Measuring the quality of e-learning

This paper shows how concept mapping can be used to measure the quality of e-learning. Six volunteers (all of them 3rd-year medical students) took part in a programme of e-learning designed to teach the principles of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). Their understanding of MRI was measured before and after the course by the use of concept mapping. The quality of change in individuals' maps was assessed using criteria developed to distinguish between meaningful and rote-learning outcomes. Student maps were also scored for evidence of conceptual richness and understanding. Finally, each map was compared directly with the content of the electronic teaching material. The results show that many of the student misconceptions were put right in the course of their learning but that many of the key concepts introduced in the teaching were ignored (or sometimes learnt by rote) by the students. This was because the teaching material locked these new ideas in structures and terminology that precluded meaning-making among non-experts. Our data suggest that students' prior knowledge is a key determinant of meaningful learning. We suggest that this must be acknowledged if the design and use of electronic teaching material is also to be meaningful. Ultimately, measures of student learning are the only authentic indicators of the quality of teaching through technology. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

[1]  Joseph D. Novak,et al.  Results and Implications of a 12-Year Longitudinal Study of Science Concept Learning , 2005 .

[2]  I. Kinchin,et al.  Making learning visible: the role of concept mapping in higher education , 2008 .

[3]  Ralph W. Tyler,et al.  Basic Principles of Curriculum and Instruction , 1969 .

[4]  T. Buzan,et al.  The Mind Map Book , 1993 .

[5]  Eileen Scanlon,et al.  Contexts for evaluating educational software , 1999, Interact. Comput..

[6]  Yanfeng Tian,et al.  Divorce, gender role, and higher education expansion , 1996 .

[7]  Diana Laurillard,et al.  Rethinking University Teaching: A Framework for the Effective Use of Educational Technology , 1993 .

[8]  D. Hay.  Using concept maps to measure deep, surface and non‐learning outcomes , 2007 .

[9]  Ference Marton,et al.  The University of Learning , 1998 .

[10]  J. Biggs,et al.  Teaching For Quality Learning At University , 1999 .

[11]  Joseph D. Novak,et al.  Learning creating and using knowledge: Concept maps as facilitative tools , 1998 .

[12]  D. Ausubel.  The psychology of meaningful verbal learning. , 1963 .

[13]  T. Shuell.  Cognitive Conceptions of Learning , 1986 .

[14]  J. Novak,et al.  A Twelve-Year Longitudinal Study of Science Concept Learning , 1991 .

[15]  J. Novak,et al.  Educational Psychology: A Cognitive View , 1969 .

[16]  Jan Herrington,et al.  Developing effective hypermedia instructional materials , 1995 .

[17]  I. Kinchin,et al.  How a qualitative approach to concept map analysis can be used to aid learning by illustrating patterns of conceptual development , 2000 .

[18]  Gustav Helldén,et al.  Using Concept Maps as a Research Tool in Science Education Research , 2004 .

[19]  I. Kinchin,et al.  Using concept maps to reveal conceptual typologies , 2006 .

[20]  J. Biggs.  Enhancing teaching through constructive alignment , 1996 .

[21]  Diana Laurillard,et al.  Rethinking University Teaching 2nd Edition: A conversational framework for the effective use of learning technologies , 2002 .

[22]  Peter Knight,et al.  Being A Teacher In Higher Education , 2002 .

[23]  Elli Georgiadou,et al.  ADDURI: a framework for the development and support of resource-based learning environments and materials. , 2005 .