Definition
Instructors involved in web-based course design and delivery require competencies that have not necessarily been considered important in a face-to-face and print-based distance education context. The issues surrounding the development and delivery of web-based distance courses have implications for the instructor’s attitudes towards teaching and learning, knowledge of and capabilities in using technology, the time required to develop a course, and the instructor’s relationship with students. Instructors typically do not possess or have access to all of the resources needed to design and deliver technology-mediated courses and, therefore, require support to successfully develop and implement web-based distance courses. This support can involve instructional design support, technical support, and institutional support. Teaching using a web-based delivery format requires a re-examination of the role of the instructor in the class, of instructor and of instructor support. Distance education is student centered. Distance students, traditionally, have used pre-packaged course materials with step-by-step instructions and activities to meet identified learning objectives. The student, using these materials, teaches her or himself and the instructor evaluates the student’s learning (Parker, 1997).

Instructors in a web-based course fulfill a role that is different than in a face-to-face classroom or in print-based distance education. The essence of the difference is the combination of learner-centered learning activities and the potential for technology-facilitated interaction and enhanced accessibility to information through Internet-based technologies. In order to take advantage of the possibilities for synchronous and asynchronous communication in web-based distance courses, instructors need to design and implement learning activities that integrate these interactive elements into the course. As in print-based distance education, the instructor’s influence on student learning is found mostly in the course design; in web-based distance education, their influence is increased by the opportunity to interact more with students.

For some instructors, this focus on learner-centered activities and interactions involves a shift in attitude towards teaching methods and course design. In web-based course design, the instructor is concerned with the transmission of information during the design process; during the course itself, the instructor is more concerned with facilitating students, understanding, motivating students and encouraging interaction among students and between students and the instructor. Instructors may lack the knowledge about "…basic principles of instruction that can most meaningfully demonstrated effective curricular integration;…technology competence alone is not enough to model effective technology integration" (Deal, 1998). "The challenge of translating knowledge through the visual, non-linear hypermedia of technology" requires an "entirely different pedagogy from which [instructors]…learned to implement. And the time commitment required to de- and then re-construct our course curricula and remodel…teaching approaches to incorporate technology is far greater than most [instructors] are able to manage with already demanding loads." (Deal, 1998). This re-orientation to teaching using web-based delivery is more than learning to use the technology; it is also learning more and different ways to teach.

Some authors link web-based course delivery with collaborative, cooperative and/or problem-based learning styles, suggesting that the change to this delivery format also engenders a change in teaching and learning styles needed to make full use of the delivery technology (Alley, 1996; Brown, 1998; Meyen et al. 1998). This change is considered necessary in order to fully use the delivery mode’s potential for interaction. It is argued that interaction can not be added to existing instructional design but it must be introduced and integrated, effectively changing the instructional design model. (Parker, 1997). While this argument carries with it some weight, adopting a new instructional design and a new delivery mode can become a large and difficult development burden. When faced with several new areas of expertise to acquire, instructors may consider focusing on one area at a time, or trying new teaching and learning styles in portions of a course until they are confident enough to try new instructional approaches.

Technical knowledge and skills
Instructor competencies for web-based distance education include being able to competently use the technology in the course including course authoring software, communication technology such as e-mail, chat rooms, listservs, browsing the Internet or accessing electronic resources. Instructors need to become "comfortable and effective" with all the technology used in their web-based course (Parker, 1997, p. 9). Instructor modelling of technology use allows students to observe how to use it; a direct teaching technique which enhances student confidence in using technology (Brand, 1998). A danger in uninformed use of technology associated with web-based course delivery is shaping teaching and learning activities to fit the technology rather than using an appropriate technology that fits the activity. "The medium too often assumes a life of its own, supplanting the teacher and resulting in technology-bound activities that are debilitating to both teaching and learning" (Parker, 1997 p. 9).

The skills required to design and implement a web-based course vary with each course; courses with multi-media elements including sound and video clips and video and audio-conferencing activities will require more expertise than text and graphics based materials. General computer competencies like file management should also be included in a discussion of technical competencies because it is possible to keep a record of each student’s contributions to class discussion through e-mails, bulletin board or chat rooms messages. Some web-base course authoring systems allow tracking of each student’s progress and activities. Good file management makes it possible for the instructor to intervene in a timely way if, for instance, a student is not participating or is having trouble with part of the unit. Regardless of the means, instructors need to devise a method of organizing and responding to messages without spending all of their time engaged in and tracking the communications within the course. Technical competency for instructors is more than knowing how to run software; it also includes a willingness to be innovative in using different technologies and combinations of technologies (Alley, 1996; Meyen et al., 1997).

Time
Embarking on web-based course design and delivery requires time. Instructors need time to gain the competencies required to teach web-based courses, knowledge that comes from using the technology involved and working through a formative evaluation process during the pilot offerings of web-based courses. Formative evaluation includes the instructor’s willingness to "move ahead on one’s own initiative while learning from one’s own experience" (Meyen et al. 1997). Time is also required to integrate different teaching and learning styles, particularly collaborative, learner centered learning styles that are proposed by several authors as the styles that make the best use of web-based instructional technology. (Alley, 1996; Meyen et al., 1997; Brown, 1998). Experienced web-based course developers recommend starting with a course in which the content is known and has been taught previously (Duin, 1998). Revision of course content as well as the course format augments the development time considerably. Although revision of course content may be identified as needed during the process of converting a course to web-based format, revising the content is easier to do in a separate process from reformatting the delivery of the course.

Relationships with students
Interaction with students in a web-based course context is an important element which can demand more time and attention from an instructor than in a face-to-face classroom. Interaction with students usually takes more of the instructor’s time in web-based courses; Brown (1998) estimates about 40% to 50% more interaction time than in face-to-face classrooms. (p. 2). If a web-based course design includes communication through bulletin boards or listservs and scheduled real-time conferencing, the instructor may be inundated with messages. In web-based courses, students "demand more feedback; and the more feedback they receive, the more interaction they want" (Brown, 1998). The boundaries of when interactions can occur are not centered around class time, nor is the student inhibited by the dynamics of the classroom from contributing to a discussion or asking a question. Student expectations of the instructor can be high, especially if the instructor has publicly committed to a maximum response time, such as within a 24 hour period. Students who are comfortable with communicating online can develop a "type of intimacy" in their communications with instructors which rarely manifests in face-to-face classrooms. (Brown, 1998, p. 3).

Student expectations of the instructor’s role in facilitating communication can vary according to the mode of communication. In their case study, Powers & Mitchell (1997) found a distinct difference between the instructor’s role in asynchronous communication and synchronous communication. In the asynchronous bulletin board discussion, of the approximately 400 email messages that were not "directly related to course assignments, the instructor generated less than one quarter of [the] messages" (p. 16). During the scheduled chat sessions, in which communication more closely resembles a face-to-face discussion, students expected the instructor to take control of the discussion. Although this finding is from only one study, it speaks to students’ expectations of their instructor, to guide and focus the class discussion when it occurs in a ‘real-time’ mode.

Communication in web-based distance education is primarily text-based without the modifying influence of non-verbal cues found in a face-to-face classroom. Instructors need to be able to write facilitate good communication by writing clear, focused messages, asking regularly for feedback to acknowledge the message was understood and to use a high level of redundant messages (Meyen et al., 1997). Instructors can use the asynchronous nature of emails and bulletin boards to help students with difficult concepts, a benefit of not limiting instructor-student interaction to class time. (Schwartz, 1998). However, miscommunications are slower to be resolved in asynchronous interactions than in synchronous and face-to-face contexts. Instructors also need to make their expectations regarding communication explicit to reduce students’ confusion about their role in the course. (Brown, 1998)

Instructor Support
Instructor support includes instructional design support, technical support and institutional support. The boundaries between these different kinds of support overlap and ultimately fall under the category of institutional support. Without a firm commitment to web-based distance education, initiatives by instructors to develop web-based courses are less likely to be successful than initiatives supported fully by the institution. The infrastructure, the technical resources, instructor training and funding for web-based distance education is an institutional support base needed to develop any new program.

Instructional design support
Instructors designing web-based courses require support. Support can vary from available technical support, accessible when needed, to a collaborative design approach in which instructional, administrative and technical staff work together to design courses. Although this kind of collaboration in course design happens in face-to-face and print-based distance courses, it is more likely to be needed in web-based courses, particularly ones with multimedia elements or combinations of communications technologies. Given the relative newness of web-based course delivery, few instructors are experienced users of web-based instructional technologies. Gibson and Herrera recommend treating course developers as a team with frequent meetings to "share ideas and help each other stay focused." (1999). Training in the use of specific technologies is part of instructional support; however, effective use of instructional technologies, is more likely to be facilitated by an ongoing relationship between instructors and staff with technical expertise.

Technical support
Technical support can include both training and ongoing resources to support instructors using technology in their teaching. Training will be discussed under institutional support. Many authors talk about the importance of technical staff in the development of web-based courses and some go further to mention the need for ongoing support of web-based course instruction (Baird & Monson, 1992; Ganzert & Watkins, 1997; Rossner & Stockley, 1997; Brand, 1998). Brand (1998) suggests the need for staff with both technical and pedagogical or curricular expertise to support instructors in the use of instructional technologies. Implementing computer technology within an institution involves collaboration across program or departmental units. Due to the cost of technology, strategic planning and collaboration are required to implement it so it is used for the benefit of as many instructors and students as possible to justify the large investment of resources. Staff with technical and educational expertise are in a unique position to recommend appropriate uses of technology to administrators and instructors. This kind of support requires ongoing collaboration and negotiation with people from very different perspectives regarding the appropriate use of technology in education. The process of choosing and using instructional technology is a long, difficult process when done in a collaborative way. The long term benefits of thoughtful implementation of technology into education are, however, worth the effort.

Institutional support
Ways in which institutions can support the technological development of instructors is to allow flexible scheduling so instructors can acquire and develop technical skills as well as encouraging the sharing of course development and experiences with instructional technology (Brand, 1998). Acquiring the competencies to teach web-based courses requires time for training and for the integration of training into teaching practice. (Brand, 1998). Release time for course development is a customary practice at many institutions; what is more rare is sufficient time for ongoing practice of technical knowledge and integration of the use of technology into good teaching practices. "One-shot" training sessions have little impact on instructional practice. (Brand, 1998).

In both instructor training and ongoing refinement and application of skills, instructors need to be provided with incentives in terms of remuneration and recognition in order to take the adoption of new technological delivery methods and teaching methodologies seriously. (Brand, 1998). Without sustained staff development focused on using technology to support educational objectives, instructors are unlikely to integrate technology into their instructional practice or will integrate it in as painless a way as possible which is unlikely to make use of its potential benefits.

References

Alley, L. R. (1996). Technology precipitates reflective teaching: An instructional epiphany. Change, 28(2), 49-55.

Brand, G. A. (1998). What research says: Training teachers for using technology. Journal of Staff Development [Online], Win., 41 paragraphs. Available: http://www.nsdc.org/library/jsd/jsdw/98brand.html [1999, March 10].

Brown, B. M. (1998). Digital classrooms: Some myths about developing new educational programs using the internet. T.H.E. Journal [Online]. Dec, 1-5. Available: http://www.thejournal.com/magazine/98/dec/feat04.html [1999, March 17].

Cyrs, T. E. (1997). Competence in teaching at a distance. New Directions for Teaching & Learning, 71, 15-18.

Deal, N. (1998). Getting teachers caught in the web. T.H.E. Journal [Online] Aug., 36 paragraphs. Available: http://www.thejournal.com/magazine/98/aug/feature1.html [1999, March 11].

Duin, A. H. (1998). The culture of distance education: Implementing an online graduate level course in audience analysis. Technical Communication Quarterly, 7(4), 365-389. (From [Academic Search FullTEXT]: Ebsco Publishing. Available: http://gw3.epnet.com/ehost.asp?key=jZgWMQE&site=ehost [1999, March 17].

Gibson, J. W. & Herrera, J. M. (1999). How to go from classroom based to online delivery in eighteen months or less: A case study in online program development. T.H.E. Journal [Online] Jan., 23 paragraphs. Available: http://www.thejournal.com/magazine/current/feat01.html [1999, March 14].

Meyen, E. L., Lian, C. H., & Tange, P. (1997). Teaching online courses. Focus on autism and other development disabilities, 12(3), 166-174. (From [Academic Search FullTEXT]: Ebsco Publishing. Available: http://gw3.epnet.com/ehost.asp?key=jZgWMQE&site=ehost [1999, February 24].

Parker, A. (1997). A distance education how-to manual: Recommendations from the field. Educational Technology Review, 8, 7-10.

Powers, S. & Mitchell, J. (1997). Student perceptions and performance in a virtual classroom environment. Chicago, IL: American Educational Research Association. (Eric Document Reproduction Service No. ED 409 005).

Tolsma, R. S. (1997). Managing information resources and services in a distance environment. New directions for teaching and learning, Fall, 111-117.