Pass the SoLT

This week the New Zealand Ministry of Education released the latest report (well actually an annotated bibliography) identifying major themes and messages for the tertiary sector from an analysis of the e-learning literature. The key findings of the report entitled "Learners' Participation, Retention and Success in e-learning: An Annotated Bibliography" include few surprises and generally underscores the importance of institutional policy, teacher pedagogy and the way in which e-learning is part (or not) of the learning culture. Derek Wenmoth provides a useful summary of the major themes.

Instead of restating or repeating Derek's blog posting, and the report's Executive Summary, in the spirit of constructive critique there are a number of statements and conclusions that do not sit comfortably with me. For example, arguably one of the most serious flaws in the report is the claim associated with learning styles. The report concludes that “Learning styles are predictors and determinants of learner outcomes” (p.11). As far as I'm concerned the learning styles literature has been well and truly discredited by a number of leading scholars and there is very little evidence supporting this movement. Here is a link to just one report of many in recent years that challenges the validity of learning styles. Indeed some proponents go so far as to totally reject the claim that learning styles exist and in many respects the literature in this area is nothing more than pop psychology. I'm very surprised to see such high level endorsement of learning styles in a Ministry of Eduction report and it raises questions about whether the report was subject to sufficient peer review.

Another statement in the report that raised eyebrows to say the least is the claim that “females prefer a more collaborative, interactive approach whereas males tend to take a more functional approach” (p.14). Such sweeping generalisations are not helpful and this type of conclusion is not as well empirically grounded as common folk knowledge would suggest. Again I'm most surprised to read such a statement in a Ministry report which tends to discredit the validity of other more solidly grounded conclusions.

The other issue I have with this report is a common flaw throughout the e-learning literature in that the use of the term e-learning encompasses a range of practices. Arguably relatively little can be gleamed from studies that do not unpack the different assumptions, pedagogical orientations and tools of e-learning which range from reinforcing the practice of multi-choice tests to supporting media rich and highly complex online scenarios exploring wicked problems. Put another way e-learning is not a stable or fixed entity that can be studied as an independent variable.

At Massey University we intend to devote a forthcoming “Hot Topic” lunchbox session to discussing the major themes and messages in this report. I've already invited the author of the Ministry report to attend this session in order to engender some lively discussion.

Image Source:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/ghholmes2/5426242071/sizes/m/in/photostream

The last few weeks have been particularly busy as I'm currently the Acting Director of the National Centre for Teaching and Learning on top of my normal role. Hence the lack of postings and musings as quality thinking time has been greatly reduced due to routine administration, budget and staffing issues, and current efforts to develop and implement a number of strategic and operational plans.

I've managed to keep up, nevertheless, with some professional reading over this time and I was particularly interested to come across the Australian National VET E-learning Strategy 2012 - 2015. In many respects this initiative is a real flash back to the past of the days when the Ministry of Education (NZ) was reasonably proactive in developing the policy architecture for e-learning in both the compulsory schooling and tertiary sectors. How times change!

It would seem from a recent conversation that the Ministry and Tertiary Education Commission currently have little appetite for a more proactive, strategic, sector wide approach to e-learning. There is certainly no agreed strategy in the area and institutions are largely doing their own thing. This assessment of the current situation is evidenced by the recent decision to abandon the current national e-learning categories which institutions have been required to report on as part of their standard data returns. With the exception of Ako Aotearoa's support for e-learning initiatives, such as the Taking the Lead project, a relatively hands off approached has been adopted by central agencies and government departments.

Notably, the National VET E-learning Strategy states that it aims to "...play a key role in enabling the Australian training sector to take advantage of the roll-out of the National Broadband Network (NBN) to make major advances in the achievement of government training objectives" (p.4). The Strategy goes on to argue "that coordinated action to develop sector-wide capability in using the new technological environment will, at the same time, stimulate innovative approaches to increasing participation in training and work, and improving the skill levels of the Australian workforce" (p.4). Put succinctly, the vision is to create::

"A globally competitive Australian training system underpinned by world class e-learning infrastructure and capability".

