In the application for the grant the objective stated for the project was "to provide very low cost computer communications channels for distance education students anywhere in Australia to any Distance Education Centre". It expressed our concerns about the costs to students for long distance computer communications being a factor inhibiting expansion in the use of this medium for distance education purposes.
The requirement for a grant arose because institutions providing for external student access to AARNet would have to install additional dialup facilities, requiring expenditure on extra telephone lines, modems and terminal server ports, in order to carry the extra demand. The proposal mapped out a coordinated national approach to dialup access to AARNet for all distance education students, under the name ADEnet (Australian Distance Education network). A national approach was required to avoid the need for the individual DECs to negotiate with a large number of other institutions, DEC and non-DEC, for installation of dialup facilities. Moves towards this strategy were facilitated by the NDEC Working Party on Educational Technology.
Reduction in costs and more user friendly access for computer mediated communications to institutions help to stimulate the use of computing facilities in distance education courses, including providing access to multi-user operating systems and applications software such as packages for computer assisted learning, statistics, and many other areas, access to data bases such as library catalogues, and access to electronic mail, electronic publishing and computer conferencing. Although there are very many opportunities for improved delivery of distance education to be developed on the basis of these services, it was realised that the ADEnet project constituted only one component, and that other projects would be needed to complement the work done in reducing the cost of access.
Thus the specific objectives were to identify the centres or telephone districts to be served, find for each an institution prepared to host ADEnet modems, arrange for these sites to install additional telephone lines, modems and terminal server ports, and prepare user guides for students. As the project proceeded, it became evident that significant further objectives had to be attained in order to achieve the desired functionality. These additional objectives and their influence on the progression of the project are described below.
Dr Wally Howse (Convenor), Director, WADECThe Project's co-proposer, Ms Angela Castro, previously at the Institute for Distance Education, Deakin University, was unavailable for the Project, having taken a new position as Assistant to the Director, Division of Continuing Education, Hong Kong Baptist College, Hong Kong. The project group was expanded to facilitate the Melbourne and Sydney sites by the addition of:
(howse@csuvax1.murdoch.edu.au)
Craig Warren, Computing Services Unit, Deakin University
(ccw@deakin.oz.au)
Eve Cuskelly, DEC, University of Central Queensland
(cuskellye@topaz.ucq.edu.au)
Douglas Thomson, School of Appl Sci, Monash Gippsland
(doug@giaeb.cc.monash.edu.au)
John Lockwood, Coordinator Administrative Computing, University of
South Australia (lockwoodj@sacity.schulz.unisa.edu.au)
Mary Jane Mahoney, Campus Telecommunications Coordinator, UNE
Orange Agricultural College (mmahony@gara.une.oz.au)
Sylvia Latham, Manager, Computer Centre, Charles Sturt University
Mitchell (slatham@csunb.mit.csu.edu.au)
Judy Timmins, Coordinator of Student Support System, DEC, University
of Southern Qld (timmins@zeus.usq.edu.au)
Roger Atkinson, External Studies Unit, Murdoch Uni
(atkinson@csuvax1.murdoch.edu.au)
Keith Heale, Acting Deputy Director, Computer Centre, MonashValuable advice was received from time to time from Geoff Huston and Peter Elford of AARNet Administration, Gordon Smith at UNE, George Michaelson at University of Queensland, and a number of other correspondents not formally within the project group.
University (kheale@vaxc.cc.monash.edu.au)
Jim Sargeant, Communications Engineer, Computer Centre, Monash
University (jcs@vaxc.cc.monash.edu.au)
Jim McKee, Information Technology Services,Wollongong University
(Jim_McKee@central-gw.uow.edu.au)
Thus acquiring good access to AARNet, and learning how to use its services for the conduct of the project, were intermediate objectives of significance for some members of the project group. For example, the External Studies Unit at Murdoch operationalised its Ethernet connections in August 1991, some six months after the ADEnet project commenced. For most of the first year, the UNE representative used a dialup connection from Orange to the Mitchell campus of CSU, until improved connections became available from UNE.
| Sydney | 300 | |
| Melbourne | 300 | |
| Brisbane | 80 | |
| Canberra | 60 | |
| Adelaide | 30 | |
| Hobart | 11 | |
| Darwin | 10 | |
| Perth | 7 |
The extent to which facilities for ADEnet users should be integrated with a site's own use of dialup for its staff and local students was examined. It seemed most appropriate to separate ADEnet users from others, in order to avoid the potential problem of ADEnet modems being "hogged" by students other than those for whom the project was intended, and to minimise the potential exposure of a site to network security problems.
