Article

Analysis of Higher Education Policy Frameworks for Open and Distance Education in Pakistan

Evaluation Review 2015, Vol. 39(2) 255-277 ª The Author(s) 2015 Reprints and permission: sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav DOI: 10.1177/0193841X15570046 erx.sagepub.com

Abida Ellahi1 and Bilal Zaka2

Abstract Background The constant rise in demand for higher education has become the biggest challenge for educational planners. This high demand has paved a way for distance education across the globe. Objectives This article innovatively analyzes the policy documentation of a major distance education initiative in Pakistan for validity that will identify the utility of policy linkages. Research Design The study adopted a qualitative research design that consisted of two steps. In the first step, a content analysis of distance learning policy framework was made. For this purpose, two documents were accessed titled ‘‘Framework for Launching Distance Learning Programs in HEIs of Pakistan’’ and ‘‘Guideline on Quality of Distance Education for External Students at the HEIs of Pakistan.’’ In the second step, the policy guidelines mentioned in these two documents were evaluated at two levels. At the first level, the overall policy documents were assessed against a criterion proposed by Cheung, Mirzaei, and Leeder. At the second level, 1 2

Faculty of Management Sciences, International Islamic University, Islamabad, Pakistan Virtual COMSATS IT Centre, Islamabad

Corresponding Author: Abida Ellahi, Faculty of Management Sciences, International Islamic University, Islamabad 44000, Pakistan. Email: [email protected]

256

Evaluation Review 39(2)

the proposed program of distance learning was assessed against a criterion set by Gellman-Danley and Fetzner and Berge. Conclusion The distance education program initiative in Pakistan is of promising nature which needs to be assessed regularly. This study has made an initial attempt to assess the policy document against a criterion identified from literature. The analysis shows that the current policy documents do offer some strengths at this initial level, however, they cannot be considered a comprehensive policy guide. The inclusion or correction of missing or vague areas identified in this study would make this policy guideline document a treasured tool for Higher Education Commission (HEC). For distance education policy makers, this distance education policy framework model recognizes several fundamental areas with which they should be concerned. The findings of this study in the light of two different policy framework measures highlight certain opportunities that can help strengthening the distance education policies. The criteria and findings are useful for the reviewers of policy proposals to identify the gaps where policy documents can be improved to bring the desired outcomes. Keywords distance education in Pakistan, policy evaluation, evaluation framework

Introduction The constant rise in demand for higher education has become the biggest challenge for educational planners. This high demand has paved a way for distance education across the globe. The traditional distance learning programs without information and communication technology (ICT) tools had been practicing for many years. However, the advent of ICT has now changed the shape of traditional mail-based distance learning programs. Despite a rapid growth of technology and increase in literacy rate across the globe, developing countries still face many impediments in the education and technology field. Of these developing countries, in Pakistan, despite the radical education reforms, higher education statistics are still not pleasing. According to HEC (2013), ‘‘The coverage of higher education in Pakistan is extremely low (5%) as compared to other countries, which has brought a huge gap between the number of students who have passed higher secondary school and the number of students who get enrolled in universities and by 2015 this gap is expected to grow to over 1 million students’’ (Figure 1).

Ellahi and Zaka

257

Figure 1. Gap between high school passed and university enrolled students.

Sathar, Lloyd, Mete, and ul Haque (2003) while examining reasons of Pakistan’s educational dropout rates found that ‘‘could not pay fees, lack of interest/aptitude, family responsibilities, parents/family disapproval, and School/institutions too far and poor performance/expelled,’’ the most common or frequently occurred reasons. Hence, there is a necessity for such educational programs that could overcome these problematic issues, as the intolerable social inequalities have been preventing the country move toward a more knowledge-intensive and internationalized societies. In Pakistan, traditional distance education is generally considered less prestigious than conventional face-to-face education due to quality and lack of facilitations. By considering all these issues, HEC of Pakistan has taken an initiative to expand technology-equipped distance learning program. As part of this, Directorate of Distance Education at six selected Universities of Pakistan has been established to promote quality higher education facilities through distance means. The purpose of this study is to analyze the policy documentation of a major distance education initiative for validity that will identify the utility of policy linkages. As a ‘‘clear policy frameworks may significantly hinder or enhance the development and transformative contribution of distance learning e.g policies about what hardware and software are provided to students/institutions can have a major impact on learning and pedagogical practice’’ (James, Tynan, Baijnath, & Teixeira, 2013), hence, it is necessary to evaluate policy documents of regulatory bodies to understand its shortcomings and strengths which may affect society in the long term.

