Learning Technology: The Myths and FactsThis document created by twinIsles.dev Page 2 of 2 | First page An earlier version of this paper appeared in the May
2004 issue of the International
Journal of Instructional Technology and Distance Learning. This paper is available as a PDF
eBook. e-Learning or Blended LearningThe oft-used term e-learning implies the concept of learning which is delivered electronically. The author dislikes the term, preferring to see the computer as just one possible medium through which learning may be presented. Radio, cinema, television, video etc. were all exciting new media, once. They all remain widely used. But they have not replaced media which pre-existed them. The oldest mass medium, i.e. the printed word, continues to flourish. Just as older means of communication continue to thrive alongside the latest computer technology in the information age, so too do more traditional forms of learning medium such as the printed word and audio and video cassette. The latest forms of learning technology should supplement rather than replace these earlier media in a blended approach to learning. A successful learning experience relies on each of the available modes of delivery being employed to its strengths. There are numerous examples of so-called learning technology that do little more than transfer the contents of the printed page to the computer screen in the belief that presenting the information this way will magically promote enhanced learning. In fact delivering significant amounts of printed text on screen rather than paper is likely to be detrimental to the recipient's comprehension and comfort. Nielsen (1998) states "people read about 25% slower from computer screens than from printed paper". Reading from screen is certainly less comfortable than reading printed text. The UK Health and Safety Executive (1998) found that "long spells of VDU work can lead to tired eyes and discomfort". In fact UK law requires employers to plan the work of those using VDUs so there are breaks or changes of activity (HSE, 1998). Paper can also be more portable and robust, e.g. one cannot use a computer in the bath, whilst dropping a book doesn't usually do it any significant damage. ReusabilityA holy grail of the learning technology field is the concept of reusability as witnessed by the intense interest and activity in reusable learning objects. The concept of reusable learning objects is a simple one. Learning material is packaged into discrete chunks for the purposes of being used in a variety of contexts. Definitions of what constitutes a learning object vary. The IEEE Learning Technology Standards Committee (2002) defines a learning object as " any entity, digital or non-digital, which can be used, re-used or referenced during technology supported learning." This is not very useful since absolutely anything can be referenced during technology supported learning. Other, more precise definitions exist, e.g. learning content management system vendor Knowledge Planet states "A learning object has four components: an objective, content, a means of assessment, and metadata." (Knowledge Planet product literature). The rationale for the learning object approach is similar to that for the use of object oriented programming in computing. Rather than continually develop software to represent common entities such as people, orders, accounts etc., the software industry produces one (or a small number of) very good representation(s) of these entities. When a programmer needs to code people in his software he simply plugs in a pre-written, quality-assured person object, which he may refine as required. Rather than every mathematics teacher develop their own way of introducing students to differential calculus, they are simply able to call upon one or more very good learning objects, which do the job. The mathematics teachers may then devote their efforts to supporting students understanding of those objects. Some examples:
The best learning objects would be made available, at a cost, to the entire educational community. Widespread adoption of the learning object paradigm would see a separation between the traditionally integrated functions of content preparation and learner support. Reusability in education is not new and has not until recently been seen as controversial. A textbook is a reusable learning object. A textbook on basic calculus might be used in courses on mathematics, physics, engineering etc. with different groups of students in numerous schools and colleges throughout the world. It may be translated into different languages to further extend its reusability. Learning objects take the reusability concept a step further, extending it to the entire content component of the learning experience. Downes (2000) makes a compelling case for the economic benefits of the learning object approach, claiming "there will be sharing, because no institution producing its own materials on its own could compete with institutions sharing learning materials." One criticism of this approach comes from the recognition that knowledge does not exist as discrete chunks, but is inextricably related to other knowledge as well as to the context in which it is applied, i.e. the learning object approach is too reductionistic to meet the learning needs of the real world. The term digital divide has been coined to describe the division between those that have access to technology and those that do not. In March 2003 an estimated 649 million people, some 10% of the world's population, had Internet access (Global Reach). It is sobering to reflect that 90% do not have such, thus the technology that promises to make learning opportunities more widely available than ever before is effectively excluding the vast majority. This difference in the levels of access to technology is driving the