K-Praxis - Topic: Research Management - E learning Models-Print

E learning Models
October 20, 2004

E learning seems to be on its way to replacing the traditional methods of learning. Or at least it seems to be aspiring to do so! While in the earlier article, K-Praxis attempted to demonstrate the consequences of uniformity within e-learning, this article will evaluate the viability of e learning in terms of the responsiveness of the students, the economic feasibility and finally the desirability of such a take-over of the educational field. Besides the old question in a new article: can automated education replace the human guru, this article also looks at the practices of e learning and the delicate issues that they throw up.

(Dis)Interested Students?

It would not require an accurate quotation of statistical data to state that the drop out rate in e learning programs is much higher than in traditional educational systems. Whether this has to do with the lack of the gentle human presence (of teachers and peers) or with the community of students who opt for e-learning programs as opposed to the ones who choose the traditional educational programs, is unclear. Since e learning is often considered a successor of the distance education model, it continues to be viewed as a secondary choice to classroom learning. E learning, however, is more self-paced and hence more convenient. Moreover it also reduces the embarrassment of accessing education at any age and from any location.

The Cheaper Option

With a growing concern regarding funding (especially of higher) education, e learning seems to provide a more viable option. Reusable Learning Objects (RLO) and Shareable Coursework Object Reference Model (SCROM), which are used extensively in e learning not only, reduce the costs of the learning package but also the efforts on the part of the instructors/designers which in turn reduces costs further.

Automated Anxieties

While there can be few doubts as to the advantages of e learning in relation to traditional methods of learning, in speaking of its desirability as a system of learning, there are several issues. In accessing the e learning models, the student would encounter certain difficulties or hindrances. Designers of these models try largely to predict these difficulties and attempt to create within the model itself, provisions by which these hindrances can be removed. The difficulty however is this: as the learning models are used more and more, newer and previously unpredicted difficulties are bound to occur. These may be in terms of incomprehension either of the technology or even of the content. How is e learning bracing itself to counter this challenge? Can the learning models be made sustainable such that there is little need for continuous human evaluation?

The Human Hand…

It would be unfair to the designers of e learning courses to expect them to create learning models which would preempt every difficulty that that the real individual accessing it would have. Furthermore it would also be a complete misjudgment of the eccentricities of the human mind to expect it to function smoothly in accordance with a machine. While the learning model can record the anomalies and difficulties, there would always be a need to evaluate and continuously upgrade the model creatively. This revision can only be done by human intervention.

The interaction between man and machine is never unmediated! Even the simplest machines would require instruction manuals and service-personnel. Similarly, e learning packages would also need the assistance of technicians who are able to comprehend the glitches in these models and revise them to suit the ability of the learners.

	Making sense of online textual information and information management technologies

	E learning Models October 20, 2004 E learning seems to be on its way to replacing the traditional methods of learning. Or at least it seems to be aspiring to do so! While in the earlier article, K-Praxis attempted to demonstrate the consequences of uniformity within e-learning, this article will evaluate the viability of e learning in terms of the responsiveness of the students, the economic feasibility and finally the desirability of such a take-over of the educational field. Besides the old question in a new article: can automated education replace the human guru, this article also looks at the practices of e learning and the delicate issues that they throw up. (Dis)Interested Students? It would not require an accurate quotation of statistical data to state that the drop out rate in e learning programs is much higher than in traditional educational systems. Whether this has to do with the lack of the gentle human presence (of teachers and peers) or with the community of students who opt for e-learning programs as opposed to the ones who choose the traditional educational programs, is unclear. Since e learning is often considered a successor of the distance education model, it continues to be viewed as a secondary choice to classroom learning. E learning, however, is more self-paced and hence more convenient. Moreover it also reduces the embarrassment of accessing education at any age and from any location. The Cheaper Option With a growing concern regarding funding (especially of higher) education, e learning seems to provide a more viable option. Reusable Learning Objects (RLO) and Shareable Coursework Object Reference Model (SCROM), which are used extensively in e learning not only, reduce the costs of the learning package but also the efforts on the part of the instructors/designers which in turn reduces costs further. Automated Anxieties While there can be few doubts as to the advantages of e learning in relation to traditional methods of learning, in speaking of its desirability as a system of learning, there are several issues. In accessing the e learning models, the student would encounter certain difficulties or hindrances. Designers of these models try largely to predict these difficulties and attempt to create within the model itself, provisions by which these hindrances can be removed. The difficulty however is this: as the learning models are used more and more, newer and previously unpredicted difficulties are bound to occur. These may be in terms of incomprehension either of the technology or even of the content. How is e learning bracing itself to counter this challenge? Can the learning models be made sustainable such that there is little need for continuous human evaluation? The Human Hand… It would be unfair to the designers of e learning courses to expect them to create learning models which would preempt every difficulty that that the real individual accessing it would have. Furthermore it would also be a complete misjudgment of the eccentricities of the human mind to expect it to function smoothly in accordance with a machine. While the learning model can record the anomalies and difficulties, there would always be a need to evaluate and continuously upgrade the model creatively. This revision can only be done by human intervention. The interaction between man and machine is never unmediated! Even the simplest machines would require instruction manuals and service-personnel. Similarly, e learning packages would also need the assistance of technicians who are able to comprehend the glitches in these models and revise them to suit the ability of the learners.