258

Evaluation Review 39(2)

Global Trends in Distance Education Towhidi (2010) mentioned the definition of distance education proposed by Association for Educational Communications and Technology (AECT), which is ‘‘institution-based, formal education where the learning group is separated, and where interactive telecommunications systems are used to connect learners, resources, and instructors.’’ According to her, this definition covers four aspects, ‘‘First, distance education is institutionally based which means it is different from self-study; the second concept is the separation of the teacher and student; the third concept is synchronous or asynchronous interactive telecommunications which imply interactivity through electronic media (television, telephone, and the Internet) and is not limited to only electronic media; the forth concept is connecting learners, resources, and instructors that interact and while resources are available, they in turn help the learning process to occur.’’ According to Hanover Research report (2011), there are seven key players in the global higher education distance learning market that enroll anywhere from 100,000 to over 500,000 students. These players include Open University of United Kingdom, University of Derby, University of Maryland—University College, Drexel University Online, Universitas Terbuka (Indonesia Open University), Indira Gandhi National Open University (IGNOU), and University of South Africa (UNISA). The report summarizes global trends in distance education as ‘‘Africa and India are two of the growing markets for distance education globally, as these represent nations with high demand for higher education but insufficient existing infrastructure, active military personnel and working professionals are two prime target populations for U.S. distance education institutions and Undergraduate level programs are more commonly offered in distance learning formats in the United States, while graduate level programs are more common in the UK.’’ A report by Belawati and Baggaley (2009) on distance education in South Asia informs that the need for distance education in South Asia has increased, which is being tackled by the collaborative efforts of many agencies and public and private education sector. The notable institutes that are making efforts to resolve educational and literacy problems by means of distance education programs are as follows:   

Bhutans Samtse College of Education (SCE), India’s 15 open universities, Pakistan’s Allama Iqbal Open University (AIOU) and the Virtual University of Pakistan (VUP), and

Ellahi and Zaka



259

Sri Lanka’s Open University of Sri Lanka (OUSL), and the University of Colombo School of Computing (UCSC).

Due to ICT-enhanced higher education (open and distance learning, virtual universities, e-learning, and open educational resources), the world has been resonated with the internationalization of higher education concept. Around the world, the growth of massive online open course (MOOC) can be considered as an inundation that is expected to alter the landscape of higher education. According to Boven (2013), students enrolled in MOOC experience the locus of control and education freedom and this ‘‘MOOC phenomenon is certainly something that warrants attention both from the open learning community and from the existing educational establishment.’’ These movements have attracted a large number of audiences across the world including developing countries. Both developed and developing countries are now struggling to propose such distance education initiatives that not only provide better opportunities for their citizens but also facilitate the cross-border provision. The growth of borderless learning has compelled higher education policy in developing countries, especially in Pakistan to gain potential for high ranking and as a key to their transition to a developed country’s status.

Distance Learning in Pakistan In Pakistan, the first mega project of distance learning was started with the establishment of Allama Iqbal Open University (AIOU) in 1974. As demand for information technology in Universities increased, the Government of Pakistan took a step toward introducing ICT in education sector in order to fulfill the dream of ‘‘education for all.’’ According to Khan (2007), p. 14, this need for technology in education was felt due to the following reasons:    

‘‘Severe shortage of high quality faculty from school to university level High cost of education especially by conventional means Most of the higher education institutes are located in the urban area Social factors that don’t allow certain people to go other cities.’’

To overcome these limitations, in 2001, a Virtual University and National ICT R&D Fund was established with the aim ‘‘education for all’’ and lifelong learning. A hybrid model of knowledge delivery platform has been used by the university to provide quality distance education through electronic means. According to Mujahid (2002) ‘‘in a short-time and limited

260

Evaluation Review 39(2)

Table 1. Enrollment at Universities and Constituent Colleges Classified by Sector. Year 2001–02 2002–03 2003–04 2004–05 2005–06 2006–07 2007–08 2008–09

(p) (p) (p) (p)

Distance Learning

Public

Private

Total

89,749 108,709 159,257 187,559 199,660 272,272 305,962 339,704

142,652 167,775 202,871 204,708 242,879 276,226 331,664 348,434

43,873 55,261 61,108 65,375 78,934 91,563 103,466 115,369

276,274 331,745 423,236 457,642 521,473 640,061 741,092 803,507

Source. Higher Education Commission (HEC).

Figure 2. Enrollment at universities and constituent colleges classified by sector. Source. Higher Education Commission (HEC).

availability of resources’’ ICT in Pakistan has brought numerous changes in private and public sectors. In 2002, establishment of the Higher Education Commission (HEC) led to the establishment of a number of universities in Pakistan. According to Statistical Information Unit of HEC (2012), enrollment of students at Universities (main campuses, sub-campuses, and constituent colleges) has been increasing over the years. This increasing trend of students’ enrollment at universities since 2001–02 is given in the following Table 1 and Figure 2.

Ellahi and Zaka

261

The statistics in Figure 2 and Table 1 depict a clear picture of distance education demand which can also be attributed to the growth of technology in Pakistan. To further design and implement policies for the promotion, improvement, and evaluation of higher education in Pakistan, HEC initiated and sponsored several projects such as e-learning projects, digital library program, Pakistan Education & Research Network (PERN), Pakistan Research Repository (PRR) and campus management system, etc. One of the very recent projects is the establishment of directorate of distance education in more than six public sector universities. In 2011, it was decided by the HEC to introduce the system of distance learning in public sector universities with an emphasis on setting up of special directorate in six universities as a pilot project. As the project is in its embryonic or introduction stage, fully developed policy documents are not available for the program. So far, only two documents are available for open access, which are ‘‘Framework for Launching Distance Learning Programs in HEIs of Pakistan’’ and ‘‘Guideline on Quality of Distance Education for External Students at the HEI’s Of Pakistan’’ and these have been used for this study.

