Following up on Carolyn Park's suggestion, I've opened this thread to articulate the need for e-learning and related e-learning research.
I made a stab at this in my opening remarks, but I am sure the value of these technologies and techniques is different in different contexts. Picking up on all the people listed in our thread on "who's afraid of e-learning" makes me realize how important clear articulation of the benefits are. One of (and perhaps the most critical) steps in any change process is the sense that there is a compelling reason for that change.
It would be very useful if a few of us could post a few sentences over vieweing their own sense of the value of e-learning and why there is an urgency to develop that value.
Terry
Because e-learning provides the scaffolding and skills for participation in contemporary societal approaches to inquiry, investigation, reflection, knowledge contruction, communications and virtual work. These are all components of a knowledge society, which Canada is and wants to be.
Good one Vivian. I think we will have to address the fact that education prepares individuals to be productive members of society and as the society changes so MUST education, not only to keep abreast but to be leaders. I know Terry said this but we have to be concise and explicit for "others" to get it.
Kind of like that stuff about North America falling behind in science and math a few years back. That had an impact.
I'm sure others will be more eloquent than I.
Caroline
Kind of like that stuff about North America falling behind in science and math a few years back. That had an impact.
I'm sure others will be more eloquent than I.
Caroline
For me, elearning provides access to education. You don’t have to go very far from an urban centre in Canada to be considered ‘remote’. I think of logging/mining/mill towns, Aboriginal communities, places where the residents may not want, or be able to leave in order to pursue education. Geography should not have to be a barrier and elearning can help with issues of isolation that can occur in strictly paper based distance learning.
Terri's point needs to be emphasized! It seems obvious to say it, but Canada is a BIG country. As long as we insist that our citizenry move to urban centres for any advanced education (as we mostly still do), we are fueling a social movement that is (in my opinion) not good for Canada. The incredible expense of having to live in the city in order to attend university is like a huge education tax for us rural people. Studying so far from home & support systems is an added stress. And when I last checked, research indicated that students who move out of rural communities for university often don't return. So the investment is lost & the benefits of that advanced education do not enrich that community.
Either we continue to force urbanization on a low-density, vast country, or we extend educational opportunities to the other 90% of Canada (& we do it better). That's why e-learning is crucial for Canada.
My 2 cents!
Gina
Either we continue to force urbanization on a low-density, vast country, or we extend educational opportunities to the other 90% of Canada (& we do it better). That's why e-learning is crucial for Canada.
My 2 cents!
Gina
While I agree that access related to geography, and other common barriers to traditional education that are decreased because of Elearning are very important, I think that as a strategy those are positive off shoots but not the main message. Governments think that they are meeting their mandate to provide education so we have to show why it isn't good enough any longer.
Caroline
Caroline
I work with physicians who can't/won't travel to urban centers for training. Medicine requires lifelong learning to keep up-to-date, so e-learning is an obvious answer. In my personal practice, I provide faculty development opportunities for 800 part-time faculty scattered throughout Saskatchewan. I use blogs and wikis for less formal learning and Blackboard and Elluminate for more formal seminars.
In a past life, I worked on a post-degree certificate program for special education teachers. Again, you had working teachers scattered over large areas who needed to develop skills, but who were unable/unwilling to travel to the city for classes. This program has been operating successfully for 3 years and was written up in Plan to Learn: Case Studies in eLearning Project Management.
I used to argue that one of the hidden benefits of distance education was that it allowed us to improve teaching and learning and help instructors move away from content-delivery approaches. According to this argument, instructors would be more willing to accept advice and direction around teaching when they were developing a DE course than they would when teaching face face. The new teaching approaches they learned in developing a DE course would then transfer to their other teaching and gradually we would see an overall improvement in teaching.
After 25 years of experience in two post secondary institutions (one with a focus on research, the other with a focus on teaching) I am having doubts about this argument. At the very least, the spinoff effects of DE are not happening fast enough.
All this leads me to wonder about the value of focusing on e-learning and e-learning research if one of our main arguments is that it is a way of improving teaching an learning. If that is truly our main interest, then shouldn't we be developing a learning research agenda of which e-learning is just one part?
Mark.
After 25 years of experience in two post secondary institutions (one with a focus on research, the other with a focus on teaching) I am having doubts about this argument. At the very least, the spinoff effects of DE are not happening fast enough.
