International eLearning
Innovation in Practice
Maureen Snow Andrade
Academic Affairs, Utah Valley University, 800 W. University Parkway MS 194, Orem, Utah, U.S.A.
Keywords: Distance English Language Learning, Online Learning Models, International eLearning.
Abstract: The global demand for higher education cannot be met through traditional structures and delivery methods
or by adhering to elitist and cost-prohibitive paradigms. Tertiary education through distance delivery
provides opportunity for individuals to recognize their potential and improve their life conditions.
Innovative approaches to distance learning can remove barriers and support access for a range of learners.
This study reports on findings from an intrinsic case study of two institutions. These institutions have
developed eLearning models that provide global access and address the needs of diverse learners. An
understanding of these models can contribute to innovative practices at other institutions.
1 INTRODUCTION
“Higher education is almost universally recognized
as the means to a better quality of life,” (Andrade,
2013, p. 66). Education decreases poverty, results in
healthy lifestyles, and promotes civic engagement
(Baum & Ma, 2007; Carneiro and Steffens, 2006;
International Council for Open and Distance
Education [ICDE] & European Association of
Distance Teaching Universities [EADU] 2009). As
such, nations that have traditionally reserved tertiary
education for the elite are increasing access
(Kamenetz, 2010; Trow, 2005).
Educational providers can extend their borders
nationally and internationally through distance
learning. The latter provides educational opportunity
to underrepresented groups, improving social equity
(White, 2003). “It is inclusive, reaching individuals
previously marginalized to change lives and improve
communities and economies” (Andrade, 2013, p.
67). This intrinsic case study explores online
learning models at two U.S. higher education
institutions to determine how they extend global
educational opportunity.
2 LITERATURE REVIEW
Brick and mortar institutions cannot meet demand
(Hanna, 2013; Gourley, 2006; Kamenetz, 2010).
Challenges to expanding access include capacity,
resistance to change, structural barriers, and cost.
Many traditional higher education institutions adhere
to time-honored delivery methods and have only
recently begun to recognize and address the need to
deliver education in new ways to new audiences.
Although chief academic officers recognize the
necessity for strategic thinking related to online
learning, faculty are slower to accept its value and
purpose (Allen & Seaman, 2013
). Systems are often
unable to adapt, incorporate new technologies, or
offer effective distance learning support.
Affordability is another obstacle. Often those who
need education the most can least afford it;
increasingly, the return on investment for higher
education is in question (Kamenetz, 2010; Carlson,
2013; College Board, 2012).
Populations driving the demand for higher
education may have distinct academic and
socialization needs related to academic preparation,
technology, knowledge of higher education culture,
and, in some cases, English language proficiency.
These factors may cause learners to lack confidence
in new learning situations and impact their success.
Course designers and instructors must consider the
needs of global learners related to technology,
culture, pedagogy, communication, English
proficiency, and learning approaches (Andrade,
2013). Innovative models are critical to helping new
populations of learners succeed.
As English is the medium of instruction for much
educational content, proficiency in that language is a
41
Snow Andrade M..
International eLearning - Innovation in Practice .
DOI: 10.5220/0004705100410048
In Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on Computer Supported Education (CSEDU-2014), pages 41-48
ISBN: 978-989-758-022-2
Copyright
c
2014 SCITEPRESS (Science and Technology Publications, Lda.)
prerequisite for realizing the benefits of higher
education in both traditional and distance modalities
(Andrade, 2013). However, distance foreign
languages courses have developed more slowly than
those in other disciplines (Hurd, 2006) due to the
need for interaction, specifically input and output.
Language learners need to read and listen to the
target language and produce language, negotiate
meaning, test rules, and get feedback (Krashen,
1985; Swain, 1995; Long, 1996).
