Equivalent Library Support for Distance Learning: The Key to Staying in Business in the New Millennium

Thriving distance learning programs which fail to incorporate active academic library support--equal to that available for the same curriculum taught on campus--are heading down a rocky road. Immediate actions to correct this potentially fatal weakness must include upgrading the quality of teaching in courses in which students are not gaining practice in doing research by using library resources. Colleges should not delay offering equal academic library resources and services until workplace realities demonstrate that inadequate educational experiences have emerged as a common characteristic of unsuccessful careers. The failure to correct this problem now will eventually lead to the general assessment of graduates from specific institutions as typically being unemployable due to the inadequacy of their academic training. Unfortunately, some educators appear either deaf to this message, or completely unaware of the need for providing library services for their distance education students and teachers. When looking at the job performance of graduates, many employer observations can be indirectly related to the educational background of the worker. When analyzed, employee evaluations eventually show clearly the presence or absence of distinguishing skills that foster excellence. Some of these are: knowledge of recorded information, analytical skills and synthesis skills in combination with research and learning skills ("What Work Requires of Schools", 66). The current phrase describing and incorporating all of these is "information literacy," which includes lifelong learning skills. It stands to reason that it is less likely that these skills will be characteristic of employees who are the product of learning experiences that do not involve the use of a strong system of academic library support, for it is during the "hands-on" use of research materials that much learning transpires, skills are developed, and those skills are retained. In short, the delivery of instruction that is a weakened version of on-campus teaching will surely show up eventually as a difference in students' learning.

No matter how post-secondary education offered away from the main campus or in the absence of a main campus is described or delivered: distance learning, off-campus, extended, open, distributed, virtual, synchronous, asynchronous, franchised, correspondence etc.--library support programs are often problematic, because all too frequently, there are none. Even when such a support program does exist, it is usually not the equivalent of that available to on-campus students. Many faculty who are experienced in teaching former distance education students who eventually had to take on-campus classes in order to finish their degrees, have indelible memories of problems, including unsuccessful efforts to bring weak educational skills up to the average level of traditional on-campus students. I myself have worked with library science students who not only didn't grasp the fundamentals of cataloging and classification, but who had problems in communication as well. Rita Culross offers an intriguing consideration of the extensive need for remedial training in a 1996 article in Change. The situation becomes humiliating for both teacher and student; and, when remedial work in subject areas is needed, there may not even be an available institution-provided alternative for help outside the classroom. In a discussion of the need for remedial courses at the university and community college levels, Clifford Adelman points out that the remedial curriculum is usually limited to general education.

The Association of College and Research Libraries addresses the importance of a well-managed library support program for distance education, including adequate financing, personnel and facilities, in its Guidelines for Distance Learning Library Services (1998). The newly-revised version stresses that it is the responsibility of the institution of origin to provide convenient, direct physical and electronic access to equivalent library resources. Those are to be current items presented in appropriate formats, in adequate quality, quantity, depth and scope. The critical portion of these Guidelines, which is yet to be attained in typical extended-campus programs such as those offered at Murray State University and elsewhere in Kentucky, relates to sufficient resources to support specific courses. Services including library instruction and delivery of documents are in the formative stage for the average library supporting instruction that is delivered away from the main campus.

