Pre-Publish version of: Richter, T. & Adelsberger, H.H. (2011). E-Learning: Education for Everyone? Special Requirements on Learners in Internet-based Learning Environments. In: T. Bastiaens & M. Ebner (Eds.), Proceedings of the World Conference on Educational Multimedia, Hypermedia and Telecommunications 2011, (Lisbon, Portugal), Chesapeake, VA: AACE, pp. 1598-1604. Accessible at http://www.editlib.org/p/38075

1. E-Learning: Education for Everyone?
Special Requirements on Learners in Internet-based Learning Environments
Thomas Richter
Information Systems for Production and Operations Management
University of Duisburg-Essen, Germany
thomas.richter@icb.uni-due.de
Heimo H. Adelsberger
Information Systems for Production and Operations Management
University of Duisburg-Essen, Germany
heimo.adelsberger@icb.uni-due.de
Abstract: This paper addresses special skills, learners in E-Learning scenarios (Internet-based learning scenarios)
need. In self-directed learning scenarios, as most E-Learning scenarios are designed, learners bear the responsibil-ity
for their own learning progress. To ease this task, institutions could prime the learners for the situation, which
may be quite different to the learning experiences, they previously made in face-to-face learning scenarios. We
conducted a Delphi-study with experts from the Higher Education E-Learning sector in Germany, Austria, and
Switzerland, and determined general requirements on learners in E-Learning scenarios.
Introduction
In Germany, Austria, and Switzerland, the traditional education in schools and universities is regulated and mainly
financed by the government. In this context, learners traditionally are much more understood as beneficiaries than as
customers (Leffers 1996). Different to this, in Germany, Austria and Switzerland, higher and adult education mostly
requires a fee if basing on E-Learning technologies, even if provided by regular (governmentally financed) universi-ties.
With this change of the source of funding (the money at least partly comes from the students and not from the
government), education becomes a charged service and thus, the status of Learners shifts from beneficiaries to cus-tomers.
Different to the situation before, where most students simply accepted what they got, they now, in the
charged E-Learning scenario, start expecting to receive the best possible individual support within their learning
process, in order to foster their learning-success.
E-Learning gains influence (Rey 2009, p. 15) not only in the context of higher education but also in the
fields of professional and adult education. In Germany, the E-Learning market is continuously growing: A remark-able
increase in sales can be monitored (Rey 2009). However, the E-Learning based learning process provides new
challenges as well for the learners as also for traditionally educated teachers (Heidenreich 2009, p. 55-59).
For the development of customer-oriented E-education, it first of all is necessary to understand the special
skills this educational scenario requires from the learners. This knowledge enables educators to foster their learners
in developing the necessary skills. Related to E-Learning scenarios, several learner-specific problems are detailed in
the literature. A validated collection of skills, required to solve such problems, still is not available. Related learner-specific
problems mostly resulted in learner frustration and based, e. g., on missing technological skills (Edmundson
2007), on a technological infrastructure that did not fit the requirements of a course (Selinger 2004; Gunawardana
2005; Arias & Clark 2004), on upcoming lacks of motivation (Keller 2008), and on problems in teamwork (Dennen
& Wieland 2007; Ng & Cheung 2007).
Within the framework of a Delphi-study, we asked E-Learning professionals in Germany, Austria, and
Switzerland to identify special skills, which learners in E-Learning scenarios should have, and to evaluate the rele-vance
of those skills in the E-Learning scenario. In the following, we first give a short introduction on E-Learning
and discuss some general differences between the traditional classroom education and E-Learning, which are rele-vant
for understanding the motivation for doing the research discussed in this paper. Afterwards, we describe the re-search
setting and subsequently present the outcomes of the study. After a discussion of the results, we give some
recommendations on what institutions providing education (in both forms, the traditional and the Internet-based one)
can contribute, in order to support their learning efforts in Internet-based educational scenarios.

