Review of Military De

7/29/2019 Review of Military De

1/12

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

This article was downloaded by: [East Carolina University]

On: 31 August 2010

Access details: Access Details: [subscription number 920345396]

Publisher Routledge

Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office: Mortimer House, 37-

41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

American Journal of Distance EducationPublication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information:http://www.informaworld.com/smpp/title~content=t775648087

A review of distance-learning studies in the U. S. militaryMichael Barrya; Gregory B. Runyanba Associate Professor of College of Education, Professional Studies, Educational Foundations, and

Technology, University of West Florida, Pensacola, FL b Training systems consultant with the UnitedStates Navy, Moorestown, NJ

To cite this Article Barry, Michael and Runyan, Gregory B.(1995) 'A review of distance-learning studies in the U. S.military', American Journal of Distance Education, 9: 3, 37 47

To link to this Article: DOI: 10.1080/08923649509526896URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/08923649509526896

Full terms and conditions of use: http://www.informaworld.com/terms-and-conditions-of-access.pdf

This article may be used for research, teaching and private study purposes. Any substantial orsystematic reproduction, re-distribution, re-selling, loan or sub-licensing, systematic supply ordistribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden.

The publisher does not give any warranty express or implied or make any representation that the contentswill be complete or accurate or up to date. The accuracy of any instructions, formulae and drug dosesshould be independently verified with primary sources. The publisher shall not be liable for any loss,actions, claims, proceedings, demand or costs or damages whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly

or indirectly in connection with or arising out of the use of this material.
http://www.informaworld.com/smpp/title~content=t775648087http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/08923649509526896http://www.informaworld.com/terms-and-conditions-of-access.pdfhttp://www.informaworld.com/terms-and-conditions-of-access.pdfhttp://dx.doi.org/10.1080/08923649509526896http://www.informaworld.com/smpp/title~content=t775648087


2/12

THE AMERICAN JOURNAL OF DISTANCE EDUCATIONVol. 9 No . 3 1995

A Review of Distance-LearningStudies in the U. S. Military

Michael Barry and Gregory B. RunyanAbstract

This review of literature includes recent studies of distance learningin military settings. Aspects of distance learning reviewed include1) distance learning delivery systems, 2) effectiveness studies com-paring distance learning and resident training, and 3) speculation asto the future of distance learning in military settings. Additionally,the results of interviews conducted at military sites and universitieswith experience in distance learning are reported.IntroductionAs the complexity of military technology increases, the need for ongoingtechnical training in the operation and maintenance of these high-leveltechnology systems will also increase. The cost of sending personnel todistant training facilities for resident classroom training is an expensiveproposition. However, numerous studies have shown that distance learn-ing strategies can be a much less expensive alternative to residenttraining in the long term, can increase student throughput, and can stillbe as effective in training personnel.For example, cost savings derived from U.S. Navy training coursesand conferences conducted on their Video Teletraining (VTT) networkfrom Fiscal Year 1989 (FY89) through Fiscal Year 1994 (FY 94) was$7,154,000 in travel costs and per diem expenses alone. Cost-savingsfigures for training totaled $4,386,000 for the same period (CNET Brief-ing 1994). Th e U .S. A ir Force satel l i te t raining system yielded a$5,000,000 cost savings (1992-93) in delivering their Acquisition Plan-ning & Analysis Course via distance learning. Also, travel time savingstotaled thirty man-years, and student throughput increased from 300 to3,000 (Westfall, Christopher, and Cramer 1994). As early as 1982, theAir Force Teleteach Expanded Delivery System showed a savings of$993,000 in two years (Christopher 1982).

37

DownloadedBy:

[EastCarolinaUniversity]At:00:5931August2010


3/12

THE AMERICAN JOURNAL OF DISTANCE EDUCATION

Purpose of the StudyThe purpose of this study was to review recent research on distancelearning in the armed forces. DIALOG computer search systems (NTIS,ERIC, Aero/Def Mkts) were employed to identify studies actually car-ried out in military settings. Additionally, interviews and discussionswere held with researchers and experts in military distance learning.This study combined two current definitions of distance learning: Distance learning consists of all arrangements for providing instruc-t ion through print or electronic te lecommunicat ions media topersons engaged in planned learning in a place or time differentfrom that of the instructor or instructors (Moore 1990). Typically, the learner is given the capacity to interact with theinstructor or program directly, and given the opportunity to meetwith the instructor on a periodic basis (U.S. Department of Educa-tion's Office of Educational Research and Improvement cited inAzarmsa 1993).