In subjects where research skills must be developed through practice, additional readings beyond the textbook and a knowledge of professional reference materials are required in order to fairly reflect thinking in the discipline; however, in an apparent assumption that they could provide such materials, it seems that distance education programs often have the cart before the horse. Many institutions jumped onto the technology bandwagon before the tremendous limits in the availability of electronically-supplied information became clear. Confusing terminology and misleading, simplistic descriptions of highly technical processes may be partially responsible. Harold Billings provides an interesting description of the problems in communication about the development of electronic services (Billings 6). Online dictionaries, encyclopedias, directories, and indexes are typical resources available; however, even if all of those are in one digital database, they only constitute a subset of a library—not a comprehensive academic library. Although periodical databases of varying quality are becoming increasing available for remote access (Thomas and Kroch), and faxing and mailing copies of printed materials to students are popular means of providing access to information, generally speaking, these options are no substitute for the library resources and services available on campus. Scholars long ago found merit in broadening exposure to recorded information and in practicing research skills. Apparently, educators need to be reminded that academic libraries were found to be essential in achieving such excellence. There is also the hurdle of meeting accreditation requirements (see, for example, Herbert White's article on the changes in off-campus education). Those responsible for dealing with these issues will surely have to face the fact that electronic access to full-text databases simply is not the same as ready access to printed copies. For one thing, full-text is defined differently for each database, and often means that only selected titles are in full-text. Inclusion of a journal title in a list of those available in full-text may really mean that only one article from one issue of a volume has been included! I've studied several databases for local collection development purposes. My study and analysis of UMI's ProQuest Direct, IAC's InfoTrac and selected databases provided by EBSCO (which will be appearing in a soon-to-be published issue of The Acquisitions Librarian) reveals that full-text databases generally include only feature articles. Actually, even some of those are excluded when authors refuse to permit electronic access to their work. Furthermore, the accuracy and extent of information needed simply may not be available in electronic databases, although they often provide a good indexing service and introductory resource to many subjects. From my examination of electronic periodical databases, I have concluded that they were not designed to completely replace printed copies. Relying totally on electronic periodical databases as they now exist is a mistake for many in post-secondary education. Accrediting agencies will be forced to confront the frequent substitution of unequal electronic resources for printed research materials and other weaknesses in academic library support; if they do not, "college credit" could take on a whole new meaning, and the college degree of the future may more nearly represent education at the secondary school level.

Some distance education library support programs include on-campus librarians who execute literature searches for students as Hulshof mentions (20). It seems appropriate to question the potential effects on students of such efforts, which clearly go beyond generally accepted reference service. The job of off-campus librarian can easily devolve into that of "research assistant," who, in support of the institution's distance education program, basically frees students from a large part of their homework, instead of being an intermediate facilitator in the process of providing research materials. Aside from obvious questions regarding the integrity of such programs, one can also question the equity of the educational experience when compared to that available for on-campus students, because institutionally supplied researchers are not available for the latter group. During my work as a reference librarian, I found that many traditional on-campus students would greatly prefer that a research assistant do their homework. There is certain to be an outcry from that population, once they learn that such a highly desirable service is being provided to a select group–the distance education students.

To me, there appears to be a similarity between the researcher service and cheating. The latter is dealt with by enforcing the academic honesty policy of the particular institution, while the acquisition of research skills or utilization of existing skills is by-passed under the "librarian/research assistant" system. A student mentor program in which an individual assists another in locating readings is a somewhat acceptable version of this idea (see, for example, Bludricki). Finally, though, the use of such temporary measures--attempts to compensate for unequal access to academic library resources and services--undermines the thrust of whatever library and research instruction curriculum exists for on-campus students. How much spoon-feeding in a weak educational experience can go unnoticed? One can only partially justify weak areas by saying that nontraditional students who are actively involved in careers, and who thus cannot attend on-campus classes, must not be penalized. Whatever the temporary substitute for equal library support, it must not become the accepted standard in any local situation. All students in distance learning programs deserve the opportunity to achieve the same level of education as is possible on campus. Offering anything less may appear to many as higher education's subtle attempt to shortchange off-campus students.

The emerging virtual library programs are efforts to enrich distance learning experiences, but some students will still need to travel to the library to use printed resources. All printed materials required for curriculum support will not be digitized or available through interlibrary loan programs (Lynden 23). The contrary view, often heard even among librarians today, seems to be based on some misunderstanding; however, if one chooses to accept popular generalizations regarding the Internet and the advertising hype surrounding digital databases, one could well begin to believe that technology will eventually meet every need for information. One program still currently in the formative stages, the Commonwealth Virtual Library initiative in Kentucky, is, I believe, an example of a more successful effort to provide equal library support. Participating libraries will share electronic databases which will be available to both on- and off-campus students. The eventual merit of the total program will depend on the extent to which the sharing of print materials equals on-campus access to a comprehensive library. Additionally, the provision of instruction in research and its use must accompany the transporting of print materials—some of which were restricted from interlibrary loan under former operations. Program planners are preparing for the sharing of local holdings of print resources by means of a courier service among institutions and extended campus sites, which will be a sizable undertaking: traveling the length of the state on a continual basis will involve several vehicles, drivers and considerable expense. New staff will need to be employed in Interlibrary Loan and Circulation departments to process the heavier volume of lending. A budget increase to purchase the required multiple copies of holdings may be more difficult to negotiate than funding new positions and the "traveling resource service." This very ambitious project is looking toward a start-up date. Establishing branch libraries, which may not be more expensive than the courier service, does not appear to be a popular solution to the need for remote access to research materials. Actually, the literature suggests facilitating access to public libraries is the answer. What is the rationale for this? After all, public libraries were not created to support a university or even college-level curriculum. They are the public's source of general information, and supporting higher education or providing scholarly research materials has never been their mission. Instead, public libraries' collections were developed to serve general reading and research interest of the community (Goodson 1). They normally satisfy their clientele with publications from popular presses and secondary sources. Except for the largest of those institutions, they can hardly be expected to supply scholarly materials even remotely adequate to support any course in higher education. Proximity of public libraries to students and the fact that they are often outstanding in their own role do not equal an academic library.

