Draft

originally published in: Ebner, M., Petrovic, M. (2012), E-Learning Model in Practice Does it Work and Fit?, Global Time Conference 2012, p. 1-7

E-Learning Model in Practice Does it Work and Fit?

Martin Ebner Graz University of Technology Austria martin.ebner@tugraz.at Marina Petrovi Pedagogical faculty in Sombor Serbia marina.petrovic@pef.uns.ac.rs
Abstract: This paper presents a general model of e-learning in higher education and compares four running e-learning courses for further education to each other. The courses are described and their account within the model is discussed. The main question in this context is to find out whether it is possible to make a generalization over all courses or not? In fact of all different impact factors, such as teaching strategies, scopes and results as well as their changes during the courses, it can be concluded that this e-learning model works in general for this kind of courses anyway.

Introduction
There are a number of analyses of different e-learning strategies and models (Freitas, 2004), but there is no universal model that fits all teaching strategies and learning styles of individuals. A suggested model for a specific elearning strategy should combine the learning scope, the learning result, and the necessary teaching strategy. Nowadays each e-learning platform mostly provides its own model and did not point more to a general one. The great possibilities of ICT and its rapid development promote the necessity to create and develop just theoretical models and frameworks in which each of these practical courses can be categorized, sorted or arranged. But inventions of such models are quite hard, especially because theories and theoretical examples of e-learning do not follow this development with adequate speed. Furthermore, we are now in a situation where most of e-learning courses just implement the classical theory of learning, many of them are created in the early 21th century (Nichols, 2003). This paper aims to contribute to developing the general theory of e-learning model, to provide just a first step towards a generalization and categorization. This publication presents and analyzes a general model, developed on base of long-term research activities at Graz University of Technology (TU Graz) (Ebner, 2005). In order to verify its applicability in general the provided model will be compared to four courses, designed for the professional education of teachers in primary and secondary schools. We tried to answer whether it is possible to make a generalization over all courses or not? Is it possible to place the investigated courses within the provided e-Learning model? In this sense, the work contributes to the theoretical considerations of the general model for e-learning, supported by concrete examples of practice. Its significance lies in the attempt to extract the universal aspects of e-learning, and to provide guidance for further discussion.

Overview and analysis of the general model at TU Graz

Figure 1 shows a general model of e-learning in higher education, designed for students of technical sciences at TU Graz (Ebner, 2005).

Draft originally published in: Ebner, M., Petrovic, M. (2012), E-Learning Model in Practice Does it Work and Fit?, Global Time Conference 2012, p. 1-7

Fig. 1. E-learning model for higher education and technical sciences (Ebner, 2005) The learning results, learning objectives, and teaching strategies were developed especially for this target group of TU Graz teachers and students. If learning is understood as an interactive, social process, that takes place in real time, the proposed model can be regarded as an excellent way to present the existing interdependence of these three most important factors in learning and teaching. Our general model is actually composed of three different sub-models. Table 1 shows the same model in little bit different way the three different sub-models in dependence of a time factor: e-learning by distributing declarative knowledge using explaining e-learning by interacting conceptual knowledge understanding tutoring e-learning by collaborating procedural knowledge doing coaching Time Table 1: Overview of sub-models and their general characteristics over time The table underlines the core statement that the Learning results are of highest relevance to the model because they dictate the goals and teaching strategies. They reflect best how students gradually develop knowledge: from declarative, through conceptual to procedural ways of learning, which is by the way a direct application of their profession. Learning programming is a good example for this procedure. Multiple questionnaires on freshmen at TU Graz (Nagler & Ebner, 2009) (Ebner & Nagler, 2010) (Ebner et al, 2011) tell us that students enter university with basic, general programming knowledge. Most of them are without distinct knowledge in their field of study, but in general high equipped with digital technologies. Their ICT knowledge is very general and attests a superficial use of the World Wide Web (especially social networks) for their private usage. The goal of the university is of course to educate young students to professionals who then have the necessary procedural knowledge to work in their profession and to use the technology given. ICT has one more impact on the teaching strategy (compare figure 1) and the teachers role changing dramatically from pure ex-cathedra teaching to a tutorial process oriented one. The processes of learning shifts from teacher-regulated to a self-regulated one. Today a teacher has to face a couple of more things and fulfill different new roles: organizer, moderator, contributor, mentor, tutor, counselor etc. In comparison to the provided model, all of these roles are represented simply by three steps: explaining, tutoring and coaching. A detailed look must be taken on the sub-models, first addressed by Reinmann-Rothmeier (Reinmann-Rothmeier, 2003): Step 1 - e-learning by distributing - is characterized by mainly online delivering of digital learning materials with rare use of online communication between students and teachers. Lecture notes that are available assistant a first glance mainly declarative knowledge of general and vocational subjects, which

Learning results Learning scope Teaching strategy

Draft originally published in: Ebner, M., Petrovic, M. (2012), E-Learning Model in Practice Does it Work and Fit?, Global Time Conference 2012, p. 1-7

students of technical sciences must overcome at the beginning of their studies. Nevertheless e-learning by distributing is the beginning of any e-learning activity. With other words without delivering digital learning content follow up e-learning scenarios wont work. At this early stage, students are expected to master the information and facts from the field, to know how to recognize processes, objects, events, and to describe their properties stating, mainly without knowing main concepts and causes. As it is practically the definition of declarative knowledge, this is exactly the step characterizes declarative knowledge as a result of learning efforts. The scope of learning is therefore the use of information in an appropriate context. Teaching strategies associated with this step are explanations of unclear terms. This can be carried out online if needed or in live meetings, consultations or in the classroom. In other words, we have a flow of information from one to many. E-learning by distribution is described best by Knowing that. Step 2 - E-learning by interacting - is characterized by two things: interaction with learning content and interaction between people. Interacting with learning content primarily refers to the use of especially prepared materials (Flash animations, Java applets, simulations, games ...), so called interactive learning objects (ILO) that allow students to choose activities, and on this basis to get feedback from the ILO in order to react. In this case, students communicate only with their devices. Interaction with others refers to the communication between students and teachers, as well as communication between the students. The mentoring situation of teachers change from explaining to tutoring. By definition, a tutor can also be a graduate student to help undergraduate students understanding learning content specifically for a certain subject or even take in the teachers role. The teacher can be for example an online tutor who assists students at certain times or at specific requests by the student. Support is most often provided through suitable software tools for communication such as chat, forums, whiteboards, web conferencing, etc., or even during a live stream. This stages a typical example of a blended model of e-learning. Lecture content are prepared to encourage curiosity, in regard to research and understanding of the processes, phenomena and events that are taught. The result of these teaching efforts is conceptual knowledge characterized by linking terms into a conceptual network of knowledge, through analysis and finally reflection is leading to understanding. Understanding is the learning objective for this stage. E-learning by interacting is characterized by Knowing why. Step 3- E-learning by collaborating - aims learning in real life scenarios or working tasks, in the group, on specific complex problems and in cooperation with others. In short, it can be stated learning by doing (Dewey, 1916) and collaborating. This stage of e-learning is offered to students at a higher level which means they have already enough expertise and are able to understand the rules, algorithms, procedures and are able to apply their knowledge directly to the task or problem. Situated learning scenarios, problem based learning, self-regulated learning are the keywords of this stage. From a theoretical perspective procedural knowledge is the result of all learning efforts. The teacher's role is to assist and guide the student to choose a better learning strategy, more efficient techniques to improve learning, to focus on how to easily get the necessary information and how to choose among them important from unimportant. The teacher as a coach, is an upgrade of a mentoring role, and implies that the students work independently because they were taught to learn that way. This stage is very demanding, both for students and teachers, and naturally it is a progression of the previous two stages, just like shown in figure 1. E-learning by collaborating is characterized by Know-How.

Brief review of courses for employees in education

For an employee in education it is hard to keep up with latest trends and developments in teaching because their own schooling often dates back to years or even decades. Especially in the field of ICT they lack knowledge and capability of good didactics. According to that, teachers are an excellent example of the necessity for lifelong learning. On the other hand, very often our students get bored in a traditional classroom because of classic teaching. Regarding this, some effort has been made in Serbia. It was tried to train teachers to take advantage of ICT. With the approval of the Ministry of Education and Science in Serbia, we created and delivered some training seminars for employees in education. Seminars are graded for basic knowledge needs, for acquiring the ICT skill to work with other pears totally independently. All seminars were realized as courses on the Learning Management System (LMS) Moodle, from September 2010 to November 2011, and were situated at: http://www.azomj.com/moodle. Teachers attended to the courses across the country. From October 2010 to November 2011 427 participants passed in summary. In Serbia this way of training is a very new; a huge number of teachers even do not

Draft originally published in: Ebner, M., Petrovic, M. (2012), E-Learning Model in Practice Does it Work and Fit?, Global Time Conference 2012, p. 1-7

know how to use a computer and Internet technology in general; little money funds for professional development allocated by the Ministry of Education and Science in Serbia. 1) Tools for e-classroom Description / purpose / idea of the seminar: Through the processing of various software tools, teachers were taught to self-use ICT and to change their classrooms to e-classroom. The aim was to create teaching materials and to offer them to the students. They then should choose which material they will use for being taught, following the principles of individualization of teaching and differentiation with respect for different learning styles of individuals. Within the final meeting, participants went through knowledge tests, and represented their best work done during the seminar as well as discussed their results. During a year, this seminar was passed by 266 participants, organized into eight groups. Duration: 6 weeks; total of 24 academic hours (24h on Moodle plus 2h face-to-face (f2f) for the final meeting). Topics of the seminar: theoretical basis of e-learning, working with digital images, making preparations for lessons, creating mind maps, work with PDF documents, making audio and video tutorials, making presentations, creating the test to assess the knowledge, working with tools for communication. Teaching Strategy: Ten topics were opened on the schedule, divided into three logical sections: 1) the theory of e-learning, 2) software tools for the preparation of lessons and 3) Internet for communicational purposes. 1) The theory of e-learning (2 hours): Learning objective was to adopt the basic concepts, terms and information in the field of e-learning. The focus was on the cognitive aspect of learning. Communication with the instructor / moderator was minimal because the task was clearly set, the text for the study was available on the system, and the test was reviewed automatically by the system. The working concept on this section was similar to the first sub-model of the e-learning model of TU Graz, e-Learning by distributing. 2) Software tools for preparation of lesson materials (18 hours): The learning goals were multiple: learning by doing it; independently using ICT; preparing learning materials in the form of images, mind map, podcasts, videos, multimedia presentations that can be offered to students in the classroom; analyze and evaluate the advantages and disadvantages of certain tools for creating teaching materials; understanding the role of new technologies in teaching; share experiences with colleagues from other schools and communities. Activities were mainly based on individual work. Instructors kept the role of lecturers and tutors. The concept of work on these topics including almost all elements of the first two sub-models: e-learning by distributing and e-learning by interacting, while the third, e-learning by collaborating match just goals and learning outcomes without the accompanying form of teaching strategies. Presence of collaborative work here was minimal. 3) Internet for communicational purposes (2 hours): The aim of the work on this subject was to gain insight into the possibilities of Internet communications by learning about it and getting used to it after its implementation to the course. In this context the following ways were used: chat (Moodle, Gmail, Skype, and Facebook), forums, instant messaging and wikis. As a result the different ways of implementing these communicational possibilities into every day teaching were summarized. For a lot of participants of the course it was to break with their prejudice on this kind of communication and social networks. The instructor was a fully coequal member during all activities. The concept of work on this topic is corresponding with sub-models e-learning by distributing and mostly with e-learning by collaborating. 2) Multimedia as an engine of active learning (Module 1, Module 2) Description / purpose / idea of the seminar: The seminar is offered in two modules (for computer beginners and for advanced users). Both courses are generally engaged enhancing the professional ICT-competences of teachers. The courses aims that the use of multimedia extends the teaching efforts. A total of 119 participants (76 in Module 1 and 43 in Module 2) were assigned to 4 groups. Duration: 3 weeks; 10 academic hours; without face-to-face final meeting. Topics of the seminar: MODULE 1: Active learning and multimedia; what is PowerPoint?; creating and designing presentations; work with objects; visual effects and animations; printing, preparing a CD and for the class; final work. MODULE2: Educational software and multimedia; audio book; photo story; work with video in PowerPoint; plan implementation of educational software in the classroom; set presentation; final work. Teaching Strategy: MODULE 1: 1) active learning by example; 2) learning through research; 3) final work.

