Hypothesis 1: eLearning is a means of implementing education that can be applied within varying education models (for example, face to face or distance education) and educational philosophies (for example behaviourism and constructivism).

I agree with this hypothesis. For me, this hypothesis suggests that the elearning platform can be used in a variety of use cases.  Nichols (2003) notes that various learning theories can be expressed using elearning. Alternatively, it can be a simple tool to organise resources to support a face to face scenario.

Hypothesis 2: eLearning enables unique forms of education that fits within the existing paradigms of face to face and distance education.

Within my own constraints of discussing elearning technology with lecturing colleagues I agree. I find they are able to test interesting new means of delivery and collaboration within the framework of their existing course.

Hypothesis 3: The choice of eLearning tools should reflect rather than determine the pedagogy of a course; how technology is used is more important than which technology is used.

This hypothesis cautions against relying on new technology to solve issues with course pedagogies. It also suggests that simple technology can be very effective so I would agree again with this.

Hypothesis 4: eLearning advances primarily through the successful implementation of pedagogical innovation.

I think eLearning can be advanced by incremental improvements in technology without changes to teaching practise.  Consider an easy to use online collaboration tool such as Microsoft Teams which can allow a student to participate in a class in all but their presence.  In this way I feel that technological improvement alone can improve elearning without pedagogical innovation.

Hypothesis 5: eLearning can be used in two major ways; the presentation of education content, and the facilitation of education processes.

An elearning platform can be both a digital repository and the facilitator of the educational process.  I cannot think of an elearning activity which falls outside of this definition.

Hypothesis 6: eLearning tools are best made to operate within a carefully selected and optimally integrated course design model.

Agreed: an untidy, unstructured course containing eye-catching digital tools may not be so successful when compared to a properly structured designed course using a simple interface.

Hypothesis 7: eLearning tools and techniques should be used only after consideration has been given to online vs offline trade-offs.

This is perhaps true in it’s historical context but I don’t think the constraints noted still apply.

Hypothesis 8: Effective eLearning practice considers the ways in which end-users will engage with the learning opportunities provided to them.

I think this is still relevant although the checks we must make are slightly different. The materials provided must now be designed or altered to work across a variety of devices and consider modern Accessibility legislation.

Hypothesis 9: The overall aim of education, that is, the development of the learner in the context of a predetermined curriculum or set of learning objectives, does not change when eLearning is applied.

 This relates to hypothesis 1 in that the learning can be delivered in a variety of situations but ultimately the student must meet the criteria to pass a course.

Hypothesis 10: Only pedagogical advantages will provide a lasting rationale for implementing eLearning approaches.

It could be argued that in absentia students provide a financial incentive for implementing eLearning approaches.