Recent Developments in Technology-Enhanced LearningA Critical Assessment

  1. Steffens, Karl
  2. Bannan, Brenda
  3. Dalgarno, Barney
  4. Bartolomé, Antonio R.
  5. Esteve-González, Vanessa
  6. Cela-Ranilla, José
RUSC. Universities and Knowledge Society Journal

ISSN: 1698-580X

Year of publication: 2015

Issue Title: Número especial: nous escenaris d'aprenentatge des d'una visió transformadora

Volume: 12

Issue: 2

Pages: 73-86

Type: Article

DOI: 10.7238/RUSC.V12I2.2453 DIALNET GOOGLE SCHOLAR lock_openDialnet editor

More publications in: RUSC. Universities and Knowledge Society Journal


Our societies are considered knowledge societies in which lifelong learning is becoming increasingly important. At the same time, digital technologies are entering almost every aspect of our lives and now play an important role in education. The last decade has seen numerous new developments in the field of technology-enhanced learning. In 2004, George Siemens presented connectivism as a learning theory for the digital age. His ideas inspired the creation of Massive Open Online Courses (MOOCs), which have recently received a great deal of attention. Theoretical works on the use of digital devices for learning have focused on the affordances users perceive in these devices. Design research has also shown us that learning environments enriched by digital technologies are extremely complex and should be viewed as learning ecologies. The discussions on connectivism and MOOCs, affordances of digital devices, and design research have taken place in different discourses that have paid hardly any attention to each other. It is important to point out, however, that the developments in technology-enhanced learning not only can but need to be related to each other.

Bibliographic References

  • Alraimi, K.M., Zo a, H., & Ciganek, A.P. (2015). Understanding the MOOCs continuance: The role of openness and reputation. Computers & Education, 80, 28-38. doi:
  • Anderson, T., & Shattuck, J. (2012). Design-based research: A decade of progress in education research? Educational Researcher, 41(Jan./Feb.), 16-25. doi:
  • Archer, M. (1995). Realist Social Theory: The Morphogenetic Approach. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  • Armstrong, L. (2013). 2013- the year of ups and downs for the MOOCs. Changing Higher Education. Retrieved from
  • Bannan, B., Cook, J., & Pachler, N. (in press). Reconceptualizing design research in the age of mobile learning. Interactive Learning Environments.
  • Bartolomé, A. R., & Steffens, K. (2015). Are MOOCs promising learning environments? Comunicar, 44. doi:
  • Bower, M. (2008). Affordance analysis – matching learning tasks with learning technologies. Educational Media International, 45(1), 3-15. doi:
  • Breslow, L., Pritchard, D. E., DeBoer, J., Stump, G. S., Ho, A. D., & Seaton, D. T. (2013). Studying learning in the worldwide classroom: research into edX’s first MOOC. Research & Practice in Assessment, 8, 13-25. Retrieved from:
  • Champaign, J., Fredericks, C., Colvin, K., Seaton, D., Liu, A., & Pritchard, D. (2014). Correlating skill and improvement in 2 MOOCs with a student’s time on task. Paper presented at Learning@Scale Conference, Atlanta, GA. doi:
  • Chiappe-Laverde, A., Hine, N., & Martínez-Silva, J. A. (2015). Literature and Practice: A Critical Review of MOOCs. Comunicar, 44, 9-17. doi:
  • Cobb, P., Confrey, J., diSessa, A., Lehrer, R., & Schauble, L. (2003). Design experiments in educational research. Educational Researcher, 32(1), 9-13. doi:
  • Confrey, J. (2006). The evolution of design studies as methodology. In: R. Keith Sawyer (Ed.) The Cambridge Handbook of the Learning Sciences, pp. 135-152. New York: Cambridge University Press.
  • Conole, G., & Dyke, M. (2004). What are the affordances of information and communication technologies? ALT-J, 12(2), 113-124. doi:
  • Dalgarno, B., & Lee, M. J. W. (2010). What are the learning affordances of 3D virtual environments? British Journal of Educational Technology, 41(1), 10-32. doi:
  • de Jong, T., & Pieters, J. (2006). The design of powerful learning environments. In: P. A. Alexander and P. H. Winne (Eds.), Handbook of Educational Psychology, pp. 739-754, 2nd. ed. Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum.
  • Duke, B., Harper, G., & Johnston, M. (2013). Connectivism as a digital age learning theory? The International HETL Review, Special Issue, 4-13. Retrieved from
  • Firmin, R., Schiorring, E., Whitmer, J., Willett, T., & Sujitparapitaya, S. (2013). Preliminary summary SJSU+ Augmented Online Learning Environment pilot project. Retrieved from: -September 10 2013 final.pdf
  • Fishman, B., Marx, R., Blumenfeld, P., & Krajcik, J. (2004). Creating a framework for research on systemic technology innovations. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 13(1), 43-76. doi:
  • Gaseric, D., Kovanovic, V., Joksimovic, S., & Siemens, G. (2014). Where is the research on open online courses headed? A data analysis of the MOOC research initiative. International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 15(5), 134-176.
  • Gibson, J. J. (1977). The theory of affordances. In: R. Shaw, & J. Bransford (Eds). Perceiving, Acting and knowing: toward an Ecological Psychology, pp. 67-82. Michigan: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
  • Gravemeijer, K., & Cobb, P. (2006). Design research from a learning design perspective. In: J. Van Den Akker, K. Gravemeijer, S. McKenney, & N. Nieveen (Eds.), Educational Design Research, pp. 17-51. London: Routledge.
  • Haggard, S. (2013). The maturing of the MOOC. BIS Research Paper Number 130. London: Department for Business, Innovation and Skills.
  • Hollands, F. M., & Tirthali, D. (2014). MOOCs: expectations and reality. Full report. Center for Benefit-Cost Studies of Education, Teachers College, Columbia University, NY. Retrieved from:
  • Jona, K., & Naidu, S. (2014). MOOCs: emerging research. Distance Education, 35(2), 141-144. doi:
  • Karsenti, T. (2013). The MOOC. What research says. International Journal of Technologies in Higher Education, 10(2), 23-37.
  • Kelly, A. E., Lesh, R. A., & Baek, J. Y. (Eds). (2008). Handbook of Design Research Methods in Education Innovations in Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics Learning and Teaching. New York: Routledge.
  • Kirkwood, A., & Price, L. (2005). Learners and learning in the twenty-first century: what do we know about students‘ attitudes towards and experiences of information and communication technologies that will help us design courses? Studies in Higher Education, 30, 257-274. doi:
