Module 2 Group Summaries
Below I’ve included the summaries submitted by each group of their discussions for Module 2. Kudos to each group for insightful, substantive, and collegial interactions once again. Groups will continue to share summaries of their interactions and conclusions reached in each of the future group discussion activities. ~ Dr. J
Group 1
Members: Kelly, Megan, Alissa, Sandra, Teresa
Our group had varied opinions on the e-learning definition that made the most sense to them. Each person brought her own perspective and criteria for selecting a definition, which led to a lively discussion overall that helped shape individual opinions. For example, Megan really related to Sandra’ post:
Your last couple of sentences makes complete sense to me and emphasizes the meaning of e-learning. “Learning should have a goal in mind — something concrete and measurable. Experience is nebulous and subjective based on the individual doing the experiencing! I like the Clark/Mayer definition because it captures the idea of a goal at the outset.” This really sums it up.
Overall, the majority of students found Horton’s definition made the most sense, but recognizes the value of Clark and Mayer’s definition in the academic setting.
Analysis of Horton definition:
According to Horton, e-learning can be defined as “the use of information and computer technologies to create learning experiences” (Horton, 1, 2006). All students really seemed to relate to the openness of the definition, but the openness is a double edged sword – some felt it was accurate to the nature of e-learning, others thought it was too vague for academic learning. The following points emphasize themes the group noticed:
- This definition deals with the goal of having a learner engage in an experience — not a measurable goal.
- Embraces the constructivism view of learning, where learner constructs meaning from their experiences
- The definition is influenced by design, technology and economics.
- He denotes a variety of e-learning modes that represent categories many e-learning forms related to school learning, but also includes less academically rigid, non-graded forms of e-learning (Horton, 2006).
Analysis of Clark and Mayer’s definition:
Clark and Mayer state that e-learning is “training delivered on a computer (including CD-ROM, Internet and Intranet) that is designed to support individual learning or organizational performance goals”, so their focus is more on the informative nature of e-learning related specifically to training or teaching (Clark and Mayer, 2008). This aspect of open-ended versus structured learning is what created the debate in discussion.
The recognition of knowledge and skill building that Clark and Mayer (2008) suggests when they stated “the goal of e-learning is to build job-transferable knowledge and skills linked to organizational performance or to help individuals achieve personal learning goals” is what supports the argument for the validity of this definition. Many group members believe that the inclusion of goal-setting is very important to e-learning.
Furthermore, Clark and Mayer (2008) highlight there are many “elements” to e-learning consisting of “what, how and why”:
- What – Content and instructional methods assist in the overall learning process.
- How – Content is distributed via computer with text, media, and audio through synchronous and asynchronous settings using collaboration through “wikis, discussion boards, and email”.
- How – refers to the “E” in e-learning which is housed in “electronic form”.
These elements were universally agreed to be important to e-learning.
Conclusions
We have come to the conclusion that there are many ways of viewing Merril’s principles of instruction. One member of the group agrees that a linear relationship exist between the phases of learning, noting that the phases build from one another. For example, the prior knowledge scaffolds the learning process and principles of instruction. This group member noted that Merril’s principles of instruction took students from lower levels of thinking to higher order thinking. However, even though the phases have order they are non-linear as they refer back to the problem at hand or a prior step. This outlook notes that the phases can be seen as cyclical or never ending, instead of linear which has unidirectional approach or definite end.
In another sense, Merril’s instructional phases are viewed as having a linear relationship because they build from one another and show order. This is the same thought process as above, except from the phases building from one another and having order are expressed as being linear and/or cyclical. Again, prior knowledge is employed to scaffold learning.
Another point of view suggests that Merril did suggest a linear relationship between instructional phases. Each phase represented learning from start to finish while touching base on how each phase can be promoted through presenting the task, utilizing previous knowledge, demonstration, coaching and incorporation.
Lastly, Merril’s phases of instruction are analyzed as reflecting a linear sequence of events; however the linear sequence is not supported. For example, as stated by the student, “the demonstration of skills might precede activation of prior experience as the demonstration of skills can invoke activation of prior experience.
In conclusion, with the differences of opinions and great points of view, group 2 has reflected on each post and opened our minds to the concept that Merril’s phases of instruction having a linear sequence is based on individual analysis and particular situation. Merril’s phases of instruction definitely demonstrate a sequenced order; however that sequence being linear or cyclical is a matter of opinion. We believe there is not a definite right or wrong answer to Merril’s linear and/or cyclical phases of instruction.
References
Clark, R., & Mayer, R. (2008). E-Learning and the science of instruction: Proven guidelines for consumers and designers of multimedia learning. 2nd ed. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass/Pfeiffer.
Horton, W. (2006). e-Learning by Design. Washington D.C.: Pfeiffer.
Merril, M.D. (2002). First Principles of Instruction. Education Technology Research and Development, 50(3).
Group 2
Members: Bruce, Shari, Jaquenette, Mary, Liz
Horton and Clark & Mayer’s definitions on E-Learning
Horton (2006) defines e-learning as, “E-learning is the use of information and computer technologies to create learning experiences.” Horton states that the definition is open-ended and continues his discussion by describing the various forms of e-learning, such as standalone courses, virtual-classroom courses, learning games and simulations, embedded e-learning, blended learning, mobile learning and knowledge management (Horton, 2006). It seems that his primary focus is on design. Horton’s definition is very broad and has more application to it.
