly Review of Distance Education, 7(4), vii-viii.

Simonson, M. (2009). Scientific rigor and distance education. Quarterly Review of Distance Education, 10(4), vii-viii.

Tait, A. (2003, April). Reflections on student support in open and distance learning. International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning. Retrieved from http://www.irrodl .org/index.php/irrodl/article/view/134/214

Tallent-Runnels, M. K., Thomas, J. A., Lan, W. Y., Cooper, S., Ahern, T. C., Shaw, S. M., & Liu, X. (2006). Teaching courses online: A review of the research. Review of Educational Research. Retrieved from http://casat.unr.edu/ docs/TallentRunnels 2006.pdf

Wikeley, F., & Muschamp, Y. (2004). Pedagogical implications of working with doctoral students at a distance. Distance Education, 25(1), 125-142.

Jacqueleen A. Reyes, Learning Solutions Program Developer, Checkers Drive-In Restaurants, Inc. 4300 W. Cypress Street, Ste. 600, Tampa, FL 33607.

I’m not Cured, but I’m Healed,” Patry Bentz told participants at the 10th anniversary conference of the National Catholic AIDS Network in Chicago. A middle-aged Minnesota woman who contracted AIDS from her now-deceased husband, Ms. Bentz meant that, though not cured of the disease, she felt healed in spirit by the support she has received from the church, and especially by the companionship of participants gathered for the six-day event at Loyola University Chicago. “Companions on the Journey,” in fact, was the title of this year’s gathering that ran from July 17 to July 22.

The conference brought together 350 men and women from around the country, both religious and lay. Virtually all — including persons like Ms. Bentz who are living with the disease — are engaged in various kinds of AIDS-related ministries. As the word “companions” also suggests, the themes of the plenary sessions and the workshops had much to do with community. Because of the stigma connected with AIDS, however, the lack of a strong sense of community nationwide has meant that efforts to address the pandemic in a unified and mutually supportive way have been slowed.

In the first plenary session, for example, Mindy Fullilove, M.D., associate professor of clinical psychology and public health at the New York State Psychiatric Institute and Columbia University, spoke of homophobia as one of the destructive forms of this stigma. Referring to a study of attitudes among black youths in San Francisco, she spoke of the youths’ view that African Americans who had contracted the disease through intravenous drug use were worthy of compassion and respect, but not those infected by homosexual activity. It was difficult for them, she said, even to imagine a black man as gay, because they believed that AIDS was a disease of gay white men. Dr. Fullilove, who is herself African-American, described attitudes of this sort as reflective of what she termed a consciousness of separateness; it must be replaced, she urged, by an acknowledgment of the interdependence of all communities.

The absence of wholeness in the wider community and the separateness that goes with it, is also evident in the unequal access to newly developed drugs called protease inhibitors. Taken in combinations, referred to as a cocktail, they have made it possible for many people with the virus not only to live longer lives, but also to live more active lives. The drugs are very expensive, though, and consequently availability tends to be limited to the well insured or wealthy. Jon Fuller, a Jesuit priest and physician who is assistant director of the Clinical AIDS program at Boston City College, observed that, in consequence, the virus is making increasingly deadly inroads among poor people of color — the very people with least access to the new medications. As for developing nations, he added, where just providing clean water is often a major problem, protease inhibitors are out of the question.

Moreover, although the death rate among males in the United States has begun to decline because of the protease inhibitors and more emphasis on prevention, there is a shadow side to this good news — namely, the emergence of an overly optimistic outlook. Dr. Fuller spoke critically of newspaper headlines like “When the Plague Ends” as premature and misleading. Once the public thinks that the epidemic is over, he said, it will be difficult to regain a strong interest in pursuing an end to the disease. The negative implications for fund-raising are already being felt; donations have fallen off, and there have been cuts in government funding.

