Online Tutoring e-book - CHAPTER 1 - Learning Online

em Ensino a Distância

 *Sarah Cornelius

  1. Introduction

This chapter combines material from two themes that were considered separately at the OTiS(Online Tutoring Skills ) e-workshop:
  • tutor and learner styles
  • models of online learning
The aim is to examine the context and pedagogy for online learning. Contributions from case studies, discussions and other aspects of the e-workshop are used to demonstrate how different theoretical approaches can inform learning styles and why a knowledge of these styles and approaches is useful for the online tutor (Rosie-D 2000d).

The approach we adopted, is summarised by Gilbert-Hunt and McLaine:

"However, the focus in developing the subject was on how best the technology could enhance the student learning, so that the teaching and learning process was the driver of the subject development and not the technology." (Gilbert-Hunt and McLaine)
This chapter considers theoretical perspectives on the learning styles of adult learners and models of learning which adapt to the online environment. Throughout, contributions from the e-workshop are used to relate these perspectives to current practice. These contributions include a wide range of case study exemplars that illustrate the many ways of accommodating different learning styles using online pedagogies.

References given without dates are references to conference case study contributions. References designated by the letter 'D' and with dates are references to conference discussion group contributions. Details for both of these are given in the appendix

2. Learning Styles

Online courses have the potential to reach a large number of learners. Each learner is an individual, with his or her own motivation for studying, access to resources, and study habits and practices. 'Just in time' and even 'just for me' education is often proposed as a way of meeting the education needs of today's learners, so educators need to understand who their learners are and how they learn. Appropriate activities can be designed only when there is a clear understanding of the different approaches to learning adopted by adults.

One of the ways in which any diverse group of learners can be characterised is by their 'learning style'. Keefe (1979, reported in Ellis 1994 p499) suggests that a learning style is: " . . . the characteristic cognitive, affective and physiological behaviours that serve as relatively stable indicators of how learners perceive, interact with and respond to the learning environment. . . Learning style is a consistent way of functioning, that reflects underlying causes of behaviour".

Lockitt (1997) stresses that there is no single learning style that will be perfect for every individual, since human beings are complex. He refers to research by Honey and Mumford (1985) which indicates that your individual learning style affects the way that you accept and assimilate information.

Many authors have attempted to classify learning styles. Just a few of the most commonly used classifications that are applied to adult learners were discussed during the OTiS e-workshop:





  • activists, reflectors, experimenters and theorisers,
  • deep and surface learners,
  • visual, auditory, tactile and kinasthetic.
These three classifications are introduced below, and comment is provided on their role in online learning. Then the practical question of how to assess a participant's learning style is addressed.

2.1 Activists, reflectors, experimenters and theorisers

One of the most widely adopted and adapted classifications of learning styles is based on the four learning modes identified by Kolb (1976) and based on experiential learning theory. It classifies learners as active, reflective, experimental and theorising:

Active learners (learning through concrete experience)

These learners learn by trial and error. They tend to be impatient and want to do things for themselves rather than wait and be told how to do them. This leads them to give spontaneous answers and to quickly move on to something new. Slow, methodical work bores them and they often take the lead to push on ahead. ("I want to get on and do things.")

Reflective learners (learning through reflective observation)

Reflective learners adopt a "wait and see" approach. These learners try to think things through and do not give the first answer they come across but require more information. They tend to be uncertain about what to do and this leads them to confer with other people to see what their opinions are. ("I want to think about things.")

Experimental learners (learning through active experimentation)

Experimental learners seek to find new ways of doing things. Even if they like to be shown how to do something, they need to put their newly acquired knowledge immediately into practice. What is important to them is finding the most effective way of putting into practice what they know. They tend to be energetic and impatient and they do not hesitate to take short cuts in solving problems. New challenges are seen as new possibilities for learning. ("I want to see if there isn't a better way of doing things.")

Theorising learners (learning through abstract conceptualisation)

Theorisers try to build an all-encompassing logical system. In thinking problems through step by step, they question assumptions and make rules from different cases. "Concrete" examples are perceived as being too limited to understand the general whole. Their effort goes into making coherent pictures of complex situations. In doing this they try to detach themselves from emotions and personal opinions, often making them less sympathetic to the feelings of others. ("I want to understand things.")

Research using Kolb's inventory of learning styles was reported at the OTiS e-worksbop:

















"…we do measure learning styles against the Kolb inventory. When we did a bit of research to see which type of people preferred asynchronous collaborative learning, it was interesting to find that reflectors did not find it most appealing. Activists got turned onto the idea, but soon became bored if there was not enough activity, and reflectors seemed to want to work more alone, and be less collaborative, despite the advantages of the technology for reflection. The results were not what we expected, I must admit." (McKenzie-D 2000)
Honey and Mumford (1992) created their own version of Kolb's classification - activists, practical, theorists and reflectors - after revisiting the work of Kolb (1984). Salmon (2000) in her book (E-moderating: the key to teaching and learning online) reviews how well the adapted learning styles can be catered for by computer mediated conferencing (asynchronous communication):
  • Activists need a range of different activities to keep them occupied. They like to 'hold the floor' (or conference), and be able to bounce ideas off others. Asynchronous learning caters for all these needs very well.
  • Reflectors probably benefit most in asynchronous discussions. They benefit from the opportunity to engage with the learning and think deeply, and to give considered responses in asynchronous discussion.
  • Pragmatists need to have opportunities to try out what they have learnt. They need online activities that allow them to evaluate what they have learnt.
  • Theorists need time to explore links between ideas and situations. Asynchronous activities would suit these learners well, allowing time for exploration. Opportunities for lots of structured and appropriate interaction are likely to appeal to them.

