K-12 Distance Ed. in NL-8: CDLI Startup and Pilot Year (2000-2002)

In 1999 a provincial Ministerial Review Panel which looked into the Delivery of k12 education in this province published its findings in a document called ‘Supporting Learning.’ Chapter six of it addressed the issue of distance education and made a series of recommendations. Chief among these was the establishment of a ‘Centre for Distance Learning and Innovation’ (CDLI) which would enact many of the suggested courses of action. The CDLI was created within months of the document’s release.

Chapter six of 'Supporting Learning' recommended the creation of a Centre for Distance Learning and Innovation.
Chapter six of ‘Supporting Learning’ recommended the creation of a Centre for Distance Learning and Innovation.

The founding director of CDLI, Wade Sheppard, as it turned out, had been the director of the Vista school district when the eLearning project mentioned in the previous post had been carried out so he was no stranger to both the new and emerging models.

It was decided to start by piloting ten new Internet-based courses, one each in ten school districts (the eleven districts that existed at the time have since been consolidated to five). The task of developing the first courses fell to Leon Cooper, a program specialist with the Department of Education who was no stranger to eLearning. He had initially been seconded, twelve years earlier, to work on the development of the content for the legacy model of distance education. Since then he had been the province’s tech. ed. program development specialist. In the mid-nineties he, along with colleague Alex Hickey had authored the TILE report which had set out a recommended course of action for the province on the whole area of technology Integration. He had also played a key role in the initial development of the Vista Project. Leon began by creating a framework for content creation, along with a development template and by training all content developers in the use of framework and templates.

Leon Cooper leads a content development team meeting. Clockwise from top left Leon Cooper (program development specialist) Me (physics) Bruce King (comm. tech.) Andre Hudson (chemistry) Don Squibb (math) Ed Somerton (math) Blaine Priddle (math)
Leon Cooper leads a content development team meeting. Clockwise from top left Leon Cooper (program development specialist) Me (physics) Bruce King (comm. tech.) Andre Hudson (chemistry) Don Squibb (math) Ed Somerton (math) Blaine Priddle (math). Nick Soper (English) and Camilla Stoodley (French) were also present at that meeting but are not shown in the photo. Note the old Commodore 64 monitor just over my shoulder–we used those as monitors for video editing; just couldn’t kill those old Sony tubes! Note also the old PET top right in the picture–it’s still around…somewhere.

My initial role with the newly created CDLI was as developer of the pilot grade eleven physics course. Macromedia Flash (Later Adobe® Flash™) was fairly new then and I saw incredible promise in it so I took the time to learn it, along with action script 2 and used it to create dozens of small learning objects which I embedded in traditional web-based materials. A sample; one of the eighty or so lessons I created back in 2000 can still be found here, if you are interested. Introductory information is on the ‘get started’ page and the actual lesson is on the ‘go to work‘ page. Be kind; that lesson was created 13 years ago :>)

Once the content developers had completed our tasks the attention turned to implementation–piloting, rather–of the new model. That job fell to me. In September 2001 I was charged with the task of getting ten web based pilots underway in ten different districts—a daunting task as:

  • In the field there was skepticism of the new model. In many minds the old system (I renamed it the legacy model as I thought ‘old’ at the time had the wrong tone) worked well so people wondered why we should change it.
  • The ‘supporting learning’ model was advocating a primarily asynchronous model; a model that ran against what had been done previously.
  • Internet connectivity was nowhere near where we wanted it to be. The majority of the rural schools used a hybrid model that used a satellite for downloads and a dial up connection for uploads and it was quite congested as we here in NL shared the system with most of North America. Once the US woke up for the day the system often became hopelessly slow.
  • In many quarters there was a strong skepticism against distance education in any form.

Fortunately the task was made easier.  Most importantly I was not alone. There were ten well-chosen pilot teachers. Wade, Leon and Frank Shapleigh as well as other STEM~Net personnel were solidly behind the implementation process too. District office program specialists were also allocated some time to help with the pilot. By going with pilot, against the recommendation of the document, the CDLI had the opportunity to make the necessary changes in the first year without the pressures of going completely over to the new model. That, as it turned out was a good thing! By going with a pilot, the school system had the chance to see how the new model held up against the legacy one. As it turned out it not only held up well but, as the pilot year progressed and the needed changes were made, it became clear that the new model was significantly better.

