Introduction

Chapter 1

Introduction

Problem Context

Distance education is expanding rapidly in higher education, bringing revolutionary changes in the way education can be delivered (Simonson, Smaldino, Albright, & Zvacek, 2003). Courses are being offered in a variety of distance education formats, including fully online and hybrid courses, interactive television courses, and telecourses. Students expect the flexibility offered by distance courses and institutions are working hard to meet ever growing student demand (Losco & Fife, 2000; Simonson, et al., 2003).

This is especially true in the community college setting. Teaching excellence is at the core of the community college mission (Cohen & Brawer, 2003). As such, innovative teaching with technology is only to be expected (Cohen & Brawer, 2003). Community colleges have long engaged in the delivery of technology enhanced distance education, beginning with telecourses in the 1970s (Dalziel, 2003).

Community college students are also uniquely in need of the flexibility provided by distance education. Community college students tend to be older than traditional college students, they are balancing work and family, and they tend to be attending school part time (Cohen & Brawer, 2003). Distance education also allows community colleges to provide educational opportunities to students in rural areas, students who are disabled or otherwise home-bound, frequent travelers, military, and people confined to prison (Dalziel, 2003). The ability to extend the reach of the educational experience is also central to the mission of community colleges (Cohen & Brawer, 2003).

It is generally accepted that teaching a distance education course requires a faculty member to use different teaching methods than they do in traditional courses (NEA, 2000, AAUP, undated b). Teaching distance education courses can also take more time, particularly when one first gets started (NEA, 2000). Not surprisingly, faculty resist the added workload associated with distance education. Indeed, one study found that the absence of release time, technical training, technical support and added workload prevent faculty from getting involved in distance education (Dalziel, 2003). Yet, community college administrators feel compelled to offer distance education courses to meet the growing demands of students and the teaching of distance education is increasingly becoming an expectation of new and existing faculty (Dalziel, 2003). Consequently, some institutions have begun to include distance education specific terms in their contracts (Simonson & Bauck, 2003). These terms typically relate to compensation for additional work, limiting class size, and clarification of expectations regarding training, intellectual property, and advancement. Models for distance education policy emphasize the importance of early integration of distance education policy with labor-management policy (Simonson & Bauck, 2003).

Collective bargaining has long been a part of community colleges, with Cohen & Brawer (2003) reporting that most community college faculty are unionized. Negotiated faculty agreements cover a wide range of topics, including management procedures, personnel policies, economic benefits, working conditions and academic items (Cohen & Brawer, 2003, Johnstone, 1981). The academic items may include class size, workload and, increasingly, distance education (Cohen & Brawer, 2003). In this study, I will conduct a comprehensive exploration of current community college faculty contracts available in the NEA/AFT contracts database known as the Higher Education Contract Analysis System (HECAS). The study will determine what distance education specific terms typically exist in faculty contracts.

See the chapter 1 attachment for the rest of Chapter 1. . .

Distance Education Terms in Faculty Contracts by Stephanie Delaney, JD is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-Share Alike 3.0 United States License.