Alternative Educational Delivery: Using Information Technology in a Multicampus Environment |-------------------------------------| | Paper presented at CAUSE92 | | December 1-4, 1992, Dallas, Texas | |-------------------------------------| ALTERNATIVE EDUCATIONAL DELIVERY: Using Information Technology In A Multicampus Environment Stephen L. Daigle, Senior Research Associate Patricia M. Cuocco, Manager, Media and Telecommunications Support Information Resources and Technology Office of the Chancellor California State University Seal Beach, California ABSTRACT Three concerns dominate virtually all discussion of higher education in this decade: student access, academic quality, and fiscal efficiency. The California State University (CSU) has formed a systemwide commission to examine the role of emerging technologies in addressing these issues. Its charge is to develop new models of instructional delivery and information access for the 21st century based on the latest developments in telecommunications networks and interactive multimedia. Concurrent with this effort are activities aimed at enhancing the existing technical infrastructure to support alternative educational delivery. The CSU currently enrolls 360,000 students on 20 campuses spanning a distance of almost 1,000 miles. Like institutions across the nation, the system in confronted with facility constraints, faculty shortages, fiscal retrenchment, and political demands for greater accountability, but within a unique environmental context of projected enrollment growth of 140,000 to 180,000 students over the next 15 years. This paper will describe (1) the commission's progress in developing a conceptual model and implementation plan for alternative instructional delivery in the system and (2) long range plans for infrastructure enhancement. They will be of interest to policy planners as well as technical management. INTRODUCTION The California State University (CSU) has launched an important new strategy to help meet the projected enrollment increases of 140,000 to 170,000 additional students over the next two decades. It is called Project DELTA which stands for Direct Electronic Learning Teaching Alternative. The project's goals are to greatly increase the role of technology in educational delivery by expanding existing CSU campus efforts in distance learning, and by promoting multi-campus cooperation in technical and programmatic areas. Like its symbol, Project DELTA is about change. It envisions one alternative to the current way of teaching and learning among the 20 campuses of the CSU system. It builds on the long history and traditions of academe within the context of long-term fiscal challenges and significant enrollment increases projected for the next two decades, and the conditions and opportunities for change which they imply. It suggests that solutions to these issues lie, at least partially, in developing and implementing an effective teaching and learning delivery system using the learning tools of emerging information technologies. An important assumption of the project is that the teaching and learning paradigms of the information age may be significantly different from those of previous generations, and that the educational needs of learners and scholars may require major changes in how knowledge is created, stored, transmitted, and acquired. The teaching and learning universe of the information age assumes that the boundaries of place and distance become less important as the demands of time and access for the individual become more important. The future educational needs of learners will become increasingly demand-based, unencumbered by the familiar constraints of time and place, They will be satisfied through direct electronic access to the information/knowledge and to the faculty, rather than by in classroom teaching and on campus mediated support services. This change in the nature and convenience of instruction and support services delivery will become as natural as most other personal service needs are already. Most of American higher education will continue to evolve as it has over the past 350 years. However, some universities, like other organizations in society have already, will place a major emphasis on digital delivery systems,- interactive media (particularly video), iconic and visual literacy, and integrated modes of learning that engage all the senses of the individual learner simultaneously. These universities will seek to provide the individual learner with access to the teaching/learning processes "any time from any where" rather than require the individual to come to the campus. They will develop and implement alternatives to the traditional classroom delivery model of education and to the policies, norms, and rules that govern the university's operation. In essence, they may be quite different from those in current campus settings. Distance education and instructional technology have been part of the CSU instructional process for many years. However, they often have developed along separate tracks. Distance learning, which includes all forms of off-campus instruction, still tends to be "non-traditional" more in terms of where instruction is delivered than in terms of how it is delivered. On the other hand, instructional applications using technology have stimulated alternatives to the lecture format but have tended to be "place-bound" in the sense that learning still occurs in a classroom setting on campus. Most estimates suggest that the technical means for integrating these two dimensions of non-traditional instruction (i.e., delivery and format) are only a few years away. An historic merger of technologies in the telecommunications, computing, and consumer electronics industries has the potential for transforming the nature of teaching and learning as it has existed for hundreds of years. The development of ubiquitous telecommunications networks and digital-based information formats promise to bring instruction directly to the learner rather than requiring the learner to be in a specific place at a specific time in order to receive it. Teaching and learning in the information age will be less print-oriented and classroom-bound than ever before; they will also need to be less labor-intensive and more portable and modular in formats and delivery. The home and the workplace will become the classrooms of tomorrow. The traditional delivery system of higher education has emphasized face- to-face interaction between the instructor and students in a campus, classroom environment. This approach is both labor and capital intensive, and often inconvenient to students and faculty alike. The emerging delivery systems of the information age will rely heavily on "virtual" environments; i.e., access to instruction and information resources anytime, anywhere through electronic interaction. Knowledge created by the faculty will be stored, transmitted, and accessed in digital formats using computer networks, cable, satellites, compact disks, videodiscs, and a host of multimedia tools which combine data, voice, and video information. According to some experts, fully 98 percent of all information will be available in digital formats by the end of this decade, creating a trillion dollar industry organized around digital-based media, publishing, computers, consumer electronics, and telecommunications. By comparison, the current estimated value of the personal computer industry is about 60 billion dollars. The digital revolution already is transforming many aspects of everyday life, and the norms and values associated with them; it may do no less for higher education. Access and convenience are the hallmarks of this revolution. California represents an ideal laboratory for testing its potential. The state is physically large, densely populated in sections, socially diverse, fiscally troubled, and technically sophisticated, all of the elements needed to stimulate new ways of thinking about educational delivery. The CSU has an opportunity and a responsibility to assume a leadership position in making this transition to a new instructional paradigm based on the emerging social norms, technological values, and educational expectations of the next generation of learners. The Need The need for Project DELTA stems from four interrelated sources: individual institutional ,political/social, and technological. Together they form a network of internal and external pressures on the CSU which may challenge many traditional assumptions, policies, and practices concerning the nature of higher education in the next century. Individual expectations and demands concerning the nature and delivery of educational services are changing, largely in response to technological innovations. Increasingly, institutions of higher education will be expected to offer instructional and support services based on the convenience of consumers rather than that of campus constituencies. Education which is truly learner-centered may be delivered directly to the individual at a time and in a place determined by the learner. Personalized instruction of this nature depends on sophisticated delivery systems and portable learning tools made possible by the revolution in digital electronics. But learning need not be an "atomized" experience divorced from a meaningful social context, the same systems that deliver information directly to the individual can also promote communication and intellectual interaction among students and with faculty members that equal or surpass that which is possible in traditional classrooms. The amount, quality, and breadth of interaction possible via electronic networks may enhance the learning experience while simultaneously making it more personal and convenient. Learner-centered education is consumer driven and can be technologically based. Anything less may be at a severe market disadvantage in a social environment of individual empowerment. The institutional pressures include enrollment growth, facility deficits, faculty shortages, and fiscal retrenchment. System enrollments are projected to increase by approximately 140,000 to 170,000 students by the year 2005. Current estimates suggest that roughly 50,000 students will have to be accommodated through means other than the existing 20 campuses or academic calendar (i.e., off-campus centers, instructional technology, year round operation) once current and planned facilities are filled to capacity. During the same period, 14 of the existing 20 campuses are projected to reach their physical limits, dictating the need for additional campuses in those areas, or new modes of service delivery. The facility needs of the system as a whole would require building the equivalent of a 10,000- student campus each year for the next 15 years. The current five-year Capital Outlay Plan projects an average annual budget of $405 million, yet funding for capital projects is based on voter approval of bond propositions, which face increasing opposition