E-Learning and Depression 2.0 Revisited

Prologue: Today’s post was meant to be a short piece about how the e-learning industry is faring in current market conditions, but as I carried out my research for the article, something a little more worrying emerged from the source information.

Now read on…

About a year ago, I began commenting on the affects of the current financial crisis on the e- learning industry; it's been a while, so I guess that it's about time I revisited the subject. In my post Recession and the Challenge to E-Learning in February 2008 I remarked that:

Historically, when a slowdown or organization rationalization occurs, the first against the wall are the folks in the PR, marketing, and training departments. Typically, individuals and organizations revert to previously-learned behaviors in tough times; this usually means going through the process of carrying out tried-and-tested, though not necessarily logical responses to the problems put in front of them. Outcome: tea and sympathetic chat, and the Training team get their pink slips / P45s. ...I reckon that this will be strategy undertaken by a significant number of organizations over the next year or so.

Sadly, it seems that my prediction was correct.

According to a recent Expertus/Training Industry, Inc. report: for 2009 over twice as many training professionals who responded to their survey said that they expected budget decreases rather than increases. Forty-eight percent expect their budgets to decrease in 2009, up from 41% in 2008. Less than one-fifth expect their budgets to increase in 2009, down from 31% in 2008. Similarly, since 2008 budgets were first approved, far more saw decreases (38%) than increases (11%) in funding and capital.

These data are reinforced by the findings of a 2009 Bersin & Associates study: B&A's Karen O'Leonard indicated that the U.S. corporate training market shrank from $58.5 billion in 2007 to $56.2 billion in 2008, the greatest decline in revenue in over a decade.

In a 23 January 2009 press release, Josh Bersin himself stated that

…to reduce costs, companies are switching from e-learning [my italics] to coaching, collaboration and on-the-job training methods

The press release also states:

Today’s business world demands a combination of formal and informal learning with an emphasis on collaboration, knowledge sharing, social networking, coaching, and mentoring. While formal, instructor-led training is not going away, it is becoming a smaller and smaller percentage of training budgets.

This shift in organizations' thinking and strategy merits discussion in it's own right, so I will return to the topic once I have given it more consideration.

However, I have to say that I'm not encouraged by the inaccurate terminology Mr. Bersin used in the press release: I want to know - how do Bersin & Associates define ‘e-learning’? Based upon the above statement, collaboration and knowledge-sharing in particular, but also mentoring, coaching, and OTJ training are not categories of e-learning.

I’m sure you have your own favorite definition of e-learning – I’ve included mine below – but regardless of how you define it, you are in the e-learning domain if the learning materials are

• networked
• delivered to end-users via a computer using standard internet technology
• focused on the broadest view of learning

By e-learning, Bersin & Associates of course mean "e-training" - those superannuated, expensive page-turner style self-paced courseware libraries provided by vendors like SmartForce and HMH. You may argue that I am merely fussing over semantics, and that such terminology is unimportant. Tomayto / tomahto.

When questions are investigated using quantitative analysis, the Scientific Method is being used. Contingent with that is a healthy skepticism of the assumptions and conclusions made by the investigator. This is the essence of progress, acquiring new knowledge, or correcting and integrating previous knowledge. To be termed scientific, a method of inquiry must be based on gathering observable, empirical and measurable evidence subject to specific principles of reasoning and criticism.

In this context I would assert that precise categorization of terms is an essential part of communicating meaning accurately. If you consider that e-learning is

The continuous assimilation of knowledge and skills by adults stimulated by synchronous and asynchronous learning events – and sometimes knowledge management outputs – which are authored, delivered engaged with, supported and administered using internet technologies,

(Morrison, D. 2004, p.4)

then we must say that the Bersin statement contradicts itself.

Based upon the Bersin & Associates data (see Table 1), what seems to be occurring is a contraction in the use by organizations of one e-learning modality (the self-paced page-turner - in a sense the methodology most aligned with traditional instructor-led workplace learning), and the growth or expansion of a range of other modalities of e-learning, based upon non-formal and informal structures, Web 2.0 principles, and the removal of intermediaries in the workplace learning & development supply chain.