An equal balance of meaning focused input,
meaning focused output, language focused
instruction, and fluency development is critical to an
effective language course (Nation, 2001). While
meaning focused input (i.e., understanding readings,
lectures, and conversations), some aspects of
meaning focused output (i.e., communicating
through writing), language focused instruction (i.e.,
studying grammar, vocabulary, and pronunciation),
and some features of fluency development (i.e.,
using familiar vocabulary and grammatical
structures for reading, writing, and listening,) lend
themselves to distance learning, other aspects, such
as social interaction, require innovative approaches
and application of technology (Andrade, 2013).
Non-native English language speakers with
aspirations for further education not only need the
opportunity to develop academic English skills
preparatory to enrolling in distance courses, but also
benefit from socialization to educational
expectations, which differ by culture, and the
development of attributes for success in distance
learning contexts. Although the same is true for
many students, the specific linguistic, academic, and
cultural support requirements of non-native English
speakers has been well-established (Andrade, 2008;
Gunawardena, 2013; Holta, 2013).
In addition to language acquisition theories,
distance education and learning theories are also
relevant, specifically as they relate to helping
learners succeed. The theory of transactional
distance explores the relationship among structure,
dialogue, and autonomy (Moore, 2013).
Transactional distance is the gap between the learner
and the teacher in a distance course. The basic tenet
of the theory is that when structure and dialogue are
high, autonomy is low. When structure and dialogue
are low, autonomy is high. Structure consists of the
materials, assignments, due dates, and other built-in
design elements of a course while dialogue reflects
interactions among students and teacher. The latter
may include email, feedback, announcements, and
live conferences. Autonomy refers to both choice
and capacity—the learner’s freedom to choose what,
when, and how to learn, and the learner’s ability to
be self-directed (Moore, 2013).
Related to autonomy is the concept of self-
regulated learning, defined as learners taking
responsibility for the elements that affect their
learning (Dembo & Eaton, 2000). It consists of six
dimensions—motive, methods, time, physical
environment, social environment, and performance
(Zimmerman, 1994; Zimmerman & Risemberg,
1997). Self-regulation behaviors can be taught and
can help students improve their achievement. The
concept has been specifically applied to English
language learning, both online and face-to-face
(Andrade & Bunker, 2009; Andrade & Evans,
2013). As learners consider their reasons for
learning, methods and strategies, use of time and
priorities, where they study, how and when they
seek help, set goals, reflect on their performance,
revise their goals, and make changes, they increase
their capacity for learning and autonomy. The
teacher acts as a facilitator. The result is a learning-
centered rather than a teacher-centered experience.
These elements must be carefully considered in
terms of course design and learner support for
international eLearning. “Development teams must
understand diverse learner characteristics and design
pedagogical environments that address learner goals
and aid achievement” (Andrade, 2013, p. 69). The
case studies in this research examine these factors.
3 METHODS
This is an intrinsic case study in which the case itself
is of interest due to its unique nature (Stake, 1995).
Case studies are appropriate when the research
addresses the questions of how or why (Yin, 2003).
In this study, the focus is on how two institutions
successfully developed programs to address the
needs identified in the literature review—global
access to higher education, affordability, and support
of diverse learners, particularly in terms of English
language proficiency. The purpose of an intrinsic
case study is to understand the case rather than an
abstract phenomenon or to establish a theory or new
methodology (Stake, 1995).
As established, a clear need exists for global
eLearning to provide access and support the success
of non-native speakers of English with a range of
educational, cultural, linguistic, and technological
backgrounds. The two institutions selected for the
study illustrate how this need can be addressed. As
such, this is a collective case study that examines the
similarities and differences between the programs
CSEDU2014-6thInternationalConferenceonComputerSupportedEducation
42
(Yin, 2003) to better understand how the models
respond to international contexts and student
populations. The unit of analysis is the two programs
(Miles & Huberman, 1994).
Data was collected from websites, teacher
training materials, courses, and teacher and learner
experiences. The researcher’s involvement with
course design and teacher training at one institution
and teaching online English language courses at both
institutions provided direct interaction with learners
and teachers over two years and involved
approximately 230 students and 56 teachers. Data
also involved one-hour telephone interviews with an
administrator at each institution, and multiple
interactions with approximately six course
supervisors. Administrator interviews focused on
vision and goals, admission and costs, delivery
models, and enrollment. The interviews clarified
other data sources and provided additional details
and insights. The sampling was purposeful in that it
drew from a variety of sources to better understand
the programs. Multiple data sources and the
researcher’s prolonged exposure to the programs
triangulated the findings.
