Subject: [IFETS-Discuss] Pre-discussion paper
From: Dr Kinshuk (kinshuk@massey.ac.nz)
Date: Fri 26 May 2000 - 03:31:16 MEST
From: Dr Kinshuk <kinshuk@massey.ac.nz> Subject: [IFETS-Discuss] Pre-discussion paper Date: Thu, 25 May 2000 18:31:16 -0700
List address to send message to everyone: ifets-discuss@topica.com
Details of current discussion: http://ifets.ieee.org/discussions/discuss.html
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dear colleagues
Please find below the pre-discussion paper for our next discussion. The HTML
version of the paper is available at:
http://ifets.ieee.org/discussions/discuss_june2000.html
Please send your comments on the paper to IFETS list at
ifets-discuss@topica.com
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Implementing Virtual Learning Environments: Looking for Holistic Approach"
Moderators & Summarisers:
Mario Barajas, University of Barcelona, Spain
Martin Owen, University of Wales, Bangor, United Kingdom
** Background
The implementation of innovative pedagogical/educational practices is a response
to the social needs for educational change. Such needs emerge from the massive
request and access to post-secondary education, the necessity to increase
competitiveness mainly through the increase of the human potential and the need
to take into account new approaches to learning in a world highly mediated by
technology where becoming a democratic, tolerant and responsible citizen is
proving to be more difficult than becoming a highly trained worker or
professional. The recent technological developments and the possibilities they
offer provide useful tools in the introduction of educational innovations. With
the same token however the implementation of technology in educational
environments and in the learning process, in formal education or in more informal
learning structures, poses a real challenge for the education and training
institutions undertaking it.
As a result of the new ICT systems, there are emerging experiences where most
of the traditional universities (as well as traditional open universities) are
in the process of restructuring by introducing new "virtual campuses" (VCs).
Participants are experiencing new ways of learning and communicating with peers
and teachers by organising the learning environment in a different way, based
on several technological configurations. "Virtual Learning Environments" (VLEs)
are based on different combinations of telematics tools and multimedia.
Traditional universities and training centres see this as an opportunity to
widen access to their courses while improving the quality of education, as well
as a future source of income. Training companies are also very interested in
reaching new potential by approaching learning to people's homes.
Although VLE might be triggered by socio-economic factors, these processes will
only mean an education and training improvement if we consider those elements
related to the teaching (pedagogic effectiveness) and institutional sphere
(institutional restructuring, resistance to change, etc.). Furthermore, if we
do not respond to the academic, linguistic, and cultural diversity of today’s
world, we are taking the risk of creating systems of low social, pedagogical
and economic efficiency. This is the reason why the situation needs a holistic
perspective of study and discussion.
In this paper we present some of the preliminary results of the study undertaken
by the Thematic Network IVETTE (Implementation of Virtual Environments in
Training and Education). IVETTE is a consortium of nine European Universities
funded by the Targeted Socio-Economic Research Programme (European Union, IV
Framework Programme). The goal of the IVETTE Thematic Network (1998-20009 is to
investigate the institutional, cultural and learning is-sues involved in the
implementation of innovative Virtual Learning Environments (VLEs) in post-
secondary public educa-tional institutions, as well as in training institutions.
For more information, visit http://improving-ser.sti.jrc.it/default/ (cluster
"Innovation in Education and Training via Technology") or
http://xiram.doe.d5.ub.es/IVETTE
We summarise here major issues and questions on the implementation of VLEs in
traditional educational institutions. These concerns and pending issues have
been defined primarily on the basis of nine European case studies. We start
by the findings and pending issues on “What are VLEs?”, we look into “To whom”
they are addressed and what questions have to be dealt with there. Next we
deal with “Why” implement VLEs and we finish with the issues concerned with
“How” to implement VLEs.
** What are VLEs
In attempting to answer to the question we have underscored the notion that
virtual learning environments have first and foremost to be thought of as
learning environments. The “learning” aspect drives the activity, virtuality
rather refers to the 'technology' that is brought in to support learning. The
definition we chose to employ for VLEs is “any combination of distance and
face-to-face interaction, where some kind of time and space virtuality is
present”.
The reader might argue that this definition is quite broad. However, our
experience and analyses looking into the what of VLEs justifies this. Indeed,
we observed significant variance between the different VLE activities studied
with respect to: the objectives and reasons why for introducing VLEs, the
audiences targeted, the chosen technology, the prevailing pedagogic arrangement,
the scope of orientation of the initiative (local or international) with
consequent cross-cultural issues and the implementation process at the
institutional level. Clearly, this feature of VLEs renders the making of
general conclusion on when, why and how to adopt and implement them in higher
education quite difficult. Future research may want to identify clusters of
related parameters identifying the learning context that warrant a particular
implementation approach.
We can also conclude that the undertaking of VLE development within
institutions of higher learning requires:
1. the attention of a variety of institutional actors. These range from
developers to administrators and institutional factors. Designing and using
VLEs requires fundamental changes in the role of academic and technical staff.
Academics have to acquire or develop new knowledge and skills to become teaching
materials designers, tutors, facilitators, etc. Additionally, and more
importantly, they have to cope with essential changes in the conception of
time and space introduced by these technologies. On-going experiences on VLEs
provide evidence of substantial transformations in the work carried out by
teachers.
2. a transdisciplinary approach engaging a multiplicity of disciplines ranging
from subject matter specialists to instructional designers to system
administrators.
3. a careful consideration for the integration of socio-cultural elements.
The apparent accessibility and time and space flexibility of most VLEs are
used by market oriented agents to sell this “educational technology” as “the
panacea” for educational problems and equity issues. However, a closer and
more rigorous approach to implemented VLEs makes evident new forms of
colonisation (English language, pragmatic culture, etc.), new forms of
exclusions (the need of more expensive tools) and new forms of frustration
(everybody can have access to quality courses, the only thing they need is:
money, time and the required background).
** Why learners, teachers, institutions might wish to implement VLEs.
The research done reveals a multiplicity of reasons. We summarise here by
giving some illustrative examples, depending on whose perspective is taken.
* Students (in favour)
- to experience on-line learning for its own sake,
- to access education and training courses that otherwise wouldn’t have taken
- to participate in a distributed learning environment which they feel is
richer than a traditional one,
- to get the opportunity to discuss their own professional situations with
other learners and with their colleagues while staying close to the work
environment, etc.
* Students (wish to avoid)
- lack technological skills and/or money to buy equipment,
- have had bad experiences using new technologies and are reluctant to
renew the suffering.
* Teachers (in favour)
- to experience teaching in a VLE,
- to gain professional standing by teaching with VLEs,
- to offer the possibility of learning to those learners who would not find
it possible to participate in a traditional face to face experience, etc.
* Teachers (wish to avoid)
- they feel that they lack the necessary technological and didactical skills
to facilitate learning through VLEs,
- they are convinced that the best way to teach their discipline is through
face to face teaching
* Institutions (in favour)
- they can promote the use of a particular language,
- learning materials created in one language can often be converted for use
by speakers of another language at relatively low cost.
- they can be used to bring people from different cultures together in a
single learning experience.
In the European Union context:
- they can promote the use of a particular language,
- learning materials created in one language can often be converted for use
by speakers of another language at relatively low cost,
- they can be used to bring people from different cultures together in a
single learning experience.
* Institutions (wish to avoid)
- the power structure in the institution is such that traditional ways are
rewarded and innovation is not rewarded,
- the lack of technological infrastructure within and around the institution
is such that it is not feasible to consider using VLEs,
- they fear the damage that could result from a well-publicised failure.
In the European Union context:
- the danger that it can be swamped by a dominant culture or a dominant
language grouping with the consequent suppression of the others,
Clearly, the merits of VLEs for learners, teachers and institutions identified
in this research need dissemination within the educational world. For those
who are reluctant to engage in VLE activities because of too many “unknowns”
and uncertainty, this review of (potential) benefits might function as a
catalyst for the adoption process. More research seems required, however,
into the delineation of the precise conditions under which potential advantages
are transformed into real benefits.
We feel that special attention should be devoted to a further investigation of
the reasons why actors in the education field might not want to adopt a VLE
approach as a way of delivering education and training. Here the question arises
how the issues put forward in our analysis should be dealt with:
- Is there a need for additional valid research so as to establish which
elements/issues are to be considered justifiable reasons for avoiding VLEs,
preferably broken up into nature and type of learning context, and on the other
hand to determine where avoidance behaviour is based on erratic perception or
beliefs and reasons that can easily be overcome?
- Should the relevant national bodies engage in efforts to overcome and lessen
resistance? If yes, there is a need for deciding on appropriate approaches,
ranging from sensitising and awareness raising campaigns, pointing out prejudices
or widely held but mistaken beliefs, carefully designing possible solutions to
perceived problems to eventually preparing necessary changes in laws and
regulations to support further adoption of VLEs.
** How VLEs can be implemented
The next line of research concerns how VLEs can be implemented into traditional
higher and continuing education. Throughout the analysis into the “how”, it was
observed that it is fairly difficult, and to a large extent undesirable, to
engage in a prescription of the procedural steps to follow when implementing
VLEs. This is primarily due to the fact that VLEs are defined within a very
specific learning context (in terms of technology, learning paradigm, target
audience, type of institution embedding the VLE etc. – cf. supra) and hence,
procedures cannot be generalised over different conditions. Therefore, rather
than providing vague procedural descriptions, the “How” question deals with
important issues to be taken into account when implementing VLEs.
This inventory is made according to the three main dimensions used in the project:
(1) teaching and learning issues
(2) institutional issues
(3) cross-cultural issues.
The major findings are summarised in accordance with these dimensions. Analysis
of these questions from the perspective of implementation, reveals that there are
major factors to be taken into consideration.
In the discourse on 'teaching and learning' issues, the project faced issues such as:
- The emergence of new educational paradigms.
Education currently faces a period of transition in which old paradigms are
opposed to new ones. Whereas the old paradigm is based on the concept of
knowledge transfer (knowledge from person A to be transmitted to person B) the
new paradigm relies more on constructivist principles. The IVETTE project
demonstrated that VLEs develop primarily within the new paradigm. However, it
was observed that the implementation of VLEs within the older paradigms occurs
as well. From a teaching and learning point of view, the first case of
innovation seems the most challenging; two novelties are faced simultaneously:
- the introduction of learning technology
- new concepts on teaching and learning.
Nevertheless, we consider the adoption of VLEs in the context of the traditional
paradigms a very important phenomenon as well. It implies for the institutions
involved a step in the evolutionary transition from traditional teaching
environments towards newer models of education.
- The context of teaching and learning in VLEs.
The central players in a learning environment are the learners and the teachers.
Classrooms, which are isolated from real life, can only simulate reality to a
certain extent. This is also true of virtual classrooms constructed by
technological means (e.g. video conferencing). Based on the IVETTE evidence,
it seems essential that learning in open learning environments is closely
connected with learners’ real-world activities, situations and social relations.
- The changing nature of the learning materials
Some cases studied have shown that teaching situations can also be considered as
resources of learning in a similar way to ready-written learning materials. The
availability of teaching situations can be improved through access to multimedia
materials such as video or audio (including video-on-demand) resources of lectures
and archived discussions as part of the learning materials. It then becomes
difficult to distinguish between interactive learning materials and teaching
situations.
Depending on the concept the most important learning material can be the outcomes
produced by the students themselves during the learning process.
- Key issues for pedagogical design and teaching in VLEs
To analyse key issues in the implementation of teaching and learning in VLEs, we
refer to pedagogical functions as being the practical activities and methods in
the learning environment that make learning possible.
When teaching and learning take place in VLES it should be kept in mind that there
is already a didactical concept incorporated within the environment determining
the scale of pedagogical functions.
It could also be observed that there are pedagogical barriers to overcome and
compromises to be made when standardised products are chosen which are
increasingly available on the commercial sector.
A trade-off has to be made between bottom-up and top-down strategies for
implementation. When a top-down strategy is chosen, the variety of pedagogical
functions is reduced to the tools offered by the pre-defined and standardised
environment A bottom-up strategy, however, can entail other problems such as
technical instability, incompatibility of the software developed by different
actors, etc.
- Planning and development issues of the VLE.
It should be noted that that teaching and learning always takes place in a
specific context. Teaching in VLEs means that there are a lot of organisational
aspects to consider. By implication then, being a good teacher means that in
addition to being a good educator you have to be a good organiser and designer
of information, communication, didactical implementation and media integration.
Teaching becomes a much more complex process during several stages than
traditional educational situations.
If education takes place on an international and inter-cultural level there are
even more aspects to be considered related to the organisation of communication,
the basic language to be used and the taking into account of cultural
particularities. It becomes clear, that teaching issues in virtual environments
are multi-dimensional and directly inter-linked with other crucial aspects of
activities within and without of the environment.
- New strategies for teaching.
Within the context of new educational paradigms the new functions can be
characterised by the shift from traditional teaching as a content provider and
“transmitter” towards a mentor guiding and supporting learners through the
process of knowledge acquisition. In an open learning environment, learning can
be largely directed by the learners themselves.
There are many “open questions” concerned with online teaching which are still
being widely discussed in the field of computer-mediated communication (CMC) as
to how and to what extent moderation must take place in settings where learners
work collaboratively on the assessment of contents.
Special technical tutoring might become necessary in open learning environments
in order to avoid student frustrations. Tutors can use an increased range of
alternative channels to provide efficient tutoring (telephone, e-mail, tutorials,
etc.) either at a distance or in a face-to-face context.
Whatever kind of techniques is being used it becomes clear, that pedagogues need
special training for online-education. Implementing teaching in Virtual Learning
Environments needs competence in technological and organisational aspects as well
and new skills in applying relevant didactical methods.
Future teachers must be introduced to technology and its application in the
educational area in order to be enabled to measure the whole range of
possibilities available for organising education and teaching in this virtual
context.. Even when a sharing of work takes place within a team of specialists
a minimum competence of knowing what the others do is required. Some soft skills
like working in inter-disciplinary teams become more important too in this
context and are to be considered as well in teacher training.
In the discussion on opportunities, problems, leverage factors and pitfalls 'at
the institutional level', we addressed concerns such as:
- What is the institutional perspective to the undertaking of VLE implementation?
- What are the factors that led institutions to consider using VLE?
- Do all institutions regard VLE as the best approach to meet social and in some
cases market needs?
- What type of networks/collaborations are being formed for VLE undertaking?
- What type of institutional change is being sought?
- What is the management approach to institutional change?
Firstly, it deserves emphasising that the majority of the case studies analysed
pertain to pilot activities; a few concerned well-established VLEs, albeit in
non-mainstream activity. In all, we can conclude that at present there is little
evidence of consistent moves – or of the willingness to do so – from an
experimental and piloting stage to embedding VLE activities into mainstream
education. Universities, as yet, have not embraced this new avenue of education
delivery wholeheartedly.
Hence, we must remain aware of the fact that focusing on the small scale
implementation of VLE reveals important factors, but unless the wider issues
are addressed, the ability of traditional HE institutions to respond to any
opportunities or threats that VLEs pose for these institutions will be inhibited.
We summarise issues that were derived from the pilot experimentation and that
warrant further investigation in order to develop an implementation policy for
mainstream learning activities:
a) Issues regarding the mediation system (the capabilities and limits of VLE
themselves):
- The capability of the new technologies to deliver the quality of service that
the actors require.
- The optimal scale of the innovation: is it to be the whole institution or does
it involve just the work of one tutor or what?
- The best rate and pace of change and transformation (how soon will we introduce
it, over what period of time, how will it grow?)
- The quality of the education or training delivered.
b) Issues arising from the management and governance of Higher Education:
- What are the rules and regulations regarding the delivery and award of degrees
etc. that an institution can offer?
- Are there limitations to do with time, attendance etc.?
- What are the rules governing external accountability?
- Are there limitations on the financial structures which determine the running
of courses?
- Are there laws, pertaining to the organisation of education, that apply?
- Are there laws/government policy that encourage the development of VLEs?
- Is there government inducement to encourage participation in developing VLEs?
- Is there other legislative activity which makes “some form of change” necessary?
- Is there other financial activity or inducement that makes “some form of change”
necessary?
- Are there issues in the style and contracts of employment of University staff
which enable/inhibit change?
c) Issues arising from quality of knowledge production and transmission:
- What is the meaning of change and transformation in academic work?
- -How could they affect the field of studies, especially those related to Social
and Human Sciences?
Finally, the research looked into 'cross-cultural issues' that arise when
implementing VLEs that involve co-operation between institutions, teachers
and learners belonging to different cultural and/or linguistic environments.
Indeed, a strong feature of VLEs is their potential (technology wise) to operate
at an international and even at a global level. VLEs allow institutions to
extend their reach beyond local and national geographical borders. However,
it deserves mentioning here that most of the cases studied did not optimise on
the advantage of this challenging possibility. The element of collaboration
turned out to be stronger at the intra and inter university (national) level than
it is at the European level (independent of whether it is university-university
or university-industry collaboration). It seems that it is only upon a level of
maturation – one could call it the “post pilot study phase” - that some of these
initiatives envisage the establishment of collaboration with other European and
international institutions and markets.
Clearly however, the presence of an international component in the virtual
learning environment asks for appropriate tools, methodologies and management.
The IVETTE cases addressing cross-cultural audiences identified that international
VLE activities demonstrate problems of legal and economic nature as well as
problems that emerge from the differences in the learning patrimonies of the
audiences. It was also observed that the implementation of virtual courses
depends heavily on the financial situation. Since the course offer is not limited
to students of the particular university, the sharing of cost for the other has
to be discussed. Although high international participation lifts the quality
level, limitation of participant numbers have to be considered, and also the
question of where to find additional resources. The discussion of on-line
courses, and consequently the 'virtual university', automatically touches the
ongoing discussion within the societies of some countries on how education should
be financed and accredited.
The issues of 'language' and 'cultural differences' constitute perhaps the two most
important elements for consideration. Indeed, one of the main characteristics
of the European continent is its linguistic and/or cultural diversity. This
diversity should be taken into account in any educational and training programme
that is organised in each European country or Europe-wide.
Although there have been legislative resolutions referring to cultural diversity
at the level of the member-states and Europe, we observe that these have not
been embraced by the educational policies of national educational authorities.
This fact gives rise to a number of questions, such as:
i) Is it necessary for the relevant European bodies to formulate further more
strongly worded supplementary resolutions and recommendations to national
governments referring to the necessity of implementing concrete measures in the
field of intercultural approaches in their educational and training system? Also,
should these resolutions and recommendations contain some concrete measures that
will facilitate their implementation in the various member-states of the European
Union?
ii) Is it really of crucial importance for the various member-states of the
European Union to take the necessary measures which will allow them to
immediately implement already existing and forthcoming recommendations of the
relevant European bodies (such as the European Commission, the European
Parliament, the Council of Europe etc.) referring to the intercultural approach
in education and training? If this is the case, why have they not been
implemented so far? In this respect is it not the responsibility of the national
Ministries of Education, the national educational institutions or public opinion?
Furthermore, will the implementation of the intercultural approach in education
and training have some serious negative consequences for the education of the
majority of the learners in the national educational systems, i. e. the learners
who do not belong to the linguistic and/or cultural minorities?
Educational and training programmes organised on a Trans-European (or Pan-European)
scale by various European institutions, organisations and enterprises, mainly with
the use of VLE, face intercultural problems related to: the calendar and curriculum
of the course, the methodologies to be used for overcoming the language barrier
problem, the methodologies to be used for enhancing the intercultural
communication among tutors and learners and the design and production of the
learning materials for the course. This gives rise to a number of questions,
such as:
i) Which methodologies should be used, in order to overcome the language barrier
problem?
ii) Which methodologies should be used, in order to enhance the intercultural
communication among tutors and learners?
iii) Which methodologies should be used for the most cost-effective design and
production of the learning materials to be used in these programmes?
iv) Which special measures should be taken when fixing the calendar and/or the
syllabus of these programmes?
It is our hope that the above analyses, laying bare a series of interesting and
challenging issues to take into account in the further discourse on VLEs in higher
education, will elicit a stimulating and fruitful exchange of ideas during IFETS
discussion. Although the cases we have been analysed belong to the European
context, we think that the constellation of issues apply to other countries
around the world. We encourage you to share your opinions and experiences in
IFETS discussion.
** Discussion
Summarising the questions for discussion, we will like to schedule this
discussion in three phases, each one concentrating in one of the main issues
we tackle in this paper. This does not mean that you can discuss the issues
separately. In fact we propose to look for a holistic view of the problems
and solutions of implementing virtual learning environments in traditional
higher education institutions; We encourage you to look for synergies among
the thematic areas proposed. Among others you can consider, we pose the
following questions for discussion:
1st. Phase: Teaching and learning issues
- What are the new strategies and methods applied for teaching in VLEs?
- What are the new “soft” and “hard” skills tutors/lecturers need in
multidimensional and inter-cultural VLEs?
- What are the best assessment methods in VLEs?
- How do we manage lecturers’ overload in VLE?
- Can we think on the emergency of a new conception of learning materials
in VLE?
2nd.Phase: Institutional issues
- Is there a need for additional valid research so as to establish which
elements/issues are to be considered justifiable reasons for avoiding VLEs,
preferably broken up into nature and type of learning context, and on the other
hand to determine where avoidance behaviour is based on erratic perception or
beliefs and reasons that can easily be overcome?
- Should the relevant national bodies engage in efforts to overcome and lessen
resistance?
- What are the institutional perspectives to the undertaking of VLE implementation?
- What are the factors that led institutions to consider using VLE?
- Do all institutions regard VLE as the best approach to meet social and in some
cases market needs?
- What type of networks/collaborations are being formed for VLE undertaking?
- What type of institutional change is being sought?
- What is the management approach to institutional change?
3rd. Phase: Cross-cultural issues.
i) Which methodologies should be used, in order to overcome the language barrier
problem?
ii) Which methodologies should be used, in order to enhance the intercultural
communication among tutors and learners?
iii) Which methodologies should be used for the most cost-effective design and
production of the learning materials to be used in these programmes?
iv) Which special measures should be taken when fixing the calendar and/or the
syllabus of these programmes?
-------
End
---------------------------------------------------------
Forum website: http://ifets.ieee.org/
Forum's contact person: kinshuk@massey.ac.nz
Info on Join/Leave List: http://ifets.ieee.org/maillist.html
Change your subscription options (digest, vacation hold etc.) at: http://www.topica.com/lists/ifets-discuss/prefs
---------------------------------------------------------
___________________________________________________________
T O P I C A The Email You Want. http://www.topica.com/t/16
Newsletters, Tips and Discussions on Your Favorite Topics
This archive was generated by hypermail 2a24 : Fri 26 May 2000 - 03:31:24 MEST