Home

Educational Innovation: Hype, Heresies and Hopes

by Sloan-C

I. INTRODUCTION

The objective of this paper is to examine some recent educational innovations with the view to distinguishing those claims that are hype or pure heresy from those which appear to have some hope in improving learning. Its purpose is to make current research and proven educational principles accessible to those who are not specialist education researchers, as was the aim of the public lecture on which it is based. Increasingly the hype, heresies and hopes in educational innovation involve the possible applications of technology. This paper uses examples from technology to illustrate hype, heresies and hopes. Ehrmann's conclusion however remains our guard: "Without asking hard questions about learning, technology remains an unguided missile" [1]. The perspective of this paper therefore is to draw attention to this target and the means by which it should be guided, and not to consider the missile in isolation. Effecting change in student understanding must remain as the ultimate aim of all educational innovation. To this end, the range of learning resources must be integrated carefully into the curriculum. This requires relevant, interactive learning tasks to be supported by appropriate incentives so that students are encouraged to take a deep approach to learning.

There are four major motivations for this paper. First, examining the educational literature should enable us to properly dispel the hype and heresies that have been surfacing in recent years. Intentions to con by false publicity (i.e., hype) or simply opinions opposed to research based knowledge (i.e., heresy) have abounded as technology improvements and cost pressures have challenged the status quo in education. Second, and on a more positive note, a review should encourage good practice. Third, by summarizing results, principles of good practice can be made available to a wide range of educators and educational administrators. The focus of the paper is tertiary education. Fourth, by sharing some innovative ideas that do not focus on technology alone, we want to raise hopes of what can reasonably be accomplished to further improve student learning.

This paper is structured as follows. In Section II we review the current state of false publicity and contrast it to the hype of the past. Section III describes the heresies currently abounding with a brief summary of appropriate responses. While appropriate hopes for educational innovation are detailed in Section IV, Section V provides an overview of managing the educational innovation process to achieve these hopes. Section VI summarizes the present situation of educational innovation in one particular context, including our own experience. Section VII provides four examples of innovations currently under evaluation that have results that are hopeful. Future possibilities are sketched in Section VIII. Concluding remarks are contained in Section IX.

II. HYPE

Hype: to bluff or con by false publicity [2]

False publicity or hype can be of direct benefit to the person uttering it. It is like a politician who promises during an election campaign to eradicate poverty for every child. While we may smile with cynicism on hearing that campaign line, some will probably believe the statement enough to influence their voting. Hype is a tool of trade for many sales people.

A. Educational Innovation Hype|
Wild claims abound in tertiary education as well. Those promoting innovations in educational technology appear to be major promulgators of hype. Since 1946, when the first computer began operating at University of Pennsylvania, people have been predicting computer technology-based revolutions in education.

"One can predict that in a few years millions of school children will have access to what Philip of Macedon's son Alexander enjoyed as a royal prerogative: the services of a tutor as well-informed and as responsive as Aristotle." [3]

"Expanding the speed and scope of the Internet to help make computers in school classrooms as important as blackboards would lead to an explosion in learning." Bill Clinton, 1996.

As the Internet has grown in accessibility in more recent times, we have seen another wave of hype alluding to the end of the educational industry as we know it. False publicity includes statements like:

• Face to face (FTF) learning will go. The only university in the future will be the virtual one.

• Microsoft University or McDonalds University--these will be the only universities of the future.

• Sophisticated programs integrated into the Internet will surely replace teachers.

• IT improvements mean people will learn more and learn more quickly.

• Everyone will prefer to learn in his or her own time and place using the Internet.

• The paperless office is just around the corner as electronic storage is so efficient and knowledge is changing soswiftly anyway.

• People will interact only in their virtual communities--interactions with your physical neighbour will not be necessary.

B. Responding To Hype
While there is often an element of truth in hype, it can be such a small aspect blown out of all proportion that it becomes laughable. Exclusive qualifiers like "only" and "every" expose the hyperbole. The danger is not in the aspect that is in fact true. It lies in that part that is untrue or overstated. This is compounded when individuals accept hype without reflection. Many appear to have never learned the skill of critically evaluating the statements of others. Hype can become propaganda if enough people of influence propagate such uncritical views. A well-funded and independent university research strategy is one critical means of unmasking such hype.

Hype can be perilous for a completely different reason: the hype may turn out not to be bluff. It may actually be true. Those intelligent skeptics who based their decisions on a dismissal of hype will now be disadvantaged. A classic example of this was the hype during the 1950s and 1960s of "the superiority of American products over that Japanese rubbish." American manufacturers who had believed the hype of US superiority and acted on it, were caught off guard as high quality Japanese products captured their market share. Slowly but surely a paradigm shift happened such that there were no longer able to hold that belief. Academics who dismissed the "hype" that computer skills would be necessary for university graduates in the 1990s will have found recent changes in delivery of learning materials particularly difficult to accommodate.

Educational administrators, whose task it is to allocate our scarce resources, must distinguish which of the educational innovations of today are pure hype and which point to common future practice. We need research to provide the best possible data upon which decisions are to be made. The research needs to be undertaken in a range of educational contexts since results are not necessarily transferable. There is no substitute for a correct focus on the true problem, however. And the true problem is not the technology. The true problem in education is helping students learn. To this central point we will return.

III. HERESIES

Heresy: any belief or opinion opposed to that which is generally accepted. [2]

We are all exposed to various opinions which stand against those which are generally held. Many flower and fade; others persist and become the new orthodoxy. One frequently hears statements which seek to deny the weight of evidence provided by current research. Only a willingness to accommodate concepts which are supported by evidence will allow us to test the heresies which will become the new orthodoxy - and to dismiss the unfounded hypotheses.

A. Educational Innovation Heresies
Heresies, views which challenge the received wisdom, abound in education as well. As the Internet has grown in accessibility in more recent times, we have seen a wave of hype and new sets of "heresies" suggesting the end of education as we know it.

There is no shortage of such "heresies." The following are some common statements which run counter to current educational research.

• There is a wealth of evidence to suggest that IT solutions have significantly improved learning.

• There is no substitute for FTF instruction (and this includes IT!).

• Successful teachers are those who are good at presenting.

• Successful teachers are those who are efficient at transmitting information.

• We need a short course to get our academics up to the speed of our students in PowerPoint and Netscape.

• Successful teachers, having found the right teaching formula, should stick to it.

• As long as a university lecturer knows the intricacies of their discipline, then they make a good teacher.

• Teachers are relatively unimportant because it is students who do the learning.

• Students are not good judges of good teaching.

• Students can not tell the difference between an entertaining but superficial teacher and a good teacher.

• IT will enable economies of scale in teaching resulting in large cost savings.The Internet in particular is the most efficient method of teaching available today.

• Substantial cost savings are just around the corner once we overcome this initial hump from investing in the right size "pipes and pumps."