This literature review covers the following aspects of distance learningin military settings: 1) delivery systems; 2) studies comparing the effec-tiveness of distance learning with comparable resident training; and 3)speculation as to the future of distance learning in military settings.Delivery Systems

In the 1940s, military distance learning programs were delivered aslow-technology, print-based correspondence courses, which continue inuse today (CNET 1984; King 1994). Television emerged as a distancelearning medium in the early 1950s (Kanner, Runyon, and Desiderator1954) but, like the correspondence courses, broadcast and even closed-circuittelevision lacked the all-important feature of interactivity,whereby distant learners can personally interact with instructors, andvice versa.A limited amount of interactivity was incorporated into distancelearning in 1973 when the Air Force Institute of Technology (AFIT)began using "Teleteach" commercial dial-up telephones to provide limit-ed-duration instruction to remote locations (Christopher and Milam1981). Teleteach was expanded in 1979 to include the electronic black-

board, a device that can transmit material written on an electronic sensor38

DownloadedBy:

[EastCarolinaUniversity]

At:00:5931August2010


4/12

BARRY AND RUNYAN

board through telephone lines for display on a TV monitor. The expan-sion also included two pairs of dedicated telephone lines (one pair sentand received verbal information while the other pair transmitted writinggenerated on the electronic blackboard). After the expansion, the systembecame known as the Teleteach Expanded Delivery System (TEDS).

U.S. Army systems for the development, delivery, and evaluation ofcourses operate within the Teletraining Network (TNET) and the ArmyLogistics Management Center (ALMC). Asynchronous Computer Con-ferencing (A CC ), a com puter-b ased d el ivery system for dis tancelearning, also is used by the Army (Hahn 1990). Com puters are connect-ed to a network, typically via a modem to a central computer that storestext or graphics entered by the sender and asynchronously transmits theinformation to the recipients when they later call the central computer toretrieve it. The asynchronous transmission of data allows parties to com-municate without having to use the same medium at the same time(Waggoner 1992).

Another computer-based delivery system for distance learning iscalled Computer-Mediated Communication (CMC). Instructional CMCis usually categorized in three ways: Computer Conferencing, which provides e-mail (asynchronouselectronic communication), real-time interactive messaging (syn-chronous computer conferencing), and small- and large-groupdiscussion Informatics, which provides access to repositories of organizedinformation such as on-line library catalogs, databases, and infor-mation managers (e.g., Gopher and Veronica) Computer Assisted Instruction (CAI), in which the computer struc-tures and manages both the presentation of information and thepossible responses available to the user (Berge and Collins 1994)

The U.S. Navy's video teletraining (VTT) system goes well beyondthe old noninteractive one-way lecture via broadcast television to a high-ly i n t e rac t i ve two-way v ideo and aud io de l ive ry s ys t em wi thlarge-screen televisions, video cameras, and audio systems at both thelocal classroom and the distant receiving sites. (The terms "video tele-c o n f e r e n c i n g , " " v i d e o t e l e s e m i n a r , " a n d " i n s t r u c t i o n a l v i d e oteleconferencing" are often used interchangeably to refer to a similardelivery technology.) VTT uses digital video compression (384 KBPS)to allow communication via two-way video and audio within narrower

39

DownloadedBy:



5/12

THE AMERICAN JOURNAL O F DISTANCE EDUC ATION

bandwidths. This networked system (operating via satellite or landlines)consists of eleven sites and sixteen classrooms, is secure at the SECRETlevel and is available twenty-four hours a day; it is used an average often hours a day. The system is voice activated so that students can seethe person to whom they are talking over the network, whether theinstructor or another student at a different location. The enhanced inter-action between instructors and students at the various sites promotes afeeling of learning in an extended classroom (CNET Briefing 1994).

