L7 4 4

=Students’ engagement is regularly monitored. =

Evidence
To improve e-learning outcomes it is important to learn from past mistakes, according to Ehrmann (2002), who argues that tracking progress is not only necessary to stay on course but also to identify solvable problems that can attract fresh resources (p. 55). The results of monitoring should be used to inform ongoing and new development, and to support resources and strategy. Information on performance can be used as a tool for improving quality, but only if the information is disseminated. Such validation of e-learning practices and resources is a significant stage in the full cycle of organisational learning that describes success in terms of ‘student performance, student satisfaction, staff experience, and cost effectiveness, as judged in relation to the original intentions’ (Salmon, 2000, p. 236). Salmon discusses validating as one of six activities in the iterative process of creating an effective learning organisation infrastructure that enables ‘the system to learn about itself’ (p. 237).

If assuming that participation is merely the number of written messages then this can be easily monitored in an e-learning environment. But, participation is not merely talking or writing. It is not enough to measure how much learners are writing or talking (Hrastinski 2008). Hrastinski further notes that low-level conceptions of online participation recognized by most of the literature are not sufficiently complex. Vicarious learning may occur through observation of other learners engaged in active or cooperative dialogues.

One concern surrounding the ‘massification’ of higher education is the lowering of entry standards and an input-output approach to students-graduates. Wilson (2007) argues that this has the potential to weaken quality education. This means that there is a great responsibility on increasing the quality and quantity of student support systems. However, these must be targeted where they are actually needed. Hence, we must monitor the abilities of students, what they are actually doing, as learning progresses (see Usoro & Abid 2008).

Juan et al. (2009) describe the SAMOS information system for monitoring students’ and groups’ activities in an e-learning context. They have attempted to ensure that students reach a satisfactory level of involvement in the learning process and to avoid high drop-out rates caused by lack of adequate support and guidance in e-learning. Non-participating students and groups can be identified by these methods and timely intervention initiated.