• Students want to learn flexibly. Transferring as much data as possible onto the Web is the best way of achieving a flexible learning strategy. Students can then download the lectures in text or video in their own time and place.

• IT is particularly advantageous for extending gifted students as they have control over what information they can consume and a huge range of resources from which to choose.

• Web-based teaching suits all ESL (English as second language) students as they can take the time to compose their messages.

• Males are likely to make better use of IT teaching methods.

• Academics should respond to the evidence that teaching matters and develop their IT skills for teaching.The best solution is to learn some authoring language like Authorware or HTML.

• Educational research should be attempting to find the optimal way of teaching.

• The key to teaching well is discovering the student's learning style and matching the solution that best suits that style.

B. Responding to Heresies When They Are Grounded in Sound Research
When we come to recognize that we hold a view that is contrary to well-accepted research-based knowledge, we can respond in four possible ways. First, we may accept the new view. Seeing changed conceptions leading to changed behaviour must surely be a significant desire for every teacher. Observing the light go on in regard to a significant corporate finance misconception or to a heresy has always been highly motivational for us. Similarly, we have seen the joy on our mentors' faces, when we have come to grips with a concept based on accepted findings in education research.

Second, we may reject the view because we genuinely do not accept the basis of that body of research. Whilst at first sight such a stance may appear to be arrogant, immature and short-sighted, it is important to allow space and time to assess the basis as well as the findings of research before taking it on board. Otherwise, we risk living in hypocrisy, which results in perpetuating the heresy. Denial and attack are common reactions to things we do not wish to admit. Unfortunately, experts in other disciplines too often conclude that these educational heresies are irrelevant, at least as they relate to their teaching or subject area [4]. One frequently hears comments which insinuate that all methodology in educational research is somehow second-rate. Many who engage in educational research have been stung by criticisms that it is not doing real (i.e., disciplinary), research or is dependent on "unreliable" research methods. Of course, "real research" for the holder of such views is purely quantitative, and even then defined somewhat narrowly.

Third, we may accept the view but decide that the cost-benefit equation precludes the effort required to effect changes. I see this as the most endemic response in some areas of tertiary education. It is also the saddest response. Most academics want to teach well because it provides so much satisfaction to do so. Those who have reflected on their own learning and teaching methods grow in their desire to encourage deeper learning in their students [5]. However, those academics who perceive that the effort in changing does not pay off, may choose a less satisfactory teaching option. This is a dominant paradigm. Where such a view is prolific among educational administrators under budgetary pressures, the pressure to take shortcuts can be overwhelming. The outcome of pursuing such heresies strategically can result in harmful consequences for entire nations. It is no surprise that those universities attempting to export learning solutions which have been developed and tested only in their own situation are accused of imperialism and colonialism. Thaman notes this in the increasing presence of overseas-based educational institutions establishing themselves in the Pacific Islands, due to the increasing deregulated and competitive environment. She comments that "most of them are profit-oriented, targeting a small but influential and affluent clientele. Their programs are usually in the areas of business and commerce, with curricula imported from metropolitan home countries, with little effort to adapt to Pacific contexts" [6].

Fourth, we may accept a distorted view which tries to merge the product of research with our long-accepted misconceptions. Thus we may accept that teaching is about changing students' understandings, but not want to acknowledge the ways in which we influence that process of learning. Our focus is then likely to be simply on peripheral changes, like converting our lectures onto PowerPoint. By way of example, some years ago when one of us (Freeman) was involved in a video conferencing experiment [7], it became important to make sure not to wear clothes with stripes, because that caused problems in camera focus. Now, however, there is no problem in wearing all sorts of clothes, since the particular change was necessary only for that context. While minor changes and improvements are not bad in themselves, they miss the point if they are taken out of context, or become ends in themselves. While there is no harm in ensuring a tool is properly used, some practitioners seem to give the impression that this is their primary concern. In the section below we expand on the importance of maintaining the focus on the truly important things, like the link between interaction activities and learning, or the link between assessment and learning.

Since we are dynamic human beings, we may adopt any or all of the four responses during our lives. But the workplace is decreasingly tolerant of those who refuse to change in the face of "irrefutable" evidence. The dramatic increase in student numbers in tertiary education is forcing us to weigh the available evidence. The possibility of survival with old solutions and views is diminishing. Lecturers who view teaching as merely transmitting information are more likely to see growing dissatisfaction amongst their students as the norm moves towards the large lecture situation rather than the small tutorial or one-on-one consultations in their offices. Older, teacher-centered views make it harder to foster individualized learning in large classes.

C. Responding to Heresies When They Are NOT Grounded in Sound Research
Consider now the situation where the research outcomes are not conclusive. If sound research suggests that a former heresy is now proven true in a particular context, then an appropriate response is to determine whether it is applicable in other situations by further research. This is the status of a number of innovative applications of technology in education today. We know that teachers who view teaching as helping students change their understandings are more effective than those who do not [8]. They do so by designing learning environments that integrate learning resources and learning activities to achieve particular learning goals, and they use assessment to direct student efforts. But we do not know exactly which interaction of learning activities and resources works best in each and every learning context. We need to adopt approaches which, in the light of the best available research, we think are most appropriate for our desired learning outcomes. We need to bear in mind our knowledge of our students and their context, and then to evaluate what has worked and see what can be done to make improvements. We may find ourselves standing against accepted beliefs, and be labeled a heretic ourselves.

The challenge for educational administrators is to foster a conducive environment for "thinking outside the box," and encouraging innovation and experimentation [9]. Because we do not know which aspects of current educational innovation will be heretical and which will be proved right in the light of research, we need to continue testing a wide variety of methods and technologies in different contexts. The challenge is to fund and encourage our skeptics and critics as well as our innovators and early adopters, so that the best combinations of methods and technologies, old and new, are tested and refined. The role of independent academic research, the media and academic publishers is critical in ensuring that work is not wastefully duplicated, but more importantly that good practice in one field stimulates innovation in others.

IV. HOPES

Hope: the expectation of something desired. [2]

Academics and educational administrators differ in the particulars of what they hope. Many base their hopes on using teaching methods as tools to increase the efficiency in the delivery of information. Others base their hopes on helping students change their conceptions.

A. Heretical Hopes
Most of the hype and heresies discussed above are perpetuated because the providers of educational services have a teacher-centred or technology-centred model of learning. A typical view is depicted in Figure 1. Trigwell and Prosser [8] show that teachers with a view that the purpose of their teaching is to transmit information to students are less likely to develop curriculum and learning tasks that result in students taking a deep approach to learning. Teachers and educational leaders who hold such conceptions may see technological solutions as a way of increasing the efficiency of information transmission. Their practice and their research questions will assume "that education operates something like a machine" [1], so they will consider that the purpose of research is to seek the most effective and efficient "machine" to do the transmitting.

Figure 1. A Teacher-centered View of Learning.