Dr. Fuller also Warned that because the new drugs can in certain cases reduce the virus to undetectable levels, some who are infected may mistakenly assume that it is permanently gone and abandon needed precautions. Contributing to this misperception are magazine advertisements for the protease inhibitors. He showed slides of several that have appeared in Arts and Understanding. Healthy looking young men (all of them white) are shown engaged in physical activities as strenuous as rock climbing. Such images subtly suggest that the virus is less threatening than it really is. Even the term “cocktail,” he said, has a falsely glamorous edge to it.

Toward the end of his presentation, Dr. Fuller stressed that because there is no cure for AIDS, the first priority must still be prevention. In this regard, he voiced concern that the Catholic Church has been reluctant to engage in dialogue about the role that needle exchange and condom education programs have played in reducing the rate of infection in some parts of the world. He suggested that dialogue along these lines could be productive, and that this might best be approached through the efforts of theologians — a proposal endorsed in several of the regional meetings that took place before the end of the conference.

If insufficient attention is given to the needs of low income people of color in general who are H.I.V.-positive, so is there neglect regarding women. Most of the AIDS-related research has focused on males; and yet, while the rate of infection among men has started to drop, for women it is rising. AIDS in the United States is now the third leading cause of death among women between the ages of 25 and 44. They have consequently been among those most harmfully affected by the consciousness of separateness.

By way of underscoring this lack of attention, the conference included several presentations by women who discussed some of the steps now being taken to address the imbalance. Since many H.I.V.-positive women are mothers, one of the issues facing them concerns the need to make arrangements for the care of their children before they are incapacitated by their illness. This was the theme of a workshop entitled “Mothers with H.I.V., the Journey,” conducted by Patty Bentz and another woman from Minnesota, Mary Gherer. The focus of their workshop was a video of the same title that they have produced in conjunction with a group of H.I.V.-positive mothers. The video describes the way in which-working with case managers and attorneys — the mothers are offered an opportunity to ensure that the eventual caregivers of their children will be the ones they themselves have chosen.

Another example of emerging efforts to assist mothers with H.I.V./AIDS began two years ago in Portland, Ore. Realizing that there were no services there, the Rev. Bruce Cweikowski, who is in charge of AIDS ministries for the Archdiocese of Portland, collaborated with Sharon Kirk, a member of the Sisters of St. Mary of Oregon, and other religious women. Together they have developed a ministry called Women’s Intercommunity AIDS Resource. Sponsored jointly by a dozen congregations, W.I.A.R. provides direct services for H.I.V.-positive women and also for their children — increasing numbers of whom are also testing positive throughout the country. It is a difficult ministry on more than the health level, because women who test positive not only struggle with the disease itself, but also with the psychological scars from their backgrounds of isolation, poverty and abuse. As to abuse, the director of W.I.A.R., Sia Lindstrom, noted that H.I.V. and abuse, both sexual and physical, tend to go hand in hand.

Besides the Practical Help provided by groups such as W.I.A.R. and videos like “Mothers With H.I.V., the Journey,” efforts of this kind perform an additional service — namely, raising consciousness about the suffering and the humanity of persons with AIDS, men and women alike. Few individuals have had a greater impact in raising consciousness on the national level than Cleve Jones, another of the main speakers. It was he who began the Names Project and the AIDS quilt. In his address, he described how the idea of the quilt originated from his attachment to a quilt his great-great-grandmother had made for him decades before. The concept began to crystalize after a 1985 commemoration of the murder of Harvey Milk, the gay activist San Francisco supervisor who had been murdered seven years before. The commemoration included placards with the names of people who had by that time died of AIDS in San Francisco. The idea continued to crystalize, and two years later quilt pieces with the names of deceased loved ones made by the friends and family were assembled and displayed for the first time on the grounds of the Washington Monument in Washington, D.C.

The quilt struck a deep chord. As Mr. Jones observed, for ordinary men and women it quickly became not only a form of personal commemoration, but also a powerful symbol of caring for others and an unspoken plea that there be no rejection of persons with AIDS. In the first year, residents of 10 cities had an opportunity to see it, and of 16 in the following year. Now grown to an enormous size, it was last displayed in its entirety on the Monument grounds in the fall of 1996. Since its beginnings, 45 local Names chapters have been organized in different parts of the country; several panels lent by the Chicago chapter were on view at the conference.

