Transcript Holy COW: Grazing Recent E-Learning Findings and Prophecies for the Future of Business and Education Dr.

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
[email protected]
Ten Minnie-Myths of E-Learning and
the Data to Dispel Them (Corporate)
Dr. Curtis J. Bonk
Alias: Mickey Mouse
President, CourseShare.com
Associate Professor, Indiana University
http://php.indiana.edu/~cjbonk, [email protected]
With supporting Help from:
Ms. Minnie Mouse
Orlando, Florida
[email protected]
Corporate ELearning 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
100%
80%
76-100%
51-75%
26-50%
1-25%
0%
60%
40%
20%
0%
1 Year
2
Years
5
Years
10
Years
Myth #2.
E-learning can now take
place at home and on the
road.
Figure 49. Location Where Learners Access WebBased Training
Other
Road
Home
Office
0
10
20
30
40
50
Percent of Respondents
60
70
80
Myth #3. Everyone is
evaluating e-learning but
us.
Percent of Respondents
Figure 26. How Respondent Organizations Measure
Success of Web-Based Learning According to the
Kirkpatrick Model
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
Learner satisfaction
Change in
knowledge, skill,
atttitude
Job performance
Kirkpatrick's Evaluation Level
ROI
Myth #4.
Learner completion rate has
magical importance.
Percent of Respondents
Figure 53. Learner Completion Rate in Web-Based
Courses
25
20
15
10
5
0
0-25% 26-50% 50-59% 60-69% 70-79% 80-89% 90-99%
Learner Completion Rate
99100%
Myth #5.
Work-related incentives
are important in motivating
e-learners.
Figure 55. Incentives for Successful Completion of WebBased Learning
Promotion
Salary
Inc Job Security
Awarding Credits to Degree
Public Recognition
Inc Job Responsibility
None
0
10
20
30
40
Percent of Respondents
50
60
Myth #6.
Thiagi has convinced the
world of the need for
interactivity and social icebreakers.
Figure 41. Activities Learners Would Deem Highly
Engaging and Useful
Ice Breakers/Social
Display Products
Article Discussion/Critique
Role Play/Debates
E-mail Pals/Peer Review
Voting/Polling
Symposia/Panels
Students Leading Discussion
Electronic Guests/Mentoring
Group Projects/Teams
Brainstorming
Cases or Job Reflections
0
10
20
30
40
50
Percent of Respondents
60
70
Myth #7.
Watch out…trainers will
soon be out of a job.
Percenrt of Respondents
Figure 19. Purpose of Web-Based Learning in
Organization
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
Sole source of
learning
Supplement
traditional
Follow-up to
traditional
Alternative to
traditional
Other
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
80
Percent of Respondents
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
Exploration
Student
Generated
Content
Case-Based
Guilded
Learning
PBL
Modeling
Online
Traditional
Equal
Figure 39. Instructional Strategies Perceived as Better
Supported by Online than Traditional Classroom
Environments
Percent of Respondents
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
Group Prob
Solving &
Collab
Socratic
Questioning
Role Play &
Simulations
Discussion
Coaching or
Mentoring
Lecturing
Online
Traditional
Equal
Myth #9.
Trainers operate alone and
do not want to give away
trade secrets.
Figure 56. Important Features of a Free CourseSharing Resource Community
Pre-Rated Web Resources
Pedagogical Ideas
Stories of instructional experiences
Answ ers to Teaching Problems
Courses, Catalogs, Products
Web Resource Sharing Tools
Expert Advice
Professional Links
Articles and New sletters
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
Percent of Respondents
70
80
Myth #10.
Trainers are loyal.
Figure 44. Freelance or Adjunct Instructor WebBased Training
100%
80%
60%
No
Yes
40%
20%
0%
Past Experience
Future Interest
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.com
Associate Professor, Indiana University
http://php.indiana.edu/~cjbonk, [email protected]
With supporting Help from:
Ms. Minnie Mouse
Orlando, Florida
[email protected]
Higher Education ELearning Myths
For full report, see:
http://PublicationShare.com
Myth #1.
College instructors are
loyal.
Interested in Freelance Instruction?
Freelance or Adjunct Web-Based Teaching
100%
Percent of Respondents
90%
80%
70%
60%
Yes
50%
No
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
Past Experience
Interest in Next 5 Years
Myth #2.
Young instructors will jump
on this.
How Old Are Early Web Adopters?
Respondent's Age
2%
7%
20-35
36-50
47%
44%
51-65
66+
N=218
Figure 7. Rank of Respondents
10%
Professor or Assoc
Professor
Assistant Professor
5%
8%
Adjunct Professor
17%
60%
Lecturer
Other (e.g., admin
plus faculty)
Myth #3.
Web instruction is an
either-or decision (i.e., a
Mickey Mouse decision).
Figure 18. Online Teaching Experiences
Partially and
Completely
18%
None
24%
Completely Online
19%
Partially Online
39%
Myth #4.
Pedagogical tools exist
to teach online.
Percent of Respondents
Online Instructional Activities
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
Scientific
Simulations
Data Analysis
Actual Use
Lab
Performance
Critical and
Creative Thinking
High Usability
What Instructional Activities are Needed?
Myth #5.
College instructors will not
put their instruction on
display for others to critique.
Co
ur
s
th
Reasons
N = 211 (*Note: Categories are not m utually exclusive.)
O
th
er
Fu
n
G
ro
w
Ex
pe
rim
en
t
M
ar
ke
tS
e
el
Sh
f
ar
Sh
in
g
ar
Im
e
po
Th
rta
eo
nt
rie
s
or
St
ra
te
gi
es
Re
qu
ire
d
Num ber of Respondents
Why Post to MERLOT or WLH*
120
100
80
60
40
20
0
Pedagogical
Ideas
Answers to
Teaching
Problems
Expert
Advice
Class
Management
Tips
Recognition
Newsletters
Storytelling
Percent of Respondents
Figure 36. Important Features of Free CourseSharing Community
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
Myth #6.
College instructors will
flock to sophisticated
technologies.
Figure 19. Degree of Comfort with Web Skills
Courseware
Online Discussion
File Attachments
Chat
HTML
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
Percent of Respondents
Low
Medium
High
100%
Myth #7.
The institution will own the
online courses.
Online Courses are the Property of an
Institution, Not an Instructor (N= 215)
Strongly
Agree
Agree 4%
Strongly
12%
Disagree
34%
Unsure
21%
Disagree
29%
Myth #8.
College faculty just need a
little more training to
teaching on the Web.
Te
ch
ni
In
ca
st
ru
lS
ct
up
io
po
na
rt
lD
Ti
e
si
m
gn
e
to
er
Le
s
Tr
ar
ai
n
ni
ng
W
eb
to
Us
St
e
W
ud
eb
en
tA
cc
Ch
es
at
s
Ro
O
om
nl
in
He
e
lp
Re
so
ur
Ece
m
ai
s
lC
ha
ng
es
In
Re
st
co
ru
gn
ct
io
itio
na
n
lS
tip
en
Re
ds
le
as
e
Ti
m
e
Percent of Respondents
Any Supports Needed?
Supports Needed for Web-Based Teaching By
Institution Type
100
80
60
40
20
0
Private
Public
Myth #9.
Profit is the key motivator
for most Web initiatives.
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
Strongly
Agree
Agree
Unsure
Disagree
Profit
Learning
Access
Strongly
Disagree
Percent of Respondents
Figure 23. Primary Insitutional Motives for
Developing Online Education
Myth #10.
Shhh…If you don’t say
anything, college instructors
will just do this for free.
Compensation
No Add'l
Compensation
Other
Release Time
Recognition
Salary
Course
Royalties
Stipends
Percent of Respondents
Figure 17. Suggested Instructor Compensation for
Teaching Online
40
35
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
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
[email protected]
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.
Vanessa Dennen’s (2001) Research
on Nine Online Courses
(sociology, history, communications, writing, library
science, technology, counseling)
Poor Instructors
• Little or no feedback given
• Always authoritative
• Kept narrow focus of what
was relevant
• Created tangential
discussions
• Only used “ultimate”
deadlines
Good Instructors
• Provided regular qual/quant
feedback
• Participated as peer
• Allowed perspective sharing
• Tied discussion to grades,
other assessments.
• Used incremental deadlines
Additional Myth #3. Only the
big companies are doing this.
Figure 2. Size of Respondent Organizations
Percent of Respondents
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
1 to 30
31-100
101 to
500
501 to
1,000
1,001 to
5,000
5,001 to
10,000
Number of Employees
10,001 to More than
100,000 100,001
Additional Myth #4. We need to catch
up, everything is going online.
Figure 12. Methods Used to Deliver Training in
Organization
Other
Paper-Based Correspondence
Videotape
Multimedia
Internet/Intranet
Instructor-Led Classroom
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
Additional Myth #5. No worries—
the administrators are there to
support you teach.
“Campus-technology leaders say they
worry more about administrativecomputing 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 Faced
Administrative:
Pedagogical:
• “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.”
• “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
Before
After
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)
Number of Studies
Year of Publication
12
10
8
6
4
2
0
1996
1997
1998
1999
Year
2000
2001
Bob Wisher’s Wish List
• Effect size of .5 or higher in
comparison to traditional classroom
instruction.
Web Based
Instruction
Average Effect
Size
Number of
Studies
CBI
Kulik [8]
CBI
Liao [18]
31
.
32
.
11
97
46
.
41
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).
On-Task
Social
Mechanics
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
Month 1,2
Month 3,4
Month 5,6
Overall frequency of interactions
across chat categories (6,601
chats).
Mechanics
15%
Social
30%
On-Task
55%
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 email 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 opinions
4. 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.
Starter
Centered
Interaction:
Scattered
Interaction
(no starter):
Week 4
Level of Cognitive Processing:
All Posts
Both
12%
Surface
33%
Surface
Deep
Deep
55%
Both
Hara, Bonk, & Angela, 2001
Social Construction of Knowledge
(Gunawardena, Lowe, & Anderson, 1997)
• Five Stage Model
1. 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
Study #3. Fall, 1997
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
Unsupported
I feel technology will never over take the role of the teacher...I
feel however,
Social
this is just help us teachers...
Justified
26. Author: Daniel
Date: Apr. 30 0:11 AM 1998
Extension
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…
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 Needed
1)
2)
3)
4)
5)
6)
7)
Variations in Instructor Moderation
Forms of Online Debating and Role Play
The Impact of Online Mentoring and
Tutoring
Motivational Activities to Increase Retention
Student Perceptions of e-Learning
Environments
The Development of Online Learning
Communities
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 Future
1. Digital Portfolios
2. Communities of
Learners
3. Electronic Books
4. Instructor Portals
5. Sync Courseware
6. Intelligent Agents
7. Online Language
Learning
8. Online Exams and
Gradebooks
9. Online Mentoring
10. Games & Simulations
11. Assistive Technologies
12. Peer-to-Peer
Collaboration
13. Reusable Content
14. Virtual Worlds/
Reality
15. Wearable Computing
16. 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 Books
MetaText (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/overv
iew.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 people
Objects--representations of objects
Maps--the landscape which can be explored
Bots--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