  • Koller, D., Ng, A., Do, C., & Chen, Z. (2013). Retention and intention in Massive Open Online Courses. Depth. Educause Review (
  • Kolowich, S. (2013). MOOCs are largely reaching privileged learners, survey finds. The Chronicle of Higher Education.
  • Kolowich, S. (2015). The MOOC Hype Fades, in 3 Charts. The Chronicle of Higher Education.
  • Kop, R., & Hill, A. (2008). Connectivism: Learning theory of the future or vestige of the past? The International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 9(3).
  • Kukulska-Hulme, A., & Traxler, J. (2007). Mobile Learning: A Handbook for Educators and Trainers. London: Routledge.
  • Lajoie, S., & Azevedo, R. (2006). Teaching and learning in technology-rich environments. In: P. A. Alexander and P. H. Winne (Eds.). Handbook of Educational Psychology, pp. 803-821, 2nd. ed. Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum.
  • Li, Z. (2014). Rethinking the relationship between learner, learning contexts, and technology: a critique and exploration of Archer’s morphogenetic approach. Learning, Media and Technology. doi:
  • Liyanagunawardena, T. R., Adams, A. A., & Williams, S. A. (2013). MOOCs: a systematic study of the published literature 2008-2012. The International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning 14(3), 202-227. Retrieved from:
  • Margaryan, A., Bianco, M., & Littlejohn, A. (2015). Instructional quality of Massive Open Online Courses (MOOCs). Computers & Education, 80, 77-33. doi:
  • Martin, F. G. (2012). Will Massive Open Online Courses change how we teach? Communications of the ACM, 55(8), 26-28. doi:
  • McKenney, S., & Reeves, T. C. (2012). Conducting Educational Design Research. London: Routledge.
  • Murray, O. T., & Olcese, N. R. (2011). Teaching and learning with iPads, ready or not? TechTrends, 55(6), 42-48. doi:
  • Norman, D. (1988). The Psychology of Everyday Things. New York: Basic Books.
  • Norman, D. (1999). Affordances, conventions and design, Interactions, May/June 1999, pp. 38-43. doi:
  • OpenupEd (b. d.) retrieved from
  • Pachler, N., Bachmair, B., & Cook, J. (2010) Mobile Learning: Structures, Agency, Cultural Practices. New York: Springer.
  • Pappano, Laura. (2012). The year of the MOOC. The New York Times. Retrieved from
  • Reimann, P. (2013). Design-based research: Designing as research. In: R. Luckin, S. Puntambekar, P. Goodyear, B. Grabowski, J. Underwood, J., & N. Winters (Eds.) Handbook of Design in Educational Technology, pp. 44-52. New York: Routledge.
  • Sandoval, W. (2013). 21st century educational design research. In: R. Luckin, S. Puntambekar, P. Goodyear, B. Grabowski, J. Underwood, J., & N. Vinters (Eds.) Handbook of Design in Educational Technology. New York: Routledge.
  • Selwyn, N. (2010). Looking beyond learning: Notes towards the critical study of educational technology. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 26, 65-73. doi:
  • Selwyn, N. (2012). Making sense of young people, education and digital technology: The role of sociological theory. Oxford Review of Education, 38(1), 81-96. doi:
  • Shah, D. (2013). MOOCs in 2013: Breaking down the numbers.
  • Sharples, M., Taylor, J., & Vavoula, G. (2010). A theory of learning for the mobile age. In: B.Bachmair (Ed.). In Medienbildung in neuen Kulturräumen, pp. 87-99. Wiesbaden: VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften.
  • Siemens, G. (2004). Connectivism: A learning theory for the digital age.
  • Siemens, G. (2006). Knowing knowledge. Retrieved from
  • Siemens, G. (2012). What is the theory that underpins our moocs? ElearnSpace, 3/6/2012 (
  • Traxler, J. (2013). Mobile learning: Shaping the frontiers of learning technologies in global context. In R. Huang, J. M. Kinshuk, and M. Spector (Eds.) Reshaping Learning: Frontiers of Learning Technology in a Global Context. Berlin Heidelberg: Springer.
  • UNESCO (2013). Introduction to MOOCs: Avalanche, Illusion or Augmentation ? Policy Brief. Moscow: UNESCO Institute for Information Technologies in Education.
  • Verhagen, P. (2006). Connectivism: A new learning theory ? Retrieved from
  • Yang, D., Sinha, T., Adamson, D., & Rose, C. P. (2013). Turn on, tune in, drop out: Anticipating student dropouts in Massive Open Online Courses. (
  • Yeager, C., Hurley-Dasgupta, B., & Bliss, C. A. (2013). cMOOCs and global learning: an authentic alternative. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 17(2), 133-147.
  • Zapata-Ros, M. (2014). Los MOOC en la crisis de la Educación Universitaria: Docencia, diseño y aprendizaje. CreateSpace Independent Publishing Platform.
  • Zemsky, R. (2014). With a MOOC MOOC here and a MOOC MOOC there, here a MOOC, there a MOOC, everywhere a MOOC MOOC. Journal of General Education, 63(4), 237-243. doi: