• Share
  • Email
  • Embed
  • Like
  • Save
  • Private Content
Reviewing the research on  distance education and e-learning
 

Reviewing the research on distance education and e-learning

on

  • 2,307 views

From Mehlenbacher, B., Holstein, K., Gordon, B., & Khammar, K. (2010). Reviewing the research on distance education and e-learning. SIGDOC’10: The 28th ACM International Conference on Design of ...

From Mehlenbacher, B., Holstein, K., Gordon, B., & Khammar, K. (2010). Reviewing the research on distance education and e-learning. SIGDOC’10: The 28th ACM International Conference on Design of Communication Proceedings. São Carlos-São Paulo, Brazil: ACM, 237-242.

This paper will provide insight into the current emphasis of research on distance education and e-learning. The review is organized by three intersecting activities. First, we informally collected and reviewed approximately 300 peer-reviewed journals for articles published on distance education and instruction and technology broadly defined. Second, we read and reviewed the numerous meta-analyses of distance education, multimedia, e-learning, and collaborative computing published over the last fifteen years. Third, we performed our own meta-analysis of the abstracts of articles published in 10 peer-reviewed journals on distance learning and e-learning. Our goal in all these activities was to generate a list of significant topics or themes contained in publications about distance education and e-learning, in part to demonstrate the lack of consistent terminology.

Statistics

Views

Total Views
2,307
Views on SlideShare
2,269
Embed Views
38

Actions

Likes
0
Downloads
49
Comments
0

3 Embeds 38

http://ida-doutoramento.posterous.com 20
http://posterous.com 16
http://www.linkedin.com 2

Accessibility

Categories

Upload Details

Uploaded via as Microsoft PowerPoint

Usage Rights

© All Rights Reserved

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Processing…
Post Comment
Edit your comment

    Reviewing the research on  distance education and e-learning Reviewing the research on distance education and e-learning Presentation Transcript

