Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Do You Have a SOLE? Research on Informal and Self-Directed Online Learning Environments

Learning, Design, and Technology

Abstract

Web-based resources and technologies for informal and self-directed learning have proliferated during the past two decades. This chapter reviews some of the key research on informal and self-directed learning. Next, it explores different types of informal and self-directed online learning environments (SOLEs) (e.g., learning portals, shared online video, language learning, adventure learning, virtual learning, global change, etc.). An eight-part scheme for analyzing the quality of those resources is then detailed. Using this scheme, the researchers analyzed more than 300 Web resources for informal and self-directed learning. The results of this analysis are briefly recapped. In addition, results of several studies on the goals, achievements, preferences, and challenges of self-directed online learners are highlighted. This chapter also offers examples of individuals who have been using such resources to experience a life change of some type. These examples reveal that learning is currently being stretched from formal school-based situations to learning anywhere and at any time on the planet. It is intended that this paper provide a lens for understanding and evaluating informal online learning including the quality of such content, tools, and resources.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Abd-El-Fattah, S. M. (2010). Garrison’s model of self-directed learning: Preliminary validation and relationship to academic achievement. The Spanish Journal of Psychology, 13(2), 586–596.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Avdal, E. (2013). The effect of self-directed learning abilities of student nurses on success in Turkey. Nurse Education Today, 33, 838–841.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bandalaria, M. D. P., & Alfonso, G. A. (2015). Situating MOOCs in the developing world context: The Philippines case study. In C. J. Bonk, M. M. Lee, T. C. Reeves, & T. H. Reynolds (Eds.), MOOCs and open education around the world (pp. 243–254). New York, NY: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. New York, NY: Worth Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bersin, J. (2016, February). Will video kill off the LMS? Chief Learning Officer. Retrieved from http://www.clomedia.com/articles/6720-will-video-based-learning-kill-the-lms

  • Blumenstyk, G. (2015, September 14). When a degree is just the beginning. The Chronicle of Higher Education. Retrieved from http://chronicle.com/article/When-a-Degree-Is-Just-the/232969/

  • Bonk, C. J. (2009a, October 19). The wide open learning world: Sea, land, and ice views. Association for Learning Technology (ALT) Online Newsletter, Issue 17. Retrieved from http://archive.alt.ac.uk/newsletter.alt.ac.uk/newsletter.alt.ac.uk/1h7kpy8fa5s.html

  • Bonk, C. J. (2009b). The world is open: How web technology is revolutionizing education. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bonk, C. J. (2011). YouTube anchors and enders: The use of shared online video content as a macrocontext for learning. Asia-Pacific Collaborative Education Journal, 7(1). Retrieved from http://www.acecjournal.org/2009/Journal_Data/Vol7No1/201103.pdf

  • Bonk, C. J., & Lee, M. M. (2016). Motivations, achievements, and challenges of self-directed informal learners in open educational environments and MOOCs. Manuscript submitted for publication.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bonk, C. J., Lee, M. M., Kim, N., & Lin, M.-F. (2009). The tensions of transformation in three cross-institutional wikibook projects. The Internet and Higher Education, 12(3–4), 126–135.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bonk, C. J., Lee, M. M., Kim, N., & Lin, M.-F. (2010). Wikibook transformations and disruptions: Looking back twenty years to today. In H. H. Yang & S. C.-Y. Yuen (Eds.), Collective intelligence and e-learning 2.0: Implications of web-based communities and networking (pp. 127–146). Hershey, PA: Information Science Reference.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Bonk, C. J., Lee, M. M., Kou, X., Xu, S., & Sheu, F.-R. (2015). Understanding the self-directed online learning preferences, goals, achievements, and challenges of MIT OpenCourseWare subscribers. Educational Technology and Society, 18(2), 349–368. Retrieved from http://www.ifets.info/journals/18_2/26.pdf

  • Bonk, C. J., Lee, M. M., Kou, X., & Sheu, F.-R. (2013, October). Documenting life change from open educational resources and participation in massive open online courses. Paper presented at the 2013 Association for Educational Communications and Technology (AECT) Annual International Convention, Anaheim, CA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bonk, C. J., Lee, M. M., Reeves, T. C., & Reynolds, T. H. (Eds.). (2015). MOOCs and open education around the world. New York, NY: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Buckner, E., & Kim, P. (2011). Mobile innovations, executive functions, and educational development in conflict zones: A case study from Palestine. Educational Technology Research & Development, 60(1), 175–192.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bullock, S. M. (2013). Using digital technologies to support self-directed learning for preservice teacher education. The Curriculum Journal, 24(1), 103–120.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Caffarella, R. (1988, November). Qualitative research on self-directed learning. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Association for Adult and Continuing Education (pp. 1–8), Tulsa, OK.

    Google Scholar 

  • Camera, L. (2016, June 16). Coursera on a mission to help refugees. US News and World Report. Retrieved from http://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2016-06-20/coursera-on-a-mission-to-help-refugees

  • Chopra, D. (2015). Shubham Jaglan overwhelmed by “dream” return home after double world championship. NDTV Sports. Retrieved from http://sports.ndtv.com/golf/news/246551-shubham-jaglan-overwhelmed-by-dream-return-home-after-double-world-championship

  • Coursera. (2016, June 20). Coursera and the U.S. Department of State launch Coursera for refugees. Coursera Blog. Retrieved from https://blog.coursera.org/post/146207863617

  • Cross, J. (2007). Informal learning: Rediscovering the natural pathways that inspire innovation and performance. San Francisco, CA: Pfeiffer/Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cross, J. (2015). Real learning: The missing manual for do-it yourself learners. Berkeley, CA: Internet Time Group Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dabbaugh, N., & Kitsantas, A. (2012). Personal learning environments, social media, and self-regulated learning: A natural formula for connecting formal and informal learning. The Internet and Higher Education, 15(1), 3–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Doering, A. (2006). Adventure learning: Transformative hybrid online education. Distance Education, 27(2), 197–215.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Doering, A., & Veletsianos, G. (2008). Hybrid online education: Identifying integration models using adventure learning. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 41(1), 23–41.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • El-Gilany, A., & Abusaad, F. E. S. (2013). Self-directed learning readiness and learning styles among Saudi undergraduate nursing students. Nurse Education Today, 33, 1040–1044.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Farrow, R., de los Arcos, B., Pitt, B., & Weller, M. (2015, November). Who are the open learners? Profiling informal users of OER repositories. Paper presented at the 2015 Open Education Conference, Vancouver, BC.

    Google Scholar 

  • Friedman, T. L. (2005). The world is flat: A brief history of the twenty-first century. New York, NY: Farrar, Straus, and Giroux.

    Google Scholar 

  • Garrison, D. R. (1997). Self-directed learning: Toward a comprehensive model. Adult Education Quarterly, 48(1), 18–33.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hartnett, M., Brown, M., & Wilson, A. (2015). MOOCs down under: Insights from the Open2Study experience. In C. J. Bonk, M. M. Lee, T. C. Reeves, & T. H. Reynolds (Eds.), MOOCs and open education around the world (pp. 78–88). New York, NY: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hiemstra, R. (1994). Self-directed learning. In The sourcebook for self-directed learning (pp. 9–20). Retrieved from http://books.google.com/books?hl=en&lr=&id=yWes2NRKQroC&oi=fnd&pg=PA9&dq=self-directed+learning&ots=x51Tt5nOyA&sig=t8awE2fr6P-L9662WhKTWT4z27E#v=snippet&q=self-directed%20learning&f=false

  • Iiyoshi, T., & Kumar, M. S. V. (2008). Opening up education: The collective advancement of education through open technology, open content, and open knowledge. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Retrieved from http://mitpress.mit.edu/catalog/item/default.asp?ttype=2&tid=11309&mode=toc

  • Jagannathan, S. (2015). Harnessing the power of open learning to share global prosperity and eradicate poverty. In C. J. Bonk, M. M. Lee, T. C. Reeves, & T. H. Reynolds (Eds.), MOOCs and open education around the world (pp. 218–231). New York, NY: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jung, E., Kim, M., Wang, Y., & Bonk, C. J. (2011, October). What technology tools promote such extreme learning?: Analysis of technologies used in extreme learning Websites. In Proceedings of the e-learn conference 2011 – World conference on e-learning in corporate, government, healthcare, and higher education (pp. 2581–2587). Chesapeake, VA: AACE. Retrieved from http://www.editlib.org/p/39017