One specific comment on your proposal - it has been generally agreed that individual sites should not have any equipment on site which allows unchecked access to AARNet. That is, a dial-in modem which connects directly to an IP capable box (such as a terminal server) is definitely a breach of the regulations, because there is no authentication involved at all. Potentially anybody with a modem and the phone number could start to use AARNet facilities (such as anonymous ftp worldwide) without any let or hindrance. So unless you specify some form of authentication in your access methods, I think you might run into trouble.Another expression of the same problem was (Sargeant, email 29 Aug 1991):
How do we go about the AARNet connect policy, which as far as I interpret means that unauthorised users (ie. users that have not provided a _unique_username/password combination) are not to get access? I can't see a generic password providing any security beyond about five minutes after it gets changed.Managers of networks connected to AARNet and Internet have become much more highly conscious of security issues. For example, Cheswick (1990, 1991) discussed an intriguing case concerning "Berferd", a hacker who penetrated many US sites by means of network connections which were traced back to a terminal server and dialup modem in the Netherlands.
The problem of network security became a much bigger concern than originally estimated. An extensive debate on security and access has occurred within the project and also in the wider AARNet community through the Newsgroup aus.aarnet and other channels. Improved access tends to compromise network security by making access easier also for unauthorised users or "hackers". It is important that the project have a well established relationship with computing centres which have the skills available for implementing an initial level of security measures, and for developing additional levels of security in subsequent years.
However, whilst this level of security is appropriate, perhaps for several years, and can be handled by the project, the availability of strategies for the longer term is important. The additional level to be developed later is the concept of a user authentication host. "The way to operate the security would be for the terminal server to only allow access to _one_ machine until that machine gave clearance to get elsewhere, or invalidated the user causing the terminal server to hang up. That _one_ machine (access verification machine) could then contact the user's "home" institution (user validation machine(s)) to do the actual verification. The advantages would be *no* admin load on either "home" or "remote" location (unless the "home" site really wanted to), and unique userid/passwords. The disadvantages could be the paranoia of sending userid/passwords through an unknown (ie. remote) machine. The access verification machine could be used to run the menus etc, and setting up/maintaining a list of user validation machine(s) at each "home" site would be a relatively low effort network management task " (Sargeant, email 1 Oct 91).
The project does not have to be expanded immediately to provide for a user authentication host, although Monash University will be undertaking some development of the concept. The important point is that a future growth path is available for adding further levels of security provision, and that the terminal server approach is proceeding. However, a good association with some of the larger computer centres and with the general AARNet community of academic and research users is likely to be essential in the future.
However, only two of the four vendors, Datacraft and Dataplex, were able to supply both rackmount and standalone, and the problem of higher prices and longer delivery times for rackmount persisted. We elected to pay the higher prices for an Australian made rackmount, this option being favoured on the grounds of ease of installation and maintenance in the case of a large bank of modems, compared with standalone units. Dataplex was selected on the basis of a marginally lower price, and good reports from Monash, Wollongong and UNE on the reliability and durability of Dataplex's products.
Dataplex's delivery time for rackmounted modems lengthened considerably since the initial negotiations. These units are now expected to be available early in October. As an interim measure, ten standalone modems were ordered from Dataplex for immediate delivery. These modems are intended to be the means for initial testing of the Annex servers, including use by students, and will be relocated to other, smaller sites when the rackmounted units are operationalised. A full rack contains 16 modem cards, compared with the estimate of 20 modems needed at the Melbourne and Sydney sites, and therefore some supplementing by a small number of standalone modems may be required. Smaller sites, for example five or fewer modems, would not warrant the purchase of a rackmount.
The main work in setting up the configurations is in progress at the Melbourne site, Monash University Computer Centre. The Sydney site, the University Centre, does not have any technical staff, and is dependent upon Wollongong University's Information Technology Services for matters such as modem installation. However, some 2400 b/s modems borrowed from UNE are now operational at the University Centre for testing purposes.
An alternative approach is being investigated for smaller sites such as Perth. This is to offer several V32 modems and phone lines for general use by the institution, in return for a commitment to provide access for students of other institutions. Given a login name and password on an appropriate host, a student can use the telnet facility to connect to his or her university's computers. This method is at best an interim measure suitable only for very small numbers of students.
Finding further sites - TAFE, schools, government and business sectors Although it is a matter beyond the scope of this project, it is expected that as AARNet's Affiliate Membership program expands, an increasing number of external students may obtain access through local area networks connected to AARNet by their employers. Thus there are good reasons for distance education developers to be promoting this area of AARNet's activities. Detailed information on AARNet is readily available to network users by anonymous file transfer protocol from AARNet's file server in Canberra, aarnet.edu.au (AARNet, 1992a).
TAFE colleges and learning network centres in particular are likely to become more important as points of access to AARNet for university distance education students. Western Australian and South Australian TAFE have obtained Affiliate Membership, and this offers scope for colleges to develop a service in regions which do not have a university campus (Atkinson, 1992a). The AARNet Advisory Board has adopted a policy which is favourable towards interconnection with TAFEs and remote campuses (AARNet, 1992b).
The project budget to date is detailed below. Note that the ten DPX-296 V32 standalone modems will be relocated to smaller sites after operationalising the rackmounts at the Melbourne (Monash) and Sydney (University Centre) sites.
| Income Item | Subtotal | Total | |
| Reserve Fund grant | 90,900 | ||
| Interest from Murdoch University | 7,740 | ||
| Less University administrative expenses | -4,166 | ||
| Net interest earnings | 3,574 | 3,574 | |
| Total income | 94,474 | 94,474 | |
| Expenditure: Actual to date Item | Subtotal | Total | |
| 1. Monash site: a. Xylogics Annex 3 terminal server, 32 ports b. Four 6 port Octopus cables @ $122 each c. Rack mount kit for above d. 5 DPX-296 V32 standalone modems @ $750 | 6,386 488 319 3,750 | ||
| Subtotal Monash site | 10,943 | 10,943 | |
| 2. University Centre Sydney site: a. Cisco and PC routers - being an agreed share for the Project to bear, approx. one third of the cost of these items, shareable with other functions at the UC. b. Annex III terminal server, full cost for a 32 port configuration as requisitioned for the Monash site, plus connectors, software and miscellaneous items not available already at the University Centre. c. Part cost for second tier of Nortel SLI PABX expansion, an agreed share for the Project to bear. d. One 16 port card for PABX 16 lines to modems. e. Power supplies, racks, installation, cabling. f. 5 DPX-296 V32 standalone modems @ $750. | 3,000 7,600 2,300 2,500 3,200 3,750 | ||
| Subtotal University Centre Sydney site | 22,350 | 22,350 | |
| Subtotal actual expenditure to date | 33,293 | ||
| Expenditure: In progress | |||
| 1. Monash site: a. 16 DPX-225-11 modem cards @ $800 b. Rackmount and power supply c. PABX and server lines (not yet invoiced) | 12,800 2,500 4,500 | ||
| Subtotal Monash site in progress | 19,800 | ||
| 2. University Centre Sydney site: a. 16 DPX-225-11 modem cards @ $800 b. Rackmount and power supply | 12,800 2,500 | ||
| Subtotal University Centre in progress | 15,300 | ||
| Subtotal in progress expenditure | 35,100 | ||
| Total actual and in progress | 68,393 | ||
| Funds remaining at September 1992 | 26,081 | ||
| Total | 94,474 | ||
You have now connected to the ADEnet facility at The
UNIVERSITY CENTRE (210 Clarence St. Sydney).
These modems are provided for use by
current students of the following destination sites.
UNIVERSITY OF NEW ENGLAND DEAKIN UNIVERSITY
a. mihi.une.edu.au j. eros.cc.deakin.oz.au
k. mensa.cc.deakin.oz.au
CHARLES STURT UNIVERSITY l. aragorn.cm.deakin.oz.au
b. zac.csu.edu.au m. sol.deakin.oz.au
c. facom.csu.edu.au n. vax1.viccol.edu.au
d. pandora.csu.edu.au
e. silo.csu.edu.au o. UNILINC
f. golum.csu.edu.au (on-line library catalogue)
MONASH UNIVERSITY JOB COMMANDS
g. giaea.cc.monash.edu.au r. Resume current job
h. giaeb.cc.monash.edu.au s. Kill current job
i. giaec.cc.monash.edu.au t. Terminate session (quit)
Enter destination choice:
Upon entering one of the letters "a" to "o", the caller is connected to the desired host, and will receive its login prompt. The Annex will not permit connections to hosts other than those programmed into it (other universities and a second menu screen have not been entered at this stage). Users do not need to know anything about the Internet protocols or addresses of the hosts (Comer, 1988; Black, 1987), and in any event cannot use direct addressing. The Annex is functioning as planned with respect to security concerns.
