=Paper=
{{Paper
|id=Vol-2393/paper_420
|storemode=property
|title=Historical Approach to Modern Learning Environment
|pdfUrl=https://ceur-ws.org/Vol-2393/paper_420.pdf
|volume=Vol-2393
|authors=Aleksander Spivakovsky,Lyubov Petukhova,Vira Kotkova,Yuriy Yurchuk
|dblpUrl=https://dblp.org/rec/conf/icteri/SpivakovskyPKY19
}}
==Historical Approach to Modern Learning Environment==
https://ceur-ws.org/Vol-2393/paper_420.pdf
Historical Approach to Modern Learning Environment
Aleksander Spivakovsky[000-0001-7574-4133], Lyubov Petukhova[0000-0003-0814-2807],
Vira Kotkova[0000-0002-1537-0923] and Yuriy Yurchuk[0000-0002-1022-7079]
Kherson State University, 27, Uninersytetska Str., Kherson, 73000, Ukraine
{spivakovsky, petuhova, veras, yurchuk}@ksu.ks.ua
Abstract. The article is devoted to review system-organizing approaches and
the development trends to the learning environment. Learning environment is
explored according to the used information technology. Six stages of learning
environment development are described. The transformation of the term
‘technology in education’ to ‘pedagogical technology’ is analyzed according its
changes in content. The relationship between e-learning, Information
Technology (IT) and Information and Communication Technologies (ICT) is
identified. E-learning is understood as an umbrella term that covers web-based
instruction, online learning, networked learning, computer-assisted learning and
computer-mediated learning. The comparative characteristics of traditional and
e-learning are made. Three levels (1.0, 2.0, 3.0) of the Web are analyzed. The
quantitative results of the survey asked about the type of e-learning institutions
use are presented. Eight trends of e-learning industry for 2019 are described. It
is pointed out that the future development of technology will change the
delivery modes used, the cost effectiveness and the acceptance and recognition
of the new learning environment.
Keywords: Learning environment, information and learning technologies, e-
learning, blended learning.
1 Introduction
Educational process is changing due to the evolution of the society all the time. Now
we are witnesses of higher education transformation and adaption of student’s
workplace for various forms of using traditional and ICT learning tools. The advances
of digital multi-tools provide wide access to various kinds of information sources,
widening the walls of the educational institution.
Until recently, higher education e-learning has attracted remarkably little attention
beyond the bounds of its dedicated communities and projects. For example, it has not
been prominent in Bologna Process discussions and only became a focal point of EU
education policy in September 2013, with the publication of the ‘Opening up
Education’ Communication by the European Commission [5].
According to the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development announced in 2015
Sustainable Development Goal 4, known as Education 2030, is a single global goal
for quality education, which aims to ensure inclusive and equitable quality education
and promote lifelong learning opportunities for all. Technology is a fundamental
driver of that vision to create equitable, dynamic, accountable and sustainable learner-
centered digital learning ecosystems that are relevant for the 21st Century. Rapid
advances in technology are revolutionizing the way in which teaching and learning is
conceptualized, designed, and implemented in higher education. These developments
play a key role in delivering quality education for all [10].
Our ability to develop skilled workers, build competitive advantages as nations and
generate growth is provided with the knowledge economy. Such invest in for children
via the schools system and right through to higher education and on-going,
professional development and training is a fundamental support to the rest of our
economic lives. To keep developing the knowledge economy we need to ensure, as
with other sectors, that we maintain a level of innovation to improve the efficacy and
efficiency of our learning systems. This is the importance of EdTech [17].
EdTech or EduTech, being a shorten form for Educational technology, is a wide
field. Therefore, one can find many definitions, some of which are conflicting. We
consider EdTech as the practice of introducing technologies and non-standard
solutions to education for better learning. In 2017, investments in the EdTech market
in the world grew to a record $ 9.5 billion. And it is forecasted that by 2020 this mark
will cross $ 252 billion [8].
