Advances in E-learning-Experiences and Methodologies

RAPAD
within any events which might be taking place.
In this study, systems methodology was used
in both these ways. The models, methods, and
strategies were used to define and explore, for
example, the concept of the student and PELE
as an e-learning system. In addition, the use of
systems methodology was, in itself, an iterative
and self-reflexive process in which the methodology
was a tool that was refined and developed by
the process of being used.
The Student as a Reflective and
Participatory system designer for
PeLe
From a systems perspective, the student can be
considered to be part of the university conceptualised
as a human activity system. This system
then contains several related subsystems, each
made up of people, processes, and technology.
We can also conceptualise the student as being
part of an e-learning system and, consequently,
as a system, being combined with and interacting
with relevant processes (attending, studying, using
the library) and technologies (books, television,
computers). As with all human activity systems,
there can then be several different conceptualisations
and viewpoints of the component parts and
makeup of the student as learning system (academic,
administrator, parent, peer, etc.). However,
the perspective which is the most important is
that of the student him or herself.
As suggested above, we can further consider
the student as learning system (SLS) to be part
of a larger learning system, the university. The
SLS interfaces with many other subsystems which
function as e-learning or e-learning support
systems. The interfaces between the SLS and
these other systems are of crucial importance in
the functioning of the student as an active and
autonomous learner.
From the perspective of a compliant student
functioning with the transmission model of e-
learning, the student can be considered to be
suboptimally interfaced with many important
systems. The student can be conceptualised as
being tightly coupled to subject learning through
the provision of prescribed materials and processes,
the use of the transmission method of
teaching and learning, and a lack of metacognitive
awareness and learning autonomy. In terms
of other subsystems, the student may be poorly
interfaced because of some of these factors plus a
lack of process knowledge—for example, a poor
knowledge of administrative procedures or of how
to access information on those procedures.
The student and individual e-learning environment
combine as SLS to produce a more effective
e-learning system. This new system produces a
tight coupling between the student and the PELE.
This then allows a loose and flexible coupling
with the subjects as e-learning systems and
other university e-learning and learning support
systems. This is the concept of Flexible Student
Alignment (Webster, 2005). By enhancing each
student’s metacognitive skills and self-regulatory
awareness, the locus of control is shifted towards
the student. The more autonomous system that
emerges is better able to handle the demands
of active and independent e-learning. Figure 3
presents an overview of this process.
The PELE is necessarily an open system designed
with the student in order to help to student to
interact with all facets of his or her environment in
order to support and sustain the learning process.
The initial interface of a prototype Individual E-
Learning Environment is shown in Figure 3. It
is built around the personal learning activities of
the student and also allows for more personal elements
to be included. The student’s cognitive style
(Analytic-Imager) in this case impacts both the
design (e.g., structure) and content (e.g., balance
of text and graphics) of the page. The student’s
learning styles affect the content (e.g., time management,
learning organisation procedures, and
resources, resource links for identified areas of
study weakness). Personality type impacts the look
and feel of the learning environment but also the
0