IN AN E-LEARNING ENVIRONMENT

THAT EMPHASIZES LEARNER-

INTERACTIVITY, REMOTE LEARNERS

CLASSROOM STUDENTS.

By Dongsong Zhang.J. Leon Zhao, Lina Zhou, andJay F. Nunamaker, Jr.

In recent years, theknowledge-based economy hasexhibited a pervasive andever-increasing demand forinnovative ways of deliveringeducation, which has led todramatic changes in learningtechnology and organizations.As the new economy requiresmore and more people to learnnew knowledge and skills in atimely and effective manner,the advancement of computerand networking technologiesare providing a diverse meansto support learning in a morepersonalized, flexible, portable,and on-demand manner.These radical changes in learn-ing needs and technology arefueling a transition in modernlearning in the era ofthe Inter-net, commonly referred to ase-learning [10]. In the midstof this transition, corporations,government organizations, andeducational institutions mustunderstand the e-learningphenomenon and make strate-gic decisions on how to adopte-learning techniques in theirunique environments. Here, we

COMMUNICATIONSOFTHEACM May 2004/Vol. 47, No 5 75

explore the recent advances in e-learning technologyand practice, and present experimental results thatcompare the effectiveness of e-learning and conven-tional classroom learning. Our investigation showsthat the Internet and multimedia technologies arereshaping the way knowledge is delivered, and thate-iearning is becoming a real alternative to tradi-tional classroom learning.

In the past few years, e-Iearning has emerged as apromising solution to lifelong learning and on-the-job work force training. E-learning can be defined astechnology-based learning in which learning materi-als are delivered electronically to remote learners via acomputer network. Effective and efficient trainingmethods are crucial tocompanies to ensure thatemployees and channelpartners are equippedwith the latest informa-tion and advanced skills.Rushing to fill this need,thousands of onlinecourses, including degreeand certificate programs,are now offered by uni-versities worldwide. In2001, MIT announced

its commitment to make Table l. Traditional classroom• I r - 11 learning vs. e-learning.

materials rrom virtually 'all of its courses freely available on the Web for non-commercial use. In 2002, enrollment in the baccalau-reate and graduate-degree programs at the Universityof Phoenix Online neared the 50,000 mark, a 70%increase from the previous year [10]. The Internet isbecoming the dominant means of delivering informa-tion and knowledge because of low cost and real-timedistribution. In comparison with traditional face-to-face classroom learning that centers on instructorswho have control over class content and learningprocess, e-learning offers a learner-centered, self-paced learning environment [1, 3, 8, 9j. Table 1 illus-trates the pros and cons of e-Iearning in comparisonwith traditional classroom learning.

As pointed out by previous studies, inadequatelyequipped e-learning systems can result in frustration,confusion, and reduced learner interest [2, 7]. For

Advantages

Disadvantages

Traditional ClassroomLearning

• Immediate feedback• Being familiar co both

instructors and students• Motivating students• Cultivation of a

social community

' Instructor-centered•Time and location constraints* More expensive to deliver

E-L earning i

* Learner-centered and self-paced•Time and location flexibility• Cost-effective for learners• Potentially available to global

audience* Unlimited access to knowledge• Archival capability for knowledge

reuse and sharing

• Lack of immediate feedback inasynchronoui e-learn ing

• Increased preparation time forthe instructor

* Not comfortable to some people• Potentially more fruscracion.

anxiety, and confusion

example, some c-learning systems only present text-based learning materials, which may lead to boredomand disengagement in students and prevent themfrom gaining a good understanding of a topic. Withthe advances of multimedia technology, more multi-media-based e-learning systems are becoming avail-able. These systems integrate and present learningmaterials in diverse media such as text, image, sound,and video. However, some of the multimedia-basedsystems suffer from insufficient learner-content inter-activity and flexibility because of their passive andunstructured way of presenting instructional content.Under such a system, learners have relatively littlecontrol over the knowledge structure and the learning

process to meet individualneeds. For example, itmay be ineffective andtime-consuming to locatea particular segment or toskip a portion of a three-hour instructional videodelivered via the Internet,making interactive learn-ing difficult. Sometimes astudent may want to askquestions about theinstruction materials and

get answers immediately instead of sequentially goingthrough an instructional video to find an answer. Butfew multimedia-based e-learning systems provide thiscapability.

The latest IT presents opportunities for both tech-nological breakthroughs and theoretical advances ine-learning. Technically, we need to engineer efficientmethods to synthesize multimedia content. Theoreti-cally, we must understand the impact of different fac-tors on e-learning effectiveness.

