Terry Anderson

I enjoyed John Biss's presentation today, but he seemed to be a bit unclear about the role of CCL in forging, funding or supporting our proposed agenda. I know the challenges of working in a new organization with uncertain funding, but CCL does have a 'pan Canadian mandate', has a vision of "To be a catalyst for lifelong learning across Canada', has some funds and is developing a national network through their 5 "knowledge centres.

However, as noted by the two year delay in releasing today's report - is not known for speed or really much innovation. John noted that the yet to be released thematic review of e-learning in Canada argues for a research agenda, but it is just a "possible future" that probably will be sold as a recommendation of the author's rather (as was the case with the International review) than a plan by CCL.

How do you feel we can best utilize the resources and support of CCL to enhance pan Canadian e-learning research?

John Biss has managed to get the release of a new and very relevant report today, in conjunction with his talk to our conference. The Report is available here:

International e-learning strategies:
Key findings relevant to the Canadian context

From the Abstract:
"This report concludes that, while Canada has played a leadership role and gained international recognition for several initiatives and achievements in e-learning over the last decade (infrastructure deployment, learning methodology, tools and practices; work on accessibility; research on learning object and repositories, etc.), it is starting to trail behind in these very important sectors. An e-learning strategy is urgently needed, together with a coordinating body which would respect the provinces’ competencies in education while mobilizing federal government agencies and other stakeholders towards clear, scalable, sustainable plans to support the new skills development agenda for the knowledge society and economy."

Please use this thread to discuss any surprising or affirming observations from the report.

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

A number of us have commented upon the lack of precision and common understanding of terms we regularly use when discssuing e-learning research.

I am thus creating this thread and welcome discussion on any terms that are defying common understanding

I'll begin with e-learning which was mentioned by a number of posters as ill defined.

A Google define: e-learning search yields 15 definitions. I'll highlight those I find of interest.

The New Zealand government defines e-learning as "Learning that is facilitated by the use of digital tools and content. Typically, it involves some form of interactivity, which may include online interaction between the learner and their teacher or peers." This definition stress the interactivity and seem to imply formal education contexts.

Oxford University adds the infrastructure for supporting elearning as"Services which are delivered, enabled or mediated by ICT for the purposes of delivering education, and the technology and services which help create, manage and deliver those activities.

Imperical College finally notes the difference between learning and education in their definition "E-Learning is the learning process created by interaction with digitally delivered content, services and support."

And finally E-Career Management defines E-learning as" an approach to facilitate and enhance learning through the use of devices based on both computer and communications technology"

I also liked The Mountainquest's definition as" any virtual act or process used to acquire data, information, skills or knowledge. In the context of our research, eLearning is enabled learning, learning in a virtual world where technology merges with human creativity to accelerate and leverage the rapid development and application of deep knowledge' Except this seems to preclude using e-learning in blended contexts that are not 'virtual'

Would anyone care to craft a definition of e-learning that we might all agree on for this conference?

During the WebConference I noted that "Evidence based" was a codeword for randomly assigned control group studies used to determine "What Works"

You will likely find the What Works Clearninghouse site run by the US Dept. of Education of interest. Notice how they dissiminate selected studies on particular educational studies and encourage review of research by many, but that the criteria for quality reflects the methodological biase of the organization.

The Ontario Ministry also has a site at What Works Research Into Practice also provides links to selected literature.

I would think our research agenda should welcome, but not prescribe rigorous control group studies. We should also likely make a statement about valuing the multiple sources of 'evidence'.

Which of the resources available at the US ClearingHouse, do you find worth developing on a research site we may develop?