Table 1 Distribution of training categories (after Bersin & Associates, 2009)

More...
_____________________

References:

Bersin & Associates (2009) 2009 Corporate Learning Factbook Reveals 11% Decline in Corporate Training Spending [Internet] Available from: http://www.bersin.com/News/Content.aspx?id=8438 Accessed 24 January 2009

Expertus (2008) Measuring Learning as Budgets Tighten [Internet] Available from: http://www.trainingefficiency.com/system/files/Survey+Results_Learning+Measurement_+Expertus_Nov08.pdf Accessed 12 January 2009

Frauenheim, E. (2009) Training Is Taking a Beating in Recession, Studies Find Workforce Management. [Internet] Available from: http://www.workforce.com/section/00/article/26/12/95.php Accessed 23 January 2009

Morrison, D. (2004) E-Learning Strategies: how to get implementation and delivery right first time Chichester: John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Mobile E-Learning Channels - More on the ELG report

In my last post on this topic I outlined some of the key findings from the E-Learning Guild 360 Report on Mobile Learning. Today I'm going to discuss the context for mobile learning (m-learning) in a little more detail.

Now read on...

Dr. Conrad Gottfredson, head of the Performance Support Lab & Seminar at the Masie Center, has described the requirement

for an orchestrated set of performance support tools to meet each learner’s moment of need

(2008, p.1)

He defines these as the Five Moments of Learning Need as:

1. When learning for the first time
2. When learning more
3. When remembering and/or applying what’s been learned
4. When things go wrong
5. When things change

He considers the requirement for a multi-channel publishing platform to ensure the currency of training information, as well as its relevancy to learners to be a central component of learning and development, particularly in the organizational context.

Similarly, with the emergence of the read/write web, the ability to contribute information and learning to the totality of an organization's knowledge is quickly gaining value; as we move to a learning 2.0 paradigm, people are not just consuming, but also creating learning, and mobile technology is a being seen as a means to facilitate this learning modality.

According to the report,

...we see that, as Guild members become more experienced in e-Learning, they embrace new approaches to e-Learning more often than people with fewer years of experience. Survey results consistently show that experience in e-Learning encourages growth and experimentation, and does not foster complacency.

[However] a large number of eLearning Guild members seem stuck with the notion that “Mobile Learning” means taking existing training courses and delivering them on a small screen with little or no interactivity. ... But some Guild members need to get out of the trench of thinking “m-Training” and think “m-Performance.”

(pp.6-7)

To support this assertion, Wexler et alia outline the growth in asynchronous learning modalities over the last decade, and note in particular the growth of podcasting and m-learning as content- and knowledge delivery channels (see Figure 1).

Figure 1. A comparison of selected training modalities

Based upon the evidence of the data collected in their survey, we can say that learning and development professionals are implementing e-learning-based training interventions almost as frequently as they rely on traditional classroom-based instructor-led training to deliver courses to learners.

The report also suggests that a competency in developing and delivering e-learning grows over time (and in experience), learning professionals implement non-traditional learning initiatives more frequently than heretofore (see Figure 2).

Figure 2. Use of m-learning delivery channels distributed by professional experience

More...

________________

References:

Wexler, S. Brown, J. Metcalf, D. Rogers, D. and Wagner, E. (2008) MOBILE LEARNING What it is, why it matters, and how to incorporate it into your learning strategy. [Internet] Available from: http://www.elearningguild.com (Subscription required) [Accessed 21 July 2008]

--

The Mobile Segment of the Learning Marketspace - new report

A few months ago, I received an e-mail from a correspondent about my view on opinion might be on

mobile learning (m-learning) and mobile device adoption as an e-learning delivery mechanism in the future (video lectures, e-book reading, short message texting).

With the emergence of so-called 'smart' mobile devices including the BlackBerry and the iPhone, the potential to deliver learning content via this channel provides some tantalizing opportunities for learning professionals to enable learners access information on-demand - and for the first time - On-the-Go.

Now read on...

I've been reviewing some of the literature on this topic over the last number of weeks, but before I elaborate on my conclusions, The E-Learning Guild in their usual timely fashion have released their latest 360 Report on the topic. In the report, Steven Wexler et al (in a potentially contentious move) define Mobile Learning as:

Any activity that allows individuals to be more productive when consuming, interacting with, or creating information, mediated through a compact digital portable device that the individual carries on a regular basis, has reliable connectivity, and fits in a pocket or purse.

