E-learning describes the use of technology to support and enhance learning practice. Within the last few years the international environment has changed remarkably with respect to the application of ICTs in higher education. For example, most educational institutions are developing or planning to develop Web based course delivery capability. As well, a significant number of governments, institutions, university Web sites and e-portfolios have emerged to chronicle the burgeoning numbers of virtual education initiatives. Further evidence of this increased activity is highlighted in the literature examining the processes of “e-education” (Bjarnason et al., 2000; Cunningham et al., 2000; Erhmann, 2000; Kerry et al., 2000, Johnston et al., 2001).
Further, other authors have described the increasing use of ICT as an evolutionary process that has been underway for some time. For instance, Farrell (2001) citing Tapsall and Ryan (1999), writing from an Australian perspective, described the evolution of delivery modes of e-learning in three main phases: distance education, open learning and flexible learning. They argue that the first phase, distance education, emerged in response to the needs of learners who were unable to access campus-based institutions because of geographical distance, work and other personal related commitments. The second phase, open learning, which also seeks to respond to the problems of distance, is focused on meeting the needs of those who are disadvantaged in terms of entry qualifications and, therefore, need to be served through “second chance” enrolment policies and alternative programmes and delivery models. Finally, they postulate that the third phase, flexible learning, in the context of Australian universities, is less about distance or those at a disadvantage rather it aims at providing “more” education to “more” students (anywhere, anytime) at “less” cost thus serving as a tool of “massification” and expansion. Flexible delivery modes employing the use of such technologies such as CD-ROMs and Internet are aimed at providing solutions to some of the problems confronted by on-campus educational delivery. Tapsall and Ryan argue that, as a result, face-to-face and distance and open learning modes are converging which implies that students in all types of venues are increasingly learning through the use of the same technologies (Farrell, 2001 citing Tapsall and Ryan, 1999).
Another trend that has accounted for the evolution of e-learning is that within the last few years higher education has become a priced commodity in which people seek to invest for their own personal gain, to ensure equality of opportunity and as a route to a better life (Davies,
1998). As a result, providers of Higher Education are finding themselves competing more than ever for students, funding, research, and recognition within the wider society. Whilst competition has always been an issue for universities, historically the focus was national rather than international. During the last decade and through the development of e-learning higher education has become more “global”. As the market continues to grow, new entrants will offer innovative world-class solutions at low cost (“Lifelong learning,” 1998), making it impossible for the ‘static’ or ‘complacent’ providers to compete. Despite this seeming urgency, professed by many, US Economist (“Lessons of a virtual timetable,”2001) stresses the dangers of ‘jumping on the band- wagon’ too soon or without due diligence”. Building on this argument, Pollock and Cornford (2000) acknowledge that in the implementation of e-learning, institutions will bear the risk of destroying those processes that offer important forms of support to students. Thus, higher educational institutions need to consider the implications for everyone involved before implementing any new e-learning strategies.
While technology alone might not be the answer to all of higher education’s problems, according to Daniel (1996), it certainly can play a key role. The benefits of utilising technology, particularly for developing online collaborative activities are well documented (Redfern & Naughton, 2002). Relationships can also be fostered within the context of an online environment. According to O’Donoghue & Singh (2001), technology can serve as a powerful medium particularly for part time and working students who find attendance requirements and study difficult. The implications are clearly multi-faceted. The higher educational institution will itself necessitate physical, cultural and managerial transformations. Students will require support in adapting to a potentially unfamiliar learning context. Also there are enormous implications for faculty members who will be under pressure to introduce and develop often more innovative approaches to their teaching and delivery.
Another view on the evolution of e-learning is offered by Peter Dirr in (1999) cited by Farrell (2001). In his opinion two main elements have characterized this process. One is that the technology application decisions have been driven primarily by technology, not by consumers. The other is that the applications have been oriented to a traditional academic paradigm. He cites for example that the widespread use of video-conferencing, which has enabled instructors to retain many of the old pedagogical methods, but has done little to accommodate the learner’s need for flexibility. Dirr (1999) argues that institutions have failed to employ the full potential of newer technologies and have not taken full advantage of the capabilities available to both learners and instructors (Dirr, 1999 cited by Farrell, 2001)
correspondence model, employed the use of print technology. The second generation, the multimedia model, employed the use of print, audio and video technologies. The third generation which was based on the tele-learning model involved the use of telecommunications technologies to provide opportunities for synchronous communication. The fourth which is based on the flexible learning model is based on online delivery via the Internet. He further stressed that even though this fourth generation of e-learning is still building up; a fifth generation is beginning to surface. According to Taylor (1999), this generation will use automated response systems that scan the text of incoming e-mail and respond intelligently without human intervention, thereby decreasing the cost of online tuition and increasing access to learning opportunities on a global scale He refers to this as the “intelligent flexible learning model” that will bring about an enhanced benefit in terms of economies of scale and cost effectiveness (cited by Farrell, 2001).
Another perspective presented in the literature is that currently higher educational institutions are searching for a unifying vision to guide their investments in teaching, learning and technology (Ehrmann, 2000 cited by Farrell, 2001). He examines separately the so-called “campus-bound” approach with the “campus-based” approach. In his opinion the “campus- bound” approach assumes that the quality of a programme is heavily dependent on the books, laboratories, faculty, students, etc. that are on-site. On the other hand, the “campus-based” approach which he refers to as the new approach is oriented to the concept that some of the resources and some of the learning are off-site. Within this current framework networks enable staff and students to use a World Wide Web of academic resources and, as a result, they may only be on campus part of the time.
Summarising; the fact remains that some higher educational institutions are less advanced than others in the use of e-learning, yet no one wants to use a label that isn’t thought to be the most current such as e-learning. This review on the evolution of e-learning emphasises how fast and radical the nature of technology enabled (e-learning) education is changing. But a synthesis of available literature emphasises the main point that the growth of e-learning activities is largely occurring in countries with mature economies and established institutional and ICT infrastructure such as Germany, the United Kingdom and the United States. But in the face of these developments, it is an acknowledgeable fact that the need for an enhanced development and use of e-learning is even greater in developing countries as they face the challenges of equipping their human capital with the competencies needed for today’s knowledge society. But for this to be the case the current “digital divide” and its causes must be addressed (Kenniston and Kumar, 2000 cited by Farrell, 2001).