Three generations of distance education pedagogy
Open accessAbstract
This paper defines and examines three generations of distance education pedagogy. Unlike earlier classifications of distance education based on the technology used, this analysis focuses on the pedagogy that defines the learning experiences encapsulated in the learning design. The three generations of cognitive-behaviourist, social constructivist, and connectivist pedagogy are examined, using the familiar community of inquiry model (Garrison, Anderson, & Archer, 2000) with its focus on social, cognitive, and teaching presences. Although this typology of pedagogies could also be usefully applied to campus-based education, the need for and practice of openness and explicitness in distance education content and process makes the work especially relevant to distance education designers, teachers, and developers. The article concludes that high-quality distance education exploits all three generations as determined by the learning content, context, and learning expectations.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
More complex ways of thinking are required and learners become more effective in today's competitive world when learning outcomes are designed at higher levels.
“as more complex ways of thinking are required and the learners become more effective in today's competitive world (e.g., Anderson and Dron [15]).”
From A Comparative Study of the ADDIE Instructional Design Model in Distance Education (2022) · cites this paper as Anderson and Dron [15]
Learning is transformed into a creative process, thus creating strong parallels with constructivist approaches that emphasize creation as a central role in the construction of knowledge.
“In this way, as argued by Anderson and Dron [15], learning is transformed into a creative process, thus creating strong parallels with constructivist approaches that emphasize creation as a central role in the construction of knowledge”
From A Comparative Study of the ADDIE Instructional Design Model in Distance Education (2022) · cites this paper as Anderson and Dron [15]
Cites
The anatomy of a large-scale hypertextual Web search engine
Brin, S., & Page, L. (1998) · Computer Networks and ISDN Systems · doi:10.1016/s0169-7552(98)00110-x · Cited by 16,004 · see citing works
Mayer, R. (2020) · doi:10.1017/9781316941355 · Cited by 7,777 · see citing works
Critical Inquiry in a Text-Based Environment: Computer Conferencing in Higher Education
Garrison, D. R., Anderson, T., & Archer, W. (1999) · The Internet and Higher Education · doi:10.1016/s1096-7516(00)00016-6 · Cited by 6,619 · see citing works
Self-citationLearning Styles and Pedagogy in post-16 learning: a systematic and critical review
Coffield, F., Moseley, D., Hall, E., & Ecclestone, K. (2004) · Newcastle University · doi:10.25405/ncl.34085991 · Cited by 1,810 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Manca, S., & Ranieri, M. (2013) · Journal of Computer Assisted Learning · doi:10.1111/jcal.12007 · Cited by 413 · see citing works
Bervell, B., & Arkorful, V. (2020) · International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education · doi:10.1186/s41239-020-0183-9 · Cited by 144 · see citing works
“For instance Anderson and Dron (2011) explain that the DE mode has metamorphosed through three to four generations beginning from print-based technologies to contemporary internet-based technologies (Aoki, 2012).”
BackgroundEducational scalability in MOOCs: Analysing instructional designs to find best practices
Julia, K., Peter, V. R., & Marco, K. (2021) · Computers & Education · doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2020.104054 · Cited by 94 · see citing works
Stephenson, N. S., Miller, I. R., & Sadler-McKnight, N. P. (2019) · Journal of Chemical Education · doi:10.1021/acs.jchemed.8b00836 · Cited by 46 · see citing works
Modelling adult learners’ online engagement behaviour: proxy measures and its application
Wong, A., & Chong, S. (2018) · Journal of Computers in Education · doi:10.1007/s40692-018-0123-z · Cited by 23 · see citing works
- Authors
- Anderson, T., & Dron, J.
- Affiliations
- Athabasca University (CA)
- Venue
- The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning
- Publisher
- Athabasca University Press
- Published
- 2011-03-25
- Volume
- 12
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 80
- ISSN
- 1492-3831 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2143360138
- Cited by
- 1,187
- References
- 4
- Citations by year
- 2026: 59 · 2025: 106 · 2024: 100 · 2023: 96 · 2022: 59 · 2021: 110 · 2020: 84 · 2019: 75 · 2018: 70 · 2017: 46 · 2016: 79 · 2015: 113 · 2014: 65 · 2013: 74 · 2012: 40
- FWCI
- 292.47
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- diamond
- doi.org
- Licence
- cc-by
- Locations
- The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- AUSpace (Athabasca University) (submittedVersion)
- DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
- Érudit (Université de Montréal) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Education › Online and Blended Learning
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Digital Education and Society
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Educational Technology in Learning
- Keywords
- social constructivist pedagogy, community of inquiry, social presence, cognitive presence, teaching presence, learning design
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