Distance Learning Policy Issues A review of literature identifies the lack of such studies that have explicitly evaluated the policy framework of distance education especially in the developing countries. Most of the studies have evaluated the effectiveness of distance education programs from students’ perspectives. In the light of transactional distance theory, Gokool-Ramdoo (2009) discussed policy deficit in distance education. He argued that policy deficit in distance education results in transactional distance. At an individual level, a national and institutional policy deficit meant lack of options and awareness among students; while at an institutional level, it poorly affects broader professional opportunities as well as an effective deployment of resources like capacity building, career planning, quality teaching, management, administration, and the development of reward and recognition programs. Prinsloo and Sharon (2013) by conducting a directed content analysis of the policy frameworks of two large distance education institutions found that current policy frameworks of open and distance education do not provide a supporting environment for learning analytics to fulfill its promise. Gulati (2008) argued that although open and distance learning developments in developing countries aim for equitable and extended educational opportunities for disadvantaged and poor populations, these are hindered by several factors including inappropriate policy and funding decisions. Salmi (2013)

262

Evaluation Review 39(2)

identified that ‘‘tertiary education reform is most feasible within a supportive policy environment in which all participants are in fundamental agreement on the scope, pace, and direction of reform.’’

Methodology The study adopted a qualitative research design which consisted of two steps. In the first step, a content analysis of distance learning policy framework was made. For this purpose, two documents were accessed titled ‘‘Framework for Launching Distance Learning Programs in HEI’s of Pakistan’’ and ‘‘Guideline on Quality of Distance Education for External Students at the HEI’s of Pakistan.’’ In the second step, the policies guidelines mentioned in these two documents were evaluated against a certain set of considerations described below. This evaluation was done at two levels, that is, at general and specific level. At the general level, the overall policy documents were assessed against a criteria proposed by Cheung, Mirzaei, and Leeder (2010). At the specific level, the proposed program of distance learning was assessed against a criteria set by Gellman-Danley and Fetzner (1998) and Berge (1998). For reference, the document ‘‘Framework for Launching Distance Learning Programs in HEIs of Pakistan’’ was coded as D1, while the document ‘‘Guideline on Quality of Distance Education for External Students at the HEI’s of Pakistan’’ was coded as D2. The documents were selected because they are the major policy documents for dealing with distance education program in Pakistan. Cheung et al. (2010) in their study offered a compressive framework to assess policy documents and the utility of document maps to identify policy linkages. In their study, they used this framework for a major health policy; however, the framework proposed by them can be used for evaluation of any policy documentation regardless of the policy area. According to them, this criterion can be used by reviewers of policy proposals to find where policy documents can be improved to increase the chance of their successful implementation. Hence, at the generic level, their criterion has been used to evaluate policy document of distance education in Pakistan, as the predefined set of criteria mentioned in this framework provide an ‘‘easily understood and persuasive connection between policy determinants and policy outcome.’’ Second, to assess the face validity of this framework, two experts were consulted. They confirmed that the criteria sets mentioned in the framework proposed by Cheung et al. (2010), that is, ‘‘accessibility, policy background, goals, resources, monitoring and evaluation, public

Ellahi and Zaka

263

Table 2. Evaluation Criteria for Policy Documents. Evaluation Criteria of Main Policy Document Accessibility 1 Policy background

2 Goals

3 Resources

4 Monitoring and evaluation

5 Public opportunities

6 Obligations

The policy document is accessible (hard copy and online) The source of policy is explicit 1. Authority (persons, books, articles, or other sources of information) 2. Quantitative or qualitative analysis 3. Deduction (premises that have been established from authority) The policy encompasses some set of feasible alternatives The goals/objectives are explicitly stated The goals are concrete enough to be evaluated later The goals are clear in intent and in the mechanism with which to achieve the desired goals, yet does not attempt to prescribe what the change must be The action centers on improving the literacy level of society The outcomes of the goals are clearly stated Financial resources are addressed (e.g., estimated financial resources and their cost) Human resources are addressed Organizational capacity is addressed The policy indicated monitoring and evaluation mechanism The policy nominated a committee or independent body to perform the evaluation The outcomes measures are identified for each objective/goals The data collected for evaluation collected before, during, and after the introduction of the new policy Follow-up takes place after a sufficient period to allow the effects of policy change to become evident Criteria for evaluation are adequate or clear The population supports the actions Multiple stakeholders are involved Primary concern of stakeholders and acknowledged to obtain long-term support The obligations of various implementations are specified—who has to do what The action is part of educational institutions’ existing duties

264

Evaluation Review 39(2)

opportunities, and obligations’’ are appropriate for any type of policy document and are not context specific (see Table 2).

