Alexa Pieper
Handwerkskammer Bildungszentrum, Münster, Germany ale.xa.pieper@hwk-muenster.de
THEORY AND PRAXIS OF E-LEARNING - A CRITICAL REVIEW
Az e - l e a r n i n g elméleti és gyakorlati kérdései - kritikai á t t e k i n t é s Recent surveys and press releases s h o w that the euphoria t o w a r d s e-learning of the past years has given way to plain disenchantment.
N o w that provider, developers and users of e-learning solutions have gained first insight in the reality of this brave new world of teaching and learning it is obvious that we have j u s t scratched the top of the iceberg if it comes to the capabilities of e- learning.
A Münsteri Iparkamara képzési p r o g r a m j a i b a n már több mint m á s f é l éve szere- pcinek e-learning p r o g r a m o k is. Eddigi tapasztalataink alapján azt a kérdést vizsgá- lom. hogy milyen mértékben váltotta be az e-learning azokat az ígéreteket, amelyek a rugalmas, tér- és időbeli korlátoktól mentes önirányításos tanulásra vonatkoztak.
Az már bizonyos, hogy a munkaerő-piaci képzéseket eddig ez az oktatási f o r m a nem változtatta m e g jelentős m é r t é kb e n . A z e-learning inkább kiegészítő képzési forma- ként terjedt el. A z interneten keresztül történő w e b alapú tanulás lehetővé teszi a multimediális hatások széleskörű felhasználását. A többféle kódolású információ- prezentáció é r d e k e s e b b é teheti a tanulást, H o g y ez milyen mértékben realitás m á r ma, ezt a kérdést vizsgálom e l ő a d á s o m b a n .
H B Z ^
•
•Theory and Praxis of e-Leaming
P r o m i s e d B e n e f i t s
iggilll
time benefit flexible j P ^
learning solutions
more effective learning
Quality approvement .savings
Figure 1: Some figures
T o begin with, e - I e a r n i n g has started with the m o s t promising idea of p r o v i d i n g low-budged education to everyone, e v e r y w h e r e and as m u c h customised as possible.
T h e r e f o r e the internet h a s been employed as the most p r o m i n e n t teaching aid, d u e to the fascination of its technical potentialities. And it does bare m u c h potential, indeed - j u s t are interactivity a n d gaudily a n i m a t e d pictures en o u g h to get students in the picture?
So w h a t ' s about the e n c h a n t m e n t of the new media, the new learning solutions?
W h a t ' s about the f u n - f a c t o r of learning with the internet? W h a t ' s about it's praised benefits?
L e t s have a closer l o o k ! (Figure I.)
E-learning m a k e s l e a r n i n g more flexible! - jet, just 50 % of the users agree with that.
E-learning m e a n s a quality a p p r o v e m e n t of learning solutions - just that only 9
% feel this ap p r o v e m e n t already.
E-learning o f f e r s the possibility of customisable learning solutions - as 4 0 % of our users concede.
E-learning d o e s n ' t only save time - wh i c h 33 % of our customers agree with - but m o n e y as well - as 3 0 % detected.
Last but not least, e-learning is said to m a k e learning more e f f e c t i v e - which only 15 % have e n d o r s e d so far.
Well, we have to a d m i t these figures - being the results of recent surveys in Ger- many - d o n ' t throw a very good light on the praxis of e-learning.
F u r t h e r m o r e as to the n u m b e r of users w e can enter on the credit side so far - not quite 1 % for the G e r m a n c r a f t s sector - it could be better as well!
Jet m o r e than to r e s i g n it is about time for a cash check and to bring the first practical experiences to b e a r .
HBZJ
Theory arid Praxis of e-Learning
Questions to be answered
206
Figure 2. Questions to be answered
Therefore we first of all would have to clarify the questions to be ask:
What components do we have to consider if it comes to e-learning?
Which of the promised advantages have been self-fulfilling so far? And why?
Correspondingly, which haven't been self-fulfilling and why not?
As to question No 1 - the components to be considered in e-learning - we can identify the following components:
H B
Theory and Praxis of e-Learning
Components to be considered
• supplier / developer of e-!earning solutions
• the students * their aims and_attempts
• their learning back-ground *t h e whole bandwidth
^ t h e i r ^xpectations and o f multimedia solutions I f e e d s towards education
Figure 3: Components to be considered
On the one hand we find the students who are using e-learning - or who we would like to use e-learning - ; their learning back-ground - that is how they have experienced learning hitherto; as well as their expectations and needs towards edu- cation in general and e-learning in particular.
On the other hand we have those who are dealing with e-learning as providers, developers, teachers.
They, too, follow certain aims and attempts and to do so, they can go back to the whole bandwidth of multimedia-solutions. Which evidently causes the problem of decision making.
Another central questions occurs: How much "e" does learning need? - W e will come back to this question later on.
To give an answer to Questions 2 and 3, which are related close to each other, it is most important to keep the above mentioned - well, lets say - fronting groups in mind.
HBZJ
Theory and Praxis of e-Learning
The Promises and their Implementation
• need of guidance
• learning exactly what
• taking advantage of the
^;műltrcpedia
• flexible learning solutions
•lea rnirtg anytime , a n y w h e re
is needed 1 ('
• qualjty prior before
Figure 4: The Promises and their Implementation
As to the promises of e-learning the questions whether they could be complied or not mainly is a question of how well the aims and attempts of the providers have met the needs and expectations of the users.
Again, on the one hand we have to determine the aims of the suppliers to take as much advantage as possible of the new media - unfortunately not always to the benefit of methodological and didactical considerations.
Furthermore we have to allow the question how much flexibility really is needed in education, especially if we are talking about national operating schools and insti- tutions. Would students really exploit a 24-hour-support?
And eventually, where is it that students most likely would access their learning- account?
At that point our considerations have to factor in the students point of view, which is much more based on the request for guidance and support than on the de- mand of temporal flexibility in learning.
Quite contrary, for most students the potentiality of e-learning to learn exactly what is needed at a most individual degree, which would not be possible in classical education, is rather attractive.
And again, interactivity and the fun-factor of learning is not the essential - even though we - and our students - do admit that it does add an extra incentive to learn- ing. But who said learning w a s n ' t supposed to be fun anyway?
208
HBZi
Theory and Praxis of e-Learning
How much ,,e" needs learning?
C o m m 1
S u c c e s s o f l e a r n i n g S u p p l e m e n t s
•
Figure 5: How much "e" needs learning
Well, now that wc h a v e detected s o m e of the problems we h a d n ' t seen - or lets say which we tended to oversee right at the start - it is about time to d r a w a line under these first theoretical expectations and real experiences and sum them up.
W h a t we find than gives us a good overview of what we have to bear in mind and - most essentially - what we have to factor in as we are aiming to elaborate e- lcarning s e t t i n g s .(F i g u r e 5.)
First of all we can learn f r o m the ventilations of the first e-learning participants - students as well as teachers - that e-learning does require s o m e kind of structure - how this could look like, we will see further on.
Second, we still do have the a r g u m e n t and defacto a d v an t a g e of flexibility, which as a matter of fact and after a closer look turns out to be a question of struc- ture, indeed. As we will see, structure and flexibility can supplement each other quite well.
Closely related to the call for structure especially the students have e x p r e s s e d , there is a need of tutoring as well. It c o m e s as another cognition of the first practical experiences with e-learning: Mainly due to the more c o n s u m e orientated attitude of most attendance classes, m a n y students d o n ' t have enough self-confidence in their own learning-ability, which actually is one of the most significant suppositions of e- learning. E v e n though e-learning provides some guidance and help t h r o u g h o u t a structure and tutor, students do have to learn much more self-dependent and inde- pendently as in classical educational settings. T o sustain our students in gaining this self-confidence and learning ability is one of the most urgent tasks we have to con- centrate on in the close future.
Closely related to self-confidence in ones learning ability is the ability of self- motivation which is especially needed in e-learning to prevent drop-out. It is up to us, the developers and engineers of e-learning, to think of mechanisms, structures, didactical solutions to support students in their venture of gaining new skills and k n o w l e d g e and to secure the learning progress. This solutions are still missing.
As it looks like right now, c o m m u n i c a t i o n either virtual or personal - as well as automatic and interactive m e c h a n i s m s - seams to be a very reliable candidate in the e f f o r t to secure the learning p r o g r e s s . The s a m e is for the provision of further infor- mation as needed, via e-mail or n e w s groups for e x a m p l e .
