e-teaching, e-learning and e-education
A paper to inform the development of the ICT Strategy in New Zealand for the Ministry of Education
April, 2001
Nola Campbell
School of Education
University of Waikato
Contents
Who are e-teachers, and what do they do?
E-learning and its impact on teachers
The preconceptions about e-learning
E-learning is not about screens and ICT
What might an effective e-learning environment for teachers like?
Changing roles of teachers and the classroom environment with the advent of e-learning.
Exploring the role of an e-teacher
A day in the life of an e-teacher
How New Zealand schools can move towards establishing strong pedagogical bases for e-learning
Building on teaching strengths
It is no longer a question of whether or not we will implement e-learning in our schools, but whether we will do it well.
This paper is set in the context of New Zealand schools and their rapidly developing use of information and communication technology [ICT]. Its key focus and emphasis is on the changes to teaching and learning that will result from an e-education environment.
Understanding the impact of e- teaching, e-learning and e- education is seen as fundamental to moving us forward so we can make greater use of the opportunities provided by the Internet. E-teachers are considered central to the move toward e-education and the way in which ICT is integrated in our schools. To implement an ICT e-strategy without e-teachers will now be like piloting a boat without a navigator.
Three key areas will be addressed in this paper:
The "e" word has become increasingly evident on the lives of New Zealanders in ways many could not have imagined less than ten years ago. With relative ease, the "e" is attached to activities like real estate, retailing, banking, entertainment and now education. The "e" stands for electronic and it relates to the use of the Internet to undertake the wide range of activities. As we become more familiar with the language of the Internet we find just how much it pervades our daily lives in the dot.com age. We readily recognise http://www......... as an Internet web site and see it plastered on vehicles, billboards, hot air balloons, merchandise and in the screen and print media. Educators are now beginning to hear terms like e- teaching, e-learning and e- education as it subtly becomes part of our regular vocabulary. 1
It is no longer a question of whether or not we will implement e-learning in our schools, but whether we will do it well. Like the Internet itself, there is no way of controlling the advent of e-learning. What we can hope to do is begin to understand the complexities of the new environment and how we can support schools and help teachers to work effectively as e-teachers.
In 1922 Thomas Edison predicted that "the motion picture is destined to revolutionize our educational system and ... in a few years it will supplant largely, if not entirely, the use of textbooks." Twenty-three years later, in 1945, William, the director of the Cleveland public schools' radio station, claimed that "the time may come when a portable radio receiver will be as common in the classroom as is the blackboard." Forty years after that the noted psychologist B. F. Skinner, referring to the first days of his "teaching machines," in the late 1950s and early 1960s, wrote, "I was soon saying that, with the help of teaching machines and programmed instruction, students could learn twice as much in the same time and with the same effort as in a standard classroom." Ten years after Skinner's recollections were published, President Bill Clinton campaigned for "a bridge to the twenty-first century ... where computers are as much a part of the classroom as blackboards." Clinton was not alone in his enthusiasm for a program estimated to cost somewhere between $40 billion and $100 billion over the next five years. Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich, talking about computers to the Republican National Committee early this year [1997], said, "We could do so much to make education available twenty-four hours a day, seven days a week, that people could literally have a whole different attitude toward learning."
Oppenheimer (1997)
Looking back on the last century and the comment by Oppenheimer, it is interesting to note how there has been a subtle shift in focus from promoting a variety of information and communication technologies in the learning environment to the expectation that education could be available twenty-four hours a day, seven days a week. What was omitted was the additional time period of 365 days a year. It is this leap of understanding that has taken many people in education by surprise and accounts for a healthy dose of both scepticism and optimism. Since 1997 when Oppenheimer wrote his paper The Computer DELUSION, examples of 24/7 education in schools have not evolved at the anticipated rapid rate to meet the promise and expectations. This is in direct contrast to the enormous growth of the Internet and the level of access in both homes and schools over the past four years. Greater access does not infer greater uptake of e-education.
Three forces are driving the charge toward e-learning according to Draves (2000) and they are coming from business, youth and competition. There are two prongs to the approach from business and industry; the first being a need for future employees who have a range of skills and attitudes to allow them to work effectively as problem solvers in the information age. Secondly, they see e-education as a lucrative market for selling a range of technologies by promoting partnerships with schools to implement ICT. The youth pressure is coming from the children of the digital age who want to learn online and currently operate in a parallel learning environment with their regular school (Layton, 2000). Competition has already been felt among tertiary institutions in New Zealand offering e-learning opportunities as they compete for student numbers while facing the competition from international institutions, particularly Australia. There is no reason to suggest that this could soon be any different in primary and secondary schools as they seek to find their areas of strength and excellence that they have to offer the new e-education marketplace (Wallhaus, 2000). One positive outcome could be the enhanced cooperation and the sharing of resources and expertise to sustain the ongoing development of e-education in New Zealand schools.
Many interested educators are now asking e-questions like:
There is a lack of available research about the process of implementing a technology as dynamic and evolving as the Internet into e-classrooms and examining the impact of e-teaching in schools. Much of what has been written is more anecdotal than conclusive. Case studies and evaluations offer the most recent comment available but the information was not necessarily generalisable. There are however some wonderful stories from which we can learn and reflect on the underlying values and avoid being swept along by the hype and glamour of a range of glittering technologies. While the case studies and stories provide food for thought, we must be aware of the essential need for further research to be undertaken to guide future policy and planning initiatives.
Research has been undertaken in tertiary education relating to online education but a depth of research has yet to emerge in primary and secondary education. However, the tertiary experience and research does provide some clear direction for considering e- teaching , e-learning and e- education in New Zealand schools and it will be considered later in this paper.
In order to discuss the "e" terms and how they relate to education, the following are definitions of e-teachers, e-learning and e-education as described in this paper.
Who are e-teachers, and what do they do?
E-teachers are the new generation of teachers who will work in an Internet environment in both regular and virtual classroom situations. They will build new concepts of working in time and space. E-teachers collaborate, build and discover new learning communities and explore resources as they interact with information, materials and ideas with their students and colleagues.
E-learning is learning which takes place as a result of experiences and interaction in an Internet environment. It is not restricted to a regular school day and can take place in a variety of locations including home, school and community locations e.g. libraries, cafes etc.
E-education involves e-teaching and e-learning along with the various administrative and strategic measures needed to support teaching and learning in an Internet environment. It will incorporate a local, regional, national and international view of education.
The importance of a vision for e-teaching, e-learning and e-education
The early adopters in New Zealand education have led the move toward e-education in New Zealand. From the exciting email activities of the late 1980s to the distance conferencing opportunities and web-building of the 1990s, enthusiastic teachers have worked hard to lead their colleagues toward an often uncertain e-teaching future.
Building on our experience in distance education in New Zealand and our willingness to innovate and problem-solve, there has been a range of exciting strategies for utilising the Internet in our schools. In the spirit of innovation, the early adopters have been given time and space to explore a range of opportunities and possibilities without too many rules to bar their progress. As time passed more and more people became interested and were absorbed by the teaching and learning potential of the Internet for themselves as teachers, and for their e-literate students. The possibilities and vision for e-education was becoming stronger and stronger with a clear need for an e-education strategy that compliments the ICT strategies of the future.
Rosenberg (2001) highlighted the importance of an e-learning strategy and warned that this was not just about utilising tools:
An effective e-learning strategy must be more than the technology itself and the content it carries. It must also focus on critical success factors that include building a learning culture, marshalling true leadership support, deploying a nurturing business model, and sustaining the change throughout the organization.
(p. xv11)
The people who can help to implement the change according to Rosenberg (2001) are those who are ready and willing to see learning in a much broader context. This is not about reinventing what we do now but about broadening our horizons as we take advantage of new opportunities to enhance what we might do in a classroom that has no traditional walls.
The Web-based Education Commission [WEBC] to the President and Congress of the United States undertook a year long study of the potential of the Internet to enhance learning in schools. WEBC issued a statement following publication of the Report on December 19th, 2000. They promoted a nationwide "Call-to-Action To Harness INTERNET’S Power for Learning" and announced the "Broadest Report To Date On E-Learning Recommends Investment, Regulatory Reform". The hard-hitting report urged:
We must immediately put to rest the notion that full development of Web-based technology for education is a choice," Kerrey [Commission Chairperson] said. "The Internet is revolutionizing all parts of society, but its impact on education is just beginning to be understood. We believe that a national mobilization is necessary to ensure that the tremendous potential of this new technology is harnessed to benefit all learners whether in our nation’s schoolhouses, college campuses, corporate training rooms, or at their kitchen tables.
The WEBC (2000) found that "the Web is a medium today's kids expect to use for expression and communication—the world into which they were born" while acknowledging "the Internet is not a panacea for every problem in education"
(p. iii). The WEBC Report focussed on the promise of the Internet and web-based learning:
It highlighted the need for continuous and relevant training and support for educators and administrators at all levels. However, the report had a minimal focus on e-teaching and a heavy emphasis on e–learning. A potential e-teacher could well be left wondering What does this mean for me if I want to be an e-teacher?
The move toward e-education in partnership with the integration of ICT in New Zealand schools is commendable. At the end of the first three-year ICT Strategy the time has come to now ask What is e-education? and Are we clear about what being an e-Teacher might mean? If teachers do not have a vision of their role as e-teachers and what this might mean for them both personally and professionally then the "e" ceases to have any relevance.
E-learning and its impact on teachers
The networked environment of this new Internet-connected world has expanded the opportunities for teaching and learning in ways that we are only beginning to understand. What makes the implementation of e-teaching so challenging is that we are asking teachers of the dot.com age to teach in a way in which they have never been taught when they were at school. They will work in an environment in which they have never been learners and may have had few first-hand experiences. However, without a history and a wide knowledge base to draw on, e-teachers will have the opportunity to be pioneers in their own right as they set sail. They will have the chance to re-examine what it means to be a teacher.
The level of internal motivation to utilise ICT and to consider new and different teaching options was found to be an essential factor in research by Goodwin et al. (1993), Hirschbuhl (1994) and Wolcott (1997) in tertiary education settings. A positive attitude toward the use of ICT was a strong indicator of whether a teacher might consider e-teaching. Conversely, one of the major barriers to e-teaching identified by Hirschbuhl was the fear some staff felt when faced with stepping outside their comfort levels and they were not willing to take the risk. At Emporia State University, Clay and Grover (1995) found that the fear centred on staff feelings of having little or no preparation or support to teach in this new way. This fear was consistent with the findings of a study of staff integration of technology into their teaching by Munson, Poage, Conners and Evavold (1994). Following discussion with the participants, the researchers described the fears:
They included fear of looking foolish, fear of asking for help, fear of not ‘catching on’ quickly enough, and fear of not being able to be effective with the technology in instructional settings. It was important for us to note that these fears were self-imposed and self-generated, but very real nevertheless.
(p. 765)
Rutherford and Grana (1995) also focused their research on academic staff fear in the face of technology. They identified nine areas that could prevent staff from making changes that would enable them to integrate technology into their teaching:
The issues of a lack of knowledge about ICT, a perceived lack of support, and an unwillingness to experiment with innovation all impact on the move to e-teaching.
It is important that the concerns are acknowledged and addressed if progress toward e-teaching is to be made for many teachers. Supporting e-teachers as they begin their journey has to acknowledge the fears and anxieties as well as the likely predictors of success. Contrasting this notion of fear, Kaye (1989) indicated four predictors of success when using computers to teach students at a distance:
When discussing ownership as the basis of individual commitment to change in education, Ruddick (1991) highlighted the importance of reflection on past experiences and practice so that teachers could see what it was they wished to change and why. The risks and fears, once acknowledged could become part of a recipe for change and success.
The preconceptions about e-learning
Rosenberg (2001) described how e-learning "refers to the use of Internet technologies to deliver a broad array of solutions that enhance knowledge and performance" (p. 28). To suggest that e-learning is about having something "delivered" to the student infers a less interactive environment and one where the student may well spend considerable time teaching themselves! Is there a hint of a traditional distance education model here? Rosenberg did acknowledge that while "e-learning is a form of distance learning" he also made it clear that what we know as "distance learning is not e-learning" (p. 29). This distinction is an important one because it means that many educators may well have preconceived ideas about e-learning based on past models of their own distance learning experiences or understanding. These preconceptions may reinforce notions of isolation, geographical separation and a learning experience that is not always very flexible or learner-centred.
Rosenberg (2001) described the importance of the Internet to enable networking for the shared storage/retrieval of information in the context of what he saw as the broadest view of learning (p. 29). However having access to vast amounts of information online is to deny the importance of social interaction and the communication and interaction that take place as part of the practice of teaching. Networking is not just about information and linked technologies, it is something that people can engage in most effectively online and provide one of the real strengths of e-learning. Rosenberg did not mention the importance of e-teaching when he defined e-learning. Can you have one without the other?
Despite the wealth of available information available on the Internet this is not the essence of e-education. Andrew Feenberg (1999) believed that the primitive technologies that were used for asynchronous, text-based human interaction in the early days of the Internet are still some of the most exciting activities that take place even today. This view was shared by Palloff and Pratt (2001) who reported that student evaluations of e-learning highlighted their ability to engage with their peers in asynchronous discussion. While the Internet does allow for the transmission of video images to simulate a face-to-face interaction this relies on synchronous activity, not something all users will desire. Research has yet to validate this mode of interaction over other less time and cost intensive asynchronous options.
We do e-learning an injustice if it is simply regarded as something to emulate what is currently happening in classrooms or to suggest that it is an "alternative" to current classroom activity. Nothing could be further from the truth when there is an interactive environment facilitated by an e-teacher who sees the potential to utilise the learning environments which best meet the needs of her/his students.
E-learning is not about screens and ICT
Involvement in e-learning is not going to mean that teachers will spend hours sitting in front of computer screens any more than there is an expectation that their students will be doing the same. To focus on this perspective is to assume that the technology is the vehicle for all e-activity and nothing could be further from the truth. E-learning is not going to replace libraries, friends, colleagues and many of the existing social networks that contribute to a satisfying learning and teaching experience. In fact many of these will be enhanced by the ability of the teacher to access them in different ways. This is not an either/or type of learning environment but one where the Internet can be used for the things that cannot be achieved in any other way. The flexibility, availability and adaptability of the Internet environment must serve the needs of both e-teachers and e-learners.
Earlier in this paper e-learning was defined as "learning which takes place as a result of experiences and interaction in an Internet environment. It is not restricted to a regular school day and can take place in a variety of locations including home, school and community locations e.g. libraries, cafes etc." The words experiences and interaction are used deliberately rather than having access to because access does not infer that any learning will necessarily take lace. Trusting computers and the Internet to instil learning is an abdication of the most essential role of teachers (Healy, 1999). E-learning is not just about having access to information any more than having access to ICT will mean that it is used effectively in classrooms. E-learning, like non-e-learning, will occur when people are engaged in an activity they value and it is meaningful for them. Teachers are the learning and information architects of e-education and the experiences they each have will enhance and challenge their e-teaching in the most unexpected ways.
What might an effective e-learning environment for teachers like?
E-learning can give students much greater control over their own learning experience while giving e-teachers an opportunity to further meet the needs of individual students in a digital age (Layton, 2000; Wallhaus, 2000). A comparison of some aspects of conventional learning and e-learning are shown in Table 1 below:
Conventional learning |
E-learning |
| Students attend a school in their local community or attend a
boarding or correspondence school.
Classes are scheduled according to school hours and timetables. Students are directed to work individually of in groups. Classes are synchronous. And teachers and students interact in real time. Students are generally enrolled with one school. Learning objectives are set by the teacher and institution. Students follow a linear pattern influenced by the needs of other class members and the teacher’s planning. Students are developing the essential skills through the seven essential learning areas of the New Zealand Curriculum Framework (1993). Teachers work in one school. |
Students participate from a variety of locations and may
"attend" multiple learning institutions and/or their local school. Students may determine the times when they access e-learning opportunities. Students can choose to work individually or collaboratively with people who may or may not be in their regular class. Classes may be synchronous or asynchronous. Students may take classes from more than one school. Students may set their own objectives and explore their own learning needs and agendas. Students can follow a non-linear path at a pace that meets their individual needs at that time, i.e. just-in-time learning. The teacher is facilitating the activity Students are developing the essential skills through the seven essential learning areas of the New Zealand Curriculum Framework (1993). E-teachers can work in more than one school. |
Table 1. A comparison of conventional learning and e-learning
This comparison highlights some of the day-to-day differences that may become apparent according to how a school chooses to offer e-education and the choices which families will make for their children.
It is important to recognise that while e-learning has much to offer it is not a signal for the end of regular classroom learning as we know it now. Classroom learning will continue to have an important role to play but as Rosenberg (2001) has identified, "it will be a different role from in the past" and no longer the "default delivery system" (p. 120).
Changing roles of teachers and the classroom environment with the advent of e-learning.
Teachers do not necessarily mind change, what they do mind is being made to change and become e-teachers in the new e-education environment.
Many words have been written about the Internet and the possibilities for its use in e-education but little has been researched about how teachers effectively modify their practice to work in this new environment. Just because teachers in schools have teacher education qualifications, this does not necessarily prepare them to be e-teachers. Being able to teach confidently in one environment is not a precursor to success as an e-teacher in a very different environment (Campbell, 1997). The fears and anxieties discussed earlier in this paper tend to overwhelm some teachers who may temporarily lose sight of the fact that teaching and e-teaching do have many commonalities.
The e-teacher who is surrounded by rapidly changing e-environments and technologies must at times feel like they are trying to change a tyre on a moving vehicle. When explaining the challenge and changing roles for e-teachers, it is a little like encouraging them to be information and environment architects. The environment they create may well be totally aligned with the work of the regular classroom so that e-learning becomes an integral part of it. Alternatively it may be a virtual classroom where the students only visit electronically. This seamless transition from what we now accept as learning to an e-learning environment will in time mean that the "e" ceases to have any particular significance.
Institutions who are investing heavily in the technology are providing networked learning opportunities. However it is not the tools that will make the difference, it is the communities who understand how they can use them. These communities consist of the e-teachers and the new generation of students described by Layton (2000) as the digital children. He believed that digital children "are more independent, more intellectually open, more tolerant, and more adventurous than most 20th-century children." The fears of social isolation for e-learners are rebuffed by Layton who described a much more collaborative environment in which:
Digital children do not learn in isolation. They might work alone, but they learn in groups (even if some of the group members live in other countries). For them, knowledge is like dropping a pebble in a pond. Waves of understanding wash over the digital classroom." Working out an answer and sharing it with your digital classmate is no longer considered cheating. Cheating is keeping the answer to yourself. Cheating is copying someone else's expression of ideas and knowledge -- not sharing those ideas and that knowledge with others. Learning is collaborative and social, not solitary and competitive.
Layton even went so far as to describe digital children as "guerrilla learners, learning only what they need at the moment to solve the problem" as they seek relevance and the chance to solve real problems, not a series of arbitrary hoops. The students of the new e-learning environment do face new challenges and are, according to Layton (2000), going to have to:
… learn to read critically, write effectively, listen intently, and speak fluently. They must be able to find information, understand the information they locate, evaluate the reliability of that information, and see how to apply it to answer a pressing question or to take advantage of a new opportunity. They must be able to communicate their ideas to diverse groups using a variety of media. They must also be able to understand the ideas of others and see how their own concepts might blend with those of their work-mates to solve problems and create new things.
These are not only the desirable attributes of an e-learner, they are also the attributes which will allow them to solve a variety of different challenges at school and in their communities. One of the challenges for e-learners identified by OECD (2000) were low literacy and inadequate language skills to access the Internet. As much of the content and interaction on the Internet relies heavily on written communication, this will provide a real challenge for e-teachers and e-learners. OECD believe that many "students who enter secondary school still reading at a far lower level will gain little meaning from most of what they encounter on the WWW" (p. 73). While it is acknowledged that literacy and language skills are essential to making sense of the WWW this also makes the assumption that students would need access to everything. In reality this is neither desirable nor possible with the rate at which the Internet is evolving. Supporting students who are e-learning connoisseurs will require a far wider range of attributes, not just a focus on learning new skills to bridge the gap. Both e-teachers and e-learners are now part of a much wider and complicated learning community (Lankshear and Snyder, 2000).
Exploring the role of an e-teacher
The ability of teachers to communicate via the Internet, accessing and publishing information is very diverse. There are some who are pre-e-literate and others who utilise the Internet for regular school and classroom activity. It is not unusual to find teachers storing information so that it is web-accessible but to actually make the move toward e-teaching is the next brave step.
JoAnn Harrison (n.d.) suggested that the e-teacher will not be "the person who knows all the answers and decides what the question will be" but it is the e-teacher who "becomes "an expert learner," who can help students solve problems and find answers to their questions" (p. 3). The teacher therefore becomes as much a part of the learning process as their students as they learn to work in a facilitative and collaborative e-learning environment.
Willis (1994) identified five specific areas where changes in the role and attitude of academic staff in tertiary institutions were necessary to accommodate e-teaching and the acceptance of the associated technologies. These changes highlighted the need to:
(p. 278)
These five key changes are just as relevant in a school situation but I would add another that will reflect the need for flexibility in mixing a traditional along with an e-learning approach. Often this mix will take place in a regular classroom environment and the teacher will have to be a teacher and e-teacher all at the same time as students move from one mode of learning to another. A profile of a teacher who is prepared to accept change and be at the forefront of revolutions involving ICT was described as follows by Mehlinger (1995):
If I were to try to sketch a profile of a revolutionary teacher I would describe him or her as neither a new teacher nor one about to retire; they have taught long enough to feel comfortable in their jobs and yet be concerned about growing stale. They tend to be independent, self-confident and unafraid to take risks. They are likely to solve their own problems rather than merely complain about them.
(p. 120)
Similar attributes were identified by the participants Campbell’s (1997) study of tertiary teachers learning to teach online for the first time. The included an ability to:
(p. 68)
The participants also identified attributes they felt would make e-teaching more difficult. They included people who:
(p. 68)
When discussing the changing roles for teachers implementing ICT the OECD (2000) described how the "ideal instructional mix for K-12 schooling will vary according to student age and maturity level but will always involve a combination of direct instruction, guided and independent practice, group interaction, and individual reflection, search, and creation" (p.72). Many teachers in New Zealand schools do already teach in this way and are able to juggle the needs of the school, community and curriculum with the needs of their students. At the same time they are integrating a range of technologies into the daily life of the classroom and have acquired the necessary skills to implement ICT effectively into their teaching. The need to acquire new teaching styles has and will now become the challenge for the next generation of e-teachers (Fancy, 2000).
A day in the life of an e-teacher
In order to begin to understand what e-teaching might be like, a glimpse into three fictitious e-teachers’ online diaries might provide some food for thought.
Warren is a Year 4 e-teacher
Day 50, Monday, 12.30 pm
I noticed today that some of the children are using the library much more. I found a group were logged on to the computer in there and they were comparing what a book said about how spreadsheets could be used and what an online group of students in Wales had found when they had used a spreadsheet to calculate some information from growth charts.
The information coach in the library has offered to help me with some planning and we have set up a forum to brainstorm some ideas ready for when we meet at the end of next week.
Thank goodness we do not have to attend weekly staff meetings any more. I was often really tired at the end of the day. Now I can log on any time and look at all previous information given over the year and even search for topics to help find them quickly.
Day 61, Friday, 4 pm
My literacy group of teachers are really proving to be a godsend. Pete from Adelaide is a real hoot and has a ton of stuff to share. Kay from North Carolina is interesting and I was a little sceptical when she joined our group. However the questions she asks really make me think about what I am doing so I will take up the chance to do some research with her next term. This could also fit in with the requirements for Assignment Three in my online varsity class.
When I move to Ahipara next term I will still have my support networks in place and can continue to be part of my literacy group.
The members of class who are all living away for short periods are managing to keep up with the class and share in what is happening, great for Damion stuck in hospital.
Day 66, Wednesday, 8 am
I am glad I decided not to continue to use the synchronous chat for communicating with the class in Dunedin. It was chaotic at times and quite a disruptive to what is happening in our classroom. Now we have asynchronous forums students can participate at any time of the day (or night) and there is always a record to refer to. They did recall the videoconference we had with a group in Te Kuiti but few seem to recall what we actually talked about! Should I have recorded this? I think I got swept along by the technology and forgot to look past it. Hard for me to really justify the time when I look at out forum interaction now.
Kate is a Year 7 and 8 e-teacher
Day 1, Monday, 8pm
Just checked my email and discovered I will have 28 students from four continents this term in my class. Wow, how exciting. Quite a few of them are kiwis who are now living overseas but choosing to stay with us as their base school.
Email from Jane in Dallas who wants to work with us again on a collaborative environmental project, will need to check with the class to see if anyone is interested.
I have enrolled in an online Masters paper and checked out when I can start, also ordered the text and some of the materials while I was online.
Day 3, Wednesday, 8am
Well I should not have worried about whether the class had got online, they were all there and waiting for me. The term does not officially start till next week but they are keen, there is a real sense of excitement about what we might be doing this term.
James and Kylie have spent part of the holidays making lemonade and want to find out more about the Coca Cola empire. They are suggesting that they want to look at the history, production and marketing as well as sussing out the competitors. Some of the offshore students offered to gather some local data for them. Jack suggesting they check out some of the websites he had found about patenting so their recipe was safe!
Day 8, Monday, 12 noon
Went to into school today and met with some of the students who live locally. Surprised how much I already knew about them from the online introductions, some seemed relatively shy compared to the way they talked online.
Matt offered to report back about our mornings discussion to the rest of the class online, he is a great note-taker.
Some great people in my Master’s class, even caught up with Harry who was in my class at Teacher’s College in ’74. Good to see I am not the only oldie online.
Meg is a secondary art teacher
Day 3, Wednesday, 9 pm
I would really like to work on a mentoring system for year 13 students, - the painters and designers. Have found some willing mentors, including an advertising agency in Auckland for the designers. I am hoping to have a regular fortnightly contact (with the mentors) where the work to date was shown and advice as to new research was given (to the students).
I'm not sure of the best way to organise this - the only method I'm familiar with is email with attachments. Today I made some enquiries and was told that it would be possible to organise a forum or to use ICQ. I wish the IT guy would not try to tell me how to do it, I know what I want to do, just do not have all the techie skills yet.
In my room, I have several computers which are networked, a scanner and a digital camera. So should be OK.
This looks like a possible research project for my varsity class so will check this out as well.
Day 13, Saturday, 8 am
I cannot believe the progress I have made. The students are wild about the mentoring idea and we have ideas flowing on the class forum we have set up online. Karen offered to facilitate this discussion and help the group reach some consensus on how we might proceed.
I did like Reuben’s idea about groups working at the local art centre and he has checked out with the manager to see it is OK and what hours it is open, most seem to want to use it in the evening so that is great, they can be accommodated. I wonder if I should pop in to see them?
Our class interaction will be only online in the forum for much of the term now, oh I am a little nervous about this part.
Have set up the individual portfolios for each student online and they are recording their own progress and self-evaluation. This is quite different to the presentations we used to have in class, I like it. I have insight into their understanding about what they are doing and can refer back to it at different times.
Have just finished reading Gilly Salmon’s book on e-moderating, really made me think about the way in which I need to facilitate the discussion with the class, it will not just happen unless I know what I am doing and can effectively interact with them.
Day 33, Friday, 10 pm
Just called into the art centre and what a hive of industry for a Friday night. There were several parents there who were most intrigued and a couple of local artists who were singing my praises. I feel a little bit like a fraud as I am only just beginning to understand this e-learning environment.
I giggled to myself when two of the boys mentioned they had spent the last two days surfing at Raglan and how pleased they were that all their current classes, were all online at that time.
The students enrolled this year in first year online university papers are really enjoying this challenge. This is a good stepping stone to tertiary education for them.
Our web site is working really well. The students take digital pictures of their progress and put these, along with the comments, on to our web site. The mentors in Auckland are great at providing honest and detailed feedback about the student’s work. What great motivation for the students who used to rely on me and each other for feedback.
My Year 9 and 10 class have heard about the Year 13 class and asked when they were starting! Help!
Have heard back from my varsity lecturer and my research proposal to write up the Year 7 class as a case study has an A grade, YES! Maybe I do know what I am doing after all. She keeps saying I need to build on my strengths and experience as a teacher and an art teacher focussing on good communication and facilitation of the online activity. She asked how I would assess the students work this time, mmmm, good point, I need to think more about that as the old way will never capture what is happening now.
Support for e-teachers is often difficult to get when the supporters have not had any direct and practical e-teaching or e-learning experience themselves (Campbell, 1997). IT support staff, like the technologies, should be seen as supporting e-teaching and e-learning (Lankshear and Snyder, 2000). It is e-teachers who need to feel they are in the driving seat of a vehicle they have helped to design. Campbell (1997) in her research examining a group of tertiary teachers learning to teach online, found that the best support people for e-teachers were those colleagues who "had been there" and understood first-hand what it was like.
Fancy (2000) suggested that e-learning "enhances the mentor and facilitator roles of the teacher more than ever." It is possible that an e-teacher can be mentored in an online team-teaching situation that provides peer support and some valuable role-modelling. Other e-teachers have opted to enrol in online papers themselves to explore the e-learner role firsthand while having the support and experience of a an experienced e-teacher.
The epilogue in Campbell’s (1997) thesis tells the story of a health educator who had just finished teaching her paper online for the first time. Her email told the story:
I actually decided to contact you just to report in re MMP [Mixed Media Programme for teacher education at the university of Waikato]. I have to eat my words. Initially I was reticent about embarking on health curriculum taught on-line. It was also hard work knowing how to write the course when health deals with so many variables and sensitive issues. One of the things I say to students is that the teacher of health should know their students well before any teaching. So what was I doing teaching health from a distance, not knowing the students and certainly not modelling what I preach!!!
Result: This was the most fulfilling course I have taught this year. The interaction on-line, the feedback, the questions and discussions and the quality of work produced by the students has been way and above that of students on campus. Their depth of understanding … was so much more perceptive than that of other students.
(Email, November, 1997)
Teachers need time, support and latitude to experiment and be creative as they learn to become e-teachers (Campbell, 1997; Cambre & Hawkes, 2001). Undertaking any new teaching activity for the first time generally involves more time and Fancy (2000) indicated there would be "implications for staff working patterns and workloads." On the first occasion when the e-teacher begins they tend to try to reproduce what they already know works in a regular classroom. It is not until they have had a successful e-learning experience on which they can draw that they can begin to explore further and gain confidence as e-teachers. The health educator above will now approach e-teaching with quite a different perspective based on her experience.
How New Zealand schools can move towards establishing strong pedagogical bases for e-learning
The major task confronting schools is to utilise the e-environment as more than an add-on to our historic teaching and learning paradigms.
When considering how schools might move toward establishing strong pedagogical bases for e-learning, Layton (2000) suggested "we should begin with where we want to be, where we think we will be, and work back through all the steps necessary to get to that point." By using where we are today as the only starting point without a strong shared vision of e-education means schools could easily drag along excess baggage in the form of resistance and inadequate strategies for change.
When e-learning is measured against what schools are traditionally doing using the same measurements, aims and objectives, then the very advantages of e-learning may be ignored and the perceived status of e-learning will suffer. Education in a non face-to-face situation has been regarded by some people as a depersonalisation of the teaching activity. When it is packaged and marketed like many other commodities, Keegan (1994) believed there was a resultant lack of status because of this perceived commercial and mechanistic association. If there is a perceived lower status associated with e-education, innovative teachers will not be attracted to this area of teaching if they are intent on advancing their promotion and career prospects (Holt, 1996; Moskal, Martin & Foshee, 1997). A question of the perceived status and the comparison of the different modes of teaching was summed up by Feenberg (1999, p. 191) when he identified how the "problem is that we tend to judge the face-to-face at its memorable best and the computer-mediated equivalent at its transcribed worst."
Institutions who are investing heavily in the technology are providing opportunities for networked learning. However it is not the networked technologies that will make the difference, it is the teaching and learning communities in and around the school who understand how they can use them. Effective application of e-education can take place in schools with:
(Healy, 1999. p. 294)
Cambre and Hawkes (2001) highlighted how teachers who self-select to be e-teachers or are hired specifically as e-teachers "will be happier and more productive than those who are recruited for convenience or feel pressured to take part" (p. 24)
Sustainable e-learning growth and development is reliant on the capabilities of e-teachers to see the promise offered by the online opportunities and to understand the landscape of the new environment. A strategy that helps e-teachers to define the landscape will offer them support and encouragement as they move forward. Nothing takes the place of good planning in the creation of e-education initiatives. A school would be wise to undertake an assessment of the learning and programmatic outcomes it hopes to achieve through e-education (Palloff & Pratt, 2000). Including e-teachers in this process will ensure that the pedagogic, staff development and budgetary concerns are viewed with due consideration.
Lankshear and Snyder (2000) have formulated their 3D model of literacy education which involved technologies based on operational, cultural and critical dimensions of learning. They suggest that pedagogies should not focus solely on skill and ‘how-to’ knowledge but also on propositional knowledge that is contextualised in authentic settings that involve culture, history and power" (p. 44). They emphasised that it "is counterproductive to start with issues of ‘skill’ or ‘technique’, outside an ‘authentic’ context of situated social practice" (p. 44).
When the use of ICT and e-learning is planned, Healy (1999) described how it is possible to:
… ground education in projects that have intrinsic meaning, while still teaching critical skills of symbolic analysis and a core base of integrated knowledge. But this requires rethinking methods, asking children to tussle with real and intellectually challenging problems, and trusting them to be responsible in new and sometimes unsettling ways.
(p. 296)
It is this real life authenticity and the opportunity to explore a world outside the traditional classroom that can be so motivating for both students and their teacher. There is the opportunity to reach beyond former social, cultural and political boundaries made possible by the use of the Internet.
The arrival of the Internet has heralded the rapid growth of shovelware where information relating to classes, courses and programmes are simply put on the web (Rosenberg, 2001). The problem with this is that this information does not always make the transition well to the web and readers are expected to absorb screen after screen of text that looked better in its original format on paper. It also has the effect of passing on costs to students who may end up printing it out as they try to come to grips with the content. A good test for identifying shovelware is to see if the printouts are very different from the original source.
The word delivery, often seen linked with e-education, is also a characteristic of some shovelware. It tends to require the learning of information and facts and students are asked to respond with tests, quizzes or a series of drill and kill exercises before they can move on to the next exercise. Feedback from the e-teacher is often delayed and/or minimal. Is this teaching? Where is the teaching?
It is possible that the pressure will come on some schools to move quickly into e-learning and claim a significant market share in what could become a very competitive marketplace. Speed can well lead to the temptation of creating shovelware as a visible means of having something to show. The myth that e-education will allow schools to become bigger and bigger and attract more students with the associated economies of scale can come at a heavy price in terms of the quality of the e-teaching and e-learning.
To think of the Internet as a delivery vehicle for vast amounts of text and graphics along with the talking heads made possible by greater bandwidth, is to adopt the technocentric approach. The medium is not the message and all that is changed here is the way the experience is transmitted. "In other words, the substance of learning and teaching remains more or less the same, only 'technologised' under a new technology regime. This has been referred to as the 'old wine in new bottles' syndrome in a flexible learning context (Lankshear and Bigum, 1998). ICT is more than just a set of tools although our practice in classrooms is inextricably linked to the technologies of the time and as a result, is changed by it. The use of ICT is saturated with human ideas, feelings, values and understandings. This is where e-teachers can show their strengths.
Building on teaching strengths
There needs to be careful consideration of how to make best use of the teaching possibilities in the Internet environment. It is not about creating large amounts of content but about designing and creating different learning opportunities and experiences (Rosenberg, 2001). There will be content online but it should be embedded in a teaching and learning framework that is flexible and accessible in terms of design. The content is not king, it is the activity around the content that is paramount.
The design of effective e-learning will be undertaken by e-teachers who are familiar with this new e-classroom environment. This is not the role of the technical support people or software designers. The e-learning environment should be flexible enough for e-teachers to design and implement their own unique environments independently. Then e-teachers can leverage the distinct attributes afforded by the new technologies so that they are meaningful and motivational for e-learners.
The assessment and evaluation of e-learning and the e-curriculum will not necessarily utilise the traditional models of accreditation. If there is a deliberate attempt in e-education to not simply reproduce current classroom practice, then there is every justification for considering new "standards" of achievement in e-learning situations (Palloff and Pratt, 2001).
Discussion and Conclusions
In my lifetime, I've never seen hype and understatement walk hand in hand. But that's what we are seeing now. I'm convinced that our great-grandchildren will look back and wonder why we didn't get it"
Nicholas Negroponte,
Director, MIT Media Lab 2
We are now sailing into a sea of change made possible by the rapid development and availability of the Internet. These developments have already begun to fundamentally alter the way in which we can utilise ICT in our classrooms. What we can now consider is that the access to the Internet outside of formal classroom settings has opened up possibilities that were inconceivable ten years ago. For many students their home will be the principal place of access to the Internet and the word classroom will assume a whole new meaning. The nature of the traditional classroom is going to change beyond recognition and we too may wonder why we didn't get it at the time.
This paper has deliberately avoided discussion of the hardware and software that may be required to meet the needs of e-education and e-teachers. The paper is not about the tools, it is about the people who will work in the online environments we have begun to see in the past eight years of the WWW. Another reason for focussing on the people is that this investment in teachers and students can have a positive long-term return. The technologies can easily become solutions looking for problems to solve, a trap that will be avoided by e-educators who have a vision for what they can achieve. It is naive to think that e-education can happen without the associated technologies but it is suicide to think it will happen without teacher buy-in and participation in the vision-building that will be required.
The Ministry of Education’s (1998) ICT Strategy for schools briefly stated that "ICT has the potential to break down barriers created by distance, enabling teachers and students in urban and rural areas to access a range of learning opportunities from around the world" (p. 14). It is time now to focus on the needs of e-teaching and e-teachers, the architects of change in our schools. Solutions developed by instructional designers and multimedia specialists will not change the e-education world unless the teachers are the learning designers of the future. E-teachers will support and promote change when they feel they are an essential part of the process. This support was indicated by Fancy (2000) when he raised the important question "which comes first, the learning or the technology" and answered "In my mind there is little doubt, properly identified learning needs and appropriate pedagogy to meet them."
Teacher education and e-teaching
The tertiary institutions that offer teacher education, both pre-service and graduate education, will need to consider their changing roles and the way in which they model good e-teaching practice (Harrison, n.d.). For staff working in teacher education to talk about what e-teaching might be like without actually doing it, will leave their students wondering why it might be so difficult. What could be even more discouraging for teacher education students is for the institutions to put courses online and assume that this is e-teaching. The Web-Based Education Commission (2000) warned "if teacher education programs do not address this issue at once, we will soon have lost the opportunity to enhance the performance of a whole generation of new teachers, and the students they teach" (p. iv). Trying to teach in the same old ways but simply utilising some technologies and calling it e-learning is a little like what was referred to earlier as the using 'old wine in new bottles' syndrome (Lankshear & Bigum, 1998).
One of the challenges of e-education is the need for new organisational and programmatic systems (Wallhaus, 2000). The WBEC Report (2000) identified the need for the removal of regulatory restrictions to e-learning so that schools can move from the legacy of the one-room schoolhouse to the one-world classroom. The Report highlighted how in the United States the regulations and requirements like "the school day, year, delivery systems, and accounting requirements" no longer matched current realities:
The regulations that govern much of education today, from pre-kindergarten to higher education, are focused on supporting the welfare of the educational institution, not the individual learner. They were written for an earlier model, the factory model of education in which the teacher is the center of all instruction and all learners must advance at the same rate, despite their varying needs or abilities. (p. 87)
In an e-learning environment WBEC proposed that:
Course content comes not just from a textbook or materials passed out in class by the teacher, but from many sources, in many formats, and even created by the students themselves. Time, institution, and location do not form the defining elements of education.
(p. 87)
If indeed time, location and how long a student sits in a seat are no longer the defining elements of a school then how does a school committed to e-education define their role and operation within the current education environment? How can we move the promise to practice?
As e-education evolves in New Zealand schools there will be a need, at classroom, school and/or national level, to answer such diverse questions as:
Considering the questions above begins to widen the perspective for how e-education might evolve in New Zealand schools. It is clear that it is not a case of if it will happen but when and how it will happen. With this in mind it is time to find some answers so that a e-teaching and e-learning are given support and recognition in the new global schoolhouse.
It seems a little ironical to have ended this paper with far more questions than I set out to answer. As I wrote and thought about the challenge to implement e-education in New Zealand schools the questions flowed and I could hear the voices of e-luddites I have known:
"It’s not real teaching!"
"How do you know it is the student’s own work?"
"We will never have enough hardware to do it."
"What about our time and workload, we have more than enough to do now!"
"Not everybody has access to the net so stop feeding the digital divide!"
I have met many e-luddites in my own online teaching experience and the only certainty is that they will continue to be there. They will remind me that I need to be really clear about what I am doing when teaching online, why I am doing it and how I can improve my own practice and share it with a growing group of friends, students and colleagues in my global community.
I thank you for the opportunity to explore my research and passion for e-teaching.
Nola Campbell
Senior Lecturer in ICT
Coordinator of Online Development
School of Education
University of Waikato
Endnotes
Bigum, C. and Lankshear, C. (1998). Literacies and Technologies in School Settings: Findings from the Field. Keynote Address to 1998 ALEA/ATEA National Conference, Canberra, July 7th.
Cambre, M. and Hawkes, M. (2001). Twelve steps to a telecommunity. Learning and leading with technology. 7 (3), 22-27, 52.
Campbell, N. G. (1997) Learning to teach online: An investigation of practice in teacher education. Unpublished masters thesis, University of Waikato, Hamilton, New Zealand.
Clay, M. & Grover, R. (1995). Throw me a rope: A distance learning faculty guide. In D. A. Willis, B. Robin & J. Willis (Eds.), Technology and teacher education annual, 1995, (pp. 621-625). Charlottesville, VA: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education.
Draves, W.A. (2000). Teaching online. River Falls, Wisconsin: Learning Resources Network.
Fancy, H. (2000). Text of a speech delivered by Howard Fancy at the International Workshop on Advanced Learning Technologies at Massey University. [On-line]. Available: http://www.minedu.govt.nz/web/document/document_page.cfm?id=5432
Feenberg, A. (1999). Questioning technology. London: New York.
Goodwin, B. N., Miklich, B. A. & Overall, J. U. (1993). Perceptions and attitudes of faculty and students in two distance learning modes of delivery: Online computer and telecourse. Orlando: FL. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 371 708)
Gotschall, Mary. (n.d.). E-learning strategies for executive education and
corporate training. [On-line]. Available: http://www.timeinc.net/fortune/sections/onlinelearn/onlinelearn.htm [2001, 10 April].
Harrison, J. (n.d.) In TeleLearning Network of Centres of Excellence. New approaches for preparing teachers. In New learning technologies, applications, challenges and success stories from the front lines. (pp. 2-4). Vancouver: Simon Fraser University.
Healy, J. (1999). Failure to connect: How computers affect our children’s minds – and what we can do about it. New York: Touchstone Books.
Hirschbuhl, J. (1994, May). Faculty uses of computers: Fears, facts and perceptions. The EDUTECH Report, 10, (2) 1, 4-5.
Holt, P. (1996). A response to Chris Dede. The American Journal of Distance Education, 10, (2) 49-52.
Kaye, A. (1989). Computer-mediated communication and distance education. In R. Mason & A. Kaye (Eds.), Mindweave: Communication, computers, and distance education, (pp. 3-21). Oxford: Pergamon Press.
Keegan, D. (1994). Introduction. In D. Keegan (Ed.), Otto Peters on distance education: The industrialization of teaching and learning (pp. 1-23). London: Routledge.
Lankshear, C. and Bigum, C. (1999). Literacies and new technologies in school settings. Pedagogy, Culture and Society, 7 (3), 241-61.
Lankshear, C. and Snyder, I. (2000). Teachers and technoliteracy: Managing literacy, technology and learning in schools. St. Leonards, N.S.W. : Allen & Unwin.
Layton, T.G. (2000). Digital learning: Why tomorrow’s schools must learn to let go of the past. [Online]. Available:
http://www.electronic-school.com/2000/09/0900f1.html
Mehlinger, H. D. (1995). School reform in the information age. Bloomington, IN: Center for Excellence in Education, Indiana University.
Ministry of Education. (1993). New Zealand Curriculum Framework. Wellington: Learning Media, Ministry of Education.
Ministry of Education. (1998). Interactive education: An information and communication technologies strategy for schools. Wellington: Ministry of Education.
Moskal, P., Martin, B. & Foshee, N. (1997). Educational technology and distance education in Florida: An assessment of capabilities. The American Journal of Distance Education, 11, (1) 6-22.
Munson, D. E., Poage, J. A., Conners, D. & Evavold, J. (1994). Technology and faculty collaboration: Psychological and sociological factors and effects. In D. A. Willis, B. Robin & J. Willis (Eds.), Technology and Teacher Education Annual, 1994, (pp. 764-766). Charlottesville, VA: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education.
Oppenheimer, Todd. (1997). The computer delusion. [Online]. Available http: http://www.theatlantic.com/issues/97jul/computer.htm
Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. (2000). Learning to Bridge the Digital Divide: Schooling for Tomorrow. Paris: OECD.
Palloff, R.M. and Pratt, K. (2001). Lessons from the cyberspace classroom: The realities of the online classroom. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Rosenberg, M. J. (2001). E-learning: Strategies for delivering knowledge in the digital age. New York: McGraw Hill.
Ruddick, J. (1991). Innovation and change. Buckingham, UK: Open University Press.
Rutherford, L. & Grana, S. (1995, September). Retrofitting academe: Adapting faculty attitudes and practices to technology. Technological Horizons in Education Journal, 23, (2) 82-83.
Salmon, G. (2000). E-Moderating: The key to teaching and learning online. Kogan Page: London.
Salomon, G. (1997). Of mind and media: How culture’s symbolic forms affect learning and thinking. Phi Delta Kappan, 78 (5), 375-380.
Stoll, C. (1995). Silicon snake oil. New York: Anchor Books.
Wallhaus, R. A. (2000). E-learning: From institutions to providers, from students to learners. In R. N. Katz & D. G. Oblinger (Eds.), The "E" is for everything (pp. 21-52). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Web-Based Education Commission. (2000). The Power of the Internet for learning: Moving from promise to practice. [Online]. Available: http://www.ed.gov/offices/AC/WBEC/FinalReport
Web-Based Education Commission. (19 December 2000). Web-based Education Commission Issues Urgent Call-to-Action To Harness Inter-net's Power for Learning. [Online]. Available:
http://www.hpcnet.org/cgi-bin/global/a_bus_card.cgi?SiteID=203877
Willis, B. (1994). Preface. In B. Willis (Ed.), Distance education: strategies and tools. (pp. v-x). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Educational Technology Publications.
Wolcott, L. L. (1997). Faculty development issues in distance education. Open Praxis, 1, 34-36.