Sinead Lawton - Trends in Elearning - Annotated Bibliography

Sinead Lawton, MSc Applied eLearning.
Module – Trends in eLearning, Annotated Bibliography
Alli, N., Rajan, R., & Ratliff, G. (2016). How Personalized Learning Unlocks Student
Success. EDUCAUSE Review Online.
In this article, Alli, Ragan and Ratliff, programme officers at the Bill & Melinda Gates
Foundation, discuss how a personalised learning environment, specific to the needs and goals
of the individual, can lead to student success.
The authors offer a comprehensive overview of the potential of personalised learning,

outlining how technology can provide organisations with tools to tailor the learning
experience to the individual, identify and support at-risk students, and develop guided
pathways that assess students’ progress toward course completion. The authors emphasise the
significance of learner demographics and how a person’s background and personal situation
can impact on their learning. This is relevant to my own professional practice as, working for
a non-profit organisation, I seek to support those pursuing further education who are often
facing unique challenges, perhaps from a disadvantaged socioeconomic background and
juggling numerous responsibilities in addition to their studies.
Taking an individualised approach that focuses on students’ pre-existing knowledge, as

outlined here, is extremely relevant to the adult learners I work with who often come with a
wealth of experience in the field they are studying. Combining learning based on real-world,
authentic experiences with adaptations based on assessment of students’ knowledge, skills
and gaps as well as their personal interests will support effective learning pathways. The
authors offer interesting examples of personalised learning innovations being used in
education institutions and give robust statistics on improved completion and success rates to
strengthen their argument for personalised learning success.
Although the authors have a specific agenda is writing this article, to promote adaptive digital
courseware and learning analytics software produced by the Bill & Melinda Gates
Foundation, they outline new technologies and approaches that are of interest for my
professional practice as I continually seek ways to build the core capabilities of my
organisation and make informed, action-based decisions to support our students and improve
their learning experience. By offering more personalised learning with content relevant to the
1
Sinead Lawton, MSc Applied eLearning. Module – Trends in eLearning, Annotated Bibliography
learner and clearly mapped to learning outcomes, I can encourage students to take ownership
of their learning, albeit on a much smaller scale than outlined in this article.
It is interesting to note the particular emphasis the authors place on change management in
this article. This seems to be a recurring theme in the literature on technology and education
trends, acknowledging that the technology will not be impactful if it is not effectively
implemented and embraced.
Brown, M., Dehoney, J., & Millichap, N. (2015). What’s Next for the LMS. Educause
Review, 50(4), 40-51.
In this article Malcom Brown, Director of Learning Initiatives; Joanne Dehoney, Vice
President for Planning and Partnerships; and Nancy Millichap, Program Officer,
EDUCAUSE consider the need for a new generation of LMS, also called Next-Generation
Digital Learning Environments (NGDLE), to reflect the move from an emphasis on the
instructor in higher education to an emphasis on learning and the learner. While traditional
LMS enable the administration of learning, NGDLE will enable learning itself.
The terminology used is significant here as the envisaged NGDLE will no longer be a
‘system’ but rather an ‘environment’ that consists of a number of components that come
together to create a personalised environment for learning. It is interesting to note that since
this paper was written in 2015, the terminology has evolved further with Penn State
University, who are currently developing an NGDLE, ELMS: learning Network, consider the
acronym to stand for Next Generation Distributed Learning Ecosystem (Ollendyke, 2018).
Whether environment or ecosystem, rather than supporting a pedagogical model, NGDLEs
will support “active learning, personalization, hybrid course designs, and new directions for
measuring degree prowess” (p. 43).
A key aspect of NGDLE that the authors highlight is that of personalisation, an important
factor shaping the user experience. However, they do not consider the challenge that this
personalisation will present in terms of coherence. As users add, alter and customise
components on the NGDLE to directly support their individual needs, they may stray quite
2
far from the intended curriculum, which could impact on how higher education institutions
assess learning on an accredited course. How the NGDLE is built will also need to be
carefully monitored as the learning environment could easily become cluttered, as
acknowledged by Malcolm Brown in a later article ‘6 Implications of the Next-Generation
Digital Learning Environments (NGDLE) Framework’ (2016). For some learners, this clutter
could serve to impede learning.
One exciting suggestion in this article is the potential for the NGDLE to incorporate
eportfolios and therefore have use beyond the scope of a particular course and continue as an
environment for learning into the professional domain.
The limited capacities of current LMS mean that more flexible spaces are required and the
authors give a clear overview of what needs to be considered in terms of technology and a
proposed ‘mash up’ of components which can be assembled in custom ways and will fit
together easily like Lego blocks. However, while their vision for what is needed in a NGDLE
is well thought out, it falls short of an actual solution. I am currently introducing a new LMS
into my organisation and suspect that standard LMS such as Moodle and Blackboard will
prevail for a while yet.
Ollendyke, B. (2018). NGDLE Is Really Just "Enigma" Misspelled. Available at

https://er.educause.edu/blogs/2018/3/ngdle-is-really-just-enigma-misspelled?
utm_source=Informz&utm_medium=Email&utm_campaign=ER#_zscxcNg1_zlUTcf4
Brown, M. (2016). 6 Implications of the Next-Generation Digital Learning Environments
(NGDLE) Framework. Why IT Matters to Higher Education: Educause Review home
page Home Library EDUCAUSE Review Events Members. Retrieved from
https://er.educause.edu/blogs/2016/6/6-implications-of-the-next-generation-digital-
learning-environments-ngdle-framework
Dziuban, C., Graham, C. R., Moskal, P. D., Norberg, A., & Sicilia, N. (2018). Blended
learning: the new normal and emerging technologies. International Journal of
Educational Technology in Higher Education, 15(1), 3.
3
In this article, the authors from University of Central Florida, USA, Brigham Young
University, Utah, US, and Campus Skellefteå, Sweden outline their research addressing
several outcomes, implications and possible future directions for blended learning in higher
education. The authors contest that blended learning is the ‘new normal’ while also
acknowledging that there is no consensus among educators about what actually defines
blended learning, with opinions varying from those who consider it any learning that
incorporates an online element and those who contest that blended learning courses are only
those in which the online element includes reduces in-class seat time for students.
This study on blended learning is of great interest for my professional practice as the courses
we offer are predominantly blended to cater for adult learners, many of whom are juggling
education with other demands such as full time employment and family commitments. As we
strive for equal access to education, it is interesting to consider how blended learning
interacts with cognitive, affective and behavioural components of student behaviour and
ultimately impacts on student success. Given that blended learning is a firmly established
trend in higher education in general, it is now possible to consider the impact it has in a way
we are not yet able with other elearning trends that are in their infancy.
The authors raise the interesting idea that technology is so firmly embedded in our lives that
our real world is now blended “so much that we hardly see the individual components of the
blend any longer” (p.2). This idea that blended learning is merely a reflection of our blended
lives should perhaps put the conversation around blended learning to rest – it is the new
normal.
The authors offer a robust review of the literature which has in general found small to
positive effects in favour of blended learning when compared to fully online or traditional
face to face environments. They then outline their study, which compared the success and
withdrawal rates, as well as the student evaluation rates, of blended learning courses with
face-to-face and online modalities over four semesters at the University of Central Florida.
The authors used a clear methodology for their analysis, considering numerous variables,
which serves to produce clearly evident results.
While acknowledging that grade success is not a direct reflection of learning outcomes, the
authors conclude that blended learning had a better overall success rate and lower withdrawal
4
rate than other forms. It also fares more positively in student evaluations. Overall, they found
blended learning the most effective method for clear establishment and progress toward
course objectives, creating an effective learning environment and the instructors’ effective
communication.
The educators in this study were required to undergo specific training on the design of
blended learning programmes, which, the authors acknowledge, probably led to many
educators making further improvements to educational content as they redesigned their
course, which may have impacted somewhat on results. Furthermore, the authors
acknowledge limitations and potential issues with their data analysis throughout this article,
particularly the contentious issue of end of course student evaluations. Allowing for these in
the description of their study outcomes, however, merely gives further weight to the authority
of the authors’ conclusions.
Grajek, S., & 2017–2018 EDUCAUSE IT Issues Panel. (2018). Top 10 IT Issues, 2018:
The Remaking of Higher Education. EDUCAUSE. Retrieved 1 March 2018, from
https://er.educause.edu/articles/2018/1/top-10-it-issues-2018-the-remaking-of-higher-
education
This report, written by Susan Grajek, Vice President for Communities and Research with
EDUCAUSE, and the 2017-2018 EDUCAUSE IT Issues panel considers how digital
technology is remaking higher education through four key themes: institutional adaptiveness,
improved student outcomes, improved decision-making, and IT adaptiveness. The report
gives examples of notable advances in the use of IT, such as virtual reality and related
technologies, and their potential impact and benefits for higher education.
While similar reports focus solely on the technology, this report closely aligns advancements
in technology with cultural issues such as data management and change leadership in higher
education, acknowledging the main issues facing decision-makers today. This is coupled with
a robust acknowledgement of the challenges of implementing digital technology in higher
education institutions such as the financial implications of technological innovation and
issues relating to cultural change.
5
Changing culture in any organisation can be extremely challenging, particularly when

introducing new technology that will impact on people’s daily lives. While this report
considers the changing role of IT staff within higher education institutions it does not
acknowledge the impact of technological change on academic staff and the need for
comprehensive training strategies that are implemented in a timely fashion. Not everyone
adopts new skills easily and confidence is key is embracing change. If academic staff do not
have the required knowledge and skills to manage and use new technologies and decision-
makers don’t emphasise the enabling aspects of the technology, problems will arise. Effective
change leadership will address any reticence and reluctance early on.
The report emphasises the need for student-centred institutions that focus on student
experience and success. However, it does not fully consider the implications of learning
technology on student experience. For example, while the authors state that there is no single
optimal way for students to engage with an institution via technology and institutions need to
provide “multiple, personalized student experiences” (p.38), they fail to fully acknowledge
that, for engagement with technology to be a positive experience for students, a single student
experience platform can be preferable as too many systems can be overwhelming. Not even
student will be a ‘digital native’ (Prensky, 2001) and streamlining systems can lead to
improved student experiences and outcomes.
While perhaps to be expected in a report centred IT, the authors primarily focus on the role of
technology in student success rather than examining the human context. For example, they
don’t fully consider the importance of staff-student relationships as core to student
experience. Even with courses that are wholly online, students need to feel that their learning
is supported as this cannot be forgotten in as higher education institutions rush to embrace
technology.
With IT developments often ahead of the digital culture in higher education and vast
differences in the use of technology, not only between institutions but between departments
within the same institution, it is essential that decision-makers pay close attention to
technology. The possibilities, and also the limitations, of technology and a data rich
environment, are soundly acknowledged in this report. The authors suggest that institutions
6
consider ecosystem opportunities where they can collaborate with a view to standardised
practice and advocate for change in educational policy at government level.
What is clear from this report is that technology is a major component in higher education
and leadership and change management are importance processes. “Institutional leaders need
to think about the student experience with technology and how to best use technology to
engage and interact with students.” (p.38) As my own organisation seeks to implement
numerous new technologies into our education programmes, it will be important to ensure
that any changes put in place are managed effectively.
Prensky, M. (2001). Digital natives, digital immigrants part 1. On the horizon, 9(5), 1-6.
Liu, M., McKelroy, E., Corliss, S. B., & Carrigan, J. (2017). Investigating the effect of
an adaptive learning intervention on students’ learning. Educational technology
research and development, 65(6), 1605-1625.
In this article, the authors, Liu, Professor of Learning Technologies, McKelroy, Ph.D.
Candidate in the Learning Technologies program, Corliss, Ph.D in the Education Evaluation
and Research Specialist, and Carrigan, doctoral student in the Department of Educational
Psychology, all at the University of Texas, outline a study investigating students’ experiences
with an adaptive learning system. In particular, the authors examine the effects of adaptive
learning on students’ learning and the students’ perceptions of their adaptive learning
experience, and they compare student characteristics of those who engaged and did not
engage in the intervention.
Advances in technologies present new opportunities for adapting instruction to individual

learning paths by providing learners with immediate assistance, resources specific to their
learning needs that address gaps in knowledge, and relevant feedback, all in understandable
and engaging ways that are situated in relevant and meaningful contexts personalised to the
learner. This has the potential to transform both higher education and continual professional
development, including my own professional practice.
7
The diversity of demographic and background variables as well as cognitive and non-
cognitive characteristics of learners have long since proved to be a challenge to educators as
they consider how best to modify their instruction to reach all of their students’ learning
needs. In my professional practice, for example, the diversity in experience among cohorts of
learners on early childhood care and education courses is vast, ranging from those who have
just completed secondary education to adult learners with years of experience in the field.
Adaptive learning may also prove beneficial in that any improvements in students’ learning
achievements may lead to an increase in the students’ belief in their own abilities, which
should compound their eventual success. This issue of lack of confidence, addressed by the
authors in this study as they investigate the impact of adaptive learning on students with
‘math anxiety’, is of particular relevance to the adult learners prevalent in my professional
practice who are often returning to education after a significant amount of time, some of
whom have had previous negative experiences of formal education.
The study described in this article used a mixed-methods design to determine the
effectiveness of adaptive learning, employing both qualitative (post study survey of student
experiences and focus group interviews) and quantitative (pre and post test scores) data
sources to address the research questions. While finding significant differences in test scores
for one subject and small differences for others, the results were not as dramatic as one might
have expected, highlighting some aspects of adaptive learning that warrant further
consideration.
Overall, students professed that they found adaptive learning helpful during discussion in
focus group interviews, however, they expressed frustration with the format, structure and the
design of the modules. It would seem, therefore, that to ensure adaptive learning is engaging
and meaningful, effective instructional design is key. The authors admit later in the study that
there were no personnel with instructional design expertise on the development teams.
Another finding in this study, that lack of time was a major reason cited by students for not
participating in the intervention, is particularly significant for my professional practice. This
lack of time is consistent with some findings from the literature where the use of an adaptive
learning system requires a larger time commitment from students than the traditional model
of education (Howlin, 2014). Learners within my own organisation are often juggling many
8
commitments including full time employment as well as study and larger time commitments
may not be realistic.
The results of this study provide some empirical evidence that an adaptive learning
intervention can have a positive impact on student learning, although one must be cognisant
of the lack of control group within this study. However, it appears that resources in this study
were not always targeted to specific learning outcomes and were, therefore, ineffective. It is
clear that the success of an adaptive learning intervention, like any educational research or
teaching strategy, depends on well thought-out instructional design.
Howlin, C. (2014). Realizeit at the University of Central Florida: Results from initial trials of
Realizeit at the University of Central Florida: Dublin, Ireland
Rigole, N., Hollingsworth, L., & Ray, J. (2017). Badges and Gamification In eLearning:
Effects on Achievement And Engagement. SAIS 2017 Proceedings.13.
In this conference presentation, the authors, from Middle Georgia State University, United
States, investigate if and how the use of digital badges and gamification strategies increase
student engagement and achievement in elearning environments.
The authors examined data from a pilot study of the implementation of digital badges and
gamification strategies in two elearning courses composed of 52 students offered in 2016.
Optional badges were awarded for project-based assignments and non-optional badges were
awarded as rewards for obtaining ‘excellent’ results. The gamification strategies employed
included the use of a leadership board that identified the top badge-earners.
The authors state that “badges can be a way for the user to showcase their skills and
credentials earned” (p.1), thus, badges are awarded predominantly an extrinsic motivational
tool. I have found in my professional practice that, while intrinsic motivation is usually held
as the ideal, both extrinsic motivation and intrinsic motivation are important ways of driving
behaviour. In effect, often extrinsic motivation can be internalised, leading to a self-propelled
motivation to excel and accomplish goals. The use of leadership boards, however, while
9
potentially motivating competitive students, may only serve to demoralise some students who
aren’t achieving at the same level.
When properly implemented, gamification can produce positive outcomes and have real
benefits for learners. It is essential, therefore, that educators and instructional designers
consider the learner profile and design with the learner in mind to avoid any potential
negative impacts of gamification strategies.
The results from this study found that the use of the strategies employed did increase
engagement in the courses as well as achievement to some degree. It is interesting to note,
however, that participation in the optional badges in this study decreased as the course
progressed, which would suggest an initial ‘novelty’ element to these badges that faded in
time. Perhaps for time-pressed students, the achievement of badges is only sustainable if
actual learning is taking place. If the work required to achieve a badge isn’t relevant to
learners or increasing their knowledge in the subject, then interest wanes. Again, effective
instructional design is key to ensure that badges are linked to learning outcomes.
By introducing a control group to this study, where these gamification strategies were not
incorporated, the authors could have drawn comparisons with their results, strengthening
their conclusion that gamification strategies did impact on student engagement and
achievement. They might also have considered including a post-course student survey or
focus groups evaluating students’ experience of the gamification strategies and how the
strategies used impacted on their engagement and enjoyment of the course.
Encouraging learners to gain more knowledge as they advance forward in any educational
programme can only be beneficial if the modes and means of encouragement are carefully
designed, and I believe that badges and gamification are set to become more prevalent in
education programmes as a result.
Sclater, N., Peasgood, A., & Mullan, J. (2016). Learning analytics in higher
education. London: Jisc. Accessed February, 8, 2017.
10
In this report, Niall Sclater, consultant and director, Sclater Digital Ltd; Alice Peasgood,
educational technology consultant and researcher; and Joel Mullan, former senior executive
adviser for JISC, an organisation that provides digital solutions for UK education and
research, document the emerging uses of learning analytics in the United States, Australia and
the United Kingdom. Through a series of eleven case studies the authors present an overview
of the evidence of the impact that analytics are having on teaching and learning – and
highlight some of the opportunities for the UK higher education sector, which is also relevant
for higher education in Ireland.
The case studies presented give a snapshot of some of the most prominent institution level
learning analytics initiatives worldwide and highlight some of the benefits of taking a more
data-driven approach to higher education provision. The use of case studies in this report
anchors the issues and challenges pertaining to learning analytics in real life settings, giving
credence to the opinions proposed by the authors and illustrating the impact that learning
analytics can have on students, staff and institutions. Unavoidably, given the fact that the case
studies are relatively recent, this report can only show us short-term results of interventions
put in place by institutions and the long-term impact remains unknown.
Some of the issues raised by the case studies in this report are of particular interest as they
appear to show contradictory outcomes, however this is not fully acknowledged by the
authors. The use of student-facing dashboard, for example, giving students information on
how they are progressing and what they need to do to meet their educational goals, is seen in
some instances to enable students to take control of their own learning and encourages them
to become more engaged. This is seen to be particularly useful at the beginning of a course
when students have no idea how they are faring compared to peers. However, one case study
shows that interventions based on the analytics near the beginning of a course may have
encouraged some students to withdraw from courses who may not ultimately have failed.
Having access to information that shows them fare negatively seems to have possibly
pressured students who were already stressed.
Another contradicition can be found in the widespread assumption in many of the case
studies that students who use a VLE often are doing well as they are very engaged with the
course. In one case study, however, the authors acknowledge, “sometimes the most engaged
11
students appear to be the weaker ones who are working particularly hard to try to improve
their performance” (p.15).
What is clear from this report is that the interventions and supports put in place for students
deemed at risk must be carefully considered. The report briefly mentions but doesn’t go into
detail about the ethical issues surrounding learning analytics which perhaps deserve more
focus. Overall, however, although repetitive in places, this report offers an excellent overview
of the uses of learning analytics and how they are being put into practice.
Slade, S., & Prinsloo, P. (2013). Learning analytics: Ethical issues and
dilemmas. American Behavioral Scientist, 57(10), 1510-1529.
The seminal paper by Sharon Slade, Faculty of Business and Law, The Open University UK,
and Paul Prinsloo, Directorate for Curriculum and Learning Development, University of
South Africa, considers ethical issues and dilemmas that arise in the use of learning analytics
– the power imbalances that can exist between higher education institutions and students, the
impact of surveillance, the need for transparency and an acknowledgment that student
identity is a transient, temporal and context-bound construct – and how each of these affects
the scope and definition of the ethical use of learning analytics.
In my professional practice, learning analytics is currently being used to improve the

educational content and pedagogical approaches of a number of course modules. Slade and
Prinsloo refer to the obligation that institutions have to act on knowledge gained through
analytics. Indeed, when discussing the issue of consent, they go so far as to voice support for
the idea that the benefit for the majority supersedes the right of the individual to withhold
permission for use of his or her data.
This paper effectively addresses many of the ethical issues around learning analytics and
outline principles that offer effective solutions for higher education institutions to navigate
this ethical minefield. These principles are similar to many of the governing principles
outlined by Welsh and Mckinny (2015) and also the six sample principles outlined for higher
education institutions in Ireland proposed by ORLA (Online Resource for Learning Analytics
12
developed by The National Forum for the Enhancement and Learning in Higher Education
(2017). With the issue of privacy and the use of personal data coming under increased
scrutiny, it is imperative that institutions adopt such principles.
Although written five years ago, the concerns and issues raised by the authors are still mostly
relevant today as more and more data is collected about each and every action a person takes,
both on and offline. There have been some developments since the paper was written,
however, for example with some higher education institutions offering student facing
dashboards (Sclater, Peasgood & Mullan, 2016), which seems to lessen the power imbalance
between institutions and students who at least can now examine their own data and in some
cases see how they fare with peers. The paper does, however, raise as many questions as it
answers and it will be interesting to see how the field of learning analytics progresses.
National Forum for the Enhancement and Learning in Higher Education. (2017). Proposed
Learning Analytics Principles. Teaching and Learning. Retrieved 7 March 2018, from
https://www.teachingandlearning.ie/learning-analytics-educational-data-mining-
learning-impact/proposed-learning-analytics-principles/
education. London: Jisc.
Welsh, S. & Mckinny, S. (2015). Clearing the Fog: A Learning Analytics Code of Practice. In
T. Reiners, B.R. von Konsky, D. Gibson, V. Chang, L. Irving, & K. Clarke (Eds.),
Globally connected, digitally enabled. Proceedings ascilite 2015 in Perth (pp. CP:241-
CP:245).
Teachonline.ca. (2018). RETHINKING LEARNING & TEACHING IN THE DIGITAL

AGE: TEN KEY DEVELOPMENTS CHANGING THE DYNAMICS OF UNIVERSITIES
AND COLLEGES. Teachonline.ca. Retrieved 12 March 2018, from
https://teachonline.ca/tools-trends/insights-online-learning/2018-02-05/rethinking-
learning-teaching-digital-age-ten-key-developments-changing-dynamics
This report from Contact North Online Learning, a non-profit corporation funded by the
Government of Ontario, Canada, to provide services for higher education institutions,
13
students and staff, gives a brief overview of the ten key developments the authors view as
changing the dynamics of universities and colleges in 2018. Each of these developments has
the potential to impact the strategic plans and actions of higher educational institutions.
In such a short report the overview is fairly superficial but it definitely gives food for thought
as interesting themes emerge. The first of these is the link between higher education
programmes and the workplace, which emerges in a number of the key developments
outlined. The authors argue a need for programmes to prepare learners with both applied
workplace skills and high level abilities in team work, communication, project management
etc. Having undertaken a highly theoretical Masters in Publishing a number of years ago that
in no way prepared me for the realities of working in a publishing house, I fully agree that
today’s higher education institutions should aim to bridge the gap between the competencies
employers are seeking and the skills of graduates. The authors also highlight the increase in
popularity in more flexible routes to achieving accreditation, such as competency-based
courses, higher education institutions partnering with private sector organisations to offer
greater recognition for learning undertaken in the workplace, and more flexibility in the
recognition of learning. This is of interest to my own professional practice as my organisation
is involved in investigating the potential of an apprenticeship model for those pursuing a
career in early childhood care and education.
A second significant theme that emerges in this report is the potential for technology to
further open up mediums for learning to include a myriad of different learning styles and
competencies, for example, with simulations and games, thus opening further education up to
those who may not be suited to the more traditional academic modes of teaching and
learning. More emphasis could have been given here, however, to the potential for
technology to create more universal design, reducing the need for adaptation.
This report places an emphasis on the importance of relationships in higher education, which
is refreshing. In the rush to embrace the latest technology we can often forget that
relationships – between student and knowledge base, student and academic staff, peer
relationships, staff and knowledge base – are key to learning success. How these relationships
can be analysed as predictors of learning outcomes and student performance is not yet clear.
This does, however, raise questions as to the evolving role of the educator in the context of
14
technological advances in education, which I think will become more and more significant as
we navigate changing student-educator relationships.
Trowbridge, S., Waterbury, C., & Sudbury, L. (2017). Learning in Bursts: Microlearning
with Social Media. EDUCAUSE Review. Retrieved 9 March 2018, from
https://er.educause.edu/articles/2017/4/learning-in-bursts-microlearning-with-social-
media
In this article, Stephanie Trowbridge, director of Academic Technology Services, Clair

Waterbury, academic instructional technologist, and Lindsey Sudbury, senior academic
instructional technologist, Northeastern University, in Boston, Massachusetts consider
microlearning in a formal learning context. They investigate the tools and best pedagogical
practices for effectively creating and delivering microlearning, focusing on social media
platforms due to their ability to facilitate connected learning and peer interaction.
Microlearning offers short, focused bursts of learning that decrease the strain on working
memory, which, I feel, has the potential to reduce cognitive load, as outlined by Sweller
(1988). The question as to whether human attention spans are actually decreasing, as popular
media would have us believe, is raised in this article. However, the authors are contradictory
on this point, first stating that research is inconclusive but later declaring that “microlearning
has evolved in part due to the decreasing human attention span” (p.5). Whatever the case, I
have found microlearning to be a great opportunity to engage learners on a daily basis to
achieve a learning goal.
Introducing microlearning into a digital social environment can encourage learners to connect
the subject matter with their everyday lives and create learning communities with peers.
Many mediums offered by social media, such as video, podcasts, games and simulations, are
very suited to microlearning and can be very useful when the learner is learning a specific
skill and when they are short on time. A potential downside of microlearning, of course, is the
possibility that learners will not get a coherent holistic view of a topic.
15
This article highlights how various social media tools are used at Northeastern University to
create and encourage microlearning, which gives insight into existing practice and the short-
term results. However, it fails to offer any information as to the long-term impact on learners’
understanding and knowledge. Nor do the authors fully consider the ethical question as to
whether students should be asked to introduce formal learning into their digital social spaces
or whether this crosses a privacy boundary.
I have long been an advocate of microlearning in a informal context using apps such as
Duolingo to learn a new language or #1minuteCPD to improve digital skills. In a more formal
education context, microlearning offers an opportunity to engage students on a daily basis
and retain their interest and engagement. However, microlearning can only be successful if
closely linked to the learning objectives and the learning is active, with learners creating
content.
Sweller, J. (1988). Cognitive load during problem solving: Effects on learning. Cognitive
science, 12(2), 257-285. doi:10.1207/s15516709cog1202_4.
Woolf, B. P., Lane, H. C., Chaudhri, V. K., & Kolodner, J. L. (2013). AI Grand
Challenges for Education. AI Magazine, 34(4), 9.
In this article, Woolf, research professor in the School of Computer Science at the University
of Massachusetts; Lane, research scientist at the University of Southern California’s Institute
for Creative Technologies; Chaudhri, programme director in the Artificial Intelligence Center
at SRI International; and Kolodner, Regents’ Professor in the School of Interactive
Computing at the Georgia Institute of Technology, consider the contributions that artificial
intelligence (AI) can make to address long-term educational goals.
The authors outline five persistent challenges in education – how to allow for mentors for
every learner; the need for students to learn 21st century skills; how best to analyse
interaction data for learning; the need for universal access to global classrooms; and the
importance of lifelong. For each challenge, they offer a vision, goals and a brief research
agenda, examine global educational AI resources already in use and highlight areas that
16
require more research. AI has the potential to tailor learning to individual needs, connect
learners together, provide access to digital materials, support decentralized learning and
engage students in meaningful ways. In doing so, it offers a flexibility that is impossible to
create in traditional classrooms. The authors approach the five challenges in such a way that
it becomes clear is that they are all interlinked and that a social constructivist approach to
learning is key.
By recognising the challenges facing education and examining how AI could affect positive
impact on learning, the authors present a persuasive argument for investment into the
development of AI. As people need to engage in lifelong learning to keep abreast of rapid
changes in technology, the authors highlight how AI offers alternative teaching methods to
enhancing skills and reflects the increased demand for effective online learning.
The authors outline some interesting technology, already available or in development, that
offer a fascinating insight into future possibilities of how AI can support richer experiences
for learners. For example, physiological sensors of facial expression, posture and perspiration
that can evaluate student affect will be key to finding ways to instil motivation and interest in
learning and more intuitively respond to and engage with students. As the underlying
technologies continue to develop, AI has the potential to dramatically enhance online learning
and adaptive learning software.
It is interesting to note that although this article is now five years old, the AI technologies
described as already available are not consistently used in higher education worldwide and
certainly not in Ireland. Rather than feeling dated, therefore, the AI described still feels
largely futuristic in nature. Only one trend discussed, that of MOOCS, has seen large
advances and has become more prevalent over the past five years but the challenges the
authors raise around MOOCs, that of learners predominantly coming from highly educated
backgrounds, high drop-out rate etc., persist.
What is clear is that the technology described by the authors cannot affect education in
isolation. The main challenges facing education, slowly moving governmental educational
policy development, change management at institutional level and financial limitations, mean
the adoption of AI into existing educational practice is likely to be a slow process.
17
Furthermore, the possibilities for virtual tutors and more sophisticated adaptive learning tools
are likely to be met with concern that the technology cannot and should not replace educators.
This article outlines exciting possibilities for education and the seemingly endless potential
for AI – it offers the potential to explore problem-solving approaches, to form communities
of learning in authentic contexts and to prepare students for the workforce by supporting
them to develop skills such as creativity, critical thinking, communication and self direction -
but unfortunately it may be a while yet before we see the use of AI becoming common
practice in Ireland.
References
Alli, N., Rajan, R., & Ratliff, G. (7 March 2016). How Personalized Learning Unlocks
Student Success. EDUCAUSE Review Online. Retrieved 8 March 2018, from
https://er.educause.edu/articles/2016/3/how-personalized-learning-unlocks-student-
success
Dziuban, C., Graham, C. R., Moskal, P. D., Norberg, A., & Sicilia, N. (2018). Blended
learning: the new normal and emerging technologies. International Journal of
Educational Technology in Higher Education, 15(1), 3.
Grajek, S., & 2017–2018 EDUCAUSE IT Issues Panel. (29 January 2018). Top 10 IT Issues,
2018: The Remaking of Higher Education. EDUCAUSE. Retrieved 1 March 2018,
from https://er.educause.edu/articles/2018/1/top-10-it-issues-2018-the-remaking-of-
higher-education
Liu, M., McKelroy, E., Corliss, S. B., & Carrigan, J. (2017). Investigating the effect of an
adaptive learning intervention on students’ learning. Educational technology research
and development, 65(6), 1605-1625.
Rigole, N., Hollingsworth, L., & Ray, J. (2017). Badges and Gamification In eLearning:
Effects on Achievement And Engagement. SAIS 2017 Proceedings.13.
education. London: Jisc. Retrieved February, 8, 2017, from
https://www.jisc.ac.uk/reports/learning-analytics-in-higher-education
Slade, S., & Prinsloo, P. (2013). Learning analytics: Ethical issues and dilemmas. American
Behavioral Scientist, 57(10), 1510-1529.
18
Teachonline.ca. (5 February 2018). RETHINKING LEARNING & TEACHING IN THE

DIGITAL AGE: TEN KEY DEVELOPMENTS CHANGING THE DYNAMICS OF
UNIVERSITIES AND COLLEGES Teachonline.ca. Retrieved 12 March 2018, from
https://teachonline.ca/tools-trends/insights-online-learning/2018-02-05/rethinking-
learning-teaching-digital-age-ten-key-developments-changing-dynamics
Trowbridge, S., Waterbury, C., & Sudbury, L. (10 APRIL 2017). Learning in Bursts:
Microlearning with Social Media. EDUCAUSE Review. Retrieved 9 March 2018, from
https://er.educause.edu/articles/2017/4/learning-in-bursts-microlearning-with-social-
media
Woolf, B. P., Lane, H. C., Chaudhri, V. K., & Kolodner, J. L. (2013). AI Grand Challenges for
Education. AI Magazine, 34(4), 9.
19

Sinead Lawton - Trends in Elearning - Annotated Bibliography

Hochgeladen von

Dokumentinformationen

Originaltitel

Copyright

Verfügbare Formate

Dieses Dokument teilen

Dokument teilen oder einbetten

Freigabeoptionen

Stufen Sie dieses Dokument als nützlich ein?

Sind diese Inhalte unangemessen?

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

Sinead Lawton - Trends in Elearning - Annotated Bibliography

Hochgeladen von

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

Sinead Lawton, MSc Applied eLearning.

Module – Trends in eLearning, Annotated Bibliography

The authors offer a comprehensive overview of the potential of personalised learning,

Taking an individualised approach that focuses on students’ pre-existing knowledge, as

Ollendyke, B. (2018). NGDLE Is Really Just "Enigma" Misspelled. Available at

Changing culture in any organisation can be extremely challenging, particularly when

Advances in technologies present new opportunities for adapting instruction to individual

In my professional practice, learning analytics is currently being used to improve the

Teachonline.ca. (2018). RETHINKING LEARNING & TEACHING IN THE DIGITAL

In this article, Stephanie Trowbridge, director of Academic Technology Services, Clair

Teachonline.ca. (5 February 2018). RETHINKING LEARNING & TEACHING IN THE

Das könnte Ihnen auch gefallen