Epic Think Tank
Collaboration and e-learning
Part 3: What is the role of standalone e-learning in a blend
that includes online collaboration?
As we mentioned in our introduction, the elements of collaboration
and content have long been present, in dynamic balance, within traditional
learning. We have also seen from one of the examples given in part
one, that a solely collaborative approach can put severe strains
on both mentors and learners, and will simply not work for some
learners.
At least one of our panellists believed that collaborative learning
actually implied a blended approach: 'if you're talking collaborative
learning, you're talking about The Blend'.
So what should be the constituents of that blend, and what are
the important criteria for determining how collaboration and content
should interact?
In an ideal world, perhaps, the learning objective would dictate
all. But in a practically-focused discussion such as this one, it
would be impossible to overlook the decisive factor of cost.
Collaboration e-learning is, in absolute terms, an awful lot cheaper
than creating high quality interactive e-learning content. That
is part of its attraction. However, as we have seen, there could
be limits to collaborative learning's ability to scale without importing
duplications into the system. Even with a more cost-effective 'division
of labour' (a two-tier system of mentors and tutor as envisaged
in part two) we might find that above a certain number of learners
- probably around a thousand - content begins to have a decisive
advantage on costs.
Having said that, content is in many cases no more able to dispense
with collaboration than the other way round. There are sizeable
issues around completion rates on e-learning content-only courses
- and a measure of collaboration has been shown in studies to enable
decisive improvements of results.
This is of course highly dependent on the type of learning being
followed. The highly popular Webmonkey courses in web development,
available free online, serve the primarily technical needs of its
learners perfectly well as a stand-alone. However, at the other
end of the spectrum, a corporate programme of attitudinal change
might need a high degree of tutor support, and will undoubtedly
benefit from the lateral support and insights offered by collaboration.
Ultimately this is a matter of learning design. Returning to our
earlier example of the collaborative learning environment Platinum,
Epic could point to the way in which it supports the learning package
PRIME:Leadership. Designed for the same audience, as an example
of how content and collaboration can work in a complementary fashion
to reinforce each other, it creates links not just online but into
physical world activities and networks.
However, this type of dynamic interaction is not what e-learning
is generally perceived to be all about at this moment in time. Content
is still thought to be king. Collaboration may even have contracted
something of an image problem, through being perceived as a cut-price
way to fulfil the demand of delivering some e-learning (no matter
how sketchy) within certain organisations.
Certainly the perception around the table was that the chance to
collaborate online with other learners is not seen as a selling
point. This is leading in some cases to a mismatch between expectations
of a course and what in retrospect is considered to have been most
important. Collaboration may have a low value in marketing terms,
but a high value in delivering customer satisfaction, in terms of
the quality of the eventual learning experience.
The challenge, for advocates of e-learning, is to spread an awareness
that it is not one thing but a mix of different methods and approaches,
which can be flexibly deployed in combination with conventional
means to meet a huge variety of learning and business needs.
Collaborative e-learning can boast considerable successes already.
Like any form of learning, it will have drawbacks for certain types
of learners, but then the means and methods by which people learn
are, after all, highly various. However, though it may not have
any inherent problems which should hold back its adoption, at the
moment it may well have a marketing problem.
Next>>
Background
Part 1 What works and what doesn't?
Part 2 What best suits collaboration?
Afterword
Back to Features
|