But the quilt has become well known abroad as well, and one of the many moving moments of the conference occurred when Mr. Jones spoke of the first panel that had been sent to him from Africa, by a woman there whose husband died of AIDS 10 years ago. Unbeknownst to him at the beginning of his talk, the woman was present in the audience, Noerine Kaleba of Uganda. Ms. Kaleba, who is now the Community Mobilization Advisor at UNAIDS in Geneva, Switzerland, rose to identify herself at the end of the presentation. At a later gathering she described her own story of what it means to be, as she put it living with AIDS in the family. Not only has she herself been widowed by the disease; her sister has been infected with the virus, As has the sister’s two-year-old son.

The conference’s overall theme of community as the needed antidote to the consciousness of separateness was the focus of the main liturgy, celebrated by N.C.A.N.’s episcopal moderator, Bishop Howard Hubbard of Albany, N.Y. The homilist was Msgr. Ray East, the African-American pastor of St. Teresa of Avila Church in Washington, D.C. Alluding to the second chapter of Paul’s Letter to the Ephesians, in which Paul speaks of breaking down the dividing walls of hostility, Monsignor East said that the Scriptures as a whole should “forge us into solidarity with the poorest sister or brother in the world with AIDS.” This was the clearly perceived goal of the co-workers and companions on the journey who attended the conference.

>>> View more: People

Byline: Gregg Sangillo and Sara Jerome

Hill People

The advertising and government-affairs firm R&R Partners has hired John Lopez , chief of staff to Sen. John Ensign , R-Nev., as a senior lobbyist. Lopez, 40, began working for then-Rep. Ensign in 1995. He took a leave in 1998 to work on his boss’s first Senate run, which Ensign lost in a squeaker to now-Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid , D-Nev. “It was very difficult, but it all worked out,” Lopez says. Ensign ran again in 2000, this time successfully, and Lopez was named chief of his Senate staff in 2006.

Ensign’s extramarital affair and the subsequent scandal made headlines this year, but Lopez insists that his departure has nothing to do with those problems. The senator said in a statement, “John Lopez has been a very loyal and talented aide and friend for the past 15 years.” Don Stewart , communications director for Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell , R-Ky., adds that Lopez is “well-liked, and he has a lot of people who appreciate his efforts in the leadership office.”

A Reno, Nev., native, Lopez figured out early that he was a Republican. As a 7-year-old during the 1976 presidential race, he remembers hearing a radio ad for Gerald Ford . “I looked at [my mother] and said, ‘Mommy, if you vote for Jimmy Carter , he’ll raise your taxes.’ ”

R&R Partners, incidentally, is known for promoting the Las Vegas slogan “What happens here, stays here.” –Gregg Sangillo

Around The Agencies

New to the Health and Human Services Department is policy analyst Julie Hantman , who is an interdisciplinary scientist at the Biomedical Advanced Research and Development Authority, which is part of the office of the assistant secretary for preparedness and response. Hantman, 40, will focus on policies for procuring medical supplies to confront biological emergencies, such as an H1N1 flu outbreak, a bioterrorist attack, or an emerging infectious disease.

BARDA contracts with companies that manufacture vaccines and other critical supplies to ensure that the commodities are tested and ready. Because there is rarely a market for such products until disaster strikes, the government’s procurement practices “create an incentive of the most fundamental kind,” Hantman explains.

Before joining HHS, she spent four years with the Infectious Diseases Society of America, most recently as a senior program officer for public health. During that period, she registered as a lobbyist and had frequent contact with staff members at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the National Vaccine Program Office, and the White House Homeland Security Council. Hantman also helped draft a statement on adult immunization that has since been endorsed by the American Medical Association. For 10 years before joining the society, she was an independent health policy consultant.

