E-learning - elearning model framework distance education blended learning. There are numerous names for open, flexible and distributed learning activities, including E-Learning, Web-Based Learning (WBL), Web-Based Instruction (WBI), Web-Based Training (WBT), Internet-Based Training (IBT), Distributed Learning (DL), Advanced Distributed Learning (ADL), Distance Learning, Online Learning (OL), Mobile Learning (or m-Learning) or Nomadic Learning, Remote Learning, Off-site Learning, a-Learning (anytime, anyplace, anywhere learning), etc.
Design, development, implementation and evaluation of open, flexible and distributed learning systems require thoughtful analysis and investigation of how to use the attributes and resources of the Internet and digital technologies in concert with instructional design principles and issues important to various dimensions of online learning environments. After reflecting on various factors important to open, flexible and distributed learning environments, I developed A Framework for E-learning.
E-learning quality assurance standards, organizations and research. I am surprised how often academic colleagues argue that there are no quality standards for e-learning. Well, hello, I’m sorry, but there are and some of them are damned good. However, I was surprised to find while doing some research for a client that there is no single source where one can go to compare different quality standards for e-learning. So I’m starting a list here, and would appreciate it if readers could direct me to ones that I may have missed.
(For more detailed information on some of these, see comments below). Canada Barker, K. (2002) Canadian Recommended E-learning Guidelines (CanREGs) Vancouver BC: FuturEd/CACE (also available in French) Barker, K. (2001) Creating quality guidelines for online education and training: consultation workbook Vancouver BC: Canadian Association for Community Education BC Ministry of Education (2010) Standards for K-12 Distributed Learning in British Columbia v3.0 Victoria BC: BC Ministry of Education Quality Matters Europe Sweden New Zealand. Queen’s University’s report on online learning. The future of MOOCs. MOOCs get a bad rap.
Dismissed as prescriptive, or teacher-centric, or unsocial, or something else, it’s like a badge of honour to espouse why you dislike MOOCs. Despite their pedagogical flaws, however, MOOCs provide unprecedented access to quality content for millions of learners. It’s all very well for Apple-owning, organic-buying professionals to cast aspersions, but consider the girl in Pakistan who’s too scared to set foot in a classroom.
Consider the teenager in central Australia whose school has only one teacher. Consider the young woman in Indonesia who can’t afford college. Don’t all these people deserve a better education? Sure, the pedagogy may not be perfect, but the alternative is much worse. MOOC proponent George Siemens distinguishes between two types of MOOC: the xMOOC and the cMOOC. The former is the subject of such disdain. In contrast, the latter leverages the connectedness of the participants. 1. 2. 3. 4. No more lazy professors, no more specious journal articles. 5. Global Online Universities Consortium.