1

E-learning Emerges

ADDRESSING THE EMERGENCE OF THE PROFESSION

Technology is the backbone of the e-learning industry where today’s virtual and supplemental classroom tools include; webinars, live video chat, discussion boards and virtual tours.

Learning Technology Boom

Learners control the stream of information flowing

from their computers with a click of their mouse. This

stream of information flows along the internet as

knowledge breaks past previous barriers of time and

location. Breakthroughs in learning theory rose in

instructional design, from behaviorism, cognitivism,

and constructivism.

This paper presents a brief history of instructional

design and technology starting with WWII, leading to

current uses of technology in instructional design. We

examine three major views and their influences on

instructional design and technology.

Technology in learning has a rich, slow history until

WWII with mass training of soldiers occurring in the

40’s. Research began the rapid, systematic increase

of advances in both learning theories and

technologies. Founded in behaviorism, the modern

groundwork of learning theory experienced a general

drift during the 1950s, toward implementing

scientific approaches to the social sciences. The

merge of psychology and instructional technology

arrived during and after World War II as educational

psychologists developed training materials for the

U.S. military providing research (Berliner, 2006).

The center of attention in instructional research

programs were both on, development of ISD

(instructional systems design) methods for the

investigation of content and tasks; and testing of

variables of design to deliver certain learning

outcomes. For the time being, the ISD methods to

learning theories consisted of automation and the

idea of systems as a complex association of

components, progression and control of

information, thorough breakdown of a task, and

articulate planning and decisions (Shiffman, 1995).

Rhonda Deyoung Nazarena Garrón Ciberay Simon Shadowlight

2

Basic to similar instructional theories was the grasp of forward thinking technology and the "automation" of

the learning process (Tennyson, 2010). The U. S. government advanced its attraction to and funding for

research and development of new curriculum and teaching strategies. Instructional design was viewed as an

effort to create a single norm of instructional theory constructs that would lay out teacher traits,

categorizations, assessments, actions, and ability to change the architecture being tested. The agenda from

this view was the creation of instructional programs that would allow most students to reach heights of

production as calculated, in terms of behaviorally defined goals. A push to move education forward in

instructional design rose from WWII, has not stopped as influences from Behaviorism with teaching

machines and programmed learning opened the door to computers in the classroom. Cognitivism also

influenced the development of instructional design as the individual learner was considered over mass

instruction. Finally, constructivism with its use of models in designing a more flexible learning experience,

provided learners with knowledge based on what they already knew.

The learning perspective

Prior to WWII, Pavlov presented theories focusing on observable behavior grounded in measurable research.

Known for his work with animal responses to a stimulus, Pavlov became the front-runner for the behaviorist

popularity. The fifties saw B.F. Skinner, a proponent of the behaviorist approach, as the most current and

probably best-known advocate of teaching machines and programmed learning. Based on operant

conditioning, Skinner's teaching machine required the learner to complete or answer a question and then

receive feedback on the correctness of the response (Skinner, 1965).

Computer-assisted instruction (CAI) entered the arena of

education and training in the 1950s. IBM was first on the scene

as the technology for schools did not receive promised actions

and therefore lost most of their supporters. Technical problems

notwithstanding, CAI grew rapidly in the 1960s as federal

funded research grants and growth in education and industrial

laboratories allowed for technology in education to become

more accepted (Stahl, Koschmann & Suthers, 2006). The U.S.

government wanted to discover whether computer-assisted

instruction really worked, so they created two competing

companies, (Control Data Corporation and MITRE

Corporation) whose projects showed CAI successful as both are

still around today.

CAI from the 50s and 60s centered on teaching machines with some use of computers in the classroom.

There were also, multimedia presentations and programmed instructions. Most systems approaches favored

flow charts, with stages that the designer flows through in the creation of instruction. Founded from the U.S.

military and a small part, the corporate world, the systems approach relied upon identifying goals and

objectives, determining resources, starting an action plan and ongoing assessment with change as needed of

the program. (Mergel, 1998)

Behaviorism

3

Cognitivism

The mind and its abilities

Researchers who focused on instructional design shifted from the behavioral world of

stimulation/response/reinforcement theory of instruction and created theories grounded in the mental

abilities of learners. Cognitivism picks up where behaviorism leaves off. One of the major players in the

development of cognitivism was Jean Piaget, who developed aspects of his theory as early as the 1920's.

Piaget's theories took hold in the U.S. in the 1960's thanks to George Miller and Jerome Bruner who created

the Harvard Center for Cognitive studies. Memory was important, as the idea of seven plus or minus two

became the standard capacity of learners’ abilities (Miller, 2003). In 1962, Robert Gagne broke learning

down into a hierarchy of ordered content from rudimentary information to the highly complex (Kearsley,

1994). The learning types presented were:

Verbal information

Intellectual skills

Cognitive strategies

Motor skills

Attitudes

Gagne developed a hierarchal schema of learning prerequisites

in order to advance learners to the next step, and help

instructional developers know where to start with learners.

The hierarchy is as follows:

1. Gaining attention (reception)

2. Informing learners of the object (expectancy)

3. Stimulating recall of prior learning (retrieval)

4. Presenting the stimulus (selective perception)

5. Providing learning guidance (semantic encoding)

6. Eliciting performance (responding)

7. Providing feedback (reinforcement)

8. Assessing performance (retrieval)

9. Enhancing retention and transfer (generalization)

In the 70s, stages of competent performance in a variety of areas of knowledge and skills pertinent to

education moved instructional design forward. Conditions of learning became the focus of instructional

design researchers. Testing and evaluation were a crucial part of the instructional design theories. Another

push during this time was instruction in stages; theorists also included the individual learner's cognitive

development. Research centered on clarifying parts of cognitive psychology utilized in design of instruction.

Links were drawn between computer processing and human processing information and “knowledge coding”

and “information retrieval” was the last shove past behaviorism as computer based learning was also coming

to light in the 70s and 80s (Reiser, 2001).

4

The nature of learning

Constructivism

This philosophy stems from the idea that learners are

actively creating meaning from their experiences and

interactions with the world around them (Wilson,

2010). Systematic approach was enhanced to some

degree and yet left behind in other ways in the 80-

90s, with improved technological capabilities for

instructional designers. Hyper-text/media helped

instructional designers to fan out their designs versus

the straight path of instruction previously.

Learning theory has its roots, from Dewey (1916),

Piaget (1972), Vygotsky (1978) and Bruner (1990),

constructivism is an attentive building of new

information steamed from prior experience by a

learner (Merril, 1991). Constructivism advocates a

more flexible learning experience where learning is

not easily measured and experience varied from

learner to learner.

One click on a link gave learners control of their

learning. Without consideration of how information

was stored in human memory, constructivism looked

at content and task analysis (Good, 2000). The 90s

moved forward with Bruner who believed that

learning must be meaningful, with his theory of

discovery learning where the environment of

instructional design aid learners in creating learning

and thinking strategies as they build knowledge and

are involved with active inquiry.

Guided discovery by instructors is student centered

learning that is applicable to their current state of

understanding. The 80-90’s computer use was a

regular part of students’ learning experience.

Enhanced with technology, learners can choose the

path of knowledge, bypassing information they

already know. Instruction could change, as needed

though computer use with instructors personalizing

their class to suit their style and student’s level of

knowledge (Vrasidas, 2000).

5

The nature of learning In 1948, in an effort to identify and classify the thinking behaviors that were important to the process of learning, a group of

educational psychologists, headed by Benjamin Bloom, began work on developing a classification (i.e. taxonomy) of

educational goals and objectives. The initial framework included three domains or categories. These were:

The cognitive domain (intellect and cognition)

The affective domain (emotion and attitude)

The psychomotor domain (skills and behavior)

By 1956 they had completed work on the cognitive domain, consisting of six levels. The results were published in the

handbook known as Bloom’s Taxonomy (Orey, 2001). Work was later completed on the affective domain but not on the

psychomotor domain.

Within the cognitive domain, the levels are hierarchical and the implication is that learners must master lower levels before

proceeding to higher levels. Thus, a learner will be able to demonstrate remembering (i.e. making a list) prior to

demonstrating understanding (i.e. explaining) and will be able to demonstrate both of these prior to applying (i.e.

interpreting).

