ETEC 648

1. Choose a theme for your annotated bibliography. It would be best if you chose something related to your eventual project!
In broad terms, my goal is to develop a manageable project that furthers my goal of becoming a consultant who help to gain a better return on corporate dollars invested in employee development and organization change.
Breaking this down a bit:

• The target populations are adults and corporate managers.

• Concepts of androgogy and, the more recent concept, heutogogy will be employed. or the more recent interest in Heutagogy.

• Using a systems model, adult employees managers (i.e., the dependent variable) will be viewed as human capital, an asset that will appreciate that can appreciate in value.

• Human performance technology (HPT), the “systematic approach improving performance competencies”, will be the framework to create initiatives to increase employees value. [Other research for today’s homework suggests HPT may not be a correct approach.

• On-line and blended learning are the tools that I plan to use to implement the initiatives.
As conducting an assessment or test the model is not feasible, my suggestion is that I
• Pare down the study scope.
• Articulate a viable model that can be tested.
• Create parameters/criteria/measurement criteria.
2. Locate at least 10 high quality articles related to your theme and prepare a citation list or bibliography including all 10 articles.
Two points:
• Several of the articles are not available through either the internet or the library: the person requesting the article must be an active (i.e., paid) association member.
• For those articles that do not deal directly address e-Learning or blended learning, the article review identifies the ramifications for e-Learning and blended learning.
Bezuidenhout, J, van der Westhuizen, D., & de Beer, K.J. Andragogy: A Theortetical Overview on Learning Theories that Impact on Benchmarking Blended Learning at the Central University of Technology, Free State (n.d.). Sabinet, 3(2). erim/interim_v3_n2_a2.pdf

Carliner, S. (2013). Human Performance Technology and HRD. New Horizons in Adult Education & Human Resource Development, 26 (1), 31-41. doi: 10/10021

Geri, N., Gafni, R., & Winer, A. (2014). The U-Curve of E-Learning: Course Websiteand Online Video Use in Blended and Distance Learning. Interdisciplinary Journal of E-Learning and Learning Objects, 10, 1-16. Retrieved from:

Hase, S. & Kenyon, C. (2007). Heutagogy: A Child of Complexity Theory. Complicity: An International Journal of Complexity and Education 4 (1), 111-117. Retrieved from:

Holton III, E.F., Wilson, L. S., & Bates, R.A. (2009). Toward Development of a Generalized Instrument to Measure Andragogy. Human Resource Development Quarterly, 20 (9), 169-193. doi:10.1002/hrdq.2014.

Hussein-Faraj R, Barak, M., and Yehudit, J.D. (2012). Lifelong Learning at the Technion: Graduate Students’ Perceptions of and Experiences in Distance Learning. Proceedings of the Chais Conference on Instructional technologies Research.

Kenyon, C. & Hase, S. (2001). Moving from Andragogy to Heutagogy in Vocational Education. Procedings of the 4th Australian Vocational Education and Training Research Association Conference, Aledaide, Australia, 1-9. http//

Lepak, D.P. & Snell, S.A. (1999). The Human Resource Architecture: Toward a Theory of Human Capital Allocation and Development. The Academy of Management Review, 24 (1) 31-48.

Mirriam, S.B. (2001). Andragogy and Self-Directed Learning: Pillars of Adult Learning Theory. New Directions for Adult and Continuing Education, 89, 3-13. Retrieved from:

Tan, K. & Waxman, L. (2013) Designing for Virtual Learning Spaces: A Second Life Example. International Journal of Designs for Learning, 4 (2), 72-79. Retrieved from:

Bezuidenhout, J, van der Westhuizen, D., & de Beer, K.J. Andragogy: A Theortetical Overview on Learning Theories that Impact on Benchmarking Blended Learning at the Central University of Technology, Free State (n.d.). Sabinet, 3(2). erim/interim_v3_n2_a2.pdf
The authors address the feasibility of creating and benchmarking blended learning programs at the Central University of Technology, Free State in South Africa.
The article asserts that andragogy is the preferred model to teach adult learners. Further the authors extract key principles from psychological and learning theories.
Behaviorism: From the behaviorist vantage point, “observable, measurable and controllable objectives are core to any distance and blended learning. The brain is the proverbial “black box”.
Cognitivism: Cognitivism expands to learning to include the internal mental process. Mental structures include the path to learning as well information storage and retrival. Cognitive development is a cause of learning. To assist in the learning process:
• Learners need to learn using as many sensory modalities as necessary
• Extracting long term memory can be used to learn new information.
• Chunking not only allows the learner to acquire information without overload, it also allows for learning new information in a different format.
• It is real life situations that result in higher/deep learning.
Constructivism: By engaging and being active in the learning process, learners build (i.e., construct) their own understanding of complex information.
Constructivism is especially important to adult learners. Here, blended learning, an outcome focused approach, can employ computers to help simulate multiple vantage points and challenge the individual needs of each learner.
The didactics of andragogy. The authors indicate that an andragogical model must be learner-centric approach, and recognize the unique nature of each adult. The approach needs to be tailored to the learner, and not vice versa. Further, well articulated learning outcomes are required. The reasons include:
• Learners are adults and know what they need to learn. However, they need to know the “why” before the content.
• Self-direction leads to greater self-concept. In on-line learning, adults must want to be there.
• Self-directed learning results in personal prioritization. With on-line learning, adults can better reprioritize when they are free to work at their own schedule.
• Experiential learning, especially with on-line learning affords adults opportunities to employee concepts to the real world.
• Learner readiness reflects the adult’s recognition that the there will be actual opportunities and situations where the learning can be applied.
• Transformational learning happens when the learning becomes deep learning.
This long, lengthy article (i.e., some 20+ pages in small type) seemed to address a number of characteristics and learning principles; however, it only tangentially touched upon blended learning and did not at all address the topic of benchmarking.
While I might recommend the article for a highly detailed look at different models and principles vis a vis andragogy, in no way could it be recommended for a clear presentation on either blended learning or benchmarking.

