Destructive myths about NGL – how do we cope with them?
2012 (English)In: Next Generation Learning Conference, NGL 2012: Conference Proceedings, 2012, 21-62 p.Conference paper (Refereed)
In this paper I will use the term NGL – Next Generation Learning – as more or less synonymous with terms like eLearning, distance learning, flexible learning. I will focus on learning with a large percentage of internetbased knowledge resources and communication and collaboration between teachers and students. The analysis is based on my own experiences from three Swedish universities, Mid Sweden University, Stockholm University, and Dalarna University, and on some international studies. I am personally convinced that NGL has a great potential for improving many aspects of the quality and efficiency of learning, but I am also aware of a very strong lobby of people in government and educational institutions who are convinced that NGL is a serious threat against quality: increased resources should instead be given to more conventional learning with focus on the teacher in the classroom. In my opinion, the scepticism against NGL is to a large extent based on myths which are not based upon facts. On the other hand, I think we must also admit that many arguments in favour of NGL are not yet supported by a sufficient amount of facts. This paper will analyse some of the arguments for and against NGL, and how we could possibly obtain facts which provide more solid support of the alleged advantages of NGL and which at the same time help to falsify destructive myths about NGL.
Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
2012. 21-62 p.
Research subject Computer and Systems Sciences
IdentifiersURN: urn:nbn:se:su:diva-84860ISBN: 978-91-85941-47-6OAI: oai:DiVA.org:su-84860DiVA: diva2:581618
NGL 2012, February 21–23, 2012, Falun, Sweden