Does e-learning require a different theory?

As a writer doing my first course, I can recall with excitement the first time I heard George Polti’s belief that the world only has 36 dramatic situations on which to explain the best and worst of this world. Each woe or victory neatly pigeon-holed into a category to give meaning and so too goes the current state of play with e-learning theory.

 Opponents of giving e-learning its own theory ostensibly snort and point toward existing learning theory and the lowest levels of a SAMR model (Substitution and Augmentation) to pigeon hole the extremely complex interactions occurring in e-learning.

BUT!

While commonalities between conventional learning and e-learning can be found in motivation, psychosocial process and ‘development’ as opposed to ‘learning’ (short to medium term changes) Andrews’s 2011 paper talks of a, “re-conceptualization of learning (in) e-learning (being)… an inextricably social act; and …more than a socio-technical activity”. This concept of reconceptualization, along with that of “conventional and e-learning being best conceived as overlapping circles in a Venn diagram” (Andrews, 2011) resonates with me.

Commonalities aside Andrews sets out his argument by outlining some traits and contexts of e-learning, discussing the changed relationship of the learner with knowledge and the traditional gatekeepers by answering three questions (below):
When engaged in e-learning, what are you learning? 
How do e-communities relate to situated, real world communities? AND 
What are the unexpected consequences of the drive for e-learning initiatives, such as the continued exclusion of non-ICT users?

 In developing an argument toward a theory of e-learning Anderson also discusses processes of transduction and transformation. Transduction simply denoting a modal shift from one set of resources to another while transformation “means…e-learning is generated/made possible when the available resources for learning …are transformed by the learner (resulting in personal, social and/or political change) with the added dimension of peer as well as teacher discussion” (Andrews, 2011).

This process of transformation has great potential to provide the student with voice and “whenever voice is given to students, we find students demanding changes in educational practices”, says Anthony Mackay, Co-chair Global Education Leaders Program (GELP).

Another statement supporting Andrews comes from GELP’s design and development director, David Albury in their 2013 ‘Redesigning Education: Shaping Learning Systems around the Globe’ panel discussion.

Albury (2013) says, “It’s (education) never been harder and yet with more possibility and potential. This is because both what’s needed and possible is charged with the power and challenge of technology”.

The question is does e-learning require a different theory?

Decide for yourself, but for me it’s a resounding YES! From the tallest mountain, with an ipad in one hand and a laptop in the other.

References

Global Education Learning Program (2013). Redesigning Education: Shaping Learning Systems around the Globe, http://youtu.be/1rE2R269KFo, last viewed 27, April, 2014.

Andrews, R. (2011, Does e-learning require a new theory of learning? Some initial thoughts, Journal for Educational Research Online, Volume 3, No.1, pp. 104 - 121.