|
|
Volume 6 Issue 1Promises, promises ...Dr. Alistair Inglis*Abstract For four decades computers have been holding out the promise of making learning much more interactive, exciting and effective. Yet up till recently, the reality has generally fallen far short of the promise. The high cost of computing power, slow response times, limited graphic capabilities, and in the case of on-line computing, slow transmission speeds, have greatly limited the capabilities that could be delivered in a working environment. As a result, computers have generally been relegated to playing supporting roles. In recent years, rapid advances have been made in the capabilities of technology. With the escalating demand for non-traditional forms of education, computer-based methods of delivery now have the opportunity to come into their own. The question we should now be asking is: 'Are the systems we have available capable of doing the job?' The concept of using computers for the management of learning, as distinct from the delivery of instruction, has been promoted since at least the late 1970s. However, most presently-available systems are either designed for local use or are based on architectures which are rapidly becoming out-of-date. If technology is going to start to deliver on its promises to education, then the champions of technology need to rethink the functions that computer-based systems are likely to be called on to perform. This article examines the directions in which education is moving at the tertiary level. It considers what implications these developments have for the design of systems for managing student learning. It then draws from these to try to anticipate some of features we should expect of computer managed learning systems of the future. Return to previous page *Office of the Director, Educational Quality Assurance, Research and Development Royal Melbourne Institute of Technology GPO Box 2476V, Melbourne, 3001. This is the text of a paper delivered to a conference on computer managed learning held in Melbourne 1994. Whilst not specific to law, the editors considered the quality of the paper such that it was worthy of reproduction without amendment. (Ed.) |