2.2 Deep and surface learning

The classification of learning styles into deep and surface has particular relevance to online learning since it is based on observations of how students interact with text. The ideas are based on the work of Marton and Saljo (1976) and Svensson (1977):

Deep approach

In deep learning the learner processes a text in a 'holistic' way, looking for structure and meaning. Deep learning involves (Rosie, 2000):



  • employing an effective and efficient strategy or strategies for conceptualisation,
  • being open to different forms of conceptualisation,
  • seeing interconnections between concepts and data rather than merely amassing large amounts of data,
  • showing personal commitment to learning,
  • drawing on higher order cognitive skills,
  • adopting a genuinely reflective approach.
Surface approach

When taking a surface approach the learner focuses on key words and phrases, and processes the text in an 'atomised' way. This may distort the original structure and meaning. Surface learners are more likely to learn things by rote. Adopting a surface approach to a text may lead to a student trying to remember it - and thus not really learning what it is trying to convey.

Commonly, surface learning is taken to include (Rosie, 2000):



  • drawing on lower level cognitive skills,
  • amassing detail rather than establishing a structure into which detail can be placed and indeed rearranged,
  • completing tasks with minimum effort but not necessarily in the most efficient way,
  • using a limited set of conceptualisation,
  • drawing on texts and sources without critical reflection or personal response to such sources.
Rosie considers deep learning a highly desirable outcome and suggests that the development of effective online tutoring skills "must address ways of promoting deep learning". Rosie (D 2000c) also provides an insight into how deep learning could involve a number of different learning styles:
"I think OL (online learning) is a context and we can have deep and surface learning going on. Reflecting on a synchronous discussion and responding asynchronously and perhaps revising and reformulating a problem to integrate knowledge and ideas would be an example of deep learning using a number of different learning styles" (Rosie-D 2000c).
Salmon agrees with these ideas:
"I agree with you - I think what kind of learning occurs could even be said to depend on the extent to which the learner in familiar, comfortable, effective etc. in the online context." (Salmon, 2000)
The need to make the learner feel 'at home in virtual space' so that they want to work with others is also highlighted by Rosie as a pre-requisite for deep learning. Rosie cites several of the OTiS case studies that pay attention to the development of empathy with the learner, no matter what learning style is adopted. These include Wittington and Dewar, Finkelstein and White. In general:
"It is the commitment of the tutor to the online setting and to establishing empathy and understanding rather than a superficial acknowledgement that establishes the conditions for deep learning." (Rosie, 2000)
Establishing student 'comfort' in their online environment may also be helped by the inclusion of opportunities to have some 'fun':
"Exchanges of a more social nature, such as the sharing of jokes and interests are also encouraged in order to build a sense of belonging and group identity within the Learning Sets" (Pickering and Duggleby).
Rosie also provides a useful list of a number of measures that tutors can take that encourage deep learning:
  • establish the personal (making the learner at home in virtual space),
  • deliberate use of strong positive reinforcement.
  • ensure engagement between theoretical and practical,
  • encourage self-reflection and seeking out of differences - help students to move from thesis to antithesis and use this to create a synthesis.
Cowan describes the use of reflection to encourage deep learning. Students on two undergraduate courses - a Personal Development Planning module offered at Heriot-Watt University, UK; and Enquiry and Psychology modules at the University of the Highlands and Islands, UK. Students submitted reflective journals for comment in a style exhibiting empathy, unconditional positive regard and congruence (a Rogerian style - see Zimmer and Alexander). Students then self-assessed this reflection, and were given assistance to make objective professional judgements.
In Chapter 2: 'The Tutor's role and effective strategies for online tutoring' issues of deep and surface learning and the use of technology are raised. Clarke considers that the use of technology may facilitate 'surface learning'. To help to avoid this she echoes the view that tutors should encourage reflection and deep learning (Clarke-D 2000b).

