1. Technology-Based Learning Environments
Charles Vincent
Assignment 1
CECS 5110.026
Abstract:
Introduction
Learning inserts itself as a central theme in the human experience. Being defined as the activity or process
of gaining knowledge or skill by studying, practicing, being taught, or experiencing something(Merriam-
Webster, 2011), learning takes on many forms. It has evolved from tribal societies who passed
information through oral tradition, to single room school houses in which a single teacher might educate
many students of different ages, to something altogether completely different with students of different
ages, backgrounds, and even languages educated by one or many teachers. It is this newest idea of the
classroom as a technology-based learning environment that this paper will explore.
Literature Review
E-Learning is emerging as a global trend(Sun, Tsai, Finger, & Chen, 2006). This style of learning delivers
instruction through a technology-based learning environment (TBLE). While the definition of a TBLE
allows for a broad range of technologies, the dominant software model used is that of the virtual learning
environment (VLE). A VLE uses the typical educational model of modulation which divides information
into discrete chunks to be digested by students. This type of environment is usually asymmetrical, with
teachers having a greater ability to create, edit and control content (Wilson, Liber, Johnson, Beauvoir, &
Sharples, 2006). A VLE also typically limits the access of course content to individuals within the course,
and creates a homogenous experience with all users experiencing the course in the same manner. The
Blackboard learning system serves as an example of a VLE. Beyond the VLE model, literature also
suggests that many other technologies may fall under the TBLE umbrella. Some research suggests that
social networking websites such as Facebook may provide value in an educational context(Baran, 2010).
Multi-user virtual environments such as Second Life provide a community for constructivist learning
(Burgess, Slate, Rojas-LeBouef, & LaPrairie, 2010)(Dalgarno, Lee, & J, 2010). And TBLEs have the
potential to provide for even greater educational access as the learning environment becomes mobile
through the use of smart phones and other mobile devices (Looi, et al., 2010).
Technology-based learning environments are not, however, without their pitfalls. Designers of these
environments must take care to insure that there is still an element of interaction within the course in
which the students can maintain a dialog with their teachers and with their peers (Woo & Reeves,
2007)(So & Brush, 2006). There is also evidence that not all students will benefit from a TBLE based on
their learning style, socio-economic status, and technical understanding(Chen, Lambert, & Guidry,
2010)(Bielaczyc, 2006).
Discussion
The concept of a technology-based learning environment seems to exist within a continuum with systems
that almost perfectly mirror the traditional classroom experience, to those which may seem alien and

2. extreme to many of today’s educators. The key to understanding which systems fall under the umbrella of
a TBLE is to simply examine the term itself. By taking the literal, broad definition of a TBLE being any
learning environment which makes use of technology, and by assuming the stance that learning happens
not only through a traditional asymmetric system of hierarchal pedagogy, but also through an engaged
community of inquiry, we can take a TBLE to be anything from a structured online course to Facebook.
Downes (2010) states that “We need to consider learners not only as the subjects of learning, entities to
whom we deliver learning content, but also the sources of learning, functioning as the perceptual input for
the wider network.”
As TBLEs evolve to include a wide variety of features, they will begin to be homogenized into a seamless
system, but for the moment, the continuum of TBLEs might be thought of in the following terms:
LearningManagement Systems. These types of systems might be thought of as a “classroom in a
box”. They would include systems like Blackboard and Moodle which allow an instructor to
package content for a select group of students. They are capable of acting as a standalone
classroom or experience or as a component of a traditional classroom experience. The course
content would not be directly accessible by individuals outside of the course, and the instructor
would have a greater deal of control over the content management of the course. Students would
have some ability to communicate with each other and their instructor through this system.
Immersive Environments. These types of environments include simulations such as Second Life
and World of Warcraft. The strength of these environments is in that they allow for the student to
experience semi-real world conditions in which they can solve problems by themselves or with
other students, and that communication between students is synchronous. They typically have less
structure than a typical learning environment and are still being researched for their educational
value with promising results(Burgess, Slate, Rojas-LeBouef, & LaPrairie, 2010).
Asynchronous communications systems. There are many types of asynchronous communications
systems used for education. These include blogs, email, discussion boards, and wikis. These
systems help to keep educational technology flexible by allowing individuals to communicate
even when they cannot be online at the same time.
Synchronous communications systems. These systems would include technology such as skype,
conference calling, video conferencing, and chat. They allow for communication in real time, and
allow for the learner to feel a greater sense of participation.
Technology Enhanced Classrooms. Many classrooms make use of learning technologies to
enhance an otherwise traditional classroom experience. The technology may be from one of the
categories above, or something more conventional such as power point slides, media
presentations, or overhead projectors. Some educators are also making use the fact that many of
their students own mobile phones to integrate social media such as facebook and twitter into their
classroom environments(Looi, et al., 2010).
While these categories provide a general framework for the concept of technology based learning
environments, they are no means conclusive. A classroom can become a TBLE if a teacher uses a laser
pointer or if a student uses a laptop to take notes. With this broad definition in mind, it is important to
present several factors which contribute to a good TBLE.
Content. The quality of the information presented.
Interaction. The ability of students to interact with each other and/or their instructor.
Accessibility. The accessibility of the course for individuals with diverse backgrounds and/or
disabilities.
Assessment. The ability to determine and rate the student’s performance within the course.
Applicability. The usefulness of the knowledge gained.