and uncertainty. Faculty resources are no more secure. Like all other institutions in the nation, the CSU is in the process of replacing an entire generation of tenure-track faculty. The system is projected to hire almost 12,000 tenure-track faculty over the next 12 years. However, the largest source of new faculty, recent Ph.D. graduates, has not increased in numbers for more than a decade. To make matters worse, fully one-fourth of the new doctorates are awarded to noncitizens who often plan to leave the country. The time required to produce a Ph.D. has grown to more than ten years beyond receipt of the bachelor's degree, so a serious lag between supply and demand is virtually assured for the next decade and beyond. Finally, few, economic scenarios for public sector institutions are positive, if recent studies are accurate. Given a host of structural obligations (notably, corrections, welfare, and debt service on general obligation bonds), the gap between state revenues and expenditures is projected to grow steadily, worse during the 990s. The competition for state resources among state agencies and among the four segments of public education is expected to become even more difficult than at present. The percentage of state general fund revenues appropriated for the CSU has declined over the past several years, and there are no indications of a significant reversal of this trend These four issues-enrollments, facilities, faculty, and public revenues- individually and collectively are a stimulant for a new way of thinking about higher education. Each is a major challenge, requiring responses that are equally profound. In each instance, traditional thinking offers few convincing answers for the immediate or long-term future. New and creative models of institutional planning are required. Political/social pressures, too, are reaching new levels. Higher education is one of the few institutions in American society that historically have maintained widespread public confidence. Yet, legislative demands for accountability and efficiency dictate exploring all reasonable alternatives for the delivery-of higher education services. Feasibility studies and cost-benefit models amount-to good political as well as good economic sense. Higher education has the option of evaluating its alternatives, or having it done by others. The bad news is, because of the long-term fiscal crisis facing the state, public officials are demanding new and creative approaches to meeting traditional needs; the good news is, because of that same crisis, they are willing and even eager to listen to such ideas. Greater flexibility and convenience in instructional and support service delivery offer means for maintaining public support in a consumer-driven market. Competition from private industry and from other higher education institutions, within California and outside the state, is forcing hard questions about traditional ways of doing business. The CSU has two choices. It can either play a leadership role in educational delivery by developing a viable alternative-system within scarce resources, or it can maintain a status quo strategy and run the risk of forfeiting its leadership role to others along with the opportunities that go with it. Technological resources include the broad fabric of technological change, economic dislocations, and changes in cultural values and lifestyles. The recent "marriage" of computing and various forms of telecommunications can be expected to increase the scope and pace of technological innovation almost beyond imagination. The revolution in digital electronics is transforming the nature of work in every business and institution. It is unlikely that higher education can stand apart from these currents of change if it plans to be one of the nerve centers of the information age. Emerging multimedia technologies and communications networks can make learning more convenient, efficient, and effective while broadening access far beyond the constraints of time and place. Traditionally, direct electronic delivery of education has been perceived and planned as a mechanism for predominantly rural populations. The future role of such delivery will become equally urban based among the population centers of the state. California's manpower needs increasingly are dependent on worker retraining, education for adult re-entry, and ethnic minority students. Growth among ethnically and culturally diverse populations, among the highest; in the nation, requires innovative and efficient educational outreach, steeped in the latest technological systems and tools. With multiple careers and lifelong learning the norm, the human capital needed for California's economic future will be educated in ways quite different from previous generations of college students. Perhaps the most pervasive yet diffuse factor underlying the need to augment traditional approaches to higher education is the culture itself. Technology is a major influence on personal values and everyday lifestyles. Among other things, it structures public expectations about all service industries, education included. An institution rooted in tradition may have little to say to many in a generation of students accustomed to a world of technological efficiency and innovation; institutional "fit" with changing cultural values, trends, innovations, and lifestyles may become a major concern of the university of the future. All of these pressures point to a need for alternatives to traditional