An e-learning instructional design framework for mobile devices in Africa

English text, with summaries in English, Afrikaans and ZuluThis study aims to propose an e-learning framework for mobile devices in Africa to help improve enrolment rates and education standards in the FET (Further Education and Training) phase. The study is qualitative in nature and employs document analysis as main research method. An overview of the South African education context with supporting statistical data to motivate why an e-learning alternative is crucial for improving South African and African education is provided. The literature review includes a descriptive analysis of 7 existing e- and m-learning frameworks, with key features highlighted for possible adaptation or incorporation into an e-learning framework for Africa. Behaviourism, Constructivism and Connectivism are discussed as applicable learning theories to pedagogically underpin this proposed e-learning framework. Thereafter, a critical evaluation of current South African education policy documents (White Papers, the Norms and Standards for Educators and the Draft Policy for the Provision and Management of Learning Teaching and Support Materials) is conducted to determine whether these policies support and enable e-learning effectively. Part 2 of Chapter 5 comprises a critical analysis and comparison of education systems and applicable legislation in the USA, Finland and Malawi to establish how education is structured and how e-learning is administered in these countries to make relevant recommendations for South Africa and to inform the design of an e-learning framework for Africa. Research findings are presented as answers to the research questions posed and the proposed e-learning framework with further recommendations are presented to the South African Department of Basic Education, teachers and researchers.Die doel van hierdie studie is om ‘n e-onderrig-en-leer raamwerk vir mobiele toestelle vir Afrika voor te stel, sodat inskrywingsgetalle en onderrig- en leerstandaarde in die Verdere Onderrig en Opleidings (VOO) fase verbeter kan word. Dit is ‘n kwalitatiewe studie en dokumentanalise word as navorsingsmetode toegepas. ‘n Oorsig van die huidige Suid-Afrikaanse onderwysstelsel en konteks met ondersteunende statistiese bevindinge word verduidelik om e-onderrig-en-leer as noodsaaklike alternatief vir Suid-Afrika en Afrika te motiveer. Die literatuuroorsig sluit ‘n beskrywende analise van sewe bestaande e- en m-onderrig-en-leer (mobiele-onderrig-en-leer) raamwerke in. Hoofkenmerke van elke raamwerk word uitgelig vir moontlike aanpassing en inkorporering in ‘n e-onderrig-en-leer raamwerk vir die Afrika-konteks. Leerteorië, nl Behaviourisme, Konstruktivisme en Konnektivisme (Connectivism) word in diepte bespreek as pedagogies fundamenteel om die e-onderrig-en-leer raamwerk te onderbou en te ondersteun. ‘n Kritiese evaluasie van Suid-Afrikaanse onderwysbeleid (d.w.s. Witskrifte, die Norme and Standaarde vir Onderwysers en die konsepdokument oor die Voorsiening en Bestuur van Onderrig-, Leer- en Ondersteuningsmateriaal) is gedoen om vas te stel of die beleid wel e-onderrig-en-leer effektief ondersteun en prakties moontlik maak. ‘n Krities analitiese en vergelykende studie van die VSA (Verenigde State van Amerika), Finland en Malawi se onderwysstelsels- en wetgewing is gedoen in hoofstuk 5 deel 2 om te bepaal hoe dié lande onderwys struktureer en hoe e-onderrig-en–leer geadministreer word, sodat relevante voorstelle vir Suid-Afrika gemaak kan word en om insae te lewer in die ontwerp van ‘n e-onderrig-en-leer raamwerk toepaslik vir die Afrika-kontinent. Navorsingsbevindinge word voorgelê aan die Suid-Afrikaanse Departement van Basiese Onderwys, onderwysers sowel as aan navorsers.Lolu cwaningo luhlose ukuphakamisa uhlaka lwe-e-learning lamadivaysi eselula e-Afrika ukusiza ukuthuthukisa izinga lokubhalisa nezindinganiso zemfundo kwiSigaba se-FET (Further Education and Training). Ucwaningo luyimfanelo enemvelo futhi lusebenzisa ukuhlaziywa kwedokhumenti njengendlela yokucwaninga eyinhloko. Ukuhlolisisa umongo wezemfundo waseNingizimu Afrika ngokusekela imniningwane yezibalo ukugqugquzela ukuthi kungani enye yokufunda email ibalulekile ekuthuthukiseni imfundo yaseNingizimu Afrika ne-Afrika. Ukubuyekezwa kwezincwadi kuhlanganisa ukuhlaziywa okuchazayo kwezinhlaka eziyisikhombisa ezisekhona ze-e- e-m-learning, nezici eziyinhloko eziqokonyiswe ukukhishwa kwe-adaption noma ukufakwa kwisakhiwo se-e-learning se-Afrika. Ukuzikhethela, Ukwakhiwa kwe-Constructivism (Kwe Zokwakha) kanye ne-Connectivism (Kwe Zokuxhumana) kuxoxwa njengezifundo ezifanele zokufunda ukusekela lolu hlelo oluhlongozwayo lwe-e-learning. Ngemuva kwaloko, ukuhlolwa okubalulekile kwemibhalo yamanje yemfundo yaseNingizimu Afrika (Amaphepha Asemhlophe, Imigomo Nemigomo Yabafundisi kanye neNqubomgomo Yohlaka Lokufundiswa Nezifundo Nokusekela) kwenziwa ukuze kutholakale ukuthi lezi zinqubomgomo zisekela futhi zikwazi yini ukufundisa nge-e-ephumelelayo. Ingxenye yesibili yeSahluko sesihlanu iqukethe ukuhlaziywa okubucayi kanye nokuqhathaniswa kwezinhlelo zemfundo kanye nemithetho esebenzayo eMelika, eFinland nase Malawi ukuqinisekisa ukuthi imfundo ihlelwe kanjani nokuthi i-e-learning inikezwa kanjani ukwenza izincomo ezifanele eNingizimu Afrika nokwazisa ukuklama uhlaka lwe-e-learning lwe-Afrika. Imiphumela yokucwaninga inikezwa njengezimpendulo zemibuzo yokucwaninga ephakanyisiwe kanye nohlaka oluhlongozwayo lwe-e-learning kanye nezincomo ezengeziwe ezethulwa eMnyangweni wezemfundo Eyisisekelo, othisha nabacwaningi baseNingizimu Afrika.Curriculum and Instructional StudiesM. Ed. (Curriculum Studies