Draft originally published in: Ebner, M., Petrovic, M. (2012), E-Learning Model in Practice Does it Work and Fit?, Global Time Conference 2012, p. 1-7

1) Active learning by examples (1 hour): That part consisted of goals and guidelines for the implementation of topics; seven steps the participant had to pass for 45 minutes and required discussion. The aim of the work on this topic was to understand the active teaching / learning from the position of students. The instructor in this subject was advisory. The concept of work on this subject corresponds to the second sub-model, e-learning by interacting because the participant was instructed to interact with a computer to understand the topics concept. 2) Learning through research (9 hours): Participants learn to create presentations in PowerPoint of good quality. The seminar participants were supposed to read/look at the interactive materials, to explore necessary tools and do the task independently. The instructor had advisory and mentoring roles. Since the emphasis was not on teaching itself, and given materials were only basic clues to what should be pursued through research activity, we can say that the concept of work on these topics include almost all elements of the second and third sub-models: elearning by interacting and e-learning by collaborating. 3) Final work: The estimated time of making was one week. The participants had the task to create completely independent a presentation of the final work for their own class, using the knowledge gained during the seminar. The instructor only covered the work, without direct participation. The concept of this subject complies with the most convenient sub-model, e-learning by collaborating. MODULE 2: 1) analysis of educational software; 2) research and practical work on tasks; 3) final work. 1) Analysis of educational software (2 hours): Tasks for the group work were: create a vocabulary; choose and analyze one educational software with offered (or own) criteria in wiki. The aim of that part was to understand the criteria for evaluating quality educational software. The instructor had the role of a coach. Groups independently finished with a solution. Interventions were only required in rare cases and related to organizational issues. The concept on this subject corresponds to the most convenient third sub-model, e-learning by collaborating. 2) Research and practical work on tasks (8 hours): Participants were asked to read / review the set of interactive learning materials, to meet with the required software tools, to explore working with them, and to create practical tasks (audio books, video stories, plan of implementation of educational software in the classroom, instruction on setting up presentation on the Internet). The instructor had tutoring and mentoring functions. The concept on these topics included almost all elements of the second and third sub-models: e-learning by interacting and e-learning by collaborating. 3) The final work had the same requirements, expected results and methods of work and final work of Module 1. 3) ICT in education Description / purpose / idea of the seminar: consist of three parts: on-line group work; implementation in school; evaluation. Group work is aimed at interdisciplinary treatment of selected topics (water, recycling, conflict resolution, children on the Internet ...). The idea is the acquisition and exchange of experiences through peer learning and team work. The first group had 42 participants from across the country and worked till November 2011. Duration: 6 weeks, total of 24 academic hours (16h on Moodle plus 4h at schools plus 4h f2f for final meeting). Topics of the seminar: Organization of work, writing preparation for the lessons, preparing materials, setting the course, implementation of classes, evaluation of work (presentations and discussions). Teaching Strategy: From participants it is expected to choose a group working on an issue of most interest to them. Each group consisted of teachers of different professionals. After setting the groups the organization of work was next to do using webinar methods. There were no classical learning materials, only recommendations for on-line tools (DocsPal-converter, Google docs, Picnik, Vocaroo, Picasion, You Tube, Screencast o matic, Masher, Prezi, Scribd). Subsequently, the representative of each group formulated materials for a class in a course on Moodle. With this course, the group members (individually or several together) classes are implemented in schools. Student impressions were recorded for later experience exchange. Each group had the opportunity to present their lessons with some parts of their presentation and conclusions via webinar or live. The instructor has taken the role of trainer and organizer of work. Successfully implemented ICT within the lessons, were the result of the work. The concept of work matches with the third sub-model: e-learning by collaborating.

Draft originally published in: Ebner, M., Petrovic, M. (2012), E-Learning Model in Practice Does it Work and Fit?, Global Time Conference 2012, p. 1-7

3.1; 3.2; 3.3 4.1; 4.2; 4.3

1.3 ;

3.2 1.2 ; 2.2; 2.3;

1.1; 1.2; 1.3

2.1; 2.2;

Fig. 2 Visualization of courses within the e-learning model of TU Graz

Comparative analysis
Following the parameters - learning scope, learning results and teaching strategies - each part of the course has its representation within the model of TU Graz. Therefore a classification (shown in Table 2) has been done for each module bearing in mind that different strategies take place just in one course. The result is also visualized in figure 2. Corresponding to: Seminar
1) Tools for e-classroom;

Section in seminar
1.1) theory of e-learning; 1.2) software tools for the preparation of lessons materials; 1.3) communication over the Internet 2.1) active learning by examples 2.2) learning through research 2.3) final work 3.1) analysis of educational software 3.2) research and practical work on tasks 3.3) the final work 4.1) on-line group work; 4.2) implementation in school; 4.3) evaluation

A) e-Learning by distributing B) e-learning by interacting C) e-Learning by collaborating

2) Multimedia as an engine of active learning-Module 1; 3) Multimedia as an engine of active learning-Module 2 4) ICT in education

A A, B C (without same teaching strategy) A, C B B, C C C B, C C C C C

Table 2: Classification of the courses according to parameter of the e-learning model

Conclusions

Draft originally published in: Ebner, M., Petrovic, M. (2012), E-Learning Model in Practice Does it Work and Fit?, Global Time Conference 2012, p. 1-7

The rapid development of science, techniques, technology at work and methods of communication today leads to a rapid obsolescence of technology and knowledge, with frequent and rapid changes, and with fast increasing of knowledge. Our society is today known as a "knowledge society". It seems that education becomes like a big industry and there is a need for lifelong learning strategies. The fast changing situation worldwide means a constant redefinition of learning in regard to outcomes as well as didactics. This affects the redefinition of the goals of adequate teaching and learning strategies. On the other hand because of the development of new tools and technologies for learning it has become easier to take into account different learning scenarios and learning processes. Future learning can be individualized and personalized especially to the needs of each learner. Education is a very complex problem. The way teaching and learning happen today is a result of long tradition in pedagogical research. In comparison to the very young research-field e-learning lacks on general models and clear strategies how technology will enhance future education. Therefore in this publication such an e-learning model had been examined through to see whether a generalization is possible or not. The model separated learning scopes in three sub-steps. The first step of real knowledge is to use information to create knowledge about something, the second is to understand it in order to be able to use it in a different context and the third one is to be able to do something new with it. The model brings learning scopes, learning results, and the appropriate teaching strategy together with the corresponding e-learning activity. In the beginning it was asked if a generalization and a categorization of different courses were possible. Therefore four different lectures were taken, described, and places within the model. Figure 2 shows that each part of those courses had its representation within the model, therefore it can be concluded that the e-learning model works in general for this kind of courses. On the other side it can be mentioned that one course is not exactly corresponding to just one sub-model (e-learning by contributing, e-learning by interacting, or e-learning by collaboration). It is much more like a mix, a hybrid combination of different sub-models. Reasons for that are changing teaching strategy during the seminars. Nevertheless they fit in the model because learning scopes and learning results were changing to. Finally it can be concluded that adult learning scenarios are mostly dominated by situations with a strong collaborative approach. This needs a good teaching strategy and a big effort in time to run the course too. Future research will show whether this model can be refined and adapted to other subjects of education too.

References
Dewey, J. (1916), Democracy & Education, An introduction to the philosophy of education, Rockland Free Press, New York Ebner, M. (2005) e-Learning im konstruktiven Ingenieurbau, PhD-Thesis, TU Graz Ebner, M. & Nagler, W. (2010). Has Web2.0 Reached the Educated Top?. In Proceedings of World Conference on Educational Multimedia, Hypermedia and Telecommunications 2010 (pp. 4001-4010). Chesapeake, VA: AACE. Ebner, M.; Nagler, W.; Schn, M. (2011) The Facebook Generation Boon or Bane for E-Learning at Universities?. in: World Conference on Educational Multimedia, Hypermedia and Telecommunications ; 2011 (2011), S. 3549 3557 Freitas, S. D. (2004). JISC e-Learning Models Desk Study Stage 2 : Review of e-learning theories , frameworks and models. Learning, 202(5/21/2010), 43. The Joint Information Systems Committee. Nagler, W., Ebner, M. (2009) Is Your University Ready For the Ne(x)t-Generation?, Proceedings of 21st ED-Media Conference (2009), S. 4344 - 4351; World Conference on Educational Multimedia, Hypermedia and Telecommunications Nichols, M. (2003). A theory for eLearning. Educational Technology & Society, 6(2), 1-10, Available at http://ifets.ieee.org/periodical/6-2/1.html, International Forum of Educational Technology & Society (last visited: December 2011) Reinmann-Rothmeier, G. (2003), Didaktische Innovation durch Blended Learning, Hans Huber, Berlin.