2.3 Audio, visual, tactile, kinasthetic

Gardner, in his theory of Multiple Intelligences (Gardner, 1983), suggests that there are seven different ways of processing information. These seven ways are related to seven different types of intelligence, and give rise to different learning styles (see, for example Edwards, 2001 and Winters, 2001)
  1. Verbal intelligence - learners have the ability to use words (orally or written) effectively.
  2. Spatial intelligence - learners have the ability to perceive the world accurately.
  3. Musical intelligence - learners have the ability to work with musical forms.
  4. Logical (mathematical) intelligence - learners can use numbers effectively and reason well.
  5. Bodily-Kinaesthetic intelligence - learners use their body to express ideas and feelings, they are likely to be 'good with their hands'.
  6. Interpersonal intelligence - learners can perceive and make distinctions in the moods, motivations and feelings of others.
  7. Intrapersonal intelligence - learners have a good level of self-knowledge and can act on the basis of that knowledge.
In practice, simpler versions of this classification are often used in connection with learning styles. Lockitt (1997) suggests three categories of learning style related to the senses:
  • auditory - using words and sounds for learning,
  • visual - visualising images during the learning process,
  • kinesthetic - feeling and doing things in order to learn.
Labour (D 2000b) prefers four classes:
  • visually oriented learner,
  • auditory oriented learners,
  • tactile oriented learners,
  • kinaesthetic oriented learners.
Labour (D 2000b) cites sources that suggest that visual learners make up 65% of the population, auditory learners 30%, and kinaesthetic learners 5% (McLuhan, 1964; Labour 1998). Tactile learners are those who need to be in 'direct' contact with elements of the object of knowledge, and kinaesthetic learners prefer learning according to how they perceive physical performance; their learning involves nonlinear perceptual processes.
An alternative model of learning styles is the VARK model developed by Fleming (no date). VARK refers to four sensory modal preferences for taking in or giving out information - Visual, Aural, Read/write and Kinesthetic. Fleming has observed that most respondents (60%) to a VARK Inventory to assess their learning style exhibit multiple preferences.
OTiS e-workshop participants considered the needs of learners with different sensory learning styles. For example:
"… some people access experiences through auditory memory and some through visual imagery, and for others text is a good method of instilling remembrance. So in theory if we present the same material through different media, we ought to be able to help people remember better." (McKenzie commenting on Creanor)

"We . . .felt that (meeting) face-to-face allowed for meeting a range of learning styles, i.e. the auditory learners among us, not only the visual." (Murray)

"Initially, we did not realise that some folks did not have a sense of 'space' as they moved from the learning circle, to the sandbox, to the journals. So, in our last course, we started using different coloured light backgrounds for each area and the students responded that this was very helpful. We also increased our use of images which we can easily upload. The visual learners in the group were delighted. People played with their own pictures, created collages to express ideas and used visuals to express complex ideas. We are currently working on an icon set to use as well." (White and Moussou)



Online learning, with its current reliance on written communications, would appear to favour learners with a read/write or verbal learning styles. Salmon notes this, and identifies some of the problems that may result:
"CMC (computer mediated conferencing) occurs through reading and writing. It is likely therefore that it will appeal to those more comfortable with the written word. This places at a disadvantage those for whom writing (or typing) is a problem, or who are working in something other than their first language." (Salmon, 2000)
Finally, there are some courses where the subject matter demands non-text based presentation, for example language learning. This may provide interesting opportunities to meet the needs of different learning styles, as in the case of an Italian language course offered by the University of Auckland, New Zealand:
"The course is delivered via a mix of technology that is, via the WWW, CD-ROM and print. The course features a total of 50 hours of language tuition on the CD ROMs plus other material and facilities. … This multimedia course delivers nearly 1 hour of video clips, 10 hours of audio files, an audio dictionary as well as rich graphic material." (Radic)

2.4 Personality and learning style

Two OTiS case studies (Whittington and Dewar and Gilbert-Hunt and McLaine) consider the impact of personality on learning style and the online learning experience:
"Commentators have noticed that whereas introverts have been disadvantaged in face-to-face classrooms, the online classroom levels the playing field…Our quantitative evidence reveals that introverts and extraverts participate equally in this medium, although they do experience it differently." (Gilbert-Hunt and McLaine)
"We are using the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI®), a personality assessment tool, to help understand how different personalities interact in online learning Situations." (Whittington and Dewar)  Whittington and Dewar go on to explain the MBTI®:
 
"The MBTI® is a self-report inventory with four psychological dimensions, energising, attending, deciding and living. Within each dimension are two preferences, each of which is represented by a letter. The eight preferences are: extravert
  • (E)-introvert (I) (energizing dimension)
  • sensing (S)-intuition (N) (attending)
  • thinking (T)-feeling (F) (deciding)
  • judging (J)-perceiving (P) (living)
"An individual's four letter type is determined by which end of each dimension they tend towards. An individual's type does not indicate strength of preference, but rather which combination of preferences they would ordinarily use in various situations. The 16 types are based on the 16 possible combinations of preferences." (Whittington and Dewar)
Whittington and Dewar give an assessment of how these preferences relate to the online context:
"…it is quite clear that the feeling types are showing a clear preference for the more informal areas of the conference where their postings reveal them developing relationships with other research participants. The thinking types, on the other hand, posted little in the informal areas, and confined their comments to the ideas of the research when they did post. This is in keeping with the MBTI® theory which suggests that the thinking types attend more to ideas and concepts while feeling types are concerned with creating relationships. (Briggs Myers and Myers, 1980, p. 68)" (Whittington and Dewar)
Comments on the use of the online environment for supporting different personality types are offered in another case study:
"We have found it helpful to segment the space. Space helps organise content and sets the "tone" for the type of online interaction -- serious discussion, play, reflection, work. This has been helpful for me with other online work groups and it helps accommodate different styles. Some folks just "want the meat" and have little interest in socialisation, relationship building or fun. Others need that social cushion to set the stage for learning. By creating a certain degree of segmentation, learners can choose their mix as needed and as their time allows." (White and Moussou)

2.5 Evaluating learning style

The question 'How do we determine the preferred learning styles of our students?' was posed by Higgison (D 2000a) at the OTiS e-workshop. In attempting an answer workshop participants also identified problems with the whole concept of learning styles. The limitations of learning styles classifications have long been recognised in the literature:
"The idea of pigeonholing students may seem like a convenient simplification of the vast diversity of those idiosyncratic individuals we are faced with, and I see no objection in theory to attempting to describe people in this way. It is always salutary, however, to try to pigeonhole oneself in one of these categories….applying it to oneself illuminates the crudity of the classification." (Laurillard, 1994)
The main problem seems to be that an individual's learning style is not fixed:
"It is possible to accept that there can be both consistency and variability in students' approaches to learning. The tendency to adopt a certain approach, or to prefer a certain style of learning, may be a useful way of describing differences between students. But a more complete explanation would also involve a recognition of the way an individual student's strategy may vary from task to task." (Entwistle, 1981 cited in Laurillard, 1994)
OTiS participants echo these views:
"It has been noticed that different student groups respond differently to the same environment for example, HND students generate much discussion in the introductory week, but once 'serious' learning is expected through the conference tasks they tend to become less enthusiastic. The BSc Mathematical Science students operated in the opposite way; preferring the more structured tasks and seeming less likely to interact in an exploratory session." (Street)
"My problem with "learning styles" is threefold: 1. Does is refer to self-perceived learning styles by learners via self-evaluation questionnaires? 2. Does it refer to the results based on observation by a third party while the learner was actually at work? 3. Does it refer to a combination of both points 1 and 2." (Labour-D 2000a).
Kolb (1984, cited in Lockitt, 1997) recognised that the learning experience is unique for everyone and that identification of preferred learning styles should not be used to 'typecast' learners, but rather to develop potential and extend the choice available to the learner. Thus, an understanding of preferred learning styles may assist the development of appropriate learning opportunities:
"If we believe that engaging learning styles has an impact, then, surely we should attempt to engage them all, having decided on the most appropriate typology, as we do in the live training room. There is an on-line University based in Canada that does precisely this - there are different versions of learning materials and support which learners choose after completing a learning styles inventory. Clearly there are development cost issues here, but it would be interesting to find out how successfully that University has sustained or increased its completion rates." (Mackie, 2000)
To assist the evaluation of a learner's preferred style a number of techniques are available. Rosie (D 2000b) suggests that the first step is to ask the student:
"We'd probably agree there are many different learning styles for all of us and some work better for some things than others. Evans and Abbott (1998) (I think) found that the great majority of students on a range of courses used a set of surface learning styles and this proved effective but quite stressful. So maybe a start point is to ask the student and to work through some alternatives to a question to see which ones strike chords and which don't. I think learning styles and question setting go together. If you want to use a surface learning style you will turn the question in such a way that this will happen, or conversely you will seek out styles of question that will support your favoured learning approach." (Rosie-D 2000b)
One of the many more formal approaches is suggested by Labour :
"Giving the learners power to decide how and what to learn according to their learning styles and objectives is the cornerstone of a lifelong learning project. Learners need to learn where to get help and how to negotiate for it with the various forms of learning partnerships that can be developed. This does not mean that tutors need be passive facilitators. Their role is to co-ordinate activities such as group surveys about the online learning and techniques in learning from computer mediated texts. One example is that of the five-step technique proposed by the International Tandem Network http://www.slf.ruhr-uni-bochum.de/email/." (Labour)
Gilbert-Hunt and McLaine used students' exploration of their own learning styles as an exercise in the first module of their course:
"Module 1: Learning Techniques provides an environment in which students explore their own learning styles and approaches to client education, whilst at the same time develop the necessary technical skills of Internet searching, using email, and participating in the threaded discussion." (Gilbert-Hunt and McLaine)
In an assignment, students were given an introduction to learning and learning styles, then:
". . . asked to chose three learning style models from the readings or web sites (which are linked to the study guides). They were asked to apply the rating scale in each model to themselves and compare the results with each other and their own knowledge of self. They were then asked to repeat this process on a friend or relative, looking for consistencies, etc. The students then discussed their findings with each other through the threaded discussion and shared any new resources." (Gilbert-Hunt and McLaine)
An online source that allows evaluation of whether you have a visual, aural, read/write or kinesthetic approach to learning is http://www.active-learning-site.com/, and further details of the Myers-Briggs® methodology and learner characteristics can be found at . Developing learning experiences and resources that will meet the learning styles of a group of learners is clearly not an easy task. To accommodate different learning styles a range of learning models can be used. Models that are student-centred and involve the construction of knowledge, collaboration, experiential learning and reflection on experience appear to be particularly favoured for the online environment, and these are introduced in the next section.
 