What started as an experiment in education delivery is now being transformed by a
new breed of technology entrepreneurs. Moreover EdTech is about applying digital
technology to deliver a new form of learning architecture. An architecture that
harnesses the social reach of the internet, that delivers personalized learning and
training that can automatically adjust to an individual’s learning competence and that
uses big data analysis to understand the most effective ways for learners to progress.
In changing the traditional architecture of education, EdTech has the power to create
efficiencies, cut costs and enable new levels of standardization and democratized
access. It is set to transform the future of how education is resourced, taught,
consumed and, ultimately, the results that it can then yield – both for the individual
and for society as a whole as we continue to build the knowledge economy [17].
That’s why today teachers are allowed to create an interactive learning
environment. The attention should be paid to modelling systems in education in
accordance with ICT evolution from a learning tool to the educational technology.
Such development can be easily explained within triangle Student – Teacher –
Learning Environment.
In the previous publication we made the review of didactic model transformation.
We proved the transformation of modern didactic model into three-subject one –
Student – Teacher – Information and communication pedagogical environment
(ICPE). It was made as a result of ICPE active components analyses, description of
the requirements set to ICPE as an educational subject, comparative analyses of
characteristic components of traditional and innovative teaching system, modelling
subjects’ behaviour at different training forms according to subject-subject or three-
subject didactic system. The measurement of each three educational subjects’ cogency
and their significance in the process of major study operations (collection, processing,
storage, transmission) at various training forms as lecture, practice and individual
work was presented [14].
The article aims to trace the development of learning environment and to predict its
future. This is important to teachers, who should now share such learning
environment in which a person could fully develop has or her creative potential,
develop abilities, and cultivate the need for continuous self-improvement and
responsibility for own upbringing and development.
According to The National Council of Teachers of English, active, successful
participants in this 21st century global society must be able to:
develop proficiency and fluency with the tools of technology;
build intentional cross-cultural connections and relationships with others so to pose
and solve problems collaboratively and strengthen independent thought;
design and share information for global communities to meet a variety of purposes;
manage, analyze and synthesize multiple streams of simultaneous information;
create, critique, analyze and evaluate multimedia texts;
attend to the ethical responsibilities required by these complex environments [16].
The state of modern education and the development trends of society require new
system-organizing approaches to the development of the educational environment.
2 Development of learning environment
The informational and educational environment is a systemically organized set of data
transmission means, information resources, interaction protocols, hardware-software
and organizational-methodical support, focused on meeting the needs of users for
information services and educational resources.
Developing a total learning environment for students in a particular course or
program is probably the most creative part of teaching. While there is a tendency to
focus on either physical institutional learning environments (such as classrooms,
lecture theatres and labs), or on the technologies used to create online personal
learning environments (PLEs), learning environments are broader than just these
physical components. It is also include:
the characteristics of the learners;
the goals for teaching and learning;
the activities that will best support learning;
the assessment strategies that will best measure and drive learning
the culture that infuses the learning environment.
Learning environment is used to be concerned with the information technology, as the
technology for people to work with information. According to this approach there are
6 stages of learning environment development.
The 1-st stage (up to the second half of XIX century) was ‘Hand’ information
technology, its tools were pen, ink pot, book. Communications were carried out in a
handy way by sending information with mailing lists, packages, dispatches. The main
aim of the information technology was to provide information in necessary form.
The 2-nd stage (since the end of XIX century) was ‘Mechanical’ technology; its
tools for delivering information were typewriters, telephone, and voice recorder. The
main aim of the information technology was to provide information in necessary form
in the most convenient way.
The 3-rd stage (40-60 of XX century) was ‘Electric’ technology; its tools were
developed to electric typewriters, Xeroxes, portable Dictaphones. The emphasis of
information technology started to move from the form of information presentation to
making its content.
The 4-th stage (since the beginning of 70-s) was ‘Electronic’ technology, its tools
were EOM and created on their basis automated control systems (ACS) and
information retrieval systems, equipped with a wide range of basic and specialized
software complexes.
