You are here:

The underpinnings of e-learning evaluation and research
PROCEEDINGS

, Murdoch Univ., Australia

EdMedia + Innovate Learning, in Denver, Colorado, USA ISBN 978-1-880094-95-2 Publisher: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE), Waynesville, NC

Full Text

Abstract

This paper attempts a fundamental analysis of the nature of research into e-learning. It starts by considering the phenomenon of e-learning, arguing that e-learning is an artificial, designed phenomenon, and that research approaches need to consider how the e-learning environment works and how it can be improved, before we can consider how effective it is. We also establish that e-learning inquiry involves a mixture of evaluation and research, and we discuss this in the context of different disciplinary and interdisciplinary research approaches, arguing that e-learning evaluation research involves a varying mixture of a ‘search for fundamental understanding’ and ‘consideration of use’.

We apply the preceding arguments to the e-learning lifecycle, identifying five different forms of evaluation research which are appropriate at various stages: Baseline Analysis, Design Evaluation, Formative Evaluation, Effectiveness Research, and Project-management Evaluation. These forms can be used to guide the design of an e-learning evaluation-research study, in a cyclical research approach. We recognize the strength of design-based research in this context, without claiming that it is appropriate in all circumstances.

The paper then unpacks the process of conducting evaluation research, through the use of divide-and-conquer techniques to break down the complexity of an e-learning evaluation-research study. The five forms of evaluation research allow us to conceptualise specific research questions at a particular position in the e-learning lifecycle, and evaluation-research matrices assist us to identify sources of evidence to address these questions.

Citation

Phillips, R. (2012). The underpinnings of e-learning evaluation and research. In T. Amiel & B. Wilson (Eds.), Proceedings of EdMedia 2012--World Conference on Educational Media and Technology (pp. 61-67). Denver, Colorado, USA: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE). Retrieved January 27, 2023 from .

© 2012 Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE)

Keywords

References

View References & Citations Map
  1. Becher, T. (1989). Academic Tribes and Territories: intellectual enquiry and the cultures of disciplines. Buckingham: Society for Research into Higher Education.
  2. England, E., & Finney, A. (1999). Managing Multimedia (2nd ed.). Harlow, England: Addison Wesley Longman.
  3. Friesen, N. (2009). Re-thinking e-learning research: Foundations, methods and practices. New York: Peter Lang.
  4. Jones, C., Zenios, M., & Griffiths, J. (2004). Academic Use of Digital Resources: Disciplinary Differences and the Issue of Progression Proceedings of the 4th Networked Learning Conference. Lancaster University, England, UK.
  5. Littlejohn, A., & Pegler, C. (2007). Preparing for blended e-learning. Abingdon, U.K.: Routledge.
  6. Oliver, M., Harvey, J., Conole, G., & Jones, A. (2007). Evaluation. In G. Conole& M. Oliver (Eds.), Contemporary perspectives in e-learning research: Themes, methods and impact on practice (pp. 203-216). Abingdon, Oxon: Routledge.
  7. Phillips, R.A., McNaught, C., & Kennedy, G. (2011). Evaluating e-learning: Guiding research and practice. New York and London: Routledge.-66-Reeves, T.C. (2000a). Enhancing the worth of instructional technology research through “design experiments” and other development research strategies. Paper presented at the International Perspectives on Instructional Technology Research for the 21st Century a Symposium sponsored by SIG/Instructional Technology at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association. April 27, 2000 session 41.29. , New Orleans. Reeves, T.C. (2000b). Socially Responsible Educational Technology Research. Educational Technology(November-December), 19–28.
  8. Reeves, T.C., & Hedberg, J.G. (2003). Interactive Learning Systems Evaluation. Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Educational Technology Publications.
  9. Richey, R.C., Klein, J.D., & Nelson, W.A. (2004). Developmental research: studies of instructional design and development. In D. Jonassen (Ed.), Handbook of research for educational communications and technology (2nd ed., pp. 1099-1130). Mahwah, N.J.: Lawrence Erlbaum.
  10. Shavelson, R.J., Phillips, D.C., Towne, L., & Feuer, M.J. (2003). On the science of education design studies. Educational Researcher, 32(1), 25-28.
  11. Shulman, L.S. (1988). Disciplines of inquiry in education: An overview. In R.M. Jaeger (Ed.), Complementary methods for research in education (pp. 3-17). Washington: AERA.
  12. Simon, H.A. (1969). The sciences of the artificial. Cambridge, MA.: MIT Press.
  13. Stokes, D.E. (1997). Pasteur's Quadrant: basic science and technological innovation. Washington, D.C.: The Brookings Institution. Acknowledgements

These references have been extracted automatically and may have some errors. Signed in users can suggest corrections to these mistakes.

Suggest Corrections to References

Slides

Also Read

Related Collections