Carliner, S. (2013). Human Performance Technology and HRD. New Horizons in Adult Education & Human Resource Development, 26 (1), 31-41. doi: 10/10021

This conceptual/qualitative analysis of Human Performance Technology (HPT) and Human Resource Development (HRD) asserts that both approaches have the same end goal: increasing employee productivity. For the analysis the author 1) refers to HPT’s definition of “performance” as a body of systems that increase employee performance; 2) takes a critical look at what HPT does and doesn’t achieve; and 3) looks at the relationship between HPT and HRD.

Defining Performance. For the author, performance goes beyond behavior; it is the intended outcomes of actions and can be considered the dependent variable of training and development. Performance can also be affected by other organization factors, like culture and “work processes”.

In the context of HPT, performance is an outcome driven model derived from the application of organization systems that produce better performance. Instructional System Design (ISD) is one approach.

From the HPT vantage point, unintended outcomes can be the outcome of forces like lack of support, conflicting messages, forgetting what was learned, et al.

Critical analysis of HPT. The author takes a critical look at the purported benefits of an HPT approach, like: understanding why desired and actual outcomes differ, its methodological approach in increasing performance, and the belief that HPT results in both more productive and satisfied employees.

While there are several reasons, the author notes that HPT does not produce more satisfied employees. Other criticisms include: HPT is less effective than the ISD approach to improving employee performance; HPT is not a model, but a methodology; a lack of research data to support the HPT approach.

The relationship between HPT and HRD. The reasons cited for looking to HRD and not HPT include:

• HPT concepts have made their way into HRD, and not vice versa.
• HPT is too broad; it can include “any intervention”.
• HPT is deeply rooted in education, while HRD is truly multidisciplinary.
• HRD looks to multiple interventions (e.g., coaching, OD). HPT seems too grounded in the education model.

This non-empirical article takes on a debate that appears to have been going on for some time. It is clear while reading the analysis that the author is biased against HPT. And in some ways has created a the proverbial “strawman” to make his argument.

What is clearly lacking is a need to better look at HRD through the lenses of Society for Human Resource Development (SHRM) or Association for Training and Development (ASTD)

Hussein-Faraj R, Barak, M., and Yehudit, J.D. (2012). Lifelong Learning at the Technion: Graduate Students’ Perceptions of and Experiences in Distance Learning. Proceedings of the Chais Conference on Instructional technologies Research.

The authors cite a 100 year old history of distance learning beginning with correspondence courses evolving into teaching through audiovisual and other means to what is happening today: multi-media education through computers and other workstations that are both synchronous and asynchronous.

For this study, the authors apply a “transactional distance theory” that allows for distance and time to be intervening variables that effect learning.

Comparing groups of on-line and f2f students the stated goals of the study were:
• How do science and engineering graduate students perceive on-line learning?
• Are there gender differences in how on-line learning is perceived?
• Does distance learning have an impact on the learning experience?

Students participated in one of two classes: Innovation Management or Cell to Tissue. Also, students self-selected as to being in f2f or DL classes.

Authors broke their assessments into three phases:
• Initial survey screening with all potential f2f and DL students
• Comparative assessment comparing the initial student surveys to their responses to the same survey after the class is over.
• Focused responses to live (or in some cases, Skype) interviews after the 2nd survey.

Three key findings of the study include:
• All students had a high rating of DL, with those having experienced DL in the past reporting a statistically higher rating of DL.
• DL students expressed a statistically lower satisfaction when it came to faculty interaction and peer collegiality
• Although not statistically significant students with DL experiences report a higher satisfaction with DL post course.
• While initial attitudes toward DL between male and female students were not all that great, post-class attitudes showed a statistically, significant differences: DL male students were far more favorably inclined than DL female students.

The article provides some insights into: student decision-making process when selecting a way to be taught, those who elect DL in contrast to f2f learning, as well as gender differences.

Clearly, this sample is clearly technologically savvy. In other words, can the same or similar findings be expected with courses in the humanities and fine arts.

Also, the findings suggest that there needs to be a more effective introduction to DL would increase student satisfaction post class.

Lastly, there is a suggestion that DL for female students requires greater exploration.

