Presenting courses in a distance learning mode is transforming part-time postgraduate study in the United Kingdom (UK) where increasingly, universities are offering their courses on a national (and in some cases, international) basis. Students can now choose the course they wish to study, unfettered by geographical considerations; and since they have busy lives with which academic study must compete for attention, the more flexible the means to study can become, the better for the student. Though the main motivator for academics to embrace distance learning is the power of market forces, advances in educational technology are also an important contributing factor. Therefore, for both students and course providers, pragmatism could now be said to outweigh pedagogic principles.

At the heart of the struggle to find a balance between a market-driven approach and a commitment to the development of students who can operate as independent thinkers and researchers, lies a debate about the role of libraries. In this paper, we comment on the conflicting and often ambivalent attitudes to the relationship between libraries and distance education which we encountered through our recent UK-wide study of postgraduate distance education (Unwin, Bolton and Stephens 1996). We will argue that unless libraries are encouraged to play a central role in the learning process and supported in that effort, distance learners will face a future in which their experiences as learners are tightly bounded and controlled. Furthermore, by having to confront the relationship between libraries and distance learning, academics have had to reassess their approach to the design and delivery of postgraduate courses for part-time students in general, opening their eyes to the under used potential of librarians in both university and public libraries.

Due to the emphasis it places on research-led enquiry and the development and challenging of knowledge, it is at the postgraduate level that a key aspect of higher education is clearly visible. We would want to argue, of course, that the aim of developing critical thinkers should also underpin all stages of education, but here we wish to concentrate on the postgraduate phase. In advocating the centrality of critical thinking to the postgraduate experience, we are not ignoring the pluralistic nature of the needs and goals which drive students to embark on their studies. In particular, postgraduate students are often motivated by practical concerns when choosing their courses. They may be seeking to improve their skills at the urging of an employer, in order to gain promotion in the workplace, or to change career direction. Yet our research suggests that in spite of strong work or career-related motives, students do not, in the main, want their studies to be confined within a prescriptive framework; rather, they hope to be allowed to shape a new learning agenda which might transcend existing paradigms.

In our study (which surveyed 1000 postgraduate distance learners spread across 19 academic disciplines in 23 universities, and included all UK university libraries and samples of public libraries and course providers) there seemed to be an significant mismatch of expectations between students and course providers about the role of libraries in relation to courses delivered in the distance learning mode. The sample of course providers we interviewed either regarded the problem as irrelevant to their students, or recognised the importance of the issue, but saw problems in their own institutional arrangements and the extent to which issues had been fully thought through before new courses were launched. In students' responses to a survey question, "Is it a clearly stated requirement of your course that you make use of libraries?" 51% answered 'No', while a further 10% said that they did not know if it was required or not. Yet, when asked to what extent they actually felt the need to supplement the provided course material with additional reading, a total of 78% responded that they needed to do so either "to some extent," "quite a lot" or "a great deal." These findings, which are reported more fully in Stephens, Unwin and Bolton (1997), suggest that students themselves are more aware of the extent to which they will need to use libraries than the course providers. We found further evidence of the obstacles students face in getting access to libraries and the character of their library use from diaries kept by 47 students for periods of 3 to 12 months. These students showed a high degree of commitment to, and pleasure in, library use. They particularly highlighted the value of both postal services and personal visits to browse, despite the frequently frustrating problems of gaining legitimate access.

It is necessary at this point to note that, in the UK as in other countries, the definition of a distance learning course is constantly shifting and often crosses the fluid boundary which separates distance from open and flexible learning. Our interviews with eleven course providers suggest the following typology for distance courses, with Type B being the most common:

Type A: The self-contained course - here students study from packaged materials (usually text-based but could include multi-media) and are not expected to read or consult sources beyond the supplied material.

Type B: The expandable package - here students again study largely from packaged materials but wider reading (and hence the use of libraries) would be recommended for certain sections of the course, notably a final dissertation or project.

Type A course providers justified self-containment either on the grounds of equity (some students may not have access to libraries) or on the grounds that they, the academics, should set the boundaries of study by choosing the necessary sources. Type B course providers were less certain of their course design rationale. They recognised the problems of equity, accepting that some students would only study from the supplied materials, but also believed postgraduate students should develop their skills as autonomous learners--though often ignoring consideration of the practicalities associated with library access for students who were registered with a university beyond reasonable travelling distance of their homes. In both types of courses, however, it seems that the majority of students wish to transcend the reductionist approach of their course providers. They were supported by university and public librarians who appeared dismayed by the willingness of academic colleagues to accept the pragmatic solution of the self-contained course. For librarians, a creative and pedagogically-led approach to distance learning demands close working relationships with course teams. The self-contained package approach has the potential to deskill librarians as well as students, as does the illusion that a limited electronic reserve collection can fulfil the functions of an academic library.

We are sceptical that advances in technology will necessarily help distance learners become more autonomous, and fearful that electronic access might compound the trend towards narrowly prescribed reading, leading to even greater student isolation as teachers are pushed further into becoming designers of pre-packaged programmed learning. Instead we envision a more hopeful and exciting future, in which academics and librarians collaborate to expand the pedagogical boundaries of distance learning, ensuring that electronic developments are integrated with traditional concerns for wide reading, student autonomy and independent thinking.

References

Stephens, K., Unwin, L. and Bolton, N. "The Use of Libraries by Postgraduate Distance Learning Students: a Mismatch of Expectations." Open Learning (1997, forthcoming).

Unwin, L., Bolton, N. and Stephens, K. The Role of the Library in Distance Learning, Final Report. London: British Library, 1997.

Kate Stephens and Lorna Unwin
University of Sheffield
C.J.Stephens@sheffield.ac.uk