“Supporting Learning” recommended an asynchronous model. Despite this a model that blended synchronous with asynchronous was enacted. This was for several reasons:

  • The people involved directly in the delivery, including the pilot teachers, did not need to be convinced that switching away from synchronous classes would be a bad idea. In fact all were adamant that a synchronous component was necessary for success.
  • We knew, internally, that we did not possess the ability to create truly engaging, immersive multimedia content. In short, we knew our limits—we’d learned lessons from both the Legacy and Vista models on what the students needed and on what could be done.

After a search of what was currently available the CDLI decided to buy into a new product then called “Tutor’s Edge.” This java-based application included not only the 2-way audio and whiteboarding similar to that used in both the legacy model and the Vista model, but it also added new features (messaging, polling, permissions and—within a year—application sharing). Best of all it was not the ‘bandwidth-hog’ that NetMeeting had proved to be. The teachers and students loved it.

Screen shot from a tutor's edge session. Note the whiteboard at the left, the window listing the participants, the audio tool just above it and the text tool at the far right.
Screen shot from a tutor’s edge session. Note the whiteboard at the left, the window listing the participants, the audio tool just above it and the text tool at the far right. Notice that the slide is a combination of pre-drawn stuff (the images + the typed text) and items drawn during the class. It’s likely the instructor wrote in blue and a student in black.

By the way, while the company has changed much (and changed hands) since that time, as companies do, the product line still exists, but has evolved profoundly. One year later it was renamed vClass and a few years later re-branded again as Elluminate live! Today it is the product you may know as Blackboard Collaborate™.

Instructor's view of a synchronous class. You can just see the graphics tablet bottom right. Note the headset microphone--standard issue for everyone doing distance education!
Instructor’s view of a synchronous class. In this configuration the participants are listed on the left, the chat window is on the right with the audio window above it and the whiteboard is in the middle. You can just see the edge of the graphics tablet at the bottom right. Note the headset microphone–standard issue for everyone doing distance education! Fellow Canadians will notice that it must have been ‘roll up the rim time!’

The success experienced with WebCT in the Vista model was enough to convince all to continue using it with the new CDLI model. We did not regret that decision. The content area, discussions, drop-box, email and grades tools were all used.

We also made great efforts to upgrade the Internet connectivity, to the extent that we could. The local providers, to their credit, went out of their way to upgrade sites in a way that was affordable. In places where this was not possible several new satellite services were located and purchased. In still other cases we purchased an additional dial-up line for the CDLI computers, This dial up connection could be networked and we found that it could actually sustain 3-4- students simultaneously in a synchronous class in Tutor’s Edge—a feat that would not have been possible using NetMeeting.

The combination of the three measures worked surprisingly well. Let’s face it—we had our doubters; many of them. By years end, though, we had managed to begin the process of upgrading our remote sites to an acceptable level and had started putting the mechanism in place to upgrade the rest for the implementation that would follow in 2001.

Site visits during the pilot year were essential. Frequently the visits would be done by Frank and i working together. I would work with the students, showing them anything they need to know and, more importantly, picking their brains...finding out what was working and what was not.
Site visits during the pilot year were essential. Frequently the visits would be done by Frank and I working together. I would work with the students, showing them anything they need to know and, more importantly, picking their brains…finding out what was working and what was not.

We got through it but it was by no means easy. Those of us on the supporting end of the project burned the candle at both ends to make it  work. But we did succeed.

Frank would either work on the onsite equipment or engage in onsite training, as is the case here.
Frank would either work on the onsite equipment or engage in onsite training, as is the case here.

Much of the information that informed the decisions that led to what we eventually became was obtained during that pilot year—something I recall every time I hear people say that new programs do not need to be piloted; that we ‘know enough’ to proceed. Every effort was made that year to gather data that might be used to inform future decisions. These included:

  • Constant feedback from the pilot teachers.
  • The start of a multi-year investigation by two researchers at Memorial University: Dr.’s Ken Stevens and George Coffin.
  • Meetings with district-based CDLI implementation teams.
  • Onsite visits in which students and teachers were observed and consulted.
  • Focus groups with consisting of principals at the pilot schools and with mTeachers (onsite mediating teachers who supported the eLearning efforts).
Teacher/Program Specialist meeting held during the pilot year (L-R) Pat Whelan (Program Specialist, District 6), Wade Sheppard (Director, CDLI), Andrea Neville (eLearning Specialist, District 6)
Teacher/Program Specialist meeting held during the pilot year (L-R) Pat Whelan (Program Specialist, District 3), Wade Sheppard (Director, CDLI), Andrea Neville (eLearning Specialist, District 3), Lyndon Williams (eTeacher, CDLI)

