Dr. Mona Tawakkul Elsayed

Associate Prof. of Mental Health and Special Education

Principles, Struct


Principles, Structure and Framework of e-Learning


 


Gearóid Ó Súilleabháin MScEcon


DEIS Department for Education Development


Cork Institute of Technology


April, 2003


 


Introduction


The following paper is intended to introduce some of the main issues with regard to the current state of play of e-learning in Higher Education.  It begins by discussing the multiplicity of meanings of the term e-learning and offers an open-ended definition itself before outlining the impact e-learning technologies have had upon traditional Higher Education.  The need for appropriate and effective student support services for e-learning is then treated with special attention given to the issue of assessment in e-learning. 


 


The Meaning of “E-Learning”


E-learning as an industry has received an enormous amount of hype in the last 5 to 7 years.  Famously Cisco Systems Inc. president and CEO John T. Chambers announced about 2 years ago that “e-learning is going to be the next killer app--one that makes e-mail usage look like a rounding error.”  Nor is he alone in his sanguinity.  Quoted almost as often as Chambers are stats from the Gartner group forecasting that 80 percent of the top U.S. and European universities will offer global e-learning courses by 2004 and that by 2005, one of the top 10 most in-demand positions among Global 1000 companies will be an online learning designer.  The International Data Corporation again estimates that the corporate spend on e-learning will increase from ,bn in 1999 to over 11bn in 2003[1].  Yet confusion abounds as to what it is that is being referred to here; for what practice, industry or product precisely are these forecasts being made?  Variants even in the actual spelling of the term “e-learning” can be found throughout the literature (elearning, e-learning, E-Learning or eLearning?) not to mention a plurality of proffered meanings.  As Marcus Pailing, Marketing Manager at Knowledge-Power.com, a private e-learning design company, says:


 


it is all very well for me to talk to a potential client about an e-learning solution, but we spend half the meeting making sure we are both talking about the same thing.  No wonder customers are confused[2]


 


Tsai and Machado[3] review some of the predominant definitions of e-learning. 


 


Much literature associates e-learning with Web-based learning over the Internet (e.g. Rosenberg, 2000; Driscoll, 2002; Horton, 2000).  Schank (2001) refers to learning activities involving computer networks as e-learning, and stresses that e-learning is not merely distance learning.


 


Also still found in the literature is the use of the term to denote the whole gamut of technology-meets-education, as in the following definition from the ASTD’s Learning Circuits site[4]:


 


e-Learning – a term covering a wide set of applications and processes, such as Web-based learning, computer-based learning, virtual classrooms, and digital collaboration. It includes the delivery of content via Internet, intranet/extranet (LAN/WAN), audio- and videotape, satellite broadcast, interactive TV, CD-ROM, and more.


 


There also exists an approach to defining the term which has as much, or more, to do with the purpose to which the supporting technology or technologies are used.  For example Peter Goodyear offers the following definition of the term:


 


E-Learning is the systematic use of networked multimedia computer technologies to


  • Empower learners

  • Improve learning

  • Connect learners to people and resources supportive of their needs

  • Integrate learning with performance and individual with organisational goal[5]

     

    This same two part approach to defining e-learning (technology and purpose) is found also in web-based training guru Eliot Masie’s designation:

     


e-Learning is the use of network technology to design, deliver, select, administer, and extend learning.[6]


 


E-Learning, Distance Learning and Computer-Based Learning


And the list goes on.  Often there is confusion between the term and other older phrases such as distance learning, online learning, web-based learning, distributed learning, computer-assisted learning and even lifelong learning.  While e-learning is undoubtedly closely related to at least some of these phenomena it is important to make a distinction between it and them also.  One way of doing so is in terms of the historical emergence of these terms.  We may even find that we have gone a little further to defining e-learning in the process along the way. 


 


Distance Learning, though occasionally confused with e-learning, predates it considerably going back at least to the mid-1800s with the beginning of correspondence home-study courses in America, France, Germany and the UK.  It was, and still is, the means by which education and training was made available to groups experiencing difficulty in accessing formal face-to-face courses, such as, for example, those who lived in remote areas or worked during classroom/lecture hall times.  In addition in these early days it benefited women who were not allow enrol in the traditional male-only learning institutes.  Those with certain physical and sensory disabilities also benefited.  Today distance education is big business.  On this side of the Atlantic, for instance, organisations like the British Open University and France’s Centre National d'Enseignement à Distance (CNED) organisation with student numbers in the region of 180,000 and 400,000 respectively teach using distance learning means.[7]


 


The nature of these methods have changed somewhat however.  The medium of mail remained the dominant one for distance learning courses until the early 20th century when instructional radio began to be used which, after a largely unsuccessful debut, gave way to the educational television movement of the mid-20th century which was itself succeeded in the late 1970s and 1980s to the use of cable and satellite television.  Told in this way it is tempting to see e-learning as the latest incarnation of distance education, an natural extension of distance learning models, a thesis supported, according to Venkatachary[8],  by the following characteristics:


 


  • The adoption of the ‘course team’ approach from the Distance Education models for the design and development of courseware

  • The emphasis on building a ‘dialogue’ with the learner group through technology-driven interactive elements in the courseware

  • The affordance for interaction, discussion and collaboration in learning through instructional design elements.


 


The fact that the e-learner and e-instructor are often separated in time and/or space of course provides in the minds of many the strongest and most obvious case for viewing e-learning as a form of distance learning.  But, as this is not always the case, as learner and instructor may engage in e-learning in the same face-to-face space, in a computer lab together working on a computer-based simulation for example, the thesis e-learning equals distance learning seems less satisfactory.[9] And of course many institutes use e-learning technologies and methodologies to augment their face-to-face courses (as in “mixed-mode” learning, all or some of which can take place on campus) making the thesis seem even less defendable.


 


The involvement of computers in the process along with the fact that e-learning can take place in the places like computer labs to augment a face-to face delivery may lead to it being seen as a form of Computer-Based Learning, a tradition which began in the states around the same time as the educational television movement (which is to say the 1950s) with the use of large and expensive mainframe computer systems to support early experiments in Computer Aided Instruction[10].  Individualized self-paced courseware began to emerge in the 1980s with the arrival and increasing popularity of the personal computer.[11]  With the advent of multimedia in the late 1980s and early 1990s, more and more companies began using CBL as a key part of their strategic training plan and Higher Education was beginning to take an interest in this new way teaching tool.  Much of the courseware created at the time was delivered via CD-ROM (and CD-I) a technology that gave developers the requisite storage space for feature-rich content.  Yet disc-based CBL meant learning that was limited either to single computer systems or networks, lacking the networkability that enables content to be easily and instantaneously delivered and updated.  For this reason at the end of the 1990s the internet and the web came to be seen as the way of the future for Computer Based Learning and seemed to promise “anytime anywhere” learning (at least for users with online computers).  Early e-learning efforts unsurprisingly then consisted of “re-purposed” CBT material by vendors such as Allen communication, Asymetrix and Macromedia so it is tempting to see e-learning as simply the latest form of CBT, a contemporary version of something that has been around since the 1950s. 


 


 


A Sufficient Definition of E-Learning


More satisfactory and apposite than either the e-learning as distance learning or the e-learning as CBL thesis however is a definition of e-learning as a phenomenon arising out of a convergence of these two traditions, borrowing and building upon the principles, procedures, practices and learning of the two while also taking advantage of the opportunities offered by the web and its associated technologies to facilitate learning experiences[12].  One of the reasons then for the multiplicity of meanings offered for e-learning has to do with the confusion arising from the convergence of these older traditions, another is the new-ness of the underlying technology, a technology which it is often said is changing exponentially.  We are told, for example, that computer processor speed doubles every 20 months, that disk space doubles every year, and that communication speed doubles every 24 months.  In addition, as Rosenberg points out[13], there is a merging of technologies at work also.  There, for example, the merging of television and computers in products like Web-TV as well as the delivery of web content to devices like the new generation of mobile phones and PDAs (giving rise to talk of “m-learning”).  All of which means that e-learning itself is constantly changing as new opportunities are created by the increasing sophistication and popularity of the underlying technology. 


 


Based on the above we may have to satisfy ourselves by saying that:


  • e-learning is an area of learning theory and practice which has to do with the use of the web and emerging and merging web-related technologies for learning/teaching purposes.  It shares certain characteristics with and inherits the principles and procedures of both Distance Learning/Education and Computer-based learning and may sometimes even refer to the same theories and/or practices.

  • It is constantly changing and evolving


 


E-Learning and Higher Education


 


Confusion over the meaning of e-learning has not prevented it being used to describe practices which challenge the traditional role of the traditional institute of Higher Education. 