goal of multi-purposing learning objects across a range of delivery media, e.g. it should be possible to present printed, low-bandwidth and high-bandwidth versions of a particular object. The problem in meeting this ideal is that material is written to the strengths of a target medium, e.g. a novel and a screenplay of the same story are quite different. Thus in trying to author an object for a number of formats there is a risk of compromising the strengths of each and delivering a mediocre product. Despite these criticisms reusable learning objects will most likely play a major role in the future of learning presentation. The focus at this stage should be on identifying those scenarios in which the approach has most to offer. InteroperabilityClosely related to the concept of reusability is that of interoperability. Essentially this means ensuring that where reusable learning materials are created they are truly reusable, by different institutions and across different delivery platforms. To this end a number of bodies are working towards the development of standards. These bodies include the IEEE Learning Technology Standards Committee (LTSC), Advanced Distributed Learning (ADL) Initiative (developers of SCORM - the Sharable Content Object Reference Model) and the Instructional Management System (IMS) Global Learning Consortium. Specifications are emerging to describe things like learning object metadata, content packaging and question and test interoperability. The UK Centre for Educational Technology Interoperability Standards has described the adoption of standards as being "key to the realisation of Life Long Learning and a global education marketplace." (CETIS 2002). Although much work is being done in this area few standards have been officially ratified. The learning technology practitioner would be advised to become acquainted with the current state of affairs and to ensure that any deliverables are broadly compatible with existing recommendations whilst watching closely for further developments. The Understanding MismatchOne of the greatest difficulties in implementing learning technology projects is the need for mutual understanding between a diverse range of skill sets. This difficulty exists to a lesser degree in traditional education where those with the greatest subject knowledge aren't always the most able to impart it to others. In the UK this is more of a problem in higher education, where academic staff are selected solely for expertise in their field and are not required to possess any qualifications in education. The problem is intensified in technology mediated learning as not only subject specialists and educationalists need to be involved the process but also a whole range of technical experts (systems administrators, web/multimedia designers/developers, support staff…). The successful development of a learning technology project from conception to delivery requires that each of these specialists is able to work together, each having an appreciation of the role played by the others. Without this mutual understanding the dangers are that the subject experts will simply regurgitate what they know without regard to how the learner will engage with it; the educationalist will produce unrealistic expectations of the technology, or worse, have little understanding of the technology's potential; and the technologists will create excellent demonstrations of their specific skills and knowledge that stand as works of art but do little to enhance the learner's understanding. In an attempt to address the problem of understanding mismatch two relatively new professions have emerged from the learning technology industry, namely the instructional designer and learning technologist (or educational technologist). The instructional designer is able to work with subject experts to create a learning experience appropriate to the target learner. It is a role that should be found throughout traditional educational establishments, particularly those of higher education. Indeed in the UK more and more higher education institutions are introducing learning and teaching units with a view to helping academics improve the quality of learning presented to their students. The learning technologist is likely to be technically skilled as well as being able to communicate with other technical experts and will have a good awareness of the potentials of technology in promoting learning. Most importantly he/she will be able to communicate with subject experts and/or educationalists to advise where and how technology might enhance the learning experience that is being developed. The learning technologist may demonstrate a range of examples to inspire ideas, and will then work to refine those ideas into a realisable form. These roles are intended to serve as an interface between subject specialist and technical expert. They will ensure that the right amount and level of subject knowledge is presented to the learner in the appropriate form for the most effective learning to take place. As the discipline of learning technology matures it is likely a number of project lifecycle methodologies that enshrine best practice will emerge. However, it is the author's opinion that the field is currently too young to be so rigidly constrained and that further experimentation and innovation are required if its full potential is to be realised. Effective Learning TechnologyHow may learning technology be most effectively deployed? And what might be the characteristics of the resulting learning experience? Technology has the potential to facilitate communication across physical boundaries. It also has the potential to involve the learner, particularly the distance learner, to a high degree as well as being able to present a highly personalized learning experience. We might expect an effective technologically