As I stated, the kind of “e-learning” that I describe below relates best to the definition of ‘e-learning is learning using computers or networks’. I believe that this kind of learning is useful in some, although limited, contexts. For example, if, like above, a company needs to train a new kind of product to trained and experienced employees they can build a training module quickly, without investing too much time and money into the training program, as it is unnecessary. However, the same kind of module would not be effective teaching the same product to a new recruit, as the training will not give him enough information along with enough practice and feedback.
August 19th, 2007
What experience have you had with e-Learning?
During my previous work, any new product the client asked us to sell would include a interactive e-learning product training module. We were required to go through the training individually and complete an assessment before we were able to train the phone agents about the new product.
Describe the methods of delivery you have experienced?
The above training module included text with a simulation of the software required to provision the product along with a working flash simulation of the product (especially for hardware such as mobile phones). In the end of each module was a summery quiz that included functions and features along with any procedures that must be adhered to while provisioning the product.
How do these relate to the definitions of e-Learning outlined in the earlier readings?
This kind of rote learning with the help of interactivity and simulation relates more to the e-learning definition by Tsai and Machado (2002) – “…activities involving computers and interactive networks simultaneously….”.
(Note: Further analysis posted in ‘Further Reflections’ above)
August 19th, 2007
On my previous post I expressed my opinion regarding the lacking of two definitions (Brandon Hall’s and the ASTD’s) since they relayed only on the difference in medium. Their definition did not account for the difference in the delivery as well as the reason for changing the way training is delivered.
I was then surprised to find that the article in Elearn Magazine supported that kind of definition. At that point I was resigned that I would have to correct my opinion, as it was (seemingly) obvious that was the prevailing way of defining E-learning as a whole. However, as I read the other articles I found that others held the same reasoning as I did and argued specificly against defining e-learning as ‘training on a computer or a network’.
I believe that the main reason for my initial disregard to the first definition comes from my experience as a trainer in a multitude of contexts. I learned through experience that training is not (only) about structuring a lesson and a learning environment but the way the material is delievered and the actual interactions (between students and the instructor and between the students themselves) are crucial to any learning.
August 19th, 2007
The original definition, which I wrote in class was:
An interactive training course or learning activity that is run online (so it can be accessed from anywhere). The activity is completed in the learners own time and pace by the end of which the learner would accomplish the intended objectives.
I find the definitions of Brandon Hall (year unknown) and the ‘Australian Institute of Training and Development’ (June 2001) lacking, as they only relate to the medium which delivers E-learning (e.g. Internet or Intranet). A definition of E-learning should include what makes it a suitable choice for certain situations in learning and how it differs from normal instruction, which goes beyond just a different medium.
While reading the articles provided with the activity, it became clear that there is a rift in the way E-learning is defined. E-learn Magazine (Tsai & Machado, 2006) agrees with Brandon Hall and the ASTD regarding the fact that E-learning is all about the medium used, although it does separate the different uses and contexts that the medium provides. However, Ping-Lim (2003) dismisses what she calls the ‘myths about E-learning’ and agrees with the argument that changing the medium only does not contribute anything new to the training and may actually be disadvantageous since one may not account for the weaknesses of the new medium. It is therefore important to account for the context, the intended objectives and how the strengths and weaknesses of the medium effect the delivery.
Those insights have caused me to adjust my own definition:
E-learning is an interactive course or activity which facilitate learning in an online environment (accessed anywhere) in a way that is consistent with the intended objectives and accounts for the strengths and weaknesses of the medium.
References:
Ping Lim C. 2003, What Isn’t E-learning, Techknowlogia, viewed 18 August 2007, <http://www.techknowlogia.org/TKL_active_pages2/CurrentArticles/main.asp?FileType=HTML&ArticleID=267>
Tsai S. & Machado P. 2007, E-learning, Online Learning, Web-based Learning, or Distance Learning:
Unveiling the Ambiguity in Current Terminology, Elearn Magazine, viewed 18 August 2007, <http://elearnmag.org/subpage.cfm?section=best_practices&article=6-1> document.title += ‘ – E-learning, Online Learning, Web-based Learning, or Distance Learning’;
August 18th, 2007
