A Guide to Authentic e-Learning

Jan Herrington, Thomas C. Reeves, Ron Oliver

• Publisher: Routledge
• Year: 2009
• ISBN:
  9781135194192
• Edition: 1
• Topic: Didattica
• Subtopic: Didattica generale

Part of the groundbreaking Connecting with e-Learning series, A Guide to Authentic e-Learning provides effective, working examples to engage learners with authentic tasks in online settings. As technology continues to open up possibilities for innovative and effective teaching and learning opportunities, students and teachers are no longer content to accept familiar classroom or lecture-based pedagogies that rely on information delivery and little else. Situated and constructivist theories advocate that learning is best achieved in circumstances resembling the real-life application of knowledge. While there are multiple learning design models that share similar foundations, authentic e-learning tasks go beyond process to become complex, sustained activities that draw on realistic situations to produce realistic outcomes.

A Guide to Authentic e-Learning:

• develops the conceptual framework for authentic learning tasks in online environments
• provides practical guidance on design, implementation, and evaluation of authentic e-learning tasks
• includes case studies and examples of outcomes of using authentic e-learning tasks

Written for teaching professionals in Higher Education who teach online, A Guide to Authentic e-Learning offers concrete guidelines and examples for developing and implementing authentic e-learning tasks in ways that challenge students to maximize their learning. This essential book provides effective, working examples to engages learners with authentic tasks in online learning settings.

Chapter 1
What is Authentic e-Learning?

Any discussion of authentic e-learning must begin with an explanation of what we mean by authentic learning. It could be argued that learning can be authentic, as we define it, without utilising any e-element. Littlejohn and Pegler (2007) noted that “e-learning is commonly taken to mean the use of computers and the internet for learning” (p. 16). With this in mind, however, it is almost impossible to conceive of any authentic learning endeavour in higher education today that does not take advantage of the affordances of computers and the internet. In our view, authentic learning is best executed with powerful computer-based, participatory tools—this is e-learning at its best.

Authentic learning has its foundations in the theory of situated cognition or situated learning, together with other pedagogical approaches developed over the last two decades, such as anchored instruction. The technologies associated with e-learning provide ideal affordances for the approach both in blended and fully online courses.

The Foundations of Authentic Learning: Situated Learning

It was Brown, Collins, and Duguid (1989b) who first synthesised contemporary thinking and research into the theory of situated learning and proposed a model of instruction that had implications for educational design and practice. Collins (1988) defined situated learning most simply as: “the notion of learning knowledge and skills in contexts that reflect the way the knowledge will be useful in real life” (p. 2). The model arose out of investigation of highly successful learning situations. They set out to find examples of learning in any context or culture that were effective, and to then analyse the key features of such models. One such model was snow skiing, where learning time had diminished from two years to two weeks as a result of instruction (Burton, Brown, & Fischer, 1984). An analysis of common features found in all the successful models were factors such as: apprenticeship, collaboration, reflection, coaching, multiple practice and articulation (McLellan, 1991).

In proposing their model of situated cognition, Brown et al. (1989b) argued that, contrary to many existing teaching practices which abstract knowledge from context, meaningful learning will take place only if it is embedded in the social and physical context within which it will be used. Typical work in schools and universities is often quite distinct from authentic activity or “the ordinary practices of the culture” (p. 34). Many of the activities undertaken by students are unrelated to the kind performed by practitioners in their everyday work. They proposed the use of cognitive apprenticeships, a method designed to “enculturate students into authentic practices through activity and social interaction,” and based on the successful traditional apprenticeship model (Brown et al., 1989b, p. 37).

Cognitive Apprenticeship

In an elaboration of the cognitive apprenticeship model, Collins, Brown and Newman (1989) contended that traditional apprenticeships have three characteristics that are cognitively important in a model of situated learning:

1. Learners have continual access to models of expertise-in- use against which to refine their understanding of complex skills.
2. Apprentices often have several masters and have access to a variety of models of expertise leading to an understanding that there may be different ways to carry out a task, and that no one individual embodies all knowledge and expertise.
3. Learners have the opportunity to observe other learners with varying degrees of skill (p. 456).

