Drawbacks Caused by Digital Learning Technologies

E-learning experiences will become commonplace due to the vast improvement of digital technology. However, surveys based on empirical data show the short-comings of e-learning in cases where e-learning replaces conventional learning systems. There is no doubt that e-learning will cause an evolutionary change in learning systems. It provides accessible ways to deliver learning materials in organizations conducting education. However, the potential drawbacks, such as lack of peer-to-peer interactions and the need to invest on change management, are the challenges that an organization needs to carefully consider [22].

In the next paragraphs, we aim to summarize the negative perspectives and challenges of the technical implementations of e-learning systems.

Drawback one: significant effects on Planning and management.

As suggested by research on the implementation of an e-learning system, the scheme requires an accurate design, monitoring, and control [23]. The educa-tional materials archived in the digital system have to be transformed from tradi-tional formats into digital file types according to the design and the construction of the system. The management of the materials, such as continuous updates and correction of errors, should be taken into account in the planning stage of

the system. The neglect of sustainable design for maintaining the ecosystem of e-learning will cause inevitable difficulties in the application phase.

Although many universities may hold their own individual implementations, the most beneficial way of working would be to have a system to exchange ex-periences in designing e-learning systems. The same approach may be applied in many similar circumstances. A sustainable approach to e-learning or a sus-tainable e-learning system has been widely discussed because researchers have noticed that there is an immediate need to create a culture or an environment that provides reusable models for other organizations interested in developing an e-learning system [24].

If we look at the short history of various e-learning systems developed in past 10 years, community-driven e-learning platforms such as Moodle are actively publishing new versions. However, the dotLRN platform, which is granted the highest mark in the usability research [25], released its newest version in 2010 seems to have stopped updating.

It is sure that the postponed development has resulted from various reasons, but we could see the significant effects on planning and managing e-learning plat-forms. Research suggests that universities are aware of the importance of provid-ing e-learnprovid-ing systems and digital teachprovid-ing material, but that universities are not paying enough attention to how ICT solutions should be implemented [26].

The lack of care during the development of an e-learning system may lead to negative effects. For example, learning management systems (LMSs) are widely used in universities to provide supplements to traditional education. Most universities follow the new trend, but they neglect the attitudes of teachers and students toward its usefulness [27].

The complexity of designing and planning an e-learning system to fulfill us-ers’ needs is the major issue that universities have to deal with. There are several possible approaches, such as studying the factors that influence adoption of e-learning through interviews and questionnaires. Existing studies suggest that it is important to (1) provide enough technical support and reliable infrastructure, (2) encourage teachers to try e-learning by having positive first-hand experience, and (3) let students develop and set clear expectations (see [27], [28]).

Nevertheless, many universities still struggle with the very early planning stages and with finding resources for managing the e-learning system. A draw-back of e-learning implementation is that there are no simple rules for designing an effective e-learning system.

The effort required in planning and managing the system is one of the draw-backs of e-learning when it’s implemented with limited resources and relatively weak ecology. It is an issue that universities need to actively solve or students and

teachers need to passively adapt to. On the other hand, if we compare e-learning with traditional education practices, the pedagogic considerations should be taken into account.

Drawback two: the frustration Due to the lack of interaction. E-learning models are basically a replication of traditional E-learning models but with the integration of digital technologies. Whereas the first e-learning models emphasized the role of technology in providing content delivery and electronic services, more recent models focus on pedagogical issues such as online instruc-tional design and the creation of online learning communities.

A number of studies show that technology may be confusing or frustrating to students even if they have prior experience with using digital technologies. This is due to lack of informal social interactions [22], [23]. The educational interac-tion—or, at its heart, the communication between teachers and learners—has not been influenced by the advance in technologies in the same way as other social interactions in our society [29].

Many believe that education is not about giving access to more information, but giving students the abilities to construct knowledge from data. Researchers prompting e-learning believe that technology could provide the capacity to facili-tate communication and result in qualitative enhanced outcomes beyond the ac-cess to information. The technological support of the development of knowledge structures is the positive impact that e-learning may generate [29].

However, according to existing research results, potential users of e-learning systems (i.e., the teachers and the learners) do not all have high expectations and are not all enthusiastic regarding e-learning. Researchers believe that e-learning could improve the quality of communication, but students see e-learning even as a distraction [28]. Teachers also do not see communication in the e-learning system, such as online discussion and online collaboration, as the most value-added aspect (see [27]).

Drawback three: online education as a fraud. It seems there is no way to directly link the growth of online education to an increase in online cheating.

But more online classes will mean more online students, which will mean more potential customers for cheating providers. According to the 2014 Online Learning Survey, roughly a third of all higher education enrollments in the United States are now online, with almost 7 million students taking at least one online class. Online education is already poised to be a $100 billion global industry. It seems that the entrepreneurs and freelancers openly advertise services designed to help students cheat in their online education studies. Those digital cheaters being hired will even assume a student’s identity and take a whole entire class online.

Because the market is huge, there are also institutions taking advantage of it.

For instance, Knightsbridge University, founded in Denmark in 1991, is one of the institutions sometimes connected with unclear degrees. The university provides distance learning to some private customers globally, but is not officially recognized as an educational institution in Denmark since 1991. Numerous cases have been reported that involve the use of Knightsbridge University degrees [30]. In fact, it has been registered as a limited company since 2003 and has been accused of being a “diploma mill,” an organization offering illegitimate academic degrees for a fee.

