1. FROM EVOLUTION TO REVOLUTION: THE
EFFECTIVE E-LEARNING MODEL
BUILDING BETTER ELEARNING IN 2009
Cynthia Larson-Daugherty, Ed.D.
Spectrum Pacific Learning Company
National University
clarson@spectrumpacific.com
Coleman Cooper Walker, M.S.
Spectrum Pacific Learning Company
cwalker@spectrumpacific.com
Spectrum Pacific Learning Company
http://spectrumpacific.com
858-642-8119
03/09/09 - Update
1

2. Abstract
E-learning has grown at a record pace over the last decade, especially in the academic sector
(Eduventures, 2008; Sloan Consortium, 2008; E-Learning Magazine, 2009; Roman, 2006). This growth
has prompted an onslaught of changes, challenges, questions, and an incredible opportunity to re-
examine how we process information, learn and apply it in both educational and business-settings. It
was recognized early on that e-learning (a.k.a. online learning, web learning, desk-top learning) was
different than the classroom and as such should be treated differently; most notably by the creation of
the effective e-learning model (“e2L”) in 2003 (Larson-Daugherty & Cooper, 2004). The e2L model put
the proverbial ball in play and set the initial precedent for examining and re-examining the delivery of
learning online (Larson-Daugherty & Mossavar-Rahmani, 2007). The e2L model continues to evolve as
the online learning journey continues and as researchers and practitioners alike continue to further
utilize this forum for learning. The 2009 updates offer propositions to both the theoretical construct and
the model’s practical application which focuses on designing, developing and delivering e-learning in the
most effective way to yield results.
2

3. Table of Contents
Abstract ......................................................................................................................................................... 2
Introduction .................................................................................................................................................. 4
Corporate Learning Today. ....................................................................................................................... 4
Academic Learning Today. ........................................................................................................................ 4
e2L: In the Beginning .................................................................................................................................... 6
E-Learning: Evolution to Revolution ............................................................................................................. 8
e2L (v.3, 2009) ......................................................................................................................................... 11
Build Better e-Learning Now ....................................................................................................................... 11
References .................................................................................................................................................. 13
3

4. Introduction
The status of online learning today is impressive when we consider its roots are roughly just a little over
a decade old. Consider the two venues that have seen the most growth in e-learning utilization:
corporations and academic institutions.
Corporate Learning Today. Trend data (Chief Learning Officer, 2007; www.elearningguild.com)
indicates that corporate entities are utilizing online learning more and more; however, the interesting
part to this fact is how it is being used in the workplace: supplements to classroom training and hybrid
training (a mix of onsite in the classroom and online). Based on recent research data, classroom
training is still taking up the largest chunk of corporate training budgets.
Per Chief Learning Officer’s review of a Global Industry Analysts, Inc. report (2007), “E-learning is now
the method companies use second-most often to deploy learning and development, according to the
study, “ and “the U.S. e-learning market is the world’s largest, as its 2007 revenues are expected to
exceed $17.5 billion (for e-learning). Further, the U.S. corporate e-learning market share is more than
60 percent.” Conversely, Europe is the second largest e-learning user and positioned at 15 percent.
It is suggested that with the current economic climate, we may see a trend of greater utilization of
online training and less onsite classroom training in the next 12 to 24 months. Businesses are looking
for ways to maximize the yield on resources and this includes those left after downsizing and massive
layoffs. It is therefore reasonable to deduct that more will have to be done with less. The opportunity
for increased utilization of e-learning is more prevalent in society today as the level of comfort and
interaction with digital data is increasing.
Academic Learning Today. Academic institutions, especially higher education, have experienced
the greatest growth in the last decade (Eduventures, 2007; Sloan Consortium, 2007). More students are
taking online courses now, either mixed in with an on-campus program or fully online programs, than
ever before (Eduventures, 2007; NY Times, 2008). With an increase in demand, the marketplace has
been saturated with a multitude of traditional and non-traditional institutions offering single courses,
certifications, programs, and degrees. The greatest opportunity in this situation is for the learner to
have a better learning experience based on increased competition. It is proposed that no longer will
students accept text files and PowerPoints as a quality learning experience. Not only does learning
4

