E1.5.3

=All new e-learning technologies or pedagogies are subject to formal evaluation. =

Evidence
There is an ongoing need to monitor the use of e-learning and ICTs for course delivery because there is as yet no consensus about what constitutes quality e-learning (Usoro & Abid 2008).

Attwell (2006) notes that a large portion of the evaluation literature on e-learning focuses on descriptive rather than analytic or predictive studies. There are surprisingly few robust comparison studies of e-learning compared with traditional learning. There are also surprisingly few return on investment studies. There is concern that e-learning is sometimes not succeeding in the way that had been expected, hence the need for evaluation and refinement of all new e-learning technologies or pedagogies. Attwell points out the ongoing need for technical developers and evaluators to engage in dialogue. Attwell identifies five areas of evaluation: individual learner variables, learning environment variables, contextual variables, technology variables, pedagogic variables. There is a need to undertake interpretative and analysis studies rather than merely descriptive ethnographic studies when evaluating e-learning.

Attwell’s review emphasizes the need for iteration between theory and practice. This means courses must be redesigned in an ongoing manner according to evaluation. Also, due to the initial costs of implementing e-learning programs it is important to conduct ongoing evaluation. Attwell further notes that a large portion of the evaluation literature on e-learning focuses on descriptive rather than analytic or predictive studies. There are surprisingly few robust comparison studies of e-learning compared with traditional learning.