Review by: Euler, Dieter (2004-12-20)

The very title of this final report for the Weatherstation Project of The Learning Alliance at the University of Pennsylvania elicits mixed feelings: Those who have worked hard on the high-quality implementation of e-learning may feel thrown back in their efforts; those who have always been critical on the potential of e-learning may feel strengthened in their doubts. But none of them get a full backing with the findings of this study. Despite some methodological flaws (see below), the merit of the report lies in the fact that it points out major hurdles that e-learning will need to overcome before it is fully integrated within the academic and corporate world.

For the academic world, faculty members and administrators from six universities were asked three times quarterly on their attitudes towards, expectations of and uses of e-learning. For each of these two groups around 75 opinions came up. Zemsky & Massy pointed out that the respondents may be called as innovators or early adopters of e-learning (p. 24). The approach was to be applied with corporates, but it didn’t work there for different reasons (p. 20).

Within this frame, Zemsky & Massy come up with the following major findings:

• Concerning the application of e-learning, they found a high rate (>60%) in using e-learning in terms of course enhancements (e. g. multimedia presentations with PowerPoint, using off-the-shelf software, e-mail discussions with students). Similar rates were recognized in using course management tools and computer-based assessments. Less usage takes place when it comes to developing comprehensive e-learning courses or using course material developed by others (p. 11).
• The support within the academic institutions for e-learning is decreasing. In particular, this is true for providing the necessary budgets for maintaining and extending future e-learning activities (p. 29f).
• The demand for e-learning products is confined to a limited group of disciplines and “innovation’s champions” (p. 48). In many cases there is no transfer strategy for diffusing good practices into a broader field of application.
• Students may be interested in computer-based technologies, but mainly not for learning purposes. On top of the best-seller products are games and application software such as Dreamweaver, Flash or FreeHand, not learningware (p. 50). Students want to be connected, to be entertained (principally by games, movies and music) and they want to present themselves and their work (p. 51).
• “For the most part, faculty who make e-learning a part of their teaching do so by having the electronics simplify tasks, not by fundamentally changing how the subject is taught.” (p. 52) E-learning is compatible with a notion of student-centered learning, but it requires major changes in teaching. “The full potential of e-learning and electronically mediated instruction will not be realized unless there is an acknowledgement, on the part of a large number of faculty, that there is need to substantially improve educational quality … What is required is a commitment to organized quality processes that transcend curricular innovation.” (p. 57)

Very broadly one may sum up the findings as follows: There is quite some potential to improve the quality of teaching and learning applying e-learning, but the implementation process is still in the first phase.

One may point to a couple of flaws within this study. For example, there is no clear definition on what the authors mean by e-learning. Apart from that, the sample used in the empirical part is neither representative nor drawn as a theoretical sample applying qualitative research standards. Finally the research design on the corporate sector lacks some convincing theoretical foundation. But despite these objections, the study provides a couple of hints and arguments on the questions one has to reflect on in order to promote the improvement of e-learning supported learning and teaching.