Presently I am participating in a online course on emoderating, the course refers to Salmon's eModerating model and it got me thinking about eLearning models, in particular the e-Learning desk study in 2004 and a face -to-face course I ran and helped todesign about 6 years ago on Designing for eLearning. So I excavated my original slides.
The JISC Deskstudy said:
There are really no models of elearning per se…only e-enhancements of models of learning…that is to say using technology to achieve better learning outcomes
In other words the models were based on existing learning theories. I presented three models:
Laurillard's Conversational Framework
Salmon's Etivities Approach
Collis & Moonen's Contributing Student Model
This seems like such a long time ago and although the work within these models is excellent I did wonder whether calling them models was a way to give eLearning an academic back bone. The word model at first to me seems inflexible, the definition of model according to the online oxford dictionary is " a thing used as an example to follow or imitate". But this has certainly been the case with Salmon's 5 step model (and Salmon does call it a model), I have certainly seen successful application in online course design but mainly in courses about eLearning less so in undergraduate and postgraduate courses in other disciplines. I do think Salmon's "model" does illustrate the skills teachers need to have to effectively moderate an online discussion even if the model is not implemented in its entirety and you could also argue if you are only using it to identify skills, you are not really using the model at all, and this is an affordance of the model.
I then thought maybe template is a better term but the dictionary definition of this "is something that serves as a model to copy and illustrate" so we are back at square one again. Framework was my next choice "a basic structure underlying a system, concept or text" - but is that just a model again? Then finally I thought pattern which is, an "example for others to copy" - another model? Then I started to think about whether I would use the word model in my professional practice now, I certainly have done in the past but I am not sure this engages academic colleagues, who usually present you with a problem and want you to come up with a solution, or want an e-learning solution that addresses learning and teaching outcomes and a pedagogic approach. I would only introduce a model if I thought it was congruent with the learning and teaching strategy, as is the case with any e-learning activity, which goes back to the JISC Deskstudy statement:
There are really no models of elearning per se…only e-enhancements of models of learning…that is to say using technology to achieve better learning outcomes
The JISC Deskstudy said:
There are really no models of elearning per se…only e-enhancements of models of learning…that is to say using technology to achieve better learning outcomes
In other words the models were based on existing learning theories. I presented three models:
Laurillard's Conversational Framework
Salmon's Etivities Approach
Collis & Moonen's Contributing Student Model
This seems like such a long time ago and although the work within these models is excellent I did wonder whether calling them models was a way to give eLearning an academic back bone. The word model at first to me seems inflexible, the definition of model according to the online oxford dictionary is " a thing used as an example to follow or imitate". But this has certainly been the case with Salmon's 5 step model (and Salmon does call it a model), I have certainly seen successful application in online course design but mainly in courses about eLearning less so in undergraduate and postgraduate courses in other disciplines. I do think Salmon's "model" does illustrate the skills teachers need to have to effectively moderate an online discussion even if the model is not implemented in its entirety and you could also argue if you are only using it to identify skills, you are not really using the model at all, and this is an affordance of the model.
I then thought maybe template is a better term but the dictionary definition of this "is something that serves as a model to copy and illustrate" so we are back at square one again. Framework was my next choice "a basic structure underlying a system, concept or text" - but is that just a model again? Then finally I thought pattern which is, an "example for others to copy" - another model? Then I started to think about whether I would use the word model in my professional practice now, I certainly have done in the past but I am not sure this engages academic colleagues, who usually present you with a problem and want you to come up with a solution, or want an e-learning solution that addresses learning and teaching outcomes and a pedagogic approach. I would only introduce a model if I thought it was congruent with the learning and teaching strategy, as is the case with any e-learning activity, which goes back to the JISC Deskstudy statement:
There are really no models of elearning per se…only e-enhancements of models of learning…that is to say using technology to achieve better learning outcomes