(p.13)

My initial reaction to this definition is that it omits any reference to the acquisition of new skills, knowledge, or expertise via this learning channel. In my view this is a key aspect of any definition of e-learning; I elaborated on the topic in a series of blog posts at the beginning of 2008 (you can find out more by clicking here) when I endorsed Don Morrison's definition of e-learning (including its subset m-learning) as:

The continuous assimilation of knowledge and skills by adults stimulated by synchronous and asynchronous learning events – and sometimes Knowledge management outputs – which are authored, delivered engaged with, supported and administered using internet technologies.

(2004, p.4)

As I said at the time, I'm open to debate on this definition, but I've still to find a more comprehensive definition of the discipline than the description as elucidated by Mr. Morrison.

But I digress.

The key findings of the E-Learning Guild research include:

• About 20% of E-Learning Guild members use podcasts "sometimes or often"
• 17% use m-Learning "sometimes or often" in their organizations.
• Members with seven or more year’s experience in e-Learning use Podcasts one third more frequently and m-Learning 26% more often than members with six or fewer year’s experience.
• Asia Pacific leads all geographic regions in m-Learning adoption, with 21% of members using Mobile Learning sometimes or often. Canada lags with nearly 11%.
• 37.5% of Guild members completing the Mobile Learning survey indicate they plan to do more m-Learning in the next year.
• Blackberry is the most popular development platform with about 47% of Guild members that plan to implement m-Learning targeting Blackberry devices. Windows Mobile is next with 27%, followed by the iPhone with 15%.
• Over 80% of Guild members that have implemented m-Learning have seen improvement in learner/user access and availability.
• Nearly 60% of Guild members that have implemented m-Learning have seen improved user performance.

More...

________________

References:

Morrison, D. (2004) E-Learning Strategies: how to get implementation and delivery right first time, Chichester: John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Wexler, S. Brown, J. Metcalf, D. Rogers, D. and Wagner, E. (2008) MOBILE LEARNING What it is, why it matters, and how to incorporate it into your learning strategy. [Internet] Available from: http://www.elearningguild.com (Subscription required) [Accessed 21 July 2008]

--

E-learning 101 - a very good primer

I blogged recently about how Internet search terms can lead you down some unusual highways and byways.

None more true than today: for some obscure reason I Googled "elearning" + "boat." Now while I'm a pretty good swimmer, but I hail from a land-locked county and never had any affinity for boats and whatnot. (I did watch The Cruel Sea recently, so maybe...). But I digest.

One of the search results was for the veritable How Stuff Works site's How E-learning Works page, and I have to say that it was a good an introduction to e-learning as I've seen (and better than some from people who should know more about the topic).

The article characterizes e-learning under the following topic headings:

• Introduction to How E-learning Works
• What is E-learning?
• Levels of e-learning
• The Psychology of Learning
• E-learning and Retention
• Self-paced
• Interactive & Motivating E-learning
• Benefits of E-learning
• E-learning Tips
• E-learning and College Courses
• E-learning Tools

Check out the site for an illuminating ten minutes' reading.
--

The E-learning Ecosystem in organizations

In the previous E-Learning Curve Blog entry on this topic 'adapting to knowledge workers learning needs in organizations,' I made a case for the benefits of e-learning as a means to providing workers with the appropriate and relevant learning interventions as they progress from neophyte to mastery of their particular skills, experience and expertise.

By adapting the well-known learning curve, I developed a conceptual model that maps Bloom's Taxonomy of Learning Objectives to learner requirements as they progress along the curve (see Figure 1).

Figure 1. Learning Curve model aligning Bloom's Taxonomy and components of the E-learning Ecosystem

In today's blog post, I'll look at preconditions for introducing learning modalities to this model.

Now read on.

There are two components involved in investigating this aspect of e-learning as a means to enhance knowledge worker performance:

1. E-learning tools and technologies
2. Applying effective learning modalities to learning requirements

E-learning tools and technologies

In their influential white paper Powering the leap to maturity: The eLearning ecosystem, Dillon & Hallet define the concept of the "E-learning EcoSystem." The authors assert that a "blended approach" where instructor-led resources are deployed at the earliest stages of a learner's development, and increasingly, e-learning solutions are implemented as the learner develops.

With Web-based training, as with its manual counterpart in the classroom, the zone of applicability is actually quite limited. The only time it makes sense to pull workers off their jobs for training is limited precisely to those times when no other alternative will suffice. Off the- job forms of training make good business sense only when workers are at the bottom of the learning curve and are not yet equipped to perform at any acceptable level of competence.

(p.19)

Through "pervasive connectivity" (p.19), characterized by the growth of deployment of corporate portals and intranets, as well as learning support technologies such as content management systems and knowledgebases, and is the foundation for their e-learning ecosystem. In my view, the choice of terminology that the authors use is interesting; by employing the term ecosystem -

a system whose members benefit from each other's participation via symbiotic relationships... It is a term that originated from biology, and refers to self-sustaining systems,

(LearnThat.com)

they imply that the nature (no pun intended) of organizations parallels complex natural systems. Similarly, a functioning learning ecosphere holistically supports a diverse range of learning modalities which enable the learner to thrive in the corporate environment.

As workers move up the e-learning curve, they quickly leave the relative isolation of pure asynchronous courseware. Initially, they enter the more richly supported environment of the online university, backed by an enterprise-level learning management system.

(p.20)

Progressing along the curve, the authors note the introduction of just-in-time forms of learning content delivery.

As we move even further up the e-learning curve we encounter yet another interesting revelation. Most of the learning technologies at this end of the curve are not generally recognized as “learning” technologies at all. Rather, such items as collaboration tools and intelligent search are more typically thought of as knowledge management technologies. Deploying and utilizing these types of tools are what differentiates an employee from a “performer.”

(pp. 20-21)

Having characterised the e-learning ecosystem, Dillon & Hallet define the components of it:

• Web-base training
• Online university
• Learning Objects
• Electronic Performance Support Systems
• Collaboration
• Intelligent Search

As they suggest, these components "put the 'system' in ecosystem" - a statement that I would suggest is doubly true: by describing the technologies (and to a lesser extent on technology and learning solutions vendors) in their white paper, they neglect to lend appropriate weight to how these systems are implemented.

More.

FÓGRA: Malinka Ivanova of the Technical University in Sofia has an interesting perspective on this topic. Click here to find out more.
_____________________

References:

Definition of "Ecosystem." Learnthat.com. [Internet] Available from: http://www.learnthat.com/define/view.asp?id=302 Accessed 30 May 2008.

Dillon, P. & Hallett, C. (2001, October). Powering the leap to maturity: The eLearning ecosystem. Cisco Systems white paper.

--

E-Learning along the curve: adapting to knowledge workers learning needs in organizations

As I discussed in the previous blog entry, formal, structured approaches to learning (such as to both instructor-led and traditional CBT-type training interventions), which by their nature are long in duration, relatively generalized in terms of subject matter, and are best deployed to novices in the relevant discipline or skill area. As such, they represent the best value for organizations when to knowledge worker is not expected to be a full contributor in their role. In this context, I would suggest that organizations can justify using these learning solutions for situations such as

• entry-level or new hire orientation and competency building
• internal transfers to a new discipline (i.e. the worker moves from Production to QA)
• retraining on a new production system (i.e. a new type of widget-making tool or a new software system)
• employee career advancement (i.e. from individual contributor to manager)

Psychology tells us that the learning curve obeys what is called a power law (Ritter & Scholler, 2002).

As such they are often said to conform to "the power law of practice". Cognitive psychology has shown that the power law of practice is ubiquitous, and cognitive modeling has explained both the general speedup and variability in performance.

(The Learning Curve, p.2)

So, as a worker learns a task, skill, or process ("progresses along the learning curve"), their competency improves and productivity increases with some variations but broadly within generally accepted parameters.

As workers advance from their neophyte status, they begin to attain what Marc J. Rosenberg (2006) calls "performer" status; the are transitioning from being Novice to Competent, along a path that will enable them to become Experienced, until they achieve Expert (or Master) status.

