When Learning Never Stops - From Learning to Lifelong Learning, Over e-Learning - Essay Example

When Learning Never Stops: From Learning to Lifelong Learning, over e-Learning ????????????????????? ????????????????????????????????????????????? ?????????????????????????????????????????????????????? ????????????????????????????? Abstract. This paper shows that convention physical classroom-based, structured and closed-form learning has been radically changed by the introduction of hypertext and the consequent World Wide Web. The unprecedented development of Information and Communication Technology (ICT) has transformed conventional learning to the technology driven, flexible and open mechanism of e-Learning. e-Learning itself has evolved from the comparatively static e-Learning 1.0, based on Web 2.0 technologies, to the more vibrant, dynamic and interactive user-centric e-Learning 2.0 with its defining Personal Learning Environments which facilitates lifelong learning. With Web 3.0 on the horizon, e-Learning 3.0, with its focus on content, is not very far away. Keywords: e-Learning, e-Learning 1.0, e-Learning 2.0, e-Learning 3.0, Virtual Learning Environment, Personal Learning Environment, Lifelong Learning. 1 Introduction The unprecedented development of Information and Communication Technology (ICT) from the early Eighties revolutionized many fields of work and activity, including learning and education which has undergone radical changes. The coming of the Internet and the World Wide Web (WWW) introduced the concept of “learning anytime, anywhere and anyhow” [1]. Students and teachers could be geographically dispersed in what is termed a virtual classroom. Distance education was prefixed with ‘online’ to give what is now known as e-Learning. The roots of the present-day web can be traced back to the concept of hypertext and hypermedia which goes back to 1945 when Vannevar Bush introduced the concept of hypertext in a system called ‘memex’. Bush visualized a system in which the documents could be linked in a non-linear manner modeled after the associative nature of the human mind.[33] The same objective was echoed by Ted Nelson in 1987 when he envisaged “…a fast linking electronic repository for the storage and publication of text, graphics and other digital information; permitting promiscuous linkage and windowing among all materials; with special features for alternative versions, historical backtrack and arbitrary collaging…”in his Xanadu system [34], Conklin who spoke of inter-documentary links [35] and Rada [36] who dreamt of connecting text across document boundaries. Hypertext and hypermedia gave the Web its interactivity and navigational manoeuvrability. “…concept of ‘hypertext’ is the base of all the web evolution.”[31] 2 From Learning to e-Learning 1.0 Conventional learning has been restricted to the physical classroom in which the teacher teaches students according to a prescribed course and syllabi. The genesis of e-Learning can be found in the initial web sites that were developed by schools, universities and colleges in the mid Nineties. Gradually, individual teachers also started putting up websites to support their courses with various material, and websites with learning content or study material came to be known as e-Learning sites. This e-Learning, now referred to as e-Learning 1.0 was however centrally controlled by the academic institution, with content being course-centric [1]. As e-Learning became more sophisticated, and incorporated more teaching-learning services, more holistic approaches such as Virtual Learning Environments (VLEs) and Learning Management Systems (LMSs) were adopted [1]. There were both open-source LMSs such as Moodle1, and business models such as Blackboard2. These e-Learning 1.0 systems were however still largely course centric, and centrally controlled. 3 From e-Learning 1.0 to e-Learning 2.0 The term web2.0 was introduced by the O’Reilly Media Group in 2004 and indicates a more advanced version of the old web or web1.0, even though the transition was almost seamless [2], [3]. The change was manifest in the way people used the Internet and its social communication potential, and ushered in a new era of content creation and distribution through blogs, decentralization of authority, and the liberty to share, develop and reuse content [4]. The web essentially became user centric, and the concept of the semantic web or a web that promoted much enhanced communication between human and machines came into being [5], [6]. 3.1 Web 2.0 The most visible technical change was again in the realm of hypertext and hypermedia. In Web 2.0 client-side JavaScript 3was used with (X)HTML4 and HTTP as XML (AJAX5) to enhance user experience. RSS6/Atom syndication is also a similar kind of data integration [3]. Web 2.0 opened up new avenues for the development of e-Learning. Web 2.0 tools started to be utilized for creating, developing, modifying, editing, distributing and using learning content through blogs or podcast, but the real difference was that the student was now at the centre of the entire system [7]. The web was turned into a platform of learning from just a delivery mechanism. “The software became a content authoring tool, and not a content consumption tool.”[8] The other salient feature of this new e-Learning was online collaboration. Online learning systems designed to help social groups in collaborative learning led to the development of a new VLE that is now known as e-Learning 2.0 [9]. Interaction was no longer restricted between learner and computer but was now possible between learner and learner, and learner and student [10]. In fact Ullrich et al [11] proposes that Web 2.0 can also be ideally used for research on learning. Social Software. Web 2.0 advocated what is known as social software – software that support group interaction, which extracts value from the social behaviour by using inherent interactivity to facilitate e-Learning [12]. Social software has been defined as networked tools that support and encourage individuals to learn together while retaining individual control over their time, space, presence, activity, identity and relationship [13]. Social software uses tools such as real-time audio graphics, collaborative bookmaking, VOIP audio conferencing, wikis, discussion forums, concept mapping etc. to enhance the e-Learning experience [13]. Second Life. Multimedia elements started to play a very crucial role in e-Learning 2.0. [14]. The transition to a 3-D virtual world paved the way for Multi-user Virtual Environments (MUVE) in which the collaborators stepped into a virtual or Second life (SL). People use avatars or virtual representations of their self in their second life [15] [16]. In e-Learning, virtual classrooms, multi-user online games, learning-based digital museums [17] and simulated environments are created to enable students to learn in a close-to-reality environment [18]. Fig.1 shows an SL illustration [16]. Fig. 1. Second Life Illustratio 4 From e-Learning 2.0 to Personal Learning Environment With the rapid development in technology, it was becoming evident that to harness the full potential of the technology tools, learning, it would be futile to restrict e-Learning to the reproduction of classrooms and universities through software [19]. The Personal Learning Environment (PLE) represents the next generation of e-Learning system, and refers to “an online learning environment where the student is able to customize his/her learning environment based on pedagogical and personal choices.” [20], [21]. The concept of Pervasive Information Network that can source inform from all sources to all points to drive PLEs is another development trait in e-Learning [22]. 4.1 What is PLE A PLE is not an application in itself, but a new way of using the web or web2.0 for learning. PLE focuses on the individual, the learner is presented with learning resources based on individual interests, education level, attitude and cultural, social and other factors [23] [24]. Two primary approaches have been identified for conceptualising and developing PLEs – with the PLE as an object i.e. an environment or a hub comprising all learning applications and tools; and with the PLE as a framework that integrates a variety of Web 2.0 tools according to the choice of the learner [25] Web 2.0 and social software tools that are used to develop PLEs include blogs, applications such as del.icio.us, wiki, podcasting, videocasting, wiki facebook, etc. ELGG7 and Flock8 are two open source applications that are being widely used to facilitate the use of social software and web services for e-Learning. Examples of PLEs include Colloquia9, the Manchester Framework and PLEX PLE10 [26]. 