    • Reviewing the research on distance education and e-learning Dr. Brad Mehlenbacher Leadership, Policy & Adult & Higher Education NC State University brad_m@unity.ncsu.edu www4.ncsu.edu/~brad_m ACM SIGDOC ‘10, Brazil Krista Holstein, Brett Gordon, Khalil Khammar Co-authors :
    • Overview of presentation
        • Capturing the research territory of DE
        • Examining models of instruction and learning with technology
        • Summarizing the models
        • Developing research issues (keywords)
        • Building and elaborating on models ,
        • Developing a model of learning situations, and
        • Re-viewing the research territories .
      Mehlenbacher, B. (in press). Instruction and technology: Designs for everyday learning . Cambridge, MA: MIT Press . Adopted from:
    • Publishing on DE and e-learning has …
      • Digital libraries and the paroxysmal spread of research literatures, methodologies, and peer-reviewed journal publications have generated a mass of research that promises to overwhelm us.
      • The research literatures related to instruction and learning with technology are both ubiquitous and simultaneously hidden everywhere for researchers and practitioners trained in traditional disciplines
      • Challenges faced by communication design researchers have followed similar path.
      Johnson, K., & Magusin, E. (2005). Exploring the digital library: A guide for online teaching and learning . San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass . Adopted from:
    • … been transformed
      • “ Literally thousands of studies related to computers and learning have been published during the past three decades. The problem has been one of making sense of the enormous, and growing , body of available research.”
      • “ The range and volatility of instructional information technologies … may … produce a fragmentation that will put knowledge development itself at risk of bogging down in a flood of studies based on a single course, single learning settings (let alone single institutional) which have few characteristics in common whether in their independent or dependent variables.”
      Orrill, C. H., Hannafin, M. J., & Glazer, E. M. (2004). Disciplined inquiry and the study of emerging technology. In D. H. Jonassen (Ed.), Handbook of Research on Educational Communications and Technology , 2nd Edition (pp. 335-353). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Pascarella, E. T., & Terenzini, P. T. (1998). Studying college students in the 21st Century: Meeting new challenges. Review of Higher Education, 21 (2), 151-165. Adopted from:
    • Tracing theoretical underpinnings
      • “… the vast bulk of literature on eLearning is practice-based and is typically presented in a descriptive format. The majority of conference presentations consist of a ‘here’s what we did and here’s the evaluation’ format which do little for transferability to other institutions or even other courses.”
      • “ It is unlikely that eLearning practice will continue to evolve unless the theoretical underpinnings of eLearning are explored and debased, providing a wider platform and a common philosophy for eLearning development.”
      Nichols, M. (2003). A theory for e-learning. Journal of Educational Technology & Society, 6 (2). Available online http://www.ifets.info/journals/6_2/1.html . Adopted from:
    • Balancing proximity & distance
      • Technologies that distribute my professional activities across time and space necessitate a re-articulation of what I value as natural about my non-distributed (“traditional”) activities.
      Mehlenbacher, B. (in press). Instruction and technology: Designs for everyday learning . Cambridge, MA: MIT Press . Adopted from:
    • Alienation from a natural milieu
      • Most compelling rationale for a thorough investigation of distance teaching and learning is that it by its very nature artificializes our definitions of
        • learning and the learner
        • instruction and its relationship to the classroom
        • environments and artifacts for instruction
        • the lifelong learning that pervades our professional and personal lives, and
        • the traditional distinctions between particular academic subject matters and disciplines.
      Mehlenbacher, B. (2005). eLearning and the design of everyday instruction. The Joseph D. Moore Chair Colloquium Series . Raleigh, NC: College of Education, NC State . Adopted from:
    • Defining the territory: Journal clusters
      • Developed eight very broad clusters of research on instruction and learning with technology
      • Grouped English-language journals addressing subjects that fell under those clusters.
      300 peer-reviewed journals
    • 1. Distance education & eLearning
      • 29 peer-reviewed journals, 1979-2006
      Dabbagh, N., & Bannan-Ritland, B. (2005). Online learning: Concepts, strategies, and application . Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson. Adopted from: “ Distributed learning, open or flexible learning” (Dabbagh & Bannan-Ritland, 2005, p. 22)
    • 2. Educational, instructional, & communication technology
      • 45 peer-reviewed journals
      Learner background and knowledge, learning environments and artifacts Mehlenbacher, B. (2010). Instruction and technology: Designs for everyday learning . Cambridge, MA: MIT Press . Adopted from:
    • 3. Teaching & learning sciences
