The advantages of e-learning are frequently purported in the literature and are generally manifest in the Web itself. Such benefits include the ability to engage students in non-linear information access and synthesis; the availability of learning environments from any location and at any time; the ability for students to influence the level and pace of engagement with the learning process; and, increased opportunities for deploying disparate learning strategies, such as group discussion and problem-based or collaborative learning, as well as delivering interactive learning materials or learning objects. Various administrative and managerial benefits are also cited, such as cost savings over traditional methods and the relative ease with which teaching materials or courses can be revised.
Although flexible course delivery remains a principal motivating factor, the use of e-learning is largely predicated upon the assumption that it can facilitate improvements in student learning and can therefore be more effective than conventional techniques. This assumption is largely supported by theoretical arguments and underpins the large amounts of government and institutional investment in e-learning (e.g. JISC e-learning); yet, it is an assumption that is not entirely supported by the academic literature, containing as it does a growing body of indifferent evidence...
In 1983, Richard E. Clark from the University of Southern California conducted a series of meta-analyses investigating the influence of media on learning. His research found little evidence of any educational benefits and concluded that media were no more effective in teaching and learning than traditional teaching techniques. Said Clark:
"[E]lectronic media have revolutionised industry and we have understandable hopes that they would also benefit instruction".Clark's paper was/is seminal and remains a common citation in those papers reporting indifferent e-learning effectiveness findings.
Is the same true of e-learning? Is there a similar assumption fuelling the gargantuan levels of e-learning investment? I feel safe in stating that such an assumption is endemic - and I can confirm this having worked briefly on a recent e-learning project. And I am in no way casting aspersions on my colleagues during this time, as I too held the very same assumption!!!
It is clear that evidence supporting the effectiveness of e-learning in HE teaching and learning remains unconvincing (e.g. Bernard et al.; Frederickson et al.). A number of comparative studies have arrived at indifferent conclusions and support the view that e-learning is at least as effective as traditional teaching methods, but not more effective (e.g. Abraham; Dutton et al.; Johnson et al.; Leung; Piccoli et al.). However, some of these studies exemplify a lack of methodological rigour (e.g. group self-selection) and many fail to control for some of the most basic variables hypothesised to influence effectiveness (e.g. social interaction, learner control, etc.). By contrast, those studies which have been more holistic in their methodological design have found e-learning to be more effective (e.g. Liu et al.; Hui et al.). These positive results could be attributed to the fact that e-learning, as an area of study, is maturing; bringing with it an improved understanding of the variables influencing e-learning effectiveness. Perhaps electronic media will "revolutionise" instruction after all?
Although such positive research tends to employ greater control over variables, such work fails to control for all the factors considered – both empirically and theoretically - to influence whether e-learning will be effective or not. Frederickson et al. have suggested that the theoretical understanding of e-learning has been exhausted and call for a greater emphasis on empirical research; yet it is precisely because a lack of theoretical understanding exists that invalid empirical studies have been designed. It is evident that the variables influencing e-learning effectiveness are multifarious and few researchers impose adequate controls or factor any of them into research designs. Such variables include: level of learner control; social interactivity; learning styles; e-learning system design; properties of learning objects used; system or interface usability; ICT and information literacy skills; and, the manner or degree to which information is managed within the e-learning environment itself (e.g. Information Architecture). From this perspective it can be concluded that no valid e-learning effectiveness research has ever been undertaken since no study has yet attempted to control for them all.
Motivated by this confusing scenario, and informed by the literature, it is possible to propose a rudimentary conceptual model of e-learning effectiveness (see diagram above) which I intend to develop and write up formally in the literature. The model attempts to improve our theoretical understanding of e-learning effectiveness and should aid researchers in comprehending the relevant variables and the manner in which they interact. It is anticipated that such a model will assist researchers in developing future evaluative studies which are both robust and holistic in design. It can therefore be hypothesised that using the model in evaluative studies will yield more positive e-learning effectiveness results.Apologies this was such a lengthy posting, but does anyone have any thoughts on this or fancy working it up with me?
