E-Learning and the Non-Traditional Education

NB: We do not resell your papers. Upon ordering, we do an original paper exclusively for you.

NB: All your data is kept safe from the public.

Introduction

With the coming of new technologies also comes new and alternative ways to education, hence the recognition of non-traditional education. There are two common types of non-traditional education namely, experiential learning and continuous assessment. Experiential learning relies heavily on evaluating a student’s performance beyond the classroom-type of teaching. The continuous assessment focuses on regularly evaluating performance throughout the teaching course. Although both types of education have their merits, one-time final examinations are still the most advantageous since they teach students to work under pressure (Jones-Delcorde, 1996).

Online learning or e-learning is the best example of the continuous assessment style of non-traditional education. This paper is aimed at analyzing alternative education or non-traditional education in general giving much focus to online learning. specifically, this paper is geared towards:

Classifying different approaches of non-traditional education.
Analyzing online learning as one avenue of non-traditional education.
Categorizing the advantages and disadvantages of online learning about the goals of the educational system in general.

The Non-Traditional Education

Whether the traditionalists agree with the non-traditional education processes, and despite the usual claim that the practice of credit awarded for experience is slow on the uptake, in the United States there are approximately 1,200 colleges and universities that provide an assessment service of college-level learning through experience. The better schools follow relatively strict guidelines including those set by the [American] Council for Adult and Experiential Learning (CAEL). Some of the more common areas in which credit for experiential learning may be given include on-the-job training courses, relevant volunteer work, executive leadership programs, and other similar experiences which parallel academic curricula. Although gaining university or college credit for experiential learning appears to be catching on at some schools in the United States, it has not, as yet, caught on to the same degree in Canada or the United Kingdom.

Experiential learning, to be accepted for credit, must generally be well documented – substantiated by certified copies of certificates, legal documents, letters from supervisors, employment records, etc. Better schools will also limit the amount of credit allowed for experiential learning (Jones-Delcorde, 1996).

Whether one agrees or disagrees with this form of obtaining credit, the general philosophy of the advocates is that it makes little sense to re-teach what has already been learned. It is important to understand, however, that most of the advocates are referring to that group of students typified by mid-career adults who have already progressed a fair distance in their careers. In some respects, this option makes good sense. For example, it would likely be counter-productive to insist that a commercial airline pilot be required to take an introductory college course in the fundamentals of air aviation. At the other end of the argument, however, it is safe to suggest that five years working as a medical secretary is not a sufficient experiential substitute for a formal clinical laboratory course in some aspect of a doctorate in medicine program in a medical school! Then, like most things, there are proper and improper applications of the concept of experiential learning.

One excellent compromise used in the United States is credit-granting examinations. The College Level Examination Program (CLEP) is one example of such a system whereby the student sits a national examination in a subject and achieves college credit commensurate with the grade received. The higher the grade, the higher the number of credits received (for example either 3 or 6, sometimes up to 12, depending on the university’s policy). This has particular appeal in certain situations. For example, a French-speaking person could potentially obtain 9 college credits for achieving a sufficiently high score on a French CLEP examination. Some universities in Canada will accept CLEP examination results for university credits in certain programs. Two other characteristics of CLEP and CLEP-type examinations deserve mention: they are supervised, not self-administered, and graded centrally. Other CLEP-type examinations which are available include the Proficiency Examination Program (PEP), Graduate Record Examinations (GRE), and the Defense Activity for Non-Traditional Education Support (DANTES) (Jones-Delcorde, 1996).

Evaluation is another important aspect of non-traditional education. Evaluation is typically conducted in one of three methods:

by continuous assessment based on the evaluation of assignments and written reports (but no examinations);
by assessment based on some combination of assignments/written reports and examinations (which are either supervised or unsupervised);
as exemplified by most programs in the United Kingdom, by examination only. There are, of course, pros and cons to each method.

Evaluation based on continuous assessment without a formal, supervised examination removes the pressure of performance on an examination and all the usual stressors inherent in writing examinations. This type of evaluation does not prepare the student for writing examinations which may be acceptable if the student never intends to be examined in anything. But without a supervised examination or an oral examination, there is no real verification that the term work submitted belongs exclusively to the student. Further, when completing written assignments students typically used two academically unrealistic practices: unlimited time and unlimited reference resources. The other side of the coin suggests that all things being equal and with full integrity assumed, continuous assessment gives a more reliable overall picture of the student’s knowledge of the subject matter precisely because the examination stressors which may act to negatively distort a student’s true knowledge of a subject matter are not present (Jones-Delcorde, 1996).

At the opposite extreme, evaluation based solely on a student’s performance on a final, comprehensive, ‘100% of the final grade’ examination is quite possibly one of the most stressful experiences a student can have. Some feel that this system tests only a student’s ability to ‘play the game’ and does not measure any meaningful degree of subject matter grasp. After all, skeptics claim, how can you adequately test a student on everything important in a given subject in three hours, with any reliability? The fact remains, however, that this method has been used for years and will be used for years to come. It can certainly be argued that some students are better examination-writers than others, but this argument is no more compelling than the argument for continuous assessment without examination because some students are much better than others at writing term papers and completing assignments (Jones-Delcorde, 1996).

Perhaps the compromise comes in the form of a combination of term work assessment and supervised examinations where the final grade is derived based on some combination of both styles of evaluation. This bridges the gap between the two extremes and possibly offers most students the most objective evaluation of his/her knowledge and understanding in a subject area. The compromise solution to evaluation however is a more expensive and comparatively more administratively challenging methodology for non-traditional education programs (Jones-Delcorde, 1996).

The popularity of Alternative Schools

Alternative schools and programs for junior and high school “at-risk” students are increasingly popular in school districts in many countries (Upperman, Curcio, Fortune, and Underwood, 1996). They have grown because they provide school systems an alternative to expelling or suspending at-risk students who are not succeeding in the traditional classrooms (Fuller and Sabatino, 1996). The success of alternative schools is based, in large measure, on the intensity of teachers and staff involved in the lives of the students in these generally small programs (De La Rosa, 1998). Past researchers have found that students in alternative schools benefit from teachers and staff providing positive personal interaction that includes personal and social counseling, individualized learning plans using a variety of teaching and learning techniques, social skills development, and communication from teachers and staff of their genuine concern for student’s well-being and academic progress (Bauman, 1998).

Concerning teacher investment in the lives of students, De La Rosa (1998) writes that “studies of alternative programs have consistently found that caring teachers are a vital component to any successful program and students in these programs feel the staff is genuinely concerned about them” (p. 271). Because of their small size, alternative schools can engender “community” which results in more active student participation, a sense of belonging and greater academic and social success (Sergiovanni, 1996).

The inherent value in positive school staff-student relationships is not unique to alternative schools. In reporting the “student agenda for high school reform,” Comfort, Giorgi, and Moody (1997) write that there was remarkable consistency in what students perceived to be the major problems in their high schools and in their recommendations for what would make high schools more effective environments for learning. The three core suggestions included: 1) moving toward a connected and focused curriculum; 2) using a more flexible instructional system, and 3) developing a strong sense of community. Implicit in this last suggestion–the most dominant theme–was a focus on building closer and fuller relationships with teachers and school staff (as well as other students and the community-at-large). Students in the Comfort, Giorgi, and Moody study reported that relationships with teachers were typically impersonal and distant. They desired to know and being better known by their teachers. Students wanted to feel that teachers cared about them as people, and out of that caring, were desirous of students’ personal as well as academic success. These students frequently characterized administrators and teachers in their schools as overly concerned with control which contributed to adversarial rather than collaborative relationships. Karp (1988) identifies the most frequent lament of dropouts as the lack of quality adult relationships in the school setting.

Carley (1994) suggests that the culture and climate of a school are created by the combined strength of its subsystems. Those subsystems include administrators, teachers, counselors, and policies and programs. If one or more of these subsystems are not responsive to student needs, the culture and climate of the school are weakened.

