Below, models of distance education and generational theory of distance education are examined and some theoretical light is shed on the dynamics of single-mode and dual-mode distance learning institutions.
2.2.1.1 Models of Distance Education
According to Omolewa and Adekanmbi (1994), citing Keegan (1990), there are four models of distance education: correspondence school model; the consultation model; the integrated model and; the distance teaching or open university model. The first represents the beginning of distance education with heavy reliance on the exchange of print materials. The second in addition to the use of correspondence education materials, a special attendance at seminars by the clientele, as in face-to-face teaching and learning is made compulsory part of the programme. Student would attend classes in other nearby institutions and participate in activities (practicals). In the third model, distance teaching programme is an extension of an already existing internal teaching programme where the same staff now teach and assess sets of students in the conventional and the distance education system. In terms of cost, this model is the most relatively manageable. Universities' centres for distance learning and its variants are examples of mixed institutions. The fourth model is also called the multi-media model where provisions are usually at the tertiary level although the middle-level manpower requirements may also be addressed. Here, no students in residence; there is autonomous institution with flouting faculty; no part-time/full-time or day-time/night-time dichotomies, e.g., Open University of U.K, Everyman University of Israel, and the NOUN. Course writers and tutors are outsourced; learners are reached through a multi-variety of media and methods. There may be additional elements of face-to-face thereby resulting in the use of blended or hybrid learning approach. However, because of its demanding nature and capital intensiveness, only national government may want to embark on it (Omolewa and Adekanmbi, 1994).
In a more recent classification, Onwe (2013) explains six models of distance education (as presented by Ottto, 2010): the examination preparation model, the correspondence education model, the multiple (mass) media model, the group distance education model, the autonomous learner model, and the network-based model. In the examination preparation model, the institution does not concern itself with teaching but rather hold examinations and confer degrees. This was institutionalised and predominant when the University of London was established in the mid-19th century. The correspondence model adds regular teaching to the examination preparation model. It is regarded as the oldest and the University of South Africa is a good example. Emerged in 1970s, the multiple (mass) media model regularly use radio and television combined with print materials and study centres. The model leaned towards open universities and open learning. Prominent in China, Japan and Korea, the group distance education model builds on the multiple media model by making provision for learners to receive teachings in groups in obligatory classes under supervision of instructors. The autonomous learner model provides freedom towards the development of independent learning. In this model, learners are self-directed and have more responsibilities and teachers function as facilitators. Lastly, the network-based model heavily relies on advancements in information communication technologies, where the students have access to even the remotest teaching programmes and data bases via the Internet.
2.2.1.2 Generational theory of distance education
Anderson and Simpson (2012) explores the development of distance education generational theoretical frameworks. This is in line with the notion that the historical development of distance education is closely interwoven with the development of different models of it. They argue that this approach is helpful when the focus is on both history and heritage. In a sense, development of various models of distance education cannot be separated from the historical evolution of the field both in theory and practice. Anderson and Simpson discuss the history
and heritage of distance education using the generational framework--that the concept of distance education evolves through generations and it highlights key developments. Nipper (1989) who, according to Anderson and Simpson, first used a generation framework, suggested three generations of distance education linked to production, distribution, and computer conferencing. These were later commonly tagged: correspondence, broadcast, and computer mediated. The third one is regarded as being based on telelearning (audio/video conferencing).
Anderson and Simpson (2012) account that Taylor (2001) further identify a fourth and a fifth generation which correspond to "flexible learning based on online teaching" and "additional aspects of “intelligent” digital technologies" respectively. Anderson and Simpson, however, do not indicate the timelines of these five generations.
The first generation of distance education was heavily characterised by print technology. The printing press technology combined with postal services provide a channel for what is commonly called correspondence education and this has been operated for hundreds of years.
Driven by a strong sense of social justice, correspondence education was provided by a variety of organisations, only some of which focused on qualifications (Anderson & Simpson, 2012).
The chief motivation of the distance educators then was the sense of need and importance to provide educational opportunities to those without easy access to educational institutions including the woman and working-class people. It is also pointed out that focus on guiding students through material that was systematically produced and distributed was evident in this generation of distance education as the educative transaction was very didactic in nature.
