Distance and Flexible Learning in the Twenty-First Century

  • Roumen Nikolov
  • Kwok-Wing LaiEmail author
  • Evgenia Sendova
  • Herma Jonker
Reference work entry
Part of the Springer International Handbooks of Education book series (SIHE)


With the huge increase in Internet connectivity and mobility of learning devices, learning can now become much more flexible. In this chapter, we discuss how new technologies can afford personalized learning, and in particular, how curriculum flexibility is supported by the use of technologies. We frame curriculum flexibility in terms of what, how, where, and when learning takes place. Advances in curriculum flexibility are reviewed and the elements and dimensions of a flexible curriculum addressing learner diversities are discussed. Some of the issues and challenges of flexible and distance learning are also discussed in this chapter.


Flexible learning Distance learning Curriculum flexibility Personalized learning 


  1. Aguirre-Molina, D., & Gras-Velázquez, Á. (2011). Scientix, the community for science education in Europe. In EDULEARN11 proceedings (pp. 4763–4768). IATED, Retrieved from (Accessed 17 Apr 2017).
  2. Altemueller, L., & Lindquist, C. (2017). Flipped classroom instruction for inclusive learning. British Journal of Special Education, 44(3), 341–358. Scholar
  3. Atkeson, S. (2014, September 23). Harvard-MIT partnership unveils new MOOCs for high schoolers. Education Week, 8.Google Scholar
  4. Barbour, M. K., Clark, T., DeBruler, K., & Bruno, J. A. (2016). Evaluation and approval constructs for online and blended courses and providers: A national overview. Journal of Applied Educational and Policy Research, 2(1), 32–47.Google Scholar
  5. Bergamin, P. B., Ziska, S., Werlen, E., & Siegenthaler, E. (2012). The relationship between flexible and self-regulated learning in open and distance universities. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 13(2), 101–123.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bingham, A. J., Pane, J. F., Steiner, E. D., & Hamilton, L. S. (2016). Ahead of the curve: Implementation challenges in personalized learning school models. Educational Policy, 36, doi:
  7. Booth, S. E. (2012). Cultivating knowledge sharing and trust in online communities for educators. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 47(1), 1–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Bray, B., & McClaskey, K. (2015). Make learning personal: The what, who, wow, where, and why. Thousand Oaks: Corwin.Google Scholar
  9. Campbell, R. J., Robinson, W., Neelands, J., Hewston, R., & Mazzoli, L. (2007). Personalised learning: Ambiguities in theory and practice. British Journal of Educational Studies, 55(2), 135–154.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Carlsen, A., Holmberg, C., Neghina, C., & Owusu-Boampong, A. (2016). Closing the gap: Opportunities for distance education to benefit adult learners in higher education. Hamburg: UNESCO Institute for Lifelong Learning.Google Scholar
  11. Cheng, E. (2012). Knowledge strategies for enhancing school learning capacity. International Journal of Educational Management, 26(6), 577–592. Scholar
  12. Cheong, K. (2013). Flexible learning: Dimensions and learner preferences. In Proceeding of the 27th annual conference of Asian Association of Open Universities (pp. 1–8). Islamabad: Allama Iqbal Open University.Google Scholar
  13. Collis, B. A., & Moonen, J. (2001). Flexible learning in a digital world: Experiences and expectations. London: Kogan Page Ltd..Google Scholar
  14. Daniel, J. (2012). Making sense of MOOCs: Musings in a maze of myth, paradox and possibility. Retrieved from
  15. de Jager, T. (2013). Guidelines to assist the implementation of differentiated learning activities in south African secondary schools. International Journal of Inclusive Education, 17(1), 80–94. Scholar
  16. Granić, A., Mifsud, C., & Ćukušić, M. (2009). Design, implementation and validation of a Europe-wide pedagogical framework for e-learning. Computers & Education, 53(4), 1052–1081. Scholar
  17. Gras-Velázquez, À., Schwarzenbacher, B., Tasiopoulou, E., Debry, M., Bargoin, M., Kudenko, I., & Hernández, M. (2013). The Scientix observatory: Online communication channels with teachers and students – Benefits, problems and recommendations. In M. F. Paulsen & A. Szucs (Eds.), The joy of learning: Enhancing learning experience, improving learning quality (pp. 457–466). Oslo: EDEN.Google Scholar
  18. GSMA. (2015). Mobile economy. Retrieved from (Accessed 27 April 2017).
  19. Heemskerk, I., Volman, M., ten Dam, G., & Admiraal, W. (2011). Social scripts in educational technology and inclusiveness in classroom practice. Teachers and Teaching, 17(1), 35–50. Scholar
  20. Internet World Stats (2017). Retrieved from (Accessed 27 April 2017).
  21. Kahn, K., Sendova, E., Sacristán, A. I., & Noss, R. (2011). Young students exploring cardinality by constructing infinite processes. Technology, Knowledge and Learning, 16(1), 3–34.Google Scholar
  22. Kalay, Y. E. (2004). Virtual learning environments. Journal of Information Technology in Construction (ITcon), 9(13), 195–207.Google Scholar
