holy cow: grazing recent e-learning findings and prophecies for the future of business and education...
TRANSCRIPT
Holy COW: Grazing Recent E-Learning Findings and Prophecies
for the Future of Business and Education
Dr. Curtis J. Bonk Indiana University and CourseShare.com
http://php.indiana.edu/~cjbonk
Ten Minnie-Myths of E-Learning and the Data to Dispel Them (Corporate)
Dr. Curtis J. BonkAlias: Mickey Mouse President, CourseShare.comAssociate Professor, Indiana Universityhttp://php.indiana.edu/~cjbonk, [email protected]
With supporting Help from:
Ms. Minnie MouseOrlando, [email protected]
Corporate E-Learning Myths
For full report, see: http://PublicationShare.com
Myth #1.E-learning will soon go
away.
Figure 42. Percent of Instructional Time spent training via the Web in the next decade
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
1 Year 2Years
5Years
10Years
76-100%
51-75%
26-50%
1-25%
0%
Myth #2.E-learning can now take place at home and on the
road.
Figure 49. Location Where Learners Access Web-Based Training
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80
Office
Home
Road
Other
Percent of Respondents
Myth #3. Everyone is evaluating e-learning but
us.
Figure 26. How Respondent Organizations Measure Success of Web-Based Learning According to the
Kirkpatrick Model
0102030405060708090
Learner satisfaction Change inknowledge, skill,
atttitude
Job performance ROI
Kirkpatrick's Evaluation Level
Pe
rce
nt
of
Re
spo
nd
en
ts
Myth #4.Learner completion rate has
magical importance.
Figure 53. Learner Completion Rate in Web-Based Courses
0
5
10
15
20
25
0-25% 26-50% 50-59% 60-69% 70-79% 80-89% 90-99% 99-100%
Learner Completion Rate
Per
cen
t o
f R
esp
on
den
ts
Myth #5.Work-related incentives
are important in motivating e-learners.
Figure 55. Incentives for Successful Completion of Web-Based Learning
0 10 20 30 40 50 60
None
Inc Job Responsibility
Public Recognition
Awarding Credits to Degree
Inc Job Security
Salary
Promotion
Percent of Respondents
Myth #6.Thiagi has convinced the
world of the need for interactivity and social ice-
breakers.
Figure 41. Activities Learners Would Deem Highly Engaging and Useful
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70
Cases or Job Reflections
Brainstorming
Group Projects/Teams
Electronic Guests/Mentoring
Students Leading Discussion
Symposia/Panels
Voting/Polling
E-mail Pals/Peer Review
Role Play/Debates
Article Discussion/Critique
Display Products
Ice Breakers/Social
Percent of Respondents
Myth #7.Watch out…trainers will
soon be out of a job.
Figure 19. Purpose of Web-Based Learning in Organization
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
Sole source oflearning
Supplementtraditional
Follow-up totraditional
Alternative totraditional
Other
Pe
rce
nrt
of
Re
sp
on
de
nts
Myth #8.Traditional instructional
strategies (e.g., lecture, role play, etc.) will not work
online.
Figure 38. Instructional Strategies Perceived as Fairly Equally Supported by Online and Traditional Classroom Environments
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
Exploration StudentGenerated
Content
Case-Based GuildedLearning
PBL Modeling
Per
cen
t o
f R
esp
on
den
ts
Online
Traditional
Equal
Figure 39. Instructional Strategies Perceived as Better Supported by Online than Traditional Classroom
Environments
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
Group ProbSolving &
Collab
SocraticQuestioning
Role Play &Simulations
Discussion Coaching orMentoring
Lecturing
Pe
rce
nt
of
Re
sp
on
de
nts
Online
Traditional
Equal
Myth #9.Trainers operate alone and do not want to give away
trade secrets.
Figure 56. Important Features of a Free Course-Sharing Resource Community
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80
Articles and New sletters
Professional Links
Expert Advice
Web Resource Sharing Tools
Courses, Catalogs, Products
Answ ers to Teaching Problems
Stories of instructional experiences
Pedagogical Ideas
Pre-Rated Web Resources
Percent of Respondents
Myth #10.Trainers are loyal.