2. E-Learning
For this paper, we define E-Learning as any form of Internet-based distance education (Richter, Pawlowski & Lutze
2008). Different to the traditional classroom learning scenarios where an educator and learners directly interact with
one another at the same time within the same room, E-Learning usually provides freedom regarding the location and
time where/in which the learners do their courses (Lassmann 2006). What sounds promising on the first sight is
challenging in its consequences (Wheeler & Shaver 1983). Particularly the missing face-to-face contacts (Conrad
2002, 210) cause special problems: Educators cannot recognize misunderstandings, upcoming conflicts, or starting
demotivation among the learners and, thus, do not have any chance to react/intervene in time. In group-learning sce-narios,
particularly in intercultural settings, establishing contacts to other learners is considered being much more
complicated than in face-to-face situations. Relevant basic aspects for building social contacts, like eye contact and
other tangible clues are not available (Moore 1991). Therefore, to build trust and avoid conflicts, much more explicit
communication is needed. Although it could be arranged differently, in the context of E-Learning, self-directed
learning is the usual teaching method (Carell 2006). As consequence, in E-Learning scenarios, learners bear much
more responsibility for their own learning progress than in classroom-scenarios, be it regarding motivation, the or-ganisation
and scheduling of all learning processes (often, even besides the all-days life), or the choice of learning
materials. Additionally, learners need to have enough technological understanding to use the learning materials.
As RICHTER ET AL. (2010) found out, the E-Learning community provides a new learning-culture – but to
become a part of this community, learners need a chance to adopt this learning-culture.
The Study: Setting
We had the suspicion (Conrad 2002, Carnwell 2000, Darabi 2006) that there are certain key-abilities, learners need
to have in order to successfully learn in E-Learning-based scenarios, e. g., the awareness/experience that communi-cation
follows different rules. However, we had no evidence on which those abilities were, and we particularly could
not evaluate the relevance of each of those abilities for the learning-success.
The study was designed according to the Delphi-method (Linstone & Turoff 1975), which defines a three-tiered
process:
1. Conducting Interviews (structured, semi-structured, or open) with a later proceeded transliteration
2. Analysis of the results, clustering into dimensions, and setting up a list of items
3. Evaluation of the items regarding the original topic of the interview by the former participating experts
On the one hand, we wanted to find out what the experts have in mind regarding special skills, learners need, to suc-cessfully
participate in E-Learning-based Learning scenarios. We did not want to manipulate the experts by naming
predefined topics. On the other hand, for the case, the interview stuck or went into the wrong direction, we needed a
structure to push or intervene. Therefore, we decided to design the interviews semi-structured and telephone-based.
We selected experts with their commonly recognized expertise as main selection criteria, and conducted the
telephone-interviews. The recorded interviews were transliterated and analysed. Critical statements were extracted,
clustered into dimensions, and alphanumerically ordered within a list of items. The list has been sent to all former
interviewed experts with the task to evaluate the listed items regarding their relevance for successful learning in E-Learning-
based learning scenarios. For the evaluation, we provided the list as an online form including a six-point
ordinal scale.
The interviews were planned to take 15-20 minutes.
The Field Manual
In the following, we present the field manual. We just asked the two initial questions (without giving further hints).
Further hints were meant to just being used in situations when the interview had to be revived (it stuck) or in case it
went into a completely wrong direction.
• What in your opinion are the basic differences between E-Learning-based learning and traditional face-to-face
learning situations?
o space / time
o communication
o self directed learning (time, learning materials)

3. • In your opinion, which abilities does a learner need to successfully deal with an E-Learning-based learning
process?
o technological knowledge/abilities
o communication abilities
o self-responsibility, motivation
Conducting the Survey
We invited 65 professionals from Germany, Austria, and Switzerland to participate in our study. From the 65 invited
experts, 18 participated in the interviews. The interviews took between 12 and 35 minutes. In two cases, the experts
had to be pushed a bit by asking more than the initial questions. In all other cases, the interview turned to be a fluent
conversation whereas we tried to keep the interviewees talking without giving hints on what we expected as an-swers.
As well as the interviewer, all of the selected experts were native German speakers; the interviews were con-ducted
in German language.
With the explicit allowance of the participants and the promise to publish the results without naming them,
the interviews have been digitally recorded and afterwards transliterated. The transliterations led to an alphanumeri-cally
structured list of key-items (table 1), which the participants had to evaluate according to their relevance by us-ing
a six-point ordinal scale: 16 of the 18 experts returned their evaluated lists.
Findings
In the following, we show the results of the experts’ evaluation of key-competencies, which students should have
when participating in E-Learning-based learning programs. The points, the experts allocated to each item were
summed up. The items shown in table 1 are sorted, starting with the highest and ending with the lowest ranked item.
The sum of the given points can be found on the right side of the table (Evaluation). The highest possible score that
could be reached per item was 96 (16*6).
No. Criteria Evaluation
1 self-motivation 86
2 self-organization 85
3 capability to independently organize the learning
process 82
4 self-discipline 81
5 personal initiative 80
6 competency in self-learning 79
7 autonomy 78
8 self-responsibility 78
9 openness regarding IT 76
10 stamina 75
11 Internet competences 73
12 target-oriented working style 73
13 ability to adopt uncommon educational methods 71
14 ability and willingness to self-explore technical
environments (e.g., the Learning Management Sys-tems’
functions)
69
15 ability to assess oneself 69
16 competency for communication 69
17 ability to organize oneself (in order to build work-ing
groups) 66
18 media-competency 66
19 technological and technical understanding 59
20 humility (ability to accept personal criticism) 59
21 ability to collaborate (team related skills) 54

4. 22 mediation ability 53
23 patience 52
24 competency to do scientific work 52
25 openness regarding cultural differences 49
26 given expertise 47
27 practical experiences 47
28 English skills 43
29 culture-competency 42
Table 1: Findings, sorted by sum of distributed points
One of the 16 evaluating experts was of the opinion that all items had the same high impact on a successful partici-pation
in an E-Learning-based education program and allocated the maximum number of points to each topic. The
first eight items which all are related to “self” have been evaluated by 14/16 experts with 5-6 points. The topics 9-24
have been evaluated quite diverse. Just 2 of the experts evaluated cultural competency (29) and openness regarding
cultural differences with 5/6 points. All others allocated 1-3 points to the topics 25-29.
Discussion of the Outcomes
The participating experts are of the opinion that on the part of the students, there are indeed general skills which are
required or at least very helpful to have, if they plan to study in an E-Learning-based learning scenario.
All skills, listed in the table, were at least mentioned by one of the interviewed experts as being relevant for
E-Learning-based learning scenarios. With exception for the English language skill, all the listed skills are consid-ered
not being essential for traditional (face-to-face) learning scenarios. Almost all experts were of the opinion, that
an advanced English language skill is just necessary within traditional learning scenarios but not in situations of E-Learning-
based learning.
E-Learning has the potential to be distributed worldwide to everyone who is connected to the Internet.
However, the not relevant English language skill and the fact that, for E-Learning, cultural competencies and open-ness
regarding cultural diversity were not considered being very relevant, allow the conclusion, that E-Learning, in
the German speaking countries, mainly is limited to local learners (independent on where they live). In three addi-tional
informally conducted expert-interviews, we asked for exactly this assumption. Those experts stated that edu-cation
in international or intercultural scenarios is not understood enough. Therefore, they do not even dare to imag-ine
such scenarios: The risk of causing serious intercultural conflicts (through the contents themselves, the presenta-tion
form of the contents, among learners and between learners and educators) is considered being far too high.
All experts considered E-Learning as a scenario of self-directed learning. The opportunity to fully adapt the
traditional teaching forms into an online scenario is not focused.
All of the mentioned skills are skills related to a certain maturity level of the learners (soft-skills) and/or to
broad experiences with Internet technologies and learning environments. Learners are expected to be able to orga-nize
their learning processes themselves, have to be mature enough to show patience when something goes wrong,
and need to be able to motivate themselves.
The items 24-28 are fully related to advanced learning-experience and can be seen as an indicator that in the
German language speaking countries, E-Learning is mainly used in Adult (AE) and Higher education (HE). Surely,
all interviewed experts were affiliated to HE or AE institutions, but the question explicitly was not limited to those
sectors. It seems that in the opinion of the interviewed experts (at least when using their approach and methods), E-Learning
is not appropriate for basic or advanced school education: The highly advanced level of maturity which
can be deduced from the skills, the experts considered being required, simply cannot be met by children; it even is
doubtable that teen-agers may be able to meet those requirements. However, regarding a comprehensive report on
the use of E-Learning in K-12 settings (Powell and Patrick 2008), E-Learning is successfully used in the K-12 sec-tor:
In most cases it is not exclusively used but supplementary to the traditional education form (Blended Learning).
