The role of the instructor or teacher takes on a new meaning in the context of distance education. New roles also emerge since the traditional teacher role as autonomous and self-dependent is no longer reasonable for distance learning classes. Distance learning teachers are assisted by instructional designers, producers, web page developers, and production staff depending on the nature of the distance class and resources available. Some assistance is likely since most instructors are not capable of handling all the technical aspects associated with these classes. It is not reasonable to expect the instructor to be competent in all the areas necessary for developing successful distance learning classes. A new role that has emerged in this context is that of the tutor. This role has developed as a specialization and involves facilitating interaction between students in a total system. In distance education institutions that have adopted the total systems approach, tutors act as specialists that focus their attention on assisting small numbers of students with interaction and discussion based on the content that has been designed and presented by other specialists. The instructor role in this environment changes to a more focused and specialized role. The instructor is the content expert and provides the leadership and teaching strategy for the course. The instructor pays attention to what content is relevant, how it should be organized, the presentation format, and the manner of interaction with the content. The tutor interacts with the students in the learning process. In many ways, this places the time of the instructor on those areas in which there is competitive advantage and expertise. Related teaching tasks that can consume much time can be delegated to others on the team in an overall effort to enhance student understanding and learning of subject matter.

Regardless of the degree to which the roles of traditional instructors change, some change will be inevitable. Moore and Kearsley mention many factors that dictate differences for teaching distance education classes as opposed to the traditional classroom. First, the instructor will not have the luxury of seeing the spontaneous reaction of students in the same manner as in a face to face classroom. Second, instructor-effectiveness is highly dependent on how well the technology is used and functions. Each technology carries a different set of skills and behavior that must be learned. Interaction between instructor and student will be distant and more difficult to interpret. Motivational support will be more important for some students and this will be more difficult to determine. Participation and interaction will be more difficult to facilitate and monitor. The mindset of the experience is totally different and must be carefully planned.

In the traditional classroom instruction is individual and decisions are autonomous. A team approach is necessary in the distance learning environment. Tutors become an important component of the team. In some distance learning environments the tutor is the only person the student has any contact with during the course of the class experience. The instructor must learn to work with others, delegate responsibilities, and trust others to take over many of the tasks traditionally done by one person. This is a new mindset for the teacher and one that is not always easily learned.

The instructor becomes one who facilitates the learning process although not through presentations as in the traditional model but through activity-based learning oriented models of instruction. I strongly advocate the distance learning model as most effective as compared to the traditional classroom model. My stance is based on my own experience as a student in both environments. I believe the flexibility, convenience, and activity-based opportunities are challenging and exciting in ways that are not possible in the regular classroom. The technology opens doors not before possible. The advantages certainly outweigh any disadvantages both for the student and the instructor.

Interaction becomes a very important aspect of the distance learning environment. Moore and Kearsley discuss three types of interaction. First, learner-content interaction is between the student and the content or subject matter being presented. Second, learner-instructor interaction is the communication link developed between the student and the instructor. This aspect has been recognized as an important component of interaction by students. Finally, learner-learner interaction involves the aspect of students learning from one another through discussion groups, on-line chats, and listservs. The purpose is to share information and ideas and to problem solve as a group.

McIsaac and Gunawardena provide an extensive review of the current state-of-the art research that spans a wide range of issues relevant to distance education. They stress the importance of these various types of interactions and the supporting technologies available to address these various aspects of interaction. Currently, however, the literature focusing on learner activity is highly descriptive. The literature does emphasize the need for student-instructor interaction in order to decrease anxiety and increase motivation. The authors stress that the need for interaction is associated with the selection and implementation of specific media within the distance education course. Clearly, more research is needed in these areas to better understand the effectiveness of various types of interaction and their value to the learning process.

I will comment on the evaluation of two on-line courses that I am particularly familiar with in the context of the various types of interactions discussed previously. Not all of the course content for these courses is currently available to the public but I was a student in these classes and will comment from that perspective. The first course is Advanced Issues in Information Resources (http://www.sir.arizona.edu/sp97/688/). All three types of interactions as presented by Moore and Kearsley were present in this class. Student-content interaction took place primarily through the WWW and other sources of on-line content. Student- instructor interaction took place through on-line chat office hours and personally through e-mail. Student-student interaction took place through a variety of means. A class listserv was established for general interaction. Discussion software was used to respond to focused questions for discussion and reflection. Interaction through chat rooms was designed for small group interaction to discuss group projects and other group related activities.

The second course, Information Resource Development, (http://www.sir.arizona.edu/sp97/560/) was designed in a similar format. Student-content interaction took place through the WWW. Student-instructor interaction was totally over e-mail and a class listserv. Instructions and administrative issues were communicated over this class listserv. Conferencing and collaborative software was used to interact among students on an on-line project that was worked on by students in physically different locations. The class listserv served as the vehicle for discussion of subject matter topics.

Although the different interactions were designed into each course differently, the differences were appropriate for the objectives of the instructors and fit their particular teaching strategies. I think the student-content interaction is the most important for any class because it represents the core foundation of the course. Without the content and subject expertise the other aspects of interaction have little relevance.