During a recent seminar held at Murray State University the question was asked, "How many in distance learning programs really enjoy the same level of education as the student on campus"? The answer was that test scores for individual courses are sometimes approximately equal. Yet, part of becoming an educated person includes the acquisition of professionally enhancing qualities, needed to excel in the modern workplace. Some contend that these may best be acquired by daily interactions in the presence of classmates and teachers (see Dawes 171). Enriched communication skills alone offer a distinct advantage. Subject discussions among students often involve sharing job or research experiences. These may yield much insight into practical career challenges. The same value may be assigned to reference interviews with librarians and the advantages of acquiring research skills by using library resources on-site. Two of those advantages are the development of self-confidence and research skills, not to mention holding in one's own hands the authoritative and complete sources–which still generally are printed reference materials and printed periodicals. Serendipity often plays a role in locating information: scanning the tables of contents of volumes shelved adjacent to items identified from online catalogs may yield additional information on the topic in unexpected sources. Opportunities for learning in a library are seemingly limitless, because information may be inadvertently acquired on some topics by simply glancing around. Just the experience of learning research terminology and actually using printed indexes, directories, encyclopedias, proceedings, abstracts, statistical compilations, maps, and government documents affords a huge advantage in gaining skills.

It is true that some advantages may accrue to students taught via new instructional delivery methods, which usually vary even within one specific institution. Interactive television based classrooms, teaching at a distance using computer conferencing, video-taped lectures and technology-assisted education in which assignments, homework and lessons are exchanged via the Internet, are all typical options. Each one of these delivery methods may indeed offer unique experience in communicating, experience which may in some cases exceed that acquired during on-campus classes–and, careers today often require communicating via some of these methods. What could be better preparation for the novice worker than first-hand experience? Yet, exposure to communication via popular electronic means in no way makes up for missing vital elements.

Any discussion of teaching must inevitably touch on the various approaches to learning which confront most students today. All enter programs with established reading, study and research patterns. They are immediately forced to oscillate between two worlds. The first is the printed world of journals, newspapers, conference reports, proceedings, etc. The second is the world of electronically-supplied information. In the latter, the flexibility of printed information, which facilitates study just about anywhere and anytime, is gone. Carrying lightweight, inexpensive printed material to a private study corner, train, plane, car, back yard, beach or group study location is not possible. Although wireless technology does allow more freedom and portability, we are hardly there yet. Recent high school graduates are most likely to have already experienced some of the continually changing means of accessing recorded information. However, those who have been away from school for a while may be greeted with the necessity of quickly learning the technology that the research process now usually requires. A strong program of library support should recognize and rapidly meet that need. Neither the on- or off-campus student can be assumed to be able to effectively make use of information, simply because they now have access to it in a variety of formats. Amy Bernath, in discussing distance education, points out that the student is ultimately responsible. It is indeed the individual's effort which includes monitoring one's own progress that ensures learning takes place (Bernath 8). Analytical skills and knowledge can generally not be developed or acquired by osmosis. Some educators choose to ignore a lack of library support for distance education students as a factor, and turn to the argument that overall achievement levels will inevitably fall as more people participate in higher education; however, adequate assessment of the outcomes of courses taught through distance learning goes beyond the obligatory gathering of statistics which support such assumptions. Truly honest analysis of such data must lead researchers to question the equity of these programs. The results may be easily seen through nothing more complicated than differentiating among on-campus and off-campus students who participate in recognized standardized tests measuring achievement and potential for academic success, such as the Graduate Record Exam.