Renihan and Renihan (1995) underscore the importance of schools providing an environment designed to enhance student self-image and to foster a friendly and supportive atmosphere. Such an environment, they write, recognizes the “pastoral needs” of students. By this they mean the “dual student needs of school membership (characterized by a sense of belonging and social bonding to the school) and educational engagement” (p. 8). One of the key elements of pastoral care is pastoral casework [italics theirs] which recognizes that teachers and counselors alike have responsibility for the academic and psychosocial needs of students. Knutson (1996) argues that the “common-bond learning community” formed in alternative schools is the key to their success.

Because many students at risk for dropping out have serious behavioral and family problems (Streeter and Franklin, 1991)’ the value of school counselors and social workers have been recognized in alternative school programs. This staff provides both tangible and emotional support to students and their families to keep these students enrolled.

E-Learning as a Non-Traditional Education

With information technology breakthroughs, several changes in the way people communicate and interact came into being. Nowadays, there are things or circumstances which we, humans, now enjoy, but did not think that it will be possible before.

Different forms of communications such as the Internet, mobile phones and SMS, Internet chat or MIRCs, and e-groups penetrated the majority of the countries around the world.
Communication through computer–generated networks became very visible.
This enables any individual to talk with someone one cannot see on a face-to-face basis; to buy something and have it delivered without having to go out of one’s home, to research for any information with just one click on the Internet, or to meet new friends.
Even online studies or distance education through computer-generated communication sprouted like mushrooms.

Indeed, more and more schools started to offer distance forms of learning to accommodate students who, due to lack of time, opted to enroll in a much more “scheduled-free” learning method. With thousands of Internet users and the continuing rising number of advantages, if using the Internet, most educational institutions have decided to go along with the trend and maximize the use of the internet in the pursuit of promoting education.

Electronic learning or e-learning is the new recognized method of getting an educational degree nowadays.

• E-Learning is a form of learning that is stirred primarily through the use of telecommunication technologies, such as electronic mail, bulletin board systems, electronic whiteboards, inter-relay chat, desktop video conferencing, and the worldwide-web (Carlson & Repman, 1999).

E-learning may seem a bit different from the traditional classroom style of education. The differences between classroom learning and e-learning include:

In traditional classroom settings

Key interactions that affect learner attitudes and performance often occur spontaneously (Carlson & Repman, 1999).
Classroom instructors interpret verbal and nonverbal cues, clarify expectations, facilitate activities, promote discussions, elaborate concepts, render guidance and provide timely and appropriate feedback as they present content clearly and engagingly. (Carlson & Repman, 1999).
Classroom instructors can also make up for flaws in design by utilizing their appeal to gain and sustain learners’ attention and their experience to shed light on the complex or confusing content matters. (Carlson & Repman, 1999).

In E-Learning Approach

Communications are predominately asynchronous and mediated by technology.
Opportunities to interact in “real-time” are moderately confined. (Carlson & Repman, 1999).
Key interactions that occur spontaneously in traditional classroom environments must be carefully designed and sequenced as an integral part of e-learning. (Carlson & Repman, 1999).

Benefits of E-learning (Goettner, 2000)

Benefits of using e-learning services include easy access to required education through self-paced courses, capability for easily updating the courses, and its usefulness to better attract and retain qualified nurses and physicians among others.
E-learning can also help in managing the requirements of the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 by making employees aware of the requirements.
E-learning vendors provide both “off-the-shelf” catalog courses or custom-developed courses.
Online learning provides easy access to required education through self-paced courses that are available anytime, anywhere.
Also, e-learning guarantees consistency of the message–everyone in the organization gets the same information in the same way at the same time, which is crucial for compliance courses.

Training delivered via the Web can be easily updated. If one is to outsource his Web-based learning, he can gain the added benefit of solutions that are simple, inexpensive, and quick to deploy and maintain.

Also, e-learning facilitates easy, accurate tracking and reporting to help the students ensure that critical knowledge is reaching the right people.

