I get the feeling that the return on labour with perhaps the majority of most eLearning projects will be small and of potentially small pedagogical value: especially when measured to the amount of effort that has been put into the construction of the edifice/product/tool whatever....
I reckon that for eLearning to have value it has to have measurable outcomes: a 1000 years of conventional learning always had assessment to make certain that what was being taught could be measured as correct or valuable ... essentially using hypothesis, this is established from Pythagorus to Gestalt. This culmination of this formalised learning finally modifying into a post Second War pragmatic group based tutilege process, that which our generation has grown up with.
eLearning seems to stress customisation and embedding the student, the onus being that what the student finds helpful will make them learn..... We have all seen Bill Gates on webinars espousing the virtue of choice and self determination enabled or (nare dare say) enhanced with the Microsoft toolset - the world truly is our oyster here....
But back to the grit and grist of real learning... Does this set that the minimum requirements are monitored? Does the student or learner really understand the input process? How can we measure outcomes? for elearning to work from a pedagogical perspective we have to have eAssessment.... ah.... now that adds even more labour and some really tricky labour at that....... ho hum....
2 comments:
What framework are you (currently) working with?
Is the work of the advocates of these frameworks borne out by their collected data and conclusions?
I am not certain I really understand this exactly... if you are questioning how the elearning elements combine.... then...
I guess as most of the interactions are event driven between the "elearning" objects - it essentially the Hollywood principle...
Things will interact as expected within normal (real world) rules of combination and outcomes will be measured and stored, how to derive metrics will be to constrain the kinds of interactions I guess...
...In my example where I am building procedures with combinations of curriculum and associated testing; the ways in which they are combined will derive outcomes and these will be stored and measured - is this what youre trying to devine/derive...??
Post a Comment