The hallmark of the second generation of distance education borders on the ability to broadcast using technologies such as radio and television (Anderson & Simpson, 2012). This historical model enhanced the practice of distance education but the teacher-learner interaction remained minimal. We can explain this to mean that the educational technologies reduced the temporal distance between the stakeholders while the spatial distance was maintained as there was still
little or no contact between the teacher and the learner. Wedermeyer & Najem, (1969), as acknowledged by Anderson and Simpson (2012), reflect the research finding of Wedermeyer as regards the distance teaching process of the generation which was considered to be composed of areas that required specialist skills and team development of teaching materials.
Apart from the two generations above, Anderson and Simpson (2012, p. 4) in their conceptualisation also have what they tag "subsequent generations". They admit that different stakeholders hold different interpretations of what constitute subsequent generations. However, despite the different terminologies, interpretations and areas of focus, the most common thread beyond the first two generations was the recognition of interaction. Interaction indeed has subsequently remained a central focus for distance education. This is admittedly so considering the importance of interaction at different levels in instructional transaction as the theoretical framework deployed for this study reflects. It can also be added that such interaction does not aggregate to actual reduction in the traditional distance in space and time: the interaction is made possible by technological advancement and globalisation, specifically through information and communication technology (ICT). This is the educational relevance of instant messaging platforms, chatrooms, emails, audio and video teleconferencing, etc. These tools support a move in distance education from the earlier focus on organisation and didactic teaching to a focus on the social construction of knowledge.
For this reason and others, this study is hinged on socio-constructivism. In a global sense, we are now indeed in the generation of computer-mediated distance education and even of online education. These developments in distance education are characterised by mutual inquiry, knowledge construction, and interaction between students and amongst teachers and students.
This study, therefore bears this coloration despite the level of educational development and technological advancement in Nigeria. It is believed that present efforts should be channelled towards making the realisation of modern distance, open and flexible learning possible.
Meanwhile, this contemporary practice has implication on the competencies of the facilitators (among others) because of the need to develop facilitation skills.
2.2.1.3 Single-mode vs Dual-mode Institutions
As Trindale, Carmo and Bidarra (2000) state, the distinction between distance education single-mode and dual-mode organisations is a classical one. The first designation applies to organisations where distance learning activities largely dominate as compared with face-to-face ones. As at 2001 the only example of dedicated distance education institution was the National Teachers' Institute (NTI) but it is not a university. However, since 2002 the nation has been having an experience of Open University through its only National Open University of Nigeria.
Dual-mode institutions are the conventional universities that have units that organise and operate structured distance education programmes (COL International, 2001). Examples of such units are found in the University of Ibadan, the University of Lagos, the University of Abuja and the Obafemi Awolowo University. The COL International's (2001) observes that in some institutions such as the University of Ibadan distance education practices are organised by a unit originally set up for adult education.
For single-mode systems, students work mostly by themselves outside a campus, their direct contact with the system occupies just a small fraction of the yearly workload. This is the usual organisational pattern of open universities, also known as dedicated distance learning universities. Trindale et al (2000) note that when conventional universities decide to operate distance learning methods in some programmes in parallel with their conventional operation, we then have dual-mode system. Trindale et al (2000, pp. 4-5) affirm that: "This solution has been adopted by an increasing number of traditional universities as a means to provide education to students unable to follow courses regularly on campus, thereby expanding the social usefulness and the geographical radius of their influence." Single-mode institution and
dual-mode institution correspond to Keegan’s multi-media model and integrated model respectively (Omolewa & Adekanmbi, 1994).
The COL International's (2001) report describes three major kinds of institutional practice in Nigeria: “outreach” as distance education, dual-mode institutions and dedicated distance education institutions. The report admits that the outreach centres practice does not fall into the ambit of distance education as against international conceptualisation and they are of low and uncoordinated quality. Resultantly, the National Universities Commission has banned the outreach practice. Meanwhile, the COL International's report strongly emphasises the location of distance education unit within dual-mode institutions. This phenomenon is believed to have physical, psychological and administrative implications. These include: distance education tends to be regarded as a second-best option (which promote a feeling of inadequacy); a need to generate income for the mother institution for the management of the unit (which could lead to the sacrifice of quality at the altar of money); finances tend to be managed by the central institutional administration and; distance education units tend to rely heavily on writers who are already employed as fulltime lecturers. The practice is also viewed as being advantageous in the sense that it prevents brain drain in the Nigerian university system and it allows distance education programmes to work directly with content experts as well as reducing cost.