4.2 PLE Vs VLE PLEs offer distinct advantages over VLEs. PLEs can be used to pursue formal study even while being outside the realm of the educational institute; unlike VLEs, a digital record of the process of learning is conserved through the PLE by means of applications such as the Interactive Logbook (IL)11 [27]; the learner is the owner and manager of the PLE; the PLE provides a social presence for the owner; and most importantly, PLE is designed for lifelong learning, while VLE is an imitation of the classroom with its set time period. The conceptual model of a PLE is given in Fig.2 [24]. Fig. 2. Conceptual model of PLE 5 From PLE to Lifelong Learning Learning is a lifelong process, even though conventional educational systems did not truly acknowledge the fact in the way in which they worked. Closed structured learning is gradually giving way to informal learning in which the individual learns throughout a complete lifespan if so desired. It is now accepted that learning continues throughout life in different contexts and different settings, and efforts are on to access and certify informal learning by extending and recognizing PLEs [28]. In 2995, Scott Wilson proposed a future of the PLE as illustrated in Fig.3 . Fig. 3. The Future of PLE 5.1 PLE Drawbacks PLEs, however, have their own set of problems. In many cases PLEs may lead to situations of the blind leading the blind; PLEs require high-end technical resources; the bottom-up approach of PLEs is likely to clash with the top-down hierarchical structure of most conventional universities on which the PLEs reside; and web 2.0 technologies can be intimidating to the uninitiated [29] [30]. 5.2 Web 3.0 and the Future To overcome such problems, there is now a concerted effort to base e-Learning on Web 3.0 which is looming large on the horizon. Web 3.0 is focussed on the creation, development and management of content [28]. It strives to bring the user closer to the machines in a bid to make content more dynamic, efficient and interactive at the same time[29]. Web 3.0 is based on the principle of routing new information streams by linking and integrating various data sources and analysing them[30]. The World Wide Web Consortium is leading the development of Web 3.0. Semantic technologies such as Resource Distribution Framework (RDF) and SPARQL, which is a standard query language for RDF, is being used for the purpose [31]. Pattal et al [31] proposes that Semantic technologies be considered as a bridge for the technological evolution from Web 2.0 to Web 3.0. 6 Conclusion Thanks to ICT, the process of learning can now continue lifelong for any individual. Web 2.0 lent a new dimension to content creation and information sharing by the producers or the users themselves; Web 3.0 is being developed to enable linking of geographically separate data sets in different languages and in different contexts. e-Learning 3.0 will attempt to overcome the constraints of e-Learning 2.0 and to enlarge its scope to cover all knowledge and all categories of learners. The dream is to make the world a single repository of knowledge, and accord intelligible access to it to all human beings. References 1. Petegem, W, M.: From Learning over E-learning to MyLearning. In: ITI 2008 30th Int. Conf. on Information Technology Interfaces, pp. 27--30. IEEE Xplore, Belgium (2008) 2. Wever, B, D., Mechant, P., Veevaete, P., Hauttekeete, L.: E-Learning 2.0: social software for educational use, pp. 511—516. IEEE (2007) 3. Ayers, D.: The Shortest Path to the Future Web. In: Websense, pp. 76 –79. IEEE (2006) 4. Shaohua, H., Peilin, W.: Web 2.0 and Social Learning in a Digital Economy, pp. 1121—1124. IEEE (2008) 5. Yang, S. J. H., Chen, I.Y.L., Su, A.Y.S.: Personalized Annotation Management: A Web 2.0 Social Software for Enhancing Knowledge Sharing in Communities of Practice. In: Seventh IEEE International Conference on Advanced Learning Technologies (ICALT 2007). IEEE (2007) 6. Ermalai, I., Mocofan, M., Vasiu, R.: Adding Semantics to Online Learning. In: 5th International Symposium on Applied Computational Intelligence and Informatics, pp. 569—573. IEEE Xplore (2009) 7. Ardianti, R.: E-Learning, Web 2.0, and Internet Entrepreneur. Exploring Business School Students’ Interest on Becoming Internet Entrepreneur. In: International Conference on IT to Celebrate S. Charmonmans 72nd Birthday, pp. 13.1—13.7. Special Issue of the International Journal of the Computer, the Internet and Management (2009) 