Lounge

Hello Jurgis,

Well, first of all I have to mention that this report would never be accepted as a research paper at my school. The writer already draws his conclusions in the foreword; that is not good academic practice. Moreover the list of references is very lopsided and the author refers several times in his text to "studies" that support his claims, without actually giving any references for them. Furthermore, he includes interview remarks by the managers of the company commissioning the report without contrasting or supporting them with other information.

But then, we have to take into account that this report was, in fact, not written as an objective study, but that it is actually a pamphlet commissioned by a commercial enterprise whose commercial interests are not served by the success of eLearning. Hence, the clear bias and the lack of in-depth research. I guess the enterprise wanted to be able to refer to a "study" to support their claims, so they had one written, that is only a thinly disguised flyleaf for their product.

Having said that, some of the problems connected with learning, and eLearning in particular, are real and need to be addressed. We need not be reminded that hands-on, in-class learning works, after all, all of us were educated in that way since early childhood, right. However, just as eLearning is not the panacea in learning, contact education isn't either, we are just more familiar with it.

In fact, that is one of the problems eLearning faces: students have been conditioned to associate learning with a formal setting and location. Before a new learning paradigm can be broadly accepted, students will have to be prepared for it in their basic education. In the Scandinavian countries this has been done already. The claim by the author of the eLearning Myths report that most students are not self-directed or self-motivated is true now, because those learners have never learnt to be responsible for their own education. In a successful information society, in which lifelong learning is a requirement, self-directed learning is a vital career skill, though, and students ought to be trained in those skills from an early age on (in-class).

The author's blanket rejection of eLearning and equally unequivocal support of the classroom approach suffers from a distinct lack of nuance (buts and ifs do not serve the interest of the commercial enterprise). I do not even need to mention studies in support of eLearning, because there is our own experience to go by. I have taught the same classes as contact class and on-line and I find that the results are much the same. I spent as much time on the on-line classes as on the contact teaching (only the time was spent on different activities). The number of drop outs is much the same (except that different people drop out) and the evaluation results are similar or even slightly better. The gain that eLearning offers us is mainly in the increased flexibility in the classroom schedules and in the anytime/anyplace aspect that the author of the report is so dismissive of. Fact is that I have taught my courses while on trips to Europe and Asia. We even have one teacher who is based in Singapore. Our students too can be dispersed. We have projects with adult learners from all over Finland and our international projects too have received a boost from the increased opportunities for distant interaction that eLearning has provided.

Nonetheless, we find that for the majority of courses (about 80 percent) a blend of contact and on-line teaching works best. When we speak of blended learning, or multiform learning we do not mean email or telephone added to on-line text (I find it hard to believe anyone would offer that in this day and age), but a combination of online study material, assignments and interaction with contact classes. For langage learning, for instance, much of the grammar, reading and writing and even listening can be done on-line, so that the precious contact hours can be dedicated mostly to fluency, i.e. spoken exercises. Such a set up increases the efficiency of language courses, while again increasing the flexibility in the schedule (freeing up more valuable language lab time).

The author of the report makes a point of the prohibitive cost of producing good on-line learning content as one of the disadvantages of eLearning. Well, that may be true for his specific line of activity, I do not know, but in regular secondary and tertiary education the basic curriculum is pretty stable and material once produced can be easily shared and modified (much easier than books of handouts used in contact teaching). In Finland we have nationwide organisations that organise learning content production at the participating schools, with all schools being able to benefit from the material. We have a national learning content databank for universities and for polytechnics which is slowly filling up with courses and learning objects. Such a set up brings down the cost of creating content dramatically and, because many teachers are involved, the quality of the material increases after many people have improved upon it (Much like the open source community delivers quality through co-operation).

My advice to you would be to take it one step at a time. You can organise multiform courses, if the student population is not too dispersed. That way you can combine the benefits of both learning styles. As to students dropping out or being inactive there are ways to boost retention and punctuality: First of all the students must be aware that you demand commitment from them (their education is not a frivolous thing after all). For certain courses which demand a high participation level we have our students sign an agreement to bring home to them that this is serious. Apart from that, when it comes to on-line teaching, you can pace the students through their studies by having regular on-line activities scheduled. When the students must return to the learning environment on a regular (say, weekly) basis, the drop ot rate will decrease considerably. In addition, if at least part of the activities is interactive, bulletin board discussions for example, that will also bolster involvement and motivation. But remember, that the students must be prepeared for eLearning and they must see the benefits (as in more freedom to organise their own learning). At Kemi-Tornio Polytechnic all first year students follow a course in eLearning and Information Retrieval.

These were just a few of my rather unstructured thoughts concerning the claims made by the author of the Myths report and your questions.

Rgrds, Paul.

I echo what Paul says, putting quotes in a foreword rather than the results from a number of surveys (and I can't believe that the author couldn't find a single survey that was complimentary about e-learning) made me click the 'close window' key before reading anything else.

I do believe e-learning has been over hyped but people are learning what it is good for and what it is not so good for. 

Richard