Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

What Do We Mean by Cyberlearning: Characterizing a Socially Constructed Definition with Experts and Practitioners

  • Published:
Journal of Science Education and Technology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The term “cyberlearning” reflects a growing national interest in managing the interactions of technology and education, especially with respect to the use of networking and information technologies. However, there is little agreement about what the term means. Such disagreements reflect underlying differences in beliefs about the purposes of education. These disagreements are problematic for anyone interested in evaluating cyberlearning practices. This study used surveys and interviews to investigate how practitioners and experts in the field of cyberlearning define it, how they implement it and what they believe its purpose to be. Little agreement was found among participants in terms of their definitions of cyberlearning, which was supported by the wide variety of practices labeled “cyberlearning.” Although most participants emphasized the purpose of cyberlearning as a form of content delivery, an often-passionate minority argued for the potential of cyberlearning to encourage a shift away from content-delivery paradigms. The participants’ spoke from a variety of perspectives about cyberlearning including as educators, designers, activists, and policymakers, which led them to construct diverse narratives about the purposes and problems facing education and education policy. While the differences in embodied in these narratives remain an important consideration, some emerging points of convergence are identified.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Atkins DE, Doroegemeier KK, Feldman SI, Garcia-Molina H, Klein ML, Messerschmitt DG et al (2003) Revolutionizing science and engineering through cyberinfrastructure: report of the National Science Foundation Blue-Ribbon advisory panel on cyberinfrastructure

  • Braun V, Clarke V (2006) Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qual Res Psychol 3:77–101

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Committee on Improving Learning with Information Technology (2003) Planning for two transformations in education and learning technology: report of a workshop. National Research Council

  • NSF Task Force on Cyberlearning (2008) Networked world: the cyberlearning opportunity and challenge. National Science Foundation

  • Dillman DA (2007) Mail and Internet surveys: the tailored design method, 2nd edn. Wiley, Hoboken

    Google Scholar 

  • Emerson RM, Fretz RI, Shaw LL (1995) Writing ethnographic fieldnotes. Univeristy of Chicago Press, Chicago

    Google Scholar 

  • Feuer MJ (2006) Response to Bettie St. Pierre’s “scientifically based research in education: epistemology and ethics”. Adult Educ Q 56(4):267–272

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fischer F (1995) Evaluating public policy. Nelson-Hall, Chicago

    Google Scholar 

  • Fontana A, Frey JH (2003) The interview: from structured questions to negotiated text. In: Denzin NK, Lincoln YS (eds) Collecting and interpreting qualitative materials, 2nd edn. Sage, Thousand Oaks, pp 61–106

    Google Scholar 

  • Ginsburg HP (1997) Entering the child’s mind: the clinical interview in psychological research and practice. Cambridge University Press, New York

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Heclo H (1978) Issue networks and the executive establishment. In: King A (ed) The new American political system. American Enterprise Institute, Washington, pp 97–124

    Google Scholar 

  • Hogan K (2000) Exploring a process view of students’ knowledge about the nature of science. Sci Educ 84(1):51–70

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • John P (2003) Is there life after policy streams, advocacy coalitions, and punctuations: using evolutionary theory to explain policy change? Policy Stud J 31(4):481–498

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kingdon JW (2003) Agendas, alternatives and public policies, 2nd edn. Longman, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Maykut P, Morehouse R (1994) Beginning qualitative research: a philosophical and practical guide. Falmer Press, Washington

    Google Scholar 

  • Miles MB, Huberman AM (1994) Qualitative data analysis, 2nd edn. Sage, Thousand Oaks

    Google Scholar 

  • Office of Educational Technology (2010) Transforming American education: Learning powered by technology. Draft National Educational Technology Plan. U.S. Department of Education

  • Patton MQ (2002) Qualitative research and evaluation methods, 3rd edn. Sage, Thousand Oaks

    Google Scholar 

  • Rittel H, Webber M (1973) Dilemmas in a general theory of planning. Policy Sci 4:155–169

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sandoval WA (2005) Understanding students’ practical epistemologies and their influence on learning through inquiry. Sci Educ 89:634–656

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schaefer DR, Dillman DA (1998) Development of a standard e-mail methodology: results of an experiment. Public Opin Q 62(3):378–397

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smith KB, Larimer CW (2009) The public policy theory primer. Westview, Philadelphia

    Google Scholar 

  • St. Pierre EA (2006) Scientifically based research in education: epistemology and ethics. Adult Educ Q 56(4):239–266

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Steering Committee on Improving Learning with Information Technology (2002) Improving learning with information technology: report of a workshop. National Research Council

  • Stone DA (2002) Policy paradox: the art of political decision making (revised edn). W.W. Norton & Company, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Wolcott HF (1994) Transforming qualitative data: description, analysis and interpretation. Sage, Thousand Oaks

    Google Scholar 

  • Zucker AA (2008) Transforming schools with technology: how smart use of digital tools helps achieve six key education goals. Harvard Education Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

This report was prepared during an internship funded by Washington State University’s “Nitrogen Systems: Policy-oriented Integrated Research and Education” (NSPIRE) program (NSF grant number DGE—0903714) for Russell Pimmel, a Program Director in the National Science Foundation’s (NSF) Division of Undergraduate Education.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Devlin B. Montfort.