3. Models of Learning

There are many different theoretical approaches to learning that inform teaching practice. These range from instructivist, tutor-centric classroom approaches, to student-centred discovery learning involving action and interaction. This section reviews and illustrates the application of different learning models in the online setting. The models covered are:
  • constructivist learning,
  • collaborative learning,
  • experiential learning,
  • problem based learning.
It should be remembered that the methods are not mutually exclusive. In particular constructivist and collaborative learning work together well. In many cases, tutors use a variety of approaches to meet the needs of their learners.

3.1 Constructivist learning

The adoption of a constructivist approach to learning is demonstrated in a number of OTiS case studies. In each case the focus is on the learner's construction of knowledge and understanding through appropriate activities. Newby-Fraser and Clayton describe the approach they adopted for a staff development course at Waikato Polytechnic, New Zealand, in which all participants were involved in course development, delivery or support:
"A constructivist approach, where it is argued that knowledge is actively constructed by the cognising subject and not passively received from the external environment led to an approach that included reflection and tasks based activities involving learning by doing. This ensured that participants were involved in activities that were relevant and meaningful." (Newby-Fraser and Clayton)
Hird describes a graduate level course on integrating reading and writing into middle level (ages 10-14) classroom instruction at Feinstein School of Education and Human Development, Rhode Island College, USA. This course is:
"… based on a constructivist learning approach in which students are expected to build their own understanding of effective strategies for middle school teaching. Students do this through their own integration of insights and experience gained through course discussion, reading, group projects and field experience. Feedback from other students and from teachers in the middle school field placement is as important as feedback from the instructor. Although I have used a constructivist approach in prior teaching, the interactive web site provided a learning environment more conducive to this approach than a traditional classroom." (Hird)
Salter outlines the model used for staff development in online teaching for academics at the University of Western Sydney, Australia:
"In the constructivist model I use, learning is viewed as the result of mental construction. Students learn by fitting new information, gained from interacting with objects and events, with what they already know. Typically, learner autonomy and initiative is accepted and encouraged." (Salter)
Salter provides more details of the constructivist principles upon which online teaching can be based, and gives some comment on these:
  1. Multiple Representations of Content and Complex Learning Environments - Hypermedia lends itself to a constructivist perspective for organising information. Rather than a linear sequence leading to certain conclusions set by the author, the information can be fragmented and presented in discrete units. Learners can select the information in the quantity and order they choose and in ways which make sense for them.
  2. Social Negotiation and Collaboration - a discussion area to which learners will be encouraged to contribute is needed. Contributions might include - reflection on current practice, sharing a good idea, peer review of other comments, or providing a link to an external resource.
  3. Understanding the Knowledge Construction Process - by experiencing online education as learners themselves, teachers will have a much greater understanding of what will be required by their students.
  4. Student-Centered Instruction - as well as having the freedom to use the module as they wish, contributions from participants should be welcomed and additions to the module made by incorporating appropriate contributions. (Salter)
The case for constructivism is enthusiastically supported by Janes (D 2000), and here by Ewing (D 2000b): "I am a supporter of the constructivist approach to learning and the aspects of this which I think link closely with student support for online learning are rather 'built in' to the online approach. For example:
  1. conceptual learning through active involvement - student learning online by its very nature means that the learner is actively involved with the learning environment from the moment he makes contact with the online learning environment. True, this may or may not be at a very 'deep' level (depending on the internalised learning events which are part of the student's interaction). The learner will create personal meaning by interaction (physically as well as intellectually) with the learning environment and he will (hopefully) be less inclined to sit back and let it all happen around him as he might in a lecture environment.
  2. learning is through collaboration with others - this aspect of constructivism contributes to other areas of the online learning scenario but as far as supporting the student online there is already lots of evidence (including many comments from participants in this e - conference) where it is clear that students can gain a lot from sharing their thoughts with fellow learners and often make significant advances in their own thinking through trying to communicate their ideas online (with the semipermanence which is not present in face-to-face exchanges).
"So I try to promote constructivism as a theoretical basis for online learning." (Ewing-D 2000b)
Ewing (D 2000c) goes onto explain what he feels are the features of his model of learning which contribute to its success with student teachers:
"There is information which has to be made available to the learners and will (hopefully) become his personal knowledge. This is available online both through tutor prepared webpages and from those which the students can access from the web.
  1. There is the verification of this knowledge and the clarification of misunderstandings or poorly developed concepts. This would normally be implemented through submissions, tests, assignments or other text based interactions between student and tutor. . .
  2. There is application of (improved) knowledge to a new scenario where it becomes meaningfully internalised through linking with a (new) practical environment. This is relatively 'easy' for student teachers because we always ask them to try and apply their knowledge and understanding in a real (or virtual) classroom situation. The number of such 'new' environments is therefore virtually endless and our students can always find something new for the application of their learning. Students will (but mine are not quite there yet) be expected to produce this application of their learning in an online format.
I try to attempt online learning with these three elements. The first two already happen quite successfully, the third is 'getting there'." (Ewing-D 2000c)
Perhaps one of the reasons for this enthusiasm about constructivism is the relationship it has with deep learning:
"Deep learning … seems at first sight to be much more aligned to a constructivist approach. It refers to learners not just being personally involved but also to them making connections and organising fields of knowledge in ways that are personally meaningful. The online environment can be really helpful here." (Rosie-D 2000e)
But Rosie also notes that constructivism does not hold all the answers:
"The online world is a constructed one. If web sites are used then they are returned to the online classroom for reflection and documentary. It is here that learning processes are paramount. If we accept that different learners adopt different learning strategies can a constructivist approach say anything? Can it handle the variety of learning styles and say anything meaningful? Perhaps the crucial element is the need to help learners build up conceptual maps, ones they cause in their learning but also maps which they can revise as required." (Rosie)
Not all e-workshop participants were enthusiastic about constructivism. Phillips (D 2000) outlines his problems with the approach, and suggests some alternatives:
"Now, I am not much of a fan for 'constructivism'. For one, constructivism is a term with flexible meanings, as pointed out by Graeme Salter …What do you mean by it? [This is a rhetorical question - please don't respond.] It also doesn't address aspects of scaffolding and relevance, which are covered in part by Situated Cognition Theory, Cognitive Flexibility Theory and Laurillard's Ideal Teaching and Learning model." (Phillips-D 2000a)
Mackie (2000) is also pleased to see moves away from constructivism in online learning:
". . . I am delighted to see that there are significant attempts being made to move away from the didactic and/or constructivist positions that currently dominate much of what currently passes as learning theory in the context of on-line learning. As a practicing trainer for over 15 years and a designer of learning web sites since 1996 I am aware that these two approaches have their place but appeal to only some learners, engage only some learning styles in some typologies and are not appropriate to all content." (Mackie, 2000)