  • Kartal, E., & Uzun, L. (2010). The Internet, language learning, and international dialogue: Constructing online foreign language learning Web sites. Turkish Online Journal of Distance Education, 11(2), 90–107.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kim, P. (2009). An action research for the development of mobile learning system for the underserved. Educational Technology Research & Development, 57(3), 415–435.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kim, P., Buckner, E., Kim, H., Makany, T., Taleja, N., & Parikh, V. (2011). A comparative analysis of a game-based mobile learning model in low-socioeconomic communities of India. International Journal of Educational Development, 32(2), 329–340.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kim, M., Jung, E., Altuwaijri, A., Wang, Y., & Bonk, C. J. (2014, Spring). Analyzing the human learning and development potential of websites available for informal learning. International Journal of Self-Directed Learning, 11(1), 12–28. Available: http://sdlglobal.com/IJSDL/IJSDL%2011.1%20final.pdf

  • Knowles, M. (1975). Self-directed learning: A guide for learners and teachers. Englewood Cliffs, NJ/Cambridge: Prentice Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kong, K. (2009). A comparison of the linguistic and interactional features of language learning Web sites and textbooks. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 22(1), 31–55.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kop, R. (2011). The challenges to connectivist learning on open online networks: Learning experiences during a massive open online course. International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 12(3), 19–37.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kop, R., & Fournier, H. (2010). New dimensions to self-directed learning in an open networked learning environment. International Journal for Self-Directed Learning, 7(2), 1–19.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kou, X., & Bonk, C. J. (2013, November). Finding success from informal learning in OpenCourseWare (OWC) and massive open online courses (MOOCs): A qualitative analyses. Presentation at the 2013 Association for Educational Communications and Technology (AECT) Annual International Convention, Anaheim, CA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lee, M. (2007). “Making it relevant”: A rural teacher’s integration of an international studies program. Intercultural Education, 18(2), 147–159.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lee, M. M. (2010). “We are so over pharaohs and pyramids!” Re-presenting the othered lives with young people through an international studies program. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education (QSE), 23(6), 737–754.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lee, M. M., & Bonk, C. J. (2013). Through the words of experts: Cases of expanded classrooms using conferencing technology. Language Facts and Perspectives, 31, 107–137.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lee, M. M., Bonk, C. J., Reynolds, T. H., & Reeves, T. C. (Eds.). (2015). Special issue: MOOCs and open education. International Journal on E-Learning, 14(3), 261–400.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lee, M., & Hutton, D. (2007, August). Using interactive videoconferencing technology for global awareness: The case of ISIS. International Journal of Instructional Technology and Distance Learning, 4(8). Retrieved from http://www.itdl.org/Journal/Aug_07/article01.htm

  • Li, S. T., Tancredi, D. j., Patrick, J., & West, D. C. (2010). Factors associated with successful self-directed learning using individualized learning plans during pediatric residency. Academic Pediatrics, 10(2), 124–130.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lin, M.-F., Sajjapanroj, S., & Bonk, C. J. (2011, October–December). Wikibooks and Wikibookians: Loosely-coupled community or the future of the textbook industry? IEEE Transactions on Learning Technologies, 4(4), 327–339. Retrieved from http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/stamp/stamp.jsp?tp=&arnumber=5744067

  • Liu, M., Traphagan, T., Huh, J., Koh, Y., Choi, G., & McGregor, A. (2008). Designing websites for ESL learners: A usability testing study. CALICO Journal, 25(2), 207–240.

    Google Scholar 

  • Livingstone, D. W. (1999). Exploring the icebergs of adult learning: Findings of the first Canadian survey of informal learning practices. The Canadian Journal for the Study of Adult Education, 13(2), 49–72.

    Google Scholar 

  • Longview Foundation. (2008). Teacher preparation for the global age: The imperative for change. Silver Spring, MD: Longview Foundation for World Affairs and International Understanding. Retrieved from http://www.longviewfdn.org/files/44.pdf

  • Marsick, V. J., & Volpe, M. (1999). The nature of and need for informal learning. In V. J. Marsick & M. Volpe (Eds.), Informal learning on the job: Advances in developing human resources. San Francisco, CA: Berrett Koehler.

    Google Scholar 

  • Marsick, V. J., & Watkins, K. E. (2001). Informal and incidental learning. New Directions for Adult and Continuing Education, 2001(89), 25–34.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McLemee, S. (2016, January 15). Wikipedia at 15. Inside Higher Ed. Retrieved from https://www.insidehighered.com/views/2016/01/15/essay-wikipedias-fifteenth-anniversary

  • Merriam, S. B. (2001). Andragogy and self-directed learning: Pillars of adult learning theory. New Directions for Adult and Continuing Education, 89, 3–13.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Merryfield, M. M. (2007). The Web and teachers’ decision-making in global education. Theory and Research in Social Education, 35(2), 256–276.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Merryfield, M. M. (2008). The challenge of globalization: Preparing teachers for a global age. Teacher Education & Practice, 21(4), 434–437.

    Google Scholar 

  • Merryfield, M. M., & Kasai, M. (2009). How are teachers responding to globalization? In W. Parker (Ed.), Social studies today: Research and practice (pp. 165–173). New York, NY: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Miller, C., Veletsianos, G., & Doering, A. (2008). Curriculum at forty below: A phenomenological inquiry of an educator/explorer’s experience with adventure learning in the Arctic. Distance Education, 29(3), 253–267.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Milne, J. (2015, October 7). Video killed the radio star. Will it do the same to learning management systems? Diginomica. Retrieved from http://diginomica.com/2015/10/07/video-killed-the-radio-star-will-it-do-the-same-to-learning-management-systems/#.VrbO2v0UVjs

  • MIT News. (2001, April 4). MIT to make nearly all course materials available free on the World Wide Web. MIT News. Retrieved from http://web.mit.edu/newsoffice/2001/ocw.html

  • NDTV. (2015, August 4). India’s golf prodigy Shubham Jaglan returns home to hero’s welcome. NDTV. Retrieved from http://www.ndtv.com/video/player/news/india-s-golf-prodigy-shubham-jaglan-returns-home-to-hero-s-welcome/377614

  • O’Neal, M. (2013, September 16). Rwandan degree program aims for a ‘University in a Box.’ Chronicle of Higher Education. Retrieved from http://chronicle.com/article/Rwandan-Degree-Program-Aims/141631/

  • OER Research Hub. (2015). Data report 2013–2015: Informal learners. Retrieved from http://oerresearchhub.org/2015/09/07/data-report-2013-2015-informal-learners/

  • Owen, T. R. (2002). Self-directed learning in adulthood: A literature review. (Ed 461 050). Retrieved from http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED461050.pdf

  • Richards, G., & Diallo, B. (2015). OER and MOOCs in Africa: The AVU experience. In C. J. Bonk, M. M. Lee, T. C. Reeves, & T. H. Reynolds (Eds.), MOOCs and open education around the world (pp. 255–261). New York, NY: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Riel, M. (1993). Global education through learning circles. In L. Harasim (Ed.), Global networks (pp. 221–236). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sajjapanroj, S., Bonk, C. J., Lee, M., & Lin M.-F. (2008, Spring). A window on Wikibookians: Surveying their statuses, successes, satisfactions, and sociocultural experiences. Journal of Interactive Online Learning, 7(1), 36–58. Retrieved from http://www.ncolr.org/issues/jiol/v7/n1/a-window-on-wikibookians-surveying-their-statuses-successes-satisfactions-and-sociocultural-experiences#.UrYBf9oo5js

  • Schugurensky, D. (2000). The forms of informal learning. Towards a conceptualization of the field (Working Paper 19–2000). Paper presented at the New Approaches for Lifelong Learning (NALL) Fourth Annual Conference, October 6–8, 2000.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sheu, F. R., Lee, M. M., Bonk, C. J., & Kou, X. (2013, June). A mixed methods look at self-directed online learning: MOOCs, open education, and beyond. Paper presented at the 25th Annual Ethnographic & Qualitative Research Conference (EQRC), Cedarville, OH.

    Google Scholar 

  • Song, D., & Bonk, C. J. (2016). Motivational factors in self-directed informal learning from online learning resources. Cogent Education, 3. Retrieved from http://cogentoa.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/2331186X.2016.1205838

  • Song, L., & Hill, J. R. (2007). A conceptual model for understanding self-directed learning in online environments. Journal of Interactive Online Learning, 6(1), 27–42.

    Google Scholar 

  • Veletsianos, G., & Klanthous, I. (2009). A review of adventure learning. International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 10(6), 84–105. Retrieved from http://www.irrodl.org/index.php/irrodl/article/view/755/1435

  • Venkataraman, B., & Kanwar, A. (2015). Changing the tune: MOOCs for human development? In C. J. Bonk, M. M. Lee, T. C. Reeves, & T. H. Reynolds (Eds.), MOOCs and open education around the world (pp. 206–217). New York, NY: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Warschauer, M., & Kern, R. (Eds.). (2000). Network-based language teaching: Concepts and practice. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wikipedia. (2016). Wikipedia: Size of Wikipedia. Retrieved from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Size_of_Wikipedia

  • Young, J. R. (2015, September 14). Credit for watching a TED talk? The Chronicle of Higher Education. Retrieved from http://chronicle.com/article/Credit-for-Watching-a-TED/232973/

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Indiana University, Bloomington, IN, USA

    Curtis J. Bonk, Minkyoung Kim & Shuya Xu

  2. Department of Instructional Systems Technology, Indiana University School of Education, W.W. Wright Education Building, Room 2238, 201 N. Rose Avenue, Bloomington, IN, 47405-1006, USA

    Curtis J. Bonk, Minkyoung Kim & Shuya Xu

Authors
  1. Curtis J. Bonk
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Minkyoung Kim
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Shuya Xu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Curtis J. Bonk .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. College of Info, Ste G150, Univ of North Texas, Denton, Texas, USA

    Michael J Spector

  2. School of Education, Virginia Tech, Blacksburg, Virginia, USA

    Barbara B Lockee

  3. School of Education, Baker University, Overland Park, Kansas, USA

    Marcus D. Childress

Appendix A

Appendix A

Extreme learning Website coding scheme.

No.

Criteria

Definition

1 (Low)

2

3 (Medium)

4

5 (High)

1.

Content richness

This criterion deals with how much information the website, resource, or project contains on the topic chosen, how adequately it fulfills the purpose of learning, and whether the information is credible and up-to-date or not.

The website, resource, or project doesn’t contain much information on the topic chosen, and doesn’t adequately fulfill the purpose of learning. The information is not credible or is out-of-date. There are few resources providing access to learning content; it may appeal to different learning preferences or styles.

–

The website, resource, or project contains less information on the topic chosen and fulfills the purpose of learning to some extent. The information is somewhat credible or is up-to-date. There are some resources providing access to learning content; it may appeal to different learning preferences or styles.

–

The website, resource, or project contains much information on the topic chosen and adequately fulfills the purpose of learning. The information is credible and up-to-date. There are a wide range of resources providing access to learning content; it may appeal to different learning preferences or styles.

2.

Functionality of technology

This criterion deals with the ease of access, navigation, and use of the website, resource, or project and whether it contains effective and appropriately employed technology to serve the stated learning purpose.

The website, resource, or project is difficult to access, navigate, and use and contains ineffective technology for the stated learning purposes of potential users.

–

The website, resource, or project is relatively intuitive or easy to access, navigate, and use and contains somewhat effective and appropriately employed technology to serve the stated learning purposes of potential users.

–

The website, resource, or project is extremely intuitive and easy to access, navigate, and use and contains highly effective and appropriately employed technology to serve the stated learning purposes of potential users.

3.

Extent of technology integration

This criterion deals with the range, amount, and types of technologies employed including issues of interaction, collaboration, and information collection, contribution, and community through such technology.

The website, resource, or project contains few technologies for learning. Technology tools are not interactive, collaborative, or participatory and do not promote communication or sense of community. User contribution is limited or nonexistent.

–

The website, resource, or project contains some range of technologies for learning. Technology tools are moderately interactive and collaborative and might enhance information exchange or user communication and contribution.

–

The website, resource, or project contains a wide range and amount of technologies for learning. Technology tools are highly interactive and collaborative and can greatly promote information collection and dissemination as well as user communication and contribution.

4.

Novelty of technology (Coolness factor #1)

This criterion deals with whether the website, resource, or project contains emerging, unusual, or novel technologies.

There is no experimentation with emerging, unusual, or novel technologies for learning and the technologies which are used are out-of-date.

–

There is some experimentation with emerging, unusual, or novel technologies for learning which might motivate or engage potential users/learners.

–

There is extensive experimentation with emerging, unusual, or novel technologies for learning, some of which is quite exciting, motivating, or appealing for potential users/learners.

5.

Uniqueness of learning environment/learning (Coolness factor #2)

The website, resource, or project serves the purpose of learning in a nontraditional, unique, or extreme learning environment, which is highly different from traditional classroom settings.

The website, resource, or project is just a replication of formal or traditional school-based learning. The learning is essentially what the user or learner might experience in a traditional teaching or training situation. The website, resource, or project might be rather plain or unappealing to the potential learner or user; it is one of dozens of such sites.

–

The website, resource, or project is somewhat unique or different from traditional learning. There are learning opportunities that are somewhat novel or hard to find in formal or traditional settings. The website, resource, or project makes an attempt to connect people to each other as well as to novel resources and activities and current information not easily found in books or other traditional learning resources. There is also some room for creative expression of the users.

–

The website, resource, or project is unique or different. There are learning opportunities that are novel or hard to find in formal or traditional settings. The website, resource, or project connects people to each other as well as to novel resources and activities and current information is not easily found in books or other traditional learning resources. There is also extensive room for creative expression of the users.

6.

Potential for learning

This criterion deals with whether the website, resource, or project enables and provides learning activities or learning opportunities for the target audience to achieve the intended learning goals. There might be many markers, targets, or goals for such learning as well as celebration of those who have completed one or more learning-related units, activities, or segments. Such markers might come in the forms of self-tests, discussions, reviews, interactions, etc., or various rich media resources. The paths for learning are varied and extensive.

The website, resource, or project enables and provides few learning activities or opportunities for the target audience to achieve the intended learning goals. There are extremely limited markers, targets, or goals for such learning and limited acknowledgment related to those who have completed one or more learning-related units, activities, or segments (i.e., self-tests, discussions, reviews, interactions, etc., or various rich media resources). The paths for each learner may be not unique. There may be few ways to socially network or collaborate with others at the website, resource, or project.

–

The website, resource, or project enables and provides some learning activities or learning opportunities for target audience to achieve some intended learning goals. There might be some markers, targets, or goals for such learning as well as celebration of those who have completed one or more learning-related units, activities, or segments (i.e., self-tests, discussions, reviews, interactions, etc., or various rich media resources). The paths for each learner may be somewhat unique. There may also be some ways to socially network or collaborate with others at the website, resource, or project.

–

The website, resource, or project enables and provides the potential for learning activities or learning opportunities for the target audience to achieve most or all of the intended learning goals. There might be markers, targets, or goals for such learning as well as celebration of those who have completed one or more learning-related units, activities, or segments (i.e., self-tests, discussions, reviews, interactions, etc., or various rich media resources). The paths for each learner may be highly unique. There may also be ways to socially network or collaborate with others at the website, resource, or project.

7.

Potential for life changing

This criterion deals with whether the website, resource, or project influences or improves the quality of life and extends or changes the perspective of the world for the intended audience. As part of this, there is potential for individuals to experience life changing or empowerment moments from the use of the website, resource, or project.

The website, resource, or project does not offer much in the way of improving or influencing the quality of life or the perspective of the world for the intended audience. The impact is quite narrow or limited. Users might not gain anything beyond basic skills.

–

The website, resource, or project somewhat influences or improves the quality of life and the perspective of the world for intended audience. People are somewhat empowered to learn in ways that change their lives or broaden their outlook, perspectives, or knowledge and competencies. They can connect to other people or to knowledge and information in some ways that they might not have felt or experienced previously.

–

The website, resource, or project significantly influences or improves the quality of life and extends or changes the perspective of the world for the intended audience. People are empowered to learn in ways that change their lives or broaden their outlook, perspectives, or knowledge and competencies. They can connect to other people or to knowledge and information in many ways previously unseen or seldom experienced.

8.

Scalability of audience

This criterion deals with the potential impact of the website, resource, or project including the possibility to broaden the size and scope of its potential intended audience.

The website, resource, or project has a narrow focus or does not have wide appeal or potential impact. The intended or actual audience is quite limited.

–

The website, resource, or project has the potential to impact many people or a somewhat wide audience. It might have relevance to several different audiences or types of users.

–

The website, resource, or project has high possibility to impact a broad audience or large scale and scope from one or more educational sectors (e.g., K-12, higher education, corporate, government, nonprofit, or informal).

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2016 Springer International Publishing AG

About this entry

Cite this entry

Bonk, C.J., Kim, M., Xu, S. (2016). Do You Have a SOLE? Research on Informal and Self-Directed Online Learning Environments. In: Spector, M., Lockee, B., Childress, M. (eds) Learning, Design, and Technology. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-17727-4_35-1

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-17727-4_35-1

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-17727-4

  • eBook Packages: Springer Reference EducationReference Module Humanities and Social SciencesReference Module Education

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Chapter history

  1. Latest

    Do You Have a SOLE? Research on Informal and Self-Directed Online Learning Environments
    Published:
    28 June 2023

    DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-17727-4_35-2

  2. Original

    Do You Have a SOLE? Research on Informal and Self-Directed Online Learning Environments
    Published:
    20 December 2016

    DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-17727-4_35-1

Search

Navigation