N o w that we h a v e defined the main c o l u m n s of e-learning, we find that all of theses requirements and conditions of e-learning interact with each other in multiple ways. Structure f o r example, as mentioned ab o v e , seems to contrast with flexibility for a given time-table obviously limits flexibility. On the other hand, exactly the sa me time-table c a n help students to organise their learning time most effectively and thus to gain b a c k flexibility. This is just one of the multiple e x a m p l e s for two conditions of e - l e a r n i n g which s e e m to contrast with each other but turn out to c o m - plement each other quite well.
Theory and Praxis of e-learning
Conclusions
Macro-Level ...
• o p e n e - l e a r n i n g no timed structure free access to the contents any time / any place
• s t r u c t u r e d e - l e a r n i n g timed structure
frequent consultation with the class t tutor
• b l e n d e d l e a r n i n g question of the appropriate combination of online and attendance classes
Micro-Level
• t e l e t e a c h i n g equals the common role allocation between teacher and student
• t e l e t u t o r i n g
self-organised learning process;
supported by a tutor / coach if needed
I • t e l e c o o p e r a t i o n
learning communities; supported by a tutor / coach if needed
Figure 6: Conclusions
A f t e r we have gained lucidity about the being and conditions of e-learning now, we are able to d r a w the picture of h o w e-learning should look like in future
T h e r e f o r we first of all have to straighten out the organisational matters of e- learning.
In regard to the problems r e v e a l e d above we have to distinguish between the plain structure of e - l e a r n i n g - the so called macro-level - and the different kinds of instruction conceivab le in e - l e a r n i n g - the so called micro-level. (F i g u r e 6.)
A s a s u m m a r y of the m o s t utilised forms of teaching in the past we can determine the follow:
O n the macro-level we can distinguish between
- the so called open e - l e a r n i n g which d o e s n ' t o f f e r a timely structure and pro- vides f r e e a c c e s s to the c o n t e n t s any time, any place via internet;
- different k i n d s of structured e-learning wh i c h are characterised by a given structure and frequent consultation with the class and tutor;
210
- blended learning solutions which are a combination of structured e-learning and classical attendance classes.
On the micro-level we find
teleteaching arrangements which equal the common role allocation between teacher and student;
- teletutoring situations which are self-organised learning processes supported by a tutor if needed;
- and telecooperation as a form of learning community supported by a tutor if needed.
Well, organising these figures still does not relieve us from deciding which of the listed forms would be the best!
The answer is quite simple: None and all of them!
First of all, the different types on the macro-level can be combined in multiple ways with the types on the micro-level and vice versa.
Next and most urgently, we have to consider the needs and requests of our students - as I see the development of the past years - this barely was been taken into account so far. The approaches of the past years were mainly due to the pure fascination of the possibilities of c-learning - now we have to concentrate on the neccessarities.
Our students have demonstrated us that they don't want pure interactivity and flexibility in the first place but a little more freedom in organising learning. And they definitly don't want to miss guidance and help from a qualified teacher. They even are ready to pay for this more likely than to save money booking an e-learning course without any support.
Other than that, not only the will but also the readiness to learn are to be taken into account in regard to the didactical and methodological structure of e-learning.
Not everyone is ready to learn in a more self-organised way, mostly due to the atti- tude in classical class-rooms. Most of us have grown up learning that learning is when a teacher tells you what you should know and all you have to do is getting the picture. This is totally different with e-learning, here you are much more obliged to discover the picture yourself and get it, but - first of all - you have to learn how to discover it.
MBZJ
Theory and Praxis of e-Learning
Conclusion
Didactic prior Methodology
reflective use of the communication media
E-Learning
Figure 7: Outlook
In our aims of elaborating innovative and most e f f e c t i v e e-learning solutions and to secure that e - l e a r n i n g will not only add an extra value to t o m o r r o w s education but to t o d a y ' s as well, we have to determine 4 main tasks that we have to concentrate on:
T o prior the didactic b e f o r e the methodology.
Invent new w a y s of " c l a s s - r o o m " c o m m u n i c a t i o n - either virtual or personal.
Teach our students how to learn and how to attain a higher degree of educational maturity.
And last but not least, to find innovative and e f f e c t i v e didactical solutions which guarantee success in learning.
Only if we are a w a r e that t e c h n o l o g y itself d o e s not solve the p r o b l e m s of teach- ing we are able to e m p l o y it to the most benefit in a n e w and most e f f e c t i v e way in this brave new world of learning.
2 1 2
