Online-Learning and Its Utility to Higher Education in the Anglophone Caribbean

The “learning” of “online-learning”: Online-learning as a subset of general learning

Online-learning is actually a subset of learning in general (Garrison & Shale, 1990 in Anderson, 2011). It has been suggested that learning can be achieved through environmental designs utilizing four inter-related attributes—learner-centeredness, community-centeredness, knowledge-centeredness, and assessment-centeredness (Bransford, Brown, Cocking, & National Research Council, 2004). Within the Caribbean where there is high competition for sparse resources (which are hence usually allocated via some strict merit system), learning tends to become assessment dominated even if the instruction is set-up by the teacher to be learner-centered, community-centered, and/or knowledge-centered. For instance, for the last two years I have taught a final year undergraduate course in science education for in-service teachers. All of our students are full-time teachers and the course was executed with 50% face-to-face and 50% online components after students requested a high online element to facilitate their busy lifestyles. In both years, while the online activities were used to deliver course content as well as to build the final assignment, they were not scored. In both years, the participation in the online portion of the course was extremely low, so low that the online materials had to be gradually moved into the face-to-face sessions and the online classes abandoned. Students were primarily concerned with the completion of their final assessment as opposed to covering the course materials adequately, and as the online portion carried no score toward the assessment, they were disinterested in its proceedings.

Learner-, knowledge-, community-, or assessment- centeredness can be secured through a variety of interactions within learning spaces. First, student–student and teacher–teacher interactions allow both students and teachers to benefit from peer review and membership within a professional learning community (Anderson, 2011). However, while instructors have been found to view teacher–learner and learner–learner interactions as primary to high-quality online-learning, student opinion toward increasing these types of interactions varies, apparently according to their personality and learning style (Cantrell et al., 2008). Second, within virtual environments content–content interactions are possible between automated information sources so that information remains fresh and can develop new aptitudes. “For example, a weather tutorial might take its data from current meteorological servers, creating a learning context that is up-to-date and relevant to the learner’s context” (Anderson, 2011, p. 48). Third, by tracking and assessing student–content interactions within an online environment, adaptive learning paths catering to the needs of specific users (Anderson, 2011) become possible. Last, teacher–content interactions allow instructors to keep course and knowledge materials updated and relevant (Anderson, 2011). Understandably, the increased interactivity in online environments is often overwhelming to many new instructors especially because many students expect the immediate feedback afforded by the web (Anderson, 2011; Chen, Lin, & Kinshuk, 2008). In my experience, Caribbean student–teachers require an extra deal of hand-holding to navigate the varied types of interactions that online spaces can offer. I have often had to teach my students how to use the online-tool while attempting to teach them the subject-content that the tool was designed to deliver. I feel that the courses that I teach are not assessing my students’ ability to navigate and interact within an online space but rather their competency in the content area. I try then to ensure that their online skills do not mitigate their overall success in the course; this has often times ended up significantly increasing the personal effort needed for me to successfully deliver such online courses.

The “online” of “online-learning”: Facilitating learning via remote access

Learning-that-is-online offers remote access to a 24-hour classroom from any internet source at distance from the instructor (Ally, 2011; Anderson 2011). Models of online instruction range from a depository of notes in an online holder to synchronous, interactive, and collaborative web classes. Ironically, ICTs that facilitate high interactivity diminish time–place independence (Anderson, 2011), are very expensive, and are more time-consuming to establish.

The power of its collaborative networking capability between participants and the level of time–place independence that it allows, decides whether online instruction is indicated as “mixed” (blended) or “online” (Harasim, 2000, p. 46). Instruction that is time–place independent and uses ICT tools (such as social media, blogs and wikis for instance) to set up a powerful collaborative network between participants (including the instructor) can be indicated as an online-learning environment. Early distance education was online but stand-alone and expected candidates to interact independently with heavy volumes of text-based materials. Nowadays, online-learning utilizes ICTs to network participants in different locations to the instructor and to each other in collaborative, synchronous communications. Online-learning is hence now possible through either an independent or a collaborative study mode (Anderson, 2011). Within the developing spaces of the Caribbean in which I have taught the choice between an independent or a collaborative mode has not, in my experience, been primarily based on the needs of learners or the utility of the modality at promoting learning. Instead, economic factors often decide as the licenses for the synchronous software needed to provide a collaborative online-learning environment are usually very expensive, and the funding to obtain access to a reliable platform has often not been available.

Within blended or mixed instruction, the levels (compared to fully online-learning) of time–place independence decreases, the collaborative network becomes less extensive, and instruction begins to incorporate traditional face-to-face elements (Harasim, 2000). That is, when online-learning is mixed with some degree of direct face-to-face instruction between participants and the instructor, blended or mixed learning is achieved. There can be different levels of blends too. For example, the School of Education at the university where I have taught on the island of Trinidad in the Anglophone Caribbean has in the past recommended a 30-70 blend. A weak blend would utilize online modalities for 30% of instructional time and face-to-face modalities 70% of the time. A strong blend with similar proportions of online and face-to-face components would comparatively utilize online modalities 70% of the time.

Mixed or blended instruction permits the instructor to tailor a face-to-face: online blend ratio to suit students’ learning needs. In this way, instructors can negotiate learning methodologies and mount a critical resistance against a carte blanche application of online-learning (Clegg et al., 2003). In my experience with blending, instructors were left with the option of where along the 30-70 blend ratio they would formulate their classes. The final blend depended on both the instructor’s and the students’ comfort with online-learning as a new educational technology, as well as access to efficient, stable, regularly available internet tools. Blended modalities can also help to democratize education by being “not less compelling and motivating than its campus [face-to-face] counterparts” (Larreamendy-Joerns & Leinhardt, 2006, p. 573). For instance, the definition of blended learning might be reconceptualized as outcomes as opposed to instructional modalities. Here, face-to-face and online students can be offered the same instructional experiences with the right to access these in any blended combination that they choose according to their needs (and taste) and so maximize the social and economic benefit gained by the community (Hiltz & Turoff, 2005). This can be a worthwhile practice given that the quality of the online facility is not the only contributing factor, “the personality and learning styles of students who take online courses may also contribute to the comfort level with online-learning which allows these students to learn at least as much as the on ground classes” (Cantrell et al., 2008, p. 554). This is supported by the finding that student satisfaction—rather than their locus of control and the majority of their demographics (gender, age group, residency status, academic major, GPA, and weekly working hours)—contributes most highly to retention in online-learning (Levy, 2007). In fact, as new digital media emerge, their new configurations tend to be less determined by technological demands and they tend to develop functionalities that have been determined over time by social relations (Adam, 1998). That is to say that pervasive adoption of ICTs does not occur simply because a technology is easy to use but more so because it serves the needs of users (Adams, Nelson, & Todd, 1992; Davis, 1989). Allowing students pursuing blended instruction to choose the level of their blend as Hiltz and Turoff (2005) suggest could permit students to each select, and tweak if necessary, an ideal mix of face-to-face and online activities to suit their individual learning needs, capacities, and preferences. This can be especially worthwhile to students like mine given that many of them register for programs taught using blended or online-learning modalities because of the lure of not having to drive long distances to attend face-to-face classes. However, my experience has taught me that most of those students are largely unaware of what blended or online-learning entails and have in the past ended up clamoring for increased face-to-face interaction mid-semester. They usually underestimate their ability to deal with the sterility, increased independence, and digital navigation within an online classroom. They think that it is as simple as being able to send an email or login to Facebook—the usual extent of their online or digital presence in their regular, everyday lives.

There are studies which indicate blended instruction to be the most advantageous learning modality (U.S. Department of Education, Office of Planning, Evaluation, and Policy Development, 2009) compared with online or face-to-face instruction. Within a blended paradigm, the strengths that the face-to-face modality offers to the teaching–learning process compensate for the weaknesses of the online component (Osguthorpe & Graham, 2003). It may be worth noting though that “blended learning has added value only when facilitated by educators with high interpersonal skills, and accompanied by reliable, easy-to-use technology” (Derntl & Motschnig-Pitrik, 2005, p. 111). Researches within the Caribbean that consider blended modalities recognize that the expert knowledge of the instructor is crucial (Bernard & Thompson, 2003); that there is a cultural proclivity toward face-to-face interactions (Kuboni & Martin, 2004; Morgan, 2000); and that instructors resist online-learning due to their comparatively new exposure to these instructional processes (Chandra et al., 2000) as well as their perceptions of a loss of intellectual property rights (Gulati, 2008). Other issues with online modalities regionally include the retarded interconnectivity between the island states, and the need to make ICTs more affordable through a reduction of duties and taxation by policy determination (Chandra et al., 2000).

Still, even with all of its constraints within Caribbean spaces, fully online-learning may be the most cost-effective instrument to service the region (Marrett, 2006). Blended modalities by their sheer inclusion of face-to-face elements cannot adequately service at distance populations with no ability to access the brick-and-mortar locations of the matriculating institution. This is a serious consideration given the way territories and their populations are scattered across the region. Within the relatively low-tech Caribbean, traditional technologies such as television, radio, and text-based materials may play a role in providing education at a distance to rural and disadvantaged populations (Gulati, 2008). Successful examples of such projects include Proformação in Brazil (Bof, 2004) and Telesecundaria in Mexico (Gulati, 2008). In fact, internal and external influences necessitated a central role for a text-based pre-package in University of the West Indies’ (UWI) distance programs (Kuboni & Martin, 2004) up until my personal experience as a course coordinator to 2011. With the potential to increase access many fold, and to cater to a variety of training needs across a broad socio-economic clientele, online-learning can offer great promise toward “a highly literate and competitive workforce despite the region’s financing constraints” (Smith, 2011, p. 12).

Merging “online” and “learning” to look at “online-learning”: Educational visions

The concept of online-learning has been explicated beyond simply learning that occurs through a blended or fully-online mode into three educational visions (Larreamendy-Joerns & Leinhardt, 2006).

First, presentational views enhance static text by using multimedia to present visuals of abstract concepts and their applications. Presentational views can warm the sterility of online spaces through real-time synchronous collaborations, or by providing a friendly face and voice through vodcasts in asynchronous modes (Larreamendy-Joerns & Leinhardt, 2006). I have employed free vokis in which I use my voice to animate a cartoon figure to engage my students. Given that the accents and speech of the Caribbean are non-mainstream, hearing a familiar sounding voice can help to make the online teaching–learning space more inviting.

Second, within the culturally responsive and socially constructivist epistemic-engagement view, novices are inducted into a disciplinary community through collaborations with experts that are grounded in the epistemological beliefs of the discipline (Larreamendy-Joerns & Leinhardt, 2006). For instance, I have been in the past a member of a team of teacher-educators utilizing online modalities to mentor primarily science and mathematics teachers as they learn how to integrate and deliver a STEM (Science, Technology, Education and Mathematics) Curriculum (“Stemagination,” 2013; please note that at the writing of this article, the name “Stemagination” has since been trademarked by a United States non-profit group set up to enhance the participation of girls in STEM, see http://stemagination.org/). As another example, one of my graduate students has patterned his dissertation (see Coker, 2013) after the EcoMUVE project (Harvard Graduate School of Education, n.d.). EcoMUVE demonstrates epistemic authenticity by allowing students to develop causal reasoning within a Virtual Learning Environment (VLE) where participants can investigate cases of environmental abuse utilizing processes similar to those employed by real scientists.

In the third view, Intelligent Tutoring Systems (ITS) measure actual student routines against an ideal performance model of how students problem solve and learn. In this way, ITS can deliver feedback and recommendations on how learning can be improved (Larreamendy-Joerns & Leinhardt, 2006). ITS though are presently prohibitively expensive to many institutions and are also unable to mimic activities which cannot be represented by production rules (Larreamendy-Joerns & Leinhardt, 2006). These particularly include complex adaptive activities and spaces. For example, face-to-face classrooms (Kelly, 1994) and subject domains such as evolutionary Biology are ecological and evolutionary like real organic systems (Larreamendy-Joerns & Leinhardt, 2006) and defy simple production rules. Indeed, skilled instructors, who are knowledgeable practitioners of their discipline, have a deep, sometimes organic appreciation of how to steer activities, questions, and interactions within the complexity of regular learning spaces to promote successful knowledge creation. This is as yet almost impossible to copy through the use of ITS.

A glimpse at a possible futuristic model of “online-learning”: Networked individualism

The form and shape of online-learning globally and within the Caribbean is progressing and changing at an almost unprecedented pace given the speed with which the ICTs on which they are predicated are also developing. This section takes a look at the possible face of online-learning in the future.

When “online” and “learning” collide, it can birth a complex adaptive space that is inherently networked. Such space I suggest gives rise to a networked individualism as described by Rainie and Wellman (2012). Networked individualism is a new social operating system (Rainie & Wellman, 2012):

Like most computer operating systems and all mobile systems, the social network operating system is personal—the individual is at the autonomous center [iCulture] just as she is reaching out from her computer; multiuser-people are interacting with numerous diverse others; multitasking-people are doing several things; and multithreaded-they are doing them more or less simultaneously. (Rainie & Wellman, 2012, p. 7)

These networked individuals might be thought of as points within a connected hive-mind (Kelly, 1994). Within this hive-mind, ICTs push rapid socio-political and economic changeability necessitating new paradigms of instruction to foster students capable of “improving their performance by creating new ways of working and developing the new capabilities needed for that work” (Resnick & Williams-Hall, 1998, p. 108). Students must hence be skilled toward metacognition, self-monitoring, and adaptation (Resnick & Williams-Hall, 1998). Excitingly enough (in my estimation), while the “online” of online-learning revolutionizes society, creates new types of learners, and obligates new learning competencies, it holds simultaneous potential to create iCultured learning spaces capable of alleviating the needs of such a new dispensation.

Imagine an environment that is constantly changing. Imagine an environment where the participants are building, creating, and participating in a massive network of dozens of databases, hundreds of wikis and websites, and thousands of message forums, literally creating a large-scale knowledge economy. Imagine an environment where participants are constantly measuring and evaluating their own performances, even if that requires them to build new tools to do it. Imagine an environment where user interface dashboards are individually and personally constructed by users to help them make sense of the world and their own performance in it. Imagine an environment where evaluation is based on after-action reviews not to determine rewards but to continually enhance performance. Imagine an environment where learning happens on a continuous basis because the participants are internally motivated to find, share, and filter new information on a near-constant basis. (D. Thomas & Seely Brown, 2011, pp. 106-107)

Indeed, imagination might not be necessary as this utopist learning-space is suggested to already exist in massively multiplayer online games (MMO; D. Thomas & Seely Brown, 2011), and may be the aspiration of MOOCs. Though many of my adult student-teachers currently in higher education may be unfamiliar with MMOs, their teenage students are already active participants. Within Trinidad and Tobago, since 2009 all students moving into secondary school at age 11/12 have been provided with free laptops by the Government. A wider cross-section of our population now enjoys access to computers because the device is not only accessible to the child to whom it was assigned, but to their entire family when children take their devices home to complete school tasks. The biggest complaint surrounding the use of these laptops that I have heard from my student-teachers is their students’ fascination with gaming in all forms, including MMOs.

Networked individualism might be closer to becoming a Caribbean possibility than many envisage and online-learning’s seemingly secure and expanding future suggests that its role might grow beyond the simple delivery of academic course content. Indeed, like face-to-face schools, online-learning may hence also become responsible for securing broad educational aims. For individuals to flourish in the world of the 21st century, Gardner (2008) suggests the following aims of education. He holds firstly that individuals will require expertise in a discipline. Individuals will also need to be able to assemble knowledge from varied places and synthesize it into a relevant whole under some useful theme. In addition, as computers take over rudimentary and algorithmic tasks, schools will need to produce graduates who are creative and revolutionary in their thinking. Furthermore, as globalization decreases our proximity to each other and increases our awareness of our differences, individuals will need to display a new respect for diversity. Lastly, “as workers and citizens,” individuals will be required to act ethically and to do the right thing within given circumstances even if this does not necessarily promote their own self-interest (Gardner, 2008, pp. xiii-xiv). Individuals will also need to learn how to learn, and how to secure mental, emotional, and physical flexibility by taking time to rejuvenate (Yogi Bhajan & Gurucharan Singh Khalsa, n.d.) amidst the relentless change of this century.

Within this section, the article discussed the tools of online-learning and what online-learning might look like generally, and within a Caribbean experience. The experiences cited highlight that the efficiency of online-learning as a teaching–learning instrument within a Caribbean context is mitigated by the availability of tools; the comfort of both students and their instructors with digital technologies; and the assessment orientation of the learning culture. We also recognized a younger group of learners emerging who may enjoy greater access to, as well as skills to utilize, digital technologies, and whose competencies may craft an expanded role for online-learning in teaching and learning in the future Caribbean. The discussion goes on to consider some environmental factors that may impact on the success of attempts at online-learning generally, and particularly within a Caribbean context.