May be copied for educational use provided that the source is acknowledged.
Review of educational research on virtual learning
environments [VLE] - implications for the
improvement of teaching and learning and access to
formal learning in Europe
Paper presented at the European Conference on
Educational Research, University of Ham burg, 17-20
September 2003
Abstract
The importance of VLEs in European Higher Education has
grown in the last five years under the influence of national
developments and European policy initiatives. These
changes have been accompanied by, and extended thr ough
the initiatives of multinational corporations based in North
America, although a number of national products,
including open source VLEs are available.
This situation is described in the EU e - learning strategy
‘Virtual campuses for all students’. “By end 2005, Member
States, supported by the eLearning and eTEN programmes
should ensure that all universities offer online access 1 for
students and researchers to maximise the quality and
efficiency of learning processes and activities." 2
The cost struc ture of the products of the major
commercial suppliers tends to encourage central provision
of VLE and, it is argued, a degree of inflexibility in
delivery especially when linked to student management
information systems. [Also known as a Managed Learning
Environment – MLE]
It is also argued that this approach promotes a degree of
pedagogical inflexibility. In this situation, it is argued
that the evolution of international specifications such as
IMS 3 and SCORM 4 are likely to reflect market power rather
than educational needs.
The paper will review the main features of VLE and the
principal approaches to their implementation and will
analyse their contribution to learning with reference to
two models "Cognitive Apprenticeship” 5, and
"Conversational Framew ork for the Learning Process 6"
A range of approaches to the specification of user
requirements will be discussed and conclusions proposed
as to the implications for universities in Europe.
© Jo h n K on r ad 03 j o h n . k o n r a d @ d s l . p i p e x . c o m EC E R 200 3 N et wo r k 22
1
May be copied for educational use provided that the source is acknowledged.
Although the process described above is constructed
around general theoretical perspectives and policies, there
is limited evidence that this process has been regarded as
problematic from the perspective of the users, the
students or participants in formal learning.
Policy framework
In the UK and other Anglophone count ries, there is now a
process of systematic review of the use and impact of
Virtual Learning Environments [VLE] 7. The benefits of this
approach are cited as lower costs per student for
Universities (economies of scale) as well as guaranteed
high quality le arning for students who wish to learn
‘anywhere, anytime’ 8. The nature of the issues are well
summarised by Paul Bailey of the UK Joint Information
Systems Committee [JISC] 9 who identifies the policydriven nature of the use of VLEs as a means of increasi ng
participation in Higher Education of people 18 -30 to 50%,
principally by progression from Further Education; Sue
Timmis and Julian Cook 10 address the issue of student
motivation from an objectivist perspective concluding that
VLEs need to provide learnin g opportunities not available
elsewhere, clear expectations, guidance and support to
enable students to respond to the potential of the VLE;
Mark Stiles 11 identifies some debates about the learning
process and advocates that we should be adventurous in
our choice of pedagogies.
Implementation of Virtual Learning Environments
An Analysis of Users’ Needs is a frequently used strategy
for any major software implementation 12. The JISC
PORTOLE project 13 has developed a useful approach which
involves a three -stage model:
1. “Identify possible objectives . The first step involved
the collection of general set of potential objectives.
These were identified from experts in the field of e learning and resource discovery, (academics, librarians,
and IT developers) and f rom the project team and
collated by the project manager.
2. Decide on important objectives . Focus groups were
conducted in order to discuss the importance of
different potential features for the tool.
3. Select a final set of objectives which will lead to the
evaluation analysis.” 14
This approach assumes that an organisation would take a
corporate approach to the implementation of a VLE. In
© Jo h n K on r ad 03 j o h n . k o n r a d @ d s l . p i p e x . c o m EC E R 200 3 N et wo r k 22
2
May be copied for educational use provided that the source is acknowledged.
one UK University, the Senior Management identified a
systems requirement in terms of creating links between
such major Information Systems such as Student
Information [Registration, Enrolment onto Modules,
Recording assessment, and Publishing results], Learning
Resources management, Access to the Campus through a
single portal. A representative group of teaching staff
was consulted on the implementation of the strategy and
three VLE products were identified as meeting the system
requirement. Three course teams were given limited
support to pilot one of these products for a semester. At
the end of the semester, a group of B achelors’ students
conducted their final dissertation in order to evaluate the
pilots. The reports were submitted to Senior Management
who decided on the final product.
Mark Stiles has summarised an alternative view which
identifies the importance of go od course design, the need
for a planned, pedagogical approach and the importance of
staff development when selecting and implementing a VLE .
15
The area of “appropriate pedagogy” has recently been
widely debated and this issue will be returned to in the
next Section.
A major commercial influence on these developments is
the software platform WebCT [Web Course Tools] which
currently dominates the UK market 16 and is a major force
in the rest of Europe 17. “WebCT's vision is to work in
concert with leading insti tutions to go beyond online
course delivery and actually transform the educational
experience. To that end, we will deliver state -of-the-art
educational technology that supports a full range of
teaching and learning styles and optimizes intellectual and
technical resources.” 18
“Characteristics of successful online students - not all
students are successful in online courses. Some students
have trouble with time management, need the structure of
a classroom, or miss the face -to-face interaction with
other students and the instructor. The following are some
characteristics students should have to be successful
learning online.

Discipline to complete projects by deadlines instead
of waiting until the end of the semester.

Motivations to read, write, and part icipate fully in
class activities.
© Jo h n K on r ad 03 j o h n . k o n r a d @ d s l . p i p e x . c o m EC E R 200 3 N et wo r k 22
3
May be copied for educational use provided that the source is acknowledged.

Time to devote approximately 12 hours a week to a
3-credit course. [equivalent to 10 ECTS]

Ability to work independently and in teams.

Flexibility in dealing with technology problems.

Self-starter does not procrastina te.

Able to learn from the printed word. Majority of
material and communication happens through reading
and writing.

Set aside specific times on a routine basis to
'participate' in the course.

Can ask questions when they do not understand.

Access to a current computer and the Internet.

Good, basic computer skills.