Hantman’s passion for health extends outside the policy arena: She has produced radio documentaries about the history and science of AIDS medication and the psychological effects on New Yorkers of the September 11 terrorist attacks. She also performs as a storyteller at SpeakeasyDC, the Capital Fringe Festival, and other venues. One of Hantman’s tales recounts lessons she learned as a “middle-class child of the suburbs” volunteering at needle-exchange programs aimed at preventing the spread of HIV/AIDS. –Sara Jerome

Lobby Shops

Brenda Sulick has joined the National PACE Association as vice president for congressional affairs and advocacy. She will lobby to protect the congressionally authorized Program for All-Inclusive Care for the Elderly, which coordinates the medical needs of frail senior citizens.

Sulick, 45, sees PACE as an example of successful government involvement in health care, and she wants the program to stay that way. She worries that health care reform might “inadvertently impact” PACE, which is largely financed through Medicare and Medicaid. “There could be repercussions for PACE if legislation is passed by people who aren’t aware of the PACE programs and how they function,” Sulick said.

She arrives from the Alzheimer’s Association, where she was the lead lobbyist. Before that, Sulick was an aide to Sen. Blanche Lincoln , D-Ark., on the Special Aging Committee, a position supported in part by the John Heinz Senate Fellowship in Issues of the Aging. Earlier, she handled health care issues for AARP’s National Retired Teachers Association division.

Sulick isn’t pleased with the way seniors have been drawn into the hyperbole of the health care debate, citing “inaccurate and distorted messages in the media about end-of-life counseling.” Realistic discussions about “long-term care services and supports” for seniors are necessary, she says. –S.J.<p> Jennifer Dunphy , 25, a lobbyist in the Boston office of O’Neill and Associates, was promoted to director in the firm’s Washington government-relations practice. (The CEO of O’Neill and Associates is Thomas P. O’Neill III , son of former Rep. Tip O’Neill , D-Mass., the longtime House speaker.) Dunphy says that her transition from Boston to Washington has been like “a high school reunion” with Capitol Hill staffers for the Massachusetts delegation.

Before she became a lobbyist, Dunphy focused on Bay State Democratic politics. She was a finance assistant on the 2004 Kerry-Edwards presidential campaign, and she stays in touch with former colleagues in the office of Sen. John Kerry , D-Mass. Dunphy was also the finance director for Massachusetts Sen. Marc Pacheco , and a campaign scheduler for Christopher Gabrieli during his failed 2006 bid for the gubernatorial nomination. She worked with Hillary Rodham Clinton ‘s 2008 presidential campaign on a finance steering committee devoted to young professionals.

Dunphy, who is concentrating on health care legislation, says she feels “less removed from the real action” now that she’s in D.C. –S.J.

Interest Groups

Promoting intercultural understanding has become a specialty for S amia Makhlouf , 27, who joined the Arab American Institute last month as a government and policy analyst. She came from the Defense Department, where, as a program manager at the Near East South Asia Center for Strategic Studies, she ran diplomatic seminars for international officials. Participants — from ambassadors to lieutenant colonels — would convene to hash out problems, build understanding, and learn more about Washington’s often-perplexing operations. “It’s difficult, unless you’re involved in our government, to understand how things work,” Makhlouf said. “We would explain to them how and why the things they found frustrating happen.”

Makhlouf traveled to more than 25 countries during her Pentagon tenure. Fluent in Arabic, she helped persuade officials from nations that had no diplomatic relations with one another to engage in dialogue and dinner: At the end of each seminar, participants would contribute dishes from their homeland to a potluck meal. “These men would come without their wives and struggle in hotel kitchens to make these elaborate entrees. Sometimes it would be awful,” she said, “but we’d eat it.” Makhlouf would typically prepare favorites from her Palestinian-American upbringing, unless another participant was Palestinian. Then she would represent her American roots–whipping up peanut-butter-and-jelly sandwiches or pizza.

Earlier in her career, Makhlouf interned at Defense and then was director of development for the U.S. Copts Association, which promotes the interests of a Christian religious minority in Egypt.

At the AAI, Makhlouf will focus on domestic issues, seeking ways to promote civil rights and include more Arab-Americans in government, including voting. “In the Middle East, your vote sometimes doesn’t count, depending on the type of government, your gender, and which ethnic or religious group you’re part of,” she said. “Sometimes being politically active was even dangerous. Arab-Americans sometimes have that mind-set. We want to convince them you have to vote — it’s your civic duty.” –S.J.

In other news from the Arab American Institute, Nadine Wahab recently left to become communications director for the Rights Working Group, an organization that promotes civil liberties and human rights in the U.S. She is preparing to launch the group’s program on racial profiling. While at the Arab American Institute, Wahab, 33, was a producer for Viewpoint With James Zogby, a television program featuring the group’s president. The show is broadcast throughout the Middle East by Abu Dhabi Television.

Wahab, 33, who had previous experience with a video-production company in New York City, was also an early producer for the “Imagine-Life” ad campaign, which spotlighted the hardships facing Palestinians in the occupied territories. “It seems to be that a lot of people are now looking for someone who is versed in both PR and video work,” she says. Wahab has also worked for public-relations firm Keybridge Communications in Washington, and volunteered with the Network of Arab-American Professionals in New York.

She spent the first part of her life in Egypt and Kuwait before her family moved to Northern Virginia. She graduated with a psychology degree from Virginia’s Marymount University. Even off the job, Wahab spends much of her time fighting for human rights. “A lot of my friends are organizers. I work with a lot of Palestinian organizers on the issue of peace in the Middle East,” she says. “One of the things about working and living in D.C., especially in this kind of field, is that you can’t differentiate between when you go out at night and what you do in the morning.” Wahab also enjoys Omar Offendum and other Arab-American hip-hop artists.

While she was at the AAI, a theatre organization in Venice, Calif., called the organization seeking input for developing an Arab-American character in an upcoming production. The character in the play Not Until You Know My Story was ultimately based on Wahab. When she saw the production in D.C., she got a surprise. “They really got my mannerisms. I did the entire [research] interview over the phone, and so when I saw them, I’m like, ‘How do you know that I move like that?’ ” –G.S.

Image-Makers

The Hatcher Group, a public-affairs firm, has brought in several ex-journalists to build up its Bethesda, Md., office. The latest hire is Phyllis Jordan , a former Maryland editor for The Washington Post. Jordan says she thought it was time to leave the Fourth Estate. “One of the frustrations for me in journalism was always that you could write about something that you really believed in, but you could never advocate for it. And this [job] gives me an opportunity to do that,” she says. “I don’t think I’m ready to go out and represent insurance companies. But I am ready to advocate for good causes. And everything they handle here are good causes–nonprofits and foundations.” Among the Hatcher Group’s clients are the Annie E. Casey Foundation, the Center for Global Development, and the Working Poor Families Project.

One of the highlights of Jordan’s Post career was editing a story about a 12-year-old boy whose untreated tooth abscess led to his death. “When the reporter I was working with [ Mary Otto ] first started the story, the boy was alive,” Jordan recalls. “And she was doing it as a story about how for $80, they could have fixed his tooth abscess, but instead they spent $200,000 on brain surgery. And then when we were about to run the story, we called to check on something and found out that he had died. Congress jumped on it, and it became a big issue. And they put dental benefits into [the State Children’s Health Insurance Program].”

Jordan, 50, hails from Lexington, Va. She earned her bachelor’s degree at Sweet Briar College in Virginia and a master’s in journalism at the University of Missouri (Columbia). Earlier in her career, she covered military matters for The Virginian-Pilot in Norfolk, Va., where she met her husband, Capt. Brian Wilson , a Navy lawyer. When Wilson’s career sent the couple to California, Jordan took a job at the Los Angeles Times as city editor for Ventura County. –G.S.

Have a tip for National Journal’s People column? Contact Gregg Sangillo or Sara Jerome at 202-739- 8400, or at people@nationaljournal.com.