Is e-learning better than traditional classroom learning?

Hello Radhika,

You might consider talking about means of delivery (online/offline), communication methods (synchronous/asynchronous), and learning theory (e.g., behavioralism, cognitivism, social constructivism, connectivism, etc.) when discussing e-learning. Also, notions of face-to-face, blended, online blended, and distance learning are also important distinctions when talking about e-learning. Finally, the line between formal and informal learning continues to dissipate which has both a positive and negative impact on all the stakeholders involved.

In my view, e-learning offers affordances (i.e., potential for action) that face-to-face classes simply do not have, but this is only a potential advantage as George has eluded to above. There is only a potential advantage given all the variables mentioned in the above paragraph.

P.S. Personally, I have found dichotomized discussions of this type (e-learning vs. traditional classroom) usually leading to various "shades of gray".

Hello Radhika, You might consider talking about means of delivery (online/offline), communication methods (synchronous/asynchronous), and learning theory (e.g., behavioralism, cognitivism, social constructivism, connectivism, etc.) when discussing e-learning. Also, notions of face-to-face, blended, online blended, and distance learning are also important distinctions when talking about e-learning. Finally, the line between formal and informal learning continues to dissipate which has both a positive and negative impact on all the stakeholders involved. In my view, e-learning offers affordances (i.e., potential for action) that face-to-face classes simply do not have, but this is only a potential advantage as George has eluded to above. There is only a potential advantage given all the variables mentioned in the above paragraph. P.S. Personally, I have found dichotomized discussions of this type (e-learning vs. traditional classroom) usually leading to various "shades of gray".

Save Cancel

Great Radhika, good luck with your presentation! I would add that many sites like Wikieducator (http://wikieducator.org/Main_Page) and Merlot (http://www.merlot.org/merlot/index.htm) already have a ton of open educational resources at your disposal. You might check them out!

Great Radhika, good luck with your presentation! I would add that many sites like Wikieducator (http://wikieducator.org/Main_Page) and Merlot (http://www.merlot.org/merlot/index.htm) already have a ton of open educational resources at your disposal. You might check them out!

Save Cancel

Chris says, "Assessments also has to be richer and demonstrate skills learned. The evaluation has to be based on the content of the course and the outcomes expected. Thus, 'grading on the curve' will not provide the needed information required by the learner or the teacher to prove value."

I would add that assessments should measure level of understand, skill set, and habits of mind (or disposition). These three concepts are usually measured in terms of formal and informal assessments (i.e., tests, quizzes, academic prompts, portfolios, performance tasks, etc.). I think assessments should be equally as rich regardless of the type of class being offered: f2f, blended class, or distance class.

In my opinion, grading on the curve fails to provide the "needed information" required by the learner regardless of the type of class being offered: f2f, blended class, or distance class. The distinction here really has to do with whether test items are criterion-referenced or norm-referenced. But if someone has opposing views, I'm all ears!

Chris says, "Assessments also has to be richer and demonstrate skills learned. The evaluation has to be based on the content of the course and the outcomes expected. Thus, 'grading on the curve' will not provide the needed information required by the learner or the teacher to prove value." I would add that assessments should measure level of understand, skill set, and habits of mind (or disposition). These three concepts are usually measured in terms of formal and informal assessments (i.e., tests, quizzes, academic prompts, portfolios, performance tasks, etc.). I think assessments should be equally as rich regardless of the type of class being offered: f2f, blended class, or distance class. In my opinion, grading on the curve fails to provide the "needed information" required by the learner regardless of the type of class being offered: f2f, blended class, or distance class. The distinction here really has to do with whether test items are criterion-referenced or norm-referenced. But if someone has opposing views, I'm all ears!

Save Cancel

Hi-

I think that rather than trying to decide if one is better than the other, we need to recognize that online learning does provide options for learners who may not be able to participate in face-to-face learning.

Distance learning is not new, although the computers and the internet have added new dimensions of possibility. I think that rather than wasting time trying to decide which is better, we need to focus on how the make online learning most effective. I know that as a teacher, I am slowly becoming confident teaching online and exploiting the potential of online learning, but there is definitely a learning curve for instructors as well as students.

At this stage, it is very easy to make all kinds of claims about online learning, but there is very little empirical evidence to support many of them... (I'm not suggesting that there is one answer to the questions, but that what seems self-evident isn't always so upon closer examination...)

Mary

Hi- I think that rather than trying to decide if one is better than the other, we need to recognize that online learning does provide options for learners who may not be able to participate in face-to-face learning. Distance learning is not new, although the computers and the internet have added new dimensions of possibility. I think that rather than wasting time trying to decide which is better, we need to focus on how the make online learning most effective. I know that as a teacher, I am slowly becoming confident teaching online and exploiting the potential of online learning, but there is definitely a learning curve for instructors as well as students. At this stage, it is very easy to make all kinds of claims about online learning, but there is very little empirical evidence to support many of them... (I'm not suggesting that there is one answer to the questions, but that what seems self-evident isn't always so upon closer examination...) Mary

Save Cancel

Haha funny experience Sebastian Sir .
And this is a " shades of grey " debate in end Benjamin. Thanks a lot for the points . I will make sure to include them during the presentation :D !
Actually the reason I will be giving the presentation, is to get my school to make e-teaching supplementary to the normal classes. :D ! So it would end in a blend of traditional and e-teaching .

Haha funny experience Sebastian Sir . And this is a " shades of grey " debate in end Benjamin. Thanks a lot for the points . I will make sure to include them during the presentation :D ! Actually the reason I will be giving the presentation, is to get my school to make e-teaching supplementary to the normal classes. :D ! So it would end in a blend of traditional and e-teaching .

Save Cancel

Hey thanks a ton for your reply George . Your post did confuse me when i read it for the 1st time but after reading again, I totally get your point and agree. The reason I went on to ask this question was because (as you mentioned in your post) , most of the online teaching methods are too similar to the classroom ones. So other than the fact that I don't need to move out of my house to attend a class I find it the same . But yes, if we do manage a new technique of teaching that allows integration of left and right brain then online teaching methods can be cool . But then again so many schools are already using Audio Visual techniques to educate the students. Uhh..It's tough to get an answer !!

Hey thanks a ton for your reply George . Your post did confuse me when i read it for the 1st time but after reading again, I totally get your point and agree. The reason I went on to ask this question was because (as you mentioned in your post) , most of the online teaching methods are too similar to the classroom ones. So other than the fact that I don't need to move out of my house to attend a class I find it the same . But yes, if we do manage a new technique of teaching that allows integration of left and right brain then online teaching methods can be cool . But then again so many schools are already using Audio Visual techniques to educate the students. Uhh..It's tough to get an answer !!

Save Cancel

Cool Benjamin , will do that .
And George me totally confused by your last comment . Can you please explain ?

Cool Benjamin , will do that . And George me totally confused by your last comment . Can you please explain ?

Save Cancel

The real question here is not if teaching or learning online is better than face to face or part face to face and part online, it is how does the learner and public in general feel about online courses. If the learner doesn't feel comfortable or feels that online courses are limited, than the online course will die a slow death. With that said, it is important for online courses to be of value.

Online courses do have some real advantages for busy people. It allows for learning anytime and anywhere. But to take advantage of this, one has input course information in very manner very different than face to face courses. There has to be concrete ways of demonstrating the elements of the course, one has to use the computing capabilities to enhance the material. Lectures can not be just a voice with a body.

Assessments also has to be richer and demonstrate skills learned. The evaluation has to be based on the content of the course and the outcomes expected. Thus, 'grading on the curve' will not provide the needed information required by the learner or the teacher to prove value.

If we want to succeed as online course developers or providers we need to think about who will take the course, how we attract these learners and what we can offer different than other providers. It is our duty as providers and developers to prove to our learners that we are professionals providing them with a worthly service that will improve their abilities.

The real question here is not if teaching or learning online is better than face to face or part face to face and part online, it is how does the learner and public in general feel about online courses. If the learner doesn't feel comfortable or feels that online courses are limited, than the online course will die a slow death. With that said, it is important for online courses to be of value. Online courses do have some real advantages for busy people. It allows for learning anytime and anywhere. But to take advantage of this, one has input course information in very manner very different than face to face courses. There has to be concrete ways of demonstrating the elements of the course, one has to use the computing capabilities to enhance the material. Lectures can not be just a voice with a body. Assessments also has to be richer and demonstrate skills learned. The evaluation has to be based on the content of the course and the outcomes expected. Thus, 'grading on the curve' will not provide the needed information required by the learner or the teacher to prove value. If we want to succeed as online course developers or providers we need to think about who will take the course, how we attract these learners and what we can offer different than other providers. It is our duty as providers and developers to prove to our learners that we are professionals providing them with a worthly service that will improve their abilities.

Save Cancel

It is easy to blame an orange for not being an apple and vice versa. The critic can choose his frame of reference and pick out points of weakness or failure. One cannot pit online against traditional teaching. They are complementary. Let us call it Yin and Yang.
As the 21st century learners are more and more tech savvy, "always connected",we, the teachers have to connect and use tech to reach them. Hence the need for eTeaching and eLearning. Social evolution is slow whereas technological evolution is super fast.
The other day, I had to use my mobile to get my daughter serve me my dinner. We were both at home. At home or not, she is more at home with her iPod!!

It is easy to blame an orange for not being an apple and vice versa. The critic can choose his frame of reference and pick out points of weakness or failure. One cannot pit online against traditional teaching. They are complementary. Let us call it Yin and Yang. As the 21st century learners are more and more tech savvy, "always connected",we, the teachers have to connect and use tech to reach them. Hence the need for eTeaching and eLearning. Social evolution is slow whereas technological evolution is super fast. The other day, I had to use my mobile to get my daughter serve me my dinner. We were both at home. At home or not, she is more at home with her iPod!!

Save Cancel

A final note of warning...  Some students are not really part of the digital age and would not benefit from some of the ideas we are discussing herein.  Most of my paradigm and researchrelates to students who have grown up not only under the influence of TV but also phone texting, video games and other pervasive online activities.  This not only affects their social norms and prefered learning medium it actually rewires their brains.  This conflict with left brain vs right brain dominant learners may not reflect the reality of your students.  The great thing about WIZIQ is that we do not have to choose the best.  Both can be served in our learning community.

sorry I do not have siting for picture at top
all of my thoughts can be found on my main blog here:
http://www.myeslfriends.blogspot.com/

A final note of <strong><span style="color: red;">warning</span></strong>...&nbsp; Some students are not really part of the digital age and would not benefit from some of the ideas we are discussing herein.&nbsp; Most of my paradigm and researchrelates to students who have grown up not only under the influence of TV but also phone texting, video games and other pervasive online activities.&nbsp; This not only affects their social norms and prefered learning medium it actually rewires their brains.&nbsp; This conflict with left brain vs right brain dominant learners may not reflect the reality of your students.&nbsp; <span style="background-color: lime; font-size: large;">The great thing about WIZIQ is that we do not have to choose the best.&nbsp; Both can be served in our learning community.</span> <span style="background-color: white; font-size: x-small;">sorry I do not have siting for picture at top</span> <span style="font-size: x-small;">all of my thoughts can be found on my main blog here:</span> <span style="font-size: x-small;"><a href="http://www.myeslfriends.blogspot.com/">http://www.myeslfriends.blogspot.com/</a></span>

Save Cancel

2 2=? There is a right answer to this question. It is 4.
In the world of human interaction the right thing isn't such an universally discoverable truth. If one lives in a black/white world. Or, demands choices in an either/or format, then you have a tough decision as how to proceed.

If, on the other hand, you choose to proceed in a both/and paradigm the answer (to "Am I doing the right thing?") becomes a moot point.

The old world order of left brain dominance and dictatorial rule by the academic elite would assume that there is one best answer. There must be one answer as scientific inquirery by-and-large does not stop until it does find the one or best answer. If you can convince your audience to pretend, just for a moment, that another world was possible...

A world where dogmatic assumptions on the perfection of humans and knowleddge based systems could co-exist with less-than-perfect beings and other value systems, e.g. experiential, spiritual and wisdom value systems, then you would have moved the world closer to a place where we could begin to discuss the merits of alternative forms of education.

Until you can move your self and your audience to a point where they can begin to open to a both/and world, better will always equate to only. And, change is a threat instead of an opportunity.

Good luck in your presentation. Sorry if I have totally confused the issue for you.

George

PS Do not make the mistake of thinking that just because a person is teaching online, it then means that it can be acceptable. Most of the teaching I have seen is in truth, simply a disembodied version of the exact same thing they do in the "real" world. I am speaking of something new. Something that is different in a very fundamental way. Something that meets the need of a new creature entirely. The online learner is not only from half a world away. He/she has a different way of processing information. Even their brain is wired differently than previous generations. Their value systems are totally foreign to previous living generations. They can act like they fit into our paradigm and teaching systems/styles but it is becoming increasingly difficult to do so.

Many are dropping out of the mainline schools or are not sccessful in them. Us old timers assume that they are lazy or something is wrong with them. The truth, in my opinnion, is that the problem lies not with them, it lies with us. If we, as teachers and mentors of future generations are to pass on anything, we must quickly rethink our own understandings and systems.

2 2=? There is a right answer to this question. It is 4. In the world of human interaction the right thing isn't such an universally discoverable truth. If one lives in a black/white world. Or, demands choices in an either/or format, then you have a tough decision as how to proceed. If, on the other hand, you choose to proceed in a both/and paradigm the answer (to "Am I doing the right thing?") becomes a moot point. The old world order of left brain dominance and dictatorial rule by the academic elite would assume that there is one best answer. There must be one answer as scientific inquirery by-and-large does not stop until it does find the one or best answer. If you can convince your audience to pretend, just for a moment, that another world was possible... A world where dogmatic assumptions on the perfection of humans and knowleddge based systems could co-exist with less-than-perfect beings and other value systems, e.g. experiential, spiritual and wisdom value systems, then you would have moved the world closer to a place where we could begin to discuss the merits of alternative forms of education. Until you can move your self and your audience to a point where they can begin to open to a both/and world, better will always equate to only. And, change is a threat instead of an opportunity. Good luck in your presentation. Sorry if I have totally confused the issue for you. George PS Do not make the mistake of thinking that just because a person is teaching online, it then means that it can be acceptable. Most of the teaching I have seen is in truth, simply a disembodied version of the exact same thing they do in the "real" world. I am speaking of something new. Something that is different in a very fundamental way. Something that meets the need of a new creature entirely. The online learner is not only from half a world away. He/she has a different way of processing information. Even their brain is wired differently than previous generations. Their value systems are totally foreign to previous living generations. They can act like they fit into our paradigm and teaching systems/styles but it is becoming increasingly difficult to do so. Many are dropping out of the mainline schools or are not sccessful in them. Us old timers assume that they are lazy or something is wrong with them. The truth, in my opinnion, is that the problem lies not with them, it lies with us. If we, as teachers and mentors of future generations are to pass on anything, we must quickly rethink our own understandings and systems.

Save Cancel

The following is an excerpt from "The Wall Street Journal" a conservative US newspaper the full article is available here:
http://alturl.com/ipz8

Since the Internet hit the big time in the mid-1990s, Amazon and eBay have changed the way we shop, Google has revolutionized the way we find information, Facebook has superseded other ways to keep track of friends and iTunes has altered how we consume music. But kids remain stuck in analog schools. Part of the reason online education hasn't taken off is that powerful forces such as teachers unions -- which prefer to keep students in traditional classrooms under the supervision of their members -- are aligned against it.

So children continue to learn from blackboards and books -- the kind made of dead trees! no hyperlinks! -- rather than getting lessons the way they consume virtually all other information: online. Putting reading materials and lecture notes on the Internet, like many teachers do today, is just the first step; it's like when, in the early days of movies, filmmakers pointed a camera at a stage play. Kids are still stuck watching those old-style movies, when they could be enjoying the learning equivalent of "Avatar" in 3-D. Thousands of ninth-grade English teachers are cobbling together yet another lecture on the Globe Theatre in Shakespeare's day, when YouTube is overflowing with accessible, multimedia presentations from experts on Elizabethan theater construction, not to mention a very nice illustrated series on the Kennedy Center's ArtsEdge site.

The following is an excerpt from "The Wall Street Journal" a conservative US newspaper the full article is available here: http://alturl.com/ipz8 Since the Internet hit the big time in the mid-1990s, Amazon and eBay have changed the way we shop, Google has revolutionized the way we find information, Facebook has superseded other ways to keep track of friends and iTunes has altered how we consume music. But kids remain stuck in analog schools. Part of the reason online education hasn't taken off is that powerful forces such as teachers unions -- which prefer to keep students in traditional classrooms under the supervision of their members -- are aligned against it. So children continue to learn from blackboards and books -- the kind made of dead trees! no hyperlinks! -- rather than getting lessons the way they consume virtually all other information: online. Putting reading materials and lecture notes on the Internet, like many teachers do today, is just the first step; it's like when, in the early days of movies, filmmakers pointed a camera at a stage play. Kids are still stuck watching those old-style movies, when they could be enjoying the learning equivalent of "Avatar" in 3-D. Thousands of ninth-grade English teachers are cobbling together yet another lecture on the Globe Theatre in Shakespeare's day, when YouTube is overflowing with accessible, multimedia presentations from experts on Elizabethan theater construction, not to mention a very nice illustrated series on the Kennedy Center's ArtsEdge site.

Save Cancel

I assume Radhika does not consider this a binary issue. Since we all agree on this, I express that I have asked myself the same question in the broad sense that is being treated and that, as I always do, I try to break big problems into smaller parts. Since most likely we have different backgrounds and interests, I will try to be as general as possible.
1) Local and personal reality. If for some reason the knowledge, views and experience that you want (and are able) to share with learners does not seem to find enough interest in your community, there might be an advantage in online teaching over f2f (face to face). Again, this also depends on your ability to move to another community and availability of a learning institution that might provide the appropriate physical setting. If, however, you have decided on teaching in your community for altruistic or any other reason, you might not consider any other argument than f2f, especially if the intended learners do not have the necessary internet and gear due to financial reasons.
2) The subject matter: there are some topics that lend more easily to f2f than online, such as practical demonstrations, to mention just one. It might end up being a question of ability and/or cost of developing teaching material, weighed against the impact of touchable experiments in f2f. I know from experience that it is a tough choice.
3) Somewhat derived from section 1) are your career goals which include the financial situation and goals of the whole family.
These are only a few of the criteria which I consider important. Quite on purpose I have not even mentioned the all-important considerations of didactics and deeper topics; the intelligent views expressed by of all of you take us well underway toward that arena.
In summary, I offer you a phrase extracted from a poem by Antonio Machado:
“ . . .Caminante, no hay camino,
se hace camino al andar . . ."
Which, loosely translated means: Traveler, there is no road, the road is made by traveling.
Thanks,
José

I assume Radhika does not consider this a binary issue. Since we all agree on this, I express that I have asked myself the same question in the broad sense that is being treated and that, as I always do, I try to break big problems into smaller parts. Since most likely we have different backgrounds and interests, I will try to be as general as possible. 1) Local and personal reality. If for some reason the knowledge, views and experience that you want (and are able) to share with learners does not seem to find enough interest in your community, there might be an advantage in online teaching over f2f (face to face). Again, this also depends on your ability to move to another community and availability of a learning institution that might provide the appropriate physical setting. If, however, you have decided on teaching in your community for altruistic or any other reason, you might not consider any other argument than f2f, especially if the intended learners do not have the necessary internet and gear due to financial reasons. 2) The subject matter: there are some topics that lend more easily to f2f than online, such as practical demonstrations, to mention just one. It might end up being a question of ability and/or cost of developing teaching material, weighed against the impact of touchable experiments in f2f. I know from experience that it is a tough choice. 3) Somewhat derived from section 1) are your career goals which include the financial situation and goals of the whole family. These are only a few of the criteria which I consider important. Quite on purpose I have not even mentioned the all-important considerations of didactics and deeper topics; the intelligent views expressed by of all of you take us well underway toward that arena. In summary, I offer you a phrase extracted from a poem by Antonio Machado: “ . . .Caminante, no hay camino, se hace camino al andar . . ." Which, loosely translated means: Traveler, there is no road, the road is made by traveling. Thanks, José

Save Cancel