Hopkins, P.C., Cowell, C.E., Jorden, D. McWhorter, R., Dobbs, R.L., & Allen, W.C. (2006). Technology’s Impact in Human Resource Development across the Life Span: Pedagogy Starts with Andragogy. Eric:

Citing sources that note the pervasiveness of the computers and internet in everyday life, as well as the workplace. They go on to note “technology deficit(s)” include 1) the inability to utilize computer hardware and software, 2) non-access and involvement with a computer-oriented society, and 3) the inability to improve or acquire skills. Unless students can overcome this deficit, the current and future workforces will become increasingly non-competitive.

To meet what will be a challenge, the authors wanted to identify if Knowle’s model of andragogy can have an impact upon their students.

The study’s findings to the research questions hold promise for both adult learners and their students, for each of the study questions.

1- Increased professional development of teachers increased facility with technology.

2- Increased professional development did increase the amount teachers utilized technology in the classroom.

3- Student utilization of technology increased.

4- Student academic achievement (as measured by a standardized test) increased.

While reaffirms the assertion that tech savvy educators are critical to overall education of students. And, that andragogy approaches positively affect the ability for educators to translate their skills into a pedagogical methodology.

While not addressed, the results suggest that with motivated educators, on-line training and blended learning may be a more cost-effective vehicle training educators. This is especially true with teachers who are in rural areas.

Tan, K. & Waxman, L. (2013) Designing for Virtual Learning Spaces: A Second Life Example. International Journal of Designs for Learning, 4 (2), 72-79. Retrieved from:

The case study is a design for a virtual campus by using the “Second Life” platform. Through avatars, Second Life purportedly allows students to use most any medium (e.g., language, games, gestures) to communicate and interact with others in a variety of on-line spaces (e.g., classrooms, coffee shops).

The goal for the case study was to create a virtual campus for “recruiting, orientation, teaching, and learning”. Additionally, the campus needed to be available to the largest numbers of visitors.

Project planning meetings were geared to create decisions for specific teams that were responsible for some aspect of the campus. On the campus virtual classrooms were set up for teaching. The virtual library was set upon for transactions between the virtual library staff and the avatar. The staff was to be used by merchandising, design, and marketing students at the school.

Once the virtual campus was completed, it was evaluated by some twenty students and six faculty members. The evaluation phase identified several weaknesses like the programming “failure” of several doors to open correctly. And, some of the transporting methods malfunctioned. These and other program weaknesses were corrected before a final roll-out.

While the article proved to be not what was expected (i.e., the testing of two on-line learning methods), it did provide insights into an aspect of on-line learning that was enlightening.

Being pretty much ignorant of the virtual campus, my extrapolations may be a bit eccentric. However, vis a vis on-line learning and evaluation could be:
• Assessments of customer service skills and approaches to assisting students in the on-line library. In other words, different groups of library science students can be trained and assessed for their skills under different scenarios.
• The product design for sale at the virtual retail store. In addition to the merchandising elements, groups of design students might be trained in creating clothing and products for the on-line store. Different teaching techniques can be simulated and assessed.


Module 03

Module 03 Homework-Blog Posting

  1. After reviewing the Quality Matters Checklist, what are three best practices you can extract. List each one and explain its significance and importance. Be sure to give an example of how using this idea would make either delivery or assessment better in a specific eLearning context.
Standards Learning Objectives Significance and importance Relevence to E-learning
Learning Objectives 2.3 All objectives … stated from the learner’s perspective. Unless learners know what is expected from their own lenses, miscommunication will be the norm.
  • Given lack of f2f conversation non-verbal cues, that account to some 93% of communication is lost (Heathfield, n.d.)
  • To paraphrase: Clarity is in the eyes of the reader. (VSB)
Course Activities and Learner Interaction 5.2 Learning activities provide opportunities that support active learning As deep learning is the goal for each class, activities need be structured to that goal
  • With both ETEC 500 and ETEC 648, I’ve noticed disparities between students’ commitment to the discussion board postings. Enhancing high quality peer interaction is the goal (e.g., via probing questions) takes each student and ultimately the class move beyond merely meeting the basic class requirements. (Solution: create a rubric for discussion board entries that force deep thinking)
Assessment and Measurement 3.3 Specific and descriptive criteria are provided for the evaluation of learners’ work and tied to the course grading policy Grading qualitative dimensions of students’ contributions to a class
  • While qualitative assessments are sticking points in both f2f, and blended learning environments, they are especially difficult in E-learning situations. (Solution: develop some sort of grading criteria that better quantifies qualitative responses.
  • Many non-verbal cues are lost. (Solution: inclusion of at least one skype or phone call meeting mandatory)
  • Further, the asynchronous nature of E-learning makes a dialogue difficult. (Solution: require at least one individual or small group chat)

Heathfield, Susan M. n.d. Tips for Understanding Nonverbal Communication. About Money.

  1. After reviewing the readings (and other sources that you locate on your own) what are some ideas that you can take from the work of Chickering and Gamson? How well do their suggestions map to online education in general? How well do they map to the students and/or content you might teach or develop for?

While all of Chickering and Gamson dimensions are relevant to on-line learning, several seem especially appropriate to adult professionals in an on-line environment.

Chickering and Gamson Dimension General Observations and Relevance to e-Learning
  • Encouraging contact between student and instructor
With aynchronous on-line learning, faculty have greater numbers of students and adult professional learners find themselves balancing work and class responsibilities. This might be best overcome with synchronous and blended classes. As a cost-saving measure, many corporations sponsor and/or conduct synchronous and blended programs for short term training and workshops, and reimburse students’ graduate studies for all three modalities.
Encouraging interaction between students As with the previous C&G dimension, competing priorities result in time lags between discussion board, blog posting and email problems, in general, and with group projects, in particular.  This is probably most visible with asynchronous learning situations. To save money, several corporations and training organizations sponsor and/or conduct synchronous and blended short term training and workshops. Similarly corporations appear more receptive to all three teaching methods.
Encouraging active learning In general terms, the days of a training junket to some destination city are pretty much over. Today, companies are more apt to bring the educator/facilitator to a given site or employ technology with a particular interest in synchronous learning.

However, there is a distinction between two types of professional adult learners: quantifiable (specific, measurable skills) and the more amorphous management development.

  • Quantifiable skills be easily accomplished via synchronous and asynchronous methods. Both can be expanded beyond the scientific/technical arenas.

-With synchronous learning, adult learners work through (e.g., practice) a series of specific skills as defined by the course title, objectives, etc. This is done with the assistance of the facilitator/teacher. Also on-line videoconferencing can be used as a “how to” tool

-In asynchronous situations, adult learners have weekly assignments that, ideally, relate to current work skills. If that is not possible, Progress can be readily assessed and/or quantified via on-line assignments. The educator becomes more the monitor than the facilitator. While video technologies (e.g., MP4) can be employed, peer learning and problem solving is not an option.

  • Management development is more amorphous. Yes, the goals can be articulated; however, measuring actual skills and deep learning can be more difficult asses.

-With synchronous programs, on-line video-conferencing, including YouTube-style videos allow for idea sharing, teamwork and peer learning. It becomes easier to observe learnings and assess individual progress.

-Asynchronous learning is more difficult. Professional responsibilities, including those pesky emergencies and deadlines, compete with the training program. This combination makes teamwork especially problematic. The educator becomes more the monitor than the facilitator.


Providing prompt feedback More technical and soft skill professional development both require timely feedback.. It seems that this is best achieved via synchronous programs where there are options for off-line conference calls with participants.
Communicating high expectations High expectations need to be an expectation with both synchronous and asynchronous programs.

A program I developed for a Fortune 500 was a variant of blended learning. Expectations were defined by the department head.

1- I conducted an initial f2f professional development program for three sections of a department. 18 staff representing the sections leads came from different parts of the country.

2-At the end of the training, each team became responsible for developing an action plan that filled a department priority. It was required that one plan would implement the plan of the other two sections.

3- Via conference calls, I facilitated the development of each sections action plan

4- After 4 months, I facilitated a conference call with some 50+ department employees.

5-Over the next few months 5 of the action plans were implemented.  [A reorganization and sale of a business unit intervened with at least one implementation.]


Emphasizing time on task In the above situation, team leads within each section were required to stay on task. My role was to provide technical assistance.
Respecting diverse talents and learning styles In some ways it is easier respect diverse talents and learning styles in asynchronous learning situations where f2f situations are less the norm.  However, it is a problem with both synchronous and asynchronous systems to work around different experiences and skill levels.  This is especially true with the management development training.


  1. According to the text, what are Objectives, Outcomes and Competencies. Provide an example of each.

According to Palloff and Pratt (2009, pg 6):

Objectives: “What students will learn, generally at the end of a unit of study.’

For example, the professional will be able to identify the role of performance evaluation in creating a more valuable employee.

Outcomes: “What students will able to know or do, generally at the end of the course.

For example, “The professional will know when and how to employee Management by Objectives (MBO) is the best choice of performance review tools.

Competencies: “How students demonstrate knowledge or skill acquisition, generally at the end of study.”

For example, “Using MBO as the performance review framework, the student writes four different measurable objectives that can be measured in 6 months.”


Paloff, Rena M and Keith Pratt. (2009, pg 6) Assessing the Online Learner. Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, CA)



  1. List the six levels in Bloom’s taxonomy. Now list one eLearning task, question or assignment for each level.

This answer is based upon the original Bloom taxonomy (Old Dominion University, n.d.)

Ranking Blooms Original Taxonomy eLearning task
  • Knowledge
Identifies four different types of performance review tools
  • Comprehension
Defines four different types of performance review tools
  • Application
Explains why MBO is an effective performance evaluation tool for technical employees.
  • Analysis
Articulates the relationships between Performance Planning ->Managing Performance-> Reviewing Performance->Rewarding Performance-> Planning Performance vis a vis performance planning for 8 team members
  • Synthesis
Able to use the MBO to assess the performance of 8 team members
  • Evaluation
Able to summarize and report on how MBO increases productivity and decreases turnover with a team of 8


Overbaugh, Richard C. and Lynn Schultz. n.d. Bloom’s Taxonomy. Old Dominion University.

Paloff, Rena M and Keith Pratt. (2009, pg 6) Assessing the Online Learner. Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, CA)

  1. According to the text, what is “learner focused teaching”? How does this concept relate to the work of Chickering and Gamson? Provide some ideas for providing “learner focused teaching” in an eLearning setting and give at lest one example.

Weiman in 2012 updated her 2002 discussion on learner focused learning model. In the newer discussion:

  1. Learner-centered teaching engages students in the hard, messy work of learning.
  2. Learner-centered teaching includes explicit skill instruction.
  3. Learner-centered teaching encourages students to reflect on what they are learning and how they are learning it
  4. Learner-centered teaching motivates students by giving them some control over learning processes
  5. Learner-centered teaching encourages collaboration.


In a corporate consultant capacity (i.e., developer, facilitator, evaluator) of professional learning in both blended and on-line environments my role evolves. At minimum, the consultant:

  • Transitions from the educator/teacher to the facilitator who allows the professional to articulate already learned knowledge—think andragogy—and/or build upon previously acquired technical expertise
  • Learns to be the self-teacher.
  • Sets as the goal, higher level learning and reinvention.


  • Moves the locus of motivation for professional learning from primarily external rewards to internal satisfaction


  • Makes teamwork and peer review the norm


In an e-Learning environment,

Weimer, Maryellen. 2012. Five Characteristics of Learner-Focused Teaching. Faculty Focus.

Weimer, Maryellen. 2002. Learner-Focused Teaching: Five Key Changes to Practice. Jossey-Bass: San Francisco.

While my addition to the Chickering and Gamson principles might be considered part of the Weiman analysis of student-focused learning, the combination of all these points seem applicable to the consultant’s role as the developer, facilitator, and evaluator of professional learning in both blended and on-line environments.

At minimum,

  • The educator becomes a facilitator.
  • The learner becomes a self-teacher.
  • Higher level learning and reinvention is the goal.
  • Motivation moves from external to internal.
  • Teamwork and peer review becomes a new norm.



Principle Adult learner e-Learning Example
  • The educator becomes a facilitator.
Probing questions on a blog or discussion board
  • The learner becomes a self-teacher.
Professionals identify on-line and/or other resources to satisfy e-Learning classes
  • Higher level learning and reinvention is the goal.
Through a systematic series of e-Learning training, new professional goals and a self-defined pathway to get there emerges
  • Motivation moves from external to internal.
Through e-Learning, a realization that reinvention is rewarding in and of itself, transitions the locus of control from the external to the internal
  • Teamwork and peer review become the norm
In the new professional world, on-line courses that promote collaboration either through blogs or discussion board postings, foster the growth of virtual teams.


  1. Explain how the readings this week (and your own research) connects with the Blackboard discussion.

While some of the readings (e.g., Bloom, C&G) have direct relevance to discussion board, there seems to be a more tenuous relationship between the Adrogogy posts and discussion board and assignment.

That noted, I have tried to relate the androgogy readings, as well as my own experiences with Knowles’ work and professional experiences  teaching, training and coaching adult learners. The CELT three dimensional model seems most applicable to the adult learning.


Center for Excellence in Learning and Teaching (2012) Iowa State University.

Old Dominion Unversity, n.d. Bloom’s Taxonomy.

Wilson, Leslie Owen 2013. Understanding the New Vesion of Bloom’s Taxonomy.The Second Principle.


  1. Quote your best entry from this week’s Blackboard discussion. Explain why you chose it and what it demonstrates about your understanding, learning process etc.

My best entry to the discussion board relates to the discussion of quality. The rationale for this selection is at least twofold:

  • Real world experiences form the basis of the response.
  • By introducing the concept of relative definitions of quality, the conventional definition of quality becomes challenged.


  1. Identify the student you think was the most important participant in the Blackboard discussion. Explain why and provide at least one quote from that student’s contributions to the Blackboard discussion.

Because we focus upon different audiences, Loraine Gersitz captured my attention. She explained how the QM rubric can be applied to the K-12 population. She also explained how it can be expanded to include library environments.

On the K-12 QM Rubric there are nine standards or checkpoints:

  1. The overall design of the course is made clear to the student at the beginning of the course.
  2. Learning objectives are measurable and are clearly stated.
  3. Assessment strategies are designed to evaluate student progress by reference to stated learning objectives, to measure the effectiveness of student learning, and to be integral to the learning process.
  4. Instructional materials are authoritative, up-to-date, and appropriately chosen for the level of the course
  5. Forms of interaction incorporated in the course motivate students and promote learning.
  6. Course navigation features and the technology employed in the course foster student engagement and ensure access to instructional materials and resources.
  7. The course facilitates student access to institutional services essential to student success.
  8. The course demonstrates a commitment to accessibility for all students.
  9. Local compliance standards.
  10. I think all of these quality features are important in an online class. I particularly like #7 because the facilities that are essential to student success includes the library and it’s online resources.
  11. Reflect on what you have learned this week. What have you learned that has the potential to inform or influence you or your practice of online learning going forward? Explain why.

Without becoming redundant, the CELT 3 dimensional model has changed my thinking about Blooms Taxonomy and how it can be employed with adult populations. It provides a sophisticated, yet approachable framework for designing, implementing and evaluating training/education programs for adult professionals.

The reintroduction to Androgogy, in general, Knowles, in particular creates a focal point for future assignments.


Module 02 Homework

Module 02 Homework

For the following be sure to provide citations (URL’s etc.) for sources of information you consulted to answer each items as appropriate.

  1. What are three key things associated with delivery of eLearning?

According the instructor file handout entitled “delivery_assessment_evaluation_grading” there are multiple elements associated with the delivery of eLearning. And, in reality, they appear consistent with all effective learning processes. They include but are not limited to

Communication.  Irrespective of age, communication (i.e., the engagement of at least 2 individuals in the exchange of information) is central to all learning processes.

Monitoring the process. Making sure the student has not gone too far astray from the explicit goals of the curriculum. While some divergence may result in deeper learning, it is the instructor’s ability, via email and/or probing questions and/or suggestion of specific resources that keep the student on target.

Motivation. Personally, this seems to be the most difficult task working with many undergraduate, graduate level and adult learners. As it is relatively easy for students to strive for the minimum course requirements, getting students to go beyond the extrinsic rewards (e.g., a passing grade) to discovering some intrinsic rewards (e.g., greater interest in the topic, deep learning) is a far greater challenge.

  1. What is the difference between assessment and evaluation? Why is understanding the difference important in eLearning?

Assessment is about the ”measurement of learning”. Evaluation goes far deeper: it is about the assessment as well as qualitative indices such as quality, value added to the student, and, for me, a dialogue communicating about the implications of what this student’s performance indicates.

Question: A piece of jargon was included in this reading.  Can someone define and give examples of “CMS/LMS systems”.


  1. One of the readings this week suggests that a chat room should be set up to promote social interaction in online classes. Which reading is this and what are the pros and cons to this suggestion?

While Haugen (2011) suggests that chat rooms are a viable vehicle to promote social interaction.


One concern, as noted by the UF e-Learning Helpline (, is that chat line is too informal and it should be re-titled as something more formal, like a “discussion room”.

Another concern is the viability of meaningful chat/discussion rooms in asynchronous courses. For many students, asynchronous courses enable them to complete coursework when they are able.  It may not be possible to for students to commit to a given time to engage with their colleagues.

Chat rooms are places where the “quiet” and unengaged student can show up and not participate.


It is a vehicle to allow the engaged student to pursue deeper knowledge and test out their thoughts in a relatively safe environment.

It can be a way to promote thoughtful conversation that ideally can approximate real time, f2f conversation.

  1. What is “deep learning” as discussed in the readings? Is “deep learning” something we should promote in online learning? Why and how?

As noted on my discussion board page ( deep learning fosters a learning beyond the minimum course requirements. In some ways, it seems like the product of an inquisitive mind and ability to conduct critical thinking.

Two examples of deep learning include:

  • The willingness to break down complex models into the component parts.
  • Engaging in thoughtful and thought-provoking conversations, postings, and other on-line communications.

Whether deep learning should be promoted in all classes is open for debate. If it is going to work two actors must be fully engaged: the instructor and the individual student.

My questioning, on the discussion board, if deep learning a goal for all courses appears to have provoked some reactions (ibid). I still maintain that for areas of central interest deep learning is the goal and incumbent upon the student it seek it and for the instructor to provoke it. However, there are at least two arenas where deep learning may not be the goal. For example,

  • When desire is overridden by capacity Where the student does not have the ability (e.g., innate) to acquire deep learning.
  • When deep learning in a particular area may not a short-term or strategic goal for the student. For example, the rewards (i.e., intrinsic or extrinsic) do not outweigh the desire.
  1. Identify and explain each of Kolb’s four-stage learning cycle.

Kolb’s four-learning cycle, as cited by Stansfield et al (2004), can be effectively described as experientially-based circular model beginning with “Experience” leading to “Observation and Reflecction” to “Formation of Abstract Concepts and Generalizations” to “Hypothesizes Tested by Active Experimentation, and ultimately leading back to the start “Experience”.

Kolb, using other cognitive theorists, created an assessment to test each of his model’s learning modes.

  1. Experience: The gaining of a novel experience as a result of new learning.
  1. Observation and Reflection: The realization of that something has changed. It is the assimilation and reconciliation process. Is this perhaps, akin to the concept of Cognitive Dissonance as theorized Leon Festinger (
  2. Formation of Abstract Concepts and Generalizations. To reconcile the ”dissonance” the learner becomes to create new cognitive, affective and skill models/schema.
  3. Hypothesis Testing by Active Experimentation. The learner actively test, in real time, the newly created models/schema.
  4. The learner experiences either a variant of the existing schema or engages in a new situation.

Stansfield,  Mark, McLellan, Evelyn and Connolly, Thomas   Evelyn McLellan, and Thomas Connolly, 2011. Enhancing Student Performance in Online. Learning and Traditional Face-to-Face Class Delivery Journal of Information Technology Education Volume 3, 2004

  1. Explain how the readings this week (and your own research) connects with the Blackboard discussion.

This week’s readings articulate the importance of: deep learning (in contrast to surface learning); social interaction, and the interrelationships between assessment, delivery, and assessment.

Where I think my two of Blackboard entries best add to the discussion:

The four questions posed to the class. While likely the outcome of may my own academic training, teaching graduate school and personal style, but I think my posing the four questions appear to have stimulated some reaction and interaction among the group. In fact at least two postings force me to question my assumptions.

The multidimensionality of social interaction and deep/surface learning. Over time, I am increasingly aware that bifurcation and black and white delineation is not viable in most situations. These conversations reinforced my experiences. [As suggested by Kolb’s model.] ;->

  1. Quote your best entry from this week’s Blackboard discussion. Explain why you chose it and what it demonstrates about your understanding, learning process etc.

I am including my entire entry about deep and shallow learning. The reason I chose it is that I believe that I effectively broke down some of the challenges, showed how the issue is not unidimensional  and offered potential solutions.

Shallow vs. Deep Learning. It has been my experience in teaching online classes that many students seek the most efficient path though the learning environment. This means that they are purposefully engaging in those aspects of the designed course that are connected to grades in the course and will decline to participate in things that are not graded. This became most clear to me early on in my online teaching when I set up “social areas” in my discussions so that students could hang out and get to know each other. Such practice was highly recommended in the literature, buy my experience was that students didn’t use it. When I asked why they said, “it isn’t graded”.

What do you think? What is the difference between shallow and deep learning and how can we achieve this in online classes? Don’t forget to provide citations to show that you have investigated these topics!

I have at least four questions that have relevance to a conversation about deep and shallow learning.

  • Is it the nature of online learning to teach to the course requirements?
  • How do we foster, especially in on-line courses, a desire to go beyond what is covered in the class?
  • Similarly, how do we identify high potential students who should be pushed to do more? Is this perhaps easier in f2f and blended classes?
  • While it may be the ideal, should deep learning be the real world goal for every on-line course?

Irrespective of the outcome of those conversations, getting to deep learning requires a sampling of behaviors that characterize surface and deep learning (Weimer, 2012)* **





Surface-cognitively unengaged                   Deep-cognitively engaged

I came to class                                                 I checked blackboard blog regularly

I entered info on my blog and blackboard           Posts were timely and grammatically correct

I responded to the posts                                   Responses were thoughtful/provoked                                                                       thought

I reviewed my class notes.                                 I shared my class notes/tutored with                                                                       others

I submitted the products.                                  I sought help instructor/peer                                                                                   assistance

I highlighted the text.                                      I contacted students beyond class                                                                              requirements

In essence, an inquisitive mind fosters deep learning, while shallow learning is epitomized by acceptance and no critical thinking.

Achieving deep learning in an on-line environment is challenging; however it may be achieved when correctly structured. In the business community, for example, tangible rewards are generally associated with the application of technical or content knowledge.  Some examples: actuarial students receive pay raises when they demonstrate the application of knowledge gained after a course; some professions (e.g., medicine, engineering) make it mandatory that employees demonstrate proficiency in their discipline as part of recertification and licensing; other companies (e.g., Pepsico) make completion of certifications a part of their career path and a prerequisite for promotion.

How to increase deep learning.

Chacon  (2005) asserts that it is carefully crafted organization of course modules according to a knowledge map, termed learning template, facilitates a deeper understanding of course content by students.” Do these finding differ from what might be found with successful taught f2f or blended learning?

If this assumption is correct, on-line learning should follow several of the deep learning principles cited by the Engineering Education: Journal of the Higher Education Academy Engineering Subject Centre.  While the list below is geared primarily to the engineering students and professionals, it seems incumbant upon the on-line instructor to foster this any learning environment. [N.B. My own adaptations are italicized and in parentheses.]

On-line education goals. Teach students to:

  • Look for meaning
  • Focus on concepts (i.e., not facts)
  • Interact actively (make use of media — high, medium and low tech that forces interaction)
  • Distinguish between arguement and evidence (question assumptions, as well as the validity and reliability of the data)  
  • Provide a real world context. (Also, Newberry, course handout,)(Also, peer           review)
  1. Identify the student you think was the most important participant in the Blackboard discussion. Explain why and provide at least one quote from that student’s contributions to the Blackboard discussion.

Two of Hy Su Kang’s two quotes fostered in me two very different responses.

“I had an opportunity to ask myself “Am I a deep learner or shallow learner”. Here my colleague demonstrated introspection a quality of deep learning that can also be imbedded in Kolb’s model.

“Also, I learned how deep and shallow learning are literally defined.” While I may disagree with latter parts of her statement, I do agree that most of the current readings provide literal, clearly partitioned distinctions between shallow and deep learning.

  1. Reflect on what you have learned this week. What have you learned that has the potential to inform or influence you or your practice of online learning going forward? Explain why.

My key learnings for the week are:

The distinction between deep and surface learning. Personally it reminds me that both are multidimensional and are situational (i.e., neither deep nor surface learning should be the goal in all situations).

Social interaction may actually allow the shy, back-of-the-room sitting student opportunities to engage in an a less visible environment. One of the responses to my four questions resulted in this response, forcing me to rethink my position.


Competency-Based Education (CBE) and Educational Partnerships (EP)


The focus of this compare and contrast will be limited to the corporate training (and business consulting) environment.


Despite their differences, CBE and EP—from a corporate perspective is identical:  a significant ROI (i.e., return-on-investment) for dollars spent.  In other words, employers want to know that their investment in employee training pays in ways, including but not limited to: greater skills, greater efficiency, greater customer satisfaction, lower costs, etc. Given that premise, there are some differences between the two approaches.


Educational Partnerships

According to Hill[1] educational partnerships require the educational facility to include the courses in their curriculum to ensure a student can:

  1. Attain some “industry certification”.
  2. Apply successfully completed coursework towards a degree.

Hill refers to Cisco’s Networking Academy as a technology company that has embraced this model. Cisco’s rationale for housing this partnership under their “Corporate Social Responsibility” umbrella—and not part of a line of business or as a central corporate business function—is unclear. While Cisco clearly benefits from the arrangement, its being marketed as “Social Responsibility” seems more like corporate patronage than human capital investment.


That noted, the concept of EP exploded since it first appeared in 2007 (Hill)[2]. For example, a quick Google search of “educational partnerships” reveals a litany of over 20 million colleges, universities and other organizations willing to provide these services or facilitate the process.


With Cisco’s success, many of nation’s most elite universities, like Stanford, have entered the educational partnership marketplace. For example, Stanford has partnered with Google[3]. According to its website, Stanford is also willing to expand its educational partnerships into research partnership, and vice versa[4].

For profit colleges and universities are also in the mix.  Probably the best known is the largest for-profit university, University of Phoenix, who touts its successes as corporate partners for both on-line and blended courses.[5]


While the relationship is called a “partnership”, programs and courses appear to assume more towards a traditional academic model than what might be considered a business bottom-line mentality,.


Competency-based Education.

According to Hill, CBE effectively begins at the endpoint or outcomes (e.g., skills, competencies).  Once articulated, instructional designers and content experts work backwards; they create a pathway that can include content, exercises, simulations, etc.


The learner who follows the defined path will acquire specific predetermined skills and/or knowledge.  CBE has been shown to be an especially effective to teach technical materials (e.g., engineering).


While no direct link was found, CBE seems to have its roots in the business practice of Management by Objectives (MBO). As defined by, MBO is, “A management system in which the objectives of the organization are agreed upon so that management and employees understand a common way forward.”[6] MBO dates back to the 1950’s[7].


In the Glossary of Educational Reform, CBE refers to “systems of instruction, assessment grading, and academic reporting that are based on students demonstrating that they have learned the knowledge and skills they are expected to learn as they progress through their education”.[8]The Glossary implies that that the desired outcome is the starting point.


In 2002, Vorhees posited that CBE models will force a rethinking the relationship between educators, schools and accreditations. Extending CBE to corporate environments requires a broader scope than accreditations. For example, on-line and blended MBA, engineering and other post-bachelor’s technical degrees can be tailored to employer specifications.


Currently, 2014, the Clayton Cristensen Institute’s blogs, articles and books champion CBE as (positively) disruptive force.[9][10]  Essentially, both Vorhees and the Institute suggest that CBE thinking will likely be infused in all other on-line, blended and platform education.



In sum, the premise for EP and CBE is the same: a significant ROI for dollars spent on educating employees. While the EP model is seen as a vehicle to increase employees’ skill sets and knowledge, it appears rooted in the traditional academic model. CBE seems to be rooted in the far older MBO approach to business. Like MBO outcomes are the focus. And, the process to get there is detailed. While the outcomes of EP and CBE might be identical, the probability of achieving them with CBE might be higher.


Session 1 Post

A Personal Introduction. My name is Victor Barocas. My background includes stints in the business world, teaching graduate school and corporate consulting/training.

Currently, my time is occupied by teaching business courses at a small college in the Palm Springs area.  Additionally, I write for a couple of publications and do a bit of consulting. For fun, I am a photographer

The State of E-learning. From the reading and talking with colleagues, the field is in significant flux. There are multiple models to ensure that the target audiences, at miimum, gain, retain and apply knowledge. Flack (2013) in her SRI report asserts that there is a paucity of notable  research finding dealing with E-learning in post-secondary schools. However the findings from SRI’s meta-analysis sponsored by the Department of Education suggests that on-line learning has some  potential, with the greatest hope with  blended/hybrid models that combined face time with on-line learning.

Lack, Kelly. “Current Status of Research on Online Learning in Postsecondary Education.” ITHIKA S+R, March, 2013. www.

While not necessary contradictory with the Hill’s (2012) state of the state analysis, it does elicit at least two separate questions:

  • As educational institutions continually roll out on-line courses, are the courses being built on a solid foundation? In other words, without solid data on which to build classes and programs, are postsecondary institutions building classes/programs that will be viable and not self-destruct over the mid to long term?
  •  Are universities and consortia pushing out product without the requisite buy in from past, potential future students. Or, will the drop-out rate continue to be high? More specifically, since completing on-line programs require tremendous  perserverence, are students committed enough to do the work ?

Hill, Phil. “Online Educational Delivery Methods: A Descriptive View.” Educause Review Online, November 2012.

My personal experiences with  Millenia students suggests that even with the best on-line and hybrid courses this generation’s need for immediate feedback and a short attention span is a clear challenge that must be addressed. This is a covariate that will be hard to assess quantitatively.

My Connections to E-learning.  As many of you will likely learn, my connections to E-learning are, at best, tenuous.  Right now, I find myself in “catch-up” mode: it is taking me time to navigate the blackboard’s various parts and options.

Completing the E-learning Certificate is part of my reinventing myself for yet another career. My goal is to parlay my successes business and being an educator into some consulting with a trade association or corporation.