As student numbers have dramatically increased in the last decade, teachers holding such a view have found considerable attraction in using the computer based learning programs, audio conferencing, video conferencing and the WWW. (One hears such comments as "Students can now download my notes off the Web in their own time and place.") But the heresy of such a view can be seen in the equivalent but ludicrous suggestion an academic could make at the beginning of a course: "Here is a list of the things you need to learn for the exam. Go to the library and access the appropriate books to acquire the necessary information. See you in ten weeks at the exam." The suggestion may not be ludicrous for the highly motivated learner who already has some understanding of the boundaries and nature of knowledge in their discipline (though this sounds more like the academics than the neophytes!). Perhaps it might work for some research students, who already possess a well-developed understanding of their research discipline--yet even here many postgraduate students and their supervisors would argue for a closer and more involved supervisory role [10]. The suggestion is ludicrous if applied to the majority of learners in the education system. Most students need to be guided through the process of learning, typically through a series of learning activities.

B. Appropriate Hopes
Given that we live in a world with limited resources, it is appropriate that society gets value for money from its investment in education. Better allocation decisions are likely if those who allocate funds share the hope that students will experience a real change in their understanding of the world and how it works. Those entrusted with the task need to be motivated to help the students of the 21^st century learn and change in the ways they make their decisions; in how they understanding their place in the world; and in how they develop their own conception of reality. The aim should thus be to practise those principles that previous research has identified as most likely to contribute to effective learning.

There are several places we can obtain a list of what identifies good practice in teaching. One such is "Seven Principles for Good Practice in Undergraduate Education," first published in 1987 by the American Association of Higher Education (AAHE). Those interested in the most effective ways of advancing these principles with technology should peruse the revised 1997 version by Chickering and Ehrmann [11], summarised in Table 1. It needs to be noted that effectiveness may not be the same as least costly. The cost-effective solution may be one which costs more but yields far better learning outcomes.

 

Principle	Technology application
1. Good practice encourages contacts between students and faculty	Asynchronous communications technology greatly enhances the opportunities for staff -student interactions. Learners reluctant to ask staff oral questions benefit from written interactions. Commuting part time adult learners particularly benefit from improved access.
2. Good practice develops reciprocity and cooperation among students	As above, asynchronous communications technology improves student-student interactions which strengthens group problem solving, collaborative learning and discussion of assignments.
3. Good practice uses active learning techniques	Technology has massively encouraged learning by doing instead of watching. Search facilities are significantly enhanced. Simulations of real world situations can be easily played out.
4. Good practice gives prompt feedback	Technology greatly increases the ability to achieve instant feedback on learning progress (e.g., auto-corrected quizzes, hidden comments in presentation files, access to student and staff feedback on discussions).
5. Good practice emphasizes time on task	Technology can make studying more efficient as learners spend less time commuting and queuing for resources in libraries.
6. Good practice communicates high expectations	Greater exposure to real life problems through technology sharpens motivation to acquire information as well as cognitive analysis and application skills. Web publishing adds discipline. Good examples of student work can be easily made available as benchmarks.
7. Good practice respects diverse talents and ways of learning	Technologies expand the repertoire of learning resources that may particularly suit some learners. They can allow for more individualised learning by tracking progress on pathways.

Table 1 Applications of Technology in the Light of the Principles of Good Practice.

The discussion above stresses the well-proven belief that good teachers are essential, not just for their ability to communicate as implied by a teacher-centred model, but because they largely determine the learning environment and therefore the likelihood of quality learning outcomes in a student-centred model. As the Chinese proverb has it: "Teacher opens the door. You go in by yourself."

Teachers can design relevant learning tasks using a range of methods to achieve valid learning objectives. They can also encourage high quality in staff-student and student-student interactions. Clearly the assessment system influences the degree to which students will pursue those desirable learning outcomes. Teachers therefore play a critical role in ensuring the assessment packages are integrated to these learning objectives. More than this, the teacher also models what it is to be a member of the learning community in the student's chosen discipline. This is likely to be a major influence on how and what a student learns. Biggs [12] notes that "students read their messages from what lecturers actually do in their teaching and assessing, not from what they say." The student-centred approach to learning, shown in Figure 2, whilst it is in no way separated from the influence of the teacher, is therefore more likely to result in student learning. The quality of that learning, however, is affected by the quality of the teacher's input--or, more particularly, the student's perception of that quality [5].

Figure 2. A Student-centered View of Learning.

Electronic resources therefore can play just as influential a role as other resources, in that they support "people's deep urges to learn and to teach." He continues: "information technology should provide easy paths connecting people with information, teaching, learning and educational institutions...and with each other" [12].

V. MANAGING THE PROCESS OF EDUCATIONAL INNOVATION

The process of managing an educational innovation can be seen as comprising five steps. This is shown in Figure 3. As a first step, we need to understand the forces that trigger change in the current way we do our business. Changes to the status quo in the education sector can occur for a range of reasons, not only through the desire for improvements in technology. Others triggers include changes in competition or funding, attitudes of major stakeholder groups, organisational structures and rewards systems.

The second step involves debate about the appropriate response to the trigger. Contributions to the debate may include knee-jerk reactions by those who stand to lose or gain as a result of the likely innovation. Such responses are tantamount to heresy in that they are most likely based on anything but well proven research results - although most of us have had sympathy with those expressing such reactions. Few of us like to see our colleagues (or ourselves) threatened by a loss of job security, which is among a range of reasons why some academics resist adopting new approaches to learning [9]. The role of good research is critical here, and is discussed below.

In the light of the debate, which may include a wide range of real and perceived stakeholders, the third step is undertaken. The formulation of recommendations is often seen as part of the process of debate. It is worth separating it from the debate, however, as too often expected recommendations drive the political agenda, which then shapes the process of debate. In this, the vital role of research is subjugated by the pragmatism of sifting evidence to meet set expectations. No new heresies are tested in this climate, but rather the old ones prevail.

Figure 3. A Model of the Educational Innovation Process.

The fourth step in innovation is implementation. It is important to correctly manage the implementation stage by instituting appropriate support mechanisms. It is no use for teachers or administrators to recommend an innovative approach if there is insufficient personal, political or practical support for it. This includes showing that resources which are needed are and will continue to be available. Geoghegan [13] argues that such support must exist before mainstream academics will risk an educational innovation involving technology. For example, in 1997 the University of Technology, Sydney decided to invest heavily to centrally support a single web-based conferencing and teaching program (TopClass) as part of a multi-level strategy for flexible learning. The result has been a massive reduction in student complaints about the educational technology, even in the context of a tenfold increase in its utilisation in a single year. This is an example of the sort of support mechanism that Geoghegan [13] alluded to as enabling an innovation to cross the "chasm" from use only by pioneers into mainstream adoption.

