E-learning 2.0: learning redefined.
Rupesh, Kumar A.
Introduction
The introduction of computers and the Internet has brought
significant changes to education. Though computer-aided education and
computer-assisted training have been around a long time, they were
confined to a single classroom or a laboratory. Web-based training
brought revolutionary change. Initially implemented in the business
sector, web-based training programs moved to universities soon after.
This web-based training model gradually evolved into e-learning. Today,
e-learning is a very popular phenomenon and forms the core of a number
of initiatives and programs offered by colleges and universities.
E-Learning
E-learning is a technological infrastructure with applications and
software that manage courses and users. The software that facilitates
e-learning may be called a Learning Management System (LMS) and supports
course creation, content delivery, user registration, monitoring, and
certification.
The E-Learning (R)Evolution
Gonella and Panto (2008), in their paper on didactic architectures,
have traced the following four stages in the evolution of e-learning:
1. Web-based Training
2. E-learning 1.0
3. Online Education
4. E-learning 2.0
Gonella and Panto's discussion of those four stages is
outlined below.
Web-based Training
Web-based training emerged in the 1990s in business. It was based
on the "online distribution of autonomously used learning
materials." The emphasis was on "training" rather than on
education or learning. The contents were mainly multimedia pages, which
users would consult for information. With these web-based training
systems, it was not possible to track the use of learning materials.
E-learning 1.0
The web-based training model evolved into the e-learning
architecture, which can be referred to as "E-learning 1.0".
E-learning uses and LMS to create, design, and manage courses, as well
as supporting content delivery, user registration, monitoring, and
certification. The focus of the system is on content and learning
objects, with less consideration for the learning process. There is not
much scope for communication and collaboration. Even though tools for
collaboration are available, their application in learning is
negligible.
Online Education
Earlier learning infrastructures had little or no provision for
interaction. In the late 1990s, educators began emphasizing the active
role of students in the learning process. Collaboration and
communication tools assumed greater importance and teachers and students
began using simple technologies such as mailing lists and newsgroups for
interaction. Later, more sophisticated tools like conferencing systems
were introduced. Learning consisted not only of materials delivered by
the teacher but also of interactions and discussions among students,
making learning a social process.
E-learning 2.0
The learning process is transformed when courses are interactive.
User (student) contribution is not limited to newsgroups and mailing
lists. "Social software" has revolutionized online learning.
Web 2.0 has given birth to e-learning 2.0. The influence of new
practices on the Web has resulted in a new array of services, which can
be collectively termed "E-learning 2.0".
E-Learning 2.0 Defined
Gonella and Panto (2008) present the following definition:
e-learning 2.0 refers to a second phase of e-learning based on Web
2.0 and emerging trends in e-learning.... The term suggests that the
traditional model of e-learning as a type of content, produced by
publishers, organized and structured into courses, and consumed by
students, is reversed; so that content is used rather than read and is
more likely to be produced by students than courseware authors.
Web 2.0: The Agent of Change
The Web has undergone a metamorphosis, bringing radical changes in
the information industry. "Collaboration" is the hallmark of
Web 2.0. Here are some notable changes that have occurred on the Web
over the past few years, as observed by Downes (2005). These may also be
perceived as the characteristics of Web 2.0.
"Read-Only Web" to "Read-Write Web"
A few years ago, the practice was that "hundreds would publish
and millions would read." The Web was more "readable"
than "writable." There was no or little scope for
"ordinary" user to write on the web. Web 2.0 has made it a
"Read-Write Web," with as many writers as readers. Web 2.0 has
provided a democratic publishing space.
Web of Documents to Web of Data
The Web was previously a repository of static documents. Now, it is
more dynamic with new data being added constantly. With the new set of
tools, people syndicate and remix existing content in new and useful
ways. It is not the documents but the data which rules Web 2.0.
"Web as a Medium" to "Web as a Platform"
The Web was used as a medium by publishers to transmit information
and by users to consume it. Now, it is a platform to create, share,
organize, and distribute content, and anyone can use this platform.
Reactive User to Proactive User
Web users had a very limited role in the Web 1.0 environment. They
were expected to consume readymade sources of information and react. In
the Web 2.0 environment, the availability tools for communication and
collaboration has made the user proactive. These tools empower users to
initiate communication and collaborate among peers to share their views
and reviews. Users stay connected to each other and inform each other of
happenings on the Web. Thus, the user is no longer a spectator, but a
dynamic actor on the Web 2.0 platform.
Technological Revolution to Social Movement
Web 2.0 enables users to connect, communicate and collaborate with
each other, forming online communities and socializing. Web 2.0
encourages participation through open applications and services.
Everyone has the right to create content, use it, and reuse it. Web 2.0
is not a technological revolution, but a social one.
E-learning 1.0 vs. E-learning 2.0
One may say that e-learning 1.0 is based on Web 1.0, and e-learning
2.0 is based on Web 2.0.
E-learning is found in the following forms (Hart, 2008):
* Online courses with a blend of online teaching and face-to-face
interaction (to a limited extent)
* The LMS that manages students' learning
* Live learning systems that support the delivery of scheduled
online sessions.
The factor most lacking in e-learning 1.0 is the social and
collaborative approach to learning. With the fusion of e-learning 1.0
and Web 2.0, a new set of services has emerged, which makes the learning
process more creative and learning experience more enduring. Hart (2008)
says that,
E-learning 1.0 was all about delivering content, primarily in the
form of online courses and produced by experts, i.e. teachers or subject
matter experts. E-learning 2.0 is about creating and sharing information
and knowledge with others using social media tools like blogs, wikis,
social bookmarking and social networks within an educational or training
context to support collaborative approach to learning.
Tracing the changes in the world of e-learning, Downes (2005)
remarks that
The model of e-learning as being a type of content, produced by
publishers, organized and structured into courses, and consumed by
students, is turned on its head. Insofar as there is content, it is used
rather than read--and is, in any case, more likely to be produced by
students than courseware authors. And insofar as there is structure, it
is more likely to resemble a language or a conversation rather than a
book or a manual.
Significant Features of E-Learning 2.0
The following are a few significant features of e-learning 2.0:
People-Centered Learning
E-learning 1.0 paid attention to the delivery of content.
Delivering content authored by subject matter experts will not stimulate
learning. E-learning 2.0 brings people together in the learning process.
It focuses on "people-centered learning" rather than on
"content-centered learning."
Bottom Up Learning Approach
In a conventional e-learning system, an instructor prepares
material according to a particular curriculum and uploads it to the LMS
where it is consumed by learners. There is a top-down approach in such a
system. The autonomy of creating and publishing contents lies with the
tutor. E-learning 2.0 adopts a bottom-up approach. It gives learners the
opportunity to participate in courseware creation.
Content Creation
The traditional e-learning system limits the role of student to
that of content consumer, with no role in content creation. A successful
learning process is one in which there is scope for interaction between
teachers and learners at every stage. E-learning 2.0 provides tools for
collaboration among students. Students discuss the course and its
contents, interact with teachers and help them design learning
resources. Learners have their say in deciding and getting what is most
useful to them.
Dynamic Content Publishing
Content publishing is instant and dynamic in an e-learning 2.0
environment. With tools like blogging, one can publish content on the
fly. Students can read each other's blog posts, comment and
interact, thus forming a social network among them. Further, with tools
like wikis, students may create and edit content collectively, which
promotes collective authorship and harnesses collective intelligence.
Folksonomy
The LMS organizes learning objects in a standard way, in terms of
modules and lessons, tests and discussions. This system of organizing
content is rigid. Students have no liberty to organize contents in their
own way. With the use of "tagging" tools, e-learning 2.0
facilitates organization of information in a personalized way. This
enables quick access to the learning resources. More emphasis is given
to folksonomy than taxonomy.
The Challenges in E-learning 2.0
The success of an e-learning 2.0 platform depends on many factors.
One important factor is the preparedness of students to use the platform
for their benefit. A highly ambitious e-learning 2.0 project may not
deliver the expected results and may end up being a failure if its chief
beneficiaries, i.e., the students, lack familiarity with Web 2.0 and its
tools. In other words, an e-learning 2.0 environment expects a student
to be a "student 2.0" and demands more responsibility and
accountability. Therefore, it cannot be expected to deliver success at
all levels of education.
The level of expertise among peers is a matter of concern in an
e-learning 2.0 environment. As Calvani, et al. (2008) have observed,
"E-learning 2.0 is mostly based on peer-to-peer learning; as any
other environment-based on collaboration, the principle remains valid as
regards people that interact: the more expert they are, the better the
chances that interactions are mutually profitable."
Another challenge is resources and learning cultures. In
organizations where resources are limited and learning cultures vary,
the implementation of e-learning 2.0 is a hard task.
Student Centered Learning: The Ultimatum
The traditional approach to e-learning is too often driven by the
needs of the institution rather than the individual (O'Hear, 2006).
E-learning platforms should focus on building student-centered learning
environments. Lea, et al. (2003) summarize the principles of
student-centered learning:
1. the reliance on active rather than passive learning,
2. an emphasis on deep learning and understanding,
3. increased responsibility and accountability on the part of the
student,
4. an increased sense of autonomy to the learner,
5. an interdependence between teacher and learner,
6. mutual respect within the learner teacher relationship,
7. a reflexive approach to the teaching and learning process on the
part of both teacher and learner.
Conclusion
E-learning 2.0 views online learning tools as a platform and not a
medium. It aims to create a learning environment, and not just a
learning system. By enabling participation and collaboration of students
in content creation, organization, and use, e-learning 2.0 creates a
"personal learning portfolio." In e-learning 2.0,
"everyone is a learner, but also everyone has a potential to be a
teacher" (Cobb, 2008). The LMS continues to be the dominant
technology for delivery of online courses. E-learning 2.0 combines the
quality of e-learning 1.0 and the power of Web 2.0. The teaching and
learning communities should exploit e-learning 2.0 tools and services to
make learning process enjoyable and creative.
References
Calvani, A., et al. (2008). Lifelong learning: What role for
e-learning 2.0? Journal of e-Learning and Knowledge Society 4 (1):
179-187. Available: http://www.je-lks.it/ en/08_01/06Metcalv_en1.pdf
Cobb, J. (2008). Learning 2.0 for associations: Mission to learn.
Available: http://blog.missiontolearn.com/files/Learning_20_for_Associations _eBook_v1.pdf
Downes, S. (2005). E-Learning 2.0. ACM eLearn Magazine . Available:
http://www.elearnmag.org/subpage.cfm?section=articlesAmp;article=29-1
Gonella, L., & Panto, E. (2008). Didactic architectures and
organization models. eLearning Papers . Available:
http://www.elearningeuropa.info/files/media/media15973.pdf
Hart, J. (2008). An introduction to social learning . Available:
http://www.c4lpt.co.uk/handbook/sociallearning.html
Lea, S.J., Stephenson, D., & Troy, J. (2003). Higher education
students' attitudes to student centred learning: Beyond
'educational bulimia.' Studies in Higher Education, 28 (3),
321-334.
O'Hear, S. (2006). E-learning 2.0: How Web technologies are
shaping education . Available:
http://www.readwriteweb.com/archives/e-learning_20.php
Rupesh Kumar A.
Research Scholar
Department of Library and Information Science
Bangalore University
Bangalore, India