For much of its early history, e-learning was relatively simple. Learning management systems often followed a basic “text and respond” format. Instructors posted content and questions, students submitted responses, and reusable learning objects were organized according to standards such as SCORM.
Over time, however, digital learning environments became more interactive, visual, open, and connected. Multimedia, open educational resources, networked learning, and emerging technologies changed not only how information was delivered, but also how learners interacted with knowledge, instructors, and one another.
How have they been studied?
Greeno provided a good foundation for how we attempt to modify the environment around us. As it relates to multimedia and e-learning, if we look back to the nascent phase of LMS’s we see a basic “text and respond” type of system. Questions were posted and answered, learning objects were reused, and SCORM standards were initiated (because we need more governing agencies as it relates to e-learning, right…?). As it relates to Greeno’s Affordance Theory, users began to understand the digital environment and how learning can be modified across it.
In 2001, MIT announced its OpenCourseWare initiative, marking the initiation of the OER movement. But it was in 2002 that the first OER were released, and people began to understand licenses. MIT’s goal was to make all the learning materials used in its 1,600 courses available via the internet, where the resources could be used and repurposed as desired by others, without charge. As a result of their groundbreaking idea, in February 2005, OpenCourseWare formally moved beyond MIT with the inauguration of the OCW Consortium. According to Abelson’s article on the Creation of OpenCourseWare, less than a year later, the Consortium includes more than 100 universities and other member organizations supporting the open publication of materials from more than 3000 courses.
This idea is directly linked to the Creative Commons License, developed by Larry Lessig in 2002, that went on to become essential in the OER movement. The simple licenses in Creative Commons allowed users to easily share resources and provide educational resources for those who might not be able to afford or locate the material.
Slightly veering directions, Ögren et all. (2017), sought to understand the effect that multimedia (text, pictures, graphs, etc.) helped or hurt participants in a Vector Calculus course. Meaning, when presented with a problem statement and a graph, was the subjects’ attention or thought process hindered or aided by the presence of a graph. The authors “found no support for an overall multimedia effect (H1). Instead, graphs had a beneficial effect on performance only when problem statements were to be confirmed (instead of rejected), which is referred to as the picture bias effect (H2)” (Ögren et al., 2017, p. 281). When a graph was present, students made more use of other information sources, evaluated the problem statement to a closer degree, and made better use of creating more efficient mental models. Participants also paused more, or were silent longer, when contemplating problems that involved a graph.
Reiser (2001) expounded on the history of instructional design (ID) and traced the origins back to World War II and the psychologist who were tasked with creating training manuals and screening processes for our US soldiers. From there, and because of the war, the mid-to-latter half of the 20th century featured a whirlwind of change. Wars and a depression walked jointly with civil rights and technological advancements. New demands in the form of military aircraft and space shuttles created a need for more complex forms of learning. The needs of the time called our brains to action, and we responded accordingly. B.F. Skinner’s theory on behaviorism was being replaced by Gagne’s theory of the conditions of learning and Bloom’s Taxonomy identified our principal designs of learning. The 1970’s saw an increase in the amount of instructional design models. In 1983, David Merrill developed his CDT theory and PLATO was one of the first computer systems to be integrated into the instructional realm. The 1990’s brought constructivism to the forefront, process improvement, prototyping, and computer-based training modules. E-Learning was becoming mainstream with the prevailing thought being that it would reduce costs and establish a set of e-learning standards.
Lastly, Stephen Downes and George Simon, proposed connectivism (a theory on which to understand learning in the digital age). It emphasizes how internet technologies such as web browsers, search engines, wikis, online discussion forums, and social networks contributed to new avenues of learning. Technologies have enabled people to learn and share information across the World Wide Web and among themselves in ways that were not possible before the digital age. They believed that learning does not simply happen within an individual, but within and across the networks.
How should they be studied in the future?
In recent years, an interesting and potentially useful technology has emerged that could shift the centralized nature of repositories. This technology, coupled with the idea of peer-to-peer (P2P) networking, revolves around the notion of a dispersed digital ledger to record transactions in a safe environment. My thoughts are that blockchain technology, artificial intelligence, and the Web 3.0 will have a massive impact on how we develop e-learning standards, LMS’s, coding, peer sharing/networking, and how we secure our digital rights in an era where gray is more prominent than black and white (meaning, facts, opinions, and “free” are tossed together in a bag, shaken, dumped out, and grabbed at blindly).
Where are the gaps in the research remaining to explore?
My thoughts are that the learning theory of connectivism needs to be explored as this specifically addresses how technologies are impacting our ability to learn. Our use of technology is prevalent in all aspects of our society, and we have the capability to access repositories of knowledge that directly impacts what we learn. Secondly, I believe that how we secure and preserve this information is paramount to maintaining a factual and consistent knowledge base; one that is free from exploitation and/or revisionist history.
References
- Ögren, M., Nyström, M., & Jarodzka, H. (2017). There’s more to the multimedia effect than meets the eye: is seeing pictures believing? Instructional Science, 45(2), 263–287. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11251-016-9397-6
- Reiser, R. A. (2001). A history of instructional design and technology: Part II: A history of instructional design. Educational Technology Research and Development, 49(2), 57–67. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02504928
- Siemens, G. (2001, January 5). Connectivism: A learning theory for the digital age. International Journal of Instructional Technology and Distance Learning. Retrieved March 29, 2022, from http://www.itdl.org/Journal/Jan_05/article01.htm
- Weller, M. (2018). Twenty years of edtech. EDUCAUSE Review, 53(4), 34–48. https://er.educause.edu/articles/2018/7/twenty-years-of-edtech