 


Recently we have seen, for instance, the rise of new for-profit online universities in the states such as Western Governor's University (which offers online degrees based completely on a series of assessments - as opposed to required courses) and Jones International University which bills itself as the world’s first fully online, accredited university.[14]


 


Private for-profit universities have also got into e-learning as a way of increasing their student numbers and revenues.  The much-discussed University of Phoenix Online, for instance, has a steadily growing student population of over 50,000 students online - parent college, The University of Phoenix, incidentally, is already well known for the speed with which it became the biggest ever for-profit higher-education institution.


 


Closer to home what we might call traditional distance learning organisations like the British Open University and France’s Centre National d'Enseignement à Distance (CNED) organisation - with distance student numbers in the region of 180,000 and 400,000 respectively - have taken up the challenge and begun to use e-learning methodologies and technologies to augment, and in some cases replace, print, broadcast and taped instructional materials for their distance learning programs; attracted no doubt not just by the opportunity to improve the quality of instruction, but to do so cost effectively by saving on production, distribution and travel costs.  


 


There also now exists what we might call “e-learning brokers”- organisations which specialise in buying and subsequently selling on internet-based course materials.  Often content is produced by recognised experts in the field and then offered as part of e-learning courses to students across the world - an approach which, no doubt, raises some interesting questions as to where the ownership of lectures lies: with lecturers or with their employers.  The year before Arthur Levin wrote his op-ed a legal action had been taken against a Harvard University law professor for his intention to sell his video-taped university lectures to one such organisation, the Global Education Network (GEN), for online delivery.  It has been theorised however, and many lecturers for obvious reasons may wholeheartedly embrace the idea, that we may soon see the emergence of a new breed of academic professor – celebrities who, divorce from any prestigious campus or institute, are capable of attracting students in their tens of thousands to international virtual learning spaces. 


 


In the midst of all this evolution and revolution many traditional Higher Educational institutes have made their own forays into the e-learning field.  The rise of the other players detailed above in a marketplace these traditional providers once had pretty much all to themselves no doubt provides a push (or a prod) here as do solemn warnings of the likes of Arthur Levine (and he is not anywhere close to being the most pessimistic[15]).  So also, of course, does the promise that the introduction of educational technology will, at a minimum, maintain, and ideally enhance, student learning while simultaneously increasing student numbers and reducing costs.


 


In this context certain traditional bricks and mortar HE institutes have taken the step of forming partnerships with private e-learning companies for the design and delivery of new web-based courses.  Well-known institutes such as Stanford University and The London School of Economics for example have collaborated with Unext - itself a conglomeration of many different world-wide training companies - to offer their business courses over the web under the banner of the Cardean Online University[16].


There are other traditional HE institutes who have pushed the boat out further and launched online programs themselves.  On this island The University of Ulster recently unveiled Campus One, a WebCT-based portal for their web-based distance courses – impressively the university, which had no online provision three years ago, already have the largest portfolio of online masters programmes on the island and in all of the UK.[17]


 


 


Downturns and Dissatisfaction


In a recent presentation[18] Clive Mulholland, Director of Lifelong Learning in the University of Ulster, contrasted the reality of e-learning with the hype, focussing on the following points:


  • The Temple University abandoned the “Virtual Temple” project in July 2001

  • NYU Online (a for-profit arm on NYU) ceases operations as a separate division of NYU

  • Jones International University does not perform to expectations

  • De Paul University’s Msc in E-Commerce fails to attract any enrolments in 2001

  • Enrolments in Illinois Institute of Technology’s online commerce programme drops to 10

  • Fathom, Unext and Cardean all appear to be having difficulties


 


In addition a recent survey by the European Training Village 61% of respondents rated e-learning as only fair or poor.   According to Clive Shepherd of Fastrak consulting


the IDC and others have had to admit that their forecasts for the e-learning market were unrealistic – the growth of the use of information and communication technology in education and training will come but nowhere near as fast as they thought.


Shepherd also notes


…declines in the fortunes of some of the ‘big names’ in the industry: take SmartForce, who posted such poor results earlier in the year, [2002] not to mention Docent and Click2Learn, who are struggling to maintain their full Nasdaq listings.  At the lower end of the market, listings are the least of the problem as many firms go out of business altogether. [19]


 


E-learning has also long been dogged by a number of accusations, including the issue of high attrition rates with some studies suggesting rates as high as 85%[20].  There remains, in addition to this criticism the sense that e-learning is just not as good as face-to-face teaching, that learners do not learn as well or as effectively with e-learning as they do in the conventional classroom or lecture hall. 


