Categories of
eLearning
by George Siemens |
|||
IntroductionOne of the biggest challenges in discussing elearning arises from different understandings of the field. Most often, we attach our experiences and career to our conversations, presenting an image of elearning that reflects what we have encountered. For an instructional designer, elearning often means courses or learning materials directed at meeting an objective within the larger scope of program development. A corporate trainer may view elearning as a combination of courses and knowledge management. No one perspective is symbolic of the whole industry. A danger exists in discussing various segments of elearning: paying too much attention to distinctions across categories. The real focus and unifying theme is (or at least should be) learning - whether it is in a classroom, online, blended, or embedded. Each category presented here is most effective when properly matched with the appropriate learning environment and desired outcome. None of the categories listed function in isolation. Lines
blur between categories, and a successful elearning implementation
will incorporate many different ones. In a previous paper, I detailed
the holistic and interconnected nature of elearning design. This paper
attempts to present the categories, not procedures, of the elearning
field.
Beyond the categories of elearning, it is important to note a few additional factors that impact the field:
This mindmap details the interrelation of categories:
CoursesMost discussion of elearning centres on courses. Organizations
typically take existing educational materials, add various media,
sequence the material and consider it "transferred" to the
online environment. The popularity of learning management systems
(LMS) like WebCT and Blackboard, (and the perception that they are
needed as a starting point) testify to the prominence of courses as
a view of elearning. Informal LearningInformal learning is perhaps the most dynamic and versatile aspect of learning. Unfortunately, it is also the least recognized. Informal learning is a by-product of "information foraging" - "the human behaviour when searching for information was similar to that of the hunter-gatherers and animals in search for food"( Dürsteler, undated). Our need for information (and how we intend to use it) drives our search. Search engines (like Google) coupled with information storage tools (like Furl) and personal knowledge management tools like wikis and blogs present a powerful toolset in the knowledge workers portfolio. Jay Cross (2003): states that:
Blended LearningBlended learning provides the best opportunities for learning transition from classroom to elearning. Blended learning involves classroom (or face-to-face) and online learning. This method is very effective for adding efficiency to classroom instruction and permitting increased discussion or information review outside of classrooms. For example, a new product release may be communicated to sales staff through a three-hour workshop, followed by online resources and discussions for continued learning (without significantly impacting the work activities of the sales force). The rallying cry of educational techno-prophets of the late 90's ("soon we won't need instructors, we'll learn everything online on our own time") has given way to the reality that learning is a social process, requiring instructor direction and facilitation. Blended learning utilizes the best of classrooms with the best of online learning. CommunitiesLearning is social (Driscoll, 2000, p.239). Most problems within our business environments today are complex and dynamic. Yesterday's solutions don't always work today. Problem solving requires different perspectives to create an accurate understanding of potential solutions and environment of implementation. Online communities allow people to stay current in their field through dialogue with other members of the same organization, or the larger global field. Communities strongly contribute to the flow of tacit knowledge. Knowledge ManagementKnowledge management (KM) is the significant challenge for businesses in a knowledge economy. KM involves the process of identifying, indexing, and making available (in various formats) knowledge generated within the daily activities of an organization. Some companies have found value in managing content, mining emails, and creating communities of practice. Tafe Frontiers presents eight categories of knowledge management: learning and development, information management, client feedback, knowledge capture, knowledge generation, virtual teams, communities of practice, and content management systems (http://www.tafefrontiers.com.au/i_r/progress.html). The duplication of KM and elearning concepts highlights the strong connections (and blurring) between these fields. Learning NetworksCommunities typically form around a particular goal, concept or theme. A learning network is the loose, personal coupling of communities, resources, and people. It is the cornerstone of personal knowledge management. Vaill (1996) states that: "The permanent white water in today's systems is creating a situation in which institutional learning patterns are simply inadequate to the challenge. Subject matter is changing too rapidly" (p. 41). The utilization of personal learning networks allows knowledge workers to remain current in their field. Work-based LearningElectronic Performance Support Systems (EPSS) and work-flow learning attempt to inject learning content into the actual point of need. As an alternative to courses, this style of content presentation requires heavy emphasis on context, and the employee control in initiating the learning needed. This style of learning can be seen in many computer applications (context-sensitive help). For organizations, work-based learning requires a significant investment in resource creation and usability planning (in what situation will a learner want to know this? How should it be presented? What will they search for so they can find it?). Work-based learning is generally and enterprise-wide initiative. Impacting FactorsThree aspects of elearning are important to note briefly, as they can influence all of the various categories (and are quickly developing into agents shaping the future direction of elearning). Ubiquitous
Delivery type falls into two broad categories:
Impacting Factors These various learning categories do not need to function in isolation. A complex learning implementation will certainly incorporate different facets of elearning. During course design, learning resources can be tagged and made available for later use in work-based learning. The knowledge management system can be integrated with (and update) courses. Communities themselves can also provide a feedback loop to courses, work-based learning, and the knowledge management system. Ultimately, the value in categorizing the elearning market is in detailing the entire market and attempting to incorporate as many aspects as are practical into a corporate or educational implementation. References Cross, J. (2003, May) Informal Learning - The Other 80%. Retrieved on October 15, 2004 from http://www.internettime.com/Learning/The%20Other%2080%.htm Driscoll, M. (2000). Psycology of Learning for Instruction. Needham Heights, MA, Allyn & Bacon. Dürsteler, J. C. (Undated) Information Hunters. Retrieved on October 15 from http://www.infovis.net/E-zine/2004/num_153.htm Siemens, G, (2003) The Whole Picture of Elearning. Retrieved on October 15 from http://www.elearnspace.org/Articles/wholepicture.htm Vaill, P. B.,
(1996). Learning as a Way of Being. San Francisco, CA, Jossey-Blass
Inc. |
|||