Possess time management skills.” 19
Let us reflect for a moment on ourselves and our students.
Are these criteria fully realisable in practice? Do they
take enough account of the competing pressures of
everyday life?
An influential approach to teaching and learning in Higher
Education has been the “ Seven Principles for Good Practice
in Undergraduate Education.” This study suggests that
“Good practice in undergraduate education:
1. Encourages contacts between students and faculty.
2. Develops reciprocity and cooperation among students.
3. Uses active learning techniques.
4. Gives prompt feedback.
5. Emphasizes time on task.
6. Communicates high expectations.
7. Respects diverse talents and ways of learning.20”
This framework was updated more recently recognising
that the multi -functional nature of VLE implies the need to
be more selective to ensure fitness for purpose 21. For
example, asynchronous staff -student and student-student
communication by email (ins ide or outside a VLE) can
improve understanding if all use it effectively (especially
reading their Inbox regularly). However teachers’
expectations of a regular pattern of “office hours may not
be congruent with expectation of students of ‘support at
any time’”.
© Jo h n K on r ad 03 j o h n . k o n r a d @ d s l . p i p e x . c o m EC E R 200 3 N et wo r k 22
4
May be copied for educational use provided that the source is acknowledged.
The writer’s experience with first year full -time students
aged 18-20 is that their motivation tends to be
instrumental and defined as much in terms of University
as a social process and possibly a rite of passage . In
particular, their level of competence and confidence in
using ICT applications is often too low to enable
engagement with a VLE. However, the minority of the
students who did not have these handicaps were very
positive about the possibilities of the technology in
extending the range of their learning. The experience
with part-time postgraduate professional students is quite
the reverse and having built an initial peer group through
face to face Induction at the beginning of a Semester, the
group becomes more self-sustaining. This experience
supports the Model that “Learning is built around learning
communities and interaction, extending access beyond the
bounds of time and space, but offering the promise of
efficiency and widening access. 22” The following view is
fully supported: “A successful online learning community
has many of the same characteristics as a 'real'
community. It offers individual support to its members,
so that they can feel safe to communicate openly, which in
turn allows them to develop the shared vision that they
need in order to learn together. 23”
Pedagogical issues
The principle and dominant model of e -learning in the
Anglophone commercial world is ‘blended learning’. “The
term blended learning is used to describe a solution that
combines several different delivery methods, such as
collaboration software, Web -based courses, EPSS, and
knowledge management practices. Blended learning also
is used to describe learning that mixes various event based activities, including face -to-face classrooms, live e learning, and self-paced learning. Unfortunately, there's
no single formula that guarantees learning, but here are
some guidelines from NIIT on how to order your learning
activities. 24”
As indicated in the critiques referenced in the last
endnote, there appears to be a range of responses to this
clear approach. In the writer’s experience with post
graduate part time professionals, this concept often
proves useful as an entry point to the conceptual “jungle”.
“Almost anyone who has taught online would argue that
the demands on online tutors are different from those on
face-to-face tutors, although the general issues and
© Jo h n K on r ad 03 j o h n . k o n r a d @ d s l . p i p e x . c o m EC E R 200 3 N et wo r k 22
5
May be copied for educational use provided that the source is acknowledged.
situations with which they must deal are, in essence, the
same. The online tutor must manage a course, guide
students throughout the learning ex perience, motivate
them, interact with them, assess them and deal with any
conflicts or difficulties.
The differences in tutor role result from the characteristics
identified above: the absence of non -verbal clues, the use
of text as the main means of co mmunications, and the
constraints imposed by technology. However, any list of
roles that can be produced should only be regarded as a
general framework. 25”
The COSE project at the University of Staffordshire 26, led
by Mark Stiles, has made a major contribu tion to
developments in the pedagogy of online learning.
“eLearning presents a challenge to the roles and
responsibilities of academics and “support” professionals.
Apart from the expected “quality processes” most
traditional course development is done in an ill-formed
and often quite ad-hoc way. … Involvement of support
professionals … is very rarely integrated in any real way
into the course design/development process.
eLearning, by its very nature, demands considerably more
planning. However, there is little evidence that pedagogy
is much considered in this process, with far too many staff
seeking to model traditional practice onto e -delivery.
Support, at all levels, is often either overlooked or not
effectively used. Indeed, it is very often the c ase that
developers have not thought through the reason why they
are going to use eLearning in the first place. (Sometimes
the reason for doing it is solely that funding exists!).
Overall, the essential amateurism of HE course design and
development is thrown into sharp relief by eLearning. 27”
An earlier paper put these issues in a sharp focus: “Whilst
the ultimate potential of VLEs is unlikely to be realised
until the standards and technologies are in place to
facilitate their interoperation with each othe r and wider
organisational and information systems, the view of the
developers of COSE is that their successful deployment
depends first and foremost on addressing the pedagogic
issues associated with effective learning and ultimately on
the overall qualit y of course design and learner support.
The author contends that over -attention on the "features"
provided by VLEs can lead to a "check-list" approach to
VLE selection, which, coupled with inattention to the
educational issues, can result in mere transpos ition of
© Jo h n K on r ad 03 j o h n . k o n r a d @ d s l . p i p e x . c o m EC E R 200 3 N et wo r k 22
6
May be copied for educational use provided that the source is acknowledged.
traditional teaching approaches to the computer, and
result in a poor learning experience which is ineffective. 28”
“There is a need for institutions to address within their
curriculum the developmental needs of ‘non -traditional
learners’ and most i nstitutions have taken steps in this
direction. Provision for this can be “separate” – where
provision is specifically targeted at non -traditional
learners or “integrated” where provision is aimed at
developing requisite capabilities in all learners (Warr en,
