The Foreign Service Journal, July-August 2005

Debate and Discussion Real-time debate is also incorporated in the e-learning program. On a designated day each week, the class assembles in cyberspace for an online session that takes place at a time set in “universal time.” Participants living in different time-zones adjust their schedules to make themselves available, via a typical dial-up Internet con- nection, to debate, among themselves and with the teacher, the points arising from a particular lecture. The format is a closed chat room, with all the limitations that a text-only chat entails — namely, difficulty in sustaining a single discussion thread, participants jumping in with tangential comments and, sometimes, an apparent lack of discipline. Many Internet-based learning systems deliberately avoid the online chat, perhaps finding it too distracting and not conducive to a dialogue of any depth. But the DiploFoundation’s experience has been that while the instructor must juggle two or three threads of discussion (and needs to have a very fast typing speed, as well!), the online sessions create a sense of community within the far-flung class. This sense of kinship can be augmented by intensive group work among class members, such as assignments and simulated negotiations. The Internet also gives the virtual classroom access to a range of supplementary materials that is far more abun- dant, and more varied, than most traditional, live class- rooms might find feasible. A “resources” button on the home page, takes one to a collection of folders contain- ing the texts of relevant documents as well as links to other relevant Web sites. How Does E-Learning Measure Up? One may legitimately ask, is it really possible to over- come distance, replicating the instant, natural communi- cation of the traditional format? Can online learning match the rapport that a good teacher establishes with students? And what about evaluation? Surely no video- conference or online chat room can reproduce the way a good guru assesses the absorption by the class of the ideas taught. At first sight, e-learning programs of the self-learning type miss out on the rich interactivity described above. But in practice, once a self-paced program is designed, it is easy to add on faculty intervention, either in the form of exercises whose results go to a faculty member or via periodic group exercises or simulations that break the apparent isolation of the self-taught format. There is only one caveat: the faculty add-on is possible only with serv- er-based programs, not those distributed on CD-Roms. Some e-learning systems that opt not to use the online chat, substitute for it more intensive use of asynchronous activities, including group exercises such as class assign- ments. The choice depends on the environment and goals of each particular organization. Another option, to use video links or other multimedia facilities, depends on whether a diplomatic service can provide broadband con- nectivity to all its missions abroad. Surprisingly, in our experience at the Diplo- Foundation we find that — putting aside the pure self- learning programs — e-learning generates far more intensive communication between teachers and the taught than one often finds in the traditional classroom. The fact that the lecture text undergoes intensive scruti- ny by the class — typically generating between 40 to 80 comments and queries per lecture, or an average of three to seven per student — is evidence of this. A huge advan- tage is that comments remain available for subsequent reference or reflection. Moreover, teachers invest on average 12 to 15 hours per lecture, much more than a tra- ditional lecture takes to prepare and deliver. Most par- ticipants also find that they end up spending more than the average of six to eight hours of class work the foun- dation’s part-time courses project. This may be partly due to the keen interest that such courses arouse among all but the laziest! To conclude, e-learning of the intensive kind, while not replicating the personal chemistry of traditional learning, can produce remarkable depth of its own. Where personnel needing constant skills-updating are dispersed in location, or where relatively small numbers need customized quality coaching, faculty-led e-learning, in all its variations, can be of great benefit. At the other end of the spectrum, the self-instruction materials that this medium facilitates offer another kind of option, pro- viding good value for basic training. They give a flavor of more sophisticated learning, and can be used as a prelude to other courses. For a course designer, the self-learning mode also pro- vides an opportunity to seek out that elusive, quintessen- tial “simplicity beyond complexity” of which Oliver Wendell Holmes wrote so eloquently — the kind of sim- plicity that comes from full mastery of a complex process or body of knowledge.  F O C U S J U LY- A U G U S T 2 0 0 5 / F O R E I G N S E R V I C E J O U R N A L 65