We can also say that once a worker reaches a certain level of competence, their learning needs are met less by generic courses and curricula, and more by specific, even personalized, learning interventions such as task/skill practise and coaching, access to knowledge and performance resources, and collaboration and problem solving (see Figure 1).

Figure 1. Levels of mastery and appropriate learning strategies (after Marc J. Rosenberg, 2006)

As an extension of this (and effectively demonstrated by Rosenberg), organizations failing to move beyond the classroom or traditional CBT-type courseware for their ongoing learning and development needs, are probably impeding the development of their workers, as well as negatively affecting their (the organization's) own potential (see Figure 2).

Figure 2. Advantages of workflow learning (after Marc J. Rosenberg, 2006)

In order to provide effective learning and performance support to workers after they become competent, organizations must strive to develop their workers' skills as employees undertake their regular workplace activities. It is my view that this level of performance support can only be provided through access to networked knowledge assets.

And that is what I'll be discussing tomorrow.
______________________

References:

Dillon, P. & Hallett, C. (2001, October). Powering the leap to maturity: The eLearning ecosystem. Cisco Systems white paper.

Ritter, F. E., & Schooler, L. J. (2002). The learning curve. In International encyclopedia of the social and behavioral sciences. 8602-8605. Amsterdam: Pergamon.
[Internet] Available from: http://www.iesbs.com/ Accessed 27 May 2008.

Rosenberg, M. J. (2006) Beyond e-Learning. San Francisco, CA: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

--

Definition of an E-Learning Curve

A colleague recently asked me "What is an e-learning curve?"

Well, when I originally started The E-Learning Curve Blog, my primary concern was to create a witty electronic learning-related title that hopefully caught my potential audiences' eye, and the name implied that the content of the blog would be a learning journey - for me as much as anyone. I can't deny that it's also a nice pun, or humourous play on words.

While undertaking some research on a different topic recently (learning objects - more to come about this in a few weeks), the term 'e-learning curve' cropped up with a certain regularity. Those occurrences, as well as my colleague's query have prompted me to write a short series on Curves (not the geometric kind).

Now read on.

We're all familiar with the old joke about the lost tourist in New York asking a cop how to get to Carnegie Hall. To which the cop replies "Lady, you gotta practice real hard."

Going back to the fundamentals, when we talk about learning, we're discussing ways to acquire new skills, knowledge or expertise. When we use learning curves, we're looking at approaches to measuring the growth or development of these abilities in the individual or group. As learning professionals working, we are perhaps most familiar with Bloom's Taxonomy of Educational Objectives are a means of evaluating a learner's current knowledge- or skill assets, and creating content accordingly to enhance and develop their current cognitive abilities(see Table 1). As is traditional, I will now mention the lesser-known domains, only to ignore them from this point forward...

Bloom identified three domains of educational activities:

• Cognitive: mental skills (Knowledge)
• Affective: growth in feelings or emotional areas (Attitude)
• Psychomotor: manual or physical skills (Skills)

Table 1. Bloom's Taxonomy

Competence Level	Skills Demonstrated
Knowledge Recall data or information.	observation and recall of information knowledge of dates, events, places knowledge of major ideas mastery of subject matter Associated verbs: list, define, tell, describe, identify, show, label, collect, examine, tabulate, quote, name, who, when, where, etc.
Comprehension Understand the meaning, translation, interpolation, and interpretation of instructions and problems. State a problem in one's own words.	understanding information grasp meaning translate knowledge into new context interpret facts, compare, contrast order, group, infer causes predict consequences Associated verbs: summarize, describe, interpret, contrast, predict, associate, distinguish, estimate, differentiate, discuss, extend
Application Use a concept in a new situation or unprompted use of an abstraction. Applies what was learned in the classroom into novel situations in the work place.	Use information use methods, concepts, theories in new situations solve problems using required skills or knowledge Associated verbs: apply, demonstrate, calculate, complete, illustrate, show, solve, examine, modify, relate, change, classify, experiment, discover
Analysis Separates material or concepts into component parts so that its organizational structure may be understood. Distinguishes between facts and inferences.	Seeing patterns organization of parts recognition of hidden meanings identification of components Associated verbs: analyze, separate, order, explain, connect, classify, arrange, divide, compare, select, explain, infer
Synthesis Builds a structure or pattern from diverse elements. Put parts together to form a whole, with emphasis on creating a new meaning or structure.	Seeing patterns organization of parts recognition of hidden meanings identification of components Associated verbs: analyze, separate, order, explain, connect, classify, arrange, divide, compare, select, explain, infer
Evaluation Make judgments about the value of ideas or materials.	compare and discriminate between ideas assess value of theories, presentations make choices based on reasoned argument verify value of evidence recognize subjectivity Associated verbs: assess, decide, rank, grade, test, measure, recommend, convince, select, judge, explain, discriminate, support, conclude, compare, summarize