 


 


E-Learning and Student Support Services


 


One of the reasons of course that the traditional face-to-face HE setting can seem as if it is a more effective environment for learning may have to do with the range of support services offered in the traditional campus.  A quick browse through the web sites of Higher Education institutes internationally reveals the following kinds of ancillary services and support to be on offer in addition to those which directly relate to the provision of learning/training:


  • Assessment Services

  • Exams Office

  • Registration and fees

  • Induction-type services

  • General information services

  • Counselling

  • Accommodation Services

  • Social work services

  • Library Services

  • Sport clubs and societies

  • General health services

  • Special needs services

  • International students services

  • Career Guidance

  • Financial Aid

  • Study Guidance and Study groups

  • Various liaison services

  • Intervention service (for those deemed likely to drop-out of the system)

     

    The importance of these kinds of services in addressing the high attrition rate in e-learning may be seen with reference to the oft-quoted work of Tinto on student retention[21].  Although occasionally criticised as being overly orientated towards young full-time residential students[22] the Tinto model still remains the starting point for researcher in the field (possible because it was derived initially as result of a wide-ranging literature review).  Its central idea is that of "integration": the model claims that whether a student persists or drops out is quite strongly predicted by their degree of academic integration, and social integration evolving over time in relation to the learner’s commitment.[23]. 

    Subsequent research focusing on older, part-time and non-residential students suggests other important variables to add to Tinto’s model including students’ initial educational objectives and intentions and their extra-institutional integration – i.e., the support they receive from family, peers and employers[24].  Judiciously run the range of student support services made available in the modern third level institute can directly or indirectly address these identified issues - indeed many were consciously created based on the work of Tinto to do this very job.

     

    The traditions of CBL and Distance Learning which feed into e-learning have much to teach it in this regard.  As Shirley M.Davies, past president of the USDLA, writes:


 


While e-learning presents us with opportunities for new approaches as well as new obstacles, much of what we have learned during the past 30 years of technology-assisted distance learning is still relevant[25]


 


One of the examples Davies in fact picks, as a lesson from the “telecourse experience”, is the need to provide learner support services that reduce the isolation of learning[26].  Of much wider importance is the overarching lesson that a new way of facilitating learning may require a different approach to classroom (or lecture hall) teaching.


 


What this point suggests is that there is clearly a need to emulate some SSS in the e-learning environment where often much attention is paid to the design and delivery of course content but scant or no attention at all to the provision of supports and services which are often considered essential to the successful progress from enrolment to accreditation by students in a traditional campsu.  Moreover, in the light of the defining characteristics of e-learning it is clear that the necessity for providing SSS is actually far greater here than in the face-to-face learning context, there may even be, as Davies seems to suggest, a need for a different kind of SSS.  The unique capacities of web-based technologies to host media-rich content and support many forms of synchronous and asynchronous (one-to-one, many-to-one, and one-to-many) communication also indicate a potential to facilitate SSs above and beyond what is possible via traditional means. 


 


We may then suggest three aspects with regard to SSS and e-learning:


  • The emulation of traditional SSS for e-learning

  • Special SSS required for e-learning

  • New SSS made possible by e-learning

     

    These aspects may be used to group some of the services the initial ad hoc list in the following way:


 


The Emulation of Traditional SSs For E-Learning


  • Assessment Services

  • Exams Office

  • Library Services

  • Induction-type services

  • General information services

  • Special needs services

  • International students services

  • Career Guidance

  • Financial Aid

  • Study Guidance and Study groups

  • Registration and fees

  • Various liaison services

  • Intervention service (for those deemed likely to drop-out of the system)

     


Special Sss Required for E-Learning


  • Induction services for the e-learner.  Learning with e-learning is different from learning in the traditional face-to-face environment.  Students need guidance as to how to become effective students in this new learning environment

  • Social Area.  Possible café and/or chat area for learners to increase Tinto’s dimension of social integration.[27]  

  • Technical Problems Assistance

  • Interactive Troubleshooting Tool

  • Technical Guide to the technical platform used by the course – be this commercial, home-grown

     


New Sss Made Possible by E-Learning Technologies


All of the services listed above may be augmented by the abilities of web-based technologies to host media-rich content and provide automated and human-mediated interactivity


  • “Live” FAQ area for problems directly to do with courses and for any technical problems

  • Interactive Troubleshooting Tool/s

  • Student Homepage area

  • Automated Self-evaluation/testing Services

  • Web-based information sources and services including web-based OPACs and document ordering facilities

  • Automated web-based tutoring systems

  • Integrated and fully-searchable student record database

     

     


Assessment Services


Assessment and Testing, conventionally counted as a support service, occupies a special place in learning.  Questions with regard to the effectiveness of e-learning when compared with traditional learning inevitably led to this issue.  Many studies, in addition, have shown that the assessment methodology used in a course profoundly affects the kind of learning that takes place – assessment is really at the heart of the student experience of a course, its defines what the learners regard as important, how they learn, how they understand their role as learners and how they define their learning[28].  For example the use of multiple course questions and related methodologies promote “shallower” forms of learning than project and more open-ended assessments. 


 


It is significant then that to many people assessment in e-learning just means auto-corrected quantitative tests (or quizzes, as they are sometimes called - presumably in an effort to make them sound even more user friendly to learners).  The array of commercial Learning Management System and stand alone assessment systems like Question Mark and Hot Potatoes provide a number of different ways of supporting these kinds of activities.  Used judiciously online tests can provide a good way to test facts and information, and this may often be all that is to be tested.  It can even be argued that with sufficient skill and planning certain cognitive skills can be tested using web-based testing, or enough of them at least to make using the method in conjunction with relevant course material.  These are skills like problem-solving, negotiating, decision-making, analysis, evaluation etc.  Research also suggests that quizzes in general are very effective motivational tools for learners.  


 


In addition it is possible to use tests to support what are sometimes called knowledge-paced tutorials where the results of tests are used to customise a learner’s path through a multi-levelled course.


 


The second dominant assessment model for e-learning follows much the same lines as those associated with traditional correspondence courses, e.g. involving the submission/uploading of essays or reports for marking by a human expert (a qualitative approach)


 


So assessment for e-learning in many cases means either


  • The kinds of tests associated with “pre-internet” CAL and CBL

  • Assessment associated with “pre-computer” distance learning

     

    There clearly exists a need to identify authentic assessment techniques and methodologies for the measurement of skills-based, problem-based, work-based or peer-based learning gained over time in the e-learning environment.  The development of such assessment methodologies would moreover simultaneously be a way of ensuring the quality of e-learning courses, or, at least, of checking this quality and, particularly relevant for institutes of Higher Education, of attracting credit within a formal qualification framework. 

     

     

     


Conclusion


 


E-Learning has received considerable hype over the last few years as an exciting new way to facilitate learning and as an e-industry with a bright future.  Confusion still surrounds the exact meaning of the term however.  Often it is confused with the related practices of distance learning and computer-based learning but it is best understood as a phenomenon arising out of a convergence of these two traditions which simultaneously takes advantage of the opportunities offered by the web and its associated technologies to facilitate learning.


 


E-Learning has supported the rise of new post-secondary education providers, which are challenging the traditional role of the traditional Higher Education Institute and catalysing them into making their own forays in the e-learning field. 


 


There are counter indications however for the success of e-learning technologies and methodologies, including the poor performance of certain big names in the e-learning industry, customer dissatisfaction with the quality of e-learning efforts as well as accusation of high attrition rates, and the ineffectiveness of e-learning as compared with conventional courses.


 


Many of these points can be addressed by the development of effective student support services for e-learning focussing on three different levels:  the emulation of traditional SSs for e-learning; the special SSs required for e-learning and new SSs made possible by e-learning.  Of special interest is the development of alternative assessment techniques for e-learning which would at once measure the quality of e-learning courses, increase and deepen student learning, and attract credit with a formal qualification network.


 


 


 


 


 


End Notes




[1] See “Where is e-Learning Headed” at http://www.advisor.com/Articles.nsf/aid/SMITT318 and

Henry 2001

[2] Pailing, Marcus.  “E-Learning: is it really the next best thing since sliced bread?” Industrial and Commercial Training. vol 34, Issue 4. 152

[5] In Education and the Information age: Conference Papers.  2001, 22

[7] For a short account of the history of Distance Learning please see Nasseh, B.  “A Brief History of distance Education”. http://www.seniornet.org/edu/art/history.html

[8] Venkatahcary.  2002.  “From Distance Education to eLearning”.  http://www.shef.ac.uk/nlc2002/proceedings/papers/43.htm

[9] See for example Shank, 2000. 

[10] There exists in the literature the tendency to see CAI as predating CBL

[11] See Perry, “A History of Interactive Education and Training”. http://www.coastal.com/WhatsNew/online_history.html

[12] This is actually the way in which William Horton also defines WBT

[13] Rosenberg, M.  E-Learning: Strategies For Delivering Knowledge in The Digital Age.  McGrawHill, 2001.

[14] What follows is based on

[15] For example Pete Drucker wrote in 1997 that Thirty years from now the big university campuses will be relics. Universities won't survive.... It's as large a change as when we first got the printed book

[16] From Cardea - Roman goddess of “portals” apparently

[19] See Shepherd, C.  “Back to Basics – e-learning in 2003”. http://www.fastrak-consulting.co.uk/tactix/Features/basics.htm

[20] Sadler, Andy.  “How to Make WBT Drive Profits – Not Drain Productivity”.  Technical Training, September/October 1999. 20-24

[21] Tinto, V. “Dropout from higher education: A theoretical synthesis of recent research”. Review of Educational Research, 1975 and Leaving college: Rethinking the causes and cures of student attrition, 1987

[22] Kember, D. (1989). A longitudinal-process model of dropout from distance education. Journal of Higher Education, 60, 278-301

[23] For a good account of Tinto’s model see http://www.psy.gla.ac.uk/~steve/localed/tinto.html.  (“Tinto's model of student retention” by Stephen W. Draper)

[24] As reported in Tresman 1990

[25] Davis, Shirley M.  What E-Learning Can Learn from History. http://www.usdla.org/html/journal/OCT01_Issue/article01.html

[26] For an example of a targeted strategy for improving student retention for ODL courses see http://www.irrodl.org/content/v3.1/tresman_rn.html.  A Case Study From the Open University UK

[27] There’s a good treatment of building a sense of community in the virtual world in Palloff, R.  Building Learning Communities in Cyberspace.  1999.

[28] See Brown, George.  Assessing Student Learning in Higher Education and Ramsden, P.  Learning to Teach in Higher Education.

 

 

تواصل معنا

الجدول الدراسي


روابط مكتبات


https://vision2030.gov.sa/


التوحد مش مرض

متلازمة داون

روابط هامة

برنامج كشف الإنتحال العلمي (تورنتن)

روابط مهمة للأوتيزم


ساعات الإستشارات النفسية والتربوية

تجول عبر الانترنت

spinning earth photo: spinning earth color spinning_earth_color_79x79.gif


موعد تسليم المشروع البحثي

على طالبات المستوى الثامن  شعبة رقم (147) مقرر LED 424 الالتزام بتسليم التكليفات الخاصة بالمشروع في الموعد المحدد  (3/8/1440هـ)


m.ebrahim@mu.edu.sa

معايير تقييم المشروع البحثي الطلابي



m.ebrahim@mu.edu.sa

ندوة الدور الاجتماعي للتعليم

 

حالة الطقس

المجمعة حالة الطقس

الساعات المكتبية


التميز في العمل الوظيفي

m.ebrahim@mu.edu.sa

(التميز في العمل الوظيفي)

برنامج تدريبي مقدم إلى إدارة تعليم محافظة الغاط – إدارة الموارد البشرية - وحدة تطوير الموارد البشرية يوم الأربعاء 3/ 5 / 1440 هـ. الوقت: 8 ص- 12 ظهرًا بمركز التدريب التربوي (بنات) بالغاط واستهدف قياديات ومنسوبات إدارة التعليم بالغاط

تشخيص وعلاج التهتهة في الكلام

m.ebrahim@mu.edu.sa

حملة سرطان الأطفال(سنداً لأطفالنا)

m.ebrahim@mu.edu.sa

اليوم العالمي للطفل

m.ebrahim@mu.edu.sa

المهارات الناعمة ومخرجات التعلم


m.ebrahim@mu.edu.sa

المهارات الناعمة

المهارات الناعمة مفهوم يربط بين التكوين والتعليم وبين حاجات سوق العمل، تعتبر مجالاً واسعاً وحديثا يتسم بالشمولية ويرتبط بالجوانب النفسية والاجتماعية عند الطالب الذي يمثل مخرجات تعلم أي مؤسسة تعليمية، لذلك؛ فإن هذه المهارات تضاف له باستمرار – وفق متغيرات سوق العمل وحاجة المجتمع – وهي مهارات جديدة مثل مهارات إدارة الأزمات ومهارة حل المشاكل وغيرها. كما أنها تمثلالقدرات التي يمتلكها الفرد وتساهم في تطوير ونجاح المؤسسة التي ينتمي إليها. وترتبط هذه المهارات بالتعامل الفعّال وتكوين العلاقات مع الآخرينومن أهم المهارات الناعمة:

m.ebrahim@mu.edu.sa

مهارات التفكير الناقد

مهارات الفكر الناقد والقدرة على التطوير من خلال التمكن من أساليب التقييم والحكم واستنتاج الحلول والأفكار الخلاقة، وهي من بين المهارات الناعمة الأكثر طلبا وانتشارا، وقد بدأت الجامعات العربية تضع لها برامج تدريب خاصة أو تدمجها في المواد الدراسية القريبة منها لأنه بات ثابتا أنها من أهم المؤهلات التي تفتح باب بناء وتطوير الذات أمام الطالب سواء في مسيرته التعليمية أو المهنية.

m.ebrahim@mu.edu.sa

الصحة النفسية لأطفال متلازمة داون وأسرهم

m.ebrahim@mu.edu.sa


m.ebrahim@mu.edu.sa

m.ebrahim@mu.edu.sa



لا للتعصب - نعم للحوار

يوم اليتيم العربي

m.ebrahim@mu.edu.sa

m.ebrahim@mu.edu.sa

موقع يساعد على تحرير الكتابة باللغة الإنجليزية

(Grammarly)

تطبيق يقوم تلقائيًا باكتشاف الأخطاء النحوية والإملائية وعلامات الترقيم واختيار الكلمات وأخطاء الأسلوب في الكتابة

Grammarly: Free Writing Assistant



مخرجات التعلم

تصنيف بلوم لقياس مخرجات التعلم

m.ebrahim@mu.edu.sa


التعلم القائم على النواتج (المخرجات)

التعلم القائم على المخرجات يركز على تعلم الطالب خلال استخدام عبارات نواتج التعلم التي تصف ما هو متوقع من المتعلم معرفته، وفهمه، والقدرة على أدائه بعد الانتهاء من موقف تعليمي، وتقديم أنشطة التعلم التي تساعد الطالب على اكتساب تلك النواتج، وتقويم مدى اكتساب الطالب لتلك النواتج من خلال استخدام محكات تقويم محدودة.

ما هي مخرجات التعلم؟

عبارات تبرز ما سيعرفه الطالب أو يكون قادراً على أدائه نتيجة للتعليم أو التعلم أو كليهما معاً في نهاية فترة زمنية محددة (مقرر – برنامج – مهمة معينة – ورشة عمل – تدريب ميداني) وأحياناً تسمى أهداف التعلم)

خصائص مخرجات التعلم

أن تكون واضحة ومحددة بدقة. يمكن ملاحظتها وقياسها. تركز على سلوك المتعلم وليس على نشاط التعلم. متكاملة وقابلة للتطوير والتحويل. تمثيل مدى واسعا من المعارف والمهارات المعرفية والمهارات العامة.

 

اختبار كفايات المعلمين


m.ebrahim@mu.edu.sa




m.ebrahim@mu.edu.sa

التقويم الأكاديمي للعام الجامعي 1439/1440


مهارات تقويم الطالب الجامعي

مهارات تقويم الطالب الجامعي







معايير تصنيف الجامعات



الجهات الداعمة للابتكار في المملكة

تصميم مصفوفات وخرائط الأولويات البحثية

أنا أستطيع د.منى توكل

مونتاج مميز للطالبات

القياس والتقويم (مواقع عالمية)

مواقع مفيدة للاختبارات والمقاييس

مؤسسة بيروس للاختبارات والمقاييس

https://buros.org/

مركز البحوث التربوية

http://www.ercksa.org/).

القياس والتقويم

https://www.assess.com/

مؤسسة الاختبارات التربوية

https://www.ets.org/

إحصائية الموقع

عدد الصفحات: 3687

البحوث والمحاضرات: 1166

الزيارات: 195952