All this leads me to wonder about the value of focusing on e-learning and e-learning research if one of our main arguments is that it is a way of improving teaching an learning. If that is truly our main interest, then shouldn't we be developing a learning research agenda of which e-learning is just one part?
Mark.
Is this Learning Design Research, design that incorporates tools and technologies; design that considers access and audience (geography, K-12, tertiary, workplace); design that incorporates experience design, information design, engagement design and components of application/systems design; design that is transferable between formal (accredited) and informal learning settings? Wouldn't it be great to distinguish ourselves with a *design ethos* for learning that makes Canada feel a little more like Finland maybe?
And let's not forget Terry's design-based research methodologies ;-)
I think we need some focus because learning research looks like an AERA big tent.
I agree there is a danger in getting too broad. However, AERA doesn't have an overall research agenda so the comparison is a bit extreme.
I think one of the reasons that e-learning research doesn't have the status it perhaps deserves is that it has not been well-integrated into the broader educational research agendas of our research institutions. I point to the Centre for Managing and Planning Learning Environments (MAPLE) which I presided over briefly as it gradually expired due to institutional neglect. The argument at the time was that only Faculties should be engaged in research and since MAPLE was not part of a Faculty it did not deserve institutional sanction. It didn't matter that it was the only unit in the university that was doing e-learning research.
Mark.
I think one of the reasons that e-learning research doesn't have the status it perhaps deserves is that it has not been well-integrated into the broader educational research agendas of our research institutions. I point to the Centre for Managing and Planning Learning Environments (MAPLE) which I presided over briefly as it gradually expired due to institutional neglect. The argument at the time was that only Faculties should be engaged in research and since MAPLE was not part of a Faculty it did not deserve institutional sanction. It didn't matter that it was the only unit in the university that was doing e-learning research.
Mark.
I went into instructional design with the idea that online education would transform thinking about teaching. I did design work at both a community college and a university and at both places felt like an overpaid secretary who took pages of writing, edited them and converted them to html. Other approaches to teaching were rejected out of hand and my percieved role in the development process left me powerless to make changes.
Luckily, I did work on one project mentioned in an earlier message for the development of nine courses, where the instructor respected me as an experienced teacher and we collaboratively created a model that used roleplays and problem-based cases.
I think what was missing at both the community college and the university was a process of faculty development about good teaching and content design in this type of environment. (Thats why I changed paths and went to faculty development.
)
So here is the Catch22, if faculty don't use innovative methods of teaching, how can you do useful research into that innovation. If you don't have valid research, how can you argue for particular models of course development.
Hi,
Am just weighing in now, having finally finished marking term assignments.
Re “why elearning is important to Canada?”, Bonnie's example of a typical Catch22 situation piqued my interest and prompted my jumping into this discussion: "if faculty don't use innovative methods of teaching, how can you do useful research into that innovation. If you don't have valid research, how can you argue for particular models of course development".
I can identify with this quandary. But I think there is a way out. And the impact on elearning research could be considerable. Consider this: it is not an overstatement to say that currently-serving faculty have been bombarded with more new technology than any other generation of faculty since the creation of the Academy. They’ve witnessed exponential growth and possibilities. We also all know that many have not been able to accommodate new technology into their workload for a variety of reasons, but let me focus on what I'd term the “faulty strategy” we’ve been using, i.e. the attempt to move faculty to technology rather than moving technology to faculty. Let me illustrate this with an example: I was first involved in DE then online learning as an instructional designer and I worked with faculty to develop "web" courses. I'm sure a lot of people in this forum realise the amount of time and effort the development of a full-blown web course can take, not to mention the financial expenditure involved for the institution. I came away from this experience (which I documented in a study I published in 2005, with case studies in a book that has just been published by Athabasca UP) with a number of observations: the faculty I interviewed…
a) didn’t have time to develop full web courses (even with great support!);
b) didn’t have time to learn to use an CMS that requires training (at least, not more than a few hours);
b) didn’t have much of any intrinsic incentive to develop online courses (most were required to do so);
c) tended to constantly add and subtract materials to their courses, thereby requiring constant updating, if not redesign;
d) had set habits and practices linked to a long academic tradition such as setting aside time for weekly classes and meeting students… but they were not at all accustomed to the idea (and even less the actual practice) of typing for hours on end, answering email and intervening in burgeoning forums (as a side note, several faculty I interviewed told me that the reason they became university professors in the first place was for the special bond /relationship they developed with students, not with a computer screen…)
e) were not used to a student-centered approach. Trying to get them to move in that direction WHILE implementing new technology is a double whammy: first, getting them to document in written form for online delivery what had always been transmitted orally in class is one problem; second, introducing new technology (CMS) which requires a major change in workload to do so is the killer. As a result, a logjam quickly developed. When required to put things down in writing, there was usually an issue with quality. Some faculty wouldn’t give their sign-off until everything was perfect. Literally. Which means some courses never saw the light of day…
I’m starting to get long-winded so I’ll conclude by saying that, now as a faculty member myself, I have been working on breaking the Catch22 loop by practicing what I preach (which I believe is the upcoming concepts to be debated this week). So I decided to start designing an online approach that worked for me (which I termed a “Blended online learning environment”, Power, AERA, 2008), i.e. firstly implementing a rather basic coconstructed website (with regularly updated course materials and a scaled, individual work/teamwork approach) and then secondly using a virtual classroom (for plenary session group work) into which I "virtually waltz" every Tuesday and Thursday afternoons and moderate seminar-style graduate classes. It’s business almost as usual, with coconstruction of knowledge occurring in both synchronous and asynchronous modes. Now, after having gradually implemented and improved this approach in my own teaching over the last ten years, I am in a position to discuss it with my colleagues. Hopefully, I will be able to link up with like-minded researchers in this conference to expand what is currently a small-scale (insearch of funding...) research program. This I believe is important as Canada has all the ingredients to become a major elearning actor on an expanding world stage.
Mike
Hi Michael Powers,
I can related to everything you stated. What really intrigued me was the last paragraph, where you mention designing an online approach that worked for you -- "Blended online learning environment". Firstly, I think the key is designing it took time; secondly researching it will take some small-scale funding. I think many teachers are interested in "what works and demonstrating it by research".
I'm imagining that collaboration in these efforts is key for, not only funding, but for number of cases that use "similar" approaches.
I, for one, would be interested in teaching this way as it could apply to Health Psychology -- and would like to be contacted about being involved in the research in some modest way.
Jo Ann
I can related to everything you stated. What really intrigued me was the last paragraph, where you mention designing an online approach that worked for you -- "Blended online learning environment". Firstly, I think the key is designing it took time; secondly researching it will take some small-scale funding. I think many teachers are interested in "what works and demonstrating it by research".
I'm imagining that collaboration in these efforts is key for, not only funding, but for number of cases that use "similar" approaches.
I, for one, would be interested in teaching this way as it could apply to Health Psychology -- and would like to be contacted about being involved in the research in some modest way.
Jo Ann
Sure thing. I'm currently working with a colleague in Alberta and have started an informal discussion on blended online learning among colleagues in NZ, AZ, HK, MX, US & CA. We're gearing up for an international study over the next year. Given the thrust of this conference, I'm confident we'll find other interested parties. Will conduct a follow-up at conference end.
Mike
Michael,
I would be very interested in collaborating in an international study on blended learning.
I would be very interested in collaborating in an international study on blended learning.
Hello Michael
I am also working on blended learning approaches with colleagues in NZ Aus and many others. Perhaps we might be able to share experiences over time.
Regards
Suzanne
Mark said: All this leads me to wonder about the value of focusing on e-learning and e-learning research if one of our main arguments is that it is a way of improving teaching an learning. If that is truly our main interest, then shouldn't we be developing a learning research agenda of which e-learning is just one part?
I have been teaching English to speakers of other languages via e-learning in high school settings since the mid 90s. My experiences with e-learning seem to suggest that e-learning improves language skills. I agree with Mark that the main focus should be on learning and how e-learning can improve instruction and learning.
I have been teaching English to speakers of other languages via e-learning in high school settings since the mid 90s. My experiences with e-learning seem to suggest that e-learning improves language skills. I agree with Mark that the main focus should be on learning and how e-learning can improve instruction and learning.
E-learning is important to Canada because ,knowledge is an asset to all the people. If you are in a private sector you can use e-learning for training and development of your organization. That’s why some people taking about learning organizations. If it is education then e-learning always helps you to share and produce (generate) knowledge.
As a developed country Canada can be a benchmark for other courtiers in e-learning. Especially in research.E-learning policy should go in line with ICT policy.
Hi Nalin
I slightly agree with your point of view but dveloping countries should also utilize ICT for educating their people where there is problem of thick population. I know that it will take time to get optimum benefit from ICTs by developing nations. Open university Pakistan is one of the maga universities of the world and has shifted its approach of education from traditional distance education to e-education. But the destination is.........
Canada is a dveloped country and on the other hand its literacy rate is high and has all amenties of ICT but I think ICT is global value and equally important for each nation on the globe.
Jumani
Hello Jumani,
Yes it will take time(introducing ICT and expecting fully online environment ) once we are considering about developing countries…then the responsibility of intellectuals will come in to play. Human element is very important in this sense..resources should manage well with proper planning….to curtail the time period (distance to fully e-learning environment)I think the role of intellectuals (professors like you) is very important. This is a much needed demand in this decade…development of the country depends on the development of ICT as well as development of research on theses sectors….academics, intellectuals together with entrepreneur should join hand with government(partnerships) for this journey.
Interesting that you should bring this up. I did a comparative study on ICT, education, economic development, and R & D policies that was presented at the AERA Conference in NY this year. I had wanted to include Canada as one of the countries to look at. However, I found 1) very few comparative studies on Canada (perhaps I was looking in the wrong places) and 2) very few studies that looked at these four factors more in-depth for Canada. While I could find statistics, I found very little in the way of policy analysis. I did find a lot of analyses about Western Europe, Africa, and Asia, but very little about the Americas (North, Central, and South) with the exception of the US.
You can a find a copy of the paper here. (Yonkers, V. (2008) Creating the Knowledge Economy: A model of technology, economic development, education, and research & development policies. American Educational Research Association Conference: International Education SIG. Presented March 26, New York City, NY. ) I am wondering if any of you know of any comparative studies on e-learning which includes Canada (apart from the OECD, TIMMS, or PICA studies).
You can a find a copy of the paper here. (Yonkers, V. (2008) Creating the Knowledge Economy: A model of technology, economic development, education, and research & development policies. American Educational Research Association Conference: International Education SIG. Presented March 26, New York City, NY. ) I am wondering if any of you know of any comparative studies on e-learning which includes Canada (apart from the OECD, TIMMS, or PICA studies).
Thanks..as you suggested comparative study will bring better results.I think researchers can use quantitative as well as qualitative data.(some time I wonders some qualitative researches come up with very good conclusions)..Triangulation of research should be the way.e-learning and research of e-learning should be number one in ICT and e-learning policy in the country. Percentage wise if you invest 100 Canadian $ for e-learning at least 10% should spend on research and development(like you invest 10% from your Gross National Income(GNP) for R&D).If you can benchmark some country then it is easy for you to have a comparative analysis.(in the future other countries will benchmark Canada!!).And more importantly I think there is a role of “promotion” which can play a good role in E-learning .In promotion we can use the AIDA model.
Attention
Interest
Desire
Action
To make you potential customers (in e-learning we can say people who do not aware about the subject) you can create their awareness by using promotions(advertising, sales promotion, personal selling etc,etc)…then for interest, desire and action different promotional campaigns can be used. This is very important in every industry. Especially if you want to have a proper plan (or business plan) you need this.
I really like this question - Why is e-learning crucial for Canada?
The answers everyone has come up with so far are great:
- scaffolding and skills for participation in a knowledge society - including inquiry, virtual work, knowledge construction, communication, investigation, ...
- access to education - equalized participation, overcoming geography limitations and isolation, financial affordances, reduced stress, extend educational opportunities to the 90% of Canadians in a rural, low density or remote area of Canada. Canada's a big country e-learning overcomes distance.
- lifelong learning for working professionals - physicians, teachers, ...
- improvements in teaching and transforming thinking about teaching -however contentious this might be.
I also like the question - Why is e-learning crucial for me? For e-learning to be crucial to Canada it has to be crucial to each of us. If we ourselves are not e-learners then e-learning just isn't that crucial.
Reflecting on my own personal experiences as an e-learner two things jump out at me.