The fifth and final step involves evaluation and review of the success or failure of the innovation. Whilst evaluation should characterize all aspects of the process, from needs analysis through implementation, it is appropriate to separate it as a vital step following implementation. Outcomes are evaluated using a variety of research methods, with particular emphasis on finding out if the innovation helped students learn better in a specific context. Normally it is not possible to make generalizable statements for all contexts. However, certain indicators, such as student assessment outcomes and the costing of the innovation might be useful indicators of the likely value of the innovation in other contexts. The outcomes of this evaluation then may trigger further refinement of the innovation, or may prompt the search for a better method to substitute for the innovation just tested.

A. The Place of Educational Research in Shaping Debate
There is a great need for formal as well as informal research to establish the true as opposed to imagined effects of a proposed innovation. Better recommendations for action are likely to come from formal research or a review of the existing literature than from thin air! Building on Biggs [12] and Ramsden [5], Freeman [14] describes teaching and learning in a system model. This is reproduced below in Figure 4. If meaningful learning is our central objective, then this is most likely to be accomplished when learners adopt a deep approach to learning [15]. Learners are more likely to take a deep approach to learning when:

• Their conception of learning relates to better understanding rather than accumulating a quantity of facts or knowledge [12]. This is a function of two things: the learners' external support structures, and certain internal factors [5]. Learners with strong moral and financial supports are in a better position to afford the time to study and have access to a more suitable physical context for the purposes of study. They are also more likely to have the money to take advantage of technological supports (e.g., a car to travel to FTF learning sessions; a computer and internet access to access electronic learning resources). Learners have internal factors that affect their conception of learning too. Positive previous experiences with technology or the general educational experience of tertiary learning can significantly affect anticipated outcomes from studying a new subject. Learners who are poor in math appear for example to be more fearful of finance subjects. The language with which interactions take place, especially the use of colloquialisms and unfamiliar metaphors, can seriously affect the learners' ability to participate. We have already referred to Thaman's [6] views on the impact of cultural factors as well, but other issues need addressing, such as colour (e.g., white denoting death in some Asian countries) and animations (e.g., an open palm waving can be considered an insult in some Mediterranean countries).

• Teachers appropriately design the teaching process and assessment context and then successfully implement them. In their recent adaptation of the Seven Principles for Good Practice, Chickering and Ehrmann [11] encourage academics to "eschew materials that are simply didactic, and search instead for those that are interactive, problem oriented, relevant to real-world issues, and that evoke motivation." Curriculum developers must carefully choose appropriate learning tasks and an assessment package that accommodates the learning outcomes [12]. Of course, teachers who can rely on the appropriate resources to be in place to support the implementation are far more likely to adopt a specific educational innovation.

Figure 4. A Systems View of the Teaching and Learning Evironment.

 

B. The Place of Research in Evaluating Educational Innovations
Valid research methods used to evaluate theoretically plausible explanations of educational outcomes can distinguish truly hopeful innovations from hype or heresy. The research should consider the effects on all stakeholders including students, academic and support staff, academic and organisational managers, government and professional bodies. Subsequent adoption of the innovation in similar and different contexts is a measure of its success. Similarly peer review through the publication process further validates its place in educational practice.

Alexander and McKenzie [16] suggest data from multiple sources should be collected and analysed to triangulate the research conclusions of a particular educational innovation. They suggest the research methods that are likely to be appropriate for evaluating each stage of the innovation. The design stage will usually involve interviews with experienced teachers, assessment of the learners' context, a review of the literature on teaching the subject and an exploration of the alternative learning strategies, including possible applications of technology. Potential users and technical experts review prototypes in this design stage. The development stage involves observing and interviewing users of the innovation. Peer and technical experts are also consulted. The implementation stage comprises surveys, focus groups and interviews as well as expert reviews. The institutionalisation of the innovation involves identifying and resolving institutional impediments by interviewing key participants and stakeholders, a process often assisted by a review of their reflective journals.

The final outcome of an educational innovation depends on a number of dynamic interactions among influential stakeholders. Unfortunately the best outcome does not always eventuate. This may be because of a number of factors, including some or many of the following:

• Better marketing. For example, Macintosh users have for years vehemently proclaimed its virtues over a PC, but Microsoft have been more aggressive at selling to the PC market. An important current software power battle rages over the web-based teaching programs (e.g., Lotus Notes Learning Space, FirstClass, TopClass, WebCT and a plethora of others).

• Biased views of influential players in educational institutions. Whenever a producer has a non-contestable market, they can pursue producer-focussed strategies rather than a consumer-focussed one. In Australia there have been some major examples of this prior to deregulation in, for example, the telecommunications and banking markets. Despite other sectors being seriously affected by technology-induced competitive pressures for several decades, it is only in the last few years that the education sector appears to have seriously considered how it might respond to this paradigm shift. Australian universities still have a monopoly over accreditation in Australia, but students, as a major stakeholder can increasingly gain access to other education services from competing providers in the same city. As more institutions become aware that student preferences matter and that they operate in a context where growing numbers of students are prepared to pursue services intra-state, inter-state and even overseas, they are responding with improved and competitive services. The long established on-campus lecture/tutorial model is being seriously challenged as the best teaching strategy for all learners in this increasingly consumer-driven marketplace.

• Different players have different primary motivations affecting their perspective of an educational innovation. Hence each assesses the cost-benefit equation in adapting a particular educational innovation based on different perceptions and valuations of costs and benefits. Government or university administrators may be interested more in financial consequences. Academic staff may be primarily concerned with improving student learning outcomes, although this may be mixed with concern for efficiency amongst those who feel swamped by growing student numbers. Some students may be primarily interested in accumulating only the minimum knowledge to pass an exam, due perhaps to financial pressures. Others may be more able to pursue a fuller and more nuanced understanding of the discipline and its place in the world. We can examine the reactions which each influential sector has to a particular educational innovation and use a triangulation of methods in the evaluation. This is more likely to provide a range of options for learning rather than simply exchanging one dominant mode of delivery (say a technology based one) for another (say FTF).

• Biased views of consumers. Students who do not consider that learning is more than memorising a certain quantity of knowledge may be inclined to reject innovative approaches to learning. Alexander and McKenzie [16] observe this as a major reason for a significant number of government funded technology projects failing to deliver expected outcomes. Learners were simply unable to be convinced of the benefit of the product despite the accepted wisdom of expert educationalists and technologists. The role of the teacher in integrating the assessment used in the learning tasks is crucial [5].

• Poor support structures. Over the past three decades, a number of potentially useful technological innovations have failed because of poorly thought through or badly articulated dissemination and support strategies. Support which is mere lip service is transparent to academics who will bear the risk of failures in innovation. The provision en masse of video cassette recorders and overhead projectors in schools and departments has resulted in some very expensive dust collectors! The current challenge, as governments and students (or their parents) strive to provide computers and internet access in today's learning environment, is to have support strategies which encourage appropriate usage and sustainable change. Alexander and McKenzie [16] identify poor project management as a major reason for educational innovations not delivering expected outcomes. Ehrmann [1] reinforces this view: "Perhaps our most important finding was that it usually takes years for curricular software to be developed and then to become widely accepted. There are many reasons for this. Support services are often under-funded, so faculty could not be certain that the basic hardware and software would be consistently available and in working order. Changing a course involves shifts to unfamiliar materials, creation of new types of assignments, and inventing new ways to assess student learning. It is almost impossible for an isolated faculty member to find the time and resources to do all these things, and to take all these risks. Few institutions provide the resources and rewards for faculty to take such risks. For these and other reasons, the pace of curricular change is slow."

VI. THE PRESENT STATE OF EDUCATIONAL INNOVATION AT UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY, SYDNEY

A. Flexible Learning at UTS
Educational innovation is part of a wider phenomenon within higher education. The University of Technology, Sydney (UTS), has adopted flexible learning as a strategic priority to focus innovation. Most Australian universities have flexible learning (or "flexible delivery") among their strategic initiatives. Flexible learning has many meanings (not all of which have an emphasis on either flexibility or learning!). One meaning at UTS involves assembling human, print and electronic resources to provide learning services in the most efficient and effective way possible. Flexible learning strategies, whilst they are fundamentally student-centred in their orientation, do not in and of themselves encourage students to take deeper approaches to learning. The role of the teacher is perhaps even more critical in allowing flexible learning to encourage deep approaches to learning and result in positive learning outcomes.

Learning services that can be provided flexibly include:

• Access to information via various means including different combinations of print (e.g., directly from the library or posted from a library) or electronic media (e.g., on campus access to CD ROM databases as well as off-campus search and document delivery services). This is the crudest form of what some call flexible learning but which in fact amounts simply to flexible delivery.

• Access to study a program/subject from a different faculty or university or even in a different combination to the norm. This amounts to flexible learning pathways or flexible participation.

• Interaction learning activities via different combinations of human (e.g., intensive FTF sessions), print (e.g., self managed learning materials) and electronic resources (e.g., video case studies linked to questions, computer based learning programs, web-based auto-corrected quizzes or role plays). Pedagogically sound learning tasks that encourage learners to think and analyze and which result in changed conceptions is an important part of flexible learning. Interaction is not simply mouse clicking to turn the electronic page!

• Interaction with staff and students so individualised questions which are barring a learner's development can be asked and answered by fellow travelers or expert facilitators. Learners sometimes encounter stumbling blocks, sometimes based on previous misconceptions, which cannot be overcome by quality information delivery (such as a good textbook or CD ROM) alone. In this context, learners can benefit greatly from the ability to interact with another learner, who has possibly overcome the same obstacle, or with one who has more fully mastered the discipline, such as a lecturer or tutor. Synchronous conversations (by phone or during office consultation hours) or asynchronous ones (by voicemail, fax, e-mail or discussion group) can contribute significantly to this aspect of flexible learning.

• Access to assessment at the student's own pace, and at a convenient time or place. This might allow for access to a wider range of types of assessment. Because assessment is a critical determinant of student effort, opportunities for students to be assessed in personalized ways which integrate with learning objectives need to be considered. Examples of flexible assessment include role plays, simulations, debates, presentations and action research projects.

• Interaction with support staff so that individual questions which might restrict students from more fully focusing on their learning can be asked and answered. Learners experiencing technical difficulties (e.g., forgotten passwords to web-based teaching system) or administrative problems (e.g., sickness during assessments) can greatly benefit from flexible student support services.

B. Flexible Learning in Corporate Finance
My experiments with educational innovation have largely been driven by a desire to maintain and improve the quality of student learning in an environment of massive change in the teaching and learning context. Freeman [17] describes the fourfold increase in student numbers and substantial reduction in supporting resources. Business faculties are attracting many students but receive a lower funding per student (30% of the students at UTS but only 15% of the funding). The initial response to these triggers was to rely on more "efficient" teaching methods such as the provision of mass lectures and employment of part-time teaching staff. These are not necessarily effective in providing good learning situations, and difficulties inherent in these changes in delivery have been exacerbated by the greater diversity in the student population. The compositional changes in a first year business subject have been tracked for some years now. While the gender mix and study pattern mix are largely unchanged, 15% of Business Finance students are now full-fee paying overseas students, 30% do not speak English as their first language, 15% are primary care givers and 25% receive some form of social security benefit. Some 10% say that their studying at home is difficult. Only 10% do not feel very confident with computers although the figure is marginally higher at 15% for lack of Internet confidence. Some 90% have easy access to a computer outside UTS, 65% of these have external Internet access.

C. A Personal Journey in Transformation
Mark's first desire on leaving business to become an academic was to be a good teacher. He spent an enormous amount of time preparing his lectures and lecture overheads in his desire to communicate well.

About five years later he realised that his concept of teaching had undergone a paradigm shift: He concluded that his job as a teacher was more about being a manager of student learning than about simply being a presenter. This relieved a huge burden to which he had become accustomed. Instead of worrying about his lecturing performance, it gave him the freedom to concentrate on student learning as the purpose of his teaching. He experimented with a wide range of learning resources to try to accomplish the aim of helping students change their conceptions of corporate finance. Some of his experiments failed miserably and some appeared to produce quite useful outcomes [17], [14], [7]. Not all of his experiments involved technological innovations, although he is probably biased towards innovations which are technology based, since he has found these easiest to implement and they have tended to yield the greatest time savings for him with his large numbers of students. Geoghegan [13] points out that "early adopters" of new technology (a category in which he locates himself) are normally prepared to take risks of failing, are prepared to put in the time and energy to make an innovation work, and rely on a wide network of people, often outside their own discipline, for support.

Mark's next transformation was when he realised that teaching was more than managing students' learning. His job, he recognised, was to promote a caring community of learning. A community requires more than just resources?-it requires care for individual people. He can now look on the work involved in creating a learning environment and not be hassled about the amount of time it takes for some individuals to adopt a new understanding. He is no longer concerned that learners ask questions about subjects not related to the subject immediately to hand. He can see that engaging with such questions can actually affect students' understandings of corporate finance, even though the link may be somewhat indirect (and sometimes apparent only to that one student!).

The figure below depicts the growth in educational technologies available over the past generation of tertiary teaching and parallels his own journey of experimenting with innovative techniques. Frequently these experiments have been simply replications of the pioneering work of others, based on published research results. Bailey and Cotlar's [18], description of their own experiments with teaching via the Internet helped him to separate ideas from people, and to recognise that innovations are the product of teamwork. Teamwork is also important in a student-centred view of teaching. The credit for successful innovation must be shared with the pioneers who have published the results of their successes as well as their failures.

A wide range of research methods have been utilised in evaluating educational innovations. These include surveys, focus groups, interviews, observation of students in action, analyses of their discussions and exam results. Staff evaluations include reflective journals, interviews and peer review. A multiplicity of complementary methods enables conclusions to be drawn with greater confidence.

Figure 5. A Journey Through Technological Innovation in Tertiary Education.

VII. EMERGING RESEARCH ON SOME CURRENT INNOVATIONS

Bates [19] noted that because many technologies are so new, "no-one has yet discovered all the interesting uses of the new technologies." This section details emerging research on four innovative learning tasks. Although inherently different in style, the tasks are similar not only in their use of the Internet, but more particularly in their focuses on providing an interesting and responsive context for student learning. Each reflects my hope that learners will change their conceptions of the world from one that is based on hype or heresy to one that is grounded on the agreed understandings of the discipline. This hope is implemented by carefully construction of each learning task with a view to maximising the likelihood that a deep approach to learning will be taken. If learners take up that challenge by improving their understanding, the result should be better decisions in their work and in their personal lives. The degree to which each task has resulted in improved understanding is currently being more fully evaluated.

Recent internet-based innovations in my student context have been popular. Freeman [17] notes that the interactive web pages were popular amongst UTS students and notes that they have also been used by some other universities. This innovation was tried despite a high level of technical unreliability.

A. Integrated Web-based Teaching Programs
While LAN-based conferencing programs have been used in universities for a decade (e.g., FirstClass at Open University), integrated web-based teaching programs have only been available for three or four years (e.g., TopClass, WebCT). They provide a wide range of opportunity for interactivity, learning and community. TopClass, the standard program used at UTS, provides for private electronic messaging, public conference discussions, easy and consistent delivery of learning resources and progress testing. Figure 6 depicts these features.

Figure 6. Features Available With a Typical Web-Based Teaching Program.

The activities are conducted on the Web using any popularly available browser. This means very wide access for learners. A secure password-protected environment provides a controlled and, where needed, private domain in which the interactions can happen. The various built-in features of TopClass hold many attractions, even for the busy academic with little motivation to invest effort in a new learning technology.

Results from surveys and focus groups with students indicate extremely high satisfaction with this technology, largely because it is integrated into a smorgasbord of learning resources. Despite students' perception of poor reliability and poor access to computers with internet access, some 94% responded that they expected a positive impact on their grade from using TopClass. Indicative of deeper learning outcomes, the following unsolicited comment is by no means unique.

I just wanted to let you know that having done business finance now (and passing) ... really helped me start my own company that deals purely on the internet... all those cashflows and npv's and the assignments with setting up web design companies and the use of the internet for the course, and all the rest put into practice with real world applications makes a lot of sense and helped me greatly!!!

I invite you to look at my site ... it's close to being the largest online computer shopping centre in australia now.

B. Web-based Research and Problem Solving Tasks
The next exercise, also conducted in TopClass, encouraged students to explore the resources of the WWW and report on their findings. At the start of a post-graduate course, students were asked to identify and critique a domestic and international securities markets regulator's website. These critiques were to be brief and posted to a public discussion forum. This simple learning task has multiple learning benefits including:

• Helping students learn about the Web, how to search the Web and how to use a web-based teaching program.

• Encouraging critical evaluation skills.

• Encouraging students to understand the process of securities markets' regulation, including international the international context and its implications.

• Allowing the data, as web references, to form part of the learning resources for future students.

• Showcasing expectations, by displaying the value and quality of the results of the work of other students.

• Reducing the potential for cheating, since this is increasingly possible with the expanded access to massive amounts of information and services on the Web.

C. Web-based Debates
There are two opposing theoretical views students are expected to understand in a post graduate course relating to securities markets regulation. One learning task that encourages students to extend their understanding on opposing views is a debate. Utilising the current recommendations flowing from the Australian Corporate Law Economic Reform Program, students formed groups and were given the task of debating the recommendations in either the affirmative or the negative. Many already had strong opinions because their work exposed them to these regulations. Having to argue a view different to one's own is a typical benefit of a debate. The nuances of a written debate are somewhat different to an oral one in a number of beneficial respects. For example, the lack of ability to use gestures, tone and timing were replaced subtly with efforts to express with hypertext markup language (HTML).

There were a number of learning benefits from the web-based debate, including:

• The asynchronous nature of the debate meant students could better research their arguments and counter arguments between points of presentation.

• Being on the Web meant students were more likely to search and reference relevant material from the Web, which is an increasing aspect of many jobs in this industry.

• The written nature of the debates meant that the debate had value as a reference for future student cohorts. It can also be a living record as it is added to in the future.

• Increased motivation by reducing the stress for those who were not confident oral presenters. This was beneficial in a class where there are many cultural and language differences.

• The increased learning within teams since teamwork is possible in both the preparation and presentation phases rather than just the former in an oral debate.

The debate records show some very clear indications that learning was happening at a deep level.

D. Anonymous Web-based Role Play Simulations
Towards the end of the course, students in a post-graduate course on securities markets' regulation were given the option of participating in a web-based role play [20]. This learning task builds on the method used in a Middle East Politics simulation [21]. Our role play was acted out over 10 days by those 21 who chose to participate (out of 24 in the class). Students had been given a role as they left the last FTF session before the final exam, which was to be held three weeks later. Strict instructions were given about anonymity as we were particularly interested in evaluating students' ability to immerse themselves in their role as key securities markets' players (e.g., Prime Minister John Howard, Senior Regulator Alan Cameron, Futures Exchange Head Les Hoskings). One week was spent preparing their role profile, which was posted for other players to see, before the first of a number of "press releases" relating to securities markets' regulation was given. Students were encouraged to take a deep approach to learning through acting their role in response to the crises precipitated by the press releases. It was emphasised to the class that the role play would facilitate learning by integrating the themes of the course and would also assist in preparation for the final exam.

Role plays have tremendous active learning properties, are highly motivational and are likely to result in quality learning outcomes as learners immerse themselves in their role. But a completely anonymous role play is impossible with any other medium except the Web. When participants can see or hear each other they may distort the interactions they play as their role because of the baggage of previous personal class relationships as well as the visual and verbal cues. This innovative learning task has been evaluated by analysing the public and private discourse that followed press releases, and through student interviews. All students have indicated a desire to participate if there were a next time, even those who simply observed without participating. In the interviews, a number explicitly articulated an increased understanding of how securities markets regulation works. They expected this to contribute significantly to their own understanding and to have impact on the markets in various countries around the Asia-Pacific area in which they work.

VIII. FUTURE POSSIBILITIES

We began this tour of educational innovation by talking about hype and the dangers of not considering its claim to be truth. Research and evaluation can assist in separating bluff from fact. Existing academic literature and independent research provide clarification in assessing the claims of current educational innovation. The previous sections of this paper have discussed the results of attempts to introduce educational innovations, and have outlined the aim of encouraging learning that by definition changes people through challenging their conceptions.

In the last few years, the growth of the Internet has been paralleled by growth in attempts in tertiary education to harness its educational potential. Quite hopeful ideas that utilize the asynchronous aspects of the World Wide Web include interesting learning activities like online debates and anonymous online role plays. These support the obvious WWW benefits of asynchronous learning on demand, automated and individualised feedback, access to a plethora of information and opportunities to interact with colleagues and experts with the choice of place and time made by the learner.

Over the last three decades there appear to have been many educational innovations that have been pure hype. Whenever the focus is on the technology rather than the educational process, this is the likely outcome. Ehrmann [1] concludes that "few educators are thinking much about educational strategies for using technology to improve learning outcomes." This has led some educators to be very skeptical about the future uses of the Internet. We believe such prophecies of doom to be wrong.

What then is the future of educational innovation? Is all this talk about the Internet just hype? Many colleagues think it so. Some colleagues, many who have studied education for a long time, see web-based learning as heresy because they think of it only in terms of transmission and believe that it is contrary to accepted wisdom about learning. And they have seen the dust collecting magical cure-all solutions proclaimed in the past. The following humorous quotes were famous last (but wrong) words despite being generally accepted wisdom of the time.

"I think there is a world market for maybe five computers."

Thomas Watson, IBM Chairman (1943)

 

"There is no reason anyone would want a computer in their home."

Ken Ohlson, Digital Equipment Corporation founding chairman (1977)

 

"640K ought to be enough memory for anybody."

Bill Gates, Microsoft Chairman (1981)

It is less of a problem to make the wrong prediction and to make recovery strategies, than it is to make the wrong prediction and fail to react when the error is discovered. Microsoft demonstrated a huge capacity to change their strategic efforts when they realized the enormity of the impact of the Internet. My fear is that influential stakeholders like senior university administrators and busy academics will fall into the trap of resisting the need for new processes and new approaches simply because change is hard. A producer-focused culture, and with it a teacher-centered view of teaching, persists in much of academia. The ground swell of student interest in web-based learning is like no other phenomenon in educational innovation. Even simplistic attempts to incorporate web-based learning into an overall flexible learning strategy ought to be lauded, as they are moves in the right direction.

Let me propose three "blue sky" predictions. The rudiments of forecasting tell us that there is only a slim chance of being 100% correct. But there is also a slim chance of being 100% wrong! As the oft quoted Oscar Wilde said, "A map of the world without Utopia on it is not worth using."

A. Blue Sky Prediction One
As the publishers and telecommunications companies continue their rationalizations and joint ventures, publishers will expand their packaging of human, print and electronic resources. The following sales pitch is not outside the bounds of imagination. "Recommend our text to your students and you get online auto-corrected quizzes and our paid tutor to answer some of the learning questions linked to your web-based teaching program."

B. Blue Sky Prediction Two
Some universities will fail. There will be a shake out among universities following a recognition that students are not so much customers as members. The privatization of a number of government business enterprises as well as deregulation of some classes of business (e.g., telecommunication, banking) have caused a refocussing on services to users. Unfortunately, the cultural shift required by management to take on a new and competitive environment does not occur painlessly or quickly. Mistakes sometimes made during the change process are so great that the enterprises fail to survive at all. We have concerns in treating any student as a customer. "Customer is king" is the marketing slogan. But this is an inappropriate metaphor or slogan for learners. Being a member or a "customer" of a university does not of itself make you educated, as becoming a member of a fitness gym does not of itself make you fit. The member must put the effort in and abide by the advice of the skilled fitness trainer. Likewise, learners must become members of a learning community, personally making the effort to do the learning tasks set by their skilled trainer. Academics, whatever their field, have the responsibility to learn how to be better trainers. Ultimately the market will judge which providers of learning have made short term decisions at the expense of long term quality.

C. Blue Sky Prediction Three
Australian tertiary education has recently come under close scrutiny and review (the West report). The recommendations of this to further open opportunities for tertiary study, coupled with the development of new (virtual) universities opens the probability that students will pay for different aspects of the learning services which they require. Just as banks, in a deregulated economy, are basing their fees on a "user pays" basis, so educational providers in a deregulated economy will charge their "customers" [22]. For example, students may pay a base cost to enroll in a subject and sit for assessment. Students may then choose extras, from amongst a range of human, print and electronic sources. Research in education and educational innovation should guide the process by which new scenarios develop, to the benefit of students and their needs. Of course, safety nets will be needed to allow equitable access to tertiary education. Increasing student numbers and reducing per capita government funding set challenges for us as educators. Our students and our discipline will benefit from our wise use of educational innovations.

Greater competition will cause a greater focus on "user-pays" for the different critical components of the learning process. We have already seen the deregulation of a number of service industries begin to focus more on user pays. An example is banks charging fees for using the FTF teller to conduct your banking transactions rather than the Internet or automatic teller machines. Consider this scenario:

Minh is a 22 year old working in a bank in the Sydney central business district. Minh can not afford to go to university full time at the moment in 2005, but browses the Web (in the lunch hour, of course) looking for study options. He has heard about the University of Super Teaching's business degree being practical, well-regarded by employers and highly optioned. He notes that he can take 25% of his subjects from other accredited universities with no questions asked. Minh scrutinizes the cost of a typical first year Bachelor of Business subject called Business Finance:
Minimum	$1000	Enrollment in the subject. This fee enables you to attempt the assessment tasks. Satisfactory demonstration of fulfilling the specified learning objectives will result in the subject being written to your academic record.
Optional extra	$100 per item	Stand-alone learning resources available include: A range of textbooks with annotated solutions. A range of printed manuals containing self study learning activities with feedback. Access to a website with self study learning activities with feedback (e.g., auto-corrected quizzes), expert explanations on video or animated to frequently asked questions and learner discussion groups. Access to a computer based learning program via mail or from a website. This fee enables you to each learning resources in your own time and place to improve your understanding of the material and improve your skills in application as preparation for the assessment tasks. Disclaimer: UST recommends that less experienced or disciplined learners utilize some or all of these resources. However our research shows that some learners may be better suited to the print materials than the electronic resources.
Optional extra	$500 per item	Interact with experts who really "knows their stuff" in a public forum. This gives you access to individualised interactions with experts and other learners. This also gives you the freedom to participate in the questions and answers asked by others. Available in: Asynchronous mode on WWW. Guaranteed 24 hour turnaround on all questions, seven days a week, plus the assurance of an expert moderating the learning. Synchronous tutorial sessions with maximum group size of five people. Maximum of 10 sessions per subject. Additional participation will be charged at $100 per session. Students can choose any combination of: FTF Teleconference Video conference This fee enables you to participate with other learners in a tightly monitored and guided learning environment. These facilitators are experts in their field as well as in teaching. We carefully monitor their teaching. All teachers that do not consistently receive an average rating of Highly Satisfactory are terminated. In this way we expect to dramatically improve your understanding of the material and improve your skills in application as preparation for the assessment tasks. Disclaimer: UST recommends that very inexperienced learners utilize some or all of these human resources. However, even though our research shows that some learners may be particularly suited to human resources to help their learning, it is still the primary responsibility of the learner to learn.
Optional extra	$100 per item	Interact with an expert on an individualised basis. Synchronous sessions available seven days a week. Available in: FTF (each day at 10 am and 5 pm for half an hour) Teleconference (each day at 10.30 am and 5.30 pm for half an hour) Video conference (each day at 11 am and 6 pm for half an hour) This fee enables you to use each learning resources in your own time and place to improve your understanding of the material and improve your skills in application as preparation for the assessment tasks. Disclaimer: UST recommends that less experienced or disciplined learners utilize some or all of these resources. However our research shows that some learners may be better suited to the print materials than the electronic resources

Will Minh make a choice based on trendy ideas, his own needs, the constraints of his lifestyle, best possible degree, low cost, flexibility, or a range of these and other factors? Will the University have been able to adapt to offer courses in this fashion?