Induction of student users, to commence as soon as possible, is a matter for the individual DECs to undertake. A further advantage with the Annex is that its ability to present menus provides an easier interface for inexperienced users, and the staff concerned with advice to students will have to make only minor additions to the documentation provided to their on campus students, and to dialup users in their university's local telephone district. Inexperienced users will find the Annex interface much easier to use than an Austpac interface.
Plans are outlined above for completing work at the Sydney and Melbourne sites, for exploring further levels of security measures at the main sites, and for further sites at main centres such as Brisbane, Canberra, Adelaide, Hobart, Darwin and Perth, at smaller campuses or centres in the university sector, and at smaller centres in the TAFE sector. With the remaining funds, and with relocation of the ten standalone modems from the Sydney and Melbourne sites, it should be possible to provide for five to eight further sites. With careful and patient recruitment, we should be able to provide a good range of pilot examples for small sites, to complement the large site examples in Sydney and Melbourne. However, a further twelve months should be planned to complete the project.
Cost and benefit outcomes are difficult to estimate at this stage. Questions on Austpac costs were included in the survey, but a reliable average figure was not obtainable without considerable additional effort being made. However, a crude estimate may be made by comparing the cost per installed modem with the cost of an equivalent service from Austpac. Assuming a writing off after four years, an average cost of $2,400 per modem, and an average load of 600 hours per year for each, the cost per user hour is about $1. After the restructuring of Austpac tariffs in May 1991, a typical cost per hour for a metropolitan user is about $2, comprising the 6 pm to 8 am connect time charge of $1.20 per hour and $0.80 for traffic volume ($0.80 traffic volume at $0.60 per kilosegment provides 25 to 35 screens of text). Whilst there are many other details, for and against, to be taken into account in any comparison of costs, the ratio of Austpac costs to ADEnet costs is probably about two to one, which appears to be an adequate outcome on this criterion.
Some disappointing outcomes from the May 1991 restructuring of Austpac tariffs should be noted. The cost of a Network User Identifier (NUI) is high, being $120 per year, which is a strong disincentive to those students who have no choice other than Austpac with their own NUIs. The after hours connect time charge for metropolitan users was reduced to $1.20 per hour, but a higher rate, $2.40 per hour, was introduced for non metropolitan users. Thus the ADEnet project's concentration on the two major sites, though appropriate on the basis of large numbers of users, means that students without an ADEnet site and in a non metropolitan region will face a bigger disadvantage than was estimated in earlier times.
However, institutions can expect to save significant amounts when AARNet's plan for interfacing to X25 via a single high speed gateway is implemented (Huston, 1992). Hopefully, some of these savings may be deployed into institutional spending to help students who do not have access to an ADEnet site in their local telephone district, and thus have no option other than Austpac.
There are several private providers of AARNet access, such as Pegasus and Dialix. A limited form of access to AARNet is provided by Keylink, Telecom's email service, via the X400 email gateway between the two systems, operated on behalf of AARNet by the University of Queensland. Some institutions may develop their own forms of fees for student access to AARNet, whilst Austpac itself, if directly charged to student users by means of the NUI option, is a form of fee paying access to AARNet. The direction of evolution, whether towards devolving provision of AARNet access to other parties on a fee paying basis, or towards reduction of the cost of access as espoused by the ADEnet project, needs to be clearly understood. AARNet itself was established by the AVCC because devolution to a private or public provider would not have produced the desired services at costs as low as those achievable by undertaking the work internally. The ADEnet project is expected to establish that the cost of dialup access for students can be reduced to one half, or better, compared with fee paying approaches such as Austpac with NUIs.
There are a wide range of research and development issues in the use of computer mediated communications (CMC) for educational purposes (Mason and Kaye, 1989). Although valuable and pioneering work has been done in Australia (for example, Castro, 1989; Dekkers and Cuskelly, 1989; Frost and Roberts, 1990; Guiton and Atkinson, 1991; Hawley and Spice, 1990; Howse, 1991; Inglis, 1989; Thompson, 1991), a considerably greater effort is warranted.
The project is developing an infrastructure for external students to use AARNet (Australian Academic and Research Network) for long distance connections to a remote host computers for the cost of a local telephone call. The project expenditure is on extra telephone lines, modems and terminal server ports, at selected sites. It provides a coordinated national approach to improved dialup access to AARNet which will provide initially for about one half of Australia's university external students, under the name ADEnet (Australian Distance Education network).
A limited survey of external students using Austpac, Telecom's X25 public network and the current main avenue for long distance dialup access to university computers, showed high concentrations in Sydney and Melbourne. On the basis of an average connect time of two hours per week per student, these cities each required 20 modems to serve the current users. Monash University Computer Centre agreed to host the Melbourne site, and the Sydney site is at the University Centre, located in Clarence Street, Sydney, and jointly operated by Charles Sturt, New England and Wollongong Universities.
Annex 3 terminal servers by Xylogics were selected, having particular regard to network security issues, which required that connections made by the users be restricted to nominated destinations only at the eight Distance Education Centres. A 32 port configuration was purchased, to provide readily for future expansion beyond the initial installation of modems, which will be 16 rackmounted Australian made V32 modems by Dataplex for each. The Sydney and Melbourne sites were partially operational in September 1992, with test menus available. Having achieved an acceptable design for the large sites in Sydney and Melbourne, further work will concentrate upon developing a range of pilot examples for small sites, which may include TAFE colleges in regions which do not have a university campus.
Progress on the project was much slower than the original projection of one year for implementation, owing to difficulties in devising an acceptable minimising of the risks of network access by unauthorised users, long delivery times for the modems which were selected, and the lack of provision for full time staffing. However, the project provides dialup access for students at costs which are one half, or better, compared with other approaches such as the Austpac X25 network.
Dr Wally Howse (Convenor), Director, WADECand to Geoff Huston and Peter Elford of AARNet Administration, and Angela Castro (dceangela%bc750.bitnet@yalevm.ycc.yale.edu).
(howse@csuvax1.murdoch.edu.au)
Craig Warren, Computing Services Unit, Deakin University
(ccw@deakin.oz.au)
Eve Cuskelly, DEC, University of Central Queensland
(cuskellye@topaz.ucq.edu.au)
Douglas Thomson, Sch of Appl Sci, Monash Gippsland Uni Coll
(doug@giaea.oz.au)
John Lockwood, Coordinator Administrative Computing, University of
South Australia (lockwoodj@sacity.schulz.unisa.edu.au)
Mary Jane Mahoney, Campus Telecommunications Coordinator, UNE
Orange Agricultural College (mmahony@gara.une.oz.au)
Sylvia Latham, Manager, Computer Centre, Charles Sturt University
Mitchell (slatham@csunb.mit.csu.edu.au)
Judy Timmins, Coordinator of Student Support System, DEC, University
of Southern Queensland (timmins@zeus.usq.edu.au)
Keith Heale, Acting Deputy Director, Computer Centre, Monash
University (kheale@vaxc.cc.monash.edu.au)
Jim Sargeant, Communications Engineer, Computer Centre, Monash
University (jcs@vaxc.cc.monash.edu.au)
Jim McKee, Information Technology Services,Wollongong University
(Jim_McKee@central-gw.uow.edu.au)
AARNet (Australian Academic and Research Network) (1992a). Quarterly reports, affiliate membership application forms, guides to network use and network resources, membership lists and other documents published by AARNet are available by anonymous ftp from aarnet.edu.au.
AARNet (1992b). AARNet Advisory Board draft Minutes, Meeting 25 March 1992.
Atkinson, R. (1992a). The DEET Communications Link Project. Report to the Department of Employment, Education and Training on a National Priority (Reserve) Fund grant. Perth: Murdoch University External Studies Unit.
Atkinson, R. (1992b). The National Educational Communications Framework: Analysing the question of common technical specifications. In J. G. Hedberg and J. Steele (eds), Educational Technology for the Clever Country: Selected papers from EdTech'92, 175-188. Canberra: AJET Publications. http://www.ascilite.org.au/aset-archives/confs/edtech92/atkinson.html
Atkinson, R. and Castro, A. (1991). The ADEnet Project: Improving computer communications for distance education students. In R. Atkinson, C. McBeath and D. Meacham (eds). Quality in distance education: ASPESA Forum 91, p.11-19. Bathurst, NSW: Australian and South Pacific External Studies Association (ASPESA). http://www.roger-atkinson.id.au/pubs/confs/aspesa91_adenet.html
Atkinson, R. & Castro, A. (1990). An ADEnet on AARNet: a national project to achieve low cost access to computing resources for distance students. Project proposal submitted to DEET National Priority (Reserve) Fund, August 1990.
AVCC (Australian Vice-Chancellors' Committee) (1992). AARNet Business Plan. Report presented to AVCC Executive Meeting 3/92.
AVCC (1989). Australian Academic and Research Network - Progress Report. Report presented to AVCC Executive Meeting, 16 May 1989.
Black, U. (1987). Computer networks: Protocols, standards and interfaces. Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall.
Castro, A. (1990). AARNet and Australian tertiary distance education. Distance Education, 11(2), 213-230. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/0158791900110204
Castro, A. & Warren, C. (1989). Deakinet, AARNet and study centres for Australian distance education. (Unpublished internal briefing paper. Refer Castro (1990) for the published version). Geelong: Institute of Distance Education, and Computing Services, Deakin University.
Castro, A. (1989). Options, interconnection and decision. In Distance education for training in business and industry. Forum Papers, Australian and South Pacific External Studies Association, 9th Biennial Forum, July 1989, p.11-19. Churchill, Vic: Centre for Distance Learning, Gippsland Institute.
Cheswick, W. (1991). An evening with Berferd in which a hacker is lured, endured and studied. Anonymous ftp /pub/doc/berferd.ps from aarnet.edu.au. [see http://www.cheswick.com/ches/papers/berferd.ps]
Cheswick, W. (1990). The design of a secure Internet gateway. Usenix Summer Conference Proceedings, June 1990. Anonymous ftp /pub/doc/Secure_Internet_Gateway.ps from aarnet.edu.au.
Comer, D. (1988). Internetworking with TCP/IP: Principles, protocols and architecture. Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey : Prentice Hall.
Dekkers, J. & Cuskelly, E. (1989). The use of electronic mail for distance education students - a case study. In Distance education for training in business and industry. Forum Papers, Australian and South Pacific External Studies Association, 9th Biennial Forum, July 1989, p.96-105. Churchill, Vic: Centre for Distance Learning, Gippsland Institute.
Frost, T. & Roberts, D. (1990). Electronic mail evaluated - a case study revisited. ASPESA Papers No. 9, November 1990.
Greeve, N. and Stanton, D. (1991). An analysis of the use of the Australian Academic and Research Network by academics, researchers and staff of Murdoch University and Curtin University of Technology in Western Australia. Perth: Murdoch University Library and Curtin University Library.
Guiton, P. and Atkinson, R. (1991). Delivery and communications technologies in the provision of professional continuing education for engineers. Consultant's Report to Engineering Education Australia Pty Ltd.
Hawley, G. & Spice, C. (1990). "From the mountains to the sea". In R. Atkinson & C. McBeath (eds), Open learning and new technology: Conference proceedings, p.179-186. Perth: Australian Society for Educational Technology WA Chapter. http://www.ascilite.org.au/aset-archives/confs/olnt90/hawley.html
Howse, W. (1991). AARNet - the discoveries of a beginner. In R. Atkinson, C. McBeath & D. Meacham (eds), Quality in distance education: ASPESA Forum 91, p.216-221. Bathurst, NSW: ASPESA.
Huston, G. (1992). The interfacing of public packet switched networks to AARNet. Anonymous ftp /pub/doc/x25 on aarnet.edu.au.
Inglis, A. (1989). Designing a national system for disseminating careers and course information. In Distance education for training in business and industry. Forum Papers, Australian and South Pacific External Studies Association, 9th Biennial Forum, July 1989, p.243-254. Churchill, Vic: Centre for Distance Learning, Gippsland Institute.
Mason, R. & Kaye, A. (1989). Mindweave: communication, computers and distance education. Oxford: Pergamon Press.
Jones, G. (1990). Developing open learning through a technological network. Australian Journal of Educational Technology, 6(1), 56-65. http://www.ascilite.org.au/ajet/ajet6/jones.html
McGregor, A. and Latchem, C. (1991). Networks for learning: A review of access and equity in post-compulsory education in rural and remote areas of the State of Western Australia. Perth: Western Australian Office of Higher Education.
Thompson, L. (1991). Designing and implementing an effective computer based tutorial system as a means of improving quality in distance education. In R. Atkinson, C. McBeath & D. Meacham (eds), Quality in distance education: ASPESA Forum 91, p.473-481. Bathurst, NSW: ASPESA.