What is Needed For Global E-Learning in Higher Education

  • Patrick McAndrew
Part of the Globalisation, Comparative Education and Policy Research book series (GCEP, volume 4)


This chapter examines the nature of emergent trends in methods being used to develop and deliver e-learning programmes by higher educational institutions for a global market. As a starting point global e-learning programmes that have been involved in large-scale failure for economic reasons are analysed and the reasons behind their lack of success discussed. An account of the design approaches that are currently helping produce more flexible online courses and ways in which these can be shared among practitioners is provided in order to throw light on the advantages and disadvantages of these approaches. The model used by the Open University in the UK for distance education in the global arena is also considered in some detail particularly in relation to the insights it offers about dealing with cultural bias in global e-learning programmes. Comparison of approaches to providing online courses that draw on learning objects, learning design and learning patterns is made and the chapter concludes with reflections on lessons learned and advice that could be offered to those considering the provision of online courses for a global audience.


Learning Object Distance Education Blended Learning Mobile Learning Global Arena 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


  1. Alexander, C. (1979). The Timeless Way of Building. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  2. Alexander, C., Ishikawa, S., Silverstein, M., Jacobson, M., Fiksdahl-King, I., & Angel, S. (1977). A Pattern Language: Towns, Buildings, Construction. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  3. Conole, G., Carusi, A., & De Laat, M. (2005). Learning from the UKeU experience. ICE Conference Higham Hall. Reprinted as an E-Learning Research Centre Publication, University of Southampton. Retrieved July 30, 2006 from:
  4. DfES (2005). Harnessing Technology: Transforming Learning and Children’s Services. Retrieved July 30, 2006 from:
  5. Goodyear, P., Avgeriou, P., Baggetun, R., Bartoluzzi, S., Retalis, S., Ronteltap, F., &Rusman E. (2004). Towards a Pattern Language for Networked Learning. Proceedings of Networked Learning 2004, Lancaster University, England, pp. 449–455.Google Scholar
  6. House of Commons, UK e-University Report. (2005).Third Report of Session 2004–05. Report Together with Formal Minutes, Oral and Written Evidence. Retrieved July 30, 2006 from:
  7. Howcroft, D. (2001). After the Goldrush: Deconstructing the Myths of the Market. Journal of Information Technology, 16, 195–204.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Hummel, H. G. K., Manderveld, J. M., Tattersall, C., & Koper, E. J. R. (2004). Educational Modelling Language and Learning Design: New Opportunities for Instructional Reusability and Personalised Learning. Journal of Learning Technology, 1 (1), 111–126.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Kirkwood, A. (2003). Understanding Independent Learners’ Use of Media Technologies. Open Learning, 18 (2), 155–175.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Koper, R. & Tattersall, C. (Eds.) (2005). Learning Design: A Handbook on Modelling and Delivering Networked Education and Training. Berlin/Heidelberg: Springer.Google Scholar
  11. Littlejohn, A. (Ed.) (2003). Reusing Online Resources: A Sustainable Approach to E-learning. London: Kogan Page.Google Scholar
  12. Livingstone, D. W. (1999). Exploring the Icebergs of Adult Learning: Findings of the First Canadian Survey of Informal Learning Practices. Canadian Journal for the Study of Adult Education, 13 (2), 49–72.Google Scholar
  13. Parr, J. (2004). A Review of the Literature on Computer-Assisted Learning, Particularly Integrated Learning Systems, and Outcomes with Respect to Literacy and Numeracy. Ministry of Education, Wellington, New Zealand. Retrieved July 30, 2006 from: = 5499
  14. Pegler, C. (2005). Objects and Issues – A Sunday Supplement View of Continuing Professional Development in Higher Education. Open Learning, 20 (1), 51–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Polsani, P. R. (2003). Use and Abuse of Reusable Learning Objects. Journal of Digital information 3 (4). Retrieved July 30, 2006 from:
  16. Rehak, D. R. & Mason R. (2003). Keeping the Learning in Learning Objects. In A. Littlejohn (Ed.) Reusing Online Resources: A Sustainable Approach to E-learning (pp. 20–35). London: Kogan, pp. 114–115.Google Scholar
  17. Ross, S., Kukulska-Hulme, A., Chappel, H., & Joyce, B. (2004).Taking E-moderating Skills to the Next Level: Reflecting on the Design of Conferencing Environments. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 8 (2).Google Scholar
  18. Times Online. (2004). The Sunday Times University Guide Table: Best Marks for Teaching. From:,,8405-1246628,00.html
  19. Weller M. J., Pegler C. A., & Mason R. D. (2003). Putting the Pieces Together: What Working with Learning Objects Means for the Educator. Paper Presented at the E-LearnInternational, February 2003, Conference, Edinburgh. From:

Copyright information

© Springer Science + Business Media B.V. 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  • Patrick McAndrew
    • 1
  1. 1.Institute of Educational TechnologyThe Open UniversityUK

Personalised recommendations