3.2 Collaborative learning

Daele (D 2000) reviewed some of the ideas behind collaborative learning for the OTiS participants. He explained how learning through collaboration takes place as a result of aiming for a common goal, the sharing of a common body of knowledge and interaction with peers.
There are several OTiS case studies that illustrate the application of this approach. Gwynne and Chester provide an example where students were encouraged to learn from each other. Undergraduates involved in a compulsory liberal arts program at RMIT University, Australia, were asked not to meet for the duration of the course so that an online implementation could be evaluated. The course included:
"Collaborative work where lecturers are moderators/facilitators to encourage students to learn from and critique each other." (Gwynne and Chester)
In this particular case study collaboration was also used to inform course development:
"Teaching and learning is a collaborative engagement, an iterative developmental cycle: the approach is student-centred; we learn from our students which informs our curriculum design and assessment procedure, either improving or adapting materials and methods." (Gwynne and Chester)
Scheuermann et al, describe an international seminar where students and professionals can meet to develop their skills and ideas. This demonstrates how interactions can become quite complex:
"Learning within the environment is structured to be leveled multilevel[ed] and complex. Learners are learning from the team, but also from other learners. The team is learning from learners and other team members and participating institutions are learning from learners, teams and other institutions. These complex webs of different learning levels are intimately related to the collaboration taking place across all these levels. Meta-learning is built into the design. Feedback has shown that learners rate this collaboration structure highly." (Scheuermann et al.)
Collaboration can also be coupled with other approaches - such as in Janes where experiential learning (learning by doing) is supported by a sharing of knowledge and interactions between students and tutors:
"Work based learning, projects, activities and papers involved learning by doing. Using real-life examples and scenarios are encouraged as is sharing of practice and theory. The strength [of the programme] is the online collaborative discussions, and presentations between participants and the interaction between online tutors, participants and international guest tutors." (Janes)
Collaboration is not always the best option for all learners. McKenzie CS9, describing how Henley Management College, UK, designed and implemented a large scale collaborative learning project for a major international client, noted that the time needed for collaboration became an obstacle for some learners, in this case where the process was not directly assessed:
"Time to participate in the course became an obstacle for many course members, given that they were travelling extensively, and working very long hours. The collaborative learning process was seen to be time consuming, and not directly beneficial because performance on that dimension did not contribute to the qualification process." (McKenzie)
More closely linking collaboration and assessment might overcome this problem:
"… evaluation revealed that although the emphasis on collaborative learning did not suit all students, they appreciated the integration of activities with assessment, because it guaranteed the involvement of all students." (MacDonald)

3.3 Experiential learning and reflection

"In line with adult learning principals, we learn better when we 'do'." (White and Moussou)
Experiential learning, the gaining of knowledge and learning through experience (Laurillard, 1994), is particularly applicable to adult learners, many of whom will appreciate the opportunity to put their new knowledge into practice in the workplace:
"This link to practice appears to influence the student groups' energy and ability to generalise the skills developed." (Gilbert-Hunt and McLaine)
Coupled with reflection on experience, as advocated by Salmon, experiential learning can be a successful strategy for the adult learner keen to put into practice their new knowledge:
"Engaging in reflective and interactive online activities, especially those leading to explaining, justifying and evaluating problem solutions, is a very important learning process. In 1983, Schön pointed out that people change their everyday practice by having reflective conversations, they frame their understanding of a situation in the light of experience, and they try out actions and then reinterpret or reframe the situation in the light of the consequences of that action." (Salmon)
Several OTiS case studies illustrate the application of experiential learning approaches. Sharpe and Baume CS69 describe the postgraduate certificate in 'Teaching and course design in Higher Education' - a professional development course run by the Open University, UK. This is clearly a context where experiential and task based learning have relevance:
"The courses are designed to support the development of competent teachers in higher education through organised and reflective study and assessment leading to an accredited award. The courses are strongly grounded in the day-to-day practice of teaching and associated experiential learning. Therefore, great emphasis is placed on reflection, task-based activities and the sharing and learning from peers." (Sharpe and Baume)
McKenzie provides some ideas of the methods that can be used to deliver experiential learning opportunities:
"(There is an) emphasis on practical application of theories and concepts to the learners' business environment problem using case teaching, on-line discussions, and projects, some of which may be company sponsored. The expectation is that the design of the process to deliver the content will simultaneously provide experiential learning in virtual team working." (McKenzie)
MacDonald and Nurmela both highlight the need for reflection on experience in an experiential approach:
". . . an experiential approach in which online activities and interaction form a central part of the course. The activity-based structure requires students to learn by undertaking practical activities linked to the assessment. They are required to reflect on issues debated online in their assignment essays, and to draw on evidence from messages contributed to online discussions, and other resources, in order to illustrate course issues." (MacDonald)
"Learning by doing is the key methodology used in On-line Tutor Training. Participants get models and ideas about how to guide individuals and groups in on-line education and use WebCT to practise these new skills. By doing and reflecting on their own actions and thoughts during the course, students get a picture of the tutor's role and tasks in on-line learning. In this sense both good and bad experiences are welcome." (Nurmela)
"Self-evaluations and reflections were seen as an effective method when it was time to move on from experiences to a more conceptual level of tutoring online." (Nurmela)
Rosie recognises in Ewing's case study an emphasis on
". . . students developing shared learning, a sense of community, the opportunity to work at one's own pace and time. This required an emphasis on experiential learning as referred to above and a deliberate use of strong positive reinforcement. Within this a tight structure was adopted to enable students to complete tasks. This in itself reinforces the point that deep learning does not just happen. As with any learning situation it has to be planned and structured. Tutors might use pre-set questions or points to bring out (Bowskill) but for deep learning, as Ewing shows, it is not just transmission - it is learning through communication." (Rosie, 2000)

3.4 Problem based learning

"From the practical point of view, Problem Based Learning is very interesting for online learning. Indeed, PBL is based on a "problem", a "case", a "question"... and leads the students to find solutions. They can discuss about their own solutions, research information, encounter experts in the field... All these activities are well supported by the "new" technologies." (Daele-D 2000c)
Ballantyne advocates problem based online learning to help students apply new knowledge to complex real-world situations:
"One of the pedagogical problems confronting social work educators - and others working in professional education - arises from teaching an ill-structured and contested knowledge base to students who are expected to make practical use of this knowledge by applying it to complex, real-world situations. Many of our undergraduate students struggle to make the connection between theory and practice within their academic assignments. More worryingly there is evidence that after graduation they continue to struggle to apply useful knowledge in their professional practice with individuals and families. Advocates of problem based learning (PBL) argue that this problem of "inert knowledge" may be overcome by teaching ideas in the context of their use, with authentic problems from the field acting as the stimulus and focus for student learning." (Ballantyne)
The approach adopted by Ballantye in an undergraduate social work course at Strathcylde University, UK was to have students working:
". . . collaboratively in small study groups reading relevant literature, discussing ideas (face-to-face and online), making online submissions on their hypotheses about multimedia case studies of family situations, and receiving tutor feedback." (Ballantyne)
Higgison also illustrates problem based learning. The context here is a professional development course (LOLA - Learning about Learning Online) for academic and related staff in higher education delivered by distance learning to staff in, amongst other countries, Romania:
"The course was designed around learning by doing and task-based learning. Active learning was encouraged through the use of self-assessment tasks, activities, reflection and discussion points at appropriate points throughout the material which drew heavily on the students' own experience and work environment. These tasks were designed to build towards and integrate with the tutor marked assignment, which was set at the end of each module." (Higgison)
Problem based learning also occurs where the students themselves identify and formulate the problem and collaborate to provide a solution:
"For those students who could access the on-line environment, the discussions became active and productive when the students themselves identified a real task that was of direct benefit to them. They needed to establish local meanings for some of the specialised open learning technology used in the course, i.e. agreeing a glossary of ODL terms in Romanian. The task of agreeing definitions helped to clarify and make explicit understandings and misunderstandings." (Higgison)
Problem based learning has clear relevance where students lack experience or opportunities to apply their knowledge in a work context. Problem based learning facilitates the development of 'professional competence' through defining and scoping problems before suggesting and developing solutions. In common with experiential learning, reflection is a key part of the learning process, and a deep approach should be encouraged.

