![Sample our Education journals, sign in here to start your access, latest two full volumes FREE to you for 14 days]({"type":"image" , "src" : "/sda/5932/TOC-Subject-Sample-2021-Education.jpg"})
Abstract
Dual-mode distance teaching universities differ from their single-purpose counterparts, such as the great open universities, in one critical dimension. They are not generally established to serve distance students. That is typically a commitment entered into at some point after the institution is operating conventionally with on-campus provision. The argument here is that as dual-mode provision is challenged in various ways, not least through the impact of new technologies, the commitment to serving students who are genuinely at a distance from the physical campus is at some risk in the institutions involved.
Notes
1. The University of Queensland began a distance education programme in 1910 (King, Citation1999, p. 274).
2. This is a composite definition, developed over time but reflecting early work by Willmott and King on distance education as a programme of activities (Citation1984) (and UniSA & Deakin, 1991, pp. 14–36), Keegan on key definitional elements such as the separation of teacher and taught (Citation1980), Holmberg on the role of communication in teaching at a distance (Citation1989), and Peters on the need for specialised systems for different aspects of production and delivery (Citation1983).
3. This is a perception developed through consultancies directed towards assisting institutions to make such a shift in South Africa, Indonesia, the UK, and Thailand, specifics of which are, of course, confidential.
4. This argument was first developed for a commissioned paper under a consultancy undertaken by the author in the United Kingdom and was, in part, a response to such practice in the institution concerned.
5. This is an adaptation to dual mode of a point made by Ice during questions following his presentation to the DEHub/ODLAA Summit in Sydney, 18 February 2011.