e-learning standards for educators

e-Learning is getting more popular. When we develop e-learning utilities or courses, how can we ensure the quality of e-learning? To ensure the quality of e-learning, standards have been proposed and developed. The design and implementation of e-learning should then follow the standards, the "standard" of the courses can be maintained to an acceptable level. Besides, the reusability and interoperability of the e-learning “products” can be enhanced.

Many resources regarding e-learning standards are available on the Internet. I found one paper, "The American Federation of Teachers (AFT), Distance Education: Guidelines for Good Practice” - prepared by THE HIGHER EDUCATION PROGRAM AND POLICY COUNCIL OF THE AMERICAN FEDERATION OF TEACHERS May 2000, provides very useful guidelines (You may press HERE to view the paper).

On this paper, a total of 14 standards have been stated. AFT has long been active in distance education. This report constitutes the next step in the AFT’s involvement. In the fall 1999 academic term, the union surveyed 200 members of AFT higher education locals who are themselves practitioners of distance education to produce this report. These standards are expected to be applicable equally to public, private, non-profit, and for-profit educational providers.

Heading of these standards are listed below and the implications to our eLearning course development are briefly discussed.

1. Faculty must retain academic control

Distance learning courses should be reviewed and approved in advance in order to receive college credit. Teaching and research faculty, together curriculum specialists must be involved.

2. Faculty must be prepared to meet the special requirements of teaching at a distance

Proficiency in the communications technology employed is a must. Strategies and skills to communicate with students electronically in the absence of visual and oral cues is a must.

3. Course Design should be shaped to the potentials of the medium

Course design (curriculum planning, class projects, visual aids, library materials and student interaction) should not be replicate of the traditional classrooms, but be maximizing the potential of the medium that will be employed.

4. Student must fully understand course requirements and be prepared to succeed

Students must be prepared of the new mode of learning and teaching. For example, they should be given a clear statement of course requirements in advance and their responses to be submitted electronically.

5. Close personal interaction must be maintained

Distance learning should not scarify close personal interactions, real-time electronic interchange and asynchronous forms of communication must be available.

6. Class size should be set through normal faculty channels

This is to ensure that education rather than bureaucratic or financial considerations drive the process.

7. Course should cover all material

The amount and the depth of material covered should equal that of a classroom-based course.

8. Experimentation with a broad variety of subjects should be encouraged

The process should be reviewed very carefully and courses that have been unsuccessful should not be offered in future.

9. Equivalent research opportunities must be provided

Distance learning students are provided with same opportunities as the traditional students. They should be given assess to all possible electronic research material.

10. Student assessment should be comparable

The level of achievement expected of students, and tested for in a distance education environment, should be as challenging as that in a classroom-based course.

11. Equivalent advisement opportunities must be offered

Same-time same-place advisement should be made available.

12. Faculty should retain creative control over use and re-use of materials.

Students should have guarantee that the course they take is of the same quality as before and has been updated to reflect changes in the subject area.

13. Full undergraduate degree programs should include same-time same-place coursework

The faculty should assume responsibility for carefully considering how much coursework is appropriate to be obtained through distance education. A full program taught at a distance may be acceptable as determined by the faculty.

14. Evaluation of distance coursework should be undertaken at all levels.

We must conduct more rigorous evaluation of distance education programs and disseminate the results broadly.

TSE Chi Kui (Andy)

1988054934

Mind Map of Learning Theory

http://www.mindmeister.com/maps/show/61822302%20
Mind Map of Learning Theory

Session 2 Activity: Review of “Air Pollution”

First Impression
As compare to other provided teaching examples, the topic of “Air Pollution” is somehow fall into the category of General Education which may require less detailed professional terminologies when delivering the content.
The theme design with green color, plants, tall mentions, as well as animations is quite match with the idea of “Environmental protection” under “Air Pollution”, thus I would consider it as a positive point, since students are easily get into the topic and somehow know that: “Okay, we are going to studies something green.”

The expected outcome
At the end of the day, students are required to work on a proposal which not only contains the current air pollution facts, but also possible solutions to air pollution of which can be considered as a cognitive artifact. During the research process, students are also expecting to raise their consciousness of seriousness of air pollution. When we review the whole project based on the Basic model of Learning Activities, we can identify that both Learners and Artifact are there, but how about the tools?

Contents (cognitive tools)
I am not sure the material is prepared for senior students in primary school or secondary school students, but after I examine the contents of the whole project, I would tend to believe it is a project activity for secondary school students.
The first three parts: “About Air Pollution”, “Impact of Air Pollution” and “Keeping the air clean” are mainly stating some fact sheets about the air pollution. I suppose the cognitive tools used here are limited to some animations and concept maps. 

The lack of tools used here may result a one-way communication between teacher and students and it will be hard for students to develop a cognitive network between all the facts of “Elements of air”, “major Elements of polluted air” and “the cause of air pollution”.
When it comes to the final project page, only a simple picture with minimum explanation is showing. I doubt students will have same question as me”Where is it?” “If I want to examine places near my home, where can I get the tools to picture the same map with spotted dots?” Furthermore, although it stated what kind of information should be included in the project, it lacks of more useful information to tell students where to find information and how to evaluate your project.

Posted by Sophie Gu Jiaying

Session 2 - Learning Theories

Air Pollution

Values

Through this activity students’ awareness on air-pollution were evoked and they also realized they contributed a lot to air-pollution in their daily life unconsciously.

Student learned various threaten caused by air-pollution such as global warming, ozone depletion and acid rain and how to avoid those threats.

Strength

Student would stimulated on thinking how they can help to prevent the earth form air-pollution, knowing the fact of threaten bought by air-pollution, finally students gain problem solving skills with this activity.

Limitation

The proposal would be bounded from the first three sections and the suggestion stated on the proposal requirement, because the statement said “From time to time you should refer to the three learning objects presented in the previous sections” and “We suggest that you begin your project with mind map”, it not only limit research process but also limited their thinking process.

Cognitivism

Cognitivism, stress on the learner’s mental processes such as thinking, memory, knowing and problem solving.

In this activity the designer provide some fact and information to the learner. The designer intends to change the learner’s schema by providing such information.

Kinley Chan Cho Kin