How can E-Learning be Facilitated?

Interaction is a vital part of learning, especially if the course is medical-related, such as for the nursing degrees. Thus, interaction should not be eliminated even if it is in the form of e-learning.

Interactivity in e-learning may consist of a learner accessing a page of text via a web interface and reading some content (Carlson & Repman, 1999). To have interaction, the things that are usually incorporated in e-learning courses are:

Immediacy of response.
Non-sequential access of information.
Adaptability.
Feedback.
Options.
Bi-directional.
Interrupt ability.

Merrill, Li, and Jones (1990) also emphasize the dynamic nature of the interaction, requiring the learners and the technology to adapt to each other.

It should be noted that the single most important element of successful distance learning is interactivity among participants (Merrill, Li, and Jones, 1990)
Interactions enable both the instructor and students to communicate and respond to each other’s needs and interests (Cuban, 1993).
Interactions may help reduce feelings of isolation and anonymity that can result in dissatisfaction, poor performance, and dropouts among e-learners.
Interactions are also seen as one of the keys to transforming traditional teacher-directed instructional methods into learner-centered approaches (Cuban, 1993).

Each of the events associated with an instructional strategy may be considered an interaction, a transaction that occurs between the students and other human or non-human resources. Educators can then select an instructional strategy and use each of the events to guide the design and sequencing of e-learning interactions. The application of a grounded instructional strategy gives educators a foundation for planning and managing e-Learning interactions based on a combination of research, theory, and practical experience. Five iterative steps are posited to educators to synthesize and apply these concepts (Cuban, 1993).

The Steps to Achieve E-Learning Interactions (Cuban, 1993)

Step 1 – Identify essential experiences that are necessary for the students to achieve specified goals and objectives (optional).
Step 2 – Select a grounded instructional strategy based on specified objectives, students; characteristics, context, and epistemological beliefs.
Step 3 – Operationalize each event, embedding experiences identified in Step 1 and describing how the selected strategy will be applied during instruction.
Step 4 – Define the type of interaction(s) that will be used to facilitate each event and analyze the quantity and quality of planned interactions.
Step 5 – Select the telecommunication tool(s) — chat, email, bulletin board system — that will be used to facilitate each event based on the nature of the interaction.

It must be noted that the five-step process for designing and sequencing e-learning interactions should be applied during the design phase of the systematic process – after the objectives and assessment method have been defined and during the development of an instructional strategy and the selection of media.

More so, to select the appropriate telecommunication tools for facilitating planned interactions (integrate technology), it is important to have some understanding of the use, benefits, and limitations associated with each tool.

When working with educators new to e-Learning, it is useful to have them make use of the telecommunication tools that will be facilitated to deliver the instruction to communicate and share ideas during the design process (Hill, Williams, & Hirumi, 2001).

It may be good to note that educators may neither have the time nor the inclination to complete all of the prescribed systematic design tasks.

If one chooses to skip or gloss over some steps, it is important to remember that an instructor may not be readily available to address inadequacies in the instructional materials during e-Learning (Hill, Williams, & Hirumi, 2001).
Flaws in design are amplified online. Application of a well-defined systematic instructional design process is encouraged to help ensure the design and development of effective instructional materials (Hill, Williams, & Hirumi, 2001).

During the development of e-Learning, it is particularly important to ground instructional design decisions on a combination of experience, research, and theory.

A good instructor can formulate strategies or poorly designed instructional materials by captivating the students with their charisma and by facilitating key interactions that may or may not have been designed as an integral part of the instruction (Hill, Williams, & Hirumi, 2001)
The five-step process for designing and sequencing e-Learning interactions should be applied within the context of a systematic design model.
By applying the process, it is hoped that educators will be better able to create effective e-Learning programs that promote interactivity and optimize the potential of telecommunications technologies to enhance both individual and collaborative learning (Hill, Williams, & Hirumi, 2001).