Beginning in the 1990’s, a new group of cognitive psychologists, headed by Lorin Anderson (a former student of Bloom’s)

updated the classification system. The table below represents the changes in terminology and structure:

Original Version (1956) Revised Version (2001)

Classifications Measurable Verbs Classifications Measurable Verbs

Evaluation Measure, interpret, evaluate, choose

Creating Construct, create, design, develop

Synthesis Arrange, combine, propose, construct

Evaluating Appraise, defend, select, evaluate

Analysis Analyze, compare, contrast, examine

Analyzing Compare, examine, differentiate, contrast

Application Apply, demonstrate, use, operate

Applying Choose, demonstrate, use, interpret, write

Comprehension Compare, describe, discuss, explain

Understanding Classify, describe, discuss, explain, identify

Knowledge List, name, repeat, tell, state, record

Remembering Define, duplicate, list, memorize, state

The most noticeable change is that the original terminology using nouns for the levels were revised as verbs. Additionally,

the top two levels switched places in the revision (i.e. synthesis moved from second-to-the-top to the top level and was

renamed creating).

The taxonomy is useful in that it assists educators and instructional designers to create objectives that are based on

measurable behavior and encourages the development of curriculum based on objectives that demonstrate an increasing level

of cognitive mastery.

A simplistic example of the six revised levels are presented below using the context of Goldilocks and the Three Bears:

(Orey, 2001)

Remember: Describe where Goldilocks lived.

Understand: Summarize what the Goldilocks story was about.

Apply: Construct a theory as to why Goldilocks went into the house.

Analyze: Differentiate between how Goldilocks reacted and how you would react in each story event.

Evaluate: Assess whether or not you think this really happened to Goldilocks.

Create: Compose a song, skit, poem, or rap to convey the Goldilocks story in a new form.

Bloom’s Taxonomy

6

Kirkpatrick’s Model

Level 4

evaluation (Results)

seeks to measure the actual effect

(of the behavioral change) upon

work setting outcomes. In other

words, if the initial objective of

the training is to reduce

government audit findings by

10%, a level 4 evaluation attempts

to assess if this measure has been

achieved. On one hand, this level

of evaluation truly measures if the

training has been effective (i.e.

have the objectives been achieved.

At the same time, it can be

difficult and costly to perform this

type of evaluation and attribute

the results directly to the training.

In the example above, numerous

other factors may have

contributed to the drop in audit

finding not directly related to the

instructional program.

Level 2

evaluation (Learning)

typically involves a pre-test

and a post-test in order to

assess the amount of learning

(improvement on the post-test

when compared to the pre-

test). Tests can include formal

testing instruments or may

include observations from

peers and/or supervisors. The

key element is the attempt at

an objective evaluation of

knowledge and skills both

before and after the training.

Level 3

evaluation (Behavior)

seeks to assess the degree to which

participants have actually applied

what they have learned in a

practical setting (their job). This

form of evaluation may occur at

multiple intervals over an extended

period of time after the initial

training and may include formal

assessment as well as observation

and feedback from peers and/or

managers. The evaluations,

however, can be fairly involved

and complex as they occur over

time and the behavioral change

may be difficult to quantify or

directly attribute to the training.

Kirkpatrick’s Four-Level Training Evaluation Model Donald Kirkpatrick created a model (first published in 1959) of training evaluation consisting of four levels. Each level

builds upon the next, with successive levels providing more meaningful information regarding the effectiveness of the

course. At the same time, successive levels tend to involve greater cost and difficulty in administering. The four levels

consist of the following: (Kirkpatrick, 2007; Allen, 2006a)

Level 1: Reaction - How the participants react to the training.

Level 2: Learning -The extent to which participants change attitudes, increase knowledge, and/or

increase skill.

Level 3: Behavior – The extent to which participants apply what they have learned by changing

behavior.

Level 4: Results – The extent to which targeted outcomes are met as a result of the training.

Level 1

evaluation (Reaction) seeks to assess the

perceptions of the participant in order to

improve the training (did they like it and did

they find it relevant to their work). Most

commonly this involves the completion of

an evaluation form at the end of the course

or may involve direct questioning of the

participant. This type of evaluation is fairly

quick and inexpensive to perform, however,

it cannot account for numerous subjective

variables that might influence the

participants responses which may not

directly pertain to the quality of the course.

7

ADDIE

Here to stay

Conclusion

In all, behaviorism began modern instructional design use

of technology by teaching masses the behaviors and

techniques of knowledge through movies and other media

productions. Cognitivism looked at individual cognitions

of learners as computers entered the classroom.

