Kanuka & Kelland (2008) referenced the mythologies of eLearning effectiveness, in "that it provides more interaction in terms of many-to-many versus one-to-many that can provide opportunities for learner engagement and knowledge sharing" (p. 54). This may not true, as one participant stated "while this is possible - it doesn't happen when, as is so often the case, students don't read other students' postings (p. 54). I wonder how much of the mythology around eLearning contributes to its success, particularly when there is money at stake and competition to attract students at various institutions. What is the currency attached to eLearning and its perceived effectiveness on student outcomes?
Our school is considering purchasing ipads. In our tech committee meetings, we have discussed the research on mobile devices and attended professional development workshops to learn about current trends and available applications. We are also very aware of the parental pressure associated with adopting these innovative devices and how some schools have asserted themselves as early adopters. On one hand, we want to make sound, informed decisions when it comes to technology purchases, but on the other, we have to be sensitive to the market and perceptions attached to adopting technologies early in the development cycle.
I wonder whether institutions considering investing in eLearning programming might experience a similar dilemma. In a climate plagued by funding issues in education, what are institutions reasonably able to invest in eLearning? From a business standpoint, how much should an institution invest of its finite resources in eLearning? How would decision makers know they have invested too little or too much? Finally, what information can decision makers rely on when "it is difficult to make sense of the research literature on e-learning and, in turn, to use it to make informed decisions" (p. 49).
