Literature review

Distance learning in developing countries Assis Ngolo Distance learning has been around for over 70 years, and while it benefited from numerous advances in technology, it still hasnt caught enough traction in the developing world. Below I talk about problems and previously proposed solutions for implementing distance learning in academic environments of such nations. 1. Technology One of the major obstacles to the success of distance learning implementations is the fact that developing countries by definition lack certain prerequisites such as high performance network infrastructures, if any at all. For example, Animesh Patcha et al, 2005, states that Virginia Institute of Technology (Virginia Tech), has developed a high speed gigabit network and that eLearning applications are streamed on an ATM backbone. Additionally, Virginia Tech is moving towards the implementation of Video over IP conferencing, so as to reduce costs in maintaining two separate infrastructures (IP and ATM). While the benefits can be considerable, quality of service, security and scalability can be an issue when the eLearning services have to share bandwidth throughout the network.

Knutsen et al (2003), proposes a solution to Virginia Techs IP QoS problem by implementing a hybrid environment, with both synchronous (Video over IP) and asynchronous (ex. Blackboard) components. By using optimized CODECs, such as the Wavelet CODEC by Wave

3, content could be shared effectively across IP networks. Knutsen also states that when carefully chosen, software and hardware can create an environment in which, despite bandwidth limitations, eLearning can still be implemented with improved quality of service. Even more, by providing institutions access to the Internet2 network, Distance learning can be carried out with minimum noise.

While the previous cited works focus on centralized physical network infrastructures, Filomena Papa et al (2001) experiments with tele-education, or the use of broadband cellular networks to provide eLearning environments. One of the benefits of this approach is that while most developing countries have poor IP network infrastructures, they do always have cellular service, but the drawback it that cellular networks could provide lower QoS compared to IP networks. During tests, aspects of usability, performance and user satisfaction were evaluated, being performance the determining factor in comparing the field test results against results of the same experiment under controlled conditions.

2. Post Implementation It is important to note that technology represents only half the solution for a distance learning environment. Since distance learning differs in some aspects to traditional methods, distance learning programs need to be designed in a way consistent with such differences. Yang et al (2005) proposes customizable learning systems, in which flexibility allows students to choose both the time and place of their learning, and the object of their learning. The first aspect of flexibility, time and space, has been developed considerably

over the past years, with the introduction of asynchronous eLearning. It is the course content that on most occasions remains rigid, with students that meet the minimum requirements of a course having to repeat topics, or students with the capacity to advance quickly through a course, having to slow down to the courses pace. Moreover, s students learning goals may differ from those set by the instructor. Yangs idea to break down course content into learning objects which constitute topics to be taught and that can be organized in any sequential order focuses on this issue. Yang proceeds to talk about implementation models for such flexible learning management systems (LMS).

Another issue frequently discussed in the broader topic of distance learning is the performance comparison between distance learning students and in-class students, and although Kleinman et al (2002) found through experimentation that differences did indeed exists, performance was not included. Kleinman states that distance learning students who complete their courses are equally satisfied with their graded and are also more willing to recommend the course to others. Communication however, is more of an issue to instructors which have to take care to provide information in the best possible format and in a timely manner, without the advantage of verbal face-to-face communication.

Works Cited
Animesh Patcha, Glenda Scales. "Development of an Internet based Distance Learning Program at Virginia Tech." ACM. 2005. Dehua YANG, Qiutian YANG. "Customizable Distance Learning: Criteria for Developing Learning Objects and Learning Model Templates." 2005. Derek Knutsen, Eric Knutsen, Eric Slazinski. "Employing New Advances in IP Videoconferencing to Enhance Teaching and Learning through the Use of a Hybrid Distance Learning Course." 2003. Filomena Papa, Sandra Spedaletti. "Broadband Cellular Radio Telecommunication Technologies in Distance Learning: A Human Factors Field Study." 2001. Joan Kleinman, Dr. Eileen B. Entin. "COMPARISON OF IN-CLASS AND DISTANCE-LEARNING STUDENTS' PERFORMANCE AND ATTITUDES IN AN INTRODUCTORY COMPUTER SCIENCE COURSE." 2002. Moonyati Yatid, Masahiro Takatsuka. "Awareness to Improve Interaction: Design of Distance Learning Environment." 2011. Oronzo Parlangeli, Guido Mengoni, Stefano Guidi. "The Effect of System Usability and Multitasking Activities in Distance Learning." 2011. Paul Prinsloo, Sharon Slade, Fenella Galpin. "Learning analytics Challenges, paradoxes and opportunities for mega open distance learning institutions." 2012.