[{"data":1,"prerenderedAt":-1},["ShallowReactive",2],{"detail-sidebar-cat-0-en-105":3,"doc-seo-597665-105":59,"doc-detail-597665-en":130},{"code":4,"msg":5,"data":6},0,"success",[7,13,18,23,28,33,38,43,48,51,55],{"id":8,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":10,"show_sort_weight":11,"slug":12},1,"Document","Story & Novel",90,"story-novel",{"id":14,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":15,"show_sort_weight":16,"slug":17},2,"Literature",80,"literature",{"id":19,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":20,"show_sort_weight":21,"slug":22},4,"Exam",70,"exam",{"id":24,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":25,"show_sort_weight":26,"slug":27},5,"Comic",60,"comic",{"id":29,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":30,"show_sort_weight":31,"slug":32},6,"Technology",50,"technology",{"id":34,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":35,"show_sort_weight":36,"slug":37},7,"Healthcare",40,"healthcare",{"id":39,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":40,"show_sort_weight":41,"slug":42},8,"Research & Report",30,"research-report",{"id":44,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":45,"show_sort_weight":46,"slug":47},9,"Religion & Spirituality",20,"religion-spirituality",{"id":46,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":49,"show_sort_weight":46,"slug":50},"World Cup","world-cup",{"id":52,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":53,"show_sort_weight":52,"slug":54},10,"Lifestyle","lifestyle",{"id":56,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":57,"show_sort_weight":24,"slug":58},19,"General","general",{"code":4,"msg":60,"data":61},"ok",{"site_id":62,"language":63,"slug":64,"title":65,"keywords":66,"description":67,"schema_data":68,"social_meta":123,"head_meta":125,"extra_data":127,"updated_unix":129},105,"en","a-review-of-e-learning-in-canada-rejoinder-to-commentaries-issue-323","A Review of e Learning in Canada: Rejoinder to Commentaries - Issue 32(3)","","Abrami and colleagues provide a rejoinder reviewing e-learning in Canada from 2000 onward by synthesizing information across multiple source types, including public printed media, practitioner perspectives, policy documents, research review evidence, and primary empirical studies. The review includes 726 documents and concludes that evidence is largely favourable regarding impacts on student achievement and motivation, while noting gaps in some thematic areas and limited causal evidence. Limitations include constrained depth, indirect comparison with other countries, and methodological challenges such as relying on frequency analyses and vote counts.",{"@graph":69,"@context":122},[70,84,105],{"@type":71,"itemListElement":72},"BreadcrumbList",[73,77,79,82],{"item":74,"name":75,"@type":76,"position":8},"https://docshare.wps.com","Home","ListItem",{"item":78,"name":9,"@type":76,"position":14},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/",{"item":80,"name":40,"@type":76,"position":81},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/research-report/",3,{"item":83,"name":65,"@type":76,"position":19},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/a-review-of-e-learning-in-canada-rejoinder-to-commentaries-issue-323/597665/",{"url":83,"name":65,"@type":85,"image":86,"author":91,"headline":65,"publisher":94,"fileFormat":97,"inLanguage":63,"description":67,"dateModified":98,"datePublished":99,"encodingFormat":97,"isAccessibleForFree":100,"interactionStatistic":101},"DigitalDocument",{"url":87,"@type":88,"width":89,"height":90},"https://docshare.wps.com/thumbnails/a-review-of-e-learning-in-canada-rejoinder-to-commentaries-issue-323/597665.png","ImageObject",300,407,{"name":92,"@type":93},"pop out","Person",{"url":74,"name":95,"@type":96},"DocShare","Organization","application/pdf","2026-10-30","2026-10-15",true,{"@type":102,"interactionType":103,"userInteractionCount":44},"InteractionCounter",{"@type":104},"ViewAction",{"@type":106,"mainEntity":107},"FAQPage",[108,114,118],{"name":109,"@type":110,"acceptedAnswer":111},"What sources were included in the review of e-learning in Canada?","Question",{"text":112,"@type":113},"The review synthesized 726 documents from multiple sources, including public printed media, trade/practitioner perspectives, policy documents, research reviews, and primary empirical studies.","Answer",{"name":115,"@type":110,"acceptedAnswer":116},"What overall conclusions did the authors draw about e-learning impacts?",{"text":117,"@type":113},"The authors report that evidence across Canadian primary research, international literature reviews, policy documents, media reports, and practitioner publications is mostly favourable regarding e-learning’s use and impact on outcomes such as student achievement and motivation.",{"name":119,"@type":110,"acceptedAnswer":120},"What key limitations did the authors emphasize in their rejoinder?",{"text":121,"@type":113},"They highlight unanswered questions about deployment and attendant costs, promising but specific development areas, limited ability to compare Canadian evidence directly with other countries, and methodological challenges such as reliance on frequency analyses and vote counts without assessing methodological quality.","https://schema.org",{"og:url":83,"og:type":124,"og:title":65,"og:site_name":95,"og:description":67},"article",{"robots":126,"canonical":83},"index,follow",{"doc_id":128,"site_id":62},597665,1792168046,{"code":4,"msg":5,"data":131},{"doc_id":128,"user_id":132,"nickname":92,"user_avatar":133,"doc_module":4,"category_id":39,"category_name":40,"doc_title":65,"doc_description":67,"doc_content":134,"file_id":135,"file_url":136,"file_type":137,"file_size":138,"view_count":44,"is_deleted":4,"is_public":8,"is_downloadable":8,"audit_status":8,"page_count":56,"language":139,"language_code":63,"site_id":62,"html_lang":63,"table_of_contents":140,"faqs":141,"seo_title":142,"seo_description":67,"update_tm":143,"read_time":144,"preview_page_count":4},962090760408,"https://ap-avatar.wpscdn.com/davatar_085a072bc5b1113ac321206ff7593b45","Canadian Journal of Learning and Technology  \nVolume 32(3) Fall / automne 2006  \nA Review of e Learning in Canada: Rejoinder to Commentaries  \nAuthors  \nPhilip C. Abrami, Robert M. Bernard, C. Anne Wade, Eugene Borokhovski, Rana Tamim, Michael Surkes, and Dai Zhang  \nCentre for the Study of Learning and Performance, Concordia University, Montreal, Quebec  \nAbrami et al. (this issue) provide a review of e learning in Canada from 2000 onwards by synthesizing information drawn from multiple sources, not only primary research. In total, there were 726 documents included in our review: 235 views expressed in the public printed media ( an expression of general public opinion) ; 131views from trade/ practitioner perspectives; 88 views of policy makers contained in public policy documents; 120 sources of evidence contained in reviews of research ; and 152 sources of evidence contained in primary empirical studies . As far as we know, this is the first review of its kind to be as inclusive of sources . This is both our review’s greatest strength, allowing us to determine whether consensus existed among myriad sources, and potentially its greatest weakness, as both the time for such a comprehensive review ( our contract with CCL specified the review needed to be completed in 90 days) and the cost meant we sacrificeda degree of depth for an increase in breadth.  \nWe reached a number of conclusions in our review, a few of which bear repeating:  \n Conclusions from Canadian primary research, international literature reviews, policy documents, media reports, and practitioner publications are mostly favourable towards the use and impact of e learning (i. e . , student achievement, motivation, and other outcomes) in Canada .  \n In Canada there is a lack of evidence in some theme areas, notably early childhood learning, and a lack of experimental and quasi experimental evidence that would allow unambiguous causal conclusions to be drawn about effectiveness .  \n The quality and scope of the research evidence does not match the time, cost and resources that have been and will be dedicated to the development and implementation of e learning.  \n There is a need for programs of development for new initiatives that have high quality research and evaluation programs or components built i n as a forethought, not an afterthought.  \n And we expressed important limitations, some of which also bear repeating:  \n There is an unanswered question concerning the emphasis which is placed on deployment, attendant costs, and what one might take away, or not add, given the expense of an e learning delivered curriculum.  \n There are promising areas of new development focusing on specific applications of technology such as : learning objects and repositories; standardization of metadata; electronic portfolios; and broadband enabled lifelong learning projects .  \n We emphasized Canadian primary research to determine the nature and extent of evidence in our country . Our ability to compare Canadian evidence with research from other countries was limited and indirect. We included only literature reviews of non Canadian primary research.  \n Because of the scope of this undertaking, its novelty, and the time constraints under which we operated, we have been able to provide only a rough portrait of the evidence and opinions .  \n While we incorporated a large number of explanatory variables or study features, we are certain that a finer analysis of the literature would yield far more .  \n We did not examine the evidence from a theoretical perspective, in part because of the time limits, but primarily because there is little in the way of theory testing research on e learning that can be synthesized.  \n There were methodological challenges and shortcomings to this review and to our use of an argument catalogue to synthesize views on e learning.  \n Our analyses of evidence, including the primary evidence, are based primarily on frequency analyses or vote counts of impacts wi","cbCailWa5kgNtbZE","https://ap.wps.com/l/cbCailWa5kgNtbZE","pdf",436696,"English","# A Review of e Learning in Canada: Rejoinder to Commentaries\n## Review scope, methods, and included sources\n## Conclusions and limitations\n## Systematic reviews: what is missing and why","[{\"question\":\"What sources were included in the review of e-learning in Canada?\",\"answer\":\"The review synthesized 726 documents from multiple sources, including public printed media, trade/practitioner perspectives, policy documents, research reviews, and primary empirical studies.\"},{\"question\":\"What overall conclusions did the authors draw about e-learning impacts?\",\"answer\":\"The authors report that evidence across Canadian primary research, international literature reviews, policy documents, media reports, and practitioner publications is mostly favourable regarding e-learning’s use and impact on outcomes such as student achievement and motivation.\"},{\"question\":\"What key limitations did the authors emphasize in their rejoinder?\",\"answer\":\"They highlight unanswered questions about deployment and attendant costs, promising but specific development areas, limited ability to compare Canadian evidence directly with other countries, and methodological challenges such as reliance on frequency analyses and vote counts without assessing methodological quality.\"}]","A Review of e Learning in Canada: Rejoinder to Commentaries - Issue 32(3) | PDF",1792085457,48]