Owston (1997, p. 27) pointed out that, “Nothing before has captured the imagination and interests of educators simultaneously around the globe more than the World Wide Web.” Other scholars claim that the Web is converging with other technologies to dramatically alter most conceptions of the teaching and learning process (Bonk & Cunningham, 1998; Duffy, Dueber, & Hawley, 1998; Harasim, Hiltz, Teles, & Turoff, 1995). From every corner of one’s instruction there lurk pedagogical opportunities—new resources, partners, courses, and markets—to employ the World Wide Web as an instructional device. Nevertheless, teaching on the Web is not a simple decision since most instructors typically lack vital information about the effects of various Web tools and approaches on student learning. Of course, the dearth of such information negatively impacts the extent faculty are willing to embed Web-based learning components in their classes. What Web-related decisions do college instructors face? Dozens. Hundreds. Perhaps thousands! There are decisions about the class size, forms of assessments, amount and type of feedback, location of students, and the particular Web courseware system used. Whereas some instructors will want to start using the Web with minor adaptations to their teaching, others will feel comfortable taking extensive risks in building entire courses or programs on the Web. Where you fall in terms of your comfort level as an instructor or student will likely shift in the next few years as Web courseware stabilizes and is more widely accepted in teaching. Of course, significant changes in the Web-based instruction will require advancements in both pedagogy and technology (Bonk & Dennen, 1999). Detailed below is a ten level Web integration continuum of the pedagogical choices faculty must consider in developing Web-based course components.
[1]
Curtis J. Bonk,et al.
Computer conferencing and collaborative writing tools: starting a dialogue about student dialogue
,
1995,
CSCL.
[2]
D. Noble.
Digital diploma mills: The automation of higher education
,
1998
.
[3]
L. Harasim.
Networlds: networks as social space
,
1993
.
[4]
Curtis J. Bonk,et al.
Content analysis of online discussion in an applied educational psychology course
,
2000
.
[5]
R. Gallimore,et al.
Vygotsky and education: Teaching mind in society: Teaching, schooling, and literate discourse
,
1990
.
[6]
Curtis J. Bonk,et al.
Holy COW: Scaffolding Case Based Conferencing on the Web with Preservice Teachers.
,
2001
.
[7]
Daniel James Rowley,et al.
Strategic Choices for the Academy: How Demand for Lifelong Learning Will Re-Create Higher Education
,
1998
.
[8]
Curtis J. Bonk,et al.
Extending sociocultural theory to adult learning.
,
1998
.
[9]
Curtis J. Bonk,et al.
Student Role Play in the World Forum: Analyses of an Arctic Adventure Learning Apprenticeship
,
1998,
Interact. Learn. Environ..
[10]
Curtis J. Bonk,et al.
Web-Based Case Conferencing for Preservice Teacher Education: Electronic Discourse from the Field
,
1998
.
[11]
Curtis J. Bonk,et al.
Teaching on the web: With a little help from my pedagogical friends
,
1999,
J. Comput. High. Educ..
[12]
Starr Roxanne Hiltz,et al.
Learning Networks: A Field Guide to Teaching and Learning Online
,
1995
.
[13]
Curtis J. Bonk,et al.
A Dozen Recommendations for Placing the Student at the Center of Web-Based Learning.
,
1998
.
[14]
R. Owston.
Research news and Comment: The World Wide Web: A Technology to Enhance Teaching and Learning?
,
1997
.