1. E-learning is a means of global citizenship. E-learning expands participation and understanding of life outside our immediate location, not just nationally but internationally. E-learning connects us to the world bringing the lives of others (students and teachers) into our lives.
2. E-learning is a means of personal and professional growth with societal benefits. Virtually all societies aspire to high degrees of education attainment for citizens. E-learning is a crucial means of fulfilling that aspiration. E-learning is a choice each of us can make to better ourselves.
When I think of e-learning I like to contemplate what it enables that is simply not possible through any other means. So, if I had to throw this thread forward with my own question it would be -
What does e-learning uniquely enable?
The answers everyone has come up with so far are great:
- scaffolding and skills for participation in a knowledge society - including inquiry, virtual work, knowledge construction, communication, investigation, ...
- access to education - equalized participation, overcoming geography limitations and isolation, financial affordances, reduced stress, extend educational opportunities to the 90% of Canadians in a rural, low density or remote area of Canada. Canada's a big country e-learning overcomes distance.
- lifelong learning for working professionals - physicians, teachers, ...
- improvements in teaching and transforming thinking about teaching -however contentious this might be.
I also like the question - Why is e-learning crucial for me? For e-learning to be crucial to Canada it has to be crucial to each of us. If we ourselves are not e-learners then e-learning just isn't that crucial.
Reflecting on my own personal experiences as an e-learner two things jump out at me.
1. E-learning is a means of global citizenship. E-learning expands participation and understanding of life outside our immediate location, not just nationally but internationally. E-learning connects us to the world bringing the lives of others (students and teachers) into our lives.
2. E-learning is a means of personal and professional growth with societal benefits. Virtually all societies aspire to high degrees of education attainment for citizens. E-learning is a crucial means of fulfilling that aspiration. E-learning is a choice each of us can make to better ourselves.
When I think of e-learning I like to contemplate what it enables that is simply not possible through any other means. So, if I had to throw this thread forward with my own question it would be -
What does e-learning uniquely enable?
Paul,
just a quick thought - I am engaged in e-learning right now while I read the posts and consider their implications. How else could I connect to this wide audience of researchers and practicioners?
Peter:
Sure, I agree this Pan-Canadian e-learning research forum is a type of informal e-learning. I'd also agree that this kind of grassroots participation in creating a research agenda is crucial but still a new and novel idea.
But of course e-learning is also associated extensively with more formal learning. So I thought I'd probe the extent to which we all are choosing e-learning as the means to achieve our formal learning goals where investment and risk are significantly higher than when we are engaged in informal e-learning.
I guess part of my thinking is that e-learning is crucial when it:
- is the mode of learning we choose (even when other options are available)
- is pervasive in both informal and formal contexts
- is achieving outcomes impossible to accomplish any other way
Paul
Sure, I agree this Pan-Canadian e-learning research forum is a type of informal e-learning. I'd also agree that this kind of grassroots participation in creating a research agenda is crucial but still a new and novel idea.
But of course e-learning is also associated extensively with more formal learning. So I thought I'd probe the extent to which we all are choosing e-learning as the means to achieve our formal learning goals where investment and risk are significantly higher than when we are engaged in informal e-learning.
I guess part of my thinking is that e-learning is crucial when it:
- is the mode of learning we choose (even when other options are available)
- is pervasive in both informal and formal contexts
- is achieving outcomes impossible to accomplish any other way
Paul
Elearning is a necessity for a number of reasons. Geography plays a big part, especially in Canada. Cradle to grave learning is enhanced through technology. Witness two-year-olds manipulating keyboards and my ninety-year-old father-in-law sending emails and text messages.
But I agree with the previous posting that innovation needs to be showcased and become part of all online learning. Yesterday I was told that elearning is "boring, not interactive and does not engage students." Perhaps this was true when it was just digitized correspondence courses. But it is not true of online learning today. How prevalent is the perception that was unapologetically articulated by one who professes to know a lot about elearning? Maybe some misperceptions need to be addressed.
I am still hung up on two things:, the definition of Elearning and why it is crucial to anybody.
Is Elearning is both a means and an end? The means, a way to get information to learners, any where any time, etc. is important but what about defining it as an end, a way of learning, perhaps even better than traditional avenues?
Viewing it as an end, what happens in formal schooling is more importantly about learning to utilize electronic communications for ongoing education, including the ever changing electronic communication world itself and, for the previous generations, still in the workforce, it is more importantly about learning to use technology to learn continuously and independently than the updating of skills and knowledge to use today.
This approach leads to a goal of maintaining (attaining, regaining?) Canada's position in the global information society, and it becomes crucial.
From that stance, the research strategy flows to best practices in learning through (with?) technologies in all disciplines, all ages, all educational levels, all locations etc.
Any sense here?
Caroline
Is Elearning is both a means and an end? The means, a way to get information to learners, any where any time, etc. is important but what about defining it as an end, a way of learning, perhaps even better than traditional avenues?
Viewing it as an end, what happens in formal schooling is more importantly about learning to utilize electronic communications for ongoing education, including the ever changing electronic communication world itself and, for the previous generations, still in the workforce, it is more importantly about learning to use technology to learn continuously and independently than the updating of skills and knowledge to use today.
This approach leads to a goal of maintaining (attaining, regaining?) Canada's position in the global information society, and it becomes crucial.
From that stance, the research strategy flows to best practices in learning through (with?) technologies in all disciplines, all ages, all educational levels, all locations etc.
Any sense here?
Caroline
To kind of veer off a little from your points and questions, Caroline, I look at it this way.
As educators, we have a responsibility to teach our learners. I'm sure most of us would agree that, from a pedagogy stand point, we try all means and ways we can to reach learners-- to facilitate their learning, to speak their language.
Delivering learning in the language of the digital natives IS crucial. I see it in my Middle School. As soon as I put instructions up on the LCD screen instead of the chalkboard, their attention goes way up, even if they are sitting in traditional desks using pen and paper.
So, the "crucial" for me fits in along the curriculum timeline of "the Metric system" and "Canada's second official language".
I see a time when elearning won't be "another kind of learning". It will be a part of a greater whole.
As educators, we have a responsibility to teach our learners. I'm sure most of us would agree that, from a pedagogy stand point, we try all means and ways we can to reach learners-- to facilitate their learning, to speak their language.
Delivering learning in the language of the digital natives IS crucial. I see it in my Middle School. As soon as I put instructions up on the LCD screen instead of the chalkboard, their attention goes way up, even if they are sitting in traditional desks using pen and paper.
So, the "crucial" for me fits in along the curriculum timeline of "the Metric system" and "Canada's second official language".
I see a time when elearning won't be "another kind of learning". It will be a part of a greater whole.
Good day:
I am enjoying the conference. Now that I have caught-up on the presentations there are a few points that I believe are critical to e-learning and a research agenda.
Fist is the realization that a large portion of the e-learning in higher education is performed by adjunct professors. Motivated and highly talented professors who take it upon themselves to do research and keep current with little institutional support.
The second challenge is the class status of e-learning. As an adjunct professor and student the pecking order for e-learning education amazed me. I learned from my fellow undergraduate classmates that e-learning ranked a poor second to the rigors of day school classes. Given that some institutions view e-learning as a “cash cow” this may be understandable. What I find more disturbing is the idea that this two-tiered system appears supported by leaders in higher education.
The second challenge is the miss-guided notion that e-learning is just-in-time anywhere learning. For the most part the classroom is structures and paced. Albeit the doors are always open there are times when students must appear for class, online tests, exercises, and posting requirements. I believe we do a disservice to students who buy into e-learning because they think they control the classroom environment. Their surprise is reflected in the course evaluations.
I am excited at the potential to become part of an active e-learning Canadian research agenda. More importantly it provides a golden opportunity to set a solid foundation upon which the three legs of e-learning research, e-learning business, teaching and learning, and knowledge production, can have a unified base to sit upon.
I believe this fits into the mind map thread of why e-learning is critical to Canada.
Sincerely,
Caterina Valentino
I've been enjoying reading this thread - some great ideas on the value of elearning for Canada.
A few quick comments on the value of elearning research (a slight twist on Terry's question):
We live in an era of increased control on the part of each individual (assuming a few "basics" such as internet connection and computer) to contribute to the pool of information. This ease of creation is highly theoretical and quickly begins to capture the attention pundits/theorizers who describe rather than research the phenomenon. We then end up generalizing what people actually do with these content creation tools based on a few talented authors/bloggers...but do not have the research base to support it. The Google Myth, for example, explores, then challenges, the assumption many educators have students use of technology. But for many, students have already been profiled by the more informal interactions with assumptions and theories put forward in online spaces or pop-culture books. The value of formal elearning research is to address this concern.