The initial conceptual framework consisted of
examining institutional contexts and program
components (e.g., purpose, target audience,
admission standards, cost, course design,
matriculation requirements, etc.) to determine how
these components supported global higher education
access, affordability, and learner support. The
framework continued to develop with the data
analysis (Miles & Huberman, 1994); as the
components were explored, the themes or categories
further emerged demonstrating specifically how the
programs worked in practice.
The study is limited in that it focuses on only two
institutions and is qualitative; however, although
findings of this type of study cannot be generalized,
the reader can determine if they are applicable to
other contexts (Baxter & Jack, 2008). An additional
limitation is researcher bias as the researcher was
involved in course design and teaching; however,
care was taken to monitor this as data was collected
and analyzed. This was accomplished by objectively
examining institutional practice through the lens of
the literature and the conceptual framework.
3.1 Context
Both institutions are private, undergraduate
institutions in the United States. They are referred to
as Institution Self-Regulated Learning (SRL) and
Institution Prepare, Teach, Ponder (PTP) to reflect
their respective online learning models.
Institution SRL has a total enrollment of 2,600
students of which 44% are international; of these,
230 students are enrolled in online courses. Data is
not available to indicate how many of the latter are
international although administrators indicated that
the majority are. Online enrollments in the English
language courses grew from 10 to 134 in a 3 year
period. The institution’s geographical service area is
worldwide with a primary focus in Asia and the
Pacific. This target area applies to both on-campus
and eLearning programs. The goal of international
online students is preparation for on-campus study.
Institution PTP has 15,000 students, of which
approximately 600 are international. A total of 6,852
are enrolled in online programs including 900
international students; 1,600 on-campus students are
enrolled in an online course. The administrator
responsible for the program indicated that online
enrollments from outside the United States are
projected to reach 20,000 by 2017. The institution
began with an enrollment of 49 students in 2010.
Similar to Institution SRL, the target region for
Institution PTP’s online program is worldwide with
a focus in Mexico and South America as well as
Africa, Russia, the Ukraine, and Canada.
International online students are primarily seeking to
complete online degrees to further their
employability rather than coming to campus. One
difference between the institutions is that Institution
SRL has a much more extensive on-campus
international population although both universities
are focused on global eLearning outreach.
4 RESULTS
Case study methodology relies on combining the
data sources to understand the case as a whole and
the contributing factors (Baxter & Jack, 2008). As
such, the data was analyzed and converged and
themes identified related to the conceptual
framework consisting of program components and
their relation to the issues evident in the literature—
access, affordability, and learner support with an
emphasis on English language learning. Each artifact
and information source was reviewed including the
learner, teacher, and administrator interview data to
determine the viability of practices and curriculum
design to understand how the components
contributed to effective eLearning. The researcher
examined the information based on the learning
theories introduced in the literature review and the
issues of global higher education. A discussion of
InternationaleLearning-InnovationinPractice
43
the resulting themes follows. Supporting quotations
from students may contain grammatical errors due to
their emerging English language proficiency.
4.1 Access
Access consists of admission, academic foundations,
and affordability. Admission requirements for the
online programs are similar at both institutions.
Neither requires high school completion or specific
marks. However, Institution SRL requires
intermediate level English language proficiency
measured by a standardized English language test.
Admission to Institution PTP involves a proficiency
test but students with any level of English can enroll.
At both institutions, admission to on-campus
study involves specific academic and English
language requirements such as high school marks
and standardized college readiness and English
language test scores. Grades in online English
language courses are considered in the admission
process for on-campus study at Institution SRL and
these courses count toward a degree. At Institution
PTP, completion of Academic Start, consisting of
English, math, and student development courses
(learning strategies and life skills), with a B average
is required for admission to online degrees. Students
wanting to enroll on-campus must meet regular
admission criteria.