The 5-th stage (from the middle of the 80-s) was ‘Computer’ (New) technology,
the main tool of which is a personal computer with a wide range of standard software
products of various purposes. At this stage there was the process of personalization of
the ACS, which manifests itself in the creation of decision support systems by certain
specialists.
The 6-th stage (now developing) is ‘Network’ technology (sometimes it is
considered as a part of computer technology). Global and local computer networks are
beginning to be widely used in various industries.
The transformation of the term ‘technology in education’ to ‘pedagogical
technology’ corresponds to a change in its content, covering the following three
periods.
The first period (40s – mid-50s) is characterized by the emergence of a variety of
technical means of presenting information – recording and reproduction of sound and
projection of images, united by the concept of ‘audiovisual means’. The term
‘technology in learning’ meant the application of engineering knowledge in the
learning process.
The second period (mid 50s-60s) introduction of technological approach is marked
by the emergence of programmed training. Audiovisual means specially designed for
educational purposes were developed: means of feedback, electronic classes,
educational machines, linguaphone rooms, simulators, etc. Unlike the term
‘technology learning’, the same term ‘technical means of learning’, under the
‘technology of education’ meant a scientific description (a set of tools and methods)
of the pedagogical process, which inevitably leads to the planed result.
For the third period (70s), three features are characteristic. First, there is an
expansion of the pedagogical technology base. In addition to audiovisual education
and programmable learning, the foundation of pedagogical technology was built on
computer science, telecommunications theory, pedagogical qualimetry, system
analysis and pedagogical sciences (psychology of teaching, theory of management of
cognitive activity, organization of educational process, scientific organization of
pedagogical work). Secondly, the methodical basis of pedagogical technology is
changing, the transition from verbal to audiovisual training is carried out. Thirdly, the
training of professional technology educators is beginning to be actively pursued [13].
Thus, pedagogical technology reflects the tactics of the implementation of
educational technologies and is based on the knowledge of the regularities of the
functioning of the system ‘Teacher – Environment – Student’ in certain study
conditions (individual, group, collective, mass, etc.), it shares the common features
and regularities of the educational process independently from a particular
educational subject.
D. Charrisony and S. Nipper first used the term ‘generation’ to refer to three
stages of e-learning development, ‘historically related to the development of
production, transport and communication technologies’ [12].
Table 1 presents a brief description of three generations of e-learning.
Table 1. Generations (stages) of e-learning development
Student’s Learning Training Teacher’s
Generation Technologies
activities mode content role
Television, radio, Reading and
Cognitive Individual Developed Creator of
print, face-to-face reviewing
behaviourism training ‘from scratch’ the content
communications materials
Discussion, Constructed
Audio, video and Learning Head of the
Constructivism development, and developed
web conferencing in groups discussion
design by a teacher
Research,
Web 2.0: social Friend that
connection, Network
Connectivism networking, Autonomic critically
creation, learning
association of users evaluates
evaluation
According to Table 1 each direction of pedagogy of distance education is
characterized by certain features of social, cognitive component in the process of
distance learning.
The first generation – ‘cognitive behaviourism’ – emphasizes the need to use the
model of distance learning, the goals of which are clearly defined, formulated and
exist separately from the students and the content of learning. The training material
should be constructed in such a way as to maximize the effectiveness of mental
activity. This generation is characterized by the absence of a ‘social’ in the process of
learning. Study is considered as an individual process. A similar emphasis on
individualized learning improves students’ autonomy. Preferably such technologies as
radio, television, postal correspondence [periods] are used. The presence of a teacher
in the learning process is extremely limited. The role of the teacher is mainly in the
preparation of printed material. Later, students could see and hear the teacher through
audio, video, multimedia technology.