Accessibility According to the first criterion ‘‘accessibility’’ as shown in Table 2, these documents are available on the website of HEC. At the moment, it is unclear how accessible (hard copy) the documents will be for all stakeholders, including researchers, practitioners, and general public.

Policy Background Although the policy documents do contain background information about why distance learning is required and the global perspective of distance education is also mentioned, however, some background information missed important references, for example, in D1 it is stated ‘‘The coverage of higher education in Pakistan is extremely low (5%) as compared to other countries’’ and ‘‘Approximately 90% of world’s top universities have an online courseware presence and offer distance learning in some form’’ missed important sources of information within the running text. However, a considerable amount of statistics and sources of information have been mentioned, for example, HEC Pakistan, American Council on Education, American Association for Higher Education, and The Western Interstate Commission for Higher Education and Commonwealth of Learning, and so on.

Goals In D2 policy guideline document, the program objectives are clearly stated. For example:      

to replace current scheme of appearing as private candidate with distance learners, to facilitate private candidates at graduate and master’s level, who cannot afford the facility of getting education as regular students, to narrow down the quality gap between private and regular students, to increase the success ratio of private students in the examinations and to ultimately improve the opportunities of employment for them, To build up capacity of large public sector universities to deliver quality education to private students through distance means, to build up capacity of universities to deliver material for private students, and

Ellahi and Zaka



265

to streamline administrative procedures for provision of quality education to private students.

However, in D1 document, it has been stated that ‘‘The main objective is to streamline the Private Candidate system and bring the students to more formal setup.’’ In this document, the goals are not mentioned under clear or separate heading or section. Although the objectives/goals have been clearly stated, the quantitative evaluation of these goals is difficult to make, for example, (in D2 document) ‘‘to narrow down the quality gap between private and regular students and to build up capacity of large Public sector Universities to deliver quality education to private students through distance means’’ does not provide a quantified narrowing down of ‘‘gap’’ as well as the capacity of large public sector universities. Hence, some of these stated goals are more generic rather than specific.

Resources In terms of financial resources (e.g., estimated financial resources and their cost) document, D2 does provide a hint by stating that ‘‘The DDE (Directorate of Distance Education) has sustainable financing for continuous provision of quality distance education programs.’’ On the contrary, in D1 no such hint could be found. Hence, overall the estimated cost or requirement of financial resources have not been allocated or stated. In terms of human resources, D1 states, ‘‘HEI must ensure availability of full-time teaching staff throughout the duration of courses to handle online teaching session with students and also to facilitate all academic issues and questions.’’ In D2, although faculty development and personnel training has been mentioned, still the total number or capacity of teaching staff is not given. Hence, it is not clear that for distance learning program which qualification of teachers would be required or mandatory; second, how many courses should be assigned to each individual instructor, so that an estimate of total staff can be made. Along with it, it is not clear whether new staff would be hired or the existing staff in the universities would be offered distance learning courses. In terms of organizational capacity, D1 document states a clear requirement of infrastructure, for example, ‘‘DL unit must have dedicated offices to efficiently host academic, administrative, technical, and support staff. The facility must be easily accessible and must have all the modern communication channels available for interaction with remote learners. Adequate arrangements for power back and online availability must be ensured. DL

266

Evaluation Review 39(2)

unit must provide details of self-maintained/rented servers to host learning contents, available communication servers, for example, Web, email, video conferencing, digital and physical library resources. Other hardware and IT support equipment and services acquired to assist e-learning and communication processes, for example, corporate SMS, TV, and radio presence, and so on. Details of Internet connectivity, regional and global online presence details (must be connected with PERN2 with a dedicated bandwidth of minimum 50 Mbps).’’ It also states that ‘‘A very robust and state-ofthe-art LMS (Learning Management System) is a must requirement for running and managing distance learning programs.’’ However, it does not state whether the LMS would be an in-house developed software or it would be purchased from vendors. HEC has already purchased campus management solution software from PeopleSoft. In the document, it should be specified. Along with it, the cost of acquisition of the software is not stated. In D2 document, the infrastructure resources in terms of organizational capacity are stated, ‘‘It has sufficient infrastructures like physical and digital library latest technology resources, expertise and equipment related to programs of distance education that it is going to offer.’’ So the overall, infrastructure or organizational capacity resources have been dealt well, however, financial and human resources are not clearly specified.

Monitoring and Evaluation The outcomes measures are not identified for each objective or goals. However, the policy indicated monitoring and evaluation mechanism by nominating quality enhancement cell at the universities to perform the evaluation. It is stated in D1, ‘‘It is necessary to impart that Quality Assurance is not a one-time action or set of one time gestures but is the function of constant self-assessment and corrective actions.’’ There seems no indication of data collection before and during the policy implementation. However, the quality assurance has been identified to be done at three levels, that is, institutional, student, and faculty level.

Public Opportunities The importance of stakeholder involvement is acknowledged in D2 by stating, ‘‘The mission statement is known to all stakeholders. . . . The end products (students) meet the requirements of the stakeholders.’’ However, it is not clear in any of the document as to who are the real stakeholders of this

Ellahi and Zaka

267

Table 3. Summary of Policy Documents Analysis. Criteria 1 2 3 4 5

Accessibility Policy background Goals Resources Monitoring and evaluation 6 Public opportunities 7 Obligations

Fulfilled p

Better But Needs Improvement

Not Fulfilled

p p p p p p

policy or program. It should be clear as to who are the possible stakeholders and how would their interests be affected by this program.

Obligations Obligations in terms of hierarchy has not been identified, hence, it is not clear who has to do what. Although in D2 document, it is mentioned that ‘‘Supplementary benefits are being provided to faculty members for their extensive effort in making distance education program successful. . . . Competent and experienced senior faculty members and evaluators are recruited to evaluate performance of distance education instructors,’’ still, the documents lack a coherent framework of obligations of participants. Table 3 shows the summary of analysis and the identified gaps.

Discussion The content analysis of policy documents for distance education program shows that some of the criteria set for a policy document were met. However, there are some areas that still need improvements. The monitoring and evaluation criteria mentioned in these documents are well mentioned. The areas that need improvements are resources, obligations, public opportunities, goals, and policy background. Although some of them are in better format, there are some specific missing attributes. The criteria used in the previous literature can be used as a checklist for a comprehensive policy setting, as robust policy making enhances the success of policy implementation. The policy document is easily accessible from the HEC website, however, specific, measurable, attainable, realistic, and timely goals or objectives are necessary to constitute a robust policy. Hence,

268

Evaluation Review 39(2)

a right level of detail is required that can be quantified when it comes to the evaluation part. For this purpose, HEC must set clear and measurable targets, for example, how many, by when, and so on. Along with it, a clear mission and vision statement must be developed. The resources in terms of financial, human, and infrastructure must all be included. In these policy documents, infrastructure resources have been well defined. However, financial resources’ detail is negligible and human resources’ detail is not adequate. Of the three constraints of any project management (i.e., time, cost, and quality), cost is one of the important aspects, hence, its details must be included for guiding policy making. Monitoring and evaluation are addressed in the policy documentation, however, a further detail would further strengthen the guidance of resource allocation. The document does not clearly identify any public opportunity or stakeholders. The inclusion of social aspects is a prerequisite for a good policy because every policy brings social changes especially in minds and behaviors of general public. A pilot study conducted by James et al. (2011) on regulatory frameworks for distance education in Asian region identified stakeholders in a distance education which are ‘‘Government and their agencies, state owned, and private distance institutions (correspondence schools and their modern counterparts); open Universities; dual mode and conventional universities and colleges; researchers, academics, teachers, students and the general public; educational broadcasters, video production centres etc; satellite Transmission and programming services, community-based institutions and organizations; professional organizations; human resource development and training departments in businesses/industries; software industries, (publishers, computer, and multimedia software companies); network operators and providers of network services; national consortia and networks of institutions; and International consortia and programmes.’’ The HEC for completing the distance education policy must identify the potential stakeholders of this program. For example, it may discuss the impact on women’s education, which is restrained by cultural taboos in the country. Similarly, a clear identification of obligations along with rewards and sanctions would reduce any futile action while implementing the policy.

Evaluation of Individual Area of Distance Learning Program Policy Berge (1998) and Gellman-Danley and Fetzner (1998) proposed frameworks for distance education policy that have been reported to provide a useful framework for an investigation of distance education policy. In this study, this framework has been used in order to evaluate the individual

Ellahi and Zaka

269

Table 4. Evaluation of Individual Area of Distance Learning Program Policy. Policy Area 1 Academic

2 Governance/ administration 3 Fiscal 4 Faculty

5 Legal 6 Student support services 7 Technical

Cultural

Key Issues Addressed Calendar, course integrity, transferability, transcripts, student/course evaluation, admission standards, curriculum/course approval, accreditation, class cancellations, course/program/degree availability, recruiting/marketing Tuition rate, technology fee, administration cost, state fiscal regulations, tuition disbursement, space, single versus multiple board oversight, staffing Compensation and workload, development incentives, faculty training, congruence with existing union contracts, class monitoring, faculty support, faculty evaluation Intellectual property, faculty, student and institutional liability Advisement, counseling, library access, materials delivery, student training, test proctoring, videotaping, computer accounts, registration, financial aid, labs Systems reliability, connectivity/access, hardware/software, setup concerns, infrastructure, technical support (staffing), scheduling, costs Adoption of innovations, acceptance of online/distance teaching, understanding of distance education (what works at a distance), organizational values

policy areas of this distance learning policy document. The policy area and their key issues are given in Table 4. Academic. In the policy documents, academic issue of distance learning programs has been well mentioned, for example, ‘‘Complete information regarding minimum entry criteria . . . the required prior knowledge and skills for pursuing the course . . . Phases of Admission Criteria . . . financial support system,’’ and so on. However, the HEC leaves it up to each university to adopt annual or semester system for distance education program by stating, ‘‘It is up to the university to adopt annual or semester system and conduct exams of distance students accordingly.’’ This flexibility would not allow a uniform distance education program, thus it would make it complex to achieve and measure the objective of ‘‘To narrow down the quality gap between private and regular students’’ as annual system and semester

270

Evaluation Review 39(2)

system of examination both produce different success results. Hence, HEC must devise a uniform policy for education system in order to make this program an accomplishment at the national level. Governance/administration/fiscal. There is no specific information about the minimum or maximum tuition fee. One of the reasons for implementing this distance learning program is the inability to pay tuition fee, hence, the maximum limit of tuition fee for each level of subject should be mentioned to ensure the maximum intake of students from low-income strata to overcome the gap. For this purpose, cost estimation is a prerequisite that has not been dealt in this policy. The possibility of scholarship and ‘‘who show remarkable performance in program through getting percentage/grade point average are exempted from payment of any fee and all paid fees will be refunded to such students’’ has been indicated. Faculty. The issue of faculty has been dealt well in terms of training and development; however, it is not clear that they would be trained for teaching methods or for technology-mediated teaching. This technology-intensive distance education program includes both education and technology, so traditional training method of teachers should be redesigned. Instead of a general-level degree known as BEd (bachelor in education), there should be a TEd (technology in education) degree for training distance education teachers, as distance learning is now heavily dependent on technology. These training programs should also include continuous professional development sessions for overcoming technophobia (tech-psychotherapy), which is a major impediment to technology-mediated learning/teaching environment. The minimum or maximum workload of an individual instructor is missing in the document. Development incentives and evaluation have been mentioned by stating, ‘‘Supplementary benefits are provided to faculty members. . . . Competent and experienced senior faculty members and evaluators are recruited to evaluate performance.’’ For the faculty, a clear human resource policy guideline should be provided. Legal. In this policy document, a clear description of legal matters is required. About student liability, it has been mentioned that ‘‘It has been observed that students of DE (Distance Education) indulge in unethical practices. In order to check these practices, strict measures are to be introduced by the DDE for maintaining the quality of DE program.’’ However, description of unethical policies and their consequences are required to be mentioned in order to avoid their definitional ambiguity, for example,

Ellahi and Zaka

271

plagiarism. Similarly, there is a lack of indication of record management and data protection policy. Student support services. Student support services such as material delivery ‘‘Course Delivery at Door Step,’’ advisement ‘‘students are provided academic advising services,’’ library access ‘‘digital libraries available for all its students,’’ and financial aid have been mentioned. However, a major concern of students’ training or orientation for using the LMS or any other distance learning system is missing. It is also unclear that for courses that require lab work such as computer programming, chemistry, or else, what strategies should be adopted. It should be acknowledged that the delivery of teaching via distance learning will vary by subject, depending on the form of teaching and content that is to be delivered. Technical. In the policy documents, technology infrastructure has been well mentioned by describing it under the heading of ‘‘Infrastructure and Technology.’’ However, software acquisition, vendor choice, costs, system upgradation, and technical support needs to be clarified and described in a comprehensive way. Along with it, it is not clear which mode of distance learning (i.e., synchronous or asynchronous) would be adopted. Cultural. Cultural or social aspects of this policy have not been dealt in this policy document. This requires a clear identification of stakeholders of this program. The potential benefits of open and distance learning program should be covered, for example for government, it may reduce gender inequality by permitting females to enter higher education through distance learning, while staying at home, for employers it will bring cost-effective professional development, and so on. Overall in a society, it will promote the innovation and opportunities for lifelong and life-wide learning by developing a new learning culture. The summary of evaluation of individual policy area is shown in Table 5. On the basis of all shortcomings, the following contents for policy document shown in Table 6 are proposed.

Conclusion The distance education program initiative in Pakistan is of promising nature which needs to be assessed regularly. This study has made an initial attempt to assess the policy document against a criteria identified from literature. The analysis shows that the current policy documents do offer some strength at this initial level; however, they cannot be considered a

272

Evaluation Review 39(2)

Table 5. Summary of Evaluation of Individual Policy Area. Individual Policy Area 1 Academic 2 Governance/administration/ fiscal 3 Faculty 4 Legal 5 Student support services 6 Technical 7 Cultural

Fulfilled p

Better But Needs Improvement

Not Fulfilled

p p p p p p

Table 6. Proposed Table of Contents. Contents

Description

Definition of distance education

How distance education programs and distance learners are defined Scope and purpose of distance Key policy provisions, focus, and education policy contextual factors The policy context of Pakistan An overview describing the need for and purposes of the policy in Pakistan Institutional mission and goals Description of SMARTER objectives and goals coupled with market-oriented mission statement Policy key stakeholders Identification of primary and secondary stakeholders General distance learning requirements Defines distance learners, identifies the methods to be used for assigning contact hours and proxy hours, defines curricula and materials that may be used at a distance, and specifies assessment requirements for distance learners. Instructional programs Explain how does the institution choose the fields of study for DE programs, what stakeholders are consulted and how are they consulted, how to overcome the certain courses type limitation in DE programs such as chemistry lab work, etc. (continued)

Ellahi and Zaka

273

Table 6. (continued) Contents

Description

Synchronous as well asynchronous modes of distance learning

How to select the delivery of instruction in distance education mode to make it fit in the objectives and content of its courses and programs, what processes exist to administer courses, whether the modes are effective or not Explains what universities or colleges will need to do in order to offer distance learning Explains how distance learning programs will be funded, whether through specialized grants or as part of the regular funding process, etc. distance education funding policy Explains all student support services such as admission procedure, student financial aid and library and learning support services to facilitate and demonstrate the achievement of distance student learning outcomes. Describes nature and frequency of training required or recommended for learners and teachers offering distance learning Explains in detail monitoring and evaluation mechanism of DE programs from institutional as well as individual perspective in order to assess accuracy, teaching and learning strategies, and student learning outcomes, whether the assessment methods be different from those methods applied for assessment of face-to-face programs Structure, lay out, manage change and reforms, innovative initiatives as well as project and program management Digitization of information, ICT infrastructure, software vendors, digital library access Determining the faculty’s expertise or teaching knowledge and expertise in the field of distance education Compensation plan structure for faculty

Application and approval procedures to operate a distance learning program Funding for distance learning programs

Student support services, including library and learning support services

Training requirements

Quality assurance

Organizational capacity

Technological infrastructure

Human resources development

Performance and compensation benefits

(continued)

274

Evaluation Review 39(2)

Table 6. (continued) Contents

Description

Decision-making roles and processes

To clarify the personnel’s roles, their job description, and specification, as well as structure of board and administrative organization Expand distance education, international exchange of research, scholarship, academics and students, and academic partnerships Proper regulation by national authorities Ethical guidelines for personal and civic responsibility as well as intellectual, aesthetic, and personal development for all of its students Are there any constraints that may create hurdle in contributing toward the development and subsequent implementation of the distance education policy? If so, what are the strategies that can be adopted to overcome these challenges?

Future growth of DE program and cross-border distance education

Rules and regulations Code of conducts

Challenges and barriers

Note. ICT ¼ information and communication technology.

comprehensive policy guide. The inclusion or correction of missing or vague areas identified in this study would make this policy guideline document a treasured tool for HEC. For the distance education policy makers, this distance education policy framework model recognizes several fundamental areas with which they should be concerned. The objectives show that this large-scale initiative of technologyintensive distance learning program in Pakistan will bring a great potential to accelerate the cost-effectiveness of education systems, to capture the underprivileged strata of society as well as to promote a revolution in culture for a lifelong learning. There are certain higher education state policy issues identified by the American Association of State Colleges and Universities (AASCU) State Relations and Policy Analysis Team (2013), which are of paramount importance for Pakistan as well. These issues are ‘‘boosting institutional performance, state operating support for public higher education, tuition prices and tuition policy, state student grant aid programs, college readiness, immigration, competency-based and online education, guns on campus, consumer protection involving for-

Ellahi and Zaka

275

profit colleges, and economic and workforce development.’’ Along with it, ‘‘the rapid growth of distance education programs (such as MOOC) has outpaced the ability of states and the federal government to provide a coherent and comprehensive system of regulation appropriately attentive to issues of consumer protection and quality that, at the same time, reflects the unique features of distance education’’ (Daniel, Hurley, Harnisch, Moran, & Parker, 2013). This makes it clear that HEC Pakistan is expected to deal with a diverse array of refined higher education state policy discussions to shape the future of higher education by delivering the renewed literacy prosperity to the nation. If dealt so, the sheer beauty of a comprehensive distance education policy will play a decisive role in meeting the demand for higher education by creating a knowledge-based society in Pakistan. The findings of this study in the light of two different policy frameworks measures highlight certain opportunities that can help strengthening the distance education policies. The criteria and findings are useful for the reviewers of policy proposals to identify the gaps where policy documents can be improved to bring the desired outcomes, as Gulati (2008) highlighted that ill informed or nonexistent distance education policy in developing countries is a major cause of a wide range of problems, ‘‘such as a diversion of resources from educational and technological infrastructures and teacher training as well as negative attitudes toward distance learning and social and cultural restrictions imposed on girls and women’’ (as cited in Gokool-Ramdoo, 2009). Every policy process has three distinct stages, that is, formulation, implementation, and evaluation (Parsons, 1995). As the policy is in its initial or introductory phase, hence, this study has made an attempt to evaluate the first stage, that is, evaluation of formulation of policy of distance education in Pakistan by relying on policy documents of HEC. However, future research can conduct a case study of any university that has recently initiated the distance education program. In this way, the implementation and the final evaluation stage of this policy can be studied. Declaration of Conflicting Interests The authors declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Funding The authors received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

