strategies. Unfortunately, most texts written for university faculty hoping to addInternet components to their courses are purely technical in nature (e.g., Keating &Hargitai, 1999) and do not address the essential peda/andragogical issues that wouldenable the faculty to create an enriching and expanded learning experience for thestudents.Two Uses of the Internet in LearningIn order to reach university students effectively and maximize their learning, it isincreasingly necessary to engage their diverse learning competencies and styles. This ismore of a peda/andragogical question than a technical one, leaving a gap in the literature(which tends to be technical in nature). <strong>No</strong> single technology is panacea for alllearning situations (Strauss and Frost, 1998). But partitioning courses into the categories“traditional” and “Internet” as the rhetoric on learning often does is a falsedilemma. From the perspective of learning styles, there are strengths to eachapproaches, and there is an alternative to the “Internet only” course, namely “TheEnriched Classroom.”The Internet Course. This type is andragogically sound since it addresses time andspace needs of nontraditional students. <strong>No</strong>ntraditional students have unique needs,especially in regard to time availability and geographic location — see Brookfield,1990]. Internet-only course are perhaps more useful to andragogy than pedagogy, butthis has not been studied sufficiently. It is safe to say, however, that the Internet-onlycourse can be very effective with certain audiences. On the other hand, the Internetonlycourse is andragogically challenging because it only addresses the visual andGorham Type 4 learners. Also, Internet-only courses make it difficult to form a cohort,which is key to many aspects of learning style and good practice (see Oppenheimer,1997 and Astin, 1997). This is particularly a problem for traditional, residential,undergraduate students, most of whom are not the ideal audience for Internet-onlycourses.The Enriched Classroom. A conventional “live” course is limited in time andspace. An Internet course is not ideal for traditional undergraduates. There is an interstitialalternative, however, that maximizes the benefit of both. This type of course, ahybrid of the conventional and Internet course, is able to address several different learningstyles (see chart on preceding page). The enriched classroom is able to involvedifferent andragogical or pedagogical strategies. The challenge is to encourage higherlevelreorganization of material (see Ruminski & Hanks, 1997). The Internet can makeuse of these learning tools, all of which expand the conventional classroom in time andspace and increase opportunities for learning:1. Online groups — a chance for asynchronous cooperation. (McKeachie, 1994);2. Group websites;3. Threaded discussions — discussions help to put the ideas into practice, and getthe students vested in the ideas (McKeachie, 1994);4. Weekly online quizzes or “just in time” learning feedback instruments and measures;5. Online research;6. Email mentoring — direct student/teacher interaction of a “tutorial” type;34<strong>Feedback</strong> <strong><strong>No</strong>vember</strong> <strong>2002</strong> (<strong>Vol</strong>. <strong>43</strong>, <strong>No</strong>. 4)
7. Online cases and simulations;8. Course content—lecture notes, etc.; and9. Online interactive puzzles and games relevant to course content.One powerful tool available on many campuses is the Blackboard learning environment.This tool has many advantages over earlier learning engines. Students are oftenahead of faculty when it comes to computer use and competency. This can causefaculty anxiety (Donald, 1997). This computer learning environment is designed toovercome this fear and limitation and help faculty get their course online. Blackboardhosts online groups and group websites. Blackboard is capable of measuring the level ofonline interactions (and thereby permits faculty members to assess quantity of groupinteraction as well as individual interaction, which is a powerful quantitative tool).Toward a Richer Learning EnvrionmentChickering and Gamson (1987) described seven principles of good practice for facultymembers constructing an undergraduate learning environment. Their study revealedthat these principles are consistent examplars of outstanding teaching practice:1. Encouraging student-faculty contact, a dialogue between learners that existsboth in and out of the classroom, reminding students that they are a part ofthe ongoing process of building knowledge;2. Encouraging cooperation among students as a means of producing team-workand collaborative skills that make for a richer learning environment. This ismore comparable to what will be encountered in the workplace than thesolitary work of the scholar;3. Encouraging active learning in which the student constructs meaning andinterpretations rather than serving as a passive receptacle of information;4. Providing prompt feedback so that students can closely monitor the progressthey are making;5. Encouraging time-on-task so that students develop skills related to projectmanagement and completion and are able to build substantive rather thansuperficial knowledge of the issue at hand;6. Maintaining high expectations so that students strive to do better and knowthat only their best performance will result in a high grade; and7. Respecting diverse learning styles by providing a number of different pedagogystrategies and different types of assessments and performance measures.Unfortunately, many of these sound principles are constrained by the tiny threehourweekly contact time of a conventional course and by a lack of diverse learningstrategies in the classroom. Happily, some of those time constraints can be overcome bythe Enriched Classroom (see Figure 2).BEA—Educating tomorrow’s electronic media professionals 35
- Page 2 and 3: Feedback November 2002 (Vol. 43, No
- Page 4 and 5: CommentSWOT Analysis: Disney Consid
- Page 6 and 7: without adding enough people to do
- Page 8 and 9: his favorite questions for prospect
- Page 10 and 11: The intellectual satisfaction you
- Page 12 and 13: Finding qualitative evidence via te
- Page 14 and 15: 2 Using a two-tailed Pearson Correl
- Page 16 and 17: • We need to expand digital editi
- Page 18 and 19: Two final points: While this paper
- Page 20 and 21: 1. As elsewhere in the profession,
- Page 22 and 23: EvaluationThere will be approximate
- Page 24 and 25: CLASSROOMEMPHASIZING ETHICS: PROMOT
- Page 26 and 27: “Avoiding Plagiarism” ( http://
- Page 28 and 29: CLASSROOMMULTIMEDIA FOR MORTALS: RE
- Page 30 and 31: Video files come in a variety of di
- Page 32 and 33: CURRICULUMDISMANTLING THE SILOS: MO
- Page 34 and 35: the Web on deadline and conceptuali
- Page 36 and 37: CLASSROOMADAPTING DIGITAL LEARNING
- Page 40 and 41: Figure 2. Good Practice and the Enr
- Page 42 and 43: CLASSROOMSTUDENTS TACKLE SUPER BOWL
- Page 44 and 45: Usually, I urge students to use the
- Page 46 and 47: aggression with intelligence, when
- Page 48 and 49: e lost in sole reporting of undiffe
- Page 50 and 51: COMMENT“SCHOOL DAYS, SCHOOL DAYS,
- Page 52 and 53: CLASSROOMSWOT ANALYSIS: DISNEY CONS
- Page 54 and 55: analysis. SWOT is an acronym for St
- Page 56 and 57: Disneyland ResortDisney Vacation Cl
- Page 58 and 59: CURRICULUMDON’T ISOLATE E-BUSINES
- Page 60 and 61: mention implications from legal and
- Page 62 and 63: viable media alternative to televis
- Page 64 and 65: management are needed to deliver th
- Page 66 and 67: Humboldt, Chris (2000). How E-comme
- Page 68 and 69: editing is a place of influence. St
- Page 70 and 71: COMMENTYO, YO, YO! THIS IS THE HIP-
- Page 72 and 73: REVIEWSchroeder, Sheila E. (2002).
- Page 74 and 75: ANNOUNCEMENTS2003-2004 Scholarship
- Page 76 and 77: ANNOUNCEMENTSBroadcast Education As
- Page 78: NEWSJohn Mark DempseyUniversity of