One challenge remaining for vice chancellors and other tertiary institution heads is to show leadership in responding quickly to change and competitive pressures. A shift in leadership paradigms is needed. Bates [19] refers to the leap of faith the British Prime Minister took many years ago in establishing the Open University. To hesitate in the increasingly competitive education services market will be to the likely detriment of any university. Those of us who are fortunate work in contexts which encourage their members to make this paradigm shift, from a transmission model of education to a model which encourages innovation in flexible learning.

IX. CONCLUDING REMARKS

Successful educators will continue to be those who build a caring community of learners, matching the learner's context. To do this requires six steps.

1. We must understand the learning context.

2. We must carefully choose a curriculum that accommodates learners' previous knowledge and experiences and sets them on a course of improved understandings.

3. We must design learning activities that achieve learning outcomes that accommodate learners' contexts. This requires carefully selecting and supporting the appropriate human, print and electronic learning resources.

4. We must integrate assessment with the desired learning outcomes to maximize the likelihood of focused effort.

5. We must track the extent to which learning outcomes are achieved at a formative and summative level, and ensure such feedback is individualised and responsive.

6. We must change the way we see our roles as teachers, from expert content providers to people who can create and support learning communities, both with our students and among our peers.

Successful institutions of learning will include those that can celebrate past teaching methods that have worked and continue to work. Successful institutions of learning will include those that can discard the baggage that stifles innovation. The pace of change demands an environment in which to dream, to imagine solutions outside old boundaries. It also demands a culture that is prepared to take risks and make mistakes as part of this process of learning what does and does not help people change their conceptions. It cries for a freedom even to toss out teaching methods that once were our staple.

Successful societies will be those that instill an attitude of lifelong learning and provide the resources to enable its achievement. The only certainty we can have is that change will happen, ever more quickly, with knowledge purported to be doubling every five years or so. Specific knowledge in some disciplines will be far more "disposable." The ramifications impose a heavy responsibility on educators at all levels of teaching to encourage the attitude and skills for a lifelong approach to learning which prizes innovation and integrative thinking above rote repetition of basic facts and principles. Educational innovation, whether technology-based or not, will only flourish where these conditions exist.

X. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

The authors are grateful to Shirley Alexander and Keith Trigwell for encouragement and advice, to Jo McKenzie for clear and helpful criticism and to Professor Tony Blake, Vice-Chancellor of the University of Technology, Sydney, whose invitation to Mark Freeman to present a public lecture to the University prompted the setting down of this material in an accessible form.

XI. REFERENCES

1. Ehrmann, S. C., "Asking the Right Question: What Does Research Tell Us About Technology and Higher Learning?," Change, 27, 20-27, 1995. http://www.learner.org/edtech/rscheval/rightquestion.html

2. Macquarie Pocket Dictionary, 2^nd ed., Jacaranda Press, 1997.

3. Suppes, P., The Uses of Computers in Education, Scientific American, 206-208, September 1966.

4. McKenzie, J., Evaluating and Documenting Flexible Learning Projects, Working Paper, University of Technology, Sydney, 1998.

5. Ramsden, P., Learning to Teach in Higher Education, Routledge, London, 1992.

6. Thaman, K.H., Equity in, and Access to, What Kind of Education? Some Issues for Consideration in the Pacific Islands, Learning Together - Collaboration in Open Learning, Curtin University of Technology, Perth, 1998.

7. Freeman, M. A, Video Conferencing: a Solution to the Multi-Campus Large Class Problem?, British Journal of Educational Technology, 29, 3, 197-210, 1998.

8. Trigwell, K., and Prosser, M., Changing Approaches to Teaching: A Relational Perspective, Studies in Higher Education, 21, 275-284, 1996.

9. Ramsden, P., Learning to Lead in Higher Education, Routledge, London, 1998.

10. Phillips, E. M., and Pugh, D. S., How to Get a Ph.D.: A Handbook for Students and Their Supervisors, Open University Press, Buckingham, 1996.

11. Chickering, A.W., and Ehrmann, S.C., Implementing the Seven Principles: Technology as Lever, 1997. http://www.aahe.org/technology/ehrmann.htm

12. Biggs, J.B., From Theory to Practice: A Cognitive Systems Approach, Higher Education Research and Development, 12, 73-85, 1993.

13. Geoghegan, W.H., Instructional Technology and the Mainstream: The Risks of Success, Mayhum Distinguished Lecture, SUNY College at Fredonia, 1996.

14. Freeman, M. A, Flexibility in Access, Interaction And Assessment: the Case for Web Based Conferencing and Teaching Programs, Australian Journal of Educational Technology, 13, 1, 23-39, 1997. http://cleo.murdoch.edu.au/gen/aset/ajet/ajet13/wi97p23.html

15. Marton, R., and Saljo, R., Approaches to Learning. In: Marton, F., Hounsell D., and Entwistle, N.J. (Eds.), The Experience of Learning, (second edition), Scottish Academic Press, Edinburgh, 1997.

16. Alexander, S., and McKenzie, J., with Geissinger, H., Evaluating IT projects for University Learning: the CAUT experience, Australian Government Printing Service, Canberra, 1998.

17. Freeman, M. A, The Role of the Internet in Teaching Large Undergraduate Classes, Flexible Online Learning Journal, 1, 1, 1996. http://www.lib.uts.edu.au/folp/journal/index.html

18. Bailey, E., and Cotlar, M. Teaching Via the Internet, Communication Education, 43(2), 184-193, 1994.

19. Bates, A.W., The impact of technological change on open and distant learning, Open Learning Conference: Your future depends on it, Brisbane, 1996.

20. Freeman, M. A., and Capper, J. M., Exploiting the Web for Education: An Anonymous Role Play/Simulation, Australian Journal of Educational Technology, 15, 1, 1999.

21. Vincent, A., and Shepherd, J., Teaching Middle East Politics by Interactive Computer Simulation, Journal for Instructional Multimedia in Education, 98, 11, 1998.

22. West, R., Learning for Life: Final Report, DEETYA, Canberra, 1998. http://www.deetya.gov.au/divisions/hed/hereview/toc.htm