Distance-learning: first CAS3 class outcomes

Military Review, Sept-Oct, 2003 by Walter R. Schumm, David E. Turek

Future projections-format for CGSC. Most students (54 percent) said they expected to take the Inactive Duty Training/Annual Training method of CGSC instruction, 19 percent preferred distance learning (if available), 18 percent preferred the correspondence approach, and 8 percent planned on taking the residence course. Notably, 78 percent of CAS3 DL students planned on taking CGSC by distance learning, if possible, compared with 14 percent 0f 8 2 students and 25 percent of 2 2 students (p<0.001).

Component and gender differences in CGSC plans. Surprisingly, USAR and ARNG students did not differ much in their plans for taking CGSC, although Active Guard and Reserve and AC students were much more likely to plan on taking CGSC in residence. There were no differences in timing of CGSC as a function of component or gender. Gender was not significantly related statistically to the preferred approach, but it is interesting that 35 percent of female students preferred the DL approach compared with 17 percent of male students. Twenty-one percent of male students (compared to 6 percent of female students) preferred the correspondence option.

Implications

On the negative side, DL classes were rated in a mixed way compared to other classes. Sixty-four percent of DL students cited pros and cons that balanced out to about the same as other learning approaches. However, on specific course gains, the differences between DL and traditional methods were much reduced, although significantly different for two of three variables. Even so, the best DL class was rated better (100 percent to 94 percent) than the average traditional class for improving staff-officer abilities. This indicates that distance learning beats the traditional method when the instructor is proficient.

Within the best DL class, 100 percent of the students said they would take DL again for CAS3, and 78 percent said they would take CGSC by DL if possible. Distance learning saved students significant amounts of travel time and reduced family complaints about the students being away from home, although complaints were slightly higher about the students being home physically but absent emotionally.

Overall, because of increased class time, the first DL classes failed to save students time. With improved software and perhaps hardware and better student training in computer networking, class time will be reduced, and eventually a timesaving will be realized for CAS3 in the DL mode.

CAS3 by distance learning allowed students more flexibility in completing requirements. For example, some students logged into their classes while on business trips to Norway and France, which would have been impossible without the DL method.

The most serious concern about the DL approach has nothing to do with its feasibility or success, both of which were demonstrated by the data. Compensation is a serious issue for DL students, even more so than for traditional CAS3 students. Over half of the RC DL students were not paid for CAS3 participation, compared to less than 20 percent of traditional students. The RC administrative headquarters needs to catch up in respect to compensating DL students adequately.