During that year we learned some valuable lessons and, more importantly, made some systemic changes in preparation for the first full year of implementation, 2001-02. Among those lessons:

  • Get the Internet connectivity up to scratch. A slow or unreliable line will not work. The connection needs to have enough bandwidth and not suffer from down-time.
  • Provide a scheduling system that offers enough choice so that schools can integrate the distance education classes with the F2F classes the students are also taking.
  • Provide an easy-to-use registration system.
  • Pay close attention to ensuring that new students are adequately oriented.
  • Provide the necessary equipment and standardize it. We wound up, in the end, supplying the PCs, the all-in-one printer/scanners used for returning student work, headset/microphones for the synchronous classes and, where necessary, graphics tablets so student could write on the whiteboards too.
  • Provide a help desk that is available all school-day long.
  • Instead of relying on one person at a site (we called that person the mTeacher, or mediating teacher in the pilot year) establish a site based team, or mTeam (mediating team) that helps support the learning. It would contain separate people to help with administration (the principal or designate), tech support (our help desk, district techs, students paid through the TFT program) and coaching (onsite teachers and peer tutors).
  • Do a better job of communicating (evaluation, class routines, technical routines, registration and reporting, for example) with our various publics.

A sad coincidence worth mentioning. Very early in the pilot year we arranged a face-to-face launch in Gander. It was out ‘official’ start of the pilot. Besides myself, Wade, Leon, Frank and the pilot teachers we also had in attendance 2 people from each of the forty schools–typically the Principal and mTeacher, all ten of the program specialists who would be assisting. There were several others there as well.

During my session, early in the morning I noticed that there seemed to be a lot more planes coming in. Frank noticed it too. When my session was over I ran over to the district office which was next door. The place was deserted. I found them all downstairs huddled around the TV set in the lunch room. The whole staff. Something horrible had happened. I ran back to the plenary and interrupted to tell the crowd what had happened. The reaction was shock and disbelief. Frankly, not much got done the next hour and, during the lunch period most of the participants drove up to the airport to see for themselves.

The date of our launch: September 11, 2001

All of the planes in the Northwest Atlantic were diverted to Newfoundland that day. Many of them landed at Gander. The passengers waited fearfully in the aircraft, not really knowing what had happened. Slowly the news started to get out. After a long time, the passengers were allowed to leave the aircraft, but were not allowed to leave.
The people of Gander and the surrounding area took care of those passengers in the days that followed. The story that resulted is one of generosity and compassion; a tale of how our ‘better parts’ can always triumph when we put love first…
It's been twelve years since that tragic day and perhaps time has helped heal some of the wounds but each year the people of central newfoundland recall the day the world came to town...
It’s been twelve years since that tragic day and perhaps time has helped heal some of the wounds but each year the people of central newfoundland recall the day the world came to town.

Next: The CDLI goes from pilot to full implementation of an Internet-based eLearning Model. The first step was to recruit and develop  an effective faculty of eTeachers.

12 thoughts on “K-12 Distance Ed. in NL-8: CDLI Startup and Pilot Year (2000-2002)

  1. Mary

    Interesting to read about how the technology evolved. Yes – the date of the launch was a sad coincidence indeed. I was working in a school library on that day and the reaction there was also total disbelief – is this real? and then shock.

    1. There’s lots of changes still ahead. Yes, that day had such a profound effect on the years that followed. It’s still some comfort, though, to see how, in this case it showed how humanity was still the stronger force.

  2. So, what will the title of the book be? The Evolution of DL in NL? I, like others who have commented, was riveted by the 9/11 coincidence. I have heard stories … told at places such as NPR … about the kindness shown by the folks of Gander and of surrounding areas. It’s nice that you have images of a number of folks who participated in these important events. Someone (you?) showed quite a bit of foresight. D

    1. Like a dog with a bone about that book aren’t you :>) …and you’re probably right. Maybe I’ll consider this the book map and see if there’s an appetite. But that will be in the fall after I retrire.

