Inclusion has traditionally been conceptualised as integrating children into the formal schooling system. Recent research conducted in South Asia, however, adds to evidence that the huge number of children out of school and the diversity of their needs can only be met by a diversity of provision, formal and non-formal; that because many state education systems cannot meet the demands in quantity and quality, governments must continue to reform, improve and expand the public system, but also consider reconceptualising their role away from being the exclusive provider and towards encouraging a more diversified and equitable educational system. This paper sets out six challenges for reaching marginalised children through such change, highlighting the political commitment needed to embed into national education policy framework a rights-based approach, with quality assurance and greater links between the formal and non-formal. It provides examples of non-formal providers, using open learning principles, which offer models of how a more flexible and equitable system could be delivered for marginalised children, with progression routes and accreditation equivalent to or the same as the formal system.(Abstract by author)

Udacity was born out of a Stanford University experiment in which Sebastian Thrun and Peter Norvig offered their "Introduction to Artificial Intelligence" course online to anyone, for free. Over 160,000 students in more than 190 countries enrolled and not much later, Udacity was born. Now we're a growing team of educators and engineers on a mission to change the future of education. By making high-quality classes affordable and accessible for students across the globe: Udacity is democratizing education. (https://www.udacity.com/us)

Coursera is an education company that partners with the top universities and organizations in the world to offer courses online for anyone to take, for free. Its technology enables our partners to teach millions of students rather than hundreds.

Traditional education and training has paid scant attention to the psychology of learning. Despite detailed research into motivation, distribution and reinforcement, most current methods of delivery still rely on a supply-led, lecture and classroom-based model that flies in the face of the theory. With e-learning we have a chance to reflect on this gap between theory and practice. E-learning, in the sense of web-based learning, is a new discipline but the psychology of learning has a much longer pedigree. This paper relates some common myths about e-learning back to some major themes in the psychology of learning. Is e-learning faster and more effective? Many people get the wrong learning at the wrong time. Can e-learning help with prerequisite knowledge? Should the learning be massed or distributed, i.e. all at once or little and often? There are also the issues of motivation and cognitive engagement. How can e-learning motivate learners or how can we motivate learners into using this new medium? What type of cognitive engagement is necessary for learning? Traditional 'sheep-dip' methods of learning are poor on reinforcement. Can e-learning help reinforce learning?[ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

"This book has been developed to look into the global practices of e-learning, getting to know what have been the success stories or otherwise as experienced by the implementers. The unique feature of this book is providing a judicious mix of practical experiences and research based information in the form of case studies"--Provided by publisher.

his is a study of the influence of social and cultural factors on the adoption of e-learning in higher education in Malaysia, Indonesia, Turkey, Singapore and Australia. Particular attention in each case was given to factors relating to social capital, attitudes and patterns of behavior in leadership, entrepreneurialism, and teaching and to broader sets of attitudes that shape general outlook. A case study approach was chosen in order to enable a richer and more finely grained analysis of the issues. The case studies are based on semi-structured interviews and observations, conducted over several years.

This research shows that previously known factors that affect the adoption of e-learning in higher education, namely policy, guidelines, paradigm shifts and pedagogical change are also significant in the contexts of each of the case studies in this research. However, this research shows that the adoption and uptake of e-learning technologies is also strongly shaped by cultural and social factors but not in ways that might first have been expected. It was not so much that there are specific cultural and social factors relating to specific e-learning technologies. Rather, it is that the degree of uptake of these technologies depends on teachers being encouraged, guided and assisted to innovate and adopt new technology. This can only occur when there is sufficient social capital, mediated through appropriate social networks, to build trust, overcome objections and anxieties and generally motivate staff to engage in challenging, time-consuming initiatives in e-learning that generally do not promise immediate rewards.

Certain culture-based issues emerged as important. These included staff mentoring, clustering through ‘bamboo networking’, trust-building and overcoming fear of ‘losing face’ (kiasu), facilitating women to take the initiative and lead, developing sensitivity to cultural differences, encouraging entrepreneurialism and rewarding pioneering endeavours were present in varying degrees across all five case studies. They were subtle variations on a central theme which was clearly that of the impact of social capital as a driver. It was social capital played out through personal relationships and social networks that most strongly influenced individual teachers and teachers to be sufficiently motivated to add to an already busy schedule by taking on the additional burdens of pioneering e-learning technology and it was those social relationships that provided guidance and ongoing encouragement. As a consequence of these findings, the thesis offers a social capital model of e-learning adoption which suggests that the adoption and uptake of e-learning technologies is strongly shaped by cultural and social factors. (Abstract by author)