When designing content, the taxonomy can be used as part of a holistic approach learning and development, rather than as a linear model (see Figure 1).

Figure 1. Bloom's Rose. [Source: John Manuel Kennedy Traverso]

Bloom's taxonomy is hierarchical - learning at the higher levels is dependent on the learner attaining prerequisite knowledge and skills at lower levels (Orlich, et al. 2004). Similarly, the verbs associated with Bloom's taxonomy must enable the learning professional to elicit a measurable result from the learner. From this perspective, we can say that learning can be quantitatively assessed and tracked, and these assessments can be represented on a graph, which leads us neatly to learning curves.

More tomorrow.

_____________________

References:

Bloom B. S. (1956). Taxonomy of Educational Objectives, Handbook I: The Cognitive Domain. New York: David McKay Co. Inc.

Orlich, C., Harder, R., Callahan, R., Trevisian, M., & Brown, A. (2004). Teaching strategies: A guide to effective instruction. (7th ed.). Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company.

St. Edward’s University Center for Teaching Excellence. (2004) Task Oriented Question Construction Wheel Based on Bloom’s Taxonomy.
[Internet] Available from:
http://www.stedwards.edu/cte/media/BloomPolygon.pdf [Accessed 15th May 2008]

--

Outlining the Course Specification. E-Learning Course Development in an Open Environment: Project Lifecycle 5

Courseware Content Specification

After yesterday's discussion of a learning object-based approach, we can begin to develop a specification for on Open Environment e-learning course. At a high level, the specification for such a course could include:

• Content to be based upon previously-agreed curriculum of content
• The content be developed according to a Reusable Learning Object approach
• Short development cycle -– three weeks proposed

Content Format
The content would be delivered in adherence to the following criteria:

• A multimedia mix of audio, video, graphics, on-screen text.
• Content to be stored and delivered on a Learning Management System. Content to be delivered via Flash-based a streaming media solution.
• Content may also be delivered via download.
• A DVD-based modular self-paced learning solution also be made available for learners with bandwidth issues.
• Supplementary learning resources: starter kits, exercises, workshops, “how to’s”, case studies, email links to instructors, Web links to relevant resources associated with the courseware.

--

Defining Learning Objects. E-Learning Course Development in an Open Environment: Project Lifecycle 4

In reaching a satisfactory definition of learning objects, a search through the literature revealed three broad characterisations:

The main idea of 'learning objects' is to break educational content down into small chunks that can be reused in various learning environments, in the spirit of object-oriented programming.

(Wiley 2000)

[A]ny entity, digital or non-digital, that may be used for training, education or technology supported learning.

(LTSC 2002)

…modular digital resources, uniquely identified and metatagged, that can be used to support learning.

(NLII 2002)

From these descriptions, we can develop a working definition of a learning object:

A Learning Object is any digital resource that can be reused to support learning.

This definition contains the following attributes:

• Learning objects are digital – can be stored and delivered electronically
• Learning objects are a resource – they contain the total means available to deliver training and learning objects are reusable – a single learning object may be used in multiple contexts for multiple purposes.
• Learning objects must contribute to the transfer of knowledge.

Further characteristics of learning objects include that they are self-contained – each learning object can be taken independently, they can be aggregated – learning objects can be grouped into larger collections of content, including traditional course structures, that they are interoperable - that learning objects have the ability to exchange information and to use the information that has been exchanged (usually through a specification like AICC or SCORM), and finally that they are tagged with metadata – every learning object has descriptive information allowing it to be easily found by a search.