Figure 44. Freelance or Adjunct Instructor Web-Based Training
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
Past Experience Future Interest
No
Yes
Want a copy of the report, “Online Training in an Online World”???
See: PublicationShare.com
Ten Minnie-Myths of E-Learning and the Data to Dispel Them (Higher Education)
Dr. Curtis J. Bonk
Alias: Mickey Mouse President, CourseShare.comAssociate Professor, Indiana Universityhttp://php.indiana.edu/~cjbonk, [email protected]
With supporting Help from:
Ms. Minnie MouseOrlando, [email protected]
Higher Education E-Learning Myths
For full report, see: http://PublicationShare.com
Myth #1.College instructors are
loyal.
Freelance or Adjunct Web-Based Teaching
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Past Experience Interest in Next 5 Years
Pe
rce
nt
of
Re
sp
on
de
nts
Yes
No
Interested in Freelance Instruction?
Myth #2.Young instructors will jump
on this.
Respondent's Age
7%
44%47%
2%
20-35
36-50
51-65
66+
N=218
How Old Are Early Web Adopters?
Figure 7. Rank of Respondents
60%17%
8%
5%
10% Professor or AssocProfessor
Assistant Professor
Adjunct Professor
Lecturer
Other (e.g., adminplus faculty)
Myth #3.Web instruction is an
either-or decision (i.e., a Mickey Mouse decision).
Figure 18. Online Teaching Experiences
None24%
Partially Online39%
Completely Online19%
Partially and Completely
18%
Myth #4.Pedagogical tools exist
to teach online.
What Instructional Activities are Needed?
Online Instructional Activities
010203040506070
Scientif icSimulations
Data Analysis Lab Performance Critical andCreative Thinking
Pe
rce
nt
of
Re
sp
on
de
nts
Actual Use High Usability
Myth #5.College instructors will not
put their instruction on display for others to critique.
Why Post to MERLOT or WLH*
020406080
100120
Requir
ed
Marke
t Self
Cours
e Sha
ring
Impo
rtant
Share
The
ories
or S
trate
gies
Expe
rimen
t
Grow
th Fun
Other
ReasonsN = 211 (*Note: Categories are not mutually exclusive.)
Nu
mb
er
of
Re
sp
on
de
nts
Figure 36. Important Features of Free Course-Sharing Community
0102030405060708090
Sto
ryte
lling
New
slet
ters
Rec
ogni
tion
Cla
ssM
anag
emen
tT
ips Exp
ert
Adv
ice
Ans
wer
s to
Teac
hing
Pro
blem
s
Ped
agog
ical
Idea
s
Per
cen
t o
f R
esp
on
den
ts
Myth #6.College instructors will flock to sophisticated
technologies.
Figure 19. Degree of Comfort with Web Skills
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
HTML
Chat
File Attachments
Online Discussion
Courseware
Percent of Respondents
Low Medium High
Myth #7.The institution will own the
online courses.
Online Courses are the Property of an Institution, Not an Instructor (N= 215)
Strongly Disagree
34%
Disagree29%
Unsure21%
Agree12%
Strongly Agree4%
Myth #8.College faculty just need a
little more training to teaching on the Web.
Supports Needed for Web-Based Teaching By Institution Type
020406080
100
Tech
nical
Suppo
rt
Instru
ction
al Des
igner
s
Time
to L
earn
Web
Train
ing to
Use
Web
Stude
nt A
cces
s
Chat R
oom H
elp
Online
Res
ourc
es
Cha
nges
Recog
nition
Instru
ction
al Stip
ends
Releas
e Tim
e
Pe
rce
nt
of
Re
sp
on
de
nts
Private Public
Any Supports Needed?
Myth #9.Profit is the key motivator for most Web initiatives.
Figure 23. Primary Insitutional Motives for Developing Online Education
0102030405060
Str
ongl
yD
isag
ree
Dis
agre
e
Uns
ure
Agr
ee
Str
ongl
yA
greeP
erce
nt
of
Res
po
nd
ents
Profit
Learning
Access
Myth #10.Shhh…If you don’t say
anything, college instructors will just do this for free.