      Yes, that story of 911 has been told…and it is an important one. I am, of course particularly drawn to it for two reasons. First because it makes me proud of my fellow NL’rs, but most importantly because I think it so clearly demonstrates that the appropriate response to aggression and hatred must be empathy, love and dedication to reconcilliation.

      Finally, about the vision. There’s no doubt that there was a strong vision but the important thing was that it was one that was shared by many who were willing to work toward that common goal. I can’t stress enough the contribution made by those such as Wilbert and Harvey…and others I have not mentioned here (They have names like ‘Max”, ‘Erin’ and ‘Edna’) who were able to spread that vision, muster the people together and light the fires that we all sustained.

  3. Your experience with Internet-based supplementary education for schools reminded me of my role in a project to evaluate a satellite-based teaching experiment for engineering students in India. This was in 2004. Special classes were beamed at set hours on pre-determined modules that had been surveyed and found to be the most difficult for the students. The classes, however, failed to find a resonance with the students due to two main reasons: one, lack of awareness among the students and two, what we felt to be teachers’ threat perception [impacting their own jobs] that prevented them from engaging with these classes by providing adequate information about this to the students and facilitating their attendance at the online sessions, which in the Indian scenario, was held in the audio-visual room in the colleges. Just thought of sharing a different perspective on education through the distance, from a different social setting.

    Additionally, I would like to express my appreciation for the sentiment you have expressed in a comment above: I couldn’t agree more that the only sustainable way forward for the human race is to continue to react to violence with non-violence. Only in compassion and empathy can there be hope.

    1. Thanks for this input! I, too, have experienced exactly the same sentiments. To them I have always said: 1–We are not trying to ‘replace’ face to face teaching with distance eduction technologies. We are, rather, working as partners, providing what is otherwise not available and 2–although many may disagree it is my FIRM belief that distance education is NOT more ‘efficient’ in that it cannot be used to save money by placing an unreasonably large number of students with a single instructor. It is my experience that for just about any subject area, class sizes F2F compare fairly well with ones online.

      1. True. At present, even best efforts through the distance can at best complement face to face teaching. However, the prevailing reality is of an enormous student population eager for quality education, and a world unable to meet their aspirations due to the availability of very few good colleges and fewer good teachers. Education through the distance can make a phenomenal change to the way such learning deprivations can be addressed. And, I think it is causing ripples already.

        I had occasion to read your earlier article on MOOCs. And, while I agree that MOOCs cannot replace live classroom teaching immediately, the enormous response from the global student community makes me think that they will find ways to plug missing links caused by absence of face to face interactions with peers and with teachers.

        The thirst for learning and knowledge that will free the mind is universal and I do fervently hope technology and human creativity will step in and plug lacuna in governance so that no student needs to feel deprived because of reasons beyond their control. Perhaps, this feeling of satisfaction at addressing a very real need at the grassroots is one of the greatest rewards your project might have given.

  4. In the jargon of the trade that is a drop-down intro of the finest sort. Or, as sometimes described as the Sunday Express style story, ie you leave the main point until the end.

    Not necessarily your main point in terms of distance learning, but in news terms and not quite the right day (not your fault!) to start, it certainly was.

    I never knew where I was or anything about when Kennedy was assassinated or John Lennon either, they are often quoted as being the ‘Where were you’ when … happened.

    I do remember 11 Sept though. Sat in front of the television watching lunchtime news or something and suddenly there was some interruption on the screen.

    The other two I remember are the storming of the Libyan Embassy (London) back in 1980 by the SAS, and the day Nelson Mandela was freed. I was on a ski-ing holiday in France. Cross-country I hasten to add.

    Odd how we remember, or don’t, momentous days in history. At least your launch date has achieved some good. That’s how I shall think about 11 Sept now.

  5. Pingback: History Of K-12 Distance Education In Newfoundland And Labrador | Virtual School Meanderings

  6. Phillyl

    Fifteen years ago today…..the great people of Gander put their lives to the side, opened their hearts, and homes to help the throngs of sudden strangers that kept arriving at the airport. There will never be enough thank you’s said, for the kindness of our great Canadian neighbors to the North.
    So today, on this day that we Remember all the lives that were lost, we also remember those who helped accommodate the sudden stranded plane people.
    Bless you….and thank you All…… from a very grateful American neighbor to the South.

Comments are Welcome!

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s