Gains in online learning since 2010

TeachOnline.ca, a good source for online learning trends and info, has released a high-level view of what we've learned about online learning since 2010. It's a good state-of-the-art summary, and a useful reference. The five questions are not my main interest here; what caught my attention is the "biggest gains in online learning since 2010" list:

  1. "Wider acceptance of online learning as being not significantly different in terms of learning outcomes than face-to-face learning", citing Russell's nsd work. 
  2. "A deeper understanding of the importance of instructional design and the ways in which course design can better engage students in their learning".
  3. "A strong investment in the professional development of faculty and instructors – more focused engagement in how best to leverage online environments for learning".
  4. "A renewed focus on learning outcomes and, more recently, competency- and capability-based learning."
  5. "Really great uses of simulation and gaming, especially in health sciences and science, to engage students in their learning".
The match between online learning and instructional design is fundamental to successful TEL. Later on the page, as the first part of an answer to the question "Do we still have issues with quality in online learning?" is another key proposition: "We need to see the work of creating online courses as requiring a team of people – we should stop relying on an individual faculty member or instructor to do the work of three or four people". 

Ah. It's refreshing to see this page and a return to roots to some extent: online learning done well links instructional design with online tools, involving teams of people each contributing their speciality. 

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

A further update to "Reading and studying from the screen"

Image
Elevator tale: Like the previous post " An update to "Reading and studying from the screen " updating my 2016 paper " Reading and studying on the screen ", this post surveys various articles not previously considered. This time ten articles released subsequent to mine and a further thirteen not included are considered. The additional articles help to portray a much richer series of nuances to what it means to read on-screen and how comparison studies between on-screen and print reading might be furthered.  Image: Hobbies on a Budget, https://www.flickr.com/photos/62030038@N02/ Earlier this year I posted an update to my 2016 article in the Journal of Open, Flexible and Distance Learning " Reading and studying on the screen: An overview of literature towards good learning design practice ". The article considered much, but not all, of the scholarship at the time related to how on-screen education might be advanced in the face of student preferenc
Read more

On AI in Ed

Image
I'm presenting a paper at next week's EDEN conference in Barcelona , on the topic of ethics for AI in education. In researching the paper, I took the time to get up to speed with some of the latest ideas. I read Frankish & Ramsey's Cambridge handbook of artificial intelligence and Boddington's Toward a code of ethics for artificial intelligence to ensure a good foundation on top of some article and internet research. Let me begin by saying that there is a HUGE array of literature already developed on the subject of AI in education (AIED). A regular AIED Society international conference generates substantial proceedings and there is at least one dedicated journal (the International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education ), ensuring that momentum is ongoing. In considering how AI might be applied in education it’s helpful to think about AI in terms of weak and strong forms. Weak AI is based on acting intelligently and the automation of specific ta
Read more

Into cognitive theory: Making it stick, How we learn, and more smudging

I recently finished reading Make it stick  by Peter C. Brown, Henry L. Roedigger III, and Mark A. McDaniel, published 2014 by Harvard University Press. The Kindle version is available here ; a summary version is also available on Kindle here . What I like about the book is summed up in this paragraph: Much of how we structure training and schooling is based on learning theories that have been handed down to us, and these are shaped by our own sense of what works, a sensibility drawn from our personal experiences as teachers, coaches, students, and mere humans at large on the earth. How we teach is largely a mix of theory, lore, and intuition. But over the last forty years and more, cognitive psychologists have been working to build a body of evidence to clarify what works and to discover the strategies that get results (p.7).  The difference is between common sense (likely a projection of our own preferences!) and evidence when it comes to promoting effective learning. Without giv
Read more