- "Some doubts" about distance education (depersonalisation; less cultivation of virtue; loss of the educator's moral example; informational vs transformational aspects of education, the latter not possible by DE; dispensing of community between learners; the importance of embodiment) gets things started.
- "At the threshold of a new missionary frontier" suggests that distance education helps to facilitate the Great Commission, the taking of the gospel to the ends of the earth. A parallel is drawn with intermediaries in sacraments; the Bible and texts as vehicles of education; adult learners with specific access needs are profiled; education is described in terms of information transmittal; distance education overcomes temporal and spacial separation.
- "Doubts about DE that won't go away" is a response to the above, questioning the relevance of the sacramental parallel, challenging the relative value of texts compared with encountering the authors of those texts, and the weaknesses of the information transmittal model suggested by the previous author.
- "How might we improve our education for both reisdents and DE students?" tries to find some middle ground; couldn't networks be set up for DE students so that they might be mentored, too?
- "DE: a gift to the Church: A current student's perspective" provides the candid voice of a learner. Without DE, this clear-thinking and carefully evaluating individual would not have been able to study at all. In fact, even a residential requirement would have disqualified them. The student points out that "force of character" can be conveyed through intermediate technologies. The (virtual) helpfulness of academic faculty is attested to, as are the benefits of asynchronous study. The student hints that PG students may not require the same level of on-campus formation than do undergraduates.
- "Distance technology alone cannot provide a proper university education" (bad news for me personally in more ways than one should this be true!) is an interesting little piece highlighting again the role of oral tradition. A worthy distinction between the Great Commission's evangelising and education's catechising is drawn, and mention is made of the value of on-campus culture. Further, intermediated forms of communication are said to lack "full expression and enthusiasm". The author suggests that technologies be used, but not that they replace traditional education. Finally, a separate qualification for DE students(!) is suggested.
- "Oral traditions and distance education" picks up on the importance of the spoken word and the teacher's presence, drawing on the work of Cardinal Newman's "The idea of a University" (full text). Reference is also made to the 'genius loci' (the "spirit of the place"), that is, the on-campus culture. While the student cited earlier seems somewhat gruffly dismissed, the article ends with a suggestion that faculty could go to the people.
- "DE: Is it good enough?" takes the position that DE may not be optimal, but it may be enough for the awarding of a degree. A nice quote here: "if DE is about anything, it is about extending the teaching of the teacher beyond the walls of the traditional classroom." It continues: "The crux of the issue is whether the teacher need be personally present to the student to teach him [sic] well." A helpful ditinction is also made between reading and being taught. It is also maintained that DE studies are, indeed, worthy of academic award. Suprisingly though the author suggests a different award for DE students: A degree in theological studies rather than a degree in theology! Finally, DE is held up as a worthy alternative to 'bad education', and an interesting analogy is applied; if someone who is thirsty can't get to the well, do we refuse to bottle the water for them? "A great chasm exists between the uneducated and the distance educated." Nice.
- Finally, a piece entitled "What is our mission really?" addresses a fundamental issue raised in the very first article. It is the Church's responsibilty to evangelise; the role of the education institution is to "see to the higher education of the students" entrusted to them. A wonderful insight to finish with!
At least three of the faculty involved in the exchange from the FU are still there. It is somewhat ironic I think that the prominent advocate of DE is a theologian, the detractor a philosopher! This is a very clearly and passionately argued exchange; it is curious to think that some of the faculty might rejoice in that I have learned from their exchange whereas others might have insisted that I would have learned more had they been debating face to face with me in the room. I am content to let both be absolutely right.