In cases where it is exclusively used, synchronous online-lectures (video) with are given.
Further on, there still is a large and widely unused potential for the integration of E-Learning in the fields of
professional training and apprenticeships in the crafting disciplines. E-Learning could be very useful within this sec-tor,
but most potential participants “just” finished the middle school and lack the expected learning-skills. In Ger-many,
in a lot of professions, professionals (for courses regarding the master of craftsmanship) and teen-agers (for

5. apprenticeships) from all parts of the country have to travel to central educational institutions, to learn the theoretical
background of their professions. Using E-learning technologies in this field, time and costs (particularly travel-expenses
on part of the learners) could be saved. However, those learners, particularly when being new to this learn-ing
form, are in the need of further support (Furnborough & Truman, 413).
How can we support the learners?
What easily could be done is raising the learners’ awareness on differences between the two forms of education.
From the three later on (again) interviewed experts, just one said that in the related institutions, there are preliminary
talks with the applying students, in which at least the issue of self directed learning is a focused topic. Making such
preliminary talks a standard, would enable the learners to understand what they really are going to be confronted
with, when taking E-Learning-based learning technologies into consideration as an alternative for the traditional
learning forms. They then may be in the position to decide whether they consider themselves being fit for that chal-lenge.
Also group-work related and communication skills could explicitly be taught or at least, awareness of the
differences between E-Learning and traditional learning scenarios should be built by the providers of E-Learning
programs. Regarding the basic communication (and other soft-) skills, maybe schools and/or universities should take
their part of responsibility and focus more on related preparation.
The experts didn’t consider cultural competencies being very relevant in (their) E-Learning scenarios. In-stead
of carefully preparing the students for intercultural learning- and working scenarios by confronting them with
related situations, the programs are limited to national or at least to culturally homogenous learners. More and more,
intercultural competencies get to be strong requirements in the professional life. Alternatively, even if not providing
intercultural learning situations, the institutions could point on or explain the differences, e. g., in communication
style, group-behavior, and gender-related questions and thus raise at least the acceptance threshold for cultural di-versity.
If (whenever) E-Learning is considered being expanded to international scenarios, also cultural awareness
(at least) will be a meaningful teaching-issue for educators and providers of educational services: As RICHTER
proved (2010), most of the required soft-skills, listed in table 1 are influenced by culture.
Deducing recommendations from the findings
The study showed that E-Learning programs require special skills from the learners: These skills are different or ad-ditionally
required to those that are implied for programs in the context of the traditional face-to-face education. The
institutions, providing such programs, are aware of such special requirements but mainly assume the related skills to
be given and see no need for providing a special course for preparation. Particularly for learners who never before
participated in a distance education-based program and/or are less familiar with computer technologies (e. g., “sen-ior”
participants), the dropout rate is significantly higher than in the traditional educational scenarios (Brachos et al.
2003, p. 18). In case of too little experience with Internet-technology, the higher dropout rate often turned out to
have its reason in the missing acceptance of the technology. In case of the learners with no or too little experiences
in such a scenario, particularly a lack of the ability to self-motivate leads to abandoning the studies (Bonk 2002).
The interviewed experts concordantly considered ‘self-motivation’, ‘self-organisation’, and the computer-
/Internet literacy (at least acceptance) being general success-factors for E-Learning programs.
Different to the traditional educational scenarios in Germany, Austria, and Switzerland, learners in E-Learning
scenarios mostly are paying customers. Therefore, the support, which can compensate the additional chal-lenges,
should not be understood as a value-added service but much more as a basic one to facilitate the learners’ ef-fort
(in the opinion of the authors).
In a learner-oriented educational scenario, learners need being picked up individually wherever they are. A pre-test
would help the learners to figure out if they consider themselves being able to manage this challenging situation.