8. Chow, K. O., Fan, K. Y. K., Chan, A. Y. K., Wong, G. L. T.: Content-based Tag Generation for the Grouping of Tags. In: 2009 International Conference on Mobile, Hybrid, and On-line Learning, pp. 7 – 12, IEEE (2009) 9. Pirrone, R., Cannella, V., Russo, G.: A Map-based Visualization Tool to Support Tutors in E-Learning 2.0, pp. 485—490, IEEE (2009) 10. Ebner, M.: E-Learning 2.0 = e-Learning 1.0 + Web 2.0? In: Second International Conference on Availability, Reliability and Security (ARES07), IEEE (2007) 11. Ullrich, C., Borau, K., Luo, H., Tan, X., Shen, L., Shen, R.: Why Web 2.0 is Good for Learning and for Research: Principles and Prototypes, International World Wide Web Conference Committee (IW3C2). (2008) 12. Wever, B, D., Mechant, P., Veevaete, P., Hauttekeete, L.: E-Learning 2.0: social software for educational use, pp. 511—516. IEEE (2007) 13. Anderson, T.: Social Software Application in Formal Online Education. In: Sixth International Conference on Advanced Learning Technologies (ICALT06). IEEE (2006) 14. Friedland, G.: Educational Multimedia, pp. 54—56, IEEE (2008) 15. Zhao, Y., Wu, L.: Second Life: A New Window for e-Learning. In: Ninth International Conference on Hybrid Intelligent Systems, pp. 191—194. IEEE (2009) 16. Zhu, Q., Wang, T., Jia, Y.: Second Life: A New Platform for Education, pp. 201—204. IEEE (2007) 17. Sookhanaphibarn, K., Thawonmas, R.: A Framework for Design and Evaluation of Digital Museums in Second Life as Learning Institutions. In: Fifth International Conference on Intelligent Information Hiding and Multimedia Signal Processin, pp, 1130—1133, IEEE (2009) 18. Ye, E., Liu, C., Polack-Wahl, J., A.: Enhancing Software Engineering Education Using Teaching Aids in 3-D Online Virtual Worlds. In: 37th ASEE/IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference, pp. 8—13. IEEE (2007) 19. Attwell, G.: Personal Learning Environments - the future of eLearning? eLearning Papers (2007) 20. Kolas, L., Staupe, A.: A personalized E-learning Interface. In: EUROCON 2007 The International Conference on “Computer as a Tool”, pp. 2670—2675. IEEE (2007) 21. Green, S. J., Pearson, E. J., Gkatzidou, S.: Formal Specification of an Adaptable Personal Learning Environment Using Prolog. In: MSIADU’09, pp. 29—38. ACM (2009) 22. Yanping, C., Jungang, H.: Personal Learning Environment Supported by Pervasive Information Network, pp. 559—562. IEEE (2007) 23. Wang, F., Li, X., Zhao, C., Xu, C.: Construct Personal Learning Environment Based on Web2.0. IEEE (2009) 24. Li, X., Xiao-Qing, G. U.: A Conceptual Model of Personal Learning Environment Based On Shanghai Lifelong Learning System. In: 17th International Conference on Computers in Education, pp. 885—889. Asia-Pacific Society for Computers in Education (2009) 25. Kompen, R. T., Edirisingha, P., Mobbs, R.: Building Web 2.0-based Personal Learning Environments – A Conceptual Framework. In: Eden Research Workshop (2008) 26. Harmelen, M. V.: Personal Learning Environments. In: Sixth International Conference on Advanced Learning Technologies (ICALT06). IEEE (2006) 27. Chan, T., Corlett, D., Sharples, M., Ting, J., Westmancott, O.: Developing Interactive Logbook: A Personal Learning Environment. In: IEEE International Workshop on Wireless and Mobile Technologies in Education (WMTE’05). IEEE (2005) 28. Attwell, G.: Personal Learning Environments - the future of eLearning? eLearning Papers (2007) 29. Dron, J., Bhattacharya, M.: Lost in the Web 2.0 Jungle. In: Seventh IEEE International Conference on Advanced Learning Technologies (ICALT 2007). IEEE (2007) 30. Frankling Consulting: Why Personal Learning Environments? 31. Pattal, M. M. I. P., Yuan, L. I., Jianqiu, Z.: Web 3.0: A real personal Web! More opportunities & more threats. In: Third International Conference on Next Generation Mobile Applications, Services and Technologies, pp. 125—128. IEEE (2009) 32. Pattal, M. M. I. P., Yuan, L. I., Jianqiu, Z.: Web 3.0: A real personal Web! More opportunities & more threats. In: Third International Conference on Next Generation Mobile Applications, Services and Technologies, pp. 125—128. IEEE (2009) 33. Marchand, Y., Guerin, J-L.: Nestor: A Trail Blazer for Hypertext. IEEE (1996) 34. Nelson, T.: The Xanadu Paradigm. In: A Poster, San Antonio,TX: Theodor H. Nelson (1987) 35. Conklin, J.: Hypertext: An Introduction and Survey, pp. Computer 17-41 (1987) 36. Rada, R.: Hypertext: Free text to expertext. McGraw-Hill (1991) Read More