2002). Warren argues strongly for the integrated
approach as the best means of meeting both the widening
participation and “skills” agendas. This view is in
concurrence with that of the author, who has previously
argued that the development of the us e of meaningmaking, or semiotic, tools which are specific to given
disciplines or professions and the reapplication of the
tools and practices of the given culture, coupled with
recognition of the relatedness of tacit and codified
knowledge in the context of tasks or problems, is
fundamental to the development of expertise (Stiles
2000a). This supports a view that skills are more likely to
be ‘transferable’ when developed in an authentic context,
rather than treated in a separate, “generic” way.
The author proposes that unless there is a national focus
on the aspects of eLearning concerned with “form”
(pedagogy and assessment) which is aimed at bringing
these into balance with the current focuses on “content”
(curriculum and resources) and issues of techno logy,
students will be increasingly provided with isolating and
passive learning experiences which, in turn, will impact
most negatively on those very learners which the
government is concerned to involve in FE/HE participation.
This negative impact could well disillusion those staff who
are currently becoming involved in the use of technology
for the first time, and may result in a “backlash” among
teaching staff and university managers, resulting in a set back to the achievement of national goals and
competitiveness. 29”
These critiques and similar views on a crude transference
of conventional approaches to the VLE context have
identified a relationship between successful online
learning and the use of constructivist approaches.
Issues in Evaluation of VL E use
As indicated in the select bibliography, there is no
shortage of recent work in this field. From a business
© Jo h n K on r ad 03 j o h n . k o n r a d @ d s l . p i p e x . c o m EC E R 200 3 N et wo r k 22
7
May be copied for educational use provided that the source is acknowledged.
perspective, it is generally agreed that “… in the US less
than 25% of businesses evaluated the impact of training
on business results. In th e UK, we suspect that it is a lot
lower.” (Clark 2003:3) Apart from the projects cited
below, the dominant approach is that of Donald Kirkpatrick
1959 four-level model 30. This puts forward the following
structure:
Level
Target
Evaluation goal
1. Reaction
Training
Initial endorsement by
participants of the training
measured by reaction
questionnaires.
2. Learning
Learner on
the course
That learning occurred because of
the training, normally assessed by
performance tests.
3. Behaviour
Learner on
the job
That learning affected behaviour,
or performance on the job
assessed by observation and
productivity data.
4. Results
Organisation
That the training had the desired
results in the organisation,
assessed by cost data, quality
indicators and return on
investment.
The Institute of Employment Studies [IES] has recently
published a study of Kirkpatrick’s approach and
approaches developed from the original model. It forms
an excellent starting point for a review of approaches to
the evaluation of training and learning as well as
reviewing alternative models which focus more on the
purpose of evaluation and on alternative measures.
(Tamkin P et al, 2002) Main findings include the lack of
an established causal relationship between ascending
levels; little corre lation between learner reactions and
measures of learning or subsequent measures of changed
behaviour (Levels 1 & 2); a failure to transfer training to
the workplace (Level 3) which related to issues of how
difficult the learner perceived the course (negat ive) and
how much line managers were supportive (positive) (Level
4). (Tamkin P et al, 2002: xi -xiii)
Previous IES Research (Pollard and Hillage 2001) is cited
which raises the key issue about e -Learning “How can you
tell if it is working?” in view of th e high costs of
implementing the technology; the need to demonstrate the
efficiency and effectiveness of this new learning solution;
and the need to show organisational value of this (as yet)
© Jo h n K on r ad 03 j o h n . k o n r a d @ d s l . p i p e x . c o m EC E R 200 3 N et wo r k 22
8
May be copied for educational use provided that the source is acknowledged.
unproven process. The main approach identified was the
measurement of performance, competences and
intellectual capital. (Tamkin P et al, 2002: 18 -22)
ASTD has conducted a major study on the evaluation of
effectiveness and return on investment of e -learning and
this makes clear that the availability of rich data within
VLEs offers an important evaluation opportunity 31.
A recent seminar paper concluded that:
“What is lacking is a theoretical basis and a coherent research
framework. There is little systematic research into broad based
issues and concepts, or the generation of transferable models and
processes of evaluating e-learning or into the design of tools for
analysing, rather than collecting, data. Furthermore, there are few
papers written which collate the results of the existing research and
classify it in an accessible way. Nor is there substantial evidence of
work that extrapolates and tests generalisable principles arising
from the case studies and surveys or which comments on the
implications or application of these in a European VET arena.”
(Hughes and Attwell 2002/03)
The writer argues that with the increasing use of
competence based national qualification frameworks 32;
such highly functional approaches should form a
significant point of departure for teaching and learning in
Higher Education, especially in the light of the earlier
discussion on “Blended Learning.” In particular, there are
significant implications for the working conditions of
teachers, support staff, and learners of a move towards a
“24/7” approach.
Towards evaluative frameworks
The bibliography of this Review indicates some important
resources that are available for the evaluation of VLEs.
The IHEP Benchmark study (Phipps & Merisotis 2000) has
provided the basis for a pilot investigation of its
appropriateness for a European cultural context o n the
JISCMAIL list “Evaluation of Online Learning”
[ w w w . j i s c m a i l . a c . u k ]. A copy of this document will be
published as an Appendix to this paper.
Another important resource is the “Evaluation Cookbook”
(Harvey 1998) which makes effective use of a “recipe”
approach to provide a range of practical approaches to the
evaluation of learning technology (not just VLEs) for a
wide variety of stakeholders.
At a more specialist level and building on the above work,
the JISC Evaluation Toolkit (Conole 2000) provide s a
© Jo h n K on r ad 03 j o h n . k o n r a d @ d s l . p i p e x . c o m EC E R 200 3 N et wo r k 22
9
May be copied for educational use provided that the source is acknowledged.
structured resource for effective evaluation. The writer
has not been able to discover published evidence of its
use outside the development context.
In summary, the state of the art in evaluation of the use
of VLEs in Higher Education is a matter of “under-use”
rather than under-theorising! As this review has shown,
there is a wide variety of theoretical and practical
approaches available for use.
In my view, it is unlikely that teaching and learning using
VLEs in Higher Education will become more ef ficient and
effective without significant applied research and
evaluation.
John Konrad
John.konrad@dsl.pipex.com
© Jo h n K on r ad 03 j o h n . k o n r a d @ d s l . p i p e x . c o m EC E R 200 3 N et wo r k 22
10
May be copied for educational use provided that the source is acknowledged.
A select bibliography of Educational Research on
virtual learning environments [VLEs]
Britain, S & Liber, O, (1999), “A framework for
pedagogical evaluation of virtual learning environments”.
A report presented to the Joint Information Systems
Committee's Technology Applications Programme (JTAP).
http://www.leeds.ac.uk/educol/documents/00001237.htm
Clark D (2003), “Evaluation of Learning”, An Epic White
Paper, Epic Group plc, Brighton UK [ h t t p : / / w w w . e p i c . c o . u k ]
Connole G (2000), “An Evaluation Toolkit for
Practitioners”, Institute for Learning and Research
Technology Bristol, w w w . l t s s . b r i s . a c . u k / i n t e r a c t 2 1 / i n 2 1 p 0 6 . h t m
Cousin G, & Deepwell, F. (1998). “Virtual Focus Group
Techniques in the Evaluation of an E lectronic Learning
Environment”, In Oliver, M. (Ed.) ELT 98: Innovation in the
Evaluation of Learning Technology Conference
Proceedings, London: University of North London, 4 -7,
http://www.unl.ac.uk/tl tc/elt/elt98.pdf
Harvey J (ed.) (1998), “The Evaluation Cookbook”,
Learning Technology Dissemination Initiative, Edinburgh,
www.icbl.hw.ac.uk/itdl
Hughes J & Attwell G (2002/03), “A Framework for the
Evaluation of E-Learning”, Paper presented to a seminar
series on Exploring models and partnerships for eLearning
in SMEs, held in Stirling, Scotland and Brussels, Belgium,
in Nov 2002 and Feb 2003,
http://www.theknownet.com/ICT_SMEs_seminars/papers.html
Joyes G (2000), “An evaluation model for supporting
higher education lecturers in the integration of new
learning technologies”, Educational Technology & Society
3(4), h t t p : / / i f e t s . i e e e . o r g / p e r i o d i c a l / v o l _ 4 _ 2 0 0 0 / j o y e s . h t m l
McFadzean, E (2001a), “Supporting virtual learning
groups: Part 1: a pedagogical perspective” Team
Performance Management: 7, 3/4. 53-62.
McFadzean, E (2001b), “Supporting virtual learning
groups: Part 2: an integrated approach” Team
Performance Management, 7, 5, 77-93
Milligan, C (1998), “The role of virtual learning
environments in the online delivery of staff development.
Phipps R & Merisotis J (20 00), “Quality on the Line:
Benchmarks for success in Internet -based Distance
Education”, The Institute for Higher Education Policy,
Washington DC, April, w w w . i h e p . c o m
© Jo h n K on r ad 03 j o h n . k o n r a d @ d s l . p i p e x . c o m EC E R 200 3 N et wo r k 22
11
May be copied for educational use provided that the source is acknowledged.
Pollard E & Hillage J (2001), “Exploring e -Learning” IES
Report 376, Brighton UK, w w w . e m p l o y m e n t - s t u d i e s . c o . u k
Report 1: Review of experiences of delivering TALiSMAN
online courses”. A report presented to the Joint
Information Systems Committee's Technol ogy Applications
Programme (JTAP).
http://www.leeds.ac.uk/educol/documents/00001230.htm
Oliver, M. (1999). “The ELT Toolkit” ,
http://www.unl.ac.uk/tltc/elt/toolkit.pdf
Oliver M (2000), “An introduction to the Evaluation of
Learning Technology”, Educational Technology & Society
3(4), h t t p : / / i f e t s . i e e e . o r g / p e r i o d i c a l / v o l _ 4 _ 2 0 0 0 / i n t r o . h t m l
Richardson, Julie A (2001), “Changes and challenges of
academic lives through the introduction of virtual learning
environments”, Paper presented at SCUTREA, 31st Annual
Conference, 3 -5 July 2001, University of East London.
http://www.leeds.ac.uk/educol/documents/00002517.htm
Richardson, Julie A & Turner A, (2000), “A Large -scale
‘local’ evaluation of students’ learning experiences using
virtual learning e nvironments”, Educational Technology &
Society 3(4), h t t p : / / i f e t s . i e e e . o r g / p e r i o d i c a l / v o l _ 4 _ 2 0 0 0 / r i c h a r d s o n . h t m l
Scanlon E, et al (2000), “Evaluating information and
communicatio n technologies for learning”, Educational
Technology & Society 3(4),
http://ifets.ieee.org/periodical/vol_4_2000/scanlon.html
Taylor J, Woodman M, Sumner T, Blake C T, (2000),
“Peering Through a Glass Darkly: Integrative evaluation of
an on-line course”, Educational Technology & Society 3(4 ),
http://ifets.ieee.org/periodical/vol_4_2000/taylor.html
Tamkin P et al (2002), “Kirkpatrick and Beyond”, IES
Report 392, Brighton UK, w w w . e m p l o y m e n t - s t u d i e s . c o . u k
van der Veen J, & de Boer W, “W3LS: Evaluation
framework for World Wide Web learning”, Educational
Technology & Society 3(4 ),
http://ifets.ieee.org/periodical/vol_4_2000/veen.html
A m o r e g en e ral t e r m i s “ on l i n e l e a rn i n g” s o m eti me s m o r e gen e r al l y
kn own a s “ e- l ea rn i n g”. T h e l att e r t e rm i s u s e d i n a c om m e r ci al
1
© Jo h n K on r ad 03 j o h n . k o n r a d @ d s l . p i p e x . c o m EC E R 200 3 N et wo r k 22
12
May be copied for educational use provided that the source is acknowledged.
c on t e xt an d al s o i n c l u des th e u s e o f su c h “ o ff - l i n e” mat e ri al a s CD RO M an d D VD . In F r en ch , th e equ i val e n t t e rm i s “l ’a pp r en t i ssag e en
li gn e”- « M o d e d ' ap pr en ti s sa g e ba s é su r l 'u ti li sati on d es n o u v el l es
te ch n ol ogi es , p e rm e ttan t l 'a cc è s à d e s f o rm ati on s en l i gn e,
i n t er ac ti ve s et pa r f o i s p e rs on n al i sé e s, d i ffu s é e s pa r l 'i n te rm édi ai r e
d' In t e rn et, d 'u n i n tr an e t ou au t r e m é di a él e ct r on i qu e , afi n d e
dé v el op pe r l e s c o mp ét en c e s, t ou t en r en dan t l e pr o c e s su s
d'a pp r en ti s sag e i n d ép en dan t d e l 'h eu r e et d e l ' en dr oi t. »
http://www.olf.gouv.qc.ca/ressources/bibliotheque/dictionnaires/Internet/fiches/8
872865.html
C om mi s si on o f th e Eu r op e an C omm u n i ti es (20 02) , e E u r o p e 20 05:
An in f o rma ti on s o ci et y f o r all , C O M ( 20 02) 263 fi n al , B ru s s el s , Pag e
13.
2
http://europa.eu.int/information_society/eeurope/news_library/d ocuments/eeurop
e2005/eeurope2005_en.pdf
3
The IMS Global Learning Consortium develops and promotes the adoption of
open technical specifications for interoperable learning technology. Several IMS
specifications have become worldwide de facto standards for delivering learning
products and services. IMS specifications and related publications are made
available to the public at no charge from www.imsglobal.org. No fee is required
to implement the specifications.
IMS is a worldwide non-profit organization that includes more than 50
Contributing Members and affiliates. These members come from every sector of
the global e-learning community. They include hardware and software vendors,
educational institutions, publishers, government agencies, systems integrators,
multimedia content providers, and other consortia. The Consortium provides a
neutral forum in which members with competing business interests and different
decision-making criteria collaborate to satisfy real-world requirements for
interoperability and re-use. (my emphasis) http://www.imsproject.org/aboutims.cfm
Sharable Content Object Reference Model [SCORM] provides a technical
architecture for learning objects to be easily shared across multiple learning
delivery environments. The SCORM specification describes an architecture
built on specifications designed to address the US Department of Defence's
(DOD) frustration with not being able to share distance learning courses
among its different learning delivery systems.
This set of specifications when applied to course content, produces small,
reusable learning objects. These can be easily merged with other compliant
elements to produce a highly modular repository of learning material.
4
http://www.cetis.ac.uk/encyclopedia/entries/20011129121727/view
“ In tra di ti on al app r en ti c e sh i p, th e e xp e rt s h o w s th e app r en ti ce
h o w t o d o a ta s k, watch e s a s th e app r e n ti ce p ra cti c e s p o rti on s o f
th e ta s k, a n d th en t u rn s ove r mo r e an d mo r e r es p on si bi l ity u n ti l th e
app r en ti c e i s p r o fi ci en t en ou gh t o a cc o mpl i sh th e ta sk
i n dep en d en tl y. Th a t i s th e ba si c n oti on of ap p r en ti c e sh i p: sh owi n g
th e a pp r en ti c e h o w to d o a ta s k an d h el pi n g th e app r en ti c e to d o i t.
Th e r e a r e f ou r i mp o rta n t as p ec ts o f t ra di ti on al app r en ti c e s h i p:
mo d el l i n g, sc af f ol di n g, f adi n g, an d c oa c h i n g. … Ou r di s cu s si on o f
c ogn i ti ve app r en ti c e sh i p rai s es n u m er ou s p eda go gi cal an d
t h e o r eti c al i ssu e s th at w e b el i eve a r e i m po rt an t t o th e d e si g n of
l ear n i n g en vi r on m en ts g en eral l y. To fa ci li tate con si d erati on o f th e s e
i ssu e s, w e h ave d evel op e d a fram e w or k c on si s ti n g of f ou r
di men si on s th at c on sti tu t e any l e a rn i n g en vi r on m en t: c on t e n t,
me th od, s equ en c e , an d s o ci ol og y. Rel e van t t o ea ch of th e s e
di men si on s i s a s et o f ch a ra ct e ri sti c s th at w e b el i eve sh ou l d b e
5
© Jo h n K on r ad 03 j o h n . k o n r a d @ d s l . p i p e x . c o m EC E R 200 3 N et wo r k 22
13
May be copied for educational use provided that the source is acknowledged.
c on si d e r ed i n c on st r u cti n g o r e val u ati n g l ea rn i n g e nvi r on m e n ts . …
Co gn i ti ve a pp r en ti c e sh i p i s n o t a m od el of t ea ch i n g th at gi ve s
te ach e r s a pa c kag e d f o rm u l a f o r i n st ru ct i on . In s te ad , i t i s a n
i n stru cti on al pa radi gm f o r t ea ch i n g. C ogn i ti ve app r en ti c e s h i p i s n ot
a r el e va n t m od el f o r al l asp e ct s of t ea ch i n g. It d o e s n ot m a ke
s en s e t o u s e i t to t e ach th e ru l e s o f c on j u gati on i n F r en ch o r t o
te ach th e el em en ts o f th e p e ri o di c t abl e . If th e ta rg et e d g o al o f
l ear n i n g i s a r ot e ta sk , c o gn i ti ve ap p r en ti ce sh i p i s n ot an
app r op ri at e m od el o f i n st ru cti o n . C ogn i ti ve a pp r en ti c e sh i p i s a
u s ef u l i n str u cti on al para di gm wh en a t e ach e r n e ed s to t e ac h a f ai rl y
c ompl ex ta s k to stu den t s .”
http://www.21learn.org/arch/articles/brown_seely.html
Th e m ai n pu rp o s e o f t h e C on v e r sati on al M od el f o r K n o wl ed g e
App r en ti c e sh i p i s to r ev e al th e c on v e rs a ti on s ta ki n g pl a c e b et w e en
an e xp e rt an d a n o v i ce . Fu rth e r , i t i s al s o t o i l l u strat e th e bu i l di n g
o f ca pabi l i ti es i n b o th a c on t ex t - sp e ci fi c an d i n a g en e ri c s en s e.
Th e CM K A i s a m o d e l th at bu i l ds u p on t wo w el l - esta bl i sh ed te ach i n g
an d l ea rn i n g th e o ri e s: th e c on v e rs ati on al f ra m ew o r k ( La u ri l l ard,
1993 P g. 1 02 - 1 04) an d c ogn i ti v e app r e n ti ce sh i p ( C ol li n s, B r own ,
an d N e wman , 19 89) . Di an a Lau ri l l ard' s c on v e r sati on al m od el
att emp ts t o r ev e al t h e ph ysi c al c on v e r s ati on s t aki n g pl ac e bet w e en
an i n st ru ct o r an d a stu d en t wh en i n v ol v ed i n th e t ea ch i n g a n d
l ear n i n g a r en a .
Th es e c on ve r s ati on s a r e th e " c on s ci ou s pr o c e ss e s a c c es si bl e t o th e
l ear n er t o co n si d e r an d m odi fy " ( Lau ri l lar d, 19 93 P g. 10 2) . In
c on c e r t wi th th e s e c on v e rs ati on s, th e La u ri l l ardi an f ra m ew o r k al s o
r e v eal s th e ac ti vi ti es th at a r e n e c es sa r y f o r a c o mp r eh en si v e
l ear n i n g p r o c es s . T h e c on v e r sati on s an d th e a cti vi ti es ta k e pl ac e
wi th i n tw o di f f e r en t stat e s of kn owl e dg e c on st ru cti on : kn owl edg e
bu i l di n g an d kn o wl e dge appl i cati on .
Wi th i n kn owl e dg e b u i l di n g, th e i n s t ru c t o r an d th e s tu d en t i n te r act t o
c r eat e th e c on t ext a n d t o bu i l d th e 'i n tr odu ct o r y' u n d e r st an di n g o f
th e m at e ri al o r su bj e ct mat t e r.
Wi th i n kn owl e dg e a ppl i cati on , th e i n st r u ct o r an d th e s tu d e n t
i n ter ac t t o a ppl y th e kn o wl edg e th at w as bu i l t (i n th e kn o wl edg e
bu i l di n g acti vi ti e s), wi th i n an i n te r ac ti ve c on t ext .
In t ot al , Lau ri l l ard s pe ci fi e s tw el v e a cti v i ti es th at mu st o c cu r i n
o rd e r t o h av e a w el l - r ou n d e d l e a rn i n g e n vi r on m en t th at c on si st s o f
both kn owl e dg e bu i l di n g an d k n o wl ed g e ap pl i cati on
6
http://watserv1.uwaterloo.ca/~acpalmer/purpose.html
F o r a g oo d i n t r odu c ti on t o th e fi el d an d s o m e M od el s of d el i ve ry ,
s e e “D el i v eri n g L e a r n i n g On l i n e: A c ou r s e f o r f aci l i tato rs ” ,
7
http://www.tafe.net/learnscope/dlo/learning8.html (Last Visited 14/09/2003)
“Wi th i n on l i n e l ea rn i n g th e r e a r e a n u m be r of d el i ve r y pa ra di gms
th at t ea ch e rs u s e , d ep en d en t on th ei r b el i ef s ab ou t h ow p e opl e
l ear n ( w e c al l th i s p ed ag og y) an d th ei r ac c e ss t o an d a bi li ty t o u s e
th e t e ch n ol og y . T h e s e ca n b e c on d en s ed i n to th e f ou r m o del s
bel o w . Wh i l e t ea ch e r s wi l l mo v e i n an d ou t o f th e m od el s a n d s om e
wi ll pr og r e ss f r om o n e m od el t o an oth e r a s th ei r u n d e rs tan d i n gs,
bel i ef s an d ski l l s ch an g e, th e y d es c ri b e th e p ra cti c e s th at w e s e e i n
th e V E T s e ct o r n ow to v a ryi n g d eg r e e s. ”
F o r e xa mpl e , “ Hi gh e r e du cati on t od ay f ac e s ri si n g en r ol m e n ts an d
c os ts , a d em og r aph i c sh i ft t ow a rd ol de r stu d en t s an d l i fel on g
l ear n i n g, an d a g r ea te r d em an d f o r an yt i me/an ywh e r e l e ar n i n g an d
on l i n e s e rvi c e s .” Ir vi n e M( 200 3), Th e E me rg in g e - Edu cat io n
8
© Jo h n K on r ad 03 j o h n . k o n r a d @ d s l . p i p e x . c o m EC E R 200 3 N et wo r k 22
14
May be copied for educational use provided that the source is acknowledged.
Lan d s ca p e: A Bla ck bo ar d St rat eg ic Wh i te P ap e r , p ag e 5
http://products.blackboard.com/cp/release6/CIOSeriesWhitePaper.pdf
http://www.ukeu.com/aboutelearning.shtml
s e e al s o
Bai l e y P (20 02) , “ In teg r at ed M an ag e d L ea rn i n g Sy st em s fo r
Li f el on g L e a rn i n g: F act o r Fi cti on ? Th e Wa y F or wa r d with V L E s:
L es s on s L e a rn ed , 2 4 Ju n e 20 02 , U n i ve r s i ty of B ri st ol
h t t p : / / w w w . l t s s . b r i s . a c . u k / e v e n t s _ v l e 6 0 2 . h t m ( L a s t V i s i t e d 1 4 / 0 9 / 2 0 0 3 ) N O T E:
“Th e c on c e pt o f a M an ag ed L ea rn i n g En vi r on m en t ( ML E ) r e f e r s t o
th e wh ol e ra n g e o f i n f o rmati on s ys t em s an d p ro c e s s es o f a c ol l eg e
o r u n i ve r si ty th a t c o n tri bu t e di r e ctl y, o r i n di re ctl y , t o l e a rn i n g an d
th e m an ag e m en t of th at l ea rn i n g. Th i s al so i n cl u de s th e
i n sti tu ti on ’s Vi rtu al L ea rn i n g En vi r on m e n t (V L E) i f i t h a s on e . M L E s
ar e al s o r ef e r r ed t o as i n teg r at ed en vi r o n me n ts f o r l e a rn e rs be cau s e
th e y p r ovi d e an o pp o rtu n i ty f o r c ompl e t e i n teg r ati on of al l
edu ca ti on al a cti vi ti e s. Di f f e r en t o r gan i s ati on s ma y h av e di f f e r en t
typ e s o f M L E s b ec au s e th ey h a v e di ff e r e n t edu ca ti on al an d bu si n e s s
n e ed s . F e w c ol l eg e s an d u n i v e rsi ti e s c u r r en tl y h a v e fu l l y de v el op ed
ML E sy st e ms i n pl a c e bu t m an y a r e p r og r e ssi n g t ow ar d th i s go al .”
9
http://www.jisc.ac.uk/index.cfm?name=about_mle
(Last Visited 14/09/2003)
Th e r an g e of r es e a r ch an d d e v el opm e n t i n th i s a r ea a r e su mma ri s ed
at h t t p : / / w w w . j i s c . a c . u k / i n d e x . c f m ? n a m e = p r o g r a m m e _ m l e _ h e
Ti mmi s S & C o ok J (2002 ), “ ’ Th e N egl e ct ed H ea rt ’ o f On l i ne
L ea rn i n g? M oti v ati n g stu d en t s t o w o rk e ff e cti v el y wi th On l i n e
L ea rn i n g En vi r on m e n ts ”, Th e Wa y F o rw ar d with V L E s:
L es s on s L e a rn ed , 2 4 Ju n e 20 02 , U n i ve r s i ty of B ri st ol
10
http://www.ltss.bris.ac.uk/1
11
http://www.ltss.bris.ac.uk/vle02_Mark.pdf
In th e bu si n e ss w or l d an an al y si s o f R e tu rn on In v es tm en t [RO I]
i s al s o i mp o rt an t .
12
13
14
S e e h ttp: //w ww .l e e ds .a c. u k/ p or t ol e/
P OR T O L E P r oj ec t: Us e r N e ed s An al ysi s Pa r a 1. 1
http://www.leeds.ac.uk/portole/userneeds.doc
Sti l es M , P e dag og y an d Vi rtu al L ea rn i n g En vi r on m en t (V L E)
E val u ati on an d S el e cti on (2 000) , “ R et e n ti on a n d a ch i ev e m en t a r e
j u st a s i mp o rt an t i n e - l ea rn i n g a s i n i ts t radi ti on al c ou n t e r pa rt. F o r
l ear n i n g t o b e e f f ect i ve i t mu st b e an a c ti ve p r oc e s s wh i ch t ak e s th e
f ol l owi n g i n to c on si de r ati on :
15
• L e arn i n g i s a s o ci al pr o c e s s an d d ev e l opm en t i s l i n ke d t o th e
sp e ci fi c ‘ su bj e ct ’ cu l tu r e i n wh i ch ‘au th e n ti c’ (an d u su al l y
c ol l abo rati v e) l ea rn i n g a cti vi ti es i n v ol vi n g sp e ci fi c kn owl e d ge ,
gen e r al kn o wl edg e an d s ki l l s a r e sh a r e d;
• L e arn i n g a cti vi ty , r e s ou rc e s an d a s s e s sm en t n e ed t o b e cl ea rl y
r el at ed t o th e s yl l abu s an d th e l ea rn e r ' s cu r r en t l e v el of
kn owl e dg e .” h t t p : / / w w w . n i l t a . o r g . u k / N I L T A / R e s o u r c e s / M L E / b p 5 . p d f
S e e “ W eb CT , p r ovi de r of th e w o rl d' s m o st fl e xi bl e an d wi d el y u s e d
h i gh er edu c ati on e - l ea rn i n g s ol u ti on s, a n n ou n c ed t od ay th a t l ea di n g
UK h i gh e r edu c ati on ( H E) an d fu rth e r e d u cati on ( F E) i n s ti tu ti on s a r e
ra pi dl y ch o o si n g W e bCT Cam pu s Edi ti on a s th ei r c ampu s s ta n da rd
f or e- l e a rn i n g. Th i s an n ou n c em en t n ot on l y ma r k s th e g r o w i n g
de man d f or edu c ati on al i n sti tu ti on s t o stan da rdi s e t o on e Vi rtu al
L ea rn i n g En vi r on m e n t (V L E) , bu t al s o h i gh l i gh ts W e bC T 's on goi n g
l ead e rs h i p i n th e UK H E an d F E ma r k e t s i n del i ve ri n g t h e mo st
16
© Jo h n K on r ad 03 j o h n . k o n r a d @ d s l . p i p e x . c o m EC E R 200 3 N et wo r k 22
15
May be copied for educational use provided that the source is acknowledged.
adv an ce d e du c ati on al te ch n ol o gy a vai l abl e t o su pp o rt al l te ach i n g
an d l ea rn i n g st yl e s.
‘ En h an ci n g t h e qu al i ty o f edu cati on i s vi tal l y i mpo rta n t an d i s
s om eth i n g w e a r e h ea vi l y c o mmi tt ed t o at th e Un i v e r si ty o f
Edi n bu rgh . Hi gh st a n da rd s an d ch an gi n g stu d en t d e man d s n e ed t o
be m et su cc e s s fu l l y,’ c om m en t ed J e ff Ha yw o od , di r e ct o r, mu l ti medi a
an d l ea rn i n g t e ch n ol og y s e r vi c es , Th e U n i ve r si ty o f E di n bu r gh .
‘U si n g a Vi r tu al L ea r n i n g En vi r on m e n t th at c on fo r m s t o i n te r n ati on al
stan da rd s h e l ps u s t o en su r e th at a c on t i n u al l evel o f h i gh q u al i ty
l ear n i n g an d t e ach i n g i s e xp e ri e n c e d th r ou gh ou t th e i n sti tu t i on an d
th at th e o v e ral l man ag em en t of c ou rs e s i s c a r ri ed ou t i n t h e m o st
e ffi ci en t an d ef f e cti v e wa y. ’ "
http://www.webct.com/service/ViewContent?contentID=17540607
W e bC T i s a vai l abl e i n Du tc h , Fi n n i sh , F r en ch , G e rm an , S pa n i sh ,
UK En gl i sh , Ital i an , P or tu gu e s e, Ru s si an , Sw edi sh . S e e
17
http://www.webct.com/europe#1
18
W e bC T 's Vi si on : T r an s f o rmi n g th e Edu c ati on al E xp e ri en c e
http://www.webct.com/transform/viewpage?name=transform_webct_vision
19
C al i forn i a St at e Un i v e rsi ty , Sa c ra m en t o
http://www.csus.edu/uccs/webct/student/character.htm
Ch i c k e ri n g A W & G am so n Z F ( 198 7), “S ev en Pri n ci pl e s f o r G o o d
Pr a cti c e i n Un d e rg ra du at e Edu cati on ” AA H E Bu l l etin M ar ch
20
http://www.aahebulletin.com/public/archive/sevenprinciples1987.asp
Ch i c k e ri n g, A W & Eh rm an n S C (19 96 ) , " Impl e me n ti n g th e S e v en
Pri n ci p l es: T e ch n ol o gy a s L e v e r, " AA H E Bu ll etin , Oc to b e r, p p. 3 6. a vai l abl e at h t t p : / / w w w . t l t g r o u p . o r g / p r o g r a m s / s e v e n . h t m l
21
22
“A ppli c ati on s an d s ys te m s in c lu d e:

pe e r- t o - p e e r t e ch n o l ogy t o al l ow i mm ed i ate an d s ati s fyi n g
i n ter ac ti on b etw e en s tu d en t s an d stu d e n ts , an d b et w e en e mo d er at o r s an d st u den t s

k ey t e ch n ol og y i s th e d e vel op ed , en t er t ai n i n g, e f f ec ti ve
In t e rn et

as yn ch r on o u s an d s yn c h r on ou s g r ou p s ys t em s su p p o rti n g a
wi de v a ri et y o f en vi r on m en ts fo r wo r ki n g an d l e a rn i n g
tog e th er

o f k ey i mp o rtan c e a r e b oth c o - a n d r e m ot el y - l o ca t ed l ea rn i n g
c omm u n i ti es (cl i ck s an d m o rta r)

l ear n er s co n n ec t th r ou gh b oth l o w an d h i gh ban d wi dth d e vi c e s
an d s y st em s

th e V L E s a c t as m e d i ati n g de vi c e s, p r om oti n g c r eati vi ty an d
c ol l abo rati on .
As s oc iat ed p e dag og y:

l ear n er c en t r ed an d c on s t ru c ti vi st i n n at u r e

k ey a cti vi ty f o r l ea r n e r s i s fi n di n g l i ke - mi n ded i n di vi du al s
an y wh e r e ( e .g . by g en d e r , by i n te r e st g r ou p , by p r o f es si on )

l ear n er s b ei n g i n t el l e ctu al l y e xt en d ed b y di al ogu e an d
ch al l en g e f r om oth e r s

l ear n er s ex p r es s th e ms el v e s f r e el y th r o u gh sp e e ch an d t e xt
© Jo h n K on r ad 03 j o h n . k o n r a d @ d s l . p i p e x . c o m EC E R 200 3 N et wo r k 22
16
May be copied for educational use provided that the source is acknowledged.

th e r ol e s o f r e fl e cti on (an e ss en ti al to o l of e xp e rt l ea rn e r s) ,
pr o f es si on al d e vel o pm en t an d th e s h a ri n g o f t aci t kn o wl edg e
ar e of c ri ti cal i mpo r tan c e

as s e ss m en t i s b a s ed on c om pl ex p r obl e m s ol vi n g an d
kn owl e dg e c on st ru ct i on ski l l s.
Vir tu al L ea rn in g En v ir on m en t (V L E) r eq u ir e me n ts :

mu st su pp o rt th e p e dag og y

bu i l t -i n r e fl ec ti on t o ol s , s yn ch r on ou s c h at an d a - s yn ch r on o u s
di scu s si on b oa rd s, p e e r - t o- p e er c om mu n i cati on s t o ol s th at
i n cl u de a wi de v a ri e ty o f c ol l abo r ati v e t o ol s

el e ct r on i c an d st ru c tu r ed i n f o rm ati on s u pp or t

sti mu l ate th e l ea rn i n g g r ou p rat h er th a n r epl ac e th e a cti v e ,
pa rti ci pati v e l e a rn i n g e xp e ri en c e

s oph i sti ca t ed d oc u m en t sh a ri n g d e vi c e s rat h er th an
as s e ss m en t t o ol s

