MODELS OF LARGE-SCALE E-LEARNING

Martin Weller

Abstract


Early interest in e-learning focused around the possibility of large-scale courses. This led to pronouncements of the demise of the educator, which were based on an infinite lecture hall pedagogy. However, cost-effective models of large-scale e-learning have proven difficult to implement. This paper examines some of the initial reaction to the notion of large-scale courses and sets out the cost difficulties associated with such courses. Five models of large-scale e-learning are proposed. Each of these have implicit associated pedagogies. The majority of these assume instructivist pedagogy. Large-scale models that use a more constructivist pedagogy may be possible using community based approaches. The importance of differentiating between pedagogic styles and scale of implementations is stressed as it highlights the reasoning behind some of the initial claims against e-learning.


Keywords


Scalability,Instructivist Pedagogy,Constructivist Pedagogy,Community,E-learning

Full Text:

PDF

References


Noble, D. Digital Diploma Mills, Part I: The Automation of Higher Education. FirstMonday 3 (1): 1997. Available Online: http://www.firstmonday.dk/issues/issue3_1/noble/.

Noam, E. Electronics and the Dim Future of University Science 270: 247–249, October 13, 1995. Available Online: http://www.asis.org/annual-96/noam.html.

Annand, D. The Problem of Computer Conferencing for Distance-based Universities. Open Learning 14 (3): 47–52, 1999.

Bates. A. W. Technology, Open Learning and Distance Education. Routledge: London, UK, 1995.

Van Hooydonk, S. Offering E-learning Throughout the Customer Cycle: Case Nokia. Elearn international conference, Edinburgh, February 18th –19th 2003. Available Online:

http://www.elearninternational.co.uk/speaker_presentations.asp.

Twigg, C. A. Improving Learning and Reducing Costs: New Models for Online Learning. Educause Review 38: 28–38, September/October 2003.

Weller, M. J. and Robinson L. Scaling Up an Online Course to Deal With 12,000 Students. Education, Communication and Information 1 (3): 307–323, 2002.

Rehak, D. R. and Mason, R. Keeping the Learning in Learning Objects. In Littlejohn, A (ed.) Reusing Educational Resources for Networked Learning. Kogan Page: London, 2003.

Advanced Distributed Learning. Available Online:

http://www.adlnet.org/index.cfm?fuseaction=abtadl.

Lave, J. and Wenger, E. Situated Learning: Legitimate Peripheral Participation. Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, 1991.

Wenger, E. Communities of Practice: Learning, Meaning, and Identity. New York: Cambridge University Press, 1998.

Lesser, E. and Everest, K. Using Communities to Practice to Manage Intellectual Capital. Ivey Business Journal 65 (4): 2001. Available Online: http://www.iveybusinessjournal.com/archives/default.asp?intYear=2001.

Gongla, P. and Rizzuto, C. Evolving Communities of Practice: IBM Global Services Experience. IBM Systems Journal 40 (4): 842–862, 2001.

Kraan, W and Wilson, S. Dan Rehak: SCORM is Not for Everyone. CETIS, October 02, 2002. Available Online: http://cetis.ac.uk/content/20021002000737.

Noble, D. Technology and the Commodification of Higher Education. 2002. Available Online: http://www.monthlyreview.org/0302noble.htm.

Beaty, E., Hodgson, V., Mann, S. and McConnell, D. Working Towards E-Quality in Networked E-Learning in Higher Education: A Manifesto Statement for Debate. Presented at Understanding the Implications of Networked Learning for Higher Education Seminar Series. University of Sheffield, Sheffield. March 26, 2002.




DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.24059/olj.v8i4.1812



Copyright (c) 2019 Martin Weller