Clark and Mayer (2008) defines e-learning as, “training delivered on a computer, (including CD-Rom, Intranet, Internet) that is designed to support individual learning or organizational performance goals with the following features:
- Includes content relevant to the learning objective
- Uses instructional methods such as examples and practice to help learning
- Uses media elements such as words and pictures to deliver the content and methods
- May be instructor-led or designed for self-paced individual study
- Builds new knowledge and skills linked to individual learning goals or to improved organizational performance.”
Clark and Mayer (2008) break their definition down further into the “what”, “how”, and “why.” The what of e-learning is the content and the instructional methods of a course. The how is how the course is delivered, usually through a particular format (synchronous or asynchronous). The why of e-learning is why the learner is taking an e-learning course, which is usually to improve job performance or to meet a personal goal. Clark and Mayer definition is very specific.
Group 2 was split down the middle as to which definition we prefer. Those who preferred Horton did so because of the simplicity of his definition and the assumptions which could be made due to that. Those who preferred Clark and Mayer did so because of their more direct, specific definition. This definition takes much of the assumptions out of it. Also, Horton’s definition lends itself to the design of instruction versus the what, how, and why of E-Learning.
Did David Merrill suggest a linear relationship between the instructional phases?
Most of Group 2’s members agree that we found Merrill’s article confusing and hard to read. Merrill talks about problem solving and real-world problems and engaging the student in real-world problems to help draw him or her into the learning. This problem solving approach drives the four phases of effective instruction. The four phases are:
- Activation: Activation is the next phase or principle of instruction whereby the instructor or the facilitator draws out the learner’s previous experience in order to lay the groundwork for new experiences or learning.
- Demonstration: Demonstration is the next phase whereby the instructor shows or demonstrates to the learner what is to be learned by attempting to draw on the learner’s previous experience but all the while introducing or demonstrating the new knowledge.
- Application: Application is the next phase whereby the learner himself has to use the new knowledge and demonstrate that he has actually attained the objective by using this new knowledge in conjunction with his previous knowledge in a real-world scenario.
- Integration: Integration is the final phase and the learner should be able to actually implement the previous application phase into his world or his environment. Learners would also be given time to actually practice their new knowledge and to use it in meaningful ways that the learner can relate to.
In his writings, David Merrill discusses various instructional phases; however, it not clearly suggested that there is a linear arrangement between the phases. Linear by definition would refer to the phases being presented or arranged in a line (Dictionary.com). Obviously there has to be a process to learning, which is the phases he explains, but learning doesn’t start, stop, and then start over. The process is always continuing. The instructional phases are both cyclical and linear.
It was recommended by Group 2 that the flexibility of the instructor to choose the phase of instruction based on the students’ needs is important. One of our group members provided this example: “I can see the value of demonstrating or modeling the learning activity prior first. For example, when I was in conducting sales training with novice representatives I would model the sales call first before expecting new reps to do the same. This was a helpful strategy when reps had no previous experiences from which to draw upon. When training sales reps with the organization for a long time, I might intentionally ask them to activate previous experiences and then reframe the new training material in either the existing context or a new context. Selection of which phase to active first is dependent upon the instructional goal and selected strategies.
References
Clark, R., & Mayer, R. (2008). E-Learning and the science of instruction: Proven guidelines for consumers and designers of multimedia learning. 2nd ed. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass/Pfeiffer.
Dictionary.com. (n.d.). Evaluate definition | Definition of linear. Retrieved November 14, 2009, from dictionary.com: http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/linea.
Horton, W. (2006). e-Learning by Design. Washington D.C.: Pfeiffer.
Merril, M.D. (2002). First Principles of Instruction. Education Technology Research and Development, 50(3).
Group 3
Members: Lisa, Drew, Zack, Bob
Compare Horton’s and Clark and Mayer’s definitions of e-learning, and discuss which one makes more sense to you.
We will begin with clarifying some confusion between distance education and e-Learning that often leads to erroneous predictions about the future of both topics. Although many believe distance education is new phenomena, it has been a method used to teach for decades. Before information communication technologies removed barriers of communication, people could correspond by delivering letters, phone calls, or messengers. Distance education denotes a physical separation between the student and learner and two-way communication between them. Different forms of media may be used and the instruction can occur asynchronously or synchronously (Guri-Rosenblit, 2005). In our opinions, e-learning is merely the delivery of knowledge using electronic media. E-learning can occur without a teacher and may be delivered without the separation of student and teacher. “Unlike distance education, e-learning is used by all types of students on all educational levels, from kindergarten to doctoral studies. E-learning offers attractive uses for learners of all ages and of various interests and needs. Younger pupils enjoy its multi-media games and fun activities in acquiring very basic literacy skills; older students use its endless information resources for preparing homework, assignments and examinations; and millions of people use e-mail, chat groups and other formats of telecommunication as learners” (Guri-Rosenblit, p. 473, 2005).
Horton (2006) and Clark and Mayer (2007) took different approaches to defining e-learning. Horton (2006) offered a very simple, open-ended definition of the concept in an attempt to freedom of thought and application while Clark and Mayer (2007) delineated a number of specific aspects of e-learning broken down into what, why, and how elements in an attempt to focus their concept on work-place application. I see the value in each approach; Horton (2006) seems to be writing to educators in any field who are interested in e-learning, while Clark and Mayer (2007) focus their attention on a specific demographic. Horton’s (2006) definition made more sense to me because its simplicity and open-endedness make it more widely applicable.
Horton (2006) defined e-learning simply as “…the use of information and computer technologies to create learning experiences” (p1). Horton (2006) claimed that leaving the definition open-ended allowed for “…complete freedom in how these experiences (were) formulated” (p2). The beauty of this definition is its ability to remain true in a field that is constantly in flux. By not imbedding any limitations in his definition of e-learning, Horton (2006) gave us a universal way to define a concept that at times seems rather nebulous without the need for constant revision as the field continues to expand and change due to constant technological advance. To support this, Horton (2006) listed several variations of e-learning that fit nicely under his umbrella: standalone courses (solo learner, self-paced, no interaction), virtual-classroom courses (online class, synchronous/asynchronous communication), learning games and simulations (simulated activities), embedded e-learning (included in another system), blended learning (mix of traditional and e-learning), mobile learning (based on mobile internet devices), and knowledge management (broad-based e-learning).
Our understanding of the definition by Clark and Mayer (2007) states that e-learning is simply learning using a computer through the use of CD-ROMs, the Internet, and the Intranet. It deploys both word and pictures that they expand on saying it covers both print and audible words and pictures encompassing anything from animations to illustrations to video. They were also stating that instructor led e-learning is synchronous although later they included the possible use of asynchronous technology within this environment whereas independent e-learning is asynchronous. Overall e-learning has the purpose of reaching educational goals or to work on organizational skill building or performance improvements.
We believe the Clark and Mayer definition is too narrow and excludes future technologies and objectives from their definition. Why isn’t learning delivered via SMS messaging a form of e-learning under their definition? In the field of education, excluding technologies which do not yet exist would account for a flawed definition. Therefore, Horton offers the best definition for e-learning providing the ability to integrate into education at all levels effectively while keeping a focus on the audience the e-learning is intended for and facilitating the transfer, application, and integration of the knowledge and meeting objectives.
Did David Merrill suggest a linear relationship between the instructional phases? If so, do you agree with how he arranged them, and why?
Merrill (2002) clearly presented five different principles that worked into various instructional design theories available through his research. He did state that not all principles were part of each and every theory presented but in general these five principles were derived from those theories researched for his paper. The principles are:
- Problem: learning is promoted when learners are engaged in solving real-world problems
- Activation: learning is promoted when existing knowledge is activated as a foundation for new knowledge
- Demonstration: learning is promoted when new knowledge is demonstrated to the learner
- Application: learning is promoted when new knowledge is applied by the learner
- Integration: learning is promoted when new knowledge is integrated into the learner’s world (pg 44)
We agreed with Merrill’s idea of problem solving and having it involved from beginning to end and the problems should be real world based. The activation phase is very logical. Instructors, to start the learning process, should bridge the new knowledge they want to provide with the knowledge students have already acquired (Merrill, 2002). Allow students to share prior experiences and expertise.
In the demonstration phase Merrill believes there is too much tell me versus show me (Merrill, 2008). This can be ineffective and lead a student to feel information over load. A mix of medium to demonstrate the learning goals, problem solving and compare and contrast activities will better cement learning.
Now students are ready for the application phase, applying what they have learned. Instructors helping student accomplish this by providing various problem solving activities. At this phase the amount of coaching needed should be diminished compared to earlier phases, but feedback is still important (Merrill, 2002).
The last phase integration is knowledge transfer. What every course should strive towards; having a student take the new knowledge and be able to apply it to other real life scenarios and other contexts.
These phases are linear and therefore build on each other with problem solving throughout. First principles of instruction phases can be very effective. It is student focused, strives to have learning be engaging, and helps to relate new knowledge by real world problem solving. Another key point made by Merrill (2008) is “motivation (of the student) alone is not enough, you need good content. Real motivation comes from learning.”
References
Clark, R., & Mayer, R. (2007). e-Learning and the Science of Instruction: Proven Guidelines for Consumers and Designers of Multimedia Learning (null ed.). Washington D.C.: Pfeiffer.
Guri-rosenblit, S. (2005). The name assigned to the document by the author. This field may also contain sub-titles, series names, and report numbers.”Distance Education” and “E-Learning”: Not the Same Thing. Higher Education, 49, 467-493.
Horton, W. (2006). e-Learning by Design. Washington D.C.: Pfeiffer.
Merrill, M. D. (2002). First Principles of Instruction. Educational Technology Research and Development, 50(3), 43-59
Merrill, M. D. (2008, August 11). Merrill on Instructional Design. YouTube. Retrieved on Nov 14, 2009 from http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i_TKaO2-jXA