mediated learning experience to offer the opportunity for communication and collaboration with similarly minded individuals from around the world. These individuals would comprise both peers and mentors and would ideally form communities in which different members could take the lead at different stages of the learning process. The communication facility could take any form from the simple e-mail list and/or discussion board through to intelligent avatars inhabiting three-dimensional virtual worlds. The experience would employ different media to achieve different ends. In many cases, depending on the nature of the course, there would be a significant reading component. This reading need not be delivered as bundles of paper. Instead it could be distributed as PDF files for the learner to print locally. It is likely these files will be fully indexed and searchable to enable the learner to quickly retrieve relevant content. There may also be some form of computerized organizer, note taker and annotation tool, which some learners might find beneficial. Where the computer is used to present learning there is likely to be a high degree of learner involvement. Rich simulations and models will allow the learner to experiment in a variety of novel situations, learning from the experience of active participation and the resulting feedback. There will not be a pre-determined pathway through the computer-presented component. Instead it will adapt itself to the characteristics, needs and earlier performance of the individual learner. Audio and video elements will also be offered where these media are most appropriate for presenting the learning material. Where a course of study is comprised of different media (print, computer, audio, video) each component will be of sufficient size to provide a study session of satisfying length and substance, i.e. learners will not be required to switch from screen to paper and back every few minutes. Multi-media courses may also provide a printed "summary" of key concepts for revision purposes. This summary could be in skeletal form to be expanded upon by the learner as they progress. ConclusionsLearning technology is currently attracting intense interest due to the rapid increases in technological capability and in the size of the audience able to access it, and also due to the increasing demands upon the education system as the need for lifelong learning becomes reality. Technology can provide quality learning to a mass audience, and by offering greater learner involvement and a more personalized learning experience can deliver the kind of learning most suited to the information age. But if technology's potential is to be fully realised its strengths and weaknesses need to be understood by learning providers. The computer is just one of a range of media that should be used to present learning in a blended approach. Reusability, and in particular the topic of reusable learning objects, is the subject of much activity. The concept is attractive from an economic standpoint, but does not represent an educational panacea. Major criticisms of the approach are that it is too reductionistic and of compromising the quality of purpose-made content. Further work is needed to identify the boundaries within which reusability might be most effectively applied, e.g. are there differences in the applicability of the approach between arts and science subjects, introductory and advanced topics, or academic and vocational contexts? Work is also needed on the development of models for the efficient authoring, representation, storage, distribution, presentation and production of learning objects. A major difficulty in learning technology project implementation is due to the diversity in the skill sets that need to be involved and the potential for misunderstanding that might occur between them. The problem of understanding mismatch may be alleviated once learning technology implementation methodologies become established. However there should be no rush to move to rigid methodologies at the expense of widespread experimentation and innovation in this evolving field. ReferencesCETIS, the centre for educational technology interoperability standards, (2002), Learning Technology Standards: An Overview, http://www.cetis.ac.uk/static/standards.html Downes, Stephen, (2000), Learning Objects, http://www.atl.ualberta.ca/downes/naweb/Learning_Objects.doc Fletcher, J.D., (2003), Does This Stuff Work? A Review of Technology Used to Teach, http://www.techknowlogia.org (Free subscription required, last accessed 17 June 2004) Global Reach, (March 2003), Global Internet Statistics (by Language),
Health and Safety Executive, (1998), Working with VDUs, http://www.hse.gov.uk/pubns/indg36.pdf IEEE 1484.12.1-2002 Draft Standard for Learning Object Metadata (2002). Knowledge Planet product literature, http://www.knowledgeplanet.com/newsletter/kp_content%207-17-01.pdf Nielsen, Jakob, (1998), Electronic Books - A Bad Idea (Alertbox for July 26, 1998), http://www.useit.com/alertbox/980726.html Riley, David, (2002), Simulation modelling: educational development roles for learning technologists, Association for Learning Technology Journal, 10(3), 54-69 Schacter, John, (1999), The Impact of Education Technology on Student Achievement, Milken Exchange on Education Technology, http://www.mff.org/pubs/ME161.pdf (last accessed 17 June 2004) Seels, Barbara B., Richey, Rita C., (1994), Instructional Technology: The Definition and Domains of the Field, Association for Educational Communications & Technology. Small, Peter, (2000), The Entrepreneurial Web, ft.com Wiman & Meirhenry, (1960), Educational Media, on Edgar Dale.
See also: Learning in the Information Age | New Model Learning | Learning Theories and Styles | Instructional Design © twinIsles.dev (http://www.twinisles.com/dev/index.htm) 2005 |