Nichols' Theory for eLearning - my views

Hypothesis 1: eLearning is a means of implementing education that can be applied within varying education models. 

Seems broadly right to me, although it seems to have some unique attributes of its own – e.g. blurring the line between formal and informal learning; giving the learner the ability to combine insights from widely differing fields; the whole process of tagging may be creating a mode of representation that is new and unique.

Hypothesis 2: eLearning enables unique forms of education that fit within the existing paradigms of face to face and distance education. 

Again, I broadly agree, but doesn’t it have the potential to do some things quite differently? E.g. peer review and assessment mechanisms – in theory these exist within face to face learning already, but doesn’t eLearning enable peer assessment to happen in a much more powerful way that, in reality, creates a new paradigm? (the tutorless course maybe?)

Hypothesis 3: The choice of eLearning tools should reflect rather than determine the pedagogy of a course: how technology is used is more important than which technology is used. 

Agree – the cart must not be put before the horse.

Hypothesis 4: eLearning advances primarily through the successful implementation of pedagogical innovation. 

I agree with the view that, in general, it will be breakthroughs in teaching practice that will make eLearning more useful and not breakthroughs in technology. But I do wonder about the phrase, “E-learning doesn’t change anything about how human beings learn.” I’d like to think that maybe something does happen differently when we learn online – e.g. if I think about how these forums work, I read a whole set of postings and, even when they contain threads, they all seem out of order and I can’t make sense of them immediately – yet maybe by some process of percolation, over time, my mind gets some new meaning from them – even though it may take days or weeks for new thoughts to emerge.

So I wonder whether the qualities of the internet – its ability to let us scan and read a lot of different materials, to wander and to go off tangent, to approach topics from a variety of directions, to sift and prioritise – I wonder whether within all of this there isn’t some form of learning happening quite differently from the traditional models.

Has anyone researched this yet? It would be interesting to know if brain-imaging technology showed different parts of the brain being activated when people learn in different ways.

Hypothesis 5: eLearning can be used in the presentation of content, and the facilitation of education processes. 

I don’t think the statement ‘technology is not process’ is quite correct – I think technology can be a process in its own right – e.g. tagging is a process that is purely possible because of technology (it is not simply facilitating an existing process) – and the categorisations it produces are learning products in their own right, not just means to an end.

Hypothesis 6: eLearning tools are best made to operate within a carefully selected and optimally integrated course design model. 

I strongly agree that ‘build it and they will come’ doesn’t work. I’m all for having a strong course model designed first. But I hope the hypothesis allows for iteration of the course design based on experience – eLearning tools can have unpredictable, yet useful, outcomes (e.g. they make it very easy for learning to go off on tangents). I think that as long as the learning outcomes are clear, there is no problem if the eLearning tools, by their nature, allow learners to go ‘off piste’, and indeed this latitude can allow for enhanced learning outcomes. The mind of enquiry is a bit like a river finding its course – it needs the freedom to meander.

For example, in this week’s activities, I found myself watching an Ayn Rand interview on YouTube. It wasn’t directly  relevant to learning theories, it was more about Ayn Rand explaining that her objectivism was a means of freeing people from the subjective views and values imposed by the religious and social institutions of her day. Yet, because constructivism was partly a reaction against objectivism, the interview indirectly gave me a useful perspective on cognitivism – I find the idea that knowledge exists outside the individual unattractive and I like the way that constructivism accords primacy to the individual constructing knowledge and making meaning -  but I now realize that cognitivism was one part of a positive social trend of trying to move society away from biased, institutional ideas (that were holding back people’s freedom to grow themselves) and more towards objective values – so it was actually part of a trend towards respecting the individual’s autonomy to think things through for themselves rather than have ideas and values imposed by others.

Hypothesis 7: eLearning tools and techniques should be used only after consideration has been given to online and offine trade-offs. 

Agreed given the current situation, where access to the internet and wireless devices is not ubiquitous. I don’t, however, understand why this hypothesis will still stand in the future when everyone has wireless and bandwidth is no longer an issue.

Hypotheses 8 (Effective eLearning practice considers the ways in which end-users will engage with the learning opportunities provided to them); 9 (the overall aim of education does not change when eLearning is applied) and 10 (only pedagogical advantages will provide a lasting rationale for implementing eLearning approaches.

I agreed with these.