Constructivism saw regular computer use as learners

experience changed to instructor-guided information

based on students’ current level of knowledge. This

along with the three highlighted core concepts, Kirkpatrick’s evaluation model, Blooms Taxonomy, and

the Addie model are clear examples that technology in the

classroom is not only here to stay but will change and

evolve as advances in processing, research and theory

multiplies every couple of years.

Instructional Design Model The ADDIE model is a model of instructional design consisting of five phases (Allen, 2006a):

Analysis - The instructional designer identifies the problem, objective, goals, participant

needs, delivery options, timelines and interface considerations in conjunction with the

client and/or subject matter experts.

Design – The objectives are typically specified in detail as are the look and feel of the

course and the user interface (i.e. the design).

Development – The course itself is built using the appropriate medium and tools specified

during the design phase.

Implementation – During this phase the course and associated materials are actually

delivered to the learners.

Evaluation – Ideally this phase involves both ongoing (formative) and end-stage

(summative) evaluations (Pallof and Pratt, 2007). During this phase necessary revisions are

made.

In the basic model, each stage has an output which then proceeds into the next phase. This

provides a basic framework in which to think about the conception and delivery of

curriculum/training and does not provide a step-by-step method.

There are those who criticize the model as being too simplistic and linear, arguing that effective

instructional design follows a more iterative process. For example, Allen (2006b) argues that

evaluation must occur along each phase as a means of providing ongoing feedback directing the

curriculum towards an ultimate output.

8

References

Allen, M. (2006a). Creating successful e-learning. Pfeiffer, (pp. 169-171)

Allen, M. (2006b). Creating successful e-learning. Pfeiffer, (pp. 37-41)

Berliner, D. C. (2006). Educational psychology: Searching for essence throughout a century of influence. In

P. A. Alexander and P. H. Winne (Eds.) Handbook of Educational Psychology (pp. 3-27).

Routledge.

Good, T.L. (2000). American education: Yesterday, today, and tomorrow. Humana Press, (p. 155)

Kearsley, G. (1994a). Conditions of learning (R. Gagne). Available: http://www.gwu.edu/~tip/gagne.html

[September 10, 2011].

Kirkpatrick, D. L. (2007) Implementing Kirkpatrick’s four levels. Retrieved September 12, 2011, from

http://astd2007.astd.org/PDFs/Handouts%20for%20Web/Handouts%20Secured%20for%20Web%

205-15%20thru%205-16/TU101.pdf

Merger, B. (1998). Instructional design and learning theory. Educational Communications and Technology.

University of Saskatchewan

Merrill, M.D. (1991), Constructivism and instructional design. Educational Technology. 31(5), 45-53

Miller, G. A. (2003). The cognitive revolution: a historical perspective. Trends in Cognitive Sciences. 7(3).

Elsevier Science Ltd.

Orey, M.(Ed.) (2001). Emerging perspectives on learning, teaching, and technology. Retrieved September

12, 2011. from http://projects.coe.uga.edu/epltt/

Overbaugh, R. C. , Schultz, L. Bloom’s taxonomy. Retrieved September 10, 2011, from

http://www.odu.edu/educ/roverbau/Bloom/blooms_taxonomy.htm

Pallof, R. M., and Pratt, K. (2007). Building online learning communities. Jossey-Bass, (pp. 205-206)

Reiser, R.A. (2001). A history of instructional design and technology: Part II: A history of instructional

design. ETR&D. 49(2), 57-67

Schiffman, S. S. (1995). Instructional systems design: Five views of the field. In G.J. Anglin (Ed.),

Instructional technology: Past, present and future. (2nd ed., pp. 131-142)., Englewood, CO:

Libraries Unlimited, Inc.

Skinner, B.F. (1965). Review Lecture: The technology of teaching. Proceedings of the Royal Society of

London. Series B, Biological Sciences. 162(989), 427-443

Stahl, G., Koschmann, T. & Suthers, D. (2006). Computer-supported collaborative learning: A historical

perspective. In R. K. Sawyer (Ed.), Cambridge handbook of the learning sciences (pp. 406-427).

Cambridge University Press.

Tennyson, R.D. (2010). Historical reflection on learning theories and instructional design. Contemporary

Educational Technology 1(1), 1-16

Vrasidas, C. (2000). Constructivism versus objectivism: Implications for interaction, course design, and

evaluation in distance education. International Journal of Educational Telecommunication.6(4),

339-362