Unconstrained Learning: Principles for the Next Generation of Distance Education



Distance education has had a dramatic effect on learning in the last decade. While providers have experienced both academic and financial success, now is not the time to be complacent. Rather, we must begin to determine the direction of the next generation of distance education. In this chapter, three generations of distance education are outlined. The first is characterized by correspondence courses; the second is identified by early internet use; and the newly proposed third generation of distance education is characterized by an emerging technology-enabled learning space that brings to distance education a volume, depth, and breadth that eclipses early internet capacity. Ten principles for the next generation of distance education are offered, including a paradigm for learning experience design that not only incorporates sound instructional design practice but also encourages instructional designers to explore the inherent strengths of the technology-enabled space to design dynamic learning experiences.


Global Position System Cloud Computing Learning Objective Instructional Design Distance Education 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


  1. Blizzard. (2010). World of warcraft subscriber base reaches 12 million worldwide. Retrieved November 25, 2010, from
  2. Bomsdorf, B. (2005). Adaptation of learning spaces: Supporting ubiquitous learning in higher education. In Paper presented at the mobile computing and ambient intelligence: The challenge of multimedia, Dahgstuhl, Germany.Google Scholar
  3. Bonk, C. J., & King, K. S. (1998). Electronic collaborators: Learner-centered technologies for literacy, apprenticeship, and discourse. New York: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  4. Braimoh, D., & Lekoko, R. N. (2005). The need for policy framework in maintaining quality in open and distance education programmes in Southern Africa. Turkish Online Journal of Distance Education—TOJDE, 6(4), 95–105.Google Scholar
  5. Carlson, N. (2011). Chart of the day: How many users does Twitter really have? Business Insider. Retrieved 31 Mar, 2011 from BusinessInsider.Com website:
  6. Czikszentmihalyi, M. (1990). Flow: The psychology of optimal experience. New York: Harper & Row.Google Scholar
  7. DeMarco, T., & Lister, T. (1987). Peopleware: Productive projects and teams (2nd ed.). New York: Dorset House.Google Scholar
  8. Dewey, J. (1938). Experience and education. New York: Touchstone. (First Touchstone Edition 1997 ed.).Google Scholar
  9. Google Earth. (2011). Google Earth Ancient Rome layer. Retrieved April 21, 2011, from
  10. Hasson, U., Landesman, O., Knappmeyer, B., Vallines, I., Rubin, N., & Heeger, D. J. (2008). Neurocinematics: The neuroscience of film. Projections, 2(1), 1–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Huett, J., Sharp, J., & Huett, K. (2010). What’s all the FOSS? How freedom and openness are changing the face of our educational landscape. International Journal of Open Source Software and Processes, 1(2), 1–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, R. (1985). Classroom conflict: Controversy versus debate in learning groups. American Educational Research Journal, 22(2), 237–256.Google Scholar
  13. Jonassen, D. H. (2006). Modeling with technology: Mindtools for conceptual change (3rd ed.). Upper Saddle River: Pearson Education.Google Scholar
  14. Jonassen, D. H., Howland, J., Marra, R. M., & Crismond, D. (2008). Meaningful learning with technology (3rd ed.). Upper Saddle River: Pearson Education.Google Scholar
  15. Keller, J. M. (2009). Motivational design for learning and performance: The ARCS model approach. New York: Springer.Google Scholar
  16. Krathwohl, D. R. (2002). A revision of Bloom’s taxonomy. Theory into Practice, 41(4), 212–218.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Marshall, S. (1997). Creating sustainable learning communities for the twenty-first century. In F. Hesselbein, M. Goldsmith, & R. Beckhard (Eds.), The organization of the future (pp. 177–188). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
  18. Morrison, G. R., & Lowther, D. L. (2010). Integrating computer technology into the classroom (4th ed.). Upper Saddle River: Pearson.Google Scholar
  19. Morrison, G. R., Ross, S. M., Kalman, H. K., & Kemp, J. E. (2011). Designing effective instruction (6th ed.). Hoboken: Wiley.Google Scholar
  20. Preskill, H., & Torres, R. T. (2000). The learning dimension of evaluation use. New Directions for Evaluation 88(Winter 2000), 25–37.Google Scholar
  21. Project Tomorrow. (2010). Speak up survey data—2009. Retrieved April 21, 2011, from
  22. Reich, R. (1992). The work of nations. New York: Vintage Books.Google Scholar
  23. Rittel, H. W. J., & Webber, M. M. (1973). Dilemmas in a general theory of planning. Policy Sciences, 4, 155–169.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Rummler, G. A. (2007). Serious performance consulting according to Rummler. San Francisco: Pfeiffer.Google Scholar
  25. Shedroff, N. (2001). Experience design: A manifesto for the creation of experiences. Indianapolis: New Riders.Google Scholar
  26. Shepard, M. (2011). Creating a culture of digital collaborative in online learning. In L. Moller & J. Huett (Eds.), The next generation of distance education: Unconstrained learning. New York: Springer Press.Google Scholar
  27. US Department of Education. (2005). Toward a new golden age in American education: How the Internet, the law, and today’s students are revolutionizing expectations. Washington: USDE.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Walden UniversityMinneapolisUSA
  2. 2.Old Dominion UniversityNorfolkUSA
  3. 3.University of West GeorgiaCarrolltonUSA

Personalised recommendations