How to Avoid E-Learning Failures

A growing number of organizations are embracing e-learning as an advantageous approach to delivering training. Some observers estimate that by 2005 as much as 90 percent of all training will be delivered electronically. This is the very reason why e-learning is also an approach that is being tried in most nursing schools nowadays.

But in the rush to implement e-learning, educational institutions are making unfortunate mistakes caused by being unacquainted with the proper uses and requirements of e-learning or by miscalculating the resources and expertise needed to ensure a program’s success. Given that e-learning is still new and unfamiliar territory for many organizations, it isn’t surprising that mistakes occur. Adding to the confusion are a large number of e-learning suppliers and the wide variation in technology, functionality, and services that surround the design and implementation of an effective e-learning program, such as an e-learning course for nursing students.

Here are the five common mishaps associated with e-learning approaches and the possible solutions:

Believing that e-learning is a cheaper training alternative (Weaver, 2002), especially if the course is for the medical professionals as this is believed to be one of the most expensive courses when taken in the formal classroom approach.
E-learning has many advantages: scalability, broad geographic reach, and unmatched delivery speed among others, but these advantages don’t make e-learning less expensive than other training delivery methods. If all training is put on the Web, implementation costs will be reduced.
E-learning can be cost-effective, especially with a large number of users in multiple locations. But don’t expect a meticulously planned, effectively implemented, well-marketed system that meets or exceeds expectations to come cheaply. Like most investments, money must be spent to make money (Weaver, 2002). Overestimating what e-learning can accomplish (Weaver, 2002).
Despite a growing reliance on e-learning, instructor-led training still predominates. According to a recent Development Dimensions International survey, 68 percent of leadership development training is classroom based; other studies report an even higher percentage (Weaver, 2002).

Such statistics suggest that e-learning will never supplant instructor-led training. One reason is because people are social learners. We like to learn in groups, exchanging thoughts and ideas and interacting with peers face-to-face. Classroom-based instructor-led training provides that experience; Web-based training generally doesn’t.

This idea should be bear in mind, so that any school that wishes to establish an e-learning system will not over or underestimate the achievements that the system can attain.

Overlooking the shortcomings of self-study (Weaver, 2002)

The flexibility to learn anytime and anywhere is one of e-learning’s greatest advantages. The self-study that characterizes that flexibility, however, poses several challenges.

In self-study (or asynchronous learning), learners follow their schedule and aren’t held accountable for their learning to an instructor, as in a classroom setting. That freedom of access is attractive, yet it has a major drawback: Unless learners are highly motivated, they neither may nor complete the training. Observers have estimated that learners don’t complete 50 to 90 percent of Web-based courses (Weaver, 2002).

Although self-study is an effective and appropriate platform for certain kinds of information – for example, on cognitive and process topics – the method runs counter to how most adults have been conditioned to learn (Weaver, 2002).

Viewing content as a commodity (Weaver, 2002)

Because writing and instructional design quality can vary greatly, one of the most significant factors contributing to the effectiveness of e-learning is the quality of the content. The sequence of the material and ease of use are also important.

E-learning courses also need to be evaluated in terms of how they fit into the organization’s entire training program. To maximize training’s impact, e-learning needs to complement and reinforce the learning delivered through other initiatives. A course that’s inconsistent with other learning or inferior in quality can lessen the entire program’s impact (Weaver, 2002).

Ignoring technology (Weaver, 2002)

While ensuring that the e-learning content is of high quality, some decision-makers overlook another critical component, the technology. When implementing a Web-based learning system, several technological issues to understand and consider are the operating system, Web browser, tracking system, learning management system, database, and video servers.

To avoid this problem, the key is to ask the right questions, rake an inventory of the organization’s technology, or secure the commitment of technical experts by involving them early in the decision-making process.

As e-learning becomes more prevalent, it will be viewed for what it is -another set of options for delivering or reinforcing training. Until that time, however, organizations need to be mindful of the special requirements and considerations that accompany the implementation of and reliance on e-learning. If problems are encountered, nursing educational institutions would normally decide to abandon e-learning. But the organizations that will prove most effective at integrating e-learning into their training strategies will be those that learn from their mistakes and continue to leverage technology to deliver the most effective training possible.

Conclusion

E-learning is being adopted rapidly in all business and educational sectors because of its ability to deploy knowledge quickly and efficiently to a large number of dispersed people.

It has been stated above that online learning approaches act as a good means of communication and a channel for information transfer. E-learning has been successfully launched, gradually penetrated the world and now being widely used by many.

Based on the case study and definition of some concepts, listed below are some major advantages and benefits students can derive from the e-learning approach.

A student can learn by reading books and also by attending classroom-based teaching, but being into e-learning is a big leap forward in expanding the capabilities of students in information gathering, knowledge development, and knowledge and information sharing. Specifically, benefits that can be derived include:

Online learning for any student, in particular, offers a ready communication channel for both the students (to other students) and the instructors and academicians.
It provides an accessible area for the students where they could find friends of the same preferences and backgrounds.
It enhances students’ ability to create more contacts or peers, likewise developing the students’ ability to socially interact.
It presents an area where students can share their talents, crafts, hence promoting self-confidence for the students.
It also provides an area where students can have faster access to news, announcements, and other information inside the university.
There is a big possibility that students will be attaining room for leadership skills improvement and personality development.

Certain issues about lack of personal or eye-to-eye communication have raised a disadvantage for this online learning. This may raise one potential problem for the university itself, and the solution for this still lies in the instructors’ way of managing the students. Students and teachers should realize that online learning is just an added feature for a certain school or university to have, and academic clubs or other civic organizations inside the campus should not be abolished to make up for the possibility of losing social interactions of the students.

With e-learning in the future of the degree aspirants, the opportunities for human knowledge to expand quickly, personally, and effectively are boundless.

References

Bauman, A. (1998). Finding experts in unexpected places: Learning from those who have failed. The High School Journal, 81(4), 258-267.

Carley, G. (1994). Shifting Alienated Student-Authority Relationships in a High School. Social Work in Education, 16(4), 221-230.

Carlson, R. D., & Repman, J. (1999). Web-based interactivity. WebNet Journal, 1(2), 11-13.

Cuban, L. (1993). How teacher taught (2nd ed.). New York: Teachers College Press.

De La Rosa, D.A. (1998). Why alternative education works. The High School Journal, 81(4), 268-272.

Fuller, C.G. & Sabatino, D.A. (1996). Who attends alternative high schools? The High School Journal, 79(4) 293-297.

Goettner, Pete (2000) “Effective E-learning for Healthcare.” Health Management Technology. Nelson Publishing.

Hill, N., Williams, R., & Hirumi, A. (2001). Facilitating the development of e-Learning through a support site. Concurrent session presented at the annual Texas Distance Learning Association conference, Houston, TX.

Jones-Delcorde, David H. 1996 Non-traditional education: an important option for changing times. Canadian Institute of Management.

Karp, E. (1988). The drop-out phenomenon in Ontario secondary schools. Toronto: Ministry of Education.

Merrill, D., Li, Z., & Jones, M. K. (1990). Second generation instructional design. Educational Technology, 30(2), 7-15.

Renihan, F.I. & Renihan, P.J. (1995). Responsive high schools: Structuring success for the at-risk student. The High School Journal, 79(1) 1-13.

Upperman, J.F., Curcio, J.L., Fortune, J.C., & Underwood, K.B. (1996). Options for everyone. American School Board Journal, 183 (1), 31-35.

Sergiovanni, T.J. (1996). The Case for Smaller Schools: Leadership for the Schoolhouse. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Streeter, C.L. & Franklin, C. (1991). Psychological and family differences between middle class and low income dropouts: A discriminant analysis. The High School Journal, 74 (4), 211-219.

Weaver, Pete. 2002. “Preventing e-learning failure: ten common pitfalls and how to avoid them.” American Society for Training & Development, Inc.

Click Here To Order Now!