Secondly, it seems intuitive to me that due to the highly social nature of humanity, when we begin to change how we interact with each other through technology, it has ripple effects that run through much of society. My personal interest is in how our interactions with information and each other are influenced by the internet, mobile phones, and other technology. Something as fundamental as how we interact with each other has (conceivably) significant implications for teaching and learning. The value of elearning research as a societal imperative rests in this area.
A few quick comments on the value of elearning research (a slight twist on Terry's question):
We live in an era of increased control on the part of each individual (assuming a few "basics" such as internet connection and computer) to contribute to the pool of information. This ease of creation is highly theoretical and quickly begins to capture the attention pundits/theorizers who describe rather than research the phenomenon. We then end up generalizing what people actually do with these content creation tools based on a few talented authors/bloggers...but do not have the research base to support it. The Google Myth, for example, explores, then challenges, the assumption many educators have students use of technology. But for many, students have already been profiled by the more informal interactions with assumptions and theories put forward in online spaces or pop-culture books. The value of formal elearning research is to address this concern.
Secondly, it seems intuitive to me that due to the highly social nature of humanity, when we begin to change how we interact with each other through technology, it has ripple effects that run through much of society. My personal interest is in how our interactions with information and each other are influenced by the internet, mobile phones, and other technology. Something as fundamental as how we interact with each other has (conceivably) significant implications for teaching and learning. The value of elearning research as a societal imperative rests in this area.
These are good observations George.
But my feeling is that our discipline is much better informed by potential than by practice. By knowing what could be done rather than by what is being done.
A person's practice is influenced by his or her knowledge, expectations or beliefs. In an era of rapidly changing technology, those expectations or beliefs are out of date. Studying practice, therefore, introduces systematically misleading data into the discussion.
I agree that substituting 'description' of what some pundit and his technorati friends do is a poor substitute for research. Following the in-crowd will not do either. But neither, I think, substitutes for a program of recognizing and creating potential.
The premise of much research is, loosely, that if we study some population, if we study what they do, then we could somehow 'get it right' a priori, that we could inform the development of programs and technology. It is this presumption that is incorrect.
But my feeling is that our discipline is much better informed by potential than by practice. By knowing what could be done rather than by what is being done.
A person's practice is influenced by his or her knowledge, expectations or beliefs. In an era of rapidly changing technology, those expectations or beliefs are out of date. Studying practice, therefore, introduces systematically misleading data into the discussion.
I agree that substituting 'description' of what some pundit and his technorati friends do is a poor substitute for research. Following the in-crowd will not do either. But neither, I think, substitutes for a program of recognizing and creating potential.
The premise of much research is, loosely, that if we study some population, if we study what they do, then we could somehow 'get it right' a priori, that we could inform the development of programs and technology. It is this presumption that is incorrect.
It seems to me that any good research agenda
In the comparative study I did on creating the knowledge economy, I discovered that the most successful economies developed a mechanism that coordinated economic development, R&D, education, and ICT policies. The form of the mechanism did not matter as long as it fit the culture of the country (i.e private or public led, loosely structured or very formal, driven by the government or locally driven). This is why I think it is very important that all the stakeholders are identified and brought into the process now. You might want to look at the models used by the Scandinavian countries, Ireland, and the Netherlands.
- looks at past, present, and future (potential)
- includes theory and practice
- looks at the macro and the micro levels.
In the comparative study I did on creating the knowledge economy, I discovered that the most successful economies developed a mechanism that coordinated economic development, R&D, education, and ICT policies. The form of the mechanism did not matter as long as it fit the culture of the country (i.e private or public led, loosely structured or very formal, driven by the government or locally driven). This is why I think it is very important that all the stakeholders are identified and brought into the process now. You might want to look at the models used by the Scandinavian countries, Ireland, and the Netherlands.
> A national research agenda would coordinate who is going to do what...
Thank you, but I do not want to be 'coordinated'.
Thank you, but I do not want to be 'coordinated'.