|
|
Line 1: |
Line 1: |
| We mostly are cringe at the thought of a reading/discussing of theories.
| | |
| However, we need to do it; because theories are important to study of the related area. The case is the same for distance education (DE). But, why we need to theory?
| |
| Moore (1994) stated that “there was a need to describe and define the field and to identify the critical elements of the various forms of learning and teaching”.
| |
| Similarly, Keegan (1995) said “… a theory gives the foundation on which the structures of need, purpose and administration can be erected”.
| |
| He also added that “theory of distance education will be one which can provide ….which decisions can be taken, with confidence”.
| |
| Keegan (1986) in his work The Foundation of Distance Education classified theories of DE into three groups as:
| |
| 1.Theories of independence and autonomy
| |
| o 1960s-1970s
| |
| o Rudolf Monfred Delling
| |
| o Charles A. Wedeneyer
| |
| o Michael Moore
| |
| 2.Theories of industrialization of teaching
| |
| o Otto Peters
| |
| 3.Theories of interaction and communication
| |
| o Böje Holmberg
| |
| o John A. Baoth
| |
| o David Seward
| |
| o Kevin C. Smith
| |
| o John S. Danuel
| |