The ubiquitous interest of students and educators in distance learning has easily distracted attention from the merits of a high quality educational experience on a traditional campus. Distance learning programs are now vital to serving a sizable portion of those enrolled in many colleges and universities (see, for example, Chepesink 52). These students are generally adult learners and nontraditional students who cannot, or are unwilling to, come to campus. The demanding expectation that the institution go to the student and not vice versa must be met (Macovec 1). In response, administrators tend to focus on numbers reflecting enrollment, tuition, technology and other concerns (Wolpert 22). This approach, which ignores the quality of the learning experience, could be equivalent to walking into the same mistake made by many correspondence programs in the past. Fundamentals of the matter are expressed in the question, "Will there continue to be a market for students of distance learning programs"? In other words, the real challenge is how to stay in business in the new millennium. The possibility of being forced out of such educational efforts, once students enter the workforce and establish job performance records, is clear. Graduates of distance learning programs must be able to compete successfully with those from traditional on-campus programs. Consequently, the parallel between trendy distance learning and old-fashioned correspondence course work merits emphasis (see Luther). There is a lesson to be learned by comparing such efforts by our distance education predecessors to those of current faculty. Colleagues and students of mine have frequently told me about the numerous victims of weak correspondence programs. I myself have often dealt with library patrons with off-campus educational backgrounds, who openly declare total lack of research skills and no knowledge of research materials. Many correspondence programs, once very active, are now closed, the reason being dissatisfaction with learning experiences. Names of the technical schools, trade schools, community colleges and college distributive education programs that formerly offered correspondence courses advertised to be transferable for college credit, are now forgotten: those projects closed in the 70's and 80's. Yet, virtually every such institution in western Kentucky was once actively involved in the then-popular correspondence schooling. I've met many correspondence students while working weekends at the reference desk and when teaching library science at Murray State University. A number of other such students encountered during my undergraduate schooling openly shared problems with finding needed remedial training and spending time in self-instruction. Students attempting to matriculate in on-campus programs quickly discovered substantial differences between their knowledge/skill level and that of their counterparts on-campus. As far back as the 1970s, I recall that it was general knowledge in western Kentucky, where I worked, that some employers preferred applicants from traditional learning experiences, and that employees from correspondence schools often had less satisfactory records of performance.

Many internationally-active institutions of higher learning seem bent on offering the most extensive distance learning programs feasible (Madaus and Webster, 51). Faculty who enthusiastically support this goal are scurrying about advocating and participating in program development. Generally, the work concentrates on housing, technology, communication and advertising. In my opinion, none of these have a profound impact upon the effectiveness of the program. Prudent educators recognize that the most dangerous pitfall exists in teaching--without adequate library support--courses which require active use of research materials. The logical results are lower student achievement, which hamper careers and places stumbling blocks in lifelong learning. Statistics on that may not be available for years, but will eventually emerge as evidence of weak educational programs. Elizabeth E. Kirk and Andrea M. Bartelstein, in discussing the high percentages of traditional colleges and universities offering distance education, point out that librarians are speaking up regarding the limited information online, the absence of nondigital collections, no research instructional services and the lack of opportunity for students to learn traditional research skills (40). Research and analytical skills acquired during practice exercises are consistently listed among the distinguishing characteristics of better scholars. Writers in different fields refer to skills developed or enhanced through research as important for success. Suruchi Mohan mentions problem-solving and analytical skills as characteristics abilities of graduate students studying computer programming (89). Strong research skills, which surely include library-related skills, are typical of those finding excellent jobs in the pharmaceutical industry (Dunbar and Hayes, 69). These skills will serve them well in their careers. The present requirement for employees to continuously learn through self-training is an established necessity on typical jobs. So, where is the quality in the teaching in distance learning programs? Do the teachers and administrators think they can fool accreditation teams? If they do, employers will surely straighten them out—right out of business. Academic librarians and other committed teaching faculty must take steps to make post-secondary educational planners aware that good research skills often relate to better scholarship and the latter to job success. Exploring ways to provide research training involving "hands-on" contact with traditional library resources is vital. This should be part of any active and strong program of library support. Access to printed, electronic and other formats must be provided in an environment where academic librarians can teach both the uses of resources and research skills. Success of students from distance learning experiences is almost certain to be relative to the quality of their educational experiences. Educators aware of the similarity of today's distance education to the failed correspondence courses of the past must take steps to ensure their programs avoid the fate of the latter. Survival of any given distance learning program hinges upon students' and employers' satisfaction with the educational experience, and wherever library support does not equal that provided for the same curriculum when it is taught on-campus, the desired level of satisfaction is far less likely to occur.

