Message from Brad Cox: 12/14/2003 2:16 PM
Richard (Ballard) wrote (in http://www.bcngroup.org/python3/eleven.htm
>So far I am not seeing any of the interactive techniques employed by
>these projects in today's page turning "electronic book/web site"
>presentations.
I share exactly the same frustration. I spent most of yesterday struggling to fit what I mean by "interaction" into the SCORM (http://adllabs.com ) and/or atutor (http://atutor.ca ) frameworks, and ultimately wrote them off (and every other web-based system I know of) off as yet another page flipper, no better than powerpoint, listservs or TV for that matter. The only difference is that they add their own deficiencies. Web based page flippers are just text TV. Who needs it? Why bother when we've already got TV with enough pretty moving pictures, naked women and all the talking heads we'd ever need?
That isn't to say approaches like SCORM don't have their advantages. The problem is that the advantages (reuse of tasks (SCOs) across universities) are things universities/instructors deem valuable, and student value false entirely off the end of the queue.
By student value, I mean a truly interactive, action-based learning experience, and by interaction I mean computer-assisted interaction with faculty and other students, NOT WITH A DUMB COMPUTER. The computer/web is just a pipe, a programmable connection, not a destination point. The thing at the other end MUST be a person or the whole idea is worthless insofar as student learning is concerned.
Notice that this rant encompasses 100% of the "eLearning systems" out there. I know of no exceptions apart from my own work (immodestly, but that is really what I think). If anyone knows of other exceptions, please let me know. Frankly, I've always thought of Plato as being just a fancier implementation of the page-flipping meme, but you may know upsides I've missed.