References:

---

Wiley, D.A. (2000). Connecting learning objects to instructional design theory: A definition, a metaphor, and a taxonomy. In D. A. Wiley (Ed.), The Instructional Use of Learning Objects: Online Version. [Internet] Available from: http://reusability.org/read/chapters/wiley.doc Accessed 17 April 2008

McGreal, R. (2002). Learning Objects: a Practical Definition International Journal of Instructional Technology and Distance learning [Internet] Available from: http://itdl.org/Journal/Sep_04/article02.htm Accessed 16 April 2008

Duval, E. (ed) (2002). IEEE 1484.12.1-2002, 15 July 2002, Draft Standard for Learning Object Metadata IEEE Learning Technology Standards Committee (LTSC) [Internet] Available from: http://ltsc.ieee.org/wg12/files/LOM_1484_12_1_v1_Final_Draft.pdf Accessed 16 April 2008

eLearning Guild Snapshot Report on Learning Modalities

Newsflash!

The eLearning Guild has just released a Snapshot Report on Learning Modalities.

This 16-page Snapshot Report is available for all Guild Members, including Associate Members.

In this eLearning Guild Snapshot Report we show Guild members’ adoption of various approaches to e-Learning as of March 2008. Our goal is to show where you and your organization are with respect to other organizations.

This report covers:

• Benchmarking what’s hot, what’s not, and the choices your peers are making
• Learning Modality Popularity
• Web 2.0 and Emerging Modalities
• Demographics of Survey Respondents

Here's a taster - there are some interesting results included in the report, including results measuring the take-up of so-called Web / Learning 2.0 technologies: it's lower than you may expect.

You can download the full snapshot report by clicking here or clicking on the image above.

--

Towards a Definition of E-learning

Over the last few weeks, I’ve been building a theoretical and conceptual framework for how I approach e-learning, beginning with an interpretation of a general theoretical view about how learners learn, through the multifaceted approaches of constructivism and begun to place this in the context of learning in organisations and even touched on how organisational entities corporately enhance their business intelligence. In this next section, I will define some of the key terms relevant to the development of an effective approach to non-formal learning.

“E-learning” means different things to different people. When you consider that you can call the discipline “e-learning”, “elearning” or even “eLearning”, it’s no surprise that there is a range of definitions of the subject, as “we prefer to define things according to how we use them” (Morrison, 2004, p.4). Clark and Mayer (2003) consider the “how, why and what” of e-learning: that the “e” in e-learning refers to the “how” - the course is digitised so that it can be stored. The “learning” refers to the “what” - the course includes content and ways to help people learn it, and the “why” - that the purpose is to help learners achieve educational goals or to help organisations build skills related to improve job performance (pp.13-14). The assumptions in their definition are telling: note the use of the term “course” and references to organisational skill-building – there is an inherent, unspoken claim on e-learning (what ever that is!) to be part of the corporate, human resources development arena. Now consider Will Richardson’s Blogs, Wikis, Podcasts and Other Powerful Web Tools for Classrooms, published only three years later. In the e-learning context, a quick scan through a text’s table of contents, introduction, or index will usually orient the reader to the author’s perspective on what they think e-learning is: not in this text. The very first point Richardson makes is that “this may look like a book about technology, but it’s really a book about …connections” (p.vii). With a nod to Jonassen, the author discusses “cool tools”, “collaborations and conversations” and “creatively motivating students to learn more deeply” using a teaching and learning “toolbox” (p.9). He’s obviously talking about e-learning, but does not see the need to define what it is. So, e-learning has become a common if imprecise term used to refer to technology-enhanced learning. The two views described above signify the breadth and the richness of the terrain that e-learning encompasses, and I contend highlight its importance of the context of learning.

References:

Clark, R. C. & Mayer R. (2003) e-learning and the Science of Instruction: Proven Guidelines for Consumers and Designers of Multimedia Learning, San Francisco, CA: Pfeiffer

Morrison, D. (2004) E-Learning Strategies: how to get implementation and delivery right first time, Chichester: John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Richardson, W. (2006) Blogs, Wikis, Podcasts, and Other Powerful Web Tools for Classrooms. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press