academic customs and practices. The very forces that are rendering traditional forms obsolete contain the seeds for workable alternatives. The missing links are a vision of an alternate future and a plan to make it happen. Project DELTA is a proposed response to that challenge. PROJECT DELTA DELTA refers to Direct Electronic Learning Teaching Alternative. In mathematics, the delta symbol stands for "change." Like its symbol, Project DELTA is about change. It envisions alternatives to the dominant approach to teaching and learning in the CSU and, indeed, higher education generally--one that is print and lecture oriented, time restricted, and place bound. Project DELTA will not replace the dominant instructional paradigm, but will be a supplement to it. The project intends to build on the long history and traditions of academe, but within the context of long-term fiscal challenges and significant enrollment increases projected for the next two decades, and the conditions and opportunities for change which they imply. The project suggests that solutions to these issues lie, at least partially, in developing and implementing an effective instructional delivery system using the learning tools of emerging information technologies. Three criteria underlie the success of the DELTA venture. First, it must sustain the quality of teaching and learning achieved in traditional classroom settings. Second, it must increase the amount and convenience of student access to higher education. Third, it must be cost-effective compared to existing delivery methods, thereby promoting greater institutional accountability in the use of public funds. The project represents an innovative response to the interrelated challenges of enrollment demand, resource shortages, and fiscal retrenchment in the system. For example, official population and enrollment projections by the Department of Finance indicate that approximately 140,000 to 170,000 additional new students will enroll in the CSU over the next 15 years. Approximately 14 campuses will approach or reach their facility ceilings in the next few years. It is uncertain whether sufficient capital outlay resources will be available either to expand existing campuses to meet this level of demand, or build new ones. Fiscal realities and prudent management require that the system explore alternatives to brick and mortar. Project DELTA is an affirmation of the state's and system's historic commitment to higher education as expressed in the Master Plan for Higher Education. It assumes that it is unacceptable to educate proportionately fewer citizens than now, and that ways can and must be found to reconcile available resources with enrollment pressures and the economic demands attending lifelong learning. Expanding student access to higher education in California is both an economic necessity and a moral imperative. The future health of the economy requires it, and social equity demands it. Moreover, the CSU is in the process of replacing an entire generation of tenure-track faculty due to record retirements among the current cohort. Beyond this replacement need, additional new faculty will be needed to accommodate increased enrollment demand. The national supply of new doctorates has been static for the past decade, and increasing its numbers in the Ph.D. pipeline extends another decade into the future. Given the projected gap between qualified faculty supply and enrollment demand, the system must find ways of delivering education other than through traditional classroom instruction alone. The overall goal, then, of Project DELTA is to: Develop an alternative and effective learning/teaching strategy to deliver academic courses and degree programs which emphasizes direct interaction among learners, faculty, and the relevant information resources using electronic media as the primary delivery mechanism. The specific objectives of DELTA are to: --Give each existing CSU campus an opportunity to extend its services more pervasively into the communities it serves. --Facilitate intercampus sharing of program offerings, resources, and services. --Provide a viable alternative to building additional facilities, including new campuses. The planning phase for Project DELTA began in spring of 1992 and will extend through the summer of 1993. It encompasses five major tasks: 1. Environmental Scans--This activity involves a systematic assessment of the current environment for distance learning in higher education-- internationally, nationally, and systemwide. These studies provide benchmarks for future planning, assist in identifying exemplary program and technical models, and offer preliminary insights on the potential demand for DELTA. A summary of the findings from the internal, systemwide environmental scan is presented below. 2. Program Development--This task is the heart of the planning phase and has a short-range and a long-range component. The former will build on existing CSU campus programs by expanding their scope and visibility in the system. The latter will emphasize development of comprehensive, integrated models of direct electronic delivery among the six dimensions of the DELTA framework (see Figure 1): --Academic Programs --Information Resources --Academic/Student Support Services --Student Evaluation and Institutional Accountability --Administrative Support Services --Infrastructure 3. Evaluation--An independent feasibility study will be conducted to examine the comparative costs and benefits of the long-range models which result from Task 2. The educational benefits to the individual learner and the cost effectiveness to the state will have to be demonstrated. 