In 199 1, AFIT 's Center for Distance Education selected videotelesem-inar (VTS), a one-way video, two-way audio delivery system, for itscourses. The system uses high-quality, full-motion compressed digitalvideo (CD V), which not only greatly reduces transmission costs, but alsohas led to a new interservice distance-learning network. The DefenseInformat ion Sys tems Ag ency manages the Defense Com m erc ia lTelecommunications Network (DCTN), the long-haul communicationscontractor for the Department of Defense. The Air Technology Network,AFIT's new broadcast station, is the first user of DCTN-CDV. Theseventy-one sites of the Army Logistics Management College also havejoined the growing community of DCTN users (Westfall, Christopher,and Cramer 1994). The technology for delivering distant learning appli-cations has improved tremendously in the past decade and will certainlycontinue to make exponential strides.Effectiveness Studies

This section focuses on the effectiveness of distance learning instruc-tion in com parison to resident training. Therefore, on ly empirical studiesthat compared student achievement in distance learning courses to stu-dent achievement in comparable resident courses are included in thisreview.Two of the earliest empirical studies on distance learning in the mili-tary were conducted in the 1950s using television as the delivery system(Kanner, Runyon, and Desiderator 1954; Kanner 1958). The 1954 studyfound no significant difference in student performance, and Kanner's1958 study reported no evidence that intensive television sessions aremore detrimental to learning than is face-to-face instruction.Christopher (1982) conducted a comparison study on the effective-ness of the Air Force Teleteach Expanded Delivery System for providinginstruction to students at remote sites in eight states. On the basis of sta-

tistical analysis of test scores, he concluded that distant students learned40

DownloadedBy:



6/12

BARRY AND RUNYAN

at least as well as resident students and that the students' attitudes towardthe courses were positive, especially for shorter courses.Partin and Atkins (1984) examined an instructional teleconferencingmethod used by the U.S. Arm y Log istics Managem ent Center, which hasa long history of course development and training evaluation. The 1984study concluded that students were generally receptive to the teleteachmethod of instruction and that student achievement was comparable toachievement resulting from resident instruction. Other findings indicatedthat knowledgeable facilitators on site enhance the teaching/learningprocess, whereas equipment shortcomings can detract from the learningexperiences.The U.S. Navy field tested a two-way video teletraining system in1990 to deliver distance learning on topics of safety, damage control,and maintenance administration (Simpson, Pugh, and Parchman 1990).Student performance on examinations was comparable in originating andremote classrooms, and student attitudes were similar at both sites. Thestudents at the remote site, however, did not feel that they had as much

access to the instructor as did students at the originating site. Additional-ly, audio quality was never fully satisfactory and remained a problemthroughout the field test.Asynchronous Com puter Conferencing (ACC) w as used by the ArmyReserve to deliver a portion of the Engineering Officer Advanced Course(Hahn 1990). The evaluation found that 1) ACC training cost less thanresident training; 2) there were no differences between resident and ACC

students on objective performance measures; 3) ACC students perceivedgreater learning benefits than did resident students; 4) ACC training hadgreater user acceptance; but 5) resident training took less time than ACCtraining and had a better com pletion rate.A year later, Computer-Mediated Communication (CMC) was used todeliver distance courses in technical engineering, tactics, leadership, andbriefing and presentation skills to Army Reserve officers (Phelps et al.1991). The CMC system included computer-aided instruction, story-boards, computer conferencing, computerized test ing, print-basedreadings, and videotapes. Phelps et al. report that the distance learning(CM C) students achieved test scores equal to or better than those of resi-dent groups and, that after ten iterations, CM C costs were 48% less thanresident training costs.The Center for Naval Analysis compared the effectiveness of videoteletraining (VTT) with classroom instruction using 178 students in each

41

DownloadedBy:



7/12

THE AMERICAN JOURNAL O F DISTANCE EDU CATION

group (Rupinski and Stoloff 1990). There were very small, nonsignifi-cant differences in course outcomes between the two groups, and therewere no differences between the two groups in the number of coursefailures. It was found, however, that most students preferred traditionalclassroom-based training to VTT.