Instead, ‘constructivism’ as the next generation comes, the main principles of
which are the following features:
new knowledge is built on the basis of prior knowledge;
distance learning is considered as an active rather than passive process;
language and other social tools play a role in building knowledge;
the purpose of cognition and evaluation is a means of developing students' abilities
to self-assess knowledge;
the student is the core of the learning environment;
it is necessary that the knowledge acquired in the process of distance learning is
subjected to discussion by the community, verification and real use [12].
The teacher in this case is a mentor, assistant and partner, and the content of the
teaching material becomes secondary to the learning process. Teacher and his
experience are still the main sources of knowledge.
The next generation of pedagogy of distance education – ‘connectivism’ – involves
unlimited access to network technologies. According to this approach, the role of the
student is not to remember all the information, but to be able to find information and
apply knowledge where necessary. For training with the use of distance learning
technologies, students need to have a high level of information and communication
competence, therefore, the primary task is to prepare students for learning with the
use of special learning technologies. Teachers and students can collaborate in content
development, offer ideas for improving teaching technology. The entire distance
learning process is carried out on the basis of cooperation. However, this direction is
characterized by the lack of pedagogical control, the structuring of educational
content.
T. Anderson and D. Dron believe that each of the generations has its advantages
and disadvantages. Future generation of distance learning, according to scientists, will
be more subject-oriented, characterized by an increase in student activity in the
learning process, learning virtualization [2].
Today we can speak about information and learning technology, that is a collection
of fundamentally new tools and methods for processing data that ensure the
purposeful creation, transmission, storage, and display of an information product,
with the least possible cost, in accordance with the laws of the social environment in
which the new information technology develops.
Generally, e-learning has been used to describe learning that is supported by
technologies through various types of delivery modes.
Since 2002, e-learning has become an umbrella term that covers web-based
instruction, online learning, networked learning, computer-assisted learning and
computer-mediated learning [11]. All of these terms refer to the use of information
and communications technologies in learning. The relationship between e-learning,
Information Technology (IT) and Information and Communication Technologies
(ICT) is identified in the eclipse diagram by Markos Tiris. Figure 1 shows that
e-learning is based on Information Communications Technologies, which is derived
from Information Technologies, to offer learning.
E-learning often refers to technology or designs used in distance teaching, but it
also is used to describe any sort of technology use in education. As of 2019, e-
learning has been replaced by the word ‘digital learning’ or sometimes EdTech [6].
We prefer continue using ‘educational technology’, although the term ‘digital
learning’ is more open to the idea that technology has become a general omnipresent
tool, i.e. encompasses any sort of technology use in education.
More design-oriented educational technologists rather look a cross-section of
several phenomena, i.e., they adopt an interdisciplinary approach that will ultimately
lead to better pedagogical designs in a given area (Figure 2).
IT Information The computer infrastructure, hardware and software used to
Technology process data and deliver information.
ICT Information and The combination of computing and communication
communication technologies (including computer networks and telephone
technologies systems) that connect and enable some of today’s most
exciting systems, e.g. the Internet.
E-learning Electronic learning E-learning is learning supported or enhanced through the
application of information and communications technology.
ILT* Information and This was used in further education colleges, to refer to the
learning use of information and communication technologies to
technologies* support the core business of colleges: the delivery and
management of learning.
* The current term is e-learning
and technology
Fig. 1. The Eclipse Diagram by Markos Tiris and the Definitions Used in the Centre of
Excellence in Leaderships Report [4]
Educational technology can be considered as a design science and as such, it has
developed some specific research methodology like ‘Design-based research’.
However, since it addresses also all fundamental issues of learning, teaching and
social organization, educational technology makes use of the full range of modern
social science and life sciences methodology.
3 The Future of learning environment
It is known that within the ICPS during the preparation and implementation of
training each student has the opportunity to choose the goals, content, method, place
and time of training, and in educational organizations – the opportunity to go in
different ways in the provision of educational services that meet the requirements of
the labor market and social needs. Table 2 shows the comparative characteristics of
traditional and e-learning [15].
Fig. 2. Interdisciplinary approach for EdTech
Table 2. Comparative characteristics of traditional and e-learning
Traditional learning E-learning
Training begins and ends in The student decides when to begin and complete the
accordance with established dates. study program.
The student faces a restriction on the Student has greater access to programming
freedom of access to the learning and
teaching process.
The student must attend classes at The student decides for himself where to study
school or in the workplace
The objectives and content of the The student, after consulting with the tutors (teacher-
programs are determined by the consultant), determines the goals and content of training
institution. in accordance with his needs and interests.
The sequence of training is The student, together with the tutors develops a work
determined by the program or teacher plan and schedule of classes
- consultant (tutor)
The speed of learning is dictated by The student, together with the tutor, agrees on his own
the program, teacher and group of pace.
studies.
The teacher provides support mainly The tutors and the learner agree on a form of support
through lectures that can be provided in the form of full-time study or
remotely
The student learns by attending Training is carried out with the help of educational
lectures and seminars or studying the materials, which necessarily include: goals, the actual
scientific and methodological content, methods of self-assessment and other
literature information for independent work
It is expected that the type of technologies for learning and the way they will be
used will change the future of education. Nowadays, the common online tool used in
blended learning is called Web 1.0. In Web 1.0, information is delivered to users
while in Web 2.0 information is created and edited by users. Web 1.0 is a read-only
environment, while Web 2.0 is a read and write environment which facilitates social
activities. Blogs, Wikis, Twitter, YouTube, Facebook, and Flicker are examples of the
most common Web 2.0 tools. Globally, the number of users of Web 2.0 has increased
dramatically [1].
At the same time, e-learning 2.0 promotes collaboration in knowledge
construction. The rapid innovations in e-learning urges for research about the impact
of these innovations on blended learning. Recently, research has started to explore the
effectiveness of using Web 2.0 in blended learning. With the continuous development
of the use of web-based applications and 3D virtual worlds like Second Life, which
can be called e-learning 3.0 (see Figure 3), there are even more opportunities to create
a better engagement blend. The future development of technology will change the
delivery modes used, the cost effectiveness and the acceptance and recognition of the
new educational environment [1].
Fig. 3. The Development of E-learning
Web 1.0 is a linear model ‘site to user’, one-dimensional interaction. The owner of a
site is the source of information; the readers are its users. There is no feedback
between the site and the users, as if you can write a letter to the editor or call (like the
readers of a newspaper).
Web 2.0 is a social web of two-dimensional interaction. The owner of a site
manages the information provided by users in accordance with own rules. Users
themselves make publications, write comments, and communicate with each other
(social networks). Feedback between the site and users is also absent, because users
do not formulate rules. Unlike Web 1.0 the owners do not have to fill the site with
information as the users do it.
Web 3.0 is a social space, three-dimensional self-organization. The higher level of
the Web is a condition where the users of a site are its owners and themselves fill in
their information according to their own rules. To manage this information resource
they knowingly and voluntarily choose the authorities and, if necessary, update them
promptly. The defining features of Web 3.0 are self-financing, self-organization and
self-control. Additional features of the third Web are mobility (can be used with
Smartphone), scalability (easy expansion) and gamification (elements of gaming
competition). Social 3D networks, formed on the model Web 3.0, acquire features of
the collective mind, so they are also called social neural networks, or ecological
networks. As the users can communicate with each other, they have an illusion that
these conversations have impact on the website.
Moreover, Bonk et al. [3] state that understanding emerging technologies that will
influence online learning helps in predicting promising technologies for blended
learning. Bonk et al. conducted a survey to explore the perceptions of Higher
Education educators of technologies that would most impact the delivery of online
education during the next few years. Out of the 14 technologies listed, reusable
learning objects, were predicted to have the most significant impact. Some of the
other tools were: wireless technologies, collaboration tools, digital libraries and
games with simulations.
Furthermore, the predicted expansion of blended learning is likely to be linked to
ten trends which are presented in the survey of Bonk et al. [3]. These trends are listed
in Table 3. The first trend is the increasing use of mobile and wireless technologies,
which foster learning anytime and from anywhere. The second trend indicates that
mobile blended learning leads to individualization. Bonk et al. introduce the fourth
trend were learners self-regulate their own learning and decide about the design of
their own degrees or programs. Global connectedness is also predicted as a feature of
blended learning. Looking into the future, Bonk et al. perceive blended learning as a
means for building shared cultural understanding on a global basis. For example, with
blended learning, courses from various contexts will share similar online Learning
Objects such as those provided in the Multimedia Educational Resource for Learning
and Online Teaching (MERLOT) website.
Moreover, Bonk et al. [3] predict that blended learning will grow in universities
because it reduces class room meeting or seat-time which then decreases the brick and
mortar needs but at the same time it can increase learning outcomes. Bonk et al. raise
the issue of how course designation in Higher Education might differ according to the
percentage of the blend and how courses with one-third credit of online learning
might become more respected in the near future than blended courses with only one
or two face-to-face meetings.
In addition, Bonk et al. [3] predict the emergence of specialist certificates and even
master’s degrees for blended learning lecturers. They also state that blended learning
lecturers must have the skills that enable them to integrate new activities that meet
learners’ interests. Certainly, understanding the abilities of the current and future
students is the key.
Most of Bonk’s predictions were proved by quantitative results of a Mapping
Survey conducted in October-December 2013 by the European University
Association [7]. 249 answers from higher education institutions, in their majority
universities, from 38 European systems (EU and wider Europe), were received. The
survey asked about the type of e-learning institutions use, their experiences in this
area and their expectations for the future.
The results of the survey show – with very few exceptions – that practically all
higher education institutions of the sample have started to embrace e-learning. Most
of the surveyed institutions are using blended learning (91%), integrating e-learning
into conventional teaching, but surprisingly 82% of institutions also indicate that they
offer online learning courses. Less frequent, but seemingly also on the rise, are other
forms of provision such as joint inter-institutional collaboration and online degree
courses. Online examinations are likely to become more widely used for all students
in all or most disciplines, also for conventionally taught courses. Besides pedagogical
and economic motives, the institutions refer to a growing need for flexibility of time
and place, and better use of resources, benefiting both residential students and a wider
range of professional and other lifelong learners [7, p. 7].
Table 3. Trends and Predictions Related to Blended Learning [3]
Mobile Blended Learning Increasing use of mobile and handheld will create rich and exciting
new avenues for blended learning.
Greater Visualization, Blended learning environments will increasingly become
Individualization, and individualized; in particular, emphasizing visual and hands-on
Hands-on Learning activities.
Self-Determined Blended Blended learning will foster greater student responsibility for
Learning learning. Decisions about the type and format of blended learning
will be made by students instead of instructors or instructional
designers. Learners will be designing their own programs and
degrees.
Increased Connectedness, Blended learning will open new avenues for collaboration,
Community, and community building, and global connectedness. It will become used
Collaboration as a tool for global understanding and appreciation.
Increased Authenticity Blended learning will focus on authenticity and real world
and On-Demand Learning experiences to supplement, extend, enhance, and replace formal
learning. As this occurs, blended learning will fuel advancements in
the creation and use of online case-learning, scenarios, simulations
and role play, and problem-based learning.
Linking Work and As blended learning proliferates, the lines between workplace
Learning learning and formal learning will increasingly blur. Higher
education degrees will have credits from the workplace and even
credit for work performed.
Changed Calendaring The calendar system or time scheduling of learning will be less
appropriate and pre-definable.
Blended Learning Course Courses and programs will be increasingly designated as blended
Designations learning paths or options.
Changed Instructor Roles The role of an instructor or trainer in a blended environment will
shift to one of mentor, coach, and counsellor.
The Emergence of There will emerge specialist teaching certificates, degree programs,
Blended Learning and resources or portals related to blended learning courses and
Specialists programs.
The vast majority of institutions offer blended learning and online learning courses
(91% and 82% respectively). While blended learning degree programs (55%), online
degree programs (39%) and online learning organized jointly with other institutions
(40%) are still less common, 10-14% of respondents said they plan to develop them
(Figure 4) [7, p. 26].
The fact that blended learning, the most widespread form of provision, occurs
throughout only one in every four institutions, indicates the very modest level of
mainstreaming in e-learning and its huge potential for further development.
Fig. 4. Does your institution offer any of the following?
The trends that will affect the learning industry, specifically the e-learning
landscape, for 2019 are the following:
1. Adaptive Learning Going To The Next Level. Adaptive learning will make
further strides in the eLearning marketplace. Organizations and learners will
benefit as organizations ensure that there are better competition rates, and learners
will enjoy the learning process as they get to see only that content that is
personalized to them. Using effective assessments, learners can skip the content
that they are completely confident about.
2. Microlearning. It is a great method of implementing learning in small chunks that
are objective driven and can be easily and quickly deployed within organizations.
Learners benefit as they get through the modules quickly and can repeat the
learning many times as well. Microlearning can be implemented as videos, small
games, quizzes, and infographics. The great advantage of microlearning is that it
can be implemented on any device.
3. Artificial Intelligence and Learner Assistance. Artificial Intelligence will be used
to predict learner behaviour, as well as help personalize the learning. Based on the
modules that were taken by learners and the difficulties or challenges faced, better
personalization will be brought about. Voice-guided bots will also help learners to
search for key content in modules. Added to the mix is the use of robots for
helping kids and people with special needs to learn new skills, and help them in
the moment of need.
4. Gamification and Game-Based Learning. Organizations will look to implement
more game-based solutions, as they see them as value adders for the organization-
wide learning. Games that are well thought out, well designed and address the
needs of learners engage them effectively. It has been proven through numerous
implementations that games help in releasing happy hormones, such as dopamine
and serotonin.
5. Augmented Reality AR / Virtual Reality VR / Mixed Reality MR. The great thing
about Augmented Reality is that it can augment the existing content through
interesting overlays of graphics and images that can pop out and thrill the
learners. More than the thrill, it is the experience itself that helps learners connect
to the content better. Organizations are now looking at Virtual Reality as an
important solution, as eLearning companies use effective Instructional Design
strategies to enhance the VR experience. Using a mixture of 360-degree
photographs, interactions, and many more elements, VR is becoming a useful
experience. Organizations are also investing in cognitive learning products that
are augmented by VR especially for children and people with special needs.
Already big players are making investments in MR which combines AR and VR
to a great effect.
6. Video-Based Learning. Videos are one of the hottest modes of training right now.
The popularity of video-based sites (like YouTube) has forced organizations to
adopt more videos into their training. Be it Instructor-Led Training that is
interspersed with anecdotal or contextual videos, or eLearning where videos play
an integral part in disseminating information, videos are here to stay.
7. Social Learning. It involves collaboration between individuals at the workplace
through various modes, such as forums, informal chat sessions, sharing sessions,
and learning circles.
8. Content Curation. It is a method of curating information and providing the
learners with just-in-time information. Learning management systems will
continue to grow and offer content curation as an important method of sharing
information, and provide the right experience to the learners [9].
4 Conclusions
The principle difference between today learning environment and the previous one is
its ability to react at student’s learning activities and needs providing personalized
local learning environment. The proliferation of virtual forms for education is a
natural stage in education evolution. It covers the whole system from chalkboard to
smart board, from a usual library to electronic one, from small training groups to
virtual classrooms of any scale, etc. Virtual and traditional forms of education should
not be perceived as mutually exclusive. A good education today is a synthesis of
various forms acquiring knowledge and modern technologies, the optimal
combination of which only the student himself can determine for himself. Hybrid
learning environment entered the XXI century as the most promising, synthetic and
integral part of education. Historical analysis of the patterns of the most effective
approaches in the field of education is extremely important for determining the best
ways to improve education today. An essential element of the article is to consider the
connection of modern learning environment with the development of information and
communication technologies (ICT). It is shown that the future of learning
environment will be based on EdTech.
References
1. Alebaikan, R., Troudi, S.: Blended Learning in Saudi Universities: Challenges and
Perspectives. Research in Learning Technology. 18(1), 49–59 (2010).
doi:10.1080/09687761003657614
2. Anderson, T., Dron, J.: Three Generations of Distance Education Pedagogy. International
Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning. 12(3), 80–97 (2011).
doi:10.19173/irrodl.v12i3.890
3. Bonk, C., Kim, K.J., Zeng, T.: Future Directions of Blended Learning in Higher Education
and Workplace Settings. In: Bonk, C., Graham, C.R. (Eds.) Handbook of Blended
Learning: Global Perspectives, Local Designs, pp. 550-567. Pfeiffer, San Francisco (2006)
4. Centre For Excellence – Excelling At Everything. http://www.centreforexcellence.org.uk
(2017). Accessed 05 Mar 2019
5. Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the
European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions. http://eur-
lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:52013DC0654&from=EN (2013).
Accessed 10 Mar 2019
6. Educational technology. http://edutechwiki.unige.ch/en/Educational_technology (2019).
Accessed 15 Mar 2019
7. Gaebel, M., Kupriyanova, V., Morais, R., Colucci, E.: E-Learning in European Higher
Education Institutions: Results of a Mapping Survey conducted in October-December
2013. European University Association. https://eua.eu/resources/publications/368:e-
learning-in-european-higher-education-institutions.html (2014). Accessed 15 Mar 2019
8. Himyak, O.: What is EdTech. 10 most high-profile Ukrainian projects in the field of
technology education. https://techno.nv.ua/technoblogs/chto-takoe-edtech-10-samykh-
hromkikh-ukrainskikh-proektov-v-oblasti-tekhnolohij-obrazovanija-bloh-ariny-khimjak-
2492493.html (2018) Accessed 15 Mar 2019
9. Kumar DN, S.: 8 Top eLearning Trends For 2019. https://elearningindustry.com/elearning-
trends-for-2019-8-top (2018). Accessed 15 Mar 2019
10. Lim, C.P., Wang, L.B. (eds.): Blended Learning for Quality Higher Education: Selected
Case Studies on Implementation from Asia-Pacific. UNESCO, Paris (2016)
11. Littlejohn, A., Pegler, C.: Preparing for Blended e-Learning. Routledge, London (2007)
12. Nipper, S.: Third generation distance learning and computer conferencing. In: Mason, R.,
Kaye, A. (eds.) Mind weave: Communication, computers and distance education.
Permagon Press, Oxford (1989)
13. Selevko, G.K.: Modern educational technology. National Education, Moscow (1998)
14. Spivakovsky, A., Petukhova, L., Spivakovska, E., Kotkova, V., Kravtsov, H.: Three-
Subjective Didactic Model. In: Ermolayev, V., Mayr, H.C., Nikitchenko, M., Spivakovsky,
A., Zholtkevych, G. (eds.) Information and Communication Technologies in Education,
Research, and Industrial Applications. ICTERI 2013. Communications in Computer and
Information Science, vol. 412, pp. 252–273. Springer, Cham (2013). doi:10.1007/978-3-
319-03998-5_13
15. Spivakovsky, A.V. (ed.): New didactics: from subject-subject to threesubject relations.
Aylant, Kherson (2016)
16. Home – NCTE. http://www2.ncte.org (2018). Accessed 10 Mar 2019
17. Vedrenne-Cloquet, B.: What is EdTech and why is it such a big opportunity?
https://www.hottopics.ht/14731/what-is-edtech-and-why-is-it-important (2018). Accessed
10 Mar 2019