4. Consultation--Strategic planning of this nature requires constant communication and consultation among constituencies within the system, state policy makers, national experts, and the private sector. Several categories of constituent groups have been identified and a schedule and process for their involvement in DELTA is being implemented. 5. Endorsement--The final task in the planning phase of Project DELTA is to seek Board of Trustees endorsement of the vision of a new environment together with a plan and strategy for full development and implementation. As part of this task, a generic workplan for the implementation phase of the project will be prepared. Ultimately, several implementation plans will be developed with varying timelines and objectives. The detailed workplan for the planning phase of DELTA contains the following elements for each task and sub-task: a brief statement of the scope and focus of the work in terms of the issues to be addressed; a description of the process to be followed; identification of the staff and other resources required to do the work; a schedule for completion of the tasks; a description of the products that will be provided; and an estimate of the costs for personnel, travel, and operating expenses. INTERNAL ENVIRONMENTAL SCAN Interviews were held with campus representatives during the summer of 1992; most lasted for about 90 minutes. Personal visits were made to seven campuses, videoconferences were held with three campuses, and telephone conference calls were placed with ten campuses The specific objectives of the internal environmental scan were to gain a general sense of the programmatic and technical status of distance education among CSU institutions; identify key faculty and administrators with expertise and interest in the broad concerns of Project DELTA; and receive the advice of campus representatives, however critical, on how to develop and manage a project of this ambition. The CSU is a system of enormous size and diversity among its campuses, students, and faculty. Accordingly, one might expect to find little consensus among them on the range of topics addressed in this study, but some patterns did emerge from the campus profiles. Following is a summary of the dominant ones. Academic Programs 1. Distance learning still exists at the margins on most CSU campuses; it has not been fully institutionalized into the credit, state-supported portion of the curriculum. Most credit off-campus programs are quite small compared to the enrollments and range of offerings available on the main campus. 2. Most of the courses and degree programs in distance learning are concentrated in professional disciplines such as business, engineering, health professions, and law enforcement, in part because these employment sectors offer easily identifiable groups with specific educational needs in large physical settings, and because of their ability to underwrite the cost of electronic delivery. Still, a fair amount of general education and liberal studies courses are offered as well. 3. Much of the distance education in the system is non-credit and occurs in certificate programs, seminars, and workshops offered through extension divisions, although the pattern varies by campus. Some campuses offer only credit courses in distance learning, others only non-credit, others both types, and a few neither. 4. Faculty teaching in distance education are a mixture of tenure- track professors and part-time lecturers. Most campuses attempt to preserve the same mix that exists in the regular curriculum. The conditions of employment for distance learning courses are mostly ad hoc arrangements between the individual faculty member and his or her department; on occasion, release time or a modest amount of technical support may be provided. Support for such activity among the faculty as a whole (including senate and union representatives) has generally been positive but cautious. As faculty involvement in distance learning increases, latent concerns may become more vocal. However, virtually every campus has a pool of faculty with technical expertise and practical experience in distance learning and, on a systemwide basis, all major disciplines are represented. 5. The lecture/classroom paradigm still dominates distance learning in the system, particularly in credit courses. The use of computers, multimedia, and advanced telecommunications (i.e., something other than telephones and televisions) is very limited. Information Resources and Support Services 1. Provision of advising services and library and computing resources to distance learners is a persistent problem, but most campuses have implemented a range of practical solutions, technological and otherwise. Electronic access to library resources appears to be gaining ground everywhere. 2. Academic and student support services are major concerns of WASC and discipline accrediting associations. With only a couple of exceptions, campuses reported that accreditation had not been a problem. 