  23. Lai, K. W. (2014). Online teaching and learning: A shift of cultural practices. In A. Maj (Ed.), Post-privacy culture: Gaining social power in cyber democracy (pp. 223–239). Oxford, UK: Inter-Disciplinary Press.Google Scholar
  24. Lai, K. W. (2017). Pedagogical practices of NetNZ teachers for supporting online distance learners. Distance Education. Advance online publication. doi:
  25. Lakkala, S., Uusiautti, S., & Maatta, K. (2016). How to make the neighbourhood school a school for all? Journal of Research in Special Educational Needs, 16(1), 46–56. Scholar
  26. Mccarthy, B., & Schauer, K. (2017). Journey to personalized learning – A race to the top-district initiative in Galt joint union elementary school district. San Francisco: WestEd.Google Scholar
  27. Mikroyannidis, A., Okada, A., Scott, P., Russman, E., Specht, M., Stefanov, K., Boytchev, P., Protopsalitis, A., Held, P., & Hetzner, S. (2013). weSPOT: A personal and social approach to inquiry-based learning. Journal of Universal Computer Science, 19(14), 2093–2111.Google Scholar
  28. Murphy, E., & Rodriguez-Manzanares, M. A. (2009). Learner centredness in high school distance learning: Teachers’ perspectives and research validated principles. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 25(5), 597–610.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Naidu, S. (2016). Mainstreaming open, flexible, and distance learning. In K. W. Lai, S. Stein, P. Field, & K. Pratt (Eds.), 30 years of distance learning and teaching at the University of Otago (pp. 92–108). Distance Learning Office: University of Otago.Google Scholar
  30. Nikolov, R., Shoikova, M., Kovatcheva, E., Dimitrov, V., & Shikalanov, A. (2016). Learning in a smart city environment. Journal of Communication and Computer, 13, 338–350. Scholar
  31. Nikolova, I. (2001). Teacher development in ICT: Vision and implementation. In Information and communication technologies in education (pp. 71–82). New York: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Nikolova, I., & Collis, B. (1998). Flexible learning and design of instruction. British Journal of Educational Technology, 29(1), 59–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Psotka, J. (2013). Educational games and virtual reality as disruptive technologies. Educational Technology & Society, 16(2), 69–80.Google Scholar
  34. Punie, Y., & Cabrera, M. (2006). The future of ICT and learning in the knowledge society. Luxembourg: European Communities.Google Scholar
  35. Rao, K., & Meo, G. (2016). Using universal design for learning to design standards-based lessons. SAGE Open, 6(4), 1–12. Scholar
  36. Scott, C. L. (2015). The futures of learning 3: What kind of pedagogies for the 21st century? UNESCO education research and foresight, ERF working papers series, no. 15. Paris: UNESCO.Google Scholar
  37. Siemens, G. (2014). Connectivism: A learning theory for the digital age. Retrieved from (Accessed 23 Oct 2017).
  38. Sriraman, B., & Haavold, P. (2016). Creativity and giftedness in mathematics education: A pragmatic view. Retrieved from
  39. Staker, H., & Horn, M. B. (2012). Classifying K-12 blended learning. Mountain View: Innosight Institute. Scholar
  40. Tomlinson, C. A. (2008). The goals of differentiation. Educational Leadership, 66(3), 26–30.Google Scholar
  41. Tomlinson, C. A., Brighton, C., Hertberg, H., Callahan, C. M., Moon, T. R., Brimijoin, K., et al. (2003). Differentiating instruction in response to student readiness, interest, and learning profile in academically diverse classrooms: A review of literature. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 27(2/3), 119–145.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Tucker, R., & Morris, G. (2011). Anytime, anywhere, anyplace: Articulating the meaning of flexible delivery in built environment education. British Journal of Educational Technology, 42(6), 904–915. Scholar
  43. UK Department for Education. (2014). MOOCs: Opportunities for their use in compulsory-age education. Retrieved from
  44. Voogt, J., & Knezek, G. (Eds.). (2008). International handbook of information technology in primary and secondary education. New York: Springer.Google Scholar
  45. Williams, S. (2013). Principal sabbatical report: Practical ways that schools can personalise learning for their students – Powerful learner pit stops. Retrieved from Williams Sabbatical Report 2013.pdf (Accessed 27 April 2017).Google Scholar
  46. Xu, D. & Jaggars, S. (2013). Adaptability to online learning: Differences across types of students and academic subject areas. Retrieved from (Accessed 27 April 2017).
  47. Yang, J. (2015). Recognition, validation and accreditation of non-formal and informal learning in UNESCO member states. Habmurg: UNESCO Institute for Lifelong Learning. (Accessed 27 Oct 2017).Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Roumen Nikolov
    • 1
  • Kwok-Wing Lai
    • 2
    Email author
  • Evgenia Sendova
    • 3
  • Herma Jonker
    • 4
    • 5
  1. 1.University of Library Studies and Information TechnologiesSofiaBulgaria
  2. 2.University of Otago College of EducationDunedinNew Zealand
  3. 3.Institute of Mathematics and InformaticsBulgarian Academy of SciencesSofiaBulgaria
  4. 4.Windesheim University of Applied SciencesZwolleThe Netherlands
  5. 5.University of AmsterdamAmsterdamThe Netherlands

Personalised recommendations