5. theory indicate that engaging content is essential to create an effective learning experience (Gagne, R.
et al, 1992; Knowles, M. 1984), offering audio, visual and kinesthetic learning opportunities but is
increasingly becoming a requirement.
With such tremendous growth in a delivery modality for learning that is relatively young in comparison
to the traditional classroom, there is incredible opportunity to reflect and assess not only what has been
learned but also what paradigm changes have occurred as a result. How does the corporate world see a
return on its investment in online training dollars? How do higher education institutions demonstrate to
both its students and accrediting bodies that they are offering a quality learning experience worth the
investment of time and money? Of particular interest in both academic and business circles is how e-
learning has changed the way we design, development and deliver “learning”. By designing,
developing, and delivering effective online learning, it is suggested we can answer these essential
questions.
In late 2003, the effective e-learning model (e2L) was developed (Larson-Daugherty & Cooper, 2004;
Larson-Daugherty & Mossavar-Rahmani, 2007) in response to the initial growth of online learning. Even
in its infancy, many recognized e-learning was different than classroom learning and mechanisms to
design, develop and deliver in this medium should be given consideration. Taking into account early
research on learning content design and development by Gagne (1992) and Knowles (1984), the
researchers were able to set the foundation for the next evolution of learning with the e2L model
(http://www.splclients.com/e2l/). The next section will provide brief reflection on the e2L development
phase.
In 2005 - 2006, the creators of the e2L model and authors of related research (Larson-Daugherty &
Cooper-Walker) examined both academic and corporate online learning by:
- reviewing scholarly research and popular press,
- accessing online courses and programs in both sectors, and
- interviewing and surveying faculty, students, trainers, and trainees.
The intent and ultimate goal was to gauge current practices and best practices for that period of time as
it related to online learning. The findings were telling because they demonstrated the speed of online
learning evolution.
Since that time both online learning and blended learning (a mix of online and onsite) have continued to
5

6. experience record growth in both the academic and corporate sectors. Most telling is that the academic
sector has seen most of the growth in fully online programs whereas the corporate sector has seen most
growth in blended programs (a mix of onsite and online). In addition to recent literature reviews, the
authors again collected data within the past six months to assess the “state” of online learning and work
to ensure the e2L model continues to provide a framework for creating, delivering and measuring
engaging and effective online learning experiences.
e2L: In the Beginning
In the early years (circa mid-to-late 1990s), online learning development and deployment content were
essentially onsite classroom curriculum placed in electronic files (i.e., Word, PDF, PowerPoint) and
placed in a virtual classroom space. Today this would be described as an e-library of documents or an e-
document warehouse. This was not necessarily effective online learning; however, it was the first
iteration or generation, as practitioners and educators were foraging new territory.
Developed in late 2003, the initial proposition of the effective e-learning model (e2L) was clearly
centered around formulating a foundation by which creators of online learning content could operate by
and know that the key elements that help enable the learning process were in place as high quality
content was identified as a key indicator of online learning success (Boehle, 2005). The image that
follows reflects the first model.
6

7. In the original publication by the e2L developers (Larson-Daugherty & Cooper, 2004) the model was
described as follows:
The premise of the model is (whether it is corporate training or an academic course) concepts, theories
and practical application are the core concepts that are delivered by key design and delivery elements.
Of paramount importance in the design is the factoring in of learning styles of participants engaging with
the content; consider the following:
“to be conveyed in the learning environment. Furthermore, the learning needs to address the three
primary learning styles as the population is broken down in to the approximate segments:
- 10% to 15% by audio (i.e., lecture, hearing)
- 20% by visual (i.e., pictures or watching)
- 60% to 70% by kinesthetic (i.e., hands-on).
In layman’s terms one might suggest having the material presented in a way that allows the learner
the option or integrated mix of being able to “see it, hear it and / or do it.” This allows them to
identify with the delivery that best meets their learning styles, requirements and needs. In addition,
we understand now that particularly for adults, the learning needs to be engaging, interactive and
in most cases pertinent to their job or life. In response to the identified requirements for effective
e-learning, members of the management team of a growing e-learning solutions and service
provider developed the Effective e-Learning Model (e2L).
The goal was to create a model that would evolve as e-learning grows as a modality for learning.
This group of professionals also recognized the need to address the three primary learning styles
and ensure that e-learning was engaging. The team that developed the model has a broad
background in online learning, training and development, and education.
As the model took form, it was critical that it be articulated that every concept, theory and
application be delivered in a strategic presentation mix that includes audio, visual and hands-on
opportunity to process the information. Other research suggested that there be subject matter
interaction, student community interaction, brief chunking of the information in the online
environment, both synchronous and asynchronous opportunities to interact, assessments through-
out the learning experience so both the learner and facilitator can understand their evolving levels
of knowledge. And as Horton (2001) noted in his research, evaluation of the e-learning process and
its content is critical. The link http://www.splclients.com/e2l/ provides a visual and audio
representation of the e2L.” (p. 9-10)
From 2002 to 2007, as e-learning continued to grow at a rapid pace, research continued and the most
notable discovery from the learner perpsective was the chunking of information. Initially the model
proposed 7-minute clusters or chunks based on processing of information and synthesis by learners.
What was gleened through research, particularly in the academic setting, was that online learners
described wanting information in smaller chunks for easier processing. For example, around a specific
concept the learner could receive an overview of the concept, theoretical construct data and practical
application delivered in audio, visual and kinethestic learning formats with a pre-assessment and post-
assessment, as well as subject matter validation in 3 to 5 minutes and increase the engagement level
7