In terms of academic foundations, the program at
Institution SRL prepares students for on-campus
study and reduces their time to a degree through
online English language coursework. It offers
intermediate level courses in reading, writing,
listening, and speaking. A limited number of online
introductory university courses, including a student
development course, are available post-completion
of English language requirements and a few
associate degrees are in development.
Academic Start at Institution PTP provides
students with the basic skills to complete an online
degree. The English language component is an
advanced level integrated skills course, which
emphasizes writing. A math course helps students
prepare for college-level math requirements. A
student development course introduces the
institution’s learning model and focuses on general
life and study skills. A 1-credit hour orientation
course is taken prior to the first online course.
The curriculum in these preparatory programs
aims to increase access to further education through
the acquisition of academic English language skills,
and in the case of Institution PTP, with basic life and
math skills. The long-term goal is to improve
learners’ employment opportunities and potential for
societal contributions.
Cost has been adjusted based on regional
economies. Institution SRL’s tuition ranges from
$25-$110 per credit hour depending on geographical
region or country whereas the scale at Institution
PTP is from $20-$65 per credit. The outreach of the
latter institution extends to learners in developed
countries who could benefit from open admission,
low-cost degree opportunities. This institution also
differs from Institution SRL in that it offers a
considerable number and types of online degrees.
Students can earn a bachelor’s degree for just under
$8,000 U.S. in the United States, and as low as
$2,400 U.S. for international students. The focus of
the online offerings at Institution SRL is primarily
English language coursework with a limited number
of certificate and associate degrees in development.
Both institutions desire to lower barriers to
education by offering open access, low-cost, high
quality online learning. The administrator at
Institution PTP indicated that the goal is to have
“high quality courses so that students will like them
and want to continue taking them.” Institution SRL
has a primary emphasis on English language
acquisition for students wanting to be admitted to
on-campus study whereas Institution PTP offers
online degrees at the certificate, associate, and
bachelor levels and the broader Academic Start
program with some English language coursework.
4.2 Learner Support
Concern with student success is evident. The
learning support theme focuses on completion,
online support, and learning models. Completion is
encouraged through a year-round academic calendar,
emphasis on utilization of summer terms, and online
learning. The goal is to complete a bachelor’s degree
in 3 years as opposed to the 4 years normally
required in the United States. Both institutions offer
online learning support in the form of academic
advising; peer tutoring; email, telephone, and live
chat technology help; optional English language and
technology tutorials; and library access.
More innovative support is evident in the
institutions’ learning models which offer opportunity
for linguistic and learning skill development. At
Institution SRL, course design is based on the
theories of self-regulated learning, language
acquisition, and transactional distance. Courses and
instructors facilitate learner responsibility for
managing the factors that affect their learning while
developing English language proficiency. The
CSEDU2014-6thInternationalConferenceonComputerSupportedEducation
44
administrator at Institution SRL describes SRL as
the “backbone” of the courses. Students set goals,
learn and apply strategies, analyze performance, and
modify goals. They submit self-evaluative weekly
learning journals and midterm and final performance
reports. Various assessments of language skills are
administered throughout each course.
The reflective journals indicate learner views
regarding SRL. Related to methods of learning, one
student commented: “I have become very good at
guessing the meaning of new words in a sentence or
paragraph.” The following indicates the use of two
SRL dimensions – social environment and methods:
“I have learned to further improve my study site. . . .
I put a whiteboard in my room. I write on my
whiteboard new verbs each week.” The midterm and
end-of-semester evaluations provide further insight
and examples of how SRL benefited learners: “One
of the surveys I like the most is where we have to
identify our values and goals. Seeing this I feel a
sense of motive.”
Teachers are introduced to SRL in a training
course which involves setting goals to facilitate
learners’ SRL behaviors. Teacher comments
illustrated support for the approach:
Goal setting and planning is something that I
enjoy on a personal basis so I think those areas
are something I can help my students with, and
the way I want to do this is to identify an
upcoming self-regulated activity and post an
announcement concerning it.
Another indicated:
The MYL assignments are very useful; for
example, the one about developing positive self-
talk. I have learned that aside from the ideas
listed in the assignment, keeping gratitude and/or
positive thoughts journal can make a huge
difference in learning.
The training also familiarizes teachers with the
institution and the on-campus English language
program, technology, planning and preparing for
class, sources of help, methods of learner feedback,
tracking student progress, and creating an online
community. The following comments indicate
teacher response to the training: “I really want to
prepare and make my course more navigable. I have
a long list of goals for improving the flow of things.”
“I am looking forward to reaping the rewards of
implementing these great strategies.”
Teachers in the training course completed an
end-of-unit reflection and goal-setting assignment
and participated in a discussion board. The latter
supported community-building. Both revealed some
challenges with online teaching: “Honestly speaking
I think this last week has been a little confusing for
the majority of us. This discussion was helpful in
seeing what other teachers have been dealing with
and reading the answers to their questions.”
Technology issues tended to get more attention
in the discussion forum than pedagogical issues as
did specific questions about courses: “The
assignments didn't roll over to my calendar and I've
been trying to fix it.” “I'm barely keeping my head
above water. My [section] doesn’t have a tutor, and I
don't know who to contact to find out what is being
done about this.” The discussion board provided
insight into teacher experiences and issues.
Institution PTP has a 3-stage course design
model: prepare, teach, ponder/prove. Students
prepare by studying assigned materials, completing
homework, and participating in groups. In the
second stage, they teach each other by sharing their
understanding of course content in instructor-
facilitated discussion forums and on-site gatherings
facilitated by volunteer senior couples and led by
students (which supports the “teach” aspect of the
learning model). The final stage involves review,
reflection, and application. Students take quizzes
and submit self-assessments.
The self-assessments consist of five or six
prompts from which students choose such as what is
most difficult, what they like best, how the course
differs from how they have learned English
previously, what they think would help them do
better, the most helpful thing they learned that week,
a goal they would like to pursue, what they learned
from their classmates, their strengths and
weaknesses in English, and future plans for using
English. The prompts are either connected to the
lessons (e.g., how writing good letters might be
useful to them) or are general in nature (e.g., the
most important thing they learned). At the end of the
course, they ponder their experience and next steps
in terms of education or employment.
The reports encourage student responsibility for
learning and the identification of specific steps for
improvement. One student wrote: “I learned that use
of transition words help us create coherence in our
paragraph and how to correctly use determiners in a
sentence. My goal for the next two weeks is to use
this knowledge in the essays that I have to do.”
Another commented on her reasons for learning: “I
need to improve and increase every day my skills in
this language, and I am doing it, for my kids for a
better life for them. Also, I can help better others
with my talents and my skills.” Specific to the
model, one student wrote: “This learning model
provide me a mental graph of how should I develop
InternationaleLearning-InnovationinPractice
45
my study method to fit in the model.”
Teachers at Institution PTP certify as online
teachers prior to teaching their first course. Similar
to the training at Institution SRL, the certification
familiarizes teachers with the learning model,
institution, and purpose and design of the online
courses. It helps them develop online facilitation and
teaching skills. Teachers interact with each other in
discussion forums throughout the training. The
course parallels the learning model that students
experience—prepare, teach, and ponder.
Each semester, teachers participate in a
discussion forum facilitated by a lead instructor who
posts topics. Examples include motivating students,
dealing with plagiarism, managing difficult students,
implementing effective discussion boards, and
providing feedback. Regarding the latter, one
instructor commented: “I feel like this semester has
been very productive for me. I'm getting better at
knowing how to fulfill my role as an instructor, and
I'm learning what it is that the students want and
need from me. I think one of the things that I've
learned is how to give better feedback.”
In addition, instructors can post questions. For
example, one instructor inquired about how to divide
students into small groups for the discussion forum
and the advantages of this. Since both new and
experienced teachers participate, the forum is an
example of instructors teaching each other as the
students do in their courses. Themes from the
forums tended to focus on pedagogy rather than
technical issues, in contrast to Institution SRL.
Colleague support is evident in the following:
“Teaching online does take some getting used to, but
you seem to be transitioning well. For me, it took a
few semesters to really feel comfortable with it.”
Each week, teachers complete a reflection report
in which they comment on the amount of time they
spent on the course, their currency with grading
assignments, how they helped struggling students,
and items of concern for their course lead.
The course design and curriculum supports
program purpose at both institutions. Provision is
made for needed English language preparation, and
at Institution PTP, for other basic skills. Learning
models have been developed to address student need
for effective study habits and strategies and increase
autonomy with the aim of course completion and
future academic success. Credentialed instructors,
both full and part-time, are trained for online
teaching and in the learning models. They also
receive on-going support. Thus, high quality
instructors, student support mechanisms, and sound
teaching and learning approaches are evident.
4.3 Linguistic Considerations
Courses in both programs include the strands of a
well-balanced English language course (Nation,
2001). Institution SRL provides comprehensive
offerings with skill-based courses in reading,
writing, listening, and speaking. Input is provided
through readings and listening (textbook excerpts,
videos, lectures, scripted and narrated PowerPoint
slides). Output occurs through writing assignments,
video posts, and weekly live interactive peer
tutoring. The latter is structured with specific
discussion topics although learners can ask for help
with other issues. Instructors may have live video
conferences with students to discuss progress and
SRL goals. Deliberate instruction in grammar,
vocabulary, reading skills, and writing techniques is
present. Fluency is developed through timed reading
exercises, learner journal reflections, discussion
board postings, and other activities.
Thus, courses consist of a linguistic input;
opportunities for output; deliberate study of
grammar, vocabulary, and pronunciation; and
fluency building. The assignments and instruction
provide structure, and teacher facilitation, which is
further developed through training, provides
dialogue (Moore, 2013). Student discussion forums
and videos are also sources of dialogue and provide
output opportunities for rule-testing and real-life
meaning negotiation (Long, 1996).
The Institution PTP English language course
focuses primarily on academic writing—
organization, grammar, vocabulary, and rhetorical
patterns. Input is provided primarily through reading
and some video while output involves writing,
discussion and video posts to other students, and
twice weekly live interactive appointments with a
peer tutor. Students meet weekly with other students
in their geographical area, which provides further
language interaction.
As with Institution SRL, these course
components fulfill the requirements for language
acquisition as well as providing differing amounts of
structure and dialogue to promote autonomy and
individual responsibility for success. Autonomy is
particularly evident in the teach each other aspect of
the learning model, operationalized in the discussion
forums and weekly gatherings. Students are
provided with a lesson plan for the gatherings, but
must use their English skills to communicate and
know the material well enough to share it with their
peers, thus both language acquisition and autonomy
are supported. An additional advantage is increased
confidence in using the language as evident from a
CSEDU2014-6thInternationalConferenceonComputerSupportedEducation
46
student’s learning report:
I realize I have the capacity to learn and
understand more about English language. I'm
feeling more comfortable with my drafting and
grammar now. I can share my feelings and
thoughts more easily and I think others can
understand me more and better than before this
semester.
5 DISCUSSION
The purpose for the two programs is similar and
addresses global education needs. Both lower
barriers and provide access in terms of admission
and cost although Institution PTP has a broader and
more fully developed online presence, allowing
students to complete degrees. Institution SRL
focuses primarily on English language acquisition
with the intention of students transferring to campus.
The following discussion reviews the issues in the
literature regarding global learning and the extent to
which the institutions address them.
Linguistic, educational, cultural, and
technological needs (Andrade, 2013) are accounted
for. The institutions seek to develop learners’
academic English skills to make future study
accessible. The curriculum encompasses the
necessary strands of a well-balanced language
course. Institution SRL provides extensive English
language coursework. Given its international
enrollment, this is an area of expertise and ensures
the institution’s academic integrity. Institution PTP
has only one English language course but the
curriculum targets needed academic English skills.