VTT can provide various levels of interaction, depending on what thetraining budget can accommodate: not surprisingly, the highest level isthe most costly. Currently, there are six levels: 1) multi-channel two-wayvideo with two-way audio; 2) single-channel two-way video with two-way audio; 3) one-way video with two-way audio; 4) one-way videowith one-way audio; 5) one-way video with intermittent two-way audio;and 6) audiographics (two-way audio supplemented by graphics and/orstill-frame or slow-frame video to remote sites via telephone lines). In astudy comparing student achievement in maintenance administrationtraining using these different levels of VTT, student achievement washigher and comparable to live instruction with fully-interactive VTT(levels 1-3), and student achievement was lower with partially-interac-tive VTT (levels 4-6). Student achievement was not higher in thetwo-way video class when compared to the one-way video class, butinstructors and students alike indicated a preference for two-way video(Simpson, Pugh, and Parchman 1991).

Interactive video teleconferencing was used for Army Reserve Com-pone nt Training to teach the Com man d and General Staff Officers'Course (Keene and Cary 1992). When compared with those receivingresident instruction, distance learners showed superior knowledge of thecourse content at the end of instruction. The authors caution, however,that subjects were not randomly assigned to groups, so selection biasmay account for the apparently superior performance of the distant stu-dents.

Simpson, Pugh, and Parchman (1992) evaluated the effectiveness ofVideo Teletraining (VTT) for delivering hands-on training by 1) compar-ing resident instruction with VTT instruction and 2) comparing residentlaboratory experiences with two alternative laboratory strategies: havingstudents view videotapes of resident students participating in a laborato-ry and having a facilitator conduct the laboratories off-line. VTT wasfound to be effective for lecture, discussion, and hands-on demonstrationportions of training, as indicated by the final examination, student courseevaluations, and observations. Students who viewed videotapes insteadof participating in a laboratory, however, took longer to com plete all per-formance tests, and they performed less accurately. The facilitator42

DownloadedBy:[EastCarolinaUniversity]



8/12

BARRY AND RUNYAN

approach was more successful, and observations indicated that the learn-ing processes occurring in the off-line laboratories were very similar tothose in traditional resident laboratories.A rather unique study conducted by the Florida Teletraining Projectassessed the feasibility of using two-year community colleges to recon-figure and deliver military courses to reserve and active duty personnelvia TNET, the U.S. Army's two-way audio/video Teletraining Network(Bramble and Martin 1995). Three Army Reserve courses and two U.S.Navy special-topics courses were presented during a four-month periodin late 1992 and early 1993. Although there were no com parison groupsin this study, standard military proficiency tests were used in addition toforty other data gathering instruments. This study concluded that com-munity colleges effectively developed and delivered occupationaltraining to the military.

Table 1 presents empirical studies that compared student achievementin distance learning courses to achievement in comparable residentcou rses . All studies in the table reported n o significant differencesbetween resident and distance g roups.Table 1. Comparison StudiesTypes of Del ivery System s Au thors/DatesTeleteach (audiographics) Christopher 1982Partin and Atkins 1984Computer-Mediated Hahn 1990Communications Phelps, Wells, Ashworth,and Hahn 1989Video teletraining Keene and Cary 1992Rupinski and Stoloff 1990Simpson 1993Simpson, Pugh, andParchman 1990, 1991

It appears from the studies reviewed here that student achievement indistance learning courses is comparable to student achievement in resi-dent courses. Considering the economies of scale that could result fromdistant learning courses with large student throughput and from the con-tinuous technological improvements in delivery systems, it seems likelythat distant learning applications w ill continue to be used as appropriatealternatives to resident training.

43

DownloadedBy:




9/12

THE AMERICAN JOURNAL OF DISTANCE EDUCATION

Future of Distance Learning in M ilitary SettingsDistance learning in military settings appears to have a secure andeven bright future. With the development of new weapons systems andother technologies, the need for technical training will only grow; how-ever, the budget for training typically does not grow proportionately withthe budget for procuring the weapons systems. It stands to reason thatresident training will be reduced because distance learning provides ahighly effective alternative in terms of cost savings and its ability to pro-vide access to large numbers of students (Savarise 1992).The U.S. Navy is committed to expanding distance learning throughinteroperable video teletraining (VTT) to all large ships in FY97 (CNETBriefing 1994) and to expanding VTT into new content areas, as well(Simp son, Wetzel , and Pugh 1995; W etzel , Simp son, and S eym our1995). The Navy's digital VTT network is capable of using variousdelivery systems for distance learning, so the future will see the imple-menta t ion of a number of new technologies , such as in terac t ive

