Masaryk University Faculty of Arts

Learner’s Perspective

First, personal factors are either predetermined or change overtime. According to Dreyer, Bangeni and Nel, predetermined factors include age, gender, prior learning experience, socio-economic and ethnic background. Out of these factors, only gender and ethnic background do not present enough correlation with distance learning outcomes to be considered variables (2005, p. 95). When it comes to the age of students, in the previous chapter it has been noted that the term digital natives signifies a shift in students’ approaches to learning, which started in the last decades of the 20^th century. Today, students can be characterized by high level of consumer technology proficiency, shorter attention span, ability to multitask and preference of visual sources of input. However, not all students conform to this technology-savvy young adult stereotype; a significant minority of university students is over thirty years old. The European Commission pre-study about the role of HEIs in adult education indicates that, in 2007, students over thirty constituted around 30 per cent of all university students across twenty-seven member states (from 6.8 in Belgium to 41.6 in Sweden) (‘Pre-study,’ n.d.). The reason why adult learners are seeking further education is the desire to improve socio-economic status through better employment opportunities available with university degrees. These learners face obstacles unfamiliar to their younger counterparts, they have to balance between studying, work and often family. Attending daytime courses may not be an option for full-time employees, which is exactly where e-learning can prove useful. Yet the novelty of ICT as a core delivery method may be intimidating for adult learners and raise the question of efficiency.

Prior learning experience may lift the barrier for some, especially if it included some technology-mediated communication and materials, and raise it for the others, as could be the case with adult learners. Indeed, when studying online, the higher level of comfort one has with various educational tools the more he or she can concentrate on the materials or tasks in hand. In most cases, this does not pose a problem for younger students, even if they are not familiar with a tool, they tend to grasp its essence with a little guidance. Adult learners, on the other hand, may have been taught using traditional methods only. They are more likely not to be familiar with online learning tools and experience difficulties with the methods of material delivery preferred in e-learning (such as a variety of media). Moreover, adult learners may feel apprehensive towards new technology and consider it inferior to f2f method. Therefore, to ensure that prior learning experience is not a limiting factor, educators need to take into account different age groups as well as the level of comfort with technology of potential learners when designing e-learning courses. A sufficient level of technical support and possibly additional tutorials should be provided.

Socio-economic background can also be a variable that contributes to students’ success in e-learning and influences their general outlook on the usefulness of ICT for learning. The European Commission survey ‘ICT in Education’ (2013) shows that students who, while in secondary school, have access to technology both in class and at home are more confident in their ICT skills and are able to use the Internet, in particular social media, responsibly and, to somewhat lesser extent, safely. In addition, technologically competent students feel positive about the impact ICT has on their education and on their future; they also tend to be more supportive towards other students in ICT-related matters. It is, therefore, possible to infer that students who have more practice with ICT in formal and informal settings will have fewer difficulties mastering new learning tools later at university level. At school, all students are provided with equal opportunities to acquire ICT skills, depending on how well a school is equipped; opportunities of access to computer and the Internet at home, on the other hand, are based on family’s socio-economic status.

Among personal factors that change overtime Dreyer, Bangeni and Nel (2005, p. 95) list learning strategies, motivation and metacognitive, cognitive and affective variables. Motivation, self-sufficiency (metacognitive variable) and the learners’ need to take control of the learning process (affective variable) are discussed in detail in the next chapter.

Cognitive variable refers to the individual’s learning style. The authors indicate that it is an important, albeit often underestimated by course designers, factor in distance learning. E-learning has the required capacity to accommodate individual preferences because of the way materials can be organized. Hills (2003) proposes an idealized scheme that would allow learners to navigate a course in accordance with their personality:

Content will be both abstract with concrete examples, offering the big picture alongside detail. Learner interactions will require either objective or subjective decision-making. Each topic will concentrate on one of these four content styles: abstract, concrete, objective [and] subjective. Learners will have the opportunity to move between topics as they wish… Their choices are theory or example, objective test or subjective assessment, and visual, text, audio or activity. (p. 150, 151)

Quite obviously, such course would require an immense effort on the production stage and extensive testing with all distinguished learner types involved. In reality it is not always possible, and yet learners whose individual preferences are not accounted for will not necessarily be less successful or altogether fail. Learners can adopt learning strategies based on both their preferences and on the way materials and requirements are presented. Indeed, Cohen (1998) and Dickinson (1990) highlight the connection of learning styles and other personal variables with learning strategies that an individual can employ to improve learning outcomes (as cited in Hurd, 2005 p. 12). Distance learning environment is particularly favourable of the autonomous development of individual learning strategies, which, arguably, could be more beneficial than their explicit teaching. For example, Little (2002) argues for an approach where learners are left to ‘explore alternatives and find out what works for them personally (as cited in Hurd, 2005, p. 12) or embrace a variety of solutions. After all, flexibility is one of the most significant contributions of technology to distance learning. It is necessary to add that students need, at the very least, to be made aware of existing strategies and encouraged to explore what fits their personal learning style best.

Second, contextual factors are grouped according to three systems that can influence students: microsystem (home and family), meso-system (institution) and macro-system (community and country) (Dreyer, Bangeni & Nel, 2005, p. 99, 100). A meso-system level appears to have the most influence over the way students learn because it is directly responsible for the delivery of education and formation of an autonomous learner. In the case of distance learning, the lack of human communication is often perceived as one of the central issues. Indeed, for example, Vygotsky (1978) maintains that people learn not in isolation but through interaction with others (as cited in Hurd, 2005, p. 2). Ellis (2003) also puts great emphasis on the social nature of learning: ‘acquisition occurs in rather than as a result of interaction’ (as cited in Hampel, 2010, p. 136). The nature of interaction in learning is two-fold: with teacher/s and with peers.

If e-learning is to be distinguished from online drilling, the learner-teacher and learner-learner interaction can play a forming role for learners’ autonomy and collaborative skills. With the introduction of VoIP software, in addition to asynchronous emails and forums, the issue may be resolved, provided an effective approach to the implication of these tools is chosen. Teachers can provide a varying amount of support and comments through synchronous online sessions either to individual students or to groups in accordance with achieved students’ autonomy levels and course objectives. Schramm (2005, p. 235) also points out the importance of privacy for many students, particularly, in the matter of grades, clarification of difficult points or personal concerns. Apart from scheduled support, students should feel comfortable contacting teachers or support staff with course-related questions, otherwise material retention can be negatively influenced.

In peer interaction, collaboration may be an answer to achieving learners’ autonomy through the development of self-reflective and analytical skills (Vygotsky, 1978; Kohonen, 1992; Little, 1996, as cited in Hurd, 2005). When working together on a topic both synchronously and asynchronously, learners share insights and critically comment on each other’s opinions thereby forming deeper awareness of their own viewpoints. This feature can be especially beneficial for language learners. Hansson and Wennö (2005, p. 292) in the conclusion of their study ‘Compensatory Strategies in Distance Language Education’ claim that students felt significant improvement of their language skills when they had to collaborate on non-language learning-related projects, such as literature or cultural studies. Students had to concentrate on tasks where language was not a goal but a tool and, therefore, were able to reflect on and analyse language-related mistakes in the context of a real-life meaningful discussion. This can make language learning more engaging and satisfying, leading to an increase in motivation and faster progress (Murphy, 2005, p. 30).

Overall, successful online learners, according to Dreyer, Bangeni and Nel (2005, p. 106), would have some prior experience with CAL, be internally motivated, have self-reflective and analytical skills and would adopt their learning strategies according to the situation. These learners would successfully cope with contextual factors and would need less guidance than the others. Success, therefore, cannot be attributed to a single variable, as cannot be the failure. This is especially relevant in e-learning where the technological aspect is as important as a social one, at the very least because communication is mediated by technology. Although moved online, learning remains a social activity. Even one-on-one with the computer screen, learners do not operate in isolation – they are connected with teachers and peers. Thus, it is crucial for learners to take into account their own and others’ personal variables, be it prior learning experience or an opinion, while primarily concentrating on the learning process itself.

4. 
   
   Download 256.37 Kb.
   
   Share with your friends: