Is e-learning effective?

After 'Why is e-learning so unpopular?’ and 'Will e-learning put me out of a job?', my concentrate nowadays is on another query that I am continually requested by l&d people: ‘Is e-learning effective?’ A cost-effective query, because there is no point in using a new technique if it doesn’t perform, however a moment or money it might protect.

Unfortunately - as is so necessary - there is no easy response.

E-learning is just a medium
E-learning is an strategy for studying, just like face-to-face connections, make, the cellphone many other technological innovation. In easy conditions, it is a distribution direction. On stability, the data indicate that the process, the distribution direction, is much less crucial in identifying performance than the training technique you choose to handle the process available (exposition, training, suggested finding, finding, etc.), individuals perspective in which the process is used (self-study, one-to-one, group) and, indeed, advantage and significance of the topic on which you are concentrating. Brownish L Russell analyzed 355 research views, summaries and information that recorded no important variations in student results between different methods to understand and studying distribution. It is the process that issues when it comes to performance, not the process.

However, e-learning is an strategy which appears the chance for techniques that would otherwise be incorrect or complicated to give using conventional indicates. Let’s take two examples:
The Large Start On the world wide web Course (MOOC) gives them every opportunity for many a large number of learners to understand together simultaneously. While the particular pedagogy of a MOOC can, in some conditions, look like that of an average course, the particular wide range of the effort and the possibilities that this provides for professional connections make the MOOC something very different from what we have ever been able to see face-to-face.
An immersive and highly-realistic training system, such as a journey simulation, has no important conventional comparative other than perform out in tangible.
In both of these conditions, e-learning presents something different from what we had before. You cannot make it off as ‘just another medium’ because the process has created possible the process, just as the growth of the publishing media developed it possible for anyone as a whole to understand by studying.

E-learning allows many methods
To response the problem, we also have to are certified the kind of e-learning that we are referring to about. Do we mean educational guides moved to the personal learner? Remain team classes in an internet based classroom? The distribution of on the world wide web content using sites, film, podcasts, etc? Collaborative, on the world wide web studying like the MOOC described above? The only function these techniques have in common is that they use the same distribution direction - a pc. In all additional aspects they are considerably different.

Let’s take the first of these techniques, the self-study information, because that’s what most office l&d individuals on the internet with the word ‘e-learning’. The Towards Adulthood Effect Sign launched in Purpose 2010 and focused on UK results, confirmed many actual benefits of e-learning to companies. However, most of the signs and signs focused on performance, i.e. projects and price benefits, comfort and scalability. None of these really indicate the performance of the process in regards to guide on personal performance, when in assessment to different methods.

It is based upon what you use it for
I’m not sure where we’ve got to in responding to the point. Is e-learning effective? Concise that an strategy can make much of something different to results, it would seem that much relies upon on the kind of e-learning and the use to which it is put. And that’s a problem to which I will come back next occasion.

Previous Post
Next Post