courseware. Maloy and Perry (1992) suggest that "integrating VTT withsimulation and artificial intelligence offers a promising road toward thenext generation of learning technologies." Griffin and Hodgins (1991)predict that artificial intelligence will assess each student's personality,tailor the training to his or her learning style, and provide individualizedremediation and re-testing whenever needed; such systems are already inprototype. They further predict that holographic or 3D-stereoscopic sim-ulation displays will allow resident instructors to serve as private tutorsto distant students because they would seem to be "actually there." Holo-graphic displays would also be useful in distant hands-on training inequipment operation or maintenance.Funding initiatives in the past six months further reinforce the mili-tary's commitment to distance learning. CAE-Link won a $3.4 millioncontract to expand the Navy's VTT network to twenty-five sites whilesupporting the fifteen sites now on the network; new sites include Japan,

Guam, and Spain (CNET contract 1994). The House Armed ServicesCommittee's FY94 defense authorization bill authorized $17 million toexpand the Army's Interactive Teletraining Network (TNET) to a mini-mum 120-system network for "worldwide training" (Teletraining 1993).

44

DownloadedBy:



10/12

BARRY AND RUNYAN

ConclusionThis review of literature examined recent studies of distance learningwith a focus on distance learning in military settings. Studies wereselected that used comparison groups, and interviews were conducted atmilitary sites and universities with experience in distance learning. Theauthors hope this review will serve as a springboard for further studiesthat will expand the literature base for researchers interested in distancelearning in the U .S. military.The early, relatively low-technology distance learning coursesbasedon the correspondence model and, later, broadcast or closed-circuit tele-visionlacked the all-important feature of interactivity. In the lastfifteen years, distance-learning delivery systems have evolved to takefull advantage of telecommunication technologies that enable distantlearners to interact with instructors, instructional courseware, and eachother. These delivery systems range in levels of interactivity from "low-e nd" t e c hno l ogy t w o- w a y a ud i o w i t h ha nd - w r i t t e n i ma ge s o r

still-frame videoto the "high-end" technologytwo-way full-motionvideo with two-way audio, which provides the maximum capability forinteraction.Studies conducted in military settings tend to show no significant dif-ference in achievement between distance learners and resident learners;a few studies have reported higher achievement among distant learners.Cost comparisons tend to favor distance learning with the Navy report-ing cost savings of $11.6 million in four years and the Air Forcereporting a cost savings of $5.0 million and 30 man-years in a two-yearperiod.In light of the recent funding initiatives to support and expand dis-tance learning systems and the excel lent t rack record of s tudentperformance within distance learning systems, it is apparent that distancelearning has not only been accepted in the U.S. Military, but will, in thenear future, have more student throughput than the traditional resident

training courses. The military virtual classroom is here...and here to stay.ReferencesAzarmsa, R. 1993. Telecommunications: A Handbook for Educators.New York: Garland.Berge, Z., and M. Collins. 1994. Computer-mediated Communicationand the Online Classroom in Higher Education. Vol. 2 of Computer

45

DownloadedBy:



11/12

THE AMERICAN JOURNAL O F DISTANCE EDUCATION

Mediated Communication and the Online Classroom. Cresskill, NJ:Hampton Press.Bramble, W., and B. Martin. 1995. The Florida Teletraining Project:Military training via two-way compressed video. The American Jour-nal of Distance Education 9(1):6-26.Christopher, G. 1982. The Air Force Institute of Technologythe AirForce reaches out through m edia: An upda te. In Teleconferencing andElectronic Communications, eds. L. Parker and C. Olgren, 343-344.Madison: University of Wisconsin-Extension, Center for Interactive

