Strategic-Model-Of-Implementing-E-learning

Full text

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF SCIENTIFIC & TECHNOLOGY RESEARCH VOLUME 3, ISSUE 5, MAY 2014 ISSN 2277-8616
235
IJSTR©2014
www.ijstr.org
Strategic Model Of Implementing E-Learning
Mohamed Jama Madar, Dr. Oso Willis
Abstract: E-learning is the application of information technology in the teaching and learning process. This paper presents the Funnel model as a
solution for the problems of implementation of E-learning in tertiary education institutions. While existing models such as TAM, theory-based E-learning
and pedagogical model have been used over time, they generally been found to be inadequate because of their tendencies to treat materials
development, instructional design, technology, delivery and governance as separate and isolated entities. Yet it is matching components that bring
framework of E-learning strategic implementation. The Funnel model enhances all these into one and applies synchronously and asynchronously to E-
learning implementation where the difference only is modalities. Such a model for E-learning implementation has been lacking. The proposed Funnel
model avoids ad-ad-hoc approach which has been made other systems unused or inefficient, and compromised educational quality. Therefore, the
proposed Funnel model should help tertiary education institutions adopt and develop effective and efficient E-learning system which meets users’
requirements.
Index Terms: E-learning, Asynchronous, Synchronous, Instructional Strategy, TAM, Implementation and Pedagogy.
————————————————————
1 INTRODUCTION
E-learning is the application of information technology such as
Internet, mobile and other computer aided systems in the
teaching and learning process, either asynchronously or
synchronously. Asynchronous E-learning is used mainly for
content management system where users access information
at different times without real time collaborations (Nichols,
2005). Synchronous E-learning (or pedagogy) is designed for
online users who collaborate at the same time (Stafin, 2009).
In both case, content management system for E-learning acts
as archives for learning materials availed on the web. E-
learning pedagogy only delivers curriculum to learners.
Establishing E-learning demands different institutional
requirements, but in all cases, an institution that deserves to
use E-learning must ensure that the system is properly
established and maintained system (Azizah, 2007). Many
institutions tend to establish E-learning systems without careful
assessment of the factors that could affect the system’s
usability within the structure. E-learning system is best
implemented through stages of careful planning of the life
components that are needed to ensure and establish a
maintained system (Mark, 2005). Ad-hoc implementations of
E-learning systems usually do not meet users’ needs, and end
up making the system unusable or stand-alone. Most higher
education institutions have tended to ignore strategic
components when developing E-learning system. They either
outsource without proper customization or just develop and
implement without adequate consideration the major
components of strategic implementation of E-learning
(Anderson, 2005). The basic building blocks of E-learning are
(a) technological, (b) pedagogical (materials development and
instructional design), (c) and managerial. It is the close
coordination between these components that reflects the
relevance system implementation. An institution’s purpose of
utilizing E-learning system affects the modalities of
implementation (Anita, 2006).The type of E-learning adopted
also shapes the strategies to implement or establish it,
depending on an institution’s academic operations and
strategies (Roberts, 2012). E-learning has become the
cornerstone of the present day education. In the current era of
information and communication advancement never witnessed
before, the practice of face-to-face teaching delivery is fast
becoming obsolete. Learners in most parts of the world now
use technology to receive class notes and information, take
assessments, and communicate on demand. University
students’ needs have become more diverse and the need for
E-learning based courses have increased (Volery & Lord,
2000), and so are the necessities of properly working E-
learning units. Preconditions for acceptance and use of the E-
learning need to be uncovered in order to assist development
of the system. Effective implementation of E-learning initiatives
requires that a number of issues such as technological,
pedagogical and individual factors be simultaneously taken
into account. However, lack of theoretical or/and conceptual
frameworks for effective implementation of E-learning systems
has resulted in inconsistent results and left one basic question
unanswered- ―What are the factors to determine the effective
delivery of E-learning?
2 PROBLEM STATEMENT
Several higher education institutions tend to adopt nonspecific
E-learning systems which do not align with their objectives or
other necessary user requirements. While the need for E-
learning system is undisputable, and while many universities
have taken bold steps to satisfy this need, the implementation
of these systems have been haphazard and often lacked in
structure across several universities, and in some cases, is
different units within the same university. Currently, there is no
standard strategic model of implementing E-learning that
reflects on an institution’s general status and requirements.
The development of such model is long overdue.
3 OBJECTIVES
The objectives of this study were to:
1. Describe the major features of the existing models of
implementing E-learning in educational institutions.
2. Identify the major limitations and inadequacies of the
existing models for implementing E-learning in
educational institutions.
4 SIGNIFICANCE OF THE STUDY
A major contribution of this study is the development of a
comprehensive model for implementing E-learning. While the
value of E-learning in education need not be emphasized, and
while explosion of technology in all fields is all evident, a model
that can guide the implementation of E-learning as an
innovation in universities has been lacking. This has resulted in
a rather ad-hoc and uncoordinated implementation strategies
often with disappointing results. This study has sealed this
gap. A model for implementing E-learning is available and can
be applied uniformly across-all universities. Henceforth,
educators and institutions need not rely on costly trial and
errors, or traditions to implement E-learning, but do so based

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF SCIENTIFIC & TECHNOLOGY RESEARCH VOLUME 3, ISSUE 5, MAY 2014 ISSN 2277-8616
236
IJSTR©2014
www.ijstr.org
on a scientific model. This model has been used in African
Virtual Universities with complete success.
5 THEORY-BASED DESIGN FRAMEWORKS FOR
E-LEARNING
The theory based design was developed by Dabbagh in 2005
as a means of combining strategies, learning technologies and
pedagogy. According to Dabbagh (2005), an E-learning design
is a collaborative interaction between three main components.
First is instructional strategy. This concerns pedagogical
aspects of delivering a curriculum or content but which does
not focus on materials development in the E-learning. The
second aspect is learning technologies. This is about tools of
support for delivering content to E-learners using mainly
synchronous and asynchronous tools of communication. Third,
concerns the different pedagogical models through which a
curriculum is delivered. These elements are related as shown
in Figure 1.
Theory-Based Design Framework for E-Learning Adapted from
N. Dabbagh, (2005).
Figure 1 shows the relationship between the elements of
Pedagogical Model. In this model, the elements of instructional
design and pedagogy represent the pedagogical dimensions of
the model while technology assists both dimensions to work
together effectively and efficiently. The model is applicable to
both synchronous and asynchronous learning. However, the
theory-based model is useful only for delivering content but do
not have students’ and teachers’ support structures.
Additionally, the model focuses only on instructional strategy
and to some extent on pedagogical construct, which is
basically the same as instructional strategy. Moreover,
pedagogy and instructional strategy as used here merely
duplicates structures, as there is no real difference between
them. In fact, they are not complementary as technology
complements E-learning delivery. This makes the model weak
for implementing E-learning when used alone. A better model
should embrace the three major axes of implementing E-
learning. The proposed Funnel Model has pedagogical,
technological and governance structures to establish the
desired E-learning system.
6 E-LEARNING TECHNOLOGY ACCEPTANCE
MODEL
The other popular available model in implementing E-learning
technology is the Acceptance Model developed by Davies in
1989, which is based on user requirements. The model is
based on the premise that both students’ perception of E-
learning use and its perceived usefulness affect users’
intention. According to this hypothesis, one fundamental
determinant of successful implementation of E-learning is user
acceptance. The TAM model consists of three variables; (a)
perceived usefulness, (b) perceived ease of use, and (c)
intension to use. This model focuses on the use of E-learning
technology for content management but does not consider
either the pedagogical aspects of E-learning or planned
implementation of E-learning system. The main features of the
TAM Model are shown in Figure 2.
Figure 2: Technology Acceptance Model Adapted from A.A,
Davies, (1989)
The TAM Model depicted in Figure 2 consists of three
correlated components. First is user interface and usability of
technology; the second is the usefulness of E-learning system,
and the third component is users’ intention. According to the
construct of the TAM Model, perceived ease of use influences
perceived usefulness of E-learning and these together
influence students’ intention to use of the E-learning system.