Particularly in the fields of self-motivation and self-organization of learning processes, they are in the need of addi-tional
instruction (Dennis & Labone 2006). In the traditional educational scenarios in Germany, Austria, and Swit-zerland,
teachers and institutions organize the learning processes for their learners (on a general level). Also, in the
traditional learning scenarios, motivation individually is fostered when educators realize motivation-loss on part of
the learners. In a scenario, where face-to-face contacts are not possible, this often can not be realized by the educa-tors
in time and thus, the learners need to learn how to self-motivate. Providing related courses that support the

6. learners to develop would be very helpful. Frequently provided qualified (individual) feedback by the instructors
would help the students to keep motivated and therefore, on track.
In case of Internet-based group-work scenarios, support through the educators is needed because of the pos-sibly
unfamiliar (for the learners) communication setting. At least, the learners need to be aware of the different
situation and its consequences. The learners should be introduced regarding a certain code of conduct, e. g., by ar-ranging
commonly agreed communication-rules. Without the typical social indicators from a face-to-face world, the
learners often have difficulties in choosing group members and building fruitful working groups. Educators should
form the groups themselves to simplify the group-forming processes, at least for the first time, when groups are to be
formed within a course.
Regarding the education of pupils and learners with less experience in diverse learning scenarios, more in-dividual
support is required. Particularly for apprentices, the concept of blended learning (Kaltenbaek 2003, p. 4)
could prove to be the better choice, at least for the first lectures. If E-Learning is a suitable technology for pupils on
the level of primary school and what support particularly would be needed, could not be determined, because the re-search
itself focused on HE and AE.
Conclusion
In Internet-based educational programs, special skills are required from the Learners which the experts did not con-sider
being relevant in the context of face-to-face education. Those additional skills are not naturally given or con-currently
taught during school education, but need to be trained explicitly. It seems obvious that providers of E-Learning-
based educational programs, if they want their learners (customers) to succeed, are challenged to render
every possible assistance instead of just providing content: Particularly newcomers (learners) in E-Learning-based
educational programs and children have to become friends with the uncommon scenario, else they may loose their
initial motivation and fail the program. E-Learning should not be understood as a budget-friendly way to simultane-ously
teach great numbers of students (in the meaning of a simple process where content is provided to the learners),
but requires a considerable amount of personnel resources in order to provide painstaking care.
As shown, there are various opportunities available to support the learners in their effort. Some of those ac-tivities
do rather have a general and preparative/informative character and can be delivered as documents. Others
have a more individual continuing character and, on part of the educators, require personnel attendance and care.
Depending on the learner types and their prior knowledge, tailor-made actions are required.
References
Arias, S & Clark, K.A. (2004). Instructional technologies in developing countries: A contextual analysis approach.
Tech Trends, AECT, Bloomington, 48 (4), pp. 52-55.
Bonk, C.J. (2002). Online training in an online world. Bloomington, IN: CourseShare.com. Retrieved on March 19,
2011 at http://www.publicationshare.com/docs/corp_survey.pdf
Brachos, F.; Dormann, A.; Falck, M.; Liethmann, W.; Maier, W.; Steffen, W., & Teufel, M. (2003). E-Learning in
der Fachhochschullehre, Positionspapier. Arbeitsgemeinschaft E-Leanring der Fachhochschulen für den öffentli-chen
Dienst (FHöD). Retrieved on March 16, 2011 at
http://www.fhr.nrw.de/foerderverein/Grusswort/dozenten/publikationen_dormann/positionspapier.pdf
Carell, A. (2006). Selbststeuerung und Partizipation beim computergestützten kollaborativen Lernen. Waxmann
Verlag GmbH, Münster.
Carnwell, R. (2000). Approaches to Study and their Impact on the Need for Support and Guidance in Distance
Learning. Open Learning: The Journal of Open and Distance Learning, 15 (2), pp. 123-140.
Conrad, D.L. (2002). Engagement, Excitement, Anxiety, and Fear: Learners' Experiences of Starting an Online
Course. American Journal of Distance Education, 16 (4), pp. 205-226.
Darabi, A.A.; Sikorski, E.G., & Harvey, R.B. (2006). Validated Competencies for Distance Teaching. Distance
Education, 27 (1), pp. 105-122.

7. Dennis, C. & Labone, E. (2006). Fostering Student Motivation and Self-Regulatory Skills in Online Learning Envi-ronments.