Regarding academic preparation, Institution PTP
offers students the basic skills support typically
needed by those who are academically
underprepared (e.g., English, math, student
development) while Institution SRL offers, but does
not require, selected academic courses, with
additional courses and degrees in development.
The institutions have well-developed learning
models that account for cultural adjustment by
ensuring that students have the self-sufficiency to be
active learners rather than teacher-dependent. They
guide students in examining goals, evaluating
performance, applying new methods, seeking help,
and developing self-regulation in support of distance
learning and educational theories (Moore, 2013;
Zimmerman, 1994). Learner and teacher feedback
attests to positive experiences with the models.
Tutorials and live technological support is
provided. Socialization, and language interaction,
occurs through face-to-face connections with peer
mentors who assist students with course content,
answer logistical questions, and direct students to
other sources of help. Thus, technological assistance,
socialization, peer support, and English language
practice are provided.
6 CONCLUSIONS
Future exploration should determine student success
in continued study such as performance in language
intensive courses and degree completion would help
determine the effectiveness of the curriculum and
learning models. Comparisons with on-campus
students, including those who have met higher
admissions standards, would also provide insights.
Both institutions fulfill a need—increasing
accessibility to higher education on a global level.
Students can study anywhere, anytime at a reduced
cost. Obstacles to obtaining a degree are
addressed—insufficient finances, busy schedules,
rigorous admission standards, and lack of learner
confidence. Increasing enrollments in eLearning
courses attest to the need for the programs, and are
evidence of positive word-of-mouth communication
among learners.
The institutions are at different points in their
development and the comprehensiveness of their
offerings; however, both provide global learners
with the opportunity to acquire English language
skills in online learning environments to build a
foundation to further study. The institutions
recognize that distance education increases access,
allowing more individuals to reach their potential.
This study contributes to the field of global
eLearning through an intrinsic case study of two
institutions that have implemented innovative global
eLearning programs. The programs address the need
to provide “sufficient publicly funded support to
expand higher education” (Hanna, 2013, p. 684),
which is “a requirement for individual, community,
economic, and collective well-being (Hanna, 2013,
p. 684). Greater understanding of the models, the
goal of this study, can lead to innovative practices at
other institutions.
REFERENCES
Allen, E. I., & Seaman, J. (2013). Changing course: Ten
years of tracking online education in the United
States. Babson Park, MA: Babson Survey Research
Group and Quahog Research Group. Retrieved from
InternationaleLearning-InnovationinPractice
47
http://sloanconsortium.org/publications/survey/changi
ng_course_2012.
Andrade, M. S. (2008). International graduate students:
Adjusting to study in the United States. In K. A.
Tokuno (Ed.), Graduate students in transition:
Assisting students through the first year (pp. 71-88).
Columbia, SC: National Resource Center for the First
Year Experience & Students in Transition.
Andrade, M. S. (2013). Global learning by Distance:
Principles and practicalities for Learner Support.
International Journal of Online Pedagogy and Course
Design, 3(1), 66-81.
Andrade, M. S. & Bunker, E. L. (2009). Language
learning from a distance: A new model for success.
Distance Education, 30(1), 47-61.
Andrade, M. S., & Evans, N. W. (2013). Principles and
practices for teacher response in second language
writing: Developing self-regulated learners. New
York: Routledge.
Baum, S., & Ma, J. (2007). Education pays: The benefits
of higher education for individuals and society.
Washington, DC: College Board. Retrieved from
http://www.collegeboard.com/prod_downloads/about/
news_info/trends/ed_pays_2007.pdf.
Baxter, P., & Jack, S. (2008). Qualitative case study
methodology: Study design and.
implementation for novice researchers. The Qualitative
Report, 13(4), 544-559.
Carlson, S. (2013, April 22). How to assess the real payoff
of a college degree. Chronicle of Higher Education.