References

"ACRL Guidelines for Distance Learning Library Services," College & Research Libraries News 59, no. 9 (Oct. 1998): 689-694.

Adelman, Clilford, "The Truth About Remedial Work: it's more complex than windy rhetoric and simple solutions suggest," Chronicle of Higher Education 43, no. 6 (Oct. 1996): A56.

Bernath, Amy, "Distance Education: the Good, the Bad, and the Ugly," Solinews 25, no. 1 (Jan/Feb 1998): 7-9.

Billings, Harold, "Library Collections and Distance Information: new models of collection development for the 21st century," Journal of Library Administration 24, no. ½ (1996): 3-17.

Bludricki, Mary, "Supporting Virtual Learning for Adult Students," The Journal of Technological Horizons in Education 25, no. 11 (June 1998): 73-76.

Chepesink, Ron, "Internet College: the virtual classroom challenge," American Libraries 29, no. 3 (March 1998): 52-55.

Culross, Rita, "Remediation: real students, real standards," Change 28, no. 6 (Nov/Dec 1996): 50-53.

Dawes, Brenda S. Gregory, "Can Distance Learning Provide a Twenty-first Century Hallmark?" AORN Journal 68, no. 2 (Aug. 1998): 170-172.

Dunbar, Donnette and Cassandra Hayes, "Prescription for Career Success: Skilled Marketing Leaders and Researchers and Making Headway in the Pharmaceutical Industry," Black Enterprise 27, no. 6 (Jan. 1997): 69.

Goodson, Carol, "A Continuing Challenge for Librarians: meeting the needs of distance education student," MC Journal: The Journal of Academic Media Librarianship 4, no. 1 (Summer 1996): 1-9. http://wings.buffalo.edu/publications/mcjrnl/v4n1/goodson.html

Hulshof, Robert, "Providing Services to Virtual Patrons," Information Outlook 3, no. 1 (Jan. 1999): 20-23.

Kirk, Elizabeth E. and Andrea M. Bartelstein, "Libraries Close in on Distance Education," Library Journal 124, no. i6 (April 1999): 40.

Lynden, Frederick C. "Remote Access Issues: Pros and Cons," Journal of Library Administration 20, no.1 (1994): 19-36.

Luther, Judy, "Distance Learning and the Digital Library," Educom Review 33, no. 4 (Jul/Aug. 1998): 22-26.

Macovec, George S., "Key Elements in Using Technology for Library Support in Distance Education," Online Libraries and Microcomputers 15, no. 12 (Dec. 1997): 1-6.

Madaus, J. Richard and Lawrence Webster, "Opening the Door to Distance Learning," Computers in Libraries 18, no.5 (May 1998): 51-55.

Mohan, Suruchi, "A Program for Success: There are Many Ways to Build a Thriving Programming Career," InfoWorld 20, no. 48 (Nov. 1998): 89.

Thomas, Sarah and Carl A. Kroch, Cornell University Library Distance Learning White Paper, 1998. http://www.library.cornell.edu/staffweb/Distance.html

"What Work Requires of Schools: a SCANS report for America 2000 workplace know- how," Teacher Librarian 26, no. 1 (Sept. 1998): 66.

White, Herbert S., "The Changes in Off-campus Education," Library Journal 124 (Feb.1999): 128.

Wolpert, Ann, "Services to Remote Users: Marketing the Library's Role," Library Trends 47 (Summer 1998): 21-41.

Jetta Culpepper
Special Programs Librarian
Murray State University
P.O. Box 9
Murray, KY 42071-0009
Phone: 270-762-3020

E-mail: jetta.culpepper@murraystate.edu

Jetta Culpepper received BA and MA degrees from Murray State University, and MLS and EdS degrees from George Peabody College. Prior to her current role as Special Programs Librarian at Murray State University, she held a wide variety of other positions there, including Cataloger, Head of Acquisitions, Head of Media Resources and Collections Analysis Librarian. She has also served as Head of the NASA Regional Teachers Resource Center and Librarian for the Kentucky Gender Equity Resource Center.