8. just by condensing it into a shorter time-span. That stated, additional information and resources are
always offered (i.e., more detailed documents, audio files), but the highest probability to click on, stay
on, and remember was in shorter chunks.
As a result, a modification was made to the e2L model in 2007 that shifted from 5 to 7 minute clusters to
3 to 5 minutes clusters of information (ModelIillustration by David Montes De Oca).
As we consider all the growth of online learning and how far we have come, fast forward from 2007 to
2009. Today, there continues to be implications for design, development and delivery. The next section
offers an update and proposition for consideration.
E-Learning: Evolution to Revolution
Most notably over the last several years has been the recognition of an evolutionary process regarding
how we learn and process information in the traditional brick and mortar classroom (group setting) and
online (individual setting). The classroom has historically been driven by lecture (auditory); whereas
online initially started out very text / document heavy (visual) and has slowly shifted to intentionally
include auditory and kinesthetic (hands-on) learning opportunities to intentionally reach the various
8

9. learning styles that individual brings to the learning experience (Knowles, 1984). This is what the
authors call from evolution to revolution in online learning
The 2009 update to the model is presented. The updates are based on the research and developments
that have evolved through what we have learned about the way people “learn” online. This data has
been drawn from both the academic and corporate sectors primarily on their increased utilization of e-
learning.
Critical updates to the e2L model include adding:
- both linear (already exists) and decision-tree learning options (coming into play more and more)
- analytics that further validate learning is occurring (beyond benchmarking and assessment)
- Interactive Learning Objects (aka multi-functional digital learning assets)
- Individual (1) – Group (2) content design and delivery (focusing on individual engagement with the
content as the primary driver in the experience)
Linear learning design online has been the most common practice in terms of design and development
(i.e., complete this section and then move to this section). Decision-tree learning allows for learners to
be routed back to the specific areas where more work is required to move through the content, and also
allows them to move forward faster if there already exists mastery of specific content items.
Analytics around online learning are becoming increasingly more important. Organizations/institutions
providing the learning experience, the learners, as well as governing and/or accrediting bodies are
starting to seek higher levels of validation and verification that learning is actually occurring in this
learning medium.
Digital Learning Assets (DLAs) are “any form of content and/or media that have been formatted into a
binary source which include the right to use it for the purpose of facilitating learning. A digital file
without the right to use it is not an asset. Digital learning assets are commonly categorized in three
major groups which may be defined as textual content (digital assets), images (media assets) and
multimedia (media assets)” (van Niekerk, A.J. 2006, Larson, C. 2009). DLAs are commonly found in
online learning (academic course work, corporate training, etc).
Individual (1) – Group (2) content design and delivery recognizes what we have learned in the last
several years regarding the online learning experience (I(1) – G(2) Illustration). Online learning is
primarily engaged from the individual “domain” (1) of thinking and processing first, and foremost, and
9

10. the group (2), i.e., classmates, is an ancillary part of the experience. This is not dismissing that
community interaction in the learning experience is helpful, if not essential (i.e., live discussions/chats,
discussion threads, group projects), but when the learner is asked why online learning was identified
(from a higher education perspective) it is the flexibility/ accessibility that he/she can do on their own
time and not in the confines of a traditional brick and mortar classroom group-setting (Johnson, J, et al,
April 2005; Eduventures, 2007). As such, the reality is the engagement with the material comes from a
framework of “self” first. This is where and why understanding learning styles and ensuring audio, visual
and kinesthetic learning opportunities became even more important in the development of online
learning.
These additional components to the model and the reorganization of the existing components provide
an opportunity for easier understanding and application in online learning development.
The e2L model has experienced three revisions since its development in 2003 and it is anticipated it will
experience more as technological advances are made, and we continue to learn more about how we
interact with technology and use it to learn (Model Illustration by David Montes De Oca). The revisions,
as noted, have not been major but more an evolutionary process. The goal is to consistently be able to
offer an engaging online learning experience that easily demonstrates results with impact.
10