3.5 Selecting a model

"The Internet is better suited to student-centred activities, supported by learning resources, than to the transmission of material, and the challenge for teachers is to design activities which encourage students to discuss, critique, summarise and reflect." (Phillips)
Instructivist learning models, involving transmission of material from tutor to student, are not recommended in the online environment:
"I firmly believe … that an instructivist … didactic approach is inappropriate for learning with computers at university level." (Phillips-D 2000)
Although this is often the model that is used, as reported by Salter:
"...it has become apparent that … most simply want to use the environment to post lecture notes electronically. This has been observed at other universities. Many of the online subjects currently promoted as 'flexible' often do little more than place lecture notes on the Web (McNaught, Kenny, Kennedy, and Lord, 1999). … Educationally ineffective or inadequate patterns of online teaching may become habits embedded in online teaching practice." (Salter)
Phillips (D 2000) reinforces the need for student-centred online learning:
"I think the measure of any online teaching and learning model is its degree of student-centredness. Palloff and Pratt support this view in their Keynote. That is, pay less attention to the writers of theories, and ask, "is this activity student-centred or teacher-centred?". That is the key - think of the way in which the activities you design can assist students to learn your discipline area, and use appropriate technology to achieve that." (Phillips-D 2000)
Selecting from a range of learning models and catering for a range of learning styles is recommended to help move away from instructivism, and this is demonstrated in many of the OTiS case studies. For example:
"The approach of the on-line course was constructivist and collaborative. This approach posits that knowledge is actively built by learners, as opposed to instructivism that assumes an instructor who delivers knowledge and expects learners to receive and repeat it." (Clarke)
"Partly based on constructivist and social collaboration, and action learning principles, different teaching and learning approaches are integrated: individual work, group work. Competitions etc.; communication oriented, work performed by asynchronous exchange of messages and upload of documents within the self-developed WWW-learning environment." (Scheuermann et al)
Daele (D 2000) provides an example of a course based on ideas from constructivism, collaboration and computer based collaborative learning:
"The design of our online learning project (Learn-Nett) is based on several theories in Pedagogy and in Psychology. These theories have a particular impact in our field: teacher training." (Daele-D 2000)
Whichever model, or combination of models is selected, attention must be given to interaction:
"Online instruction fails when it expects interaction, but simply delivers content or content that does not invite interaction. To facilitate interaction there must be sufficient attention to relationship building, creating a comfortable and appropriate environment for the learners, logical and strong connections between content and the value of interaction around that content." (White and Moussou)
Blom notes how online students do engage in interaction in two different models for online learning:
". . . two models for web based learning, the so-called 'self-paced model' and the 'web-class-model', and we are in the process of testing some assumptions about the interaction pattern in the two models. Our evaluation so far shows that the students in the self-paced model want to concentrate on student-tutor interaction and state very little interest in peer interaction, whereas the web-class students engage themselves eagerly in peer interaction." (Blom)
In addition to interaction, reflection and deep learning are needed to make online learning successful. Rosie offers a set of strategies to encourage deep learning:
  • Explore a range of pedagogies when developing on-line learning work and draw on different approaches. We all feel comfortable with some over others but don't ignore the less appealing.
  • Think through how students are going to become explicit commentators on their learning.
  • Think through the assessment strategy from the outset.
  • Ensure the assessment requires synthesis and overview and a search for alternatives rather than excessive detail.
  • Students are going to feel uncomfortable some of the time. This can be productive as well as negative. Work through where some of the problems are likely to be.
  • Get students talking to each other.
  • Use empathy, empathy, empathy, but not in a 'there, there it's ok' way. We have to learn how to handle our own learning.
And students need to:
  • Understand what the key signposts are and what assessment demands.
  • Use each other as much as possible.
  • Recognise that communicating together is an important part of learning.
  • Go beyond reflection as a retelling of a story. Be critical in the sense of working out how things could be different and why that might matter.
Finally, flexibility in approach may be necessary to meet student learning needs:
" I have had instances where I have had to resort, as a tutor to the model of learning that most helped my student make the connections and move to the next level of learning...sometimes that means choosing to use techniques that might not be your first choice but that are appropriate to the situation and the learner needs. (Janes-D, 2000)
To summarise, the experiences of OTiS e-workshop participants suggest that an online tutor should:
  • select a student-centred model of learning,
  • consider mixing models (e.g. collaboration and constructivism),
  • provide opportunities for reflection,
  • be flexible in your use of learning models to meet student needs.
All the examples provided so far have made use of pre-existing learning models, developed with the classroom or first generation distance learning situation in mind. Blom suggests that there is a need to establish completely new models of learning to accommodate the online learning experience:
"Developing suitable models is a major challenge when the Internet becomes the main vehicle for our instruction. We have developed two models where the main difference is student progress: our traditional correspondence model focuses highly on full flexibility in time and space. The students register at any time and they are fully self-paced. We want to establish a similar model on the web, believing that this very flexible model caters for the needs of many among our target groups. On the other hand, the web lends itself easily to a model where we gather students in web classes that start at the same time and proceed at a set pace. In other words, their flexibility is restricted in time compared to our traditional model, but there are also obvious gains." (Blom)
Whichever model is chosen for the design of an online learning experience, there now comes a need to find the most appropriate strategy for course delivery. The next section reviews strategies for delivery and experiences of delivering online education using different technological tools.
 
 

4. Online delivery strategies

"We need to look at the types of on-line delivery that exist, then see how each suits varying preferred learning styles. There is so much variety in what instructors do online - as witnessed by the case studies." (Roberts-D, 2000)
Roberts (D 2000) suggests that there is a progression in the types of delivery modes available:
  • <