3. Most distance learners are older students with fewer needs for traditional student support services than exist on campus. Still, policy regulations plague financial aid services and logistical barriers often limit student access to advising, registration, and bookstore needs. Many of these latter services are delivered on-site by faculty or course coordinators. Program Administration 1. Funding for distance education is a mixture of self-support, private donations, federal grants and state revenues. Almost without exception, resources for equipment and the technical infrastructure to support such learning have depended heavily on these first three sources. 2. Automation of administrative logistics and data processing for distance learning programs has lagged far behind that for the regular campus curriculum. Heavy use is made of telephones, facsimile machines, and manual service as opposed to computers. 3. Inter-campus sharing of programs, faculty, and technical resources is very limited. Much of the telecommunications infrastructure that does exist (CALNET, CVMN, CSUnet) is greatly underutilized compared to its capacity. 4. Programmatic and technical linkages to high schools for distance learning is highly developed on some campuses, but virtually non- existent on many others. Similarly, a few campuses have established strong ties to community colleges (particularly when the latter's facilities are used as sites for off-campus instruction), but the potential for such liaison among the state's 107 community colleges is only beginning. Evaluation and Accountability 1. Most campuses had performed some modest amount of evaluation of their distance learning programs. Without exception, they reported that students were satisfied with the experience and performed as well or better than students in comparable courses on campus. Faculty evaluations and accreditation reviews were also positive. 2. Few campuses were willing to argue that distance education, as presently conducted, resulted in a net cost savings compared to traditional instruction. The key factor in the equation is enrollments and the economies of scale which could be achieved through greater use of technology. The relative trade-offs between traditional capital outlay expansion on the one hand and investment in technological infrastructure on the other were unclear to most participants. More study of this point is needed. Infrastructure 1. Although many types of delivery systems for distance learning are available on CSU campuses (computing, satellite, cable, microwave, compressed video), the primary mode of distribution is ITFS--it is one of the oldest technologies. There is significant interest on most campuses in developing their satellite, cable and compressed video capabilities. 2. Campus involvement in distance learning is heavily dominated by the concept of "place," primarily in the form of off-campus centers. Planning for a world of ubiquitous communications networks which are not tied to time and place has not captured the imagination of faculty or academic planners on most campuses. 3. Campus master plans for technology tend to be internally-oriented (wiring the campus) rather than externally-oriented toward the community, state, and nation. Similarly, while there is a great deal of faculty interest and expertise in multimedia applications, they are more likely to be used for on-campus instruction rather than for distance learning. On balance, there is an unevenness among the 20 campuses along these dimensions related to distance learning. Some have a strong intra-campus investment in technology, while others are establishing links to high schools and employment centers in the community. Some have made special efforts in the areas of libraries and support services for distance learners, and still others are only in the beginning stages of moving from classroom instruction to distance education. The age and size of the campus, the nature and size of its service area and population, and the vitality of its extension and media divisions all contribute to its present status in and future plans for distance learning. The advantage from a systemwide perspective is that all of the disparate threads needed for a more integrated approach to distance learning already exist somewhere in the system. TECHNOLOGICAL INFRASTRUCTURE: CURRENT AND PLANNED A major part of the infrastructure that will undergird any serious attempt at alternative education delivery in the CSU will involve telecommunications. Historically, the CSU has considered telecommunications infrastructure as a "network of networks," which has three tiers. The first tier is an appropriate intra-campus telecommunications infrastructure with adequate voice, data and video communications. The second tier is a systemwide network which not only provides access to shared resources, but facilitates cooperative ventures between or among campuses and between campuses and their service areas. The third tier is access to global external resources (databases, specialized services, etc.) which are necessary to empower students, faculty and staff in their roles as learners, teachers and scholars, and information workers. For purposes of alternative instructional delivery, the goal is achievement of a level of communications capabilities which facilitates the delivery of instruction and support services by enabling students, faculty and support staff to communicate electronically, and readily access distant information resources, from anywhere at any time. In order to do this, a telecommunications infrastructure must address on- campus connectivity, connection of the campus to its service area, and the ability of campuses to collaborate with each other to serve systemwide needs. One of the major resources in the CSU for providing campus to campus connectivity and systemwide access to global resources is CSUnet. CSUnet is a private wide-area network connecting the twenty campuses of the California State University as well as other educational institutions throughout California. Its basic goal is to provide equal access to information resources for all faculty, students and staff, regardless of their location. Currently, CSUnet provides T-1 connections at all CSU campuses. A T-1 circuit down the California Aqueduct, on the Department of Water Resources fiber network, is also part of CSUnet. The CSU operates this circuit on behalf of the California Internet Federation, and provides transit traffic rights to this bandwidth to other California education networks such as BARRnet and CERFnet. CSUnet is connected to the National Science Foundation Network, NSFnet through Stanford (from San Francisco State) and the San Diego Supercomputing Center (from San Diego State). A T-1 circuit from the system headquarters office to U.C. Irvine connects CSUnet and CERFnet, and another T-1 between CSU, Sacramento and U.C. Davis joins CSUnet and BARRnet. CSUnet began as a data network in support of campus and systemwide administrative and academic computing activities. Today, the major use of CSUnet is still for data communications; however, the architecture of CSUnet has allowed the system to overlay compressed video signals onto the network and video is becoming an important inter-campus application. Over the last year or so, several CSU campuses have delivered courses either to remote locations in their service areas, to local high schools for advance credit, or to other CSU campuses. CSUnet provides the highway over which students at one site have two-way interactive communications with the professor and students at the distant site. Of particular importance is the utility of this application in terms of serving needs at off-campus centers. California is a large, geographically diverse, state. Several CSU campuses have found it necessary to establish off-site centers to overcome the problems associated with distance and/or commute time. Use of interactive, compressed video allows courses and student services such as advising and financial aid counseling to be offered at remote locations without having to incur the expense and wasted productivity of sending faculty and staff to the sites. CSUnet plays another role in assuring that students at off-campus centers are fully connected to all campus electronic resources, including the full range of library databases. While compressed video is the newest video communications medium and the one which can be used over CSUnet, other video technologies have existed for many years in the CSU. ITFS (Instructional Television Fixed Services) is a broadcast microwave capability used extensively for the delivery of education to areas outside the geographic boundaries of the campus. For example, Cal Poly Pomona teaches classes through ITFS at dozens of K-12 locations in Southern California. Five Los Angeles basin campuses (Pomona, Dominguez Hills, Long Beach, Los Angeles, and Fullerton) have entered into a consortium called CALNET. These campuses share four channels which are own by the CSU. The consortium is currently investigating the feasibility of offering a joint degree program in cooperation with the City Of Los Angeles' educational cable television channel. The CSU has a Central Valley Microwave Network which connects Chico, Sacramento, Fresno and Stanislaus. It is often used for course sharing and sometimes used for administrative conferencing as well, particularly in conjunction with CSUnet. A total of fourteen CSU campuses have ITFS capability. All CSU campuses have satellite downlink capability. The CSU owns and operates a mobile uplink truck which is housed at Sacramento but is available to all CSU campuses. CSU, Chico had developed an extensive network for the delivery of education through satellite technology. The owners of multiple C and Ku Band satellite uplinks, they can reach at least two-thirds of the globe and plan to be able to reach more within the next five years. A major effort to connect campuses to their serving area will involve expanding ITFS capability, particularly as the digitization of microwave frequencies and therefore greater channel utilization becomes cost effective. The CSU envisions increased use of private-public partnership arrangements. As wireless cable operators seek to use spare campus ITFS capacity for their commercial enterprises, the CSU may be able to parlay this desire into a quid pro quo of equipment and services which will allow the system to reach heretofore unreachable areas. In addition, there will be an expansion in the use of cable television facilities for campus connectivity to their service areas. Satellite transmission may well prove to be a primary technological tool for multi-campus or systemwide initiatives in alternative delivery, and therefore access to uplink facilities will have to be improved. Again, the CSU is attempting to position itself to take advantage of the digitization of satellite transmission. Despite the fact that every campus has a downlink, not every campus has an on-campus video distribution system so that programming can be efficiently distributed throughout the campus. The future for alternative instructional delivery in the CSU involves the integration of CSUnet with existing microwave networks and satellite capability and the connection of CSUnet to