/ 7 April 2005

Without quality, it means nothing

Our newspapers are abuzz with stories of aspirant higher education students being excluded. Institutions are full and student financial aid can only stretch so far. Across the world, claims are made that distance education can vastly increase access to higher education, especially for marginalised groups. Could this be a solution to South Africa’s problem?

In distance education, students don’t need to attend regular classes at a central venue at a set time, and learning guides replace the lecture as the main teaching and learning strategy. Students are able to study from anywhere and generally at a time convenient to them. They do not have to incur additional relocation, accommodation or major travel costs. Moreover, they can continue with their usual work and household responsibilities. In South Africa, distance education is already attractive to a very large number of students. In 2001, there were at least 286 000 distance education students, constituting four out of every 10 higher education students. At universities, most were studying education or economic and management sciences.

Amazingly, in education, twice as many students were studying through distance education than through face-to-face education. Most of these were practising teachers upgrading their qualifications, or completing their initial professional qualification. Distance education students are generally older, with more than 80% of them being 23 years old or above.

A more recent phenomenon is the increasing number of young people studying through distance education. In 2001, this figure was more than 50 000. Some turn to distance education because it is cheaper (Unisa’s fees for a full degree are generally way less than those of other universities), others because they can’t afford relocating, or because the entry requirements are often easier. Some prefer to study this way.

But does distance education give students an equal opportunity to be successful? The answer to this question is varied. There are some programmes where students are successful in two important respects: they pass, and they pass a course or programme with good standards.

But in others, the pass rates are abysmal. And in yet others, the standard of the course may be so poor that a pass is pretty meaningless.

In general, the distance education course pass rate in South African universities is lower than that of face-to-face courses. At qualification level, the completion rate appears quite low, especially for the longer programmes.

The lower course pass rate can in part be attributed to the competing demands being made on distance students’ time, especially their work commitments.

But sometimes providers simply do not provide the necessary support to students to enable them to be successful. This support covers well-structured, accessible learning materials to scaffold the learning process, access to help when needed and feedback on progress made. Providing some motivation through telephone calls or SMSs has also proved important.

Another feature of distance education is that its design makes it easier to expand than face-to-face education. Distance education usually relies heavily on specially prepared texts, often in the form of printed study guides. Much of the effort and expense in offering the course is incurred in preparing that material and in establishing the systems to offer the programme across a wide geographical area. But once prepared, the material can be used by thousands of students at marginal additional effort and cost. This is one of the reasons why dedicated distance education institutions tend to be very large.

Distance education in South Africa is growing. No doubt as more advanced technologies become available to more and more aspirant students, it will grow even faster. But unless we are vigilant about the quality of the programmes – and especially the support offered – the increased access will be meaningless.

Jenny Glennie is the director of the South African Institute for Distance Education