3. While these elements are part of a good TBLE they are by no means a complete list of elements that
should be available within a course.
Conclusion
The simple truth is that educators are now faced with a new type of learner. Many of our students are
exposed to technology from an early age, and it is reasonable to believe that the technology they are
exposed to will affect the way in which they think and learn(Downes, 2010). Students enrolled in web-
based courses demonstrate a higher level of student engagement (Chen, Lambert, & Guidry, 2010).
Technology-based learning environments give students the opportunity to go beyond the traditional
educational model, and become willing participants in their own instruction. This leaves us with the
challenge and the opportunity to create systems which support and channel this desire to be continuously
engaged into a positive educational experience.
References
Baran, B. (2010). Facebook as a formal instructional environment. British Journal of Educational
Technology, 46-49.
Bielaczyc, K. (2006). Designing Social Infrastructure: Critical Issues in Creating Learning Environments
with Technology. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 301-329.
Burgess, M. L., Slate, J. R., Rojas-LeBouef, A., & LaPrairie, K. (2010). Teaching and learning in Second Life:
Using the Community of Inquiry (CoI) model to. Internet and Higher Education, 84-88.
Chen, P.-S. D., Lambert, A. D., & Guidry, K. R. (2010). Engaging online learners: The impact of Web-based
learning technology. Retrieved June 10, 2011, from Sci Direct:
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0360131509003285
Dalgarno, B., Lee, & J, M. (2010). What are the learning affordances of 3-D. British Journal of Educational
Technology, 10-32.
Downes, S. (2010). New Tecknology Supporting Information Learning. Journal of Emerging Technologies
in Web Intelegence.
Looi, Chee-Kit, Seow, P., Zhang, B., So, H.-J., Chen, et al. (2010). Leveraging mobile technology for
sustainable seamless. British Journal of Educational Technology, 154-169.
Merriam-Webster. (2011). learning. Retrieved June 9, 2011, from Merriam-Webster:
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/learning
So, H.-J., & Brush, T. A. (2006, December 18). Student perceptions of collaborative learning, social.
Retrieved June 10, 2011, from Science Direct:
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0360131507000565

4. Sun, P.-C., Tsai, R. J., Finger, G., & Chen, Y.-Y. (2006, August). What drives a successful e-Learning? An
empirical investigation. Retrieved June 10, 2011, from Elsevier:
www.elsevier.com/locate/compedu
Wilson, S., Liber, O., Johnson, M., Beauvoir, P., & Sharples, P. (2006). Personal Learning Environments:
Challenging the. Retrieved June 9, 2011, from
http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&cd=1&ved=0CCAQFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fci
teseerx.ist.psu.edu%2Fviewdoc%2Fdownload%3Fdoi%3D10.1.1.107.3816%26rep%3Drep1%26ty
pe%3Dpdf&rct=j&q=Personal%20Learning%20Environments%3A%20Challenging%20the%20do
minant%20desig
Woo, Y., & Reeves, T. C. (2007). Meaningful interaction in web-based learning: A social. Internet and
Higher Education, 15-25.