276

Evaluation Review 39(2)

References Belawati, T., & Baggaley, J. (Eds.). (2009). Distance education in Asia: The PANdora guidebook. Retrieved September 28, 2013, from http://www.pandora-asia.org/ guidebook/PDEG-ed1.pdf Berge, Z. L. (1998). Barriers to online teaching in post-secondary institutions: Can policy changes fix it? Online Journal of Distance Learning Administration, 1. Boven, T. D. (2013). The Next Game Changer: The Historical Antecedents of the MOOC Movement in Education. Retrieved from http://www.academia.edu/ 3512347/The_Next_Game_Changer_The_Historical_Antecedents_of_the_ MOOC_Movement_in_Education Cheung, K. K., Mirzaei, M., & Leeder, S. (2010). Health policy analysis: A tool to evaluate in policy documents the alignment between policy statements and intended outcomes. Australian Health Review, 34, 405–413. Daniel, J., Hurley, J. D., Harnisch, L. T., Moran, L. R., & Parker, A. E. (2013). Top 10 higher education state policy issues for 2013. A Higher Education Policy Brief, 1-6. Retrieved from http://www.aascu.org/policy/publications/policy-matters/topten2013.pdf Gellman-Danley, B., & Fetzner, M. J. (1998). Asking the really tough questions: Policy issues for distance learning. Online Journal of Distance Learning Administration, 1. Gokool-Ramdoo, S. (2009). Policy deficit in distance education: A transactional distance. The International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 10(4). Accessed from http://www.irrodl.org/index.php/irrodl/article/view/702/1326 Gulati, S. (2008). Technology-enhanced learning in developing nations: A review. The International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 9(1). Accessed from http://www.irrodl.org/index.php/irrodl/article/view/477/1012 Hanover Research. (2011). Trends in global distance learning. Retrieved December 22, 2013, from http://www.hanoverresearch.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/12/ Trends-in-Global-Distance-Learning-Membership.pdf HEC plans to introduce distance learning. (2011, January 19). Dawn Newspaper. Retrieved December 23, 2013, from http://www.dawn.com/news/600049/hecplans-to-introduce-distance-learning Higher Education Commission. (2013). Retrieved from www.hec.gov.pk James, R., Tynan, B., Baijnath, N., & Teixeira, M. A. (2013). Open and distance education policy briefing. The International Council of Open and Distance Educators. Retrieved from icde.org/ . . . /OpenandDistanceEducationPolicy BriefingMarch2013.pdf James, R., Tynan, B., Marshall, S., Webster, L., Suddaby, G., & Lewis, R. (2011). Regulatory frameworks for distance education: A pilot study in the Southwest

Ellahi and Zaka

277

Pacific/South East Asia Region. The International Council for Open and Distance Education. Retrieved from www.openpraxis.org/index.php/Open Praxis/article/download/31/pdf Khan, A. W. (2007). Education in and for the Information Society. UNESCO Publications for the World Summit on the Information Society, 7, place F-75352 Paris. Knowledge Generation and Dissemination; Issues and Challenges in Nigerian Universities. Enugu: Pearls & Gold. Mujahid, Y. H. (2002). Digital opportunity initiative for Pakistan. The Electronic Journal on Information Systems in Developing Countries, 8, 1–14. Parsons, D. W. (1995). Public policy: An introduction to the theory and practice of policy analysis. London, England: Edward Elgar Publishing. Prinsloo, P., & Sharon, S. (2013, April 8–12). An evaluation of policy frameworks for addressing ethical considerations in learning analytics. In Third Conference on Learning Analytics and Knowledge (LAK 2013), Leuven, Belgium: ACM, pp. 240–244. Sathar, Z. A., Lloyd, B. C, Mete, C., & ul Haque, M. (2003). Schooling opportunities for girls as a stimulus for fertility change in rural Pakistan. Economic and Cultural Change, 51, 677–698. Salmi, J. (2013). Effective change strategies in tertiary education reform. Retrieved December 22, 2013, from http://auserf.com.au/wp-content/files_mf/ 1373507034Policynote4_EffectiveChangeStrategiesinTertiaryEductionReform_ FINAL_26062013.pdf Statistical Information Unit. (2012). Retrieved from http://www.hec.gov.pk/ InsideHEC/Divisions/QALI/Others/Pages/Enrollment.aspx Towhidi, A. (2010). Distance education technologies and media utilization in higher education. International Journal of Instructional Technology and Distance Learning, 7(8). Accessed from http://www.itdl.org/Journal/Aug_10/article01.htm

Author Biographies Abida Ellahi is a PhD scholar in technology management at International Islamic University of Islamabad. She earned her MS degree from the University in 2010. Her research interests include policy research, e-health, social impact of technology, e-learning, and social work education. Bilal Zaka is the head of the department and general manager of the COMSATS IT Centre. He has completed his PhD in computer science and his area of research is ‘‘innovative media technologies.’’

Copyright of Evaluation Review is the property of Sage Publications Inc. and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use.