11. e2L (v.3, 2009)
Build Better e-Learning Now
From those that run organizations to those that help the organization run, they all know results are
necessary regardless of the endeavor at-hand. How do we create tangible results for our organizations
from e-learning programs (whether it is a business or an institution of higher education)? The short and
easy answer is, create effective learning experiences. The simplicity of the answer provides the “context
by which to operate”:
- Define the goal(s) – expected specific end-results to be achieved by the e-learning experience
(academic program or training module)
- Engage key stakeholders (including those that will participate in the e-learning, do not create in
isolation)
- Benchmark where your entity is today and create milestones that will help you assess goal
achievement – drive the process by evaluation and utilizing the analytics (applies to both academia
and corporate environments)
- Design by the effective e-Learning model
- Create ability to “go back” to e-learning any time to make it just-in-time (works for both academia
and business)
- Provide reinforcement tools
11

12. - Corporate: in the workplace
- Academia: virtual learning communities
- Evaluate and adjust, and understand it’s an evolutionary process.
It is suggested that designing by the e2L alone will offer results, but creating this strategic mix will yield
the greatest impact. The research validates this proposition, and the research must continue as noted in
context by which to operate - it’s an evolutionary process.
12

13. References
Boehle,Sarah. (September, 2005). “The State of the e-learning Market.” www.traininmag.com
Carabaneanu, L. http://www.codewitz.net/papers/MMT_106-111_Trends_in_E-Learning.pdf
Chief Learning Officer Magazine. (September, 2007). http://www.clomedia.com/in-the-
news/2007/September/1916/index.php
Eduventures. (2007) www.edvuventures.com Learning Collaborative for Higher Education Online
Higher Education Program Custom Inquiry Report May 10, 2007
Gagne, R., Briggs, L. & Wager, W. (1992). Principles of Instructional Design (4th ed.). Fort Worth, TX: HBJ
College Publishers.
Horton, William (2001). Evaluating E-Learning. Alexandria, VA: American Society for Training and
Development
http://www.2elearning.com/no_cache/markets/corporate-business/latest-news/latest-news-
single/article/e-learning-high-growth-documentation-in-
report.html?tx_ttnews%5BbackPid%5D=565&cHash=bfa4a74d51
http://www.astd.org
http://www.elearningguild.com
http://www.elearningguild.com/research/archives/index.cfm?action=viewonly2&id=106&referer=ht
tp%3A%2F%2Fwww%2Eelearningguild%2Ecom%2Fresearch%2Farchives%2Findex%2Ecfm%3Faction
%3Dview%26frompage%3D1%26StartRow%3D1%26MaxRows%3D40
http://www.splclients.com/e2l/ The e2Ldescribed audio/visual (Flash)
http://www.spectrumpacific.com
http://www.trainingpressreleases.com/newsstory.asp?NewsID=340
Johnston, J., Killion, J., Oomen, J. Student Satisfaction in the Virtual Classroom. The Internet Journal of
Allied Health Sciences and Practice. April 2005. Volume 3 Number 2.
http://ijahsp.nova.edu/articles/vol3num2/johnston.htm
Karrer, T. (2007)
http://astd2007.astd.org/PDFs/Handouts%20for%20Web/Handouts%20Secured%20for%20Web%20
5-17%20thru%205-22/SU309.pdf
Knowles, M. (1984). Andragogy in Action. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Larson, C. (2009). Digital Learning Assets defined. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_learning_assets
13

14. Larson-Daugherty, C. and Cooper, C. (2004). Building Better Online Learning An Evolving Model. Article
may be found at http://www.clomedia.com/whitepapers/index.asp
Larson-Daugherty, C. & Mossavar-Rahmani, F. (2007). Supporting the Hybrid Learning Model: A New
Proposition. http://jolt.merlot.org/vol3no1/larson-daugherty.htm
Montes, De Oca, D. (2009). Designer/Illustrator. www.spectrumpacific.com
New York Times (2008).
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/07/11/education/11colleges.html?em&ex=1215921600&en=fc200a
a836d883c2&ei=5087%0A
Romano, Lois (2006). Online Degree Programs Take Off. Washington Post, May 16th.
Sloan Consortium (2007). http://www.sloan-c.org/publications/survey/pdf/online_nation.pdf
http://www.sloan-c.org/news/index.asp
Shrivastava, P. (1999)
http://technologysource.org/article/online_learning_trends_and_the_online_learning_paradox/
Young & Norgard, The Internet and Higher Education 9 (2006) 107-115
van Niekerk, A.J. (2006) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_asset
14