While TAM Model makes great effort to cover for the weakness
of theory-Based Model, it does not consider other components
of E-learning system such as pedagogy, governance and
curriculum design, which are the foundation of a fully-fledged
E-learning system. Additionally, this TAM Model is incomplete
due to its limitation to user interface or technology usability
only. Technology is not everything but only a complementary
factor in establishing E-learning system, be that asynchronous
and synchronous.
7 PEDAGOGICAL MODELS
The other model of E-learning developed by Dabbagh (2005)
is the Pedagogical Models, which relates content management
and delivery. This model considers mainly on two actors; the
student and the teacher services. This system depends upon
purchasing a package and customizing it according to
academic requirements of the user entity. The model is based
on the activity diagrams of the actors in order to allow each
one of them to use the system based on predefined academic
activity (Davies, 1989). But outsourced E-learning systems are
almost naturally incompatible with requirements of the
adopting institution since universities have their own standards
and procedures (Hanke & Owoc, 2006). This makes the
pedagogical model in adequate for use in all universities. A
better model should provide the fundamental elements needed
to construct a complete and compatible E-learning system in
educational institutions.

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF SCIENTIFIC & TECHNOLOGY RESEARCH VOLUME 3, ISSUE 5, MAY 2014 ISSN 2277-8616
237
IJSTR©2014
www.ijstr.org
8 PROPOSED MODEL FOR IMPLEMENTING E-
LEARNING
Successful implementation of E-learning can only be achieved
by joining three interrelated components as proposed in the
final model. Funnel-shaped E-learning implementation model,
displays the interaction between these three components. The
Funnel Model is designed to solve the mismatches between
curriculum design of E-learning and its delivery. The other
preceding models have either focused only usability, or on
pedagogy or on technology. In fact, the TAM and Theory-
Based Models do not have governance and finance, and
materials development and instructional design, which are key
in any educational endeavor. Funnel model takes curriculum or
materials development together with beneficiaries’ analysis
when implementing E-learning. This is followed by instructional
design, which is a pedagogical model. The Funnel Model
requires that teaching and learning materials be put in place
and delivery mode designed. Secondly, technological design
can be either synchronous or asynchronous since technology
is only a tool to convey content to learners. The Funnel Model
pays attention to usability and availability of technology to
ensure that technology matches instructional design of the
teaching materials. The Funnel Model also incorporates
administration, which encompasses governance and finance,
being aware that sustainability of any system depends on its
management. This component is a central axis of this model
because of high cost of technology investment and other
resources required to develop a fully-fledged E-learning
system. The elements of the Funnel Model are depicted in
Figure 3.
The Funnel Model
Figure 3 displays the relationships between the three
components of the Funnel Model, and how each component
adds value and service to the system. The interaction and
effective coordination of the component leverages well-
established E-learning in universities. Materials development
and instructional stream deals with requirement determination
of E-learning implementation, focusing mainly on E-learning
curriculum development, user profile analysis (learning styles)
and pedagogical design. The second stream is technology and
delivery and assists to convey curriculum to distance learners.
Technology and delivery is responsible for all technical
perspectives of system technology, improvements and service
delivery facilitations. This component also follows the
instructional strategies set to implement the curriculum and
involves E-learning Technology Development. The third stream
is governance and finance, which is a bridge between
technology and materials development and relates to overall
administration of the system in terms of human resources,
procurement, and avails services needed by the other two
parts. The attributes of Funnel Model indicates its operations. It
emphasizes that E-learning is more than technology, and two
components are core: materials development and instructional
design. Much depends on governance and finance for the
issues of procurement and the general administration of the E-
learning project. Although the aim for developing the E-
learning is to either manage teaching content and to deliver it,
again without the technical support of technology the content
cannot be delivered and managed. This model differs from the
other existing E-learning models because it provides for the
integration of the three elements that are core to a functional
E-learning system.
9 CONCLUSIONS
The varieties of available models for implementing E-learning
have consistently ignored the basic elements of implementing
standardized E-learning system. This has led to uncoordinated
and rather ineffective implementation strategies, and resulted
into waste of valuable resources and poor learning. The
outcome of any strategy is dependent on its implementation.
This model integrates the three elements (pedagogy,
technology and governance) of strategy implementation and
ensures that each component contributes maximally to the
realization of E-learning objectives. The model is flexible,
adaptable, and applicable to all institutions and to all concepts
because it is requirement driven. The model consists of three
coordinated components deemed necessary for establishing
demand based E-learning system. These components are
materials development and instructional design which is the
first strategy to be performed followed by role of governance
and finance as well as functions and responsibilities of
technology and delivery. These elements are complementary
since the model is designed in hierarchical order in the sense
that the completion of stage is followed by the next and they
are again interrelated.
REFERENCE
[1]. Luca, j. (2009). an e-learning solution to creating work-
related skills and competencies for the knowledge-
based economy. Catherine McLaughlin, 14-1.
[2]. Committee (20100. e-learning strategy implementation
plan. information services e-learning committee, 22, 09,
10, 1-16.
[3]. Fayed G.S.D., H., Jihad., M., Alja’am, Samir, A.S., &
Hosam, E. (2006). e-learning model based on semantic
web technology. international journal of computing &
information sciences, 4(2), 63 - 71.
[4]. George, R. 2011. Fostering generic skills through
participatory learning strategies. International Journal of
Fundamental Psychology and Social Sciences, 1(1), 14-
16
[5]. Pauline Roberts, D. M. (2012). Implementation of the E-
learning lifecycle model to develop reflection in pre-
service teachers. Ascilite 1-5.
[6]. Rhona, S.G.A.R.F. (2006). Implementing a university e-
learning strategy: levers for change within academic

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF SCIENTIFIC & TECHNOLOGY RESEARCH VOLUME 3, ISSUE 5, MAY 2014 ISSN 2277-8616
238
IJSTR©2014
www.ijstr.org
schools. Research in learning technology, 14(2), 135–
151W.-K. Chen, Linear Networks and Systems.
Belmont, Calif.: Wadsworth, pp. 123-135, 1993. (Book
style)
[7]. Nada, D. (2005). pedagogical models for e-learning: a
theory-based design framework. international journal of
technology in teaching and learning, 6(3), 25-44.
[8]. Mark, B. A. (2005). Strategic e-learning implementation.
Educational Technology and Society, 8 (4), 1-8.
[9]. Ferdos2, M. F. C. F. (2004). The mutual impact of
educational and information technologies: building
pedagogy of e-learning. Journal of Information
Technology Impact, 4(1), 15-26.
[10]. Nichols, M., & Anderson, B. (2005). Strategic e-learning
implementation. Educational Technology and Society, 8
(4), 1-8.
[11]. Clyde w. holsapple† & Anita Lee-post, (2006). Defining,
assessing, and promoting e-learning success: an
information systems perspective. Decision Sciences
Journal of Innovative Education, 5(2), 3-9
[12]. Hanke k., Owoc M., (2006). Methodology of developing
online lectures, Proceedings of E-education Conference.
[13]. Singh, H. (2000). Learning content management
systems: New Technologies for New Learning
Approaches.
[14]. Firdiyiyek, Y. (1999, January). Web-based courseware
tools: where is the pedagogy? (Online)
EducationaloTechnology,l39(1),,29–34.-Available..at:
http://www.elearningmag.com/issues/
[15]. J.S. Bridle, ―Probabilistic Interpretation of Feedforward
Classification Network Outputs, with Relationships to
Statistical Pattern Recognition,‖ Neurocomputing—
Algorithms, Architectures and Applications, F. Fogelman-
Soulie and J. Herault, eds., NATO ASI Series F68,
Berlin: Springer-Verlag, pp. 227-236, 1989. (Book style
with paper title and editor)