The Strategy is based around three main goals:

Goal 1: Develop and utilise e-learning strategies to maximise the benefits of the national investment in broadband.

Goal 2: Support workforce development in industry through innovative training solutions.

Goal 3: Expand participation and access for individuals through targeted e-learning approaches.

In comparison to previous strategies, greater emphasis will be placed on new generation technologies for learning, learner pathways and industry system change. Recognition of the need to rejig previous priorities is stark contrast to the current policy vacuum in New Zealand. At a time when Australia is attempting to expand participation and access to life-long learning for individuals, access is being restricted in New Zealand through a capped funding model, which has already resulted in the closure of some highly innovative online and distance delivered tertiary qualifications.

Ultimately, it remains to be seen whether a demand or supply driven approach will be more successful in helping to achieve the respective goals the Australian and New Zealand governments have set for the roll-out of their national broadband networks. That said, I often quote the adage "if you don't plan, then you plan to fail" and it seems entirely sensible to develop an e-learning strategy in such a nationally strategic area.

This is just a quick comment for readers who may have missed this paper in the British Journal of Educational Technology which explores trends of e-learning research from the year 2000 (Hung, 2010). The study is a bit dated now and I'm being lazy by copying the Abstract below without any real analysis.

However, in plain language, the paper identifies two major growth stages in e-learning research and concludes the literature is still at the early majority stage in the diffusion of innovation model. Having said that, importantly, comparing the effectiveness of e-learning with that of traditional instruction is no longer a popular topic, which is pleasing to read given the methodological issues associated with this type of comparative research. It is also reassuring to hear that the research based on this bibliometric analysis is now focusing more on the educational aspects of use and implementation rather than technical dimensions of elearning. The paper would be a useful discussion piece to use with a cohort of postgraduate students reflecting on what the research tells us about the use of elearning in education.

Abstract
This study investigated the longitudinal trends of e-learning research using text mining techniques. Six hundred and eighty-nine (689) refereed journal articles and proceedings were retrieved from the Science Citation Index/Social Science Citation Index database in the period from 2000 to 2008. All e-learning publications were grouped into two domains with four groups/15 clusters based on abstract analysis. Three additional variables: subject areas, prolific countries and prolific journals were applied to data analysis and data interpretation. Conclusions include that e-learning research is at the early majority stage and foci have shifted from issues of the effectiveness of e-learning to teaching and learning practices. Educational studies and projects and e-learning application in medical education and training are growing fields with the highest potential for future research. Approaches to e-learning differ between leading countries and early adopter countries, and government policies play an important role in shaping the results.

Full paper available through the Massey University Library for staff and students.

enjoy!

This is just a brief posting to alert people to this new open access book entitled, Technology in Higher Education: The State of the Art. The book has 17 chapters and is broken into four parts:

• Launching into e-Learning: Philosophy & Ethics

• The Old & The New: Engaging Students Using Various e-Learning Tools

• Collaborative Learning in New Media Environments

• Assessments in & Challenges of Teaching with ICT

Much of the content is drawn from the experience in Singapore. I can't say that I've read many of the chapters in any depth but those I have were not exactly gripping reading. Nevertheless, the book may be of interest to a wider audience of higher educators.

The easy answer to the question of 'where is eLearning heading?' would be to report the findings of the recent Horizon Report. If you’re not familiar with this report then I encourage you to take a look at the predictions. The 2011 edition was released about a month ago and the Report makes the following predictions:

Time to adoption: One Year or Less

• Electronic Books
• Mobiles

Time to adoption: Two to Three Years

• Augmented Reality
• Game-based Learning

Time to adoption: Four to Five Years

• Gesture-based Computing
• Learning Analytics

Here is a useful link to a presentation which elaborates on these predictions.

Although I’m on the Horizon Report Board for the Australia and New Zealand edition, I find many of the predictions imply that technology is an entity and influence independent of external forces—a classic example of technological determinism. The predictions would benefit from taking a wider societal view of technology which recognises in the words of Postman (1993, p.5) that “Every technology is both a burden and a blessing; not either-or, but this-and-that”.

Having said that, I'm not advocating for a socially deterministic or technological nightmare perspective as this is equally problematic. Such a view often reflects a level of moral panic about the influence technology is having on our lives. In unpacking the tension between competing conceptions of technology and views of the future, I often talk about the importance of thinking about Education for change rather than Education in change. Put another way, educators have a key role to play in being future makers rather than future takers.

Enough slogans for now! You may find the following video is a useful discussion piece in thinking about where eLearning is heading (or not heading). It was produced for the book the Tower in the Cloud: Higher Education in the Age of Cloud Computing.

IMS recently announced their 2010 Global Learning Impact Awards. I always keep a watchful eye on the award winners as they offer an international taste of some of the latest innovations likely to have an impact on learning and higher education in the future. You need a lazy afternoon to Google and explore some of the following technology-enhanced learning initiatives from around the globe:

Platinum Awards (established initiatives):

• The elementary e-curriculum library for educators - i-Scream and SigongMedia - Korea
• PebblePad: from project, to pilot, to personalised learning for all - PebblePad and University of Wolverhampton - UK

Platinum Awards (new and R & D initiatives):

• Accessibility Preferences system at the BBC - UK
• Xerte Online Toolkits and The University of Nottingham – UK

Gold Awards (established initiatives):

• Adopting the IMS Content Packaging specification for the collaborative development of an online research skills training programme -Epigeum and Durham University – UK
• Amazon:The challenges of e-learning - Colégio Militar de Manaus - Brazil

Gold Awards (new and R & D initiatives):

• Game-Based Learning for Core Academics - Florida Virtual School - USA
• I(4) Excellence - Content Authoring System - DeVry University, The Learning Edge North America (TLENA) and Pearson (eCollege) - USA

Silver Awards (established initiatives):

• Distance Education Center at the Central Officials Training Institute - Korea
• Nisai Virtual Academy - UK

Silver Awards (new and R & D initiatives):

• eLML, the eLearning Content Creation Tool of the University of Zurich – Switzerland
• Mobilae - mobile learning, assessment and evidence gathering - Centre for Learning Innovation and Western Sydney Institute of TAFE - Australia

Bronze Awards (established initiatives):

• Fairfax County Public Schools electronic Curriculum, Assessment, Resource Tool (eCART) - Fairfax County Public Schools and Northrop Grumman - USA
• Mobile Assessment and Online Recognition using QTI solutions - Tasmanian Polytechnic and Skills Institute - Australia

Bronze Awards (new and R & D initiatives):

• Personal / Professional learning network - Education.au limited - Australia
• GetsmART in Ngee Ann Secondary School - Ngee Ann Secondary School - Singapore

The following nominations received non-medal Learning Impact Leadership Awards:

Established initiatives:

• Building Europe's largest Life Long Learning for Employment Initiative on Moodle LMS and HarvestRoad Hive DR - Giunti Labs and The Region of Tuscany - Italy
• myitlab at Bunker Hill Community College - Pearson Education and Bunker Hill Community College - USA
• CAMS Enterprise Course Management / Higher Education Learning Management System (LMS) - Three Rivers Systems, Inc. and Covenant Theological Seminary - USA
• MySpanishLab at Metro State - Pearson Education World Languages and Metropolitan State College of Denver - USA
• Transfer Credit and Degree Audit System (TCDAS) - University of Maryland University College - USA
• Co-Tutor at Loughborough University – UK

New and R & D initiatives:

• Digital Text book - KERIS (Korea Education & Research Information Service) and SK C&C - Korea
• Virtual Faculty and Student Support Centers - Lone Star College System and Lone Star College-Online - USA
• Riverside Authoring Tool - Rich content editing for medical teachers - IVIMEDS and University of Dundee - UK
• Website STUDIECOACH By Open University Netherlands - Netherlands
• Common Cartridge Builder by Pearson eCollege – USA