5 conclusions

In this highly conceptual and inspirational paper, we have sought to illuminate some of the problems of current higher education and rethink the age-old para-digm of universities. The motivation for this research has been in the publicly noted crisis concerning education in its current state and its inability to meet the demands of the labor market. In this paper, we have argued for the necessity of a paradigm shift in learning, that is, a change in the way university education and learning are perceived and carried out. One of the foundational premises of our paper concerns the creation of learning ecosystems by reorganizing universities, students, and industry. In doing so, the current unidirectional flow of informa-tion and knowledge could be developed toward an educainforma-tional ecosystem where multiple parties collaborate on real issues in real or simulated contexts. Such an approach, however, relies heavily on advanced digital technologies. These un-conventional ideas were discussed with some of the leading experts in academia and refined into conceptual propositions. Although the approach suggested in this paper has its benefits, it also carries with it some challenges that need to be considered, such as ensuring informal social interaction.

References

[1] Kropotkin, P.: Encyclopædia Britannica. 11th Ed. Cambridge University Press (1911) [2] Webster, F.: The Postmodern University, Research and Media Studies. Can. J. Media Stud. 1,

21 (2010)

[3] Adams, D.: Restaurant at the End of the Universe, vol. 2. Pan Macmillan, London (1982) [4] Meet the Authors: Sustainability, Well-Being and the Future of Education, http://www.sitra.

fi/en/news/education/meet-authors-sustainability-well-being-and-future-education [5] OECD: n läksy Suomelle: Koulutuksesta leikattava varoen, http://yle.fi/uutiset/oecdn_

laksy_suomelle_koulutuksesta_leikattava_varoen/8414645

[6] Suomen koulutustaso painuu alle OECD-keskiarvon, http://www.kauppalehti.fi/uutiset/

suomen-koulutustaso-painuu-alle-oecd-keskiarvon/2Ry6vXJf

[7] Parasuraman, A., Zeithaml, V.A., Berry, L.L.: A Conceptual Model of Service Quality and Its Implications for Future Research. J. Mark, 41–50 (1985)

[8] Maringe, F., Gibbs, P.: Marketing Higher Education: Theory and Practice. McGraw-Hill Education (2009)

[9] Kotler, P., Fox, K.: Strategic Marketing for Educational Institutions. Pearson Education Print on Demand Edition (1995)

[10] Zeithaml, V.A., Bitner, M.J., Gremler, D.D.: Services Marketing: Integrating Customer Focus across the Firm. McGraw-Hill/Irwin, Boston, MA (2006)

[11] Americans Owe $1.2 Trillion in Student Loans, Surpassing Credit Card and Auto Loan Debt Totals, http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/americans-owe-1-2-trillion-student-loans-article-1.1796606

[12] Jaakkola, E.: Unraveling the Practices of Productization in Professional Service Firms.

Scand. J. Manag. 27, 221–230 (2011)

[13] Simula, H., Lethtimäki, T., Salo, J.: Re-thinking the Product: From Innovative Technology to Productized Offering. In: Proceedings of the 19th International Society for Professional Innovation Management Conference, Tours, France (2008)

[14] Aapaoja, A., Kujala, J., Pesonen, L.T.T., others: Productization of University Services. Int. J.

Synerg. Res. 1, 89–106 (2012)

[15] Santoro, M.D., Chakrabarti, A.K.: Firm Size and Technology Centrality in Industry–

University Interactions. Res. Policy. 31, 1163–1180 (2002)

[16] The Digital Tree, http://www.economist.com/news/briefing/21605899-staid-higher-education-business-about-experience-welcome-earthquake-digital

[17] Silverman, D.: Interpreting Qualitative Data: A Guide to the Principles of Qualitative Reearch. Sage Publications, California (2011)

[18] Alvesson, M.: Leadership Studies: From Procedure and Abstraction to Reflexivity and Situation. Leadersh. Q. 7, 455–485 (1996)

[19] Bioaccessability, https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/bioaccessibility

[20] Bokor, J.: University of the Future: A Thousand Year Old Industry on the Cusp of Profound Change. Ernst and Young Report. Ernst and Young, Australia (2012)

[21] Paavola, S., Hakkarainen, K.: The Knowledge Creation Metaphor—An Emergent Epistemological Approach to Learning. Sci. Educ. 14, 535–557 (2005)

[22] Welsh, E.T., Wanberg, C.R., Brown, K.G., Simmering, M.J.: E-learning: Emerging Uses, Empirical Results and Future Directions. Int. J. Train. Dev. 7, 245–258 (2003)

[23] Cantoni, V., Cellario, M., Porta, M.: Perspectives and Challenges in E-learning: Towards Natural Interaction Paradigms. J. Vis. Lang. Comput. 15, 333–345 (2004)

[24] Leacock, T.: Building a Sustainable E-learning Development Culture. Learn. Organ. 12, 355–367 (2005)

[25] Martin, L., Martínez, D.R., Revilla, O., José, M., Santos, O.C., Boticario, J.G.: Usability in E-learning Platforms: Heuristics Comparison between Moodle, Sakai and dotLRN. Artif.

Intell. 509, 75–84 (2003)

[26] Masiello, I., Ramberg, R., Lonka, K.: Attitudes to the Application of a Web-Based Learning System in a Microbiology Course. Comput. Educ. 45, 171–185 (2005)

[27] Mahdizadeh, H., Biemans, H., Mulder, M.: Determining Factors of the Use of E-learning Environments by University Teachers. Comput. Educ. 51, 142–154 (2008)

[28] King, E., Boyatt, R.: Exploring Factors That Influence Adoption of E-learning within Higher Education. Br. J. Educ. Technol. 46, 1272–1280 (2014)

[29] Garrison, D.R., Anderson, T.: E-learning in the 21st Century: A Framework for Research and Practice. Taylor & Francis, London and New York (2003)

[30] Kersey, J.: A Case Study of Higher Education in the Private Sector: An Interview with Henrik Fyrst Kristensen, Vice Chancellor of Knightsbridge University, Denmark.

Libertarian Alliance, London (2006)

The Digital Health Society: Perspectives