A critical aspect of the situated learning model is the notion of the “apprentice” observing the “community of practice.” This idea was developed by Lave and Wenger (1991), who proposed that participation in a culture of practice can, in the first instance, be observation from the boundary or legitimate peripheral participation. As learning and involvement in the culture increase, the participant moves from the role of observer to fully functioning agent. For example, apprentice hairdressers begin to learn the craft of hairdressing by first performing basic and unskilled tasks such as sweeping up hair cuttings and making tea and coffee for customers. Gradually, they are drawn more and more into key professional activities until they are fully qualified hairdressers. All the time spent in the workplace setting exposes them to the professional practices and mores of the role, and they learn the stories and behaviours related to what it means to be a hairdresser. Such peripheral but important knowledge is difficult if not impossible to teach in a decontextualised and abstract manner.

Legitimate peripheral participation enables the learner to progressively piece together the culture of the group and what it means to be a member. “To be able to participate in a legitimately peripheral way entails that newcomers have broad access to arenas of mature practice”(p. 110). Lave and Wenger (1991) proposed that the main functions of legitimate peripheral participation are to enable the learning of the language and stories of a community of practice, and to learn how to speak both within and about the practice, and yet this opportunity is denied students in many learning settings in higher education.

The Debate about Situated Learning

While the publication of the idea of situated learning met with much interest and acclaim in the early 1990s, it was also widely challenged and debated. Many of the criticisms of attempts to use situated learning as a model of instruction were based on how closely the learning environment resembled, not a cognitive apprenticeship, but a traditional apprenticeship. For example, Tripp (1993) presented a narrow set of criteria to define situated learning, which equated very much with a standard apprenticeship. In a response to the original Brown, Collins, and Duguid article (1989a), Wineburg (1989) argued that the abstract representation of knowledge was at least as effective as the situated learning approach and yet much more readily implemented in the classroom.

However, the principal theorists of situated learning consistently argued that their model, when further researched and developed, would be a model for teaching with practical classroom applications (Brown et al., 1989b; Brown, Collins, & Duguid, 1989a; Brown & Duguid, 1994; Collins, 1988; Collins et al., 1989). For those who questioned the appropriateness of the situated learning framework in conventional classrooms, the application of the model to e-learning was a further step removed from the traditional apprenticeship role. For example, Hummel (1993) described a distance education course on Soil and Environment which was based on ideas from situated learning theory. Hummel rejected the idea that the program was “true” situated learning by virtue of the fact that it was computer-based: “Instructional designers who apply situated learning theory by implementation in electronic media should realize that they take an important step away from this theory . . . courseware becomes the learning environment and not the authentic situation” (p. 15). Similarly, Tripp (1993) contended that computer-based simulations were not sufficient, and reiterated that “true expertise is learned by being exposed to experts”(p. 75).

As the discussions and debates progressed however, there was increasing agreement that computer- and web-based representations and “microworlds” did provide a powerful and acceptable vehicle for the critical characteristics of the traditional apprenticeship to be located in the classroom environment. Reeves (1993a), for example, considered that one of the major benefits of a well-designed computer-based environment is its ability to include “opportunities for simulated apprenticeships as well as a wealth of learning support activities” (p. 107).

Many of the researchers and teachers who explored the model of situated learning at this time accepted that the computer could provide an alternative to the real-life setting, and that such technology could be used without sacrificing the authentic context that is such a critical element of the model. McLellan (1994) summarised these approaches by pointing out that while knowledge must be learned in context according to the situated learning model, that context can be: the actual work setting, a highly realistic or “virtual” surrogate of the actual work environment, or an anchoring context such as a video or multimedia program (p. 8).

Critical Characteristics of Situated Learning for a Model of Authentic Learning

Brown, Collins, and Duguid (1989b), in their original article, presented a nascent theory of situated learning. From the start they suggested that their model was an attempt to begin the process of developing a theoretical perspective for successful learning that cognitive science had, to date, not been able to explain.

Lave and Wenger (1991) cautioned that the conception of situated learning was substantially “more encompassing in intent than conventional notions of ‘learning in situ’ or ‘learning by doing’ for which it was used as a rough equivalent” (p. 31). The challenge put to researchers was to identify the critical aspects of situated learning to enable it to translate into teaching methods that could be applied in the classroom.

Although McLellan (1994) summarised the key components of the situated learning model as: apprenticeship, collaboration, reflection, coaching, multiple practice, and articulation of learning skills (p. 7), the contributions of various theorists and researchers, including the original authors of the model, had expanded and refined the notion to a much more comprehensive and far-reaching framework for classroom application.

Our own work has built on that body of work and has used a design research approach (van den Akker, Gravemeijer, McKenney, & Nieveen, 2006b; Reeves, Herrington, & Oliver, 2005) to propose and test draft design principles for authentic learning based on situated learning and other related research and literature. The characteristics of authentic learning that emerged from that research are described in detail below.