Programs.Christopher, G., and A. Milam. 1981 . Teleteach expanded delivery sys-tem evaluation. ED-TR-81-4. Dayton, OH: Wright-Patterson AFB,Air Force Institute of Technology.CNET. 1984. Purpose of Navy training courses/rate training manuals:Historical survey. Pensacola, FL: Naval Air Station, Chief of NavalEducation and Training.CNET Briefing. 1994. Briefing on CNET video teletraining. Pensacola,FL : Naval Air Station, Chief of Naval Education and Training.CNET contract goes to CAE-Link. 1994. Defense and Aerospace Elec-tronics 3:1 .Griffin, G., and M. Hodgins. 1991. VTT in the Navy: Training now andfor the future. T.H.E. Journal 19(l):65-67.Hahn, H. 1990. Distributed training for the reserve component: Remotedelivery using asynchronous computer conferencing. Report No.2Q2 63743A 794. B oise, ID : Army Research Institute.Kanner, J. 1958. Television in Arm y training. Audio-Visual Communica-tion R eview 6:255-91.Kanner, J., R. Runyon, and O. Desiderato. 1954. Television in Armytraining: Evaluation of television in Army basic training. W ashington,DC: George Washington U niversity.Keene, D., and J. Cary. 1992. Effectiveness of distance educationapproach to U.S. Army reserve component training. In Distance Edu-cation for Corporate and Military Training, ACSDE ResearchMonograph No. 3, ed. M. G. Moore, 97-103. University Park, PA:The Pennsylvania State University, American Center for the Study ofDistance Education.

King, R. 1994 (December) . Interview with Robert King, Head ofAdvance Division, Naval Education and Training Program Manage-ment Support Activity, Pensaco la, FL.

46

DownloadedBy:




12/12

BARRY AND RUNYAN

M aloy, W., and N. Perry. 1992 . A N avy vid eo teletrainin g proje ct:Lessons learned. In Distance Educa tion for Corporate and MilitaryTraining, Readings in Distance Education No. 3, ed. M. G. Moore,8 6 -9 6 . University Park, PA: The Pennsylvania State University,Am erican Center for the Study of Distance Education.

Moore, M. G., ed. 1990. Contemporary Issues in Am erican DistanceEducation. New York: Pergamon.Partin, G., and E. Atkins. 1984. Teaching via the electronic blackboard.In Teleconferencing and Electronic Communications III, eds. L. Park-er and C. Olgren, 6 8 - 7 3 . Madison, WI: University of Wisconsin-Extension, Center for Interactive Programs.Phelps, R., R. Wells, R. Ashworth, and H. H ahn. 199 1. Effectiveness andcosts of distance education using computer-mediated communication.The Am erican Journal o f Distance Edu cation 5(3):7-19.Rupinski, T., and P. Stoloff. 1990. An evaluation of Navy video teletrain-ing (VTT). CRM 90-36. Alexandria, VA: Center for Naval Analyses.Savarise, P. 1992. Speaking personally with Colonel William A. Woj-ciechowski . In Distance Education for Corporate and MilitaryTraining, Readings in Distance Education No. 3, ed. M. G. Moore,126-30. University Park, PA: The Pennsylvania State University,Am erican C enter for the Study of Distance Education.Simpson, H., H. Pugh, and S. Parchman. 1990. A two-point video-tele-training system: Design, development, and evaluation. TechnicalReport-90-5. San Diego, CA: Navy Personnel Research and Develop-ment Center.Simpson, H ., H . Pugh, and S. Parchman . 199 1. Em pirical comparison ofalternative video teletraining technologies. Technical Report-92-3.San Diego, CA: Navy Personnel Research and Development Center.Simpson, H., H. Pugh, and S. Parchman. 1992. Use of videoteletrainingto deliver hands-on training: Concept test and evaluation. TN-92-14.San Diego, CA: Navy Personnel Research and Developm ent Center.Teletraining wins HASC praise: Expansion order. 1993. Defense andAerospace Electronics 2(2).Waggoner, M. 1994. Em powering Networks: Com puter Conferencing inEducation. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Educational Technology Publica-tions.Westfall, T., G. Christopher, and W. Cramer. 1994. ATN brings toDepartment of Defense a new capability in satellite distance education(brochure). Dayton, OH: Wright Patterson Air Force Base, AFIT Cen-ter for Distance Education.

DownloadedBy:



Date post:	14-Apr-2018
Category:	Documents
Upload:	pparke
View:	220 times
Download:	0 times

Review of Military De

Documents