Retrieved from http://chronicle.com/article/Is-ROI-
the-Right-Way-to-Judge/138665/
Carneiro, R., & Steffens, K. (Eds.). (2006). Editorial,
[Special issue]. European Journal of Education,
41(3/4), 345-352.
College Board. (2012). Trends in college pricing 2012.
New York : College Board. Retrieved from
http://trends.collegeboard.org/
Dembo, M. H., & Eaton, M. J. (2000). Self-regulation of
academic learning in middle-level schools. Elementary
School Journal, 100(5), 473-490.
Gourley, B. (2009, June). Higher education for a digital
age. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of
International Council for Open and Distance Learning.
Maastricht, The Netherlands.
Gunawardena, C. N. (2013). Culture and online distance
language learning. In M. G. Moore (Ed.), Handbook of
distance education (3rd ed., pp. 185-200). New York:
Routledge.
Hanna, D. E. (2013). Emerging higher education models
in higher education. In M. G. Moore (Ed.), Handbook
of distance education (3rd ed., pp. 684-694). New
York: Routledge.
Holta, J. (2013). Intercultural adjustment and friendship
dialectics in international students: A qualitative study.
International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 37(5),
pp. 550-567.
Hurd, S. (2006). Towards a better understanding of the
dynamic role of the distance language learner: Learner
perceptions of personality, motivation, roles, and
approaches. Distance Education, 27(3), 303-329.
International Council for Open and Distance Education
and European Association of Distance Teaching
Universities. (2009, June). Statement on international
development and open, distance and flexible learning.
Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of International
Council for Open and Distance Learning, Maastricht,
The Netherlands. Retrieved from.
http://www.ou.nl/Docs/Campagnes/ICDE2009/ID_M-
2009%20-%20WCHE.pdf.
Kamenetz, Anya. (2010). DIY U: Edupunks, edupreneurs,
and the coming transformation of higher education.
White River Junction, VT: Chelsea Green Publishing
Company.
Krashen, S. (1985). The input hypothesis: Issues and
implications. London: Longman.
Long, M. (1996). The role of the linguistic environment in
second language acquisition. In W. Ritchie, & T.
Bhatia (Eds.), Handbook of second language
acquisition (pp. 413-468). San Diego, CA: Academic
Press.
Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative
data analysis: An expanded sourcebook (2nd ed.).
Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Moore, M. G. (2013). The theory of transactional distance.
In M. G. Moore (Ed.), Handbook of distance
education (3rd ed., pp. 66-85). New York: Routledge.
Nation, I. S. P. (2001). Learning vocabulary in another
language. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University
Press.
Stake, R. E. (1995). The art of case study research.
Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Swain, M. (1995). Three functions of output in second
language learning. In G. Cook, & B. Seidlhofer (Eds.),
Principle and practice in applied linguistics (pp. 125-
144). Oxford University Press. Retrieved from
http://www.scribd.com/doc/105840639/Swain-1995-
Three-functions-of-output-in-second-language-
learning.
Trow, M. A. (2005). Reflections on the transition from
elite to mass to universal access: Forms and phases of
higher education in modern societies since WWII.
Berkeley, CA: Institute of Governmental Studies, UC
Berkeley. Retrieved from
http://escholarship.org/uc/item/96p3s213.
White, C. (2003). Language learning in distance
education. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Yin, R. K. (2003). Case study research: Design and
methods (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks,
CA: Sage.
Zimmerman, B. J. (1994). Dimensions of academic self-
regulation: A conceptual framework for education. In
D. H. Schunk, & B. J. Zimmerman (Eds.), Self-
regulation of learning and performance (pp. 3-21).
Hillsdale, N. J: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Zimmerman, B. J., & Risemberg, R. (1997). Self-
regulatory dimensions of academic learning and
motivation. In G. D. Phye (Ed.), Handbook of
academic learning: Construction of knowledge (pp.
105-125). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
CSEDU2014-6thInternationalConferenceonComputerSupportedEducation
48