Elements of Authentic Learning

The framework of authentic learning is based on the proposal that usable knowledge is best gained in learning settings that feature the following characteristics (Herrington & Oliver, 2000). Authentic learning designs:

1. Provide authentic contexts that reflect the way the knowledge will be used in real life
2. Provide authentic tasks
3. Provide access to expert performances and the modelling of processes
4. Provide multiple roles and perspectives
5. Support collaborative construction of knowledge
6. Promote reflection to enable abstractions to be formed
7. Promote articulation to enable tacit knowledge to be made explicit
8. Provide coaching and scaffolding by the teacher at critical times
9. Provide for authentic assessment of learning within the tasks.

Each of these elements is now explained in more detail.

An Authentic Context that Reflects the Way the Knowledge will be Used in Real Life

In designing e-learning courses with authentic contexts, it is not enough to simply provide suitable examples from real-world situations to illustrate the concept or issue being taught. The context needs to be all-embracing, to provide the purpose and motivation for learning, and to provide a sustained and complex learning environment that can be explored at length (e.g., Brown et al., 1989b; Honebein, Duffy, & Fishman, 1993; Reeves & Reeves, 1997).

In a practical sense, this means that before beginning an e-learning design, a teacher needs to ask questions about the course or unit that is being designed, and where and how the knowledge will be used. Specifically, before beginning to plan for an authentic context, the following questions need to be considered:

• What knowledge, skills and attitudes will students ideally have after completing the course?
• Where and how would students apply this knowledge in real life?
• What context might be possible and appropriate in an e-learning course to enable students to learn the knowledge, skills and attitudes of the course?

An authentic context provides important contextual information for learners. Jonassen (1991a) contended that context provides “episodic memory cues that make the acquired knowledge more memorable”(p. 37). Norman (1988) illustrated this idea by pointing out that if someone arranges a meeting with you at 5.30 pm, you do not have to consciously memorise the time, place and person. The details are easily remembered because they fit readily into your cognitive structure. Within learning environments, Rogoff (1984) defined context as “the problem’s physical and conceptual structure as well as the purpose of the activity and the social milieu in which it is embedded” (p. 2).

Avoiding Oversimplification of Context

Teachers and designers of e-learning courses are often tempted to design learning sites that simplify learning by breaking up complex processes and ideas into step-by-step sequences. Indeed, these approaches align with the systems model of instructional design, which specifies that the instructional sequence should progress from simple to complex (Gagné Briggs, & Wager, 1992). However, the tendency to simplify complex cases and situations, particularly in initial instruction, can only serve to impede the later acquisition of more complex understandings (Spiro, Feltovich, Jacobson, & Coulson, 1991b). Spiro, Vispoel, Schmitz, Samarapungavan, and Boeger (1987) argued that examples and cases must be studied as they naturally occur, “not as stripped down ‘textbook examples’ that conveniently illustrate some principle” (p. 181). Errors of oversimplification can also compound each other. For example, Feltovich, Spiro and Coulson (1989, cited in Spiro et al., 1991b) identified more than 12 serious misconceptions held by the majority of medical students they tested, the origins of which they were able to trace to oversimplification of the initial presentation of the concepts.

It is not necessary to simplify learning contexts to enhance learning.
Indeed, designing realistic levels of complexity in a learning environment can help to make learning easier. Honebein, Duffy and Fishman (1993) gave the example of a study with students who disliked fractions and who found them difficult to learn. These students were asked to design computer software that would teach fractions to students one year younger than themselves. Th...

Table of contents

• Cover Page
• Title Page
• Copyright Page
• A Guide to Authentic e-Learning
• Connecting with e-Learning Series
• Figures
• Tables
• Series Editors’ Foreword
• Acknowledgments
• Introduction
• Chapter 1: What is Authentic e-Learning?
• Chapter 2: Authentic e-Learning Tasks
• Chapter 3: What is Not Authentic e-Learning?
• Chapter 4: How Real does Authentic e-Learning Need to be?
• Chapter 5: Authentic e-Learning and the Conative Learning Domain
• Chapter 6: Designing and Producing Authentic e-Learning Courses
• Chapter 7: Assessment of Authentic e-Learning
• Chapter 8: Evaluating Authentic e-Learning Courses
• Chapter 9: Researching Authentic e-Learning
• References