an i n t er a cti v e an d p arti ci pati v e en vi r on men t

mu st su pp o rt m an y bu i l t -i n kn owl e dg e man ag e m en t t o ol s a n d
mu ch i mp r ov ed g r ou p w o r ki n g t o ol s .
Th i s i s th e m od el t o wa rd s wh i ch I b el i ev e t e a ch e rs d el i ve ri n g on l i n e
l ear n i n g a r e s tri vi n g . Th e r e i s evi d en c e of a m o v em en t t o w ar ds th i s
mo d el i n Hi gh e r E du cati o n an d th e V ET s ec t or , du e i n l arg e pa rt to
acti v e r es e a rc h an d pr acti c e th at i s c on f i rmi n g th e s ou n d
ped ag ogi c al ba si s o f th e m od el .” D el iv e r in g L ea rn i n g on l in e: m od el s
o f d e liv e r y . M od el 4 . h t t p : / / w w w . t a f e . n e t / l e a r n s c o p e / d l o / l e a r n i n g 8 . h t m l
Zi mm e r B et al , (2 000) , “B u i l di n g an O n li n e L ea rn i n g C om mu n i ty”
On l i n e Tu t o ri n g e - b o ok # 3 h t t p : / / o t i s . s c o t c i t . a c . u k / o n l i n e b o o k / o t i s - t 3 . h t m
23
Val i th i an P (20 02) , “ Bl en d ed L ea rn i n g Mo d el s” , L e a rn in g C ir cu it s ,
ASTD ’ s on lin e mag a z in e , Au gu st ,
h t t p : / / w w w . l e a r n i n g c i r c u i t s . c o m / 2 0 0 2 / a u g 2 0 0 2 / v a l i a t h a n . h t m l F o r ev a l u ati on s
o f th i s a pp r oa ch s e e B on k C ( et al ) (2 00 2), “ L ea rn i n g F r om Fo cu s
G r ou p s: An Ex ami n a ti on o f Bl en d ed L ea r n i n g”, J ou rn al of di s tan c e
edu ca ti on / R evu e d e l ’ édu cati on à di st a n c e, 2 002 , v ol . 17 , n o 3 ,
tl •n c e s p eci al edi ti o n /édi ti on s p éci al e rc e •ta , 97 - 118 ( ab st r act s i n
En gl i sh an d F r en ch ) h t t p : / / w w w . p u b l i c a t i o n s h a r e . c o m / d o c s / b l e n d . p d f ; “ T e n
24
key Web-based instruction considerations or issues mentioned across participants
related to feedback; meaningfulness of content; content size; course development
and organization; the role of the on -line instructor; structuring small groups;
flexible and active learning; use of technology; assessment practices; and general
skills such as on-line communication, problem -solving, and teamwork. Participants
offered many relevant recommendations for fine -tuning this program as well as
building similar programs.”
« Les dix considérations -clés de la formation en ligne mentionnés par les
participants touchent la rétroaction, la cohérence du contenu, la taille du
contenu, le développement du cours et l’organisation, le rôle du formateur en
ligne, l’organisation des pe tits groupes, l’apprentissage souple et dynamique,
l’utilisation de la technologie, les pratiques d’évaluation et les habiletés générales
telles que la communication en ligne, la résolution de problèmes et le travail en
équipe. Les participants ont fait pl usieurs recommandations pertinentes pour
améliorer ce programme ainsi que pour construire des programmes similaires. »
One of the benefits of the recent shakeout in ICT is that most people are now
t a l k i n g o f b l e n d e d l e a rn i n g – q u i t e s i m p l y : u s i n g t h e m e d i a t h a t a r e a v a i l a b l e ,
and no longer trying to squeeze everything through a not -very-broad-band
Internet, for instance. So, Web CD’s are OK, paper has its role, face to face
training and learning is valuable, and the trick is to get the “blend” right. And
© Jo h n K on r ad 03 j o h n . k o n r a d @ d s l . p i p e x . c o m EC E R 200 3 N et wo r k 22
17
May be copied for educational use provided that the source is acknowledged.
there is still plenty that digitalisation will bring – in mobile/wireless technologies
and broadband particularly. All of this is most welcome, and very healthy for the
IT sector as well as for learning.
Research in e-learning is now starting to provide a systematic critique of what
might be called the first phase in the development of e -learning. Up to now,
much of the activity has been to get it up and running, to establish the three or
four VLE platforms, at least one Open Source VLE – Bodington Common –
(http://bodington.org/index.html ) and to deliver the goods. That has been done.
The second phase will be to develop the next generation of platforms, and provide
more user-friendly environments for learning, as opposed to just ensuring the
delivery of courses.” Editorial Electronic Journal of e -Learning, Volume 1 Issue 1
(2003) I-ii, http://www.ejel.org/issue -1/issue1 -editorial.pdf
“A stu dy b y Pet e r D ean a n d h i s c ol l eag u e s f ou n d th at p r ovi di n g
s e veral l i n ked o pti o n s f o r l ea rn e r s, i n a ddi ti on t o cl a ss r o om trai n i n g,
i n cr ea s ed w h at th e y l ea rn ed . In 20 02 , H ar va rd Bu si n e s s S ch o ol
fa cu l ty D eL ac e y an d L e on a rd r e p or t ed t h at stu d en t s n ot on l y l e a rn ed
mo r e wh en on l i n e s e ssi on s w er e a dd ed to tradi ti on al co u r s e s, bu t
stu d en t i n t era cti on an d sa ti sf ac ti on i mp r oved a s w el l . Th om s on an d
N E Tg r el ea s ed a 2 0 0 3 w h i t e p a p e r th at r ep o rt ed sp e edi e r p e r fo rm an ce
on r eal w o rl d t as k s by p eo pl e wh o l ea rn ed th r ou gh a bl e n d e d
strat eg y—f a st e r t h a n th o s e stu d yi n g t h r ou gh e - l e a rn i n g al o n e .”
Ro s s ett A ( et al ) (2 003) , “ St rat e gi e s f o r Bu i l di n g Bl en d ed L ea rn i n g ”,
L ea rn in g Ci rc u it s , A STD ’ s on l in e mag az i n e , Ju n e.
http://www.learningcircuits.org/2003/jul2003/rossett.htm
C o rn el i u s S & Hi ggi s on C (20 00) , On li n e Tu t or in g e - B o ok: 2 - Th e
Tu t o r' s R ol e , H e ri o t - Wat t Un i v er si ty an d Th e Ro b e rt G o rd o n
Un i ve r si ty , h t t p : / / o t i s . s c o t c i t . a c . u k / o n l i n e b o o k / o t i s T 2 0 2 . h t m
25
26
See http://www.staffs.ac.uk/COSE/
Sti l es M & Y o r k e J ( 2003) , “ D e si gn i n g a n d Impl e m en ti n g L e arn i n g
T ech n ol og y P r oj ect s – A Pl an n ed Ap pr o a ch ” , EFF E CT S/ Em b e ddi n g
L ea rn i n g T e ch n ol ogi e s S emi n a r – 8 t h A p r il 2003
27
http://www.staffs.ac.uk/COSE/cosenew/eltfinal.doc
Sti l es M J (2 000 ), “ Ef f ec t i v e Le ar n in g a n d t he V irt u al Le ar n in g
E n vi ro nm en t” , Th i s p a pe r w as o ri gi n all y d el i ve r ed a s a K eyn ot e at th e
2000 Eu r op ea n U n i ve r si ti es In f o rmati on S ys te m s C on g r e ss - EU N IS
2000 - " T owa r ds Vi rtu al Un i v e rsi ti e s" i n P oz n an , P ol an d on Ap ri l
2000 . It h a s b e en pu bl i sh ed i n P r o c e e din gs : E UN IS 20 00 - To wa rd s
Vir tu al Un i v e r siti e s , In st ytu t In f o rma ty k i Pol i te ch n i ki P oz n a n ski ej ,
P oz n an Ap ri l , ISB N 83 913 639 1 0 . al s o f r om
28
http://www.staffs.ac.uk/COSE/cose10/posnan.html
Sti l es M J (2 003 ), “ Str at egi c an d P eda g ogi c R equ i r e m en t s f o r
Vi rtu al L ea rn i n g i n t h e C on t e xt of Wi den i n g Pa rti ci pati on ”
29
http://www.inter-disciplinary.net/Stiles%20Paper.pdf
K i rk pat ri c k ( 19 96) , “ G r ea t i d ea s r e vi si ted: r e vi si ti n g K i rkp atri c k ’ s
f ou r- l e v el m od el ”, T rai n in g an d D e v el op men t, 5 0, 1 , Jan u ar y, pp .
19- 25
30
31
See ASTD (2000), “There are many reasons for evaluating any type of learning
solution, and several of them apply specifically to e-learning. Many individuals
are interested in information about e-learning programs. The developers,
coordinators, and even the participants are often interested in receiving data on
these programs. Managers of participants and top management often want
specific types of information. Finally, those who support and advocate the use of
technology need certain types of data about e-learning.”
www.astd.org/virtual_community/research/What_Works/e-learning/reason_1.html
© Jo h n K on r ad 03 j o h n . k o n r a d @ d s l . p i p e x . c o m EC E R 200 3 N et wo r k 22
18
May be copied for educational use provided that the source is acknowledged.
S e e f o r a fu rth e r di s cu s si on , B eh ri n ge r F & C ol e s M (20 02) , Th e
Rol e o f Nati on al Qu al i fi cati on s Sy st e m s i n P r om oti n g Li f el o n g
L ea rn i n g - Li n ks b et w ee n Qu al i fi cati on s Sy st em s an d Li f el on g
L ea rn i n g: A C on c ept u al Fr am e w o rk f o r F u tu r e Wo r k , O E CD P ari s .
32
http://www.oecd.org/home/
© Jo h n K on r ad 03 j o h n . k o n r a d @ d s l . p i p e x . c o m EC E R 200 3 N et wo r k 22
19