why do we need theories in e-education?

Answers to why do we need theories in e-education

We need theories in e-education to improve the way education is being provided online.

Definitions of E-education
E-learning is the design, development and delivery of technology enhanced learning experiences, using a variety of media, for example web-based ...

Use of computers and electronics to assist learning; sometimes used synonymously with e-learning.

For many years, discussion of online learning, or e–learning, has been pre–occupied with the practice of teaching online and the debate about whether being online is ‘as good as’ being offline. The authors contributing to this paper see this past as an incubation period for the emergence of new teaching and learning practices. We see changes in teaching and learning emerging from the nexus of a changing landscape of information and communication technologies, an active and motivated teaching corps that has worked to derive new approaches to teaching, an equally active and motivated learning corps that has contributed as much to how to teach online as they have to how to learn while online, with others, and away from a campus setting. We see the need for, and the emergence of, new theories and models of and for the online learning environment, addressing learning in its ICT context, considering both formal and informal learning, individual and community learning, and new practices arising from technology use in the service of learning. This paper presents six theoretical perspectives on learning in ICT contexts, and is an invitation to others to bring theoretical models to the fore to enhance our understanding of new learning contexts.

New models and theories
At the same time as this transformation is taking place, many retain an idea of online learning that is fed by old notions of individuals sitting alone at computers, interacting only with a programmed tutor, learning out of context, lacking contact and engagement with real people. While tutoring systems exist, and in some contexts online learning does mean following through a tutorial program, the kind of online learning being promoted and enacted in educational institutions, communities of practice, and online groups and communities are based on principles of collaboration, dialog and conversation, active structuring of learning, and open sharing of resources and experiences. This kind of online learning appears under the names asynchronous learning networks (ALN; Harasim, et al., 1995; Hiltz and Goldman, 2005; Swan, 2005), computer–supported collaborative learning (CSCL; Koschmann, 1996; Koschmann, et al., 2002; Miyake, 2007), and, more recently, e–learning (Andrews and Haythornthwaite, 2007; Haythornthwaite and Kazmer, 2004; Lea and Nicoll, 2002; Land and Bayne, 2005).

Theoretical approaches guiding these efforts cluster at the collaborative, constructivist and cognitivist end of the spectrum – encouraging active participation and contribution by learners – and carrying principles of adult learning (andragogy; Knowles, 1984; Bransford, et al., 1999) graduate learning (Gullahorn, 2003), and expert learning (Scardamalia and Bereiter, 1996) to e–learners of all ages and stages. To date, however, much of the focus on online learning has been on guiding interactions in the online environment, effectively continuing the notion of isolation of learners (albeit now isolated with other online learners), even if not continuing the notion of passivity. Moreover, while there is consideration of the role of technology in online learning, this is too often confined to choices about learning management systems. What is only minimally explored is the role of technology as a constituent in e–learning practice (e.g., examining what online learning technologies afford for learning; e.g., Robins, 2004) and as part of an e–learning activity system (Engeström, et al., 1999; Russell, 2002). The emphasis on teaching has also overshadowed consideration of embedding contexts, giving sporadic attention to institutional actions, the embedding context for teachers (e.g., Hiltz and Turoff, 2005; Lankspear, et al., 2002; Noble, 1998) and learners (Crook, 2002); home and work contexts for learners (e.g., Kramarae, 2001; Haythornthwaite and Kazmer, 2002); the online context as a place of community rather than just of instructional learning (e.g., connecting to the literature on online community noted above; Haythornthwaite, et al., 2000; Renninger and Shumar, 2002; Barab, et al., 2004), and the impacts of decontextualizing place from educational space (Cornford and Pollock, 2002; Crook, 2002; Lankspear, et al., 2002).

These areas of consideration demonstrate how the activity system of online learning, including its technologies, people, institutions, purposes and embedding contexts, is a complex assemblage, resting on the interactions of multiple factors in multiple contexts. Planning and design can only go so far in predicting and guiding outcomes. Teachers and program directors can initiate or direct certain actions, but the configurations which emerge depend on how these are taken up and enacted.

The contributions that follow each address themes of emergence, complexity, and embedding contexts, providing models relating to online learning that address these configurations as continuously emergent, with technology and practices co–evolving as parts of a living, active system. Emergence appears as a theme in the models’ treatments of configurations of technology and practice, of learning and its context, and of norms of social interaction and participation. The models below by Andrews, Bruce, and Haythornthwaite address evolving and emergent effects of technology and learning practices; Bruce, Kazmer, Montague, and Preston address the enmeshing of learners with their contexts and communities; Kazmer, Montague, and Preston address emergent roles for learners and emergent practices in online interactions. Complexity is addressed regarding the multiplexity of people, tasks, texts, technologies, and settings, including multiple learning contexts (Kazmer), multiple technologies and relationships (Haythornthwaite), and multi–threaded, ‘braided’ conversations (Preston). Kazmer, Montague and Preston provide synergistic models of the learner experience that attend to interactions stimulated by the embedding contexts of online and offline settings.

Disclaimer - Answers to the questions are researched using various sources and are meant to increase the knowledge of our visitors. We cannot gurantee the accuracy of answers to questions.

Questions & Answers Page 2
Questions & Answers Page 1
Get Savio DSilva's Books for Free