How to improve students’ experience in blending learning? Evidence from the perceptions of students in a Postgraduate Master’s Degree

[EN] This paper examines the perceptions of a group of students of a Postgraduate Master’s Degree in Cosmetics Industry at the Universitat de València, delivered with a blended learning modality, in relation to their experience in face-to-face learning and differentiating between those with or without a previous background in a remote online learning environment, with the added purpose of identifying strategies to enhance that experience, while offering further evidence for scholars, educators and institutions in this field. To this end, a survey with open questions devised ad hoc leaning on our literature review was submitted to a group of 114 students of the Master’s Degree in the period 2017-2020. Students were enquired about the pros and cons of their blended learning experience in relation to the traditional face-to-face learning, and which modality they would choose next time if both were offered, only considering the achievement, experience and satisfaction, regardless of the price. 77 students of our initial sample participated in the questionnaire, 38 of them without previous experience in blended or distance learning. The results show a certain predilection for face-to-face learning, especially in the group of newbies in blended or distance learning. They highlight how they miss a closer interaction with their peers and professors and the difficulties to assimilate certain content, while appraising the flexibility, autonomy, and the self-pace of the blended learning modality. Correspondingly, students with experience in remote online education settings generally show a better predisposal and find fewer disadvantages in blended learning. This suggests that the factor of experience and adaptation to new tools and methods improves student perception and confidence and shapes their preferences, with a foreseeable growing acceptance of blended learning in the future. Finally, the outcome allows us to define a series of strategies to improve the achievement, experience, and satisfaction of students in this learning context.Garcia-Ortega, B.; Galan-Cubillo, J. (2021). How to improve students’ experience in blending learning? Evidence from the perceptions of students in a Postgraduate Master’s Degree. WPOM-Working Papers on Operations Management. 12(2):1-15. https://doi.org/10.4995/wpom.15677OJS115122Al-Khanjari, Z. A. S. (2018). Applying online learning in software engineering education. In Computer Systems and Software Engineering: Concepts, Methodologies, Tools, and Applications (pp. 217-231). IGI Global. https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-5225-3923-0.ch010Angeli, C., Valanides, N., & Bonk, C. J. (2003). Communication in a web‐based conferencing system: the quality of computer‐mediated interactions. British Journal of Educational Technology, 34(1), 31-43. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8535.00302Arroyo-Barrigüete, J. L., López-Sánchez, J. I., Minguela-Rata, B., & Rodriguez-Duarte, A. (2019). Use patterns of educational videos: a quantitative study among university students. WPOM-Working Papers on Operations Management, 10(2), 1-19. https://doi.org/10.4995/wpom.v10i2.12625Bonk, C. J., & Graham, C. R. (2012). The handbook of blended learning: Global perspectives, local designs. John Wiley & Sons.Clark, T., & Barbour, M. K. (2015). Online, Blended, and Distance Education: Building Successful School Programs.Dhawan, S. (2020). Online learning: A panacea in the time of COVID-19 crisis. Journal of Educational Technology Systems, 49(1), 5-22. https://doi.org/10.1177/0047239520934018Garcia-Ortega, B., & Galan-Cubillo, J., (2021). Combining teamwork, coaching and mentoring as an innovative mix for self-aware and motivational learning. Imlementation case in teamwork sessions in the context of practices in a bachelor's degree. 15th Annual International Technology, Educationa and Development Conference. Valencia. Spain. https://doi.org/10.21125/inted.2021.2219Garrison, D. R., & Vaughan, N. D. (2008). Blended learning in higher education: Framework, principles, and guidelines. John Wiley & Sons. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118269558Ginns, P., & Ellis, R. A. (2009). Evaluating the quality of e‐learning at the degree level in the student experience of blended learning. British Journal of Educational Technology, 40(4), 652-663. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8535.2008.00861.xGómez, W. A. R. (2014). Preguntas abiertas en encuestas ¿cómo realizar su análisis?. Comunicaciones en estadística, 7(2). https://doi.org/10.15332/s2027-3355.2014.0002.02Grasso, L. (2006). Encuestas. Elementos para su diseño y análisis. Editorial Brujas.Gros, B., & García-Peñalvo, F. J. (2016). Future trends in the design strategies and technological affordances of e-learning. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-17727-4_67-1Halverson, L. R., & Graham, C. R. (2019). Learner engagement in blended learning environments: A conceptual framework. Online Learning, 23(2), 145-178. https://doi.org/10.24059/olj.v23i2.1481Hong, J. C., Tai, K. H., Hwang, M. Y., Kuo, Y. C., & Chen, J. S. (2017). Internet cognitive failure relevant to users' satisfaction with content and interface design to reflect continuance intention to use a government e-learning system. Computers in Human Behavior, 66, 353-362. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2016.08.044López-Pérez, M. V., Pérez-López, M. C., & Rodríguez-Ariza, L. (2011). Blended learning in higher education: Students' perceptions and their relation to outcomes. Computers & education, 56(3), 818-826. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2010.10.023Means, B., Toyama, Y., Murphy, R., & Baki, M. (2013). The effectiveness of online and blended learning: A meta-analysis of the empirical literature. Teachers College Record, 115(3), 1-47. https://doi.org/10.1177/016146811311500307McGEE, E., & Poojary, P. (2020). Exploring Blended Learning Relationships in Higher Education Using a Systems-based Framework. Turkish Online Journal of Distance Education, 21(4), 1-13. https://doi.org/10.17718/tojde.803343Kemp, N. (2020). University students' perceived effort and learning in face-to-face and online classes. Journal of Applied Learning and Teaching, 3(1), 69-77. https://doi.org/10.37074/jalt.2020.3.s1.14Krause, K. (2007) "Griffith University blended learning strategy," Document number2008/0016252, 2007.Norberg, A., Dziuban, C. D., & Moskal, P. D. (2011). A time‐based blended learning model. On the Horizon. https://doi.org/10.1108/10748121111163913Poon, J. (2013). Blended learning: An institutional approach for enhancing students' learning experiences. Journal of online learning and teaching, 9(2), 271-288.Rafiola, R., Setyosari, P., Radjah, C., & Ramli, M. (2020). The Effect of Learning Motivation, Self-Efficacy, and Blended Learning on Students' Achievement in The Industrial Revolution 4.0. International Journal of Emerging Technologies in Learning (iJET), 15(8), 71-82. https://doi.org/10.3991/ijet.v15i08.12525Rovai, A. P., & Downey, J. R. (2010). Why some distance education programs fail while others succeed in a global environment. The Internet and Higher Education, 13(3), 141-147. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2009.07.001Rovai, A. P., & Jordan, H. M. (2004). Blended learning and sense of community: A comparative analysis with traditional and fully online graduate courses. International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 5(2), 1-13. https://doi.org/10.19173/irrodl.v5i2.192Sayed, M. (2013). Blended learning environments: The effectiveness in developing concepts and thinking skills. Journal of Education and Practice, 4(25), 12-17.Stein, J., & Graham, C. R. (2020). Essentials for blended learning: A standards-based guide. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781351043991Tang, C. M., & Chaw, L. Y. (2016). Digital Literacy: A Prerequisite for Effective Learning in a Blended Learning Environment?. Electronic Journal of E-learning, 14(1), 54-65.Tseng, H., & Walsh, E. J. (2016). Blended vs. traditional course delivery: Comparing students' motivation, learning outcomes, and preferences. Quarterly Review of Distance Education, 17(1), 1-21.Volery, Thierry, and Deborah Lord. "Critical success factors in online education." International journal of educational management (2000). https://doi.org/10.1108/09513540010344731Woo, Y., & Reeves, T. C. (2007). Meaningful interaction in web-based learning: A social constructivist interpretation. The Internet and higher education, 10(1), 15-25. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2006.10.005Zhu, Y., Au, W., & Yates, G. (2016). University students' self-control and self-regulated learning in a blended course. Internet and Higher Education, 30, 54-62. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2016.04.00

Context-adaptive learning designs by using semantic web services

IMS Learning Design (IMS-LD) is a promising technology aimed at supporting learning processes. IMS-LD packages contain the learning process metadata as well as the learning resources. However, the allocation of resources - whether data or services - within the learning design is done manually at design-time on the basis of the subjective appraisals of a learning designer. Since the actual learning context is known at runtime only, IMS-LD applications cannot adapt to a specific context or learner. Therefore, the reusability is limited and high development costs have to be taken into account to support a variety of contexts. To overcome these issues, we propose a highly dynamic approach based on Semantic Web Services (SWS) technology. Our aim is moving from the current data- and metadata-based to a context-adaptive service-orientated paradigm We introduce semantic descriptions of a learning process in terms of user objectives (learning goals) to abstract from any specific metadata standards and used learning resources. At runtime, learning goals are accomplished by automatically selecting and invoking the services that fit the actual user needs and process contexts. As a result, we obtain a dynamic adaptation to different contexts at runtime. Semantic mappings from our standard-independent process models will enable the automatic development of versatile, reusable IMS-LD applications as well as the reusability across multiple metadata standards. To illustrate our approach, we describe a prototype application based on our principles

Towards adaptive e-learning applications based on Semantic Web Services

The current state of the art in supporting E-Learning objectives is primarily based on providing a learner with learning content by using metadata standards like ADL SCORM 2004 or IMS Learning Design. By following this approach, several issues can be observed including high development costs due to a limited reusability across different standards and learning contexts. To overcome these issues, our approach changes this data-centric paradigm to a highly dynamic service-oriented approach. By following this approach, learning objectives are supported based on a automatic allocation of services instead of a manual composition of learning data. Our approach is fundamentally based on current Semantic Web Service (SWS) technology and considers mappings between different learning metadata standards as well as ontological concepts for E-Learning. Since our approach is based on a dynamic selection and invocation of SWS appropriate to achieve a given learning objective within a specific learning context, it enables the dynamic adaptation to specific learning needs as well as a high level of reusability across different learning contexts

A semantic web services-based infrastructure for context-adaptive process support

Current technologies aimed at supporting processes whether it is a business or learning process - primarily follow a metadata- and data-centric paradigm. Whereas process metadata is usually based on a specific standard specification - such as the Business Process Modeling Notation (BPMN) or the IMS Learning Design Standard - the allocation of resources is done manually at design-time, and the used data is often specific to one process context only. These facts limit the reusability of process models across different standards and contexts. To overcome these issues, we introduce an innovative Semantic Web Service-based framework aimed at changing the current paradigm to a context-adaptive service-oriented approach. Following the idea of layered semantic abstractions, our approach supports the development of abstract semantic process model - reusable across different contexts and standards - that enables a dynamic adaptation to specific actor needs and objectives. To illustrate the application of our framework and establish its feasibility, we describe a prototypical application in the E-Learning domain

Adapting e-learning and learning services for people with disabilities

Providing learning materials and support services that are adapted to the needs of individuals has the potential to enable learners to obtain maximal benefit from university level studies. This paper describes EU4ALL project which has been exploring how to present customized learning materials and services for people with disabilities. A number of the technical components of the EU4ALL framework are described. This is followed with a brief description of prototype implementations. This is then followed by a discussion of a number of research directions that may enhance the adaptability, usability and accessibility of information and support systems can be used and consumed by a diverse user population

Adressing context-awareness and standards interoperability in e-learning: a service-oriented framework based on IRS III

Current technologies aimed at supporting learning goals primarily follow a data and metadata-centric paradigm. They provide the learner with appropriate learning content packages containing the learning process description as well as the learning resources. Whereas process metadata is usually based on a certain standard specification – such as ADL SCORM or the IMS Learning Design – the used learning resources – data or services - are specific to pre-defined learning contexts, and they are allocated manually at design-time. Therefore, a content package cannot consider the actual learning context, since this is only known at runtime of a learning process. These facts limit the reusability of a content package across different standards and contexts. To overcome these issues, this paper proposes an innovative Semantic Web Service-based approach that changes this data- and metadata-based paradigm to a context-adaptive service-oriented approach. In this approach, the learning process is semantically described as a standard-independent process model decomposed into several learning goals. These goals are accomplished at runtime, based on the automatic allocation of the most appropriate service. As a result, we address the dynamic adaptation to specific context and - providing the appropriate mappings to established metadata standards - we enable the reuse of the defined semantic learning process model across different standards. To illustrate the application of our approach and to prove its feasibility, a prototypical application based on an initial use case scenario is proposed

Personalised trails and learner profiling within e-learning environments

This deliverable focuses on personalisation and personalised trails. We begin by introducing and defining the concepts of personalisation and personalised trails. Personalisation requires that a user profile be stored, and so we assess currently available standard profile schemas and discuss the requirements for a profile to support personalised learning. We then review techniques for providing personalisation and some systems that implement these techniques, and discuss some of the issues around evaluating personalisation systems. We look especially at the use of learning and cognitive styles to support personalised learning, and also consider personalisation in the field of mobile learning, which has a slightly different take on the subject, and in commercially available systems, where personalisation support is found to currently be only at quite a low level. We conclude with a summary of the lessons to be learned from our review of personalisation and personalised trails