In E. Pearson & P. Bohman (Eds.), Proceedings of World Conference on Educational Multimedia, Hy-permedia
and Telecommunications, Chesapeake, VA: AACE, pp. 1367-1372.
Dennen, V.P. & Wieland K. (2007). From Interaction to Intersubjectivity: Facilitating online group discourse proc-esses.
In: Distance Education, 28 (3), pp. 281 – 297.
Edmundson, A. (2007). The Cultural Adaptation Process (CAP) Model: Designing E-Learning for Another Culture.
In: Edmundson, A. (ed): Globalized E-Learning, Cultural Challenges. Idea Group, U.S., 2007, pp. 267-290.
Furnborough, C. & Truman, M. (2009). Adult beginner distance language learner perceptions and use of as-signment
feedback. Distance Education, 30 (3), pp. 399-418.
Gunawardana, K.D. (2005). An Empirical Study of potential challenges and Benefits of Implementing E-learning in
Sri Lanka. In: Proceedings of the Second International Conference on eLearning for Knowledge-Based Society,
Bangkok, Thailand, August 4-7, pp. 33.1-33.8.
Heidenreich, S. (2009). Pädagogische Anforderungen an das Lernhandeln im E-Learning. Verlag Dr. Kovač, Ham-burg.
Keller, J. (2008). First principles of motivation to learn and e3-learning. Distance Education, 29 (2), pp. 175-185.
Lassmann, W. (2006). Wirtschaftsinformatik – Nachschlagewerk für Studium und Praxis. 1. Aufl., Betriebswirt-schaftlicher
Verlag Dr. Th. Gabler, Wiesbaden.
Likert, Rensis (1932). A Technique for the Measurement of Attitudes. Archives of Psychology, 140, pp. 1–55.
Linstone, H.A. & Turoff, M. (1975). The Delphi Method: Techniques and Applications. Adison-Wesley.
Moore, M.G. (1991). Editorial: Distance education theory. American Journal of Distance Education, 5 (3), pp. 1-6.
Ng, C.S.L & Cheung, W.S. (2007). Comparing face to face, tutor led discussion and online discussion in the class-room.
In: Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 23 (4), pp. 455-469.
Powell, A. & Patrick, S. (2008). K12 Online Learning: A Global Perspective. In: Bonk, C. et al. (Eds.), Proceedings
of World Conference on E-Learning in Corporate, Government, Healthcare, and Higher Education, Chesapeake,
VA: AACE, pp. 2353-2380.
Rey, G.D. (2009). E-Learning. 1. Aufl., Verlag Hans Huber, Bern.
Richter, T. (2010). Open Educational Resources im kulturellen Kontext von e-Learning. Zeitschrift für E-Learning
(ZeL), Freie elektronische Bildungsressourcen, (3/2010), pp. 30-42.
Richter, T.; Pawlowski, J.M., & Lutze, M. (2008). Adapting E-Learning Situations for International Reuse. In: Sud-weeks,
F.; Hrachovec H. & Ess C. (Eds.): CATaC`08 Proceedings: Cultural Attitudes towards Technology and
Communication, Nimes, France, Murdoch University, Murdoch, Australia, pp. 713-725.
Ehlers, U.D.; Helmstedt, C., & Richter, T. (2010). Analysing New Learning Culture. In: Tait, A. & Szücs, A. (Eds.).
Proceedings of the EDEN 2010 Annual Conference, Valencia, Spain, European Distance and E-Learning Network,
Book of Abstracts (incl. CD-Rom with full text papers), p. 3.
Leffers, J. (1996). Jeder dritte packt es nicht. In: Süddeutsche Zeitung, 1996-04-20, No. 92, p. B3 (Interview with
Prof. Winfried Schlaffke).
Selinger, M. (2004). Cultural and pedagogical implications of a global e-learning program. Cambridge Journal of
Education, 34 (2), pp. 223-239.
Wheeler, L. & Shaver, P.R. (1983). Solving Social Dilemmas: A Review. In: Wheeler, L. & Shaver, P.R. (Eds.), Re-view
of personality and social psychology, Vol. 4, Beverly Hills, CA: Sage publications, pp. 11-44.