      • 42 peer-reviewed journals
      Learners and social dynamics, quantitative research emphasizing cognition Mehlenbacher, B. (2010). Instruction and technology: Designs for everyday learning . Cambridge, MA: MIT Press . Adopted from:
    • 4. Communication & information design
      • 36 peer-reviewed journals
      Instructor and learner tasks and activities, influence of multimedia elements on designs for instruction and learning Mehlenbacher, B. (2010). Instruction and technology: Designs for everyday learning . Cambridge, MA: MIT Press . Adopted from:
    • 5. Human-computer interaction & ergonomics
      • 13 peer-reviewed journals
      Interaction between technologies, tasks, and humans Mehlenbacher, B. (2010). Instruction and technology: Designs for everyday learning . Cambridge, MA: MIT Press . Adopted from:
    • 6. Training, adult education, & the workplace
      • 59 peer-reviewed journals
      Landscape and demographics of audiences for distance education beyond higher education settings Mehlenbacher, B. 2010). Instruction and technology: Designs for everyday learning . Cambridge, MA: MIT Press . Adopted from:
    • 7. Education in the humanities & social sciences
      • 54 peer-reviewed journals
      Education research emphasizing instruction and learning with technology in the humanities and social sciences disciplines Mehlenbacher, B. (2010). Instruction and technology: Designs for everyday learning . Cambridge, MA: MIT Press . Adopted from:
    • 8. Education in science, technology, engineering, & mathematics
      • 21 peer-reviewed journals
      Education research emphasizing instruction and learning with technology in the sciences, technical, engineering, and mathematics disciplines Mehlenbacher, B. 2010). Instruction and technology: Designs for everyday learning . Cambridge, MA: MIT Press . Adopted from:
    • Defining the territory: Individual journals Journal, Written Communication, under the research cluster, Communication & Information Design, which contains 36 peer-reviewed journals.
    • Selecting models of instruction and learning with technology
      • 13 theoretical models drawn from various research literatures
      • Online and Web-based learning, the design of learning environments, computer-based collaboration and work studies, educational and cognitive psychology, communication studies, and journals emphasizing the relationships between technology, pedagogy, and learning in higher education.
    • 1. Anderson's (2004) model of online learning Anderson, T. (2004). Toward a theory of online learning. In T. Anderson & F. Elloumi (Eds.), Theory and practice of online learning (p. 49). Athabasca, AB: Athabasca U. Available online: http://cde.athabascau.ca/online_book/ch2.html Adopted from:
    • 2. Astleitner's (2005) model of Web-based learning Astleitner, H., & Steinberg, R. (2005). Are there gender differences in Web-based learning? An integrated model and related effect sizes. AACE Journal, 13 (1), 50. Adopted from:
    • 3. Bain, et al.'s (1998) dimensions of computer-facilitated learning Bain, J. D., McNaught, C., Mills, C., & Lueckenhausen, G. (1998). Describing computer-facilitated learning environments in higher education. Learning Environments Research, 1 (2), 172-173. Adopted from:
    • 4. Benbunan-Fich, et al.'s (2005) inputs informing instruction and learning Benbunan-Fich, R., Hiltz, S. R., & Harasim, L. (2005). The online interaction learning model: An integrated theoretical framework for learning networks. In S. R. Hiltz & R. Goldman (Eds.), Learning together online: Research on asynchronous Learning Networks (pp. 19-37). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence, p. 24 . Adopted from:
    • 5. Biggs, et al.'s (2001) presage-process-product model of teaching and learning Biggs, J., Kember, D., & Leung, Y. P. (2001). The revised two-factor study process questionnaire: R-SPQ-2F. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 71 (1), 136. Adopted from:
    • 6. Bryant, et al.'s (2005) model of distance education Bryant, S. M., Kahle, J. B., & Schafer, B. A. (2005). Distance education: A review of the contemporary literature. Issues in Accounting Education, 20 (3), 255-272. Adopted from:
    • 7. Dabbagh's (2005) theory-based design framework for E-learning Dabbagh, N. (2005). Pedagogical models for E-learning: A theory-based design framework. International Journal of Technology in Teaching and Learning, 1 (1), 25-44. Available online: http://ijttl.sicet.org/issue0501/DabbaghVol1.Iss1.pp25-44.pdf Adopted from:
    • 8. Garrison, et al.'s (2000) elements of an educational experience Garrison, D. R., Anderson, T., & Archer, W. (2000). Critical inquiry in a text based environment: Computer conferencing in higher education. The Internet and Higher Education, 2 (2-3), 87-105. Adopted from:
    • 9. Jenkins's (1978) tetrahedral model (adapted by Bransford, et al. 2004) Bransford, J., Vye, N., Bateman, H., Brophy, S., & Roselli, B. (2004). Vanderbilt’s AMIGO project: Knowledge of how people learn enters cyberspace. In T. M. Duffy & J. R. Kirkley (Eds.), Learner-centered theory and practice in distance education: Cases from higher education (p. 212). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum . Jenkins, J. J. (1978). Four points to remember: A tetrahedral model of memory experiments. In L. S. Cermak & F. I. M. Craik (Eds.), Levels of procession and human memory (pp. 429-446). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Adopted from:
    • 10. MacDonald, et al.'s (2001, 2005) demand-driven learning model
      • MacDonald, C. J., Stodel, E. J., Farres, L. G., Breithaupt, K., & Gabriel, M. A. (2001). The demand-driven learning model: A framework for Web-based learning. Internet and Higher Education, 4 (1), 9-30 .
      • MacDonald, C. J., & Thompson, T. L. (2005). Structure, content, delivery, service, and outcomes: Quality e-learning in higher education. International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 6 (2). Available online: http://www.irrodl.org/index.php/irrodl/article/view/237/321
      Adopted from:
    • 11. Richards's (2006) pedagogical process, technological infrastructure and convergent interactivity Richards, C. (2006). Towards an integrated framework for designing effective ICT-supported learning environments: The challenge to better link technology and pedagogy. Technology, Pedagogy and Education, 15 (2), p. 245. Adopted from:
    • 12. Shea, et al.'s (2003) conceptual framework for high quality, higher education, online learning environments Shea, P. J., Pickett, A. M., & Pelz, W. E. (2003). A follow-up investigation of “teaching presence” in the SUNY learning network. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 7 (2), 61-80. Adopted from:
    • 13. Siedlaczek's (2004) factors affecting teaching online Siedlaczek, K. (2004). Perceptions about teaching online versus in a classroom environment. College Quarterly, 7 (3). Available online: http://www.senecac.on.ca/quarterly/2004-vol07-num03-summer/siedlaczek.html Adopted from:
    • Understanding the models
      • 13 models of instruction and learning (with technology) emphasize
        • Student characteristics, learner factors
        • Instructor, teacher characteristics
        • Learning framework or direction, instructional events or strategies, teaching and learning activities
        • Knowledge focus, material, nature of content, technology, system, learning technologies
        • Group characteristics, interaction
        • Learning process, criterial tasks, outcomes, and
        • Context, course, administrative policies and procedures.
      Seven general attributes
    • Understanding the models (1). . . Mehlenbacher, B. (2008). Modeling everyday instructional situations: Frameworks for distance teaching and learning. Annual Conference on Distance Teaching and Learning 2008 . Madison, WI . Adopted from:
    • Understanding the models (2). . . Mehlenbacher, B. (2008). Modeling everyday instructional situations: Frameworks for distance teaching and learning. Annual Conference on Distance Teaching and Learning 2008 . Madison, WI . Adopted from:
    • Understanding the models (3). . . Mehlenbacher, B. (2008). Modeling everyday instructional situations: Frameworks for distance teaching and learning. Annual Conference on Distance Teaching and Learning 2008 . Madison, WI . Adopted from:
    • Defining the territory: Research issues
      • Learning styles (published across 100s of journals)
      • Research on Web-based instruction, e-learning, WBT, CBT?
      • HCI/CD’s narrowing of learning
      • DE’s narrowing of HCI (performance)
      • HE’s narrowing of technology (tool versus mirror)
      • Behavioral, cognitive, social continuums.
      Essential questions : What do we talk about when we talk about teaching and learning with technology? How do we define effective instruction? How do people learn and how do we design instruction that supports it? What do we mean by technology?
    • Summarizing: Five dimensions of everyday instructional situations Mehlenbacher, B. (2010). Instruction and technology: Designs for everyday learning . Cambridge, MA: MIT Press . Adopted from: Highlights learners , collapses instructors with strategies, views content as shared by learners, instructors, and social dynamics , sets learning outcomes and institutional contexts outside the focus of attention, and argues for importance of learner tasks and activities and learning environments and artifacts .
    • Characterizing learners, their background and knowledge Mehlenbacher, B. (2010). Instruction and technology: Designs for everyday learning . Cambridge, MA: MIT Press . Adopted from:
    • Summarizing: Re-viewing research — matrix for the five dimensions Mehlenbacher, B. (2010). Instruction and technology: Designs for everyday learning . Cambridge, MA: MIT Press . Adopted from:
    • The distant research future
      • “ There is no prior history or tradition for this strange half-real, half-fantasy learning space.”
      • In the meantime, continue
        • Reviewing and organizing of (300) peer-reviewed journals divided into eight research clusters related to distance teaching and learning
        • Developing an heuristic tool for designing and evaluating distance teaching and learning environments
        • Exploring keyword/tagging/analytic methods of accessing research on instruction and learning with technology (learning, social networking, collaboration, knowledge managment).
      Polin, L. (2004). Learning with dialogue with a practicing community. In T. M. Duffy & J. R. Kirkley (Eds.), Learner-centered theory and practice in distance education: Cases from higher education (pp. 17-48). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Adopted from: