Since virtual learning environments are a new generation of computer-based educational systems, it is worth looking at whether computer-based learning is more effective than learning in a traditional classroom. The question is indeed irrelevant for those, the vast majority, who see technologies as tools for teachers and not as substitute. Let’s however have a look at research results on these issues. In short, studies show a slight advantage for computers, especially when considering the time for learning. These results have been questioned, but even if they were granted, how could policy makers generalise from these studies? Could we conclude that any courseware, even badly designed, would outperform teachers, even the best of them? Of course not. When comparing a courseware and a teacher, we do not measure the intrinsic effectiveness of computers versus humans, but the quality of two learning methods as implemented by two devices. If, for the sake of comparison, we forced the computer and the teacher to apply the same method, we would observe the same lack of difference as if one compares a FiatUno and a Porsche on a road where the speed limit is 30 km per hour!
It may seem trivial to say that a medium has no effect in general, but the history of educational technology shows that every new technology (television, computers, hypertexts, multimedia, Internet, virtual reality, ...) raise a wave of naive expectations regarding to the intrinsic effects of these technologies. Still every medium has some specificity, but this specificity can only expressed in terms of potential effects. A medium affords specific types of interactions: computers enable individualized instruction but not all software is individualized, computers are able to analyse the learner behavior, to manipulate interactive models, but most programmes don’t do it. The effect is ‘potential’ in the sense that interesting types of interactions are available, but not used or not used for them right learning objectives and audience.
Now, can we establish that some educational programmes are effective, without comparison with teachers, simply by comparing what the learners know before and after ? We can, in some cases, especially for self-contained courseware. However, we observed that the effectiveness of courseware often depends upon the pedagogical context in which it is used. We observed that, even with simple hypertexts, the way students navigate in very much influenced by the tasks that teachers assigned to them. As a simple example, let us
imagine a drill&pactice software in arithmetic, which provide learners with incorrect answers. It would be is a very bad learning tool for the teacher who use this courseware in a normal way, but it could be turned into a very interesting tool if the teacher asks the students to find the mistakes in the programme. This example is not ridiculous since the Web contains a lot of incorrect information.
Social interactions
The first obvious opportunity of virtual learning environments is that they support social interaction, in many ways: synchronous versus asynchronous, text-based versus audio or video, one-to-one versus one-to-many, ... Again, these affordances define potential effects, not actual ones. For instance, we often encounter teachers who believe that, since their students use e-mail, they will start to ask frequent and smart questions. In our experience of Web teaching, this is rarely the case. Most email conversation is about the management of
learning (finding resources, negotiating deadlines, asking for an appointment, ...). Spontaneously, they send few content-rich e-mail messages. The same applies to educational forums, in which it is very difficult to sustain the flow of messages. The problem is not due to the technology, but to the educational context. Students will not start communicating with the teacher for the sake of communication. In the following sections, we argue that the pedagogical challenge is not to imitate face-toface interactions, but to explore different new communication functionalities that are effective in virtual learning environments.
- Virtual places define the conversation context and thereby implicitly convey the communication contract.
- Virtual interactions do not have to imitate face-to-face communication in order to be effective.
- ‘Non-verbal’ communication
- Building virtual communities
