According to Michael Moore DE institutions can be assessed in three different dimensions: to the extent they facilitate dialogue, they impose structure and the degree of learner autonomy they require/allow (Peters, 1998). Two of the parameters dialogue and structure seem to be conflicting: structure to some extent constrains the open ended dialogue while free ranging dialogue drives horse through pre-planned structure. Autonomy seems to be independent. Closely guided dialogue may restrain learner autonomy as much as detailed structure.

Given that the parameters vary largely independently footprint analysis may be used to characterize DE institutions according to the three parameters. The idea of a 'footprint analysis' is based on Mansell, Wehn (1998). There it is used to map knowledge infrastructure of a society according to the INEXSK (INfrastructure, EXperience, Skills, Knowledge) approach.

The following diagram depicts the three parameters according to which Moore suggests to classify distance education programs. The circle defines a sort of standard. The three radii pointing to the respective parameters allow us to indicate if the standard in the respective dimension is not achieved or exceeded.

The British Open University allows a high degree of autonomy but within the limits of paced courses. Programs are well structured but often dialogue is restrained to rare face to face tutorials and assignment feedback.

The Empire State College is famous for its learning contracts. Since they are individually negotiated and implemented without pacing learner autonomy can be seen as extremely high. Pre-imposed course structure is low and dialogue relatively high.

The UMUC MDE program is characterized by an extremely high level of dialogue. Structure however is imposed: there is pacing and the course rooms are well structured.

The few examples show that footprint analysis of this kind may be used to profile distance education institutions.

_____________________________________________________
References:
Mansell, R., Wehn, U. (Ed.). (1998). Knowledge Societies: Information Technology for Sustainable Development. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Peters, O. (1998). Learning and Teaching in Distance Education: Analyses and Interpretations from an International Perspective. London: Kogan Page.