Figure 17. Suggested Instructor Compensation for Teaching Online
05
10152025303540
Stip
ends
Cou
rse
Roy
altie
s
Sal
ary
Rec
ogni
tion
Rel
ease
Tim
e
Oth
er
No
Add
'lC
ompe
nsat
ion
Compensation
Per
cen
t o
f R
esp
on
den
ts
For a copy of the report, “Online Teaching in an Online
World”See: PublicationShare.com
Holy COW: Grazing Recent E-Learning Findings and Prophecies
for the Future of Business and Education
Dr. Curtis J. Bonk Indiana University and CourseShare.com
http://php.indiana.edu/~cjbonk
I. The Research: Are you ready?
More E-Learning Myths….
Additional Myth #1: People Know what they are doing.
• 83 percent were provided a Web-based platform or courseware system
• 22 percent had more than one.
• 27 of those making a decision had more than one.
• 10 percent had access to three courseware systems or conferencing tools.
Additional Myth #2.Instructors can just teach the same
way they always have.
• Little or no feedback given• Always authoritative• Kept narrow focus of what
was relevant• Created tangential
discussions• Only used “ultimate”
deadlines
• Provided regular qual/quant feedback
• Participated as peer• Allowed perspective sharing• Tied discussion to grades,
other assessments.• Used incremental deadlines
Poor Instructors Good Instructors
Vanessa Dennen’s (2001) Research on Nine Online Courses
(sociology, history, communications, writing, library science, technology, counseling)
Additional Myth #3. Only the big companies are doing this.
Figure 2. Size of Respondent Organizations
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
1 to 30 31-100 101 to500
501 to1,000
1,001 to5,000
5,001 to10,000
10,001 to100,000
More than100,001
Number of Employees
Pe
rce
nt
of
Re
sp
on
de
nts
Figure 12. Methods Used to Deliver Training in Organization
0 20 40 60 80 100 120
Instructor-Led Classroom
Internet/Intranet
Multimedia
Videotape
Paper-Based Correspondence
Other
Additional Myth #4. We need to catch up, everything is going online.
Additional Myth #5. No worries—the administrators are there to
support you teach.
“Campus-technology leaders say they worry more about administrative-computing systems than about anything else related to their jobs.” (survey by Educause—an academic-technology consortium) Chronicle of Higher Ed, June 22, 2001, A33, Jeffrey R. Young
Problems FacedAdministrative:• “Lack of admin vision.”
• “Lack of incentive from admin and the fact that they do not understand the time needed.”
• “Lack of system support.”
• “Little recognition that this is valuable.”
• “Rapacious U intellectual property policy.”
• “Unclear univ. policies concerning int property.”
Pedagogical:• “Difficulty in performing
lab experiments online.”• “Lack of appropriate
models for pedagogy.”
Time-related:• “More ideas than time to
implement.” • “Not enough time to
correct online assign.”• “People need sleep; Web
spins forever.”
Additional Myth…#6. Learning is not improved
when using e-learning.
Brains Before and After e-Learning
BeforeAfter
Basic Distance Learning Finding?
• Research since 1928 shows that DL students perform as well as their counterparts in a traditional classroom setting.
Per: Russell, 1999, The No Significant Difference Phenomenon (5th Edition), NCSU, based on 355 research reports.
http://cuda.teleeducation.nb.ca/nosignificantdifference/
Online Learning Research Problems (National Center for Education Statistics, 1999; Phipps & Merisotos, 1999; Wisher et
al., 1999).
• Anecdotal evidence; minimal theory.• Questionable validity of tests.• Lack of control group.• Hard to compare given different assessment
tools and domains.• Fails to explain why the drop-out rates of
distance learners are higher.• Does not relate learning styles to different
technologies or focus on interaction of multiple technologies.
Evaluating Web-Based Instruction: Methods and Findings (41 studies)
(Olson & Wisher, in review)
Year of Publication
02468
1012
1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001
Year
Nu
mb
er
of
Stu
die
s
Bob Wisher’s Wish List
• Effect size of .5 or higher in comparison to traditional classroom instruction.
Web Based Instruction
CBIKulik [8]
CBILiao [18]
Average Effect Size
.31 .32 .41
Number of Studies
11 97 46
Evaluating Web-Based Instruction: Methods and Findings
(Olson & Wisher, in review)
“…there is little consensus as to what variables should be examined and what measures of of learning are most appropriate, making comparisons between studies difficult and inconclusive.”
e.g., demographics (age, gender), previous experience, course design, instructor effectiveness, technical issues, levels of participation and collaboration, recommendation of course, desire to take add’l online courses.
Evaluating Web-Based Instruction: Methods and Findings
(Olson & Wisher, in review)
Variables Studied:1. Type of Course: Graduate (18%) vs.
undergraduate courses (81%)2. Level of Web Use: All-online (64%) vs.
blended/mixed courses (34%)3. Content area (e.g., math/engineering (27%),
science/medicine (24%), distance ed (15%), social science/educ (12%), business (10%), etc.)
Other data:a. Attrition data collected (34%)b. Comparison Group (59%)
Three Phases of AC3-DL
I. Asynchronous Phase: 240 hours of instruction or 1 year to complete; must score 70% or better on each gate exam
II. Synchronous Phase: 60 hours of asynchronous and 120 hours of synchronous
III. Residential Phase: 120 hours of training in 2 weeks at Fort Knox
Overall frequency of interactions across chat categories (6,601 chats).
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
Month 1,2 Month 3,4 Month 5,6
On-Task Social Mechanics
Overall frequency of interactions across chat categories (6,601 chats).
On-Task55%Social
30%
Mechanics15%
Research on Instructors Online
• If teacher-centered, less explore, engage, interact (Peck, and Laycock, 1992)
• Informal, exploratory conversation fosters risktaking & knowledge sharing (Weedman, 1999)
• Instructors Tend to Rely on Simple Tools– (Peffers & Bloom, 1999)
• Job Varies; Four Key Acts of Instructors:– pedagogical, managerial, technical, social– (Ashton, Roberts, & Teles, 1999; (McIsaac, Blocher,
Mahes, & Vrasidas, 1999)
Study of Four Classes(Bonk, Kirkley, Hara, & Dennen, 2001)
• Technical—Train, early tasks, be flexible, orientation task
• Managerial—Initial meeting, FAQs, detailed syllabus, calendar, post administrivia, assign e-mail pals, gradebooks, email updates
• Pedagogical—Peer feedback, debates, PBL, cases, structured controversy, field reflections, portfolios, teams, inquiry, portfolios
• Social—Café, humor, interactivity, profiles, foreign guests, digital pics, conversations, guests
Network Conferencing Interactivity (Rafaeli & Sudweeks, 1997)
1. > 50 percent of messages were reactive.2. Only around 10 percent were truly interactive. 3. Most messages factual stmts or opinions4. Many also contained questions or requests.5. Frequent participators more reactive than low.========================================6. Interactive messages more opinions & humor.7. More self-disclosure, involvement, & belonging.8. Attracted to fun, open, frank, helpful, supportive
environments.
Week 4
Scattered Interaction (no starter):Starter Centered Interaction:
Level of Cognitive Processing: All Posts
Surface33%
Deep55%
Both12%
Surface
Deep
Both
Hara, Bonk, & Angela, 2001
Social Construction of Knowledge (Gunawardena, Lowe, & Anderson, 1997)
• Five Stage Model1. Share ideas,2. Discovery of Idea Inconsistencies, 3. Negotiate Meaning/Areas Agree, 4. Test and Modify,5. Phrase Agreements
• In global debate, very task driven.• Dialogue remained at Phase I: sharing info
Collaborative Behaviors(Curtis & Lawson, 1997; Kim & Bonk, 2002)
• Most common were: (1) Planning, (2) Contributing, and (3) Seeking Input.
• Other common events were:(4) Initiating activities,(5) Providing feedback,(6) Sharing knowledge
• Few students challenge others or attempt to explain or elaborate
• Recommend: using debates and modeling appropriate ways to challenge others
Unjustified Statements (US)
24. Author: Katherine
Date: Apr. 27 3:12 AM 1998
I agree with you that technology is definitely taking a large part in the classroom and will more so in the future…
25. Author: Jason Date: Apr. 28 1:47 PM 1998
I feel technology will never over take the role of the teacher...I feel however, this is just help us teachers...
26. Author: Daniel Date: Apr. 30 0:11 AM 1998
I believe that the role of the teacher is being changed by computers, but the computer will never totally replace the teacher... I believe that the computers will eventually make teaching easier for us and that most of the children's work will be done on computers. But I believe that there…
Study #3. Fall, 1997
UnsupportedSocialJustifiedExtension
Overall Major Findings• COW enhanced student learning
– provided a link between classroom and field
– encouraged learning about technology
• COW extended student learning– students got feedback from outside their immediate
community
– students saw international perspective
• COW transformed student learning– students took ownership for learning
– students co-constructed knowledge base
The Intraplanetary Teacher Learning Exchange (TITLE) Project
Overview of TICKIT
•In-service teacher education program
•Rural schools in southern Indiana
•Yearlong, 25 teachers from 5 schools
•Primarily school-based
•Supported by participating school systems, Arthur Vining Davis Foundations and Indiana University
TICKIT Research• Pedagogical strategies have different results• Long-term professional development seems to
have an effect on teachers’ levels of technology implementation
• Recommend TICKIT experience:
“Thank you! A poor tired out “old broad” has a new lease on teaching”
“The door is now open. I will continue to try to find technological ways to teach them.”
II. The Future Note: any predictions are bound to be
too conservative!!!
Research Still Needed1) Variations in Instructor Moderation
2) Forms of Online Debating and Role Play
3) The Impact of Online Mentoring and Tutoring
4) Motivational Activities to Increase Retention
5) Student Perceptions of e-Learning Environments
6) The Development of Online Learning Communities
7) Critical Thinking and Problem Solving in Sync and Asynchronous Environments
Role Play
• List possible roles or personalities (e.g., coach, questioner, optimist, devil’s advocate, etc.)
• Sign up for different role every week (or for 5-6 key roles during semester)
• Reassign roles if someone drops class• Perform within roles—try to refer to
different personalities in peer commenting
Role: Idea Generator Creative Energy/Inventor
• Brings endless energy to online conversations and generates lots of fresh ideas and new perspectives to the conference when addressing issues and problems.
Role: Slacker/Sloth/Slug/Surfer Dude
• In this role, the student does little or nothing to help him/herself or his/her peers learn. Here, one can only sit back quietly and listen, make others do all the work for you, and generally have a laid back attitude (i.e., go to the beach) when addressing this
problem.
16 Technologies of the Future1. Digital Portfolios2. Communities of
Learners3. Electronic Books4. Instructor Portals5. Sync Courseware6. Intelligent Agents7. Online Language
Learning8. Online Exams and
Gradebooks
9. Online Mentoring10. Games & Simulations11. Assistive Technologies12. Peer-to-Peer
Collaboration13. Reusable Content14. Virtual Worlds/
Reality15. Wearable Computing16. Wireless Technology
2. Communities of Learners
• Awareness of who is in the space (roster)
• Customization of the space for the group– a customized banner
• Ability to interact in synchronous and asynchronous ways.
• Place for a community to identify who they are: charter, principles, membership, goals, etc.
3. Electronic BooksMetaText (eBooks)
5. Synchronous Instructor-Led Tech(Horizon Live, WebEx, Centra, etc.)
7. Online Language Support and Translation (pronunciation, communication, vocabulary, grammar, etc.)
9. Online Mentoring and Adventure Learning
10. Games and Simulations
12. Peer-to-Peer Collaboration(Global Knowledge Centers--Peer Shared Document Sites)
Possibilities:1. Data Sharing
(www.napster.com)2. Resource Sharing
(www.intel.com/cure/overview.htm)
3. Workgroup Collaboration (www.groove.net)
13. Reusable Learning Objects?• “Learning Objects are small or large
resources that can be used to provide a learning experience. These assets can be lessons, video clips, images, or even people. The Learning Objects can represent tiny "chunks" of knowledge, or they can be whole courses.”
Claude Ostyn, Click2Learn
14. Virtual Worlds/Reality
Avatars--representations of peopleObjects--representations of objects Maps--the landscape which can be exploredBots--artificial intelligence
15. Wearable Computing
16. Wireless Technology
Final advice…whatever you do…
Ok, who wants a TICKIT?And, who has a TICKIT?http://www.iub.edu/~tickit