Web 2.0 – e‐learning 2.0 – quality 2.0? Quality for new learning cultures
| DOI | https://doi.org/10.1108/09684880910970687 |
| Published date | 10 July 2009 |
| Date | 10 July 2009 |
| Pages | 296-314 |
| Author | Ulf Daniel Ehlers |
| Subject Matter | Education |
Web 2.0 – e-learning
2.0 – quality 2.0? Quality for
new learning cultures
Ulf Daniel Ehlers
Institute for Computer Science and Business Information Systems,
University of Duisburg-Essen, Essen, Germany
Abstract
Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to analyse the changes taking place when learning moves
from a transmissive learning model to a collaborative and reflective learning model and proposes
consequences for quality development.
Design/methodology/approach – The paper summarises relevant research in the field of e-learning
to outline the differences between e-learning 1.0 and e-learning 2.0 and amalgamates it with a series of
previously published works. The characteristics of quality development are analyses in a next step and
suitable methodologies for developing quality for e-learning 2.0 environments are selected, proposed
and explained.
Findings – Even though the question of quality is controversially discussed already when e-learning
1.0 appeared on the market, e-learning 2.0 creates even more insecurity. This paper aims at answering
the following questions: what constitutes the new, innovative element, which is described by Web 2.0
and e-learning 2.0? Does this development have consequences for how it assures, manage and develop
quality in e-learning? In three steps, it is described what e-learning 2.0 constitutes, which basic
elements of Web 2.0 it builds on, and what has changed. In a second, step the consequences this
implies for quality development in e-learning are discussed. Third, a number of methods as examples
and practical advice on how to further advance quality development are described.
Originality/value – The original value of the paper is to outline the changes which have to be taken
into account in new and innovative learning environment which are build on Web 2.0 technologies and
to draw consequences for quality development as well as suggest methodologies for educators and
learners to improve quality of such learning environments.
Keywords E-learning, Qualitymanagement, Quality, Learningprocesses, Learning
Paper type Conceptual paper
Introduction
Download a lecture off the seminar web page as a podcast in the morning, take part in an
online session of an international studying group for the purpose of preparing for an exam in
the afternoon and log into the virtual world of Second Life to take part in a tutorial relating to
the morning’s lecture – the daily routine of studying looks like this or similar more and more
often. In companies, online trainings are no longer visions of a distant future, but reality for
more and more employees. The term “e-learning” comprises the use of online tools such as
blogs, wikis or podcasts for learning and teaching. Learners can create their own content and
exchange information in networks like the video platform (YouTube – www.youtube.com).
Teaching and learning is changing. Is the definition of quality and the method used to
develop or assess quality also changing? In this paper, it is argued that quality
methods have to be closely examined in order to be able to benefit new e-learning
2.0 learning scenarios.
The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at
www.emeraldinsight.com/0968-4883.htm
QAE
17,3
296
Quality Assurance in Education
Vol. 17 No. 3, 2009
pp. 296-314
qEmerald Group Publishing Limited
0968-4883
DOI 10.1108/09684880910970687
In many instances reality looks differentfrom what is described in the short scenario
above and e-learning means merely putting seminar texts online on a learning platform.
Kerres (2006) talks of such learning platforms as “islands on the Internet”, which could
become “gates”through the use of e-learning 2.0. Thesegates could help the whole world
use the internet as a world of learning where content can befound, changed and shared
with others. Viewed like this, the internet itself would be the learning platform.Downes
(2007), who coined the term “e-learning 2.0,” describes it with words such as “learner
centered,”“immersive learning,”“connected learning,” “game-basedlearning,” “workflow
(informal) learning,” and “mobile learning”. On top of that, he sees a development from
standardized learning environments to “personal learning environments”. But what is
really meant by that?What constitutes the new, innovative element that is describedby
Web 2.0 (O’Reily, 2005) and e-learning 2.0? Above all, will this development have
consequencesfor qualityassurance, managementand development in e-learning,and if so,
do we need newmethods and concepts to improveand assure the quality of e-learning2.0?
These questionsare the beginningof many debates around the term“e-learning 2.0”. Even
though the topic of qualitywas controversial in the time of e-learning 1.0, it is evenmore
controversial in the eraof e-learning 2.0.
This paper will deal with a number of questions. In three steps, I will first describe
what e-learning 2.0 is, on which elements of Web 2.0 it is based and what has changed
concerning e-learning 1.0. In a second step, the consequences for quality development
in e-learning resulting from this will be shown. Third, some methods will be described
as an example and practical suggestions will be given concerning a next gener ation of
quality development – in parallel to a next generation of e-learning. In the Conclusion,
I will discuss whether a new learning culture will also lead to a new quality culture.
From e-learning 1.0 to e-learning 2.0
Right at the outset what needs to be stated is that e-learning 2.0 is not a scientific
term[1]. It is not about further development, a new paradigm or a replacement in the
sense of a new release. Strictly speaking it is not even about a new technology, a new
model of learning or a new, separate, innovative variety of e-learning. E-learning
2.0 rather refers to a number of developments, trends and points of view, which require
change from teaching to learning. The new point of view essentially connects
e-learning with five characteristics:
(1) Learning takes places always and everywhere (i.e. is ubiquitous) and therefore
in many different contexts, not only in the classroom.
(2) Learners take on the role of organizers.
(3) Learning is a lifelong process, has many episodes and is not (only) linked to
educational institutions.
(4) Learningtakes place in communitiesof learning (so calledcommunities of practice:
Wenger, 1998): learners participate in formal,as well as informal communities.
(5) Learning is informal and non-formal, takes place at home, at the work place and
during leisure time and is no longer centered on teachers or institutions.
E-learning 2.0 means using social software and learning services, which can be combined
according to individual needs. The word “can” is significant here, as technology alone does
not determine its use. Only by linking it to a learning model the existing possibilities of
Quality for new
learning cultures
297
To continue reading
Request your trial