virtual private video networks, such as the Sprint Meeting Channel[registered]. This will provide enhanced opportunities not only for distance education, but for administrative teleconferencing as well. The CSU does not intend to limit itself to any one technology. Rather, the application or program being considered for alternative delivery should drive the technology. The goal of the CSU is to provide a technological infrastructure which gives faculty and staff the necessary flexibility to utilize alternative delivery methods in the most appropriate and effective manner possible. CONCLUSION It is tempting to be skeptical about the possibilities for revolutionizing teaching and learning styles to any significant extent; after all,the current system has lasted for hundreds of years, and there is almost no convincing evidence that either television or computers has changed the basic instructional paradigm or challenged its underlying academic culture. What is different? At least three factors are worth considering. First, the norms and values of everyday life are in the midst of an unprecedented social transformation. Increasingly, the constraints of time and distance in human communication are measured in seconds rather than miles or hours. The acquisition of knowledge and the cultivation of understanding requires access to information sources and interaction with them. For the first time in human history, logistical considerations associated with time and place are being rendered irrelevant in this process as they, simultaneously, assume greater personal significance and value. Future generations of college students, stimulated by visual imagery and accustomed to the technical artifacts of immediacy, may exhibit little patience with the teaching and learning styles of an earlier age. Second, higher education needs new definitions of interaction and of experience in the learning process. In simulated environments, human interaction can occur through electronic channels, and experience with technical issues can be gained through virtual contact and experimentation. The ability of computers, telecommunications, and multimedia tools to provide interactive, experiential learning is increasing at an exponential rate, and they usually engage the senses as well as the mind. The ultimate challenge is one of delivering these learning resources and experiences directly to the individual student in a time and place of his or her choice. Third, higher education is increasingly competitive. The corporate sector is investing heavily in education and worker training using technology, and scores of colleges and universities across the nation are moving toward greater use of telecommunications and distance learning. Expanding the use of alternative delivery may be less a matter of choice for the CSU than one of merely keeping pace with the educational environment of the next century. In general, Project DELTA represents an innovative response of the CSU to some historic challenges and opportunities facing the state of California, higher education, and the system itself. The state is in the midst of an unprecedented fiscal crisis affecting both the public and private sectors. Because higher education represents the single most important factor in promoting long-term economic growth, competitiveness, and social mobility in California, the CSU is in a unique position for contributing to a new economic order. It represents the largest state investment in human capital in the nation and therefore is vital to any statewide plan for economic restructuring and growth. Social and political stability rest on an educated citizenry and a productive workforce. The project is a prudent and responsible planning activity for an institution largely dependent on public funds, and on whom the state in turn depends for skilled manpower. But DELTA also is a bold response to new economic, social, political, and technological realities. It offers one means for addressing the short-term problems of higher education in the state (fiscal retrenchment, facility deficits, faculty shortages) while simultaneously promoting the state's long-term social and economic interest in maintaining access to education among a growing and diversified population. Project DELTA is a plan for achieving productivity gains in the delivery of higher education by making full use of the infrastructure and learning tools of the digital revolution. Its goal is to maintain or enhance the quality of teaching and learning for more students and with fewer resources than would be possible through traditional channels. It does so by placing the individual rather than the institution at the center of the process, and by delivering instruction and information resources directly to learners. The current economic and political environments are providing the incentives for innovation, and the emerging technological environment is providing the raw materials for achieving it. Yet the critical link is the culture - the paradigm - of teaching and learning itself. For some Project DELTA may be perceived as a challenge to many of the traditions and assumptions underlying higher education. For others, it is a model of higher education that is long overdue, and one in concert with the broader currents of social and cultural change in the twenty- first century. With so much on the line, the project must be attentive to both perspectives, and will require the involvement of everyone with a stake in its outcome.