The Virtual MentorIn Older to address some of existing problems anddevelop interactive and flexible e-Iearning systems,we have proposed a concept called Virtual Mentor(VM), a multimedia-based e-learning environmentthat enables well-structured, synchronized, andinteractive multimedia instructions. The concept ofVM consists of the following principles:

The latest IT presents opportunities for both technological breakthroughs andtheoretical advances in e-iearning. Technicaiiy, we need to engineer efficient

methods to synthesize multimedia content. Theoretically, we must understandthe impact of different factors on e-learning effectiveness.

76 May 2004/Vol. 47, No. S COMMUNICATIONS OF THE ACM

Synchronized

multimedia content in

the Interactive

E-Classroom.

• Multimedia-integration. VMcaptures experts'knowledge/wisdom on videosin the form of interviews orlectures, and presents themwith other associated materialsin various media formats suchas PowerPoint slides, narra-tives, and images.

• Just'in-time knowledge acquisi-tion. VM enables learners toaccess knowledge at any timevia the Internet.

• Intel-activity. Learning is anactive knowledge acquisitionprocess via continuous interac-tion berween VM and learn-ers. Learners are also able todirect questions to VM, andreceive real-time answers.

' Self-directivity. VM is alearner-centered process inwhich a learner chooses personal learning strate-gies, taking the initiative and responsibility todetermine his or her learning needs,

• Flexibility. VM gives learners flexible control overthe learning process, style, and content to meettheir individual needs.

• Intelligence. VM monitors each individual's learn-ing progress and provides personalized tutoring.

The VM concept is influenced by constructivistlearning theory, which describes how learning takesplace through proactive interactions and reinforce-ments [11]. According to this theory, learnersactively construct their own knowledge based onprior knowledge and experience brought to bear onlearning tasks. Learning is an active process con-ducted in a self-directed fashion. E-learning providesmany opportunities for constructivist learning bysupporting resource-rich, student-centered, andinteractive learning.

We have developed a prototypical VM systemcalled Learning By Asking (LBA), which presents syn-chronized multimedia materials on the Internet in aninteractive and cohesive manner. Materials includeinstructional videos, presentation slides, and lecturenotes. These instructional videos and the associatedmaterials are collected during lectures or interviews.Since each video is likely to contain many subtopics,videos are logically segmented into smaller individualclips based on the content so that each video clipfocuses on a specific subtopic. Then, these video clips

- Hurt worts, ih( beiHr,- Sran wiih snHdl nwds, if you don't

Imd whal pM a<( looLin; lor, nan

are compressed and stored on a video streamingserver. An integrated knowledge repository is createdon a Web server, containing metadata of videos andother multimedia instructions.

LBA consists of two major subsystems: Asking-A-Question and Interactive E-CIassroom. The Asking-A-Question subsystem allows learners to type inquestions in either keywords or conversational Eng-lish. The questions are then sent to the Web server, onwhich information processing and content retrievaltake place. The learning content retrieved with respectto those questions is displayed immediately to learn-ers. In this way, learning is conducted through a real-time question-answering interaction between learnersand LBA. We have also embedded an intelligentlearning assistant module into LBA to automaticallygenerate personalized learning guidance in the torm offollow-up suggestions after each question. These sug-gestions are dynamically generated based on the learn-ing history ot individual learners.

In a traditional classroom lecture, students cansimultaneously observe and listen to an instructor,and watch PowerPoint slides or transparencies. Anonline classroom should have a similar level of syn-chronization of various online contents [6]. There-fore, LBA has an Interactive E-Classroom, whichsimulates a traditional classroom environment. Itenables learners to watch online lectures presented viasynchronized video and audio of the instructor, Pow-erPoint slides, and lectitre notes on a single Web inter-face (see the figure here). While an instructional videois playing, the Interactive E-Classroom automaticallyshows the corresponding slides and lecture notesabout the topic the instrtictor is introducing in thevideo.

COMMUNICATIONS OF THE ACM Kay 2004/Vol. 47, No 77

The Interactive E-Classroom provides rich learner- display in the figure). As illustrated in Table 2, thecontent interaction. A learner can either allow the lee- learning contents and group size of two experimentsture to flow from the beginning to the end, slide by differed. The same instructors who taught the class-slide, or. by pressing control buttons located at thetop of that interface, the learner can activate variousoperations to control the lecture content and thelearning process. For example, the learner can clickthe Next button to skip the current videoclip/slide/note if it isalready understood, orpress the Prev button toreview the previous dis-play. When the learnermoves the mouse over theContent button, a pull-down menu shows a con-tent index of the currentlecture, allowing the

Study 1

Study 2

Lecture Content

NormaliMtion(Database)

Internet SearchEngines

Number of students inthe classroom group

17

34

Number of studentsin e-l«amjng group

17

35

room group also prepared online course materials forthe e-tearning groups to ensure the lecture contentwas consistent across all experimental groups.

During the study, every group had the sameamount of time tor lectures and went through the

same experimental proce-t-kire. The learning effec-liveness was assessed byobjective measures of stu-dent learning (test grades)and subjective measures(perceived satisfaction).

Table a. Learning contents and

group size of two studies.We gave each student a pre-lecture test and a post-lec-ture test (closed-book, closed-notes) on the contentcovered by the lectures and used the difference

learner to jump to a particular clip/siide/note direcdy berween the two scores as the individual learning per-by clicking any subtopic in the index. These control formance. Learner satisfaction was evaluated after thebuttons are designed to provide sufficient interactive experiments via a questionnaire, which employed a 7-ity between learners and the lecture. point Likert scale ranging from extremely dissatisfied

(1) to extremely satisfied (7).A text-based online dis-cussion forum is inte-grated into LBA to enablelearners to exchange ideasor post comments orquestions. The messagesare grouped by topic andare displayed in an order

Classroom group

E-Leaming group

Study 1: Average /Total Score

9.24/ 15

10.86/ IS

Study 2: Average /Total Score

23.67 / 50

34.14/50

Table 3. Comparison of average

scores between classroom and

e-learning groups [11].

Although we used different learn-ing contents and students in the twoexperiments, the results were consis-tent: the test grades of students whothrough the Interactive E-Classroomtook lectures

with interactive control and content synchronization(as illustrated in the figure) were significantly higher

based on the time they are created, starting from the than those of students in traditional classroom groupsmost recent. (see Table 3). The difference in satisfaction levels of

To assess the effectiveness of interactive learning in students in the classroom and e-learning groups wasa virtual mentor environment, we conducted two not significant,experiments using the Interactive E-Classroom of the In the post-study questionnaires, most students inLBA system. Subjects were undergraduate students at e-learning groups reported they liked the multimediathe University of Arizona (55.4% were male, either presentation in the E-CIassroom and were satisfiedfreshmen or sophomores) from more than 10 majors, with the self-controlled learning process. They alsoin both studies, students were randomly assigned into thought thar sufficient interactivity and flexibility wasthe experimental groups. Students in traditional class- critical to an e-learning environment.room groups took the regular lecture in a classroomand were allowed to ask the instructor questions,while students in e-learning groups were asked to usethe Interactive E-CIassroom in a research lab, andattended the lecture via the Internet (see the screen

A Promising AlternativeAs shown in liable 3, e-learning groups using theInteractive E-Classroom of LBA significantly out-performed traditional classroom groups as measured

E-leaming requires more maturity and seK-^iscipline from studentsthan traditional classroom education, which may explain the higher dropout rates

in e-leaming programs compared to conventional programs.

78 May 2004/Vol 47. No. 5 COMMUNICATIONSOFTHEACM

by the test scores. There is one plausible explanationfor this interesting phenomenon. In a traditionalclassroom, learning is highly instructor-centered andsequential. Although many instructors encouragestudents to ask questions during lectures, tor variousreasons, many students do not question or ask forrepetition in the class even when they have difficultycomprehending the lectures, and they do not havean opportunity to re-experience the lecture contentselectively. In contrast, a VM environment like LBAemphasizes learner-centered activity and interactiv-ity. When a student does not understand a specificconcept, he or she can select a particular piece ofcontent to review until it is fully understood.

Today, e-learning is still in an early stage, withmany uncertain issues to be clarified and investigated.There are many factors potentially influencinge-learning effectiveness, such as media characteristics,learning context, technology, and learner characteris-tics. While our experiments have demonstrated thate-learning can be at least as effective as conventionalclassroom learning under certain situations, we arenot in a position to claim that e-learning can replacetraditional classroom learning. Learning is mostly asocio-cognitive activity. Not every student will finde-learning suitable for his or her learning style. Somestudents feel bored or intimidated before a computer.A number of students in our studies reported thatalthough the system was interesting and effective, theywould still prefer to go to traditional classrooms ifthey had a choice, since e-learning environments can-not create the real life on a campus. E-learningrequires more maturity and self-discipline from stu-dents than traditional classroom education, whichmay explain the higher dropout rates in e-learningprograms compared to conventional programs [4, 5].There are also logistical concerns about e-learning.For instance, teaching on the Internet requires muchmore preparation time than in-ciassroom teaching.Furthermore, certain types of learning materials maybe too difficult or too costly to be taught online.

Other important issues in e-learning must also betaken into consideration. Issues of trust, authoriza-tion, confidentiality, and individual responsibilitymust be resolved. Owners of intellectual propertyshould be properly compensated. Security on theInternet is a growing challenge, primarily due to theopen access by the public to this universal network. Inaddition, since multimedia materials are heavily usedin e-learning systems, a high-bandwidfh network is abasic requirement for efficient content access.

Nevertheless, we believe that e-learning is a promis-ing alternative to traditional classroom learning,which is especially beneficial to remote and lifelong

learning and training. In many cases, e-learning cansignificantly complement classroom learning. E-learn-ing will keep growing as an indispensable part of aca-demic and professional education. We shouldcontinue ro explore how to create more appealing andeffective online learning environments. One way todo this is to integrate appropriate pedagogical meth-ods, to enhance system interactivity and personaliza-tion, and to better eng^e learners. B

REFERENCES1. Fallah. M.H.. How, W.J., and Ubcll, R. Blind scores in a graduate test:

Conventional compared with Web-based outcomes. ALN Magazine 4.1 (2000).

2. Hara, N. and Kling, R. Students' distress with a Web-based distanceeducation course: an ethnographic study ot" participants' oiperiences.Inforrnation. Co7n muni cat ion inid Society 3. 4 (2000), 557-^79.

3. Hilrz, S.R. and Turoff, M. What tnakes ieaniing networks effective?Commun. ACM 45. 4 (Sept. 2002). 56-59.

4. Hiitz, S.R. and Wellnian, B. Asynchronous learning networks as a vir-tual classroom. Commun. ACM 40. 9 (1997). 44-49.

5. Kumar, A., Kumar, P., and Basu, S.C, Student perceptions of virtualeducation: An exploratory study. Iti Proceedings of 2001 InformationResources Maiwgeinenc Association International Conference (Toronto,Ontario, Canada. 2001). Idea Group Publishing, 400-403.

6. Latchman, H.A.. Sal/mann, C . Cillet, D., and Bouzekri, H. Informa-tion technology enhanced learning in distance and conventional educa-tion. IEEE Transactions tin Education 42, 4 (1999), 247-254.

7. Maki, R.H., Maki, W.S., Pattt-rson, M., and Whittaker, P.D. Evalua-tion ot a Wcb-bascd mtroducrory psychology uourse: learning and sat-isfaction in online versus lecture courses. Behavior Research Methods,liismiments. and Computers 32. 2 (2000), 230-239.

8. Morales, C, Cory, C , and Bozell, D. A comparative efficiency studyberween a live lecture and a Web-based live-switched multi-camerastreaming video distance learning instructional unit. In Proceedings of2001 Inforrnation Resources Management Association lutcrnanoiial Con-ference (Tafoma. Ontario, Canada, 2001), 63-66,

9. Piccoli, G., Ahmad, R., and ives, B. Web-based virtual learning envi-ronments: A research ttamewotk and a preliminary assessment ot ettec-tiveness in basic 1*1* skills tiaiiiing. MIS Quarterly 25, 4 (2001),401-426.

10. Shea, R.H. F.-learning today—As an industry shakes out, the survivorsotfet no-frills education fot grown-ups. U.S. News A" World Report.October 28. 2002.

n . Zhang, D. Virtual Mentor and Media Structutaliiation Theory, Ph.D.Dissertation, The University of Arizona, Tucson, Arizona (2002).

DONGSONG Z H A N G (zhangd@iiinbc.edii) is an assistant professorin the Department of Information Systems, University of Miuyland,Bairitnore County.J. L E O N Z H A O (lzhao@bpa.arizona.edu) is an associate professor in

the Deparniieiu of Management Information Systems, Tbe Universityot Arizona. Tucson.LiNA Z H O U (zhoul@umbc.edu) is an assistant professor in theDepartment ot Intormation Systems, University of Maryland,Balrimore Cotinty.J A Y F . NUNAMAKiR J R . (jnunamaker&\mi.arizona.edu) isRegents' & Soldwedel I'rotessor in the Department of ManagenictitInformation Systems, The Utiiversity of Arizona, Tucson.

Permission m makt- digital or hard copies oi all or part of this work tor personal orclassrofim use is granted wjthoal lee priivitied that copies are noi made or distributedlor profit or commercial advantage and that lopies btar this notice and the full citationon the first page. To copy otherwise, to repuhlish, to post on servers or to redistributeto lists, requires prior specific permission aad/or a ice.

© 2004 ACM 0001-0782/04/0501) $5.00

COMMUNICATIONS OF THE ACM Ma)' 2004/Vol 47, No 79