Study of six online learning theories shows theories should be chosen to match institutional situations and learners' backgrounds

Abstract

Purpose

The authors assessed the following six popular online theories: Cognitivism, connectivism, heutagogy, social learning, transformative learning theories and Vygotsky’s zone of proximal development (ZPD). The theories were selected because of their relevance to improving online instruction.

Design/methodology/approach

To compare them, the authors reviewed literature on adult learning theories from the following databases: Academic Search Premier, ERIC and ProQuest. They chose the most relevant articles about each theory published between 2007 and 2017, summarized them and extracted relevant information.

Findings

The theories suggest various pointers to help course designers to improve online learning. Based on cognitivism, instructors can use media-based instruction designed especially for the working memory. Similarly, connectivism informs instructors to design instruction integrated with technology. Heutagogy also promotes the integration of technology with online learning and encourages self-directed learning. Meanwhile, social learning theory informs instructors to design group discussions and activities to foster collaboration. The other three theories - cognitivism, connectivism and heutagogy – promote the integration of technology.

Originality/value

The authors said the paper was useful as it provided a theoretical framework for adult instructors and theory designers. The paper was a follow-up to another study by the sane authors of online theories. There are also research implications. While pedagogical frameworks are well-established for online learning, studies on learner motivation would establish a wider understanding of richer design formats, the authors say.

Citation

(2021), "Study of six online learning theories shows theories should be chosen to match institutional situations and learners' backgrounds", Human Resource Management International Digest, Vol. 29 No. 6, pp. 5-7. https://doi.org/10.1108/HRMID-06-2021-0144