Appendix

Appendix

Survey Question 1

Do you use or prefer terms other than “cyberlearning” to refer to learning that is affected by computers, networked computers, the Internet, or web-based platforms or applications?

    Checkboxes—Yes or No

If yes, what terms do you prefer?

    Short-answer response field

Survey Question 2

Please mark the forms of cyberlearning you have utilized as an instructor or designed for use by other instructors

    Checkboxes—Online learning modules; Virtual laboratories; Remote access laboratories; Computerized scientific modeling; Access to online databases or archived scientific data; Personal response systems; Distance learning; Supplemental reference materials (e.g. online textbooks)

Other—Please specify

    Short-answer response field

Survey Question 3

What are the benefits of cyberlearning?

    Short-answer response field

Survey Question 4

Given the following potential components of cyberlearning, please choose which is the most important in determining the effectiveness in achieving your goals for cyberlearning? Note that you will have a chance to elaborate on what these terms mean to you in the following questions

    Checkboxes—Connecting educators; Flexibility in assessment; High quantity, quality, and diversity of data available to learners; Personalization of how, when, and where learning occurs; Inclusion and motivation of diverse students; Other (please explain below)

Other

    Short-answer response field

Survey Question 5

Please rank the following potential components of cyberlearning in terms of their importance in achieving your goals for cyberlearning

    Ranking checkboxes—Connecting educators; Flexibility in assessment; High quantity, quality, and diversity of data available to learners; Personalization of how, when, and where learning occurs; Inclusion and motivation of diverse students

Any additional comments on your ranking? (e.g. ties or large differences between sequentially ranked items)

    Short-answer response field

Survey Question 5Alternate (used if participants checked “other” in response to Question 4)

Please rank the following potential components of cyberlearning in terms of their importance in achieving your goals for cyberlearning

    Ranking checkboxes—Connecting educators; Flexibility in assessment; High quantity, quality, and diversity of data available to learners; Personalization of how, when, and where learning occurs; Inclusion and motivation of diverse students; Other (as explained above)

Any additional comments on your ranking? (e.g. ties or large differences between sequentially ranked items)

    Short-answer response field

Please describe an experience or example of when the component you listed in the “Other” category was particularly important or successful

The following 5 questions ask for more information about the options you were asked to rank in Question 5. Each question refers to one of the components of cyberlearning listed in that question

Survey Question 6

“Connecting Educators”

Please rank the following potential components in terms of their importance to you or your project

    Ranking checkboxes—Sharing lesson plans and/or curricular materials; Instructor-to-instructor interaction and/or counseling; Instructor-to-student interaction or lesson delivery; Building educator communities; Instructor-to-instructor sharing about students

Any additional comments on your ranking? (e.g. ties or large differences between sequentially ranked items)

    Short-answer response field

Survey Question 7

“Flexibility in Assessment”

Please rank the following potential components in terms of their importance to you or your project.

    Ranking checkboxes—Fast or real-time assessment feedback; Archiving for program evaluation (e.g. accreditation, progress reports); Archiving for formative, student-centered feedback

Any additional comments on your ranking? (e.g. ties or large differences between sequentially ranked items)

    Short-answer response field

Survey Question 8

“High quantity, quality, and diversity of data available to learners”

Please rank the following potential components in terms of their importance to you or your project

    Ranking checkboxes—More information available to learners; More diverse information available to learners; More interaction between information and learners; More pertinent information available during tasks

Any additional comments on your ranking? (e.g. ties or large differences between sequentially ranked items)

    Short-answer response field

Survey Question 9

“Personalization of how, when, and where learning occurs”

Please rank the following potential components in terms of their importance to you or your project

    Ranking checkboxes—Availability of course materials outside of class time and/or place; Self-paced tasks and information; Information provided only when it is needed

Any additional comments on your ranking? (e.g. ties or large differences between sequentially ranked items)

    Short-answer response field

Survey Question 10

“Inclusion and motivation of diverse students”

Please rank the following potential components in terms of their importance to you or your project

    Ranking checkboxes –Access to information regardless of geographic location; Support for non-traditional (e.g. distance learning) curricula; Accommodation for multiple styles of learning; Support for diverse aptitudes and abilities within one course design

Any additional comments on your ranking? (e.g. ties or large differences between sequentially ranked items)

    Short-answer response field

Survey Question 11

What does it take to make cyberlearning successful?

    Short-answer response field

Survey Question 12

What are some common mistakes or potential pitfalls you have discovered that may limit the effectiveness of cyberlearning?

    Short-answer response field

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Montfort, D.B., Brown, S. What Do We Mean by Cyberlearning: Characterizing a Socially Constructed Definition with Experts and Practitioners. J Sci Educ Technol 22, 90–102 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-012-9378-8

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-012-9378-8

Keywords

Navigation