The Connected Learning Space

THE CONNECTED LEARNING SPACE Edited by Madhumita Bhattacharya & Piet Kommers THE CONNECTED LEARNING SPACE Edited by Ma...

Author: Madhumita Bhattacharya | Piet Kommers

92 downloads 822 Views 3MB Size Report

This content was uploaded by our users and we assume good faith they have the permission to share this book. If you own the copyright to this book and it is wrongfully on our website, we offer a simple DMCA procedure to remove your content from our site. Start by pressing the button below!

Report copyright / DMCA form

DOWNLOAD PDF

THE CONNECTED LEARNING SPACE Edited by Madhumita Bhattacharya & Piet Kommers

THE CONNECTED LEARNING SPACE Edited by Madhumita Bhattacharya & Piet Kommers

Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education www.aace.org

EDUCATION & INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY DIGITAL LIBRARY he EdITLib is your source for 15+ years (with your 1 year T subscription) of peer-reviewed, published articles (20,000+) and papers on the latest research, developments, and applications related to all aspects of Educational Technology and E-Learning.

• Conduct scholarly research • Receive Table of Contents alerts • Keep current on the latest research and publications in your field

Journals – www.aace.org/pubs • International Journal on E-Learning (Corporate, Government, Healthcare, & Higher Education) • Journal of Computers in Mathematics and Science Teaching • Journal of Educational Multimedia and Hypermedia • Journal of Interactive Learning Research • Journal of Technology and Teacher Education • AACE Journal (electronic) • Contemporary Issues in Technology & Teacher Education (electronic)

Conference Papers/Presentations – www.aace.org/conf ED-MEDIA – World Conference on Educational Multimedia, Hypermedia & Telecommunications E-Learn – World Conference on E-Learning in Corporate, Healthcare, Government, and Higher Education SITE – Society for Information Technology and Teacher Education International Conference and others...

Please Recommend Your Library Subscribe!

www.EdITLib.org Sponsored by AACE: [email protected] 757-366-5606

THE CONNECTED LEARNING SPACE

Articles Preface: The Connected Learning Space Madhumita Bhattacharya & Piet Kommers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .7 Facilitating Online Learning Communities: The Collaborative Design of an Online Support Resource Shannon Novak, Anna Ponting, and Madhumita Bhattacharya . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .11 The Safety of Crowds Jon Dron . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .29 E-Learning Environments for Digitally-Minded Students Diana Andone, Jon Dron, Lyn Pemberton, and Chris Boyne . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .41 Design of Virtual Learning Environments for Deep Learning Mike Mimirinis and Madhumita Bhattacharya . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .55 EDUCO: Social Navigation and Group Formation in Student-Centred E-Learning Jaakko Kurhila, Mikka Miettinen, Petri Nokelainen, and Henry Tirri . . . . . . . . . . . .65 Understanding Topical Science Issues – A Learning Design Approach Trevor J. Billany, Maggie Hartnett, and Madhumita Bhattacharya . . . . . . . . . . . . .85 Conceptual Model of Learning to Improve Understanding of High School Chemistry Faguele Suaalii and Madhumita Bhattacharya . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .101 Designing for Learning Effectiveness Across Borders in a Multicultural Context Krishan Lall Kumar and Madhumita Bhattacharya . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .111

Integrated Approach to Learning Environment Design for Secondary Science Teachers Madhumita Bhattacharya and Lone Jorgensen . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .123 Managing Technological Constraints and Educational Aspiration in a Multicultural E-Learning Environment Design Laïla Oubenaïssa-Giardina and Madhumita Bhattacharya . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .135

The Connected Learning Space (ISBN 1-880094-68-1) is published by the Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE), an international, educational, nonprofit organization. Published by: AACE, PO Box 1545, Chesapeake, VA 23327-1545, USA 757-366-5606; Fax: 703-997-8760; E-mail: [email protected] © Copyright 2009 by AACE. Website: http://www.aace.org

The Connected Learning Space, 7-9

PREFACE

The Connected Learning Space Guest Editors Introduction MADHUMITA BHATTACHARYA Massey University, New Zealand [email protected] PIET KOMMERS University of Twente, Netherlands [email protected]

This book focuses on the co-evolution of learning paradigms in the resonance of WWW-based learning support systems of the recent decade. Most striking is the rather autonomous trend towards information management for learning: the beauty of transparent user interfaces, highly dynamic and diagrammatic overviews, and mathematical models in the background that reduce the complexity of documents intertwining even without bothering the learner. While early graph theorists fell back on social networks in order to get inspired, we now see the reverse – social networking architects excavate metaphors on document management and supplant the earlier scruples of human resource caretakers who thought a relationship is merely a matter of empathy and passion. In other words, the notion of social structures and learning networks have re-entered the arena of system designers and again become subdued to systematic design. It is this context that has stimulated the authors of this issue to think about design methodology. The notion of design stages and templates has been extrapolated from the context of information systems, multimedia and more recently virtual reality. The phase of Conceptual Design is a two-sided knife. Its first connotation is learning that the end user needs a thematic landscape of metacognitive entities as they emerge in verbal protocols, thinking aloud and flashing associations that can hardly be suppressed in urgent situations. This global awareness of conceptuality in the learner has penetrated curriculum and instructional design. The core idea is that superordinate topics facilitate the understanding of the more concrete (Ausubel, 1960). As a consequence of the optimism to make the learner the owner of the learning process, the envi-

JILR 18/1page layout

8

11/9/06 11:25 AM

Page 8

Bhattacharya and Kommers

ronment and the instructional context becomes a facility rather than an orchestrator. Subsequently the learner becomes responsible for the higherorder planning and needs conceptual awareness in order to cope with distraction and indolence. (Stoyanov & Kommers, 1999). Its second connotation is to bring the system designer at the most-inclusive level of consciousness and become aware of the most important factors for the learner. Both communication and learning psychology and esthetics are at stake here. It is hard to imagine that system designers can surpass the action range of the real user during its anticipating in the design stage. Here it will be the semi-real emulation of usage that will help the designer. The phase of Metaphoric Design is one of convergence. After the wide span of conceptual entailments, the designer needs a radical decision on the key aspect of an artifact like prosthesis, notebook, atelier, waiting room, and so on. This choice is important as it prunes away the multitude of user expectations like we have in entitling a book on a controversial topic. The generation and selection of metaphors is crucial for the match between users’ perception of the task and the evoked repertoire of subsequent intuitive actions. In the scope of learning applications it is likely that the student will finally create his or her own metaphor despite of the intended metaphor as reflected in the cosmetics and its inherent task approach. This will be a possible solution for the designer to create activities and examples in a distributed learning environment. The phase of Structural Design deals with the technical components like database elements, control structures etc. and is only essential for the physical implementation of the system. In fact we are now thinking ahead and expecting more than what the present day technology is capable of doing. The final design stage is the one of Navigational Design. Studies on adaptive sequencing and user modeling concern this aspect. The training of learners to become effective learners plays at this level. The longer tradition before constructionism entered our laboratories and schools, considered instruction to be responsible for effective navigation. Since the learner is trusted to learn to learn it is the learner who needs to navigate based upon metacognition and self-regulation. Also there is close link between the navigational style, thinking pattern and the culture. In this special issue, the authors have reiterated over and over again that it is not only the technology which can solve the problems associated with the globalization of education. Deeper understanding of the learners’ behaviors and acts are the foremost important factor in designing an environment for meaningful learning (Bhattacharya, 2004). Technology will no doubt allow us to organize and implement different sorts of activities, but the teachers and instructional designers will have to understand their students’ needs and their motivation. Students will have to be equal partners in the process of learning environment design (Bhattacharya & Bhattacharya, 2006).

JILR 18/1page layout

Preface

11/9/06 11:25 AM

Page 9

9

References Ausubel, D. P. (1960). The use of advance organizers in the learning and retention of meaningful verbal material. Journal of Educational Psychology, 51, 267-272. Stoyanov, S. & Kommers, P. A. M. (1999). Agent-Support for Problem Solving Through Concept Mapping. Journal of Interactive Learning Research, Special Issue on Intelligent Agents for Education and Training Systems, 10(3), 401-412. Bhattacharya, M. (2004) Conducting problem based learning online. In E. McKay (Ed.) Proceedings International Conference on Computers in Education 2004 (pp. 525-530), Melbourne, VIC: RMIT University. Bhattacharya, Y., & Bhattacharya, M. (2006). Learner as a Designer of Digital Learning Tools. In Kinshuk, R. Koper, P. Kommers, P. Kirschner, D. Sampson & W. Didderen (Eds.) Proceedings Sixth International Conference on Advanced Learning Technologies (ICALT’06) (pp. 11331134), Los Alamitos, CA: IEEE Computer Society Press Kerkrade, Netherlands, July 5-7.

JILR 18/1page layout

11/9/06 11:25 AM

Page 10

JILR 18/1page layout

11/9/06 11:25 AM

Page 11

Facilitating Online Learning Communities: The Collaborative Design of an Online Support Resource SHANNON NOVAK Massey University, New Zealand [email protected] ANNA PONTING The Correspondence School, New Zealand [email protected] MADHUMITA BHATTACHARYA Massey University, New Zealand [email protected] The design of a web-based hypermedia learning solution requires a robust design process – a full iteration that conceptually, metaphorically, structurally and navigationally defines a solution with the end users at its core as exemplified by Kommers (2001). Initially this process was considered as a sequential, hierarchical pyramid from conceptual at the base to navigational at its peak; however, upon completion of the process it appeared more fluid, flat and interdependent where each design phase influenced and informed each other. The solution was instigated by the identification of an opportunity to recreate a learning environment online. An analysis of the proposed client (in totality; student, facilitator, course and institution) resulted in the identification of an ideal solution concept. The concept was further entertained through the exploration of the metaphoric domain of the solution. This activity culminated in the identification of solution specification/personalisation and humanisation via a virtual avatar. Following this, a structure emerged which provided the technical framework for the final solution and ensured the solution would be efficient, usable and navigable. Design of the navigational architecture capped the design section. The output was a blended (synchronous/asynchronous) web-based learning solution for an online course in online facilitation, enabling users to discuss, learn, collaborate, reflect and derive meaning.

JILR 18/1page layout

12

11/9/06 11:25 AM

Page 12

Novak, Ponting, and Bhattacharya

Introduction The design of a web-based hypermedia learning solution requires a robust design process - a full iteration that conceptually, metaphorically, structurally and navigationally defines a solution with the end users at its core as exemplified by Kommers (2001). This robust design process was put into practice through the identification of an opportunity to design a web-based hypermedia learning environment for the course Facilitating an Online Learning Community (FOLC100) at the Java Institute of Technology (JIT). The process began with careful analysis of the client (in totality; student, facilitator, course and institution) which in turn drove the formation of solution concepts from which a selection of the ideal concept was made and supporting learning objectives were developed. The selected concept was subsequently enriched through the exploration of a metaphoric theme that aimed, through the fusion of cues commonly present in the learning environment, to strengthen and demystify the relationship between participant and technology. This activity culminated in a metaphor that structured the interface, humanised the virtual environment with the inclusion of a virtual avatar and accommodated the cultural diversity of participants. Following this, the genesis of application logic/structure behind the solution arose through the identification of an underlying system framework, definition of a global structure map, consideration of content presentation mechanism and the production of a screen schematic and entailing screen prototype. Finally, the navigational logic of the solution was mapped to illustrate the complex navigational relationship between structural elements. The output was a blended (synchronous/asynchronous) web-based learning solution for an online course in online facilitation, enabling participants to discuss, learn, collaborate, reflect and derive meaning. The Role of Design Pedagogy The design of a web-based hypermedia solution entails undertaking a design process specific to that medium (Carr-Chellman & Duchastel, 2002) or a design pedagogy (Mioduser, Nachmias, Lahav, & Oren, 2000) detailing a distinct sequence of applications needs to be addressed. Kommers (2001) offers up such pedagogy through a series of applications of phases by which a web-based hypermedia concept is identified and refined using a process to bring the design into fruition. The first (conceptual) phase explores the project proposal through a range of analysis activities in order to conceptualise likely products and identify the ideal concept. The second (metaphoric) phase then seeks to personify and humanise this concept through metaphor. The third (structural) phase then formulates the technical and logical architecture behind the concept which is further enhanced by the final (navigational) phase detailing navigational logic and structure.

JILR 18/1page layout

11/9/06 11:25 AM

Page 13

Facilitating Online Learning Communities

13

Hobbs (2002) suggests the design pedagogy be of primary importance and carefully analysed by course designers before the course is constructed. To this end, the authors critically reviewed Kommers’ (2001) design pedagogy (model) prior to embarking on the design activities leading to the design of a web-based hypermedia solution. Critical Review of the Design Pedagogy Bhattacharya’s (2005) model used to guide the process was pyramidal in its original form (see Figure 1), portraying the conceptual phase as being the initial and most focused phase and the subsequent phases as being of decreasing focus. Using this model advanced the design process, offering it sequential structure, however the authors found the model inadequate in representing the way phases needed to be revisited and how they informed/influenced one another. As a result, the authors augmented the original model to suit the observed multidirectional development of each design stage through the actual design experience (see Figure 2). In narrating Figure 2, we begin to see the conversational schema that surrounds the development of each design phase. For example, during the navigational design phase elements of the metaphorical design were revisited which resulted in elements in the conceptual design being further refined. Kommers (2001) makes a qualified description of the phase as ideally being performed sequentially and without back tracking or iterations, where a return to the conceptual phase would be the result of identifying inadequacies.

Structural

Navigational

Metaphorical

Conceptual

Figure 1. The original design model

JILR 18/1page layout

11/9/06 11:25 AM

Page 14

14

Novak, Ponting, and Bhattacharya

1. Conceptual

2. Metaphorical

4. Navigational

3. Structural

Figure 2. The augmented design model In the course of undertaking this particular process, our experience of a sequential process was similar to that described in Ellis and Hafner (2003) in writing of the system development lifecycle as both sequential and iterative. They explain the iterative nature of the process as being a resultant of issues arising at any given phase therefore necessitating a return to any previous phase for reassessment. The rest of this article will be devoted to an account of the design, the efficaciousness of the process, the authors practice and perception of the relationships between the phases which brought about the augmented design model. Setting the Scene The project began by attributing the design with an explicit purpose – that is, a scenario the authors could refer the design back to at each stage in the design paradigm, a scenario that would frame the reason for the design being created in the first place. To this end, a scenario was developed illustrating the need for a web-based hypermedia learning solution to aid, enhance and facilitate learning for participants in a course named Facilitating an Online Learning Community (FOLC100) at the Java Institute of Technology (JIT). The Conceptual Design Phase As a result of developing a scenario, the end product was conceptualised: a web-based hypertext solution; developed using Macromedia Dreamweaver (Macromedia, 2005); a Hyper-Text Markup Language (HTML) format; and

JILR 18/1page layout

11/9/06 11:25 AM

Page 15

Facilitating Online Learning Communities

15

an interactive resource that compliments an online course. Following the conceptualisation of an end product came the audience analysis where variables like age, gender and literacy were discussed with the intention of what Kommers describes as getting to “know and feel the intended setting” (2001, p. 6). Although time constraints meant the authors could not achieve a great sense of depth/immersion in this particular area – a context (both psychological and situational) was generated, strong enough to distill various characteristics of the intended audience, therefore allowing the design to focus clearly on the needs of the resulting persona (Nichani, 2002, p. 1). As a result of defining both scenario and audience, the project could be purposefully pinned down to a bounded system (Stake, 1995; Merriam, 1998) that concentrated on a single phenomenon and was characterised by a unit of analysis (the proposed solution). The next step was to conceptually map this unit against the target product (web-based hypermedia), target audience (persona) and target context (institutional) using a software package called Inspiration (Inspiration Software Inc, 2005). The resulting conceptual map (see Figure 3) breaks the content and practice required by the conceptualised end product into two key components: knowledge and skills, which were further broken down into: a. Participants: knowledge and understanding of the participants involved in the online learning environment. b. Technologies: knowledge, practice and understanding of technologies supporting facilitation in an online learning community. c. Skills: knowledge, practice and understanding of methods of facilitation in an online learning community. d. Practice: putting the concepts learned in a, b and c into practice by facilitation in an online learning community. It was envisaged this would culminate in a collaborative process where participants would construct meaning and engage in practice in the facilitation of an online community and scaffold the course around three key activities: initial and independent learning activities; exploration and describing facilitation; and planning and undertaking facilitation in an authentic situation amongst peers. The architecture of this map is encapsulated by the concept thick authenticity (Shaffer & Resnick, 1999) where assessments, content and objectives are placed in relevant and authentic contexts aligned with the real world context the knowledge will be applied in. From the concept map, a list of course sections, modules and learning objectives were drawn and it was anticipated how each would flow practically over the duration of the course. In retrospect this stage went down into

JILR 18/1page layout

11/9/06 11:25 AM

Page 16

16

Novak, Ponting, and Bhattacharya

Introductions

Participants and technologies

Participation, skills and knowledge

Cultural considerations Asynchronous media

Audience analysis

Social presence Facilitating an online learning community instruction

Technologies

Synchronous media

Facilitation practice

Student facilitation summative assessment

Instruction methods skills and knowledge

Reflective practice in facilitation

Facilitation plans

Figure 3. The conceptual map more detail than expected but at this stage in the design paradigm, detail is essential as by providing more detail we are providing the subsequent phases with greater stability and something increasingly concrete to draw from. The Metaphoric Phase The aim of the metaphoric phase was to formulate the personality of the web-based hypermedia module that would be presented to course participants (Kommers, 2001, p. 10). In seeking an appropriate metaphor, a theme (see Figure 4) that connected cues and structural elements (user interface)

JILR 18/1page layout

11/9/06 11:25 AM

Page 17

Facilitating Online Learning Communities

17

commonly found in the web-based hypermedia solution (such as sound and visuals) was devised, a theme that would be presented to the participants who in turn would become engaged with the web-based hypermedia solution dependent on how well the metaphor matched what the participants already knew of the subject and their frame of reference (iconic/cultural symbols found in everyday life). Putting this into context with the proposed solution (a course on facilitating online learning communities) the metaphoric design of the course was primarily informed by the audience/context analysis in the conceptual design stage. Characteristics were drawn from the analysis that could inform the unifying theme on an external level (consideration of learning styles) and an internal level (i.e., the average learner’s profile) with an aim to generating a highly persuasive, emotional hence engaging metaphor. From the synthesis of audience characteristics and the development of a unifying theme the learner experience could be described in terms of physical components such as a Graphical User Interface, virtual environments and virtual characters. The result harks back to the concept of thick authenticity (Shaffer and Resnick, 1999, p. 195) or an experience that combines personal authenticity, real-world authenticity, disciplinary authenticity and authentic assessment to create a successful learning solution. The FOLC100 course would work pedagogically through the simultaneous alignment of individual, social, epistemic and expressive elements. Of considerable influence at this point in driving how the metaphor would appear to the user was that considered by Talin (1998) who suggests the principle of metaphor requires the solution to “borrow behaviors from systems” (p. 1) familiar to the users. Through synchronous discussion and asynchronous document sharing the metaphoric design evolved into a design entity with greater clarity and purpose, especially in relation to the target audience and the target context – which appeared the crux of the success experienced in this stage. By exploring and seeking to understand the psychological and situational aspects of the host environment (for the FOLC100 solution) the enculturation of the metaphoric design was made a smoother, logical process. The Structural Phase This phase sought to define the architecture driving the application logic for the web-based hypermedia module (Kommers, 2001, p. 11). Prior to embarking on this phase, the online learning system of the institution was profiled in terms of its major components and supporting teams. This highlighted the influential relationship between the system framework and FOLC100 web-based hypermedia learning solution and provided a foundation from which subsequent design could be completed with contextual awareness (Brookfield, 1995). The key at this stage was to design globally

JILR 18/1page layout

11/9/06 11:25 AM

Page 18

18

Novak, Ponting, and Bhattacharya

Informs design of

Frame of reference

Personality/ theme

Structural elements Metaphor

Metaphor

Audio cues FOLC100

Participants

Visual cues

Engaged

Knowledge base

Socio-emotive cues Informs design of

Figure 4. The metaphoric concept

and consciously, with the wider (universal) structure in mind. Following the establishment of the system framework the natural progression seemed to be developing the “global structure” diagram (Kommers, 2001, p. 11) of the learning solution which in this case took the form of a high-level (low detail) structure diagram. In developing this diagram, reference was given largely to the concept map developed in the conceptual stage which had subsequently produced a list of topics/subtopics and list of learning objectives. From this, major subject areas were discerned along with their supporting learning chunks respectively and there were a number of design principles governing the design of the diagram: 1. Relating structure to the learning objectives (Chyung & Stepich, 2003; Hannafin & Peck, 1988; Heinich, Molenda, Russell & Smaldino, 1996).

JILR 18/1page layout

11/9/06 11:25 AM

Page 19

Facilitating Online Learning Communities

19

2. Purposeful organisation of the structure (Alessi & Trollip, 1991; Hannafin & Peck, 1988; Reigeluth, 1999). 3. Ensuring the structure was complete, authentic, cognitive load reductive and appropriately emphasised (Alessi & Trollip, 1991; Biggs, 1999; Wilson, 1997). 4. Putting the learner at the heart of the solution (Alessi & Trollip, 1991; Norman, 1986). 5. Ensuring the presence of a support function (Alessi & Trollip, 1991). Although the diagram provided an overview of the program structure, it missed a level critical to understanding the pedagogical logic of the learning environment, a level that described the logic of each learning chunk as it related to the learning experience. Part of the authors personal philosophy suggest participants learn best when engaged in a range of learning styles in equal stature as opposed to a single learning style in overriding dominance, that is, the belief a learning environment should promote proficiency in a multiple modalities (e.g., visual, audio, kinaesthetic) rather than a single modality. A major influence in this line of thinking comes from Chun and Plass (1996) who suggest that associating different objects with different forms of media (text, audio, visuals, and interactions) instills richness in “recall cues” (p. 186) therefore increasing the likelihood that students will remember what they have experienced. The logic here is that by coding the learning chunks in different modalities of learning they are more likely to cater to different types of learners therefore engage the audience in learning (as opposed to a learning chunk with a single modality). To this end each learning chunk was framed in a way that would actuate this premise by breaking the content into a: 1. Tell me section: where the student is presented with content that focuses on text/visuals/static elements, this is where the initial concept at hand is explained. 2. Show me section: where the content focuses on audio/motion-based elements, this is where the concept is demonstrated in a situated scenario. 3. Check me section: where the content focuses on kinaesthetic elements, this is where the student can try the concept out for themselves and begin to develop a skill. 4. Enrich me section: where the content focuses on bringing all the modalities together, this is where the student can begin building the skill in their ‘real world’ environment. At this point it is necessary to carefully consider the underlying framework based on the attributes of meaningful learning that largely informs the

JILR 18/1page layout

11/9/06 11:25 AM

Page 20

20

Novak, Ponting, and Bhattacharya

design activities in each phase. Consideration of this framework was inspired by the work of Bhattacharya (2002; 2004), a framework originally devised by Jonassen, Howland, Marra, and Marra (2003) who suggest “…the primary goal of education at all levels should be to engage students in meaningful learning, which occurs when students are making meaning.” (p. 6). Jonassen et. al. (2003) described five interrelated attributes of meaningful learning that include: • Active (manipulative/observant): interacting with the environment and observing the results. • Constructive (articulative/reflective): interpreting and reflecting on the interactions. • Intentional (reflective/regulatory): having goal driven, progress assessable interactions. • Authentic (complex/contextualised): developing a complex and contextual understanding of the interactions. • Cooperative (collaborative/conversational): having group-oriented, highly communicative interactions. Active

Constructive

Cooperative

Authentic

Intentional

Figure 5. The interrelated attributes of meaningful learning (based on Jonassen, 2003)

JILR 18/1page layout

11/9/06 11:25 AM

Page 21

Facilitating Online Learning Communities

21

Table 1 seeks to prove the FOLC100 web-based hypermedia solution as a solution for engaging students in meaningful learning. Although what validates meaning is highly contentious, we can consider the attributes as a starting point from which we can apply our own social beliefs as the FOLC100 solution evolves. Following the structure diagram was the development of a screen layout through three sequential steps: schematic design; focal design; and prototype design. In generating the schematic design, exemplar schematics were consulted and a particular schematic selected for it’s relevance to the solution at hand – adjusted to match the metaphoric design that designated specific requirements of the user interface. In making the adjustment, the interface had to reflect the WebCT interface students would already be familiar with. To achieve this, a study was carried out on the standard layout of the WebCT interface that identified four major areas; the main heading area, navigational breadcrumb area, course menu area and main content area. These four areas were incorporated into the schematic design respectively (see Figure 6).

Table 1 The FOLC100 Solution as a Provider of Meaningful Learning for Participants Attribute

Relationship with the FOLC100 solution

Manipulative

The provision of interactions (particularly in the ‘show me’ and ‘check me’ sections) where the student may assist or drive the interaction. The provision of ‘observational activities’ (particularly apparent in the ‘enrich me’ sections) where students are encouraged to observe actions in everyday life. The provision of links to the outside Discussion Forum where experiences within the FOLC100 solution could be articulated to the class. The provision of ‘reflective activities’ (particularly apparent in the ‘enrich me’ sections) where students reflect on their FOLC100 experiences. The provision of introductory screens (promoting solution purpose) and globally available ‘learning objectives’ (implicit rather than explicit). The provision of a ‘tracking’ function linked to the virtual character that can provide the student with a report on their progress at any given time. The provision of ‘challenging activities’ (particularly in the ‘enrich me’ sections) that require students to put what they have learned into practice. The provision of ‘situated activities’ (particularly apparent in the ‘show me’ sections) where students may view a concept in action with a real life scenario. The provision of virtual character-to-student and computer-student collaboration with links to student-student collaboration in the external learning environment. The provision of open communication channels between FOLC100 solution and the external learning environment (technical communicative specifications).

Observant Articulative Reflective Intentional Regulatory Complex Contextualised Collaborative Conversational

JILR 18/1page layout

11/9/06 11:25 AM

Page 22

22

Novak, Ponting, and Bhattacharya

Paper heading and resource ‘type’ description Course menu

Navigational aid – breadcrumb trail Main content area

Supporting image area

Virtual character area Audio

Audio transcription marquee

Nav

Figure 6. Schematic screen layout for the proposed FOLC100 solution Following the schematic design was focal design, or deciding where focal emphasis lay in each screen area identified by the schematic design. The focal design is considered critical in instructional terms as it provides a clear reference for the ensuing prototype design as to how the spatial design (colour, typography, imagery) will develop to ensure learners focus on the learning as opposed to that which hosts the learning. The three levels of focus (primary, secondary and tertiary) were drawn from McClurg-Genevese (2005) who suggests in each composition there are “three stages of dominance” (p. 1) that determine the weight of compositional elements and where the eye is likely to go first (see Figure 7). Finally, the prototype design followed and represented the personification of the previous two screen design stages. CorelDraw Graphics Suite 12 (Corel Corporation, 2005) was utilised to generate both vector and rasterbased elements in the prototype with the exception of the virtual character which was generated using Poser 6 (E-frontier America Inc, 2005). The Navigational Phase The aim of this phase was to anticipate the routes selected by the user through the “navigational space” (Kommers, 2001, p. 13) of the web-based

JILR 18/1page layout

11/9/06 11:25 AM

Page 23

Facilitating Online Learning Communities

23

Paper heading and resource ‘type’ description Course menu

Navigational aid – breadcrumb trail Main content area

Supporting image area

Virtual character area Audio Key:

Audio transcription marquee

Nav

= Primary user focus = Secondary user focus = Tertiary user focus

Figure 7. Content emphasis in the screen layout for the proposed FOLC100 solution hypermedia learning solution. One of the first tasks in designing the navigational architecture of the program was to produce a navigationally enhanced structure diagram. This was a rather simple process where the structure diagram created in the structural design phase was altered to show possible routes the user might take through the structure. What immediately became apparent during diagram enhancement was route variation or the emergence of several strong routes, each with an equal possibility of occurrence. From this it was decided to return to the conceptual design stage and reuse the idea of personas, initially used to describe the psychological profile of the target audience in general, this time the persona could be used to describe the anticipated navigational profiles of the target audience. In doing so, three distinct personas emerged; the linear persona, the non-linear persona and the hybrid persona (a mix of linear and non-linear) each with an equal possibility of occurrence, therefore the navigational design had to

JILR 18/1page layout

24

11/9/06 11:25 AM

Page 24

Novak, Ponting, and Bhattacharya

incorporate routes that pandered to both profiles. This had already been anticipated in the design of the initial screen where: • A linear path was provided for those who fell into the linear persona/hybrid persona with the inclusion of back and next buttons on each screen. • A nonlinear path was provided for those who fell into the non-linear persona/hybrid persona with the inclusion of continually available menu options. Having drawn generalisations from a preliminary analysis of the navigational architecture of the FOLC100 program we can move into more detailed analysis that begins primarily with assessing “the importance of the information elements” (Kommers, 2001, p. 14) in the program. In defining which areas on the newly created navigational diagram would be more important than others and contain the most important messages, areas were considered which would be most critical in allowing the students to engage with the content rather than the interface, hence have an increased chance of achieving the learning objectives. As a result, areas that contained navigationalrelated information or instruction that directly related to getting around the program, the purpose of the program and the expected outcomes of the program were selected. Having ensured the most important messages have been determined by level of importance and placed at distances from the initial starting point of the users journey respectively we can begin assessing the “centrality of information components” (Kommers, 2001, p. 14). The logic here is that the more essential/important the information, the more central it must be in the program’s navigational architecture therefore more user reachable. In the case of the FOLC100 solution, the central point of the program was defined as the main menu (the location where the most navigational nodes extend from) so it was ensured that navigational-related components like the introduction, course information and online help screens were the components most central to the main menu. Following the assessment of importance in information elements and centrality in information components, the underlying reference structure of the solution was explored – which was a relatively smooth process given this had largely been devised in the conceptual design stage with the development of a conceptual list (the content covered by the solution) and the structural design stage with the development of a structure diagram. From these two outputs “textual fragments” (Kommers, 2001, p. 15) or more commonly known to the authors as learning chunks, could be elicited and both overarching concepts and supporting concepts could be drawn with ease. Therefore the underlying reference structure was already in place, it just had to be made explicit through the provision of detailed storyboards.

JILR 18/1page layout

11/9/06 11:25 AM

Page 25

Facilitating Online Learning Communities

25

Having defined the basic navigational entities of the program, the final step in the navigational design stage was to create “relational diagram” (Kommers, 2001, p. 15) which was greatly influenced by concept map developed in the conceptual design phase. The resulting relational diagram (see Figure 8) was a simplification/optimisation of the concept map created through carefully aligning the logic found in the conceptual diagram, structural diagram and navigational diagram. CONCLUSION This article has critically reported on the development processes underlying the web-based hypermedia solution Facilitating an Online Learning Community in light of Kommers (2001) design paradigm encompassing four stages: conceptual, metaphoric, structural and navigational.

Cultural considerations

Social presence

Introducing community

Online participants

Audience analysis

Asynchronous media

Formative practice Online technologies

Facilitation practice

FOLC100

Summative practice

Synchronous media Facilitation preparation

Community formation

Facilitation plans

Figure 8. Relational diagram for the proposed FOLC100 solution

JILR 18/1page layout

26

11/9/06 11:25 AM

Page 26

Novak, Ponting, and Bhattacharya

During development in the conceptual design stage the establishment of a detailed target audience/context was promoted as critical to the design at each stage and to this end a detailed scenario was developed that grounded the solution and subsequently gave it a deeper sense of purpose. This stage highlighted the importance of developing an audience persona or group of personas to inform the solution concept from a psychological standpoint. Next the metaphoric design stage ensued, this stage was considered the most difficult given the definition of the stage was quite ambiguous. To this end a metaphoric paradigm showing environment, solution and theme was developed that could help to inform the design activities at this point. This stage highlighted the importance of reutilising the audience persona developed in the conceptual stage and merging it with the audience context to inform the logic of the metaphoric paradigm. Following was the structural design stage, where a structure diagram of the learning solution was produced after careful consideration of the supporting environment. Part of devising the structure diagram was to reflect on learning styles and try to accommodate for each (and promote proficiency in each) through the inclusion of sections poignant to a particular style. In developing an interface prototype the structure was considered particularly in light of focal design and content emphasis. This stage highlighted the importance of considering the underlying system framework that supports the existence of the final learning solution. From this consideration, one can devise a system-compatible structure that will heavily reduce design/development conflicts once the development stage ensues. Finally the navigational design stage arrived where the majority of work completed in this phase was the refinement of developments from the previous three design stages. Exceptions included the importance of using navigational personas to inform anticipated routes and the logic of the centrality diagram where the unit of distance became increasingly complex given a learning solution with a global menu system. This stage highlighted the importance of developing a set of navigational personas from which navigational routes could be anticipated. It is expected this idea will be refined in future solutions to include rapid structure development and subsequently user trials with a resulting structural prototype. In closing, it is useful to return to the revised design paradigm in Figure 2 and consider how it might prove useful in the design of future learning solutions, where the designers know at the outset of the design activities the level of flexibility and collaborative interdependency each stage is capable of. The authors believe that learning solutions following this paradigm in the future will have a greater chance of being intensely designed at each stage thus offer learners a richer learning experience through a final solution directed toward promoting multimodality.

JILR 18/1page layout

11/9/06 11:25 AM

Page 27

Facilitating Online Learning Communities

27

References Alessi, S. M. & Trollip, S. R. (1991). Computer-based instruction: Methods and development (2nd ed). New Jersey: Prentice-Hall. Bhattacharya, M. (2002). Creating a meaningful learning environment using ICT. Retrieved October 19, 2006, from http://www.cdtl.nus.edu.sg/brief/v5n3/sec3.htm Bhattacharya, M. (2004). PBL approach: A model for integrated curriculum. Retrieved October 19, 2006, from http://www.aare.edu.au/04pap/bha04803.pdf Bhattacharya, M. (2005). A model for dimensions of analysis of ID of a course. [PowerPoint] IDPaper.ppt Biggs, J. (1999). Teaching for quality learning at university. Buckingham: Open University Press. Brookfield, S. (1995). Becoming a critically reflective teacher. Jossey-Bass: San Francisco. Carr-Chellman, A., & Duchastel, P. (2000). The ideal online course. British Journal of Educational. Technology (n.d.), 31(3), 229-214. Retrieved October 19, 2006, from http://www.blackwell-synergy.com/toc/bjet/31/3 Chun, D. M., & Plass, J. L. (1996). Effects of multimedia annotations on vocabulary acquisition. Modern Language Journal, 80, 183-198 Chyung, S., & Stepich, D. (2003). Applying the congruence principle of Bloom’s taxonomy to designing online instruction. The Quarterly Review of Distance Education, 4(3), 317-330. Corel Corporation. (2005). CorelDraw Graphics Suite 12. Retrieved October 19, 2006, from http://www.corel.com/ E-Frontier America Inc. (2005). Poser 6. Retrieved October 19, 2006, from http://www.e-frontier.com/go/products/poser Hannafin, M. J., & Peck, K. L. (1998). The design, development and evaluation of Instructional software. London: McMillan Publishing Company. Heinich, R., Molenda, M., Russell, J. & Smaldino, S. (1996). Instructional media and technologies for learning (5th ed). New Jersey: Prentice-Hall. Hobbs, D. L. (2002). A constructivist approach to web course design, a review of the literature. International Journal on E-Learning, 1(2), 60–65. Inspiration Software Inc. (2005). Inspiration. Retrieved October 19, 2006, from http://www. inspiration.com/productinfo/inspiration/index.cfm Jonassen, D. H., Howland, J., Marra, J., & Marra, R.M. (2003). Learning to solve problems with technology: A constructivist perspective (2nd Ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Merrill/Prentice Hall. Kommers, P. (2001). Conceptual stage in designing multimedia for tele learning. Retrieved October 19, 2006, from http://www.ub.utwente.nl/webdocs/ctit/1/00000060.pdf Macromedia Inc. (2005). Macromedia Dreamweaver. Retrieved October 19, 2006, from http://www.adobe.com/products/dreamweaver/ Merriam, S. B. (1998). Qualitative research and case study applications in education. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Nichani, M. (2002). Framing learner personas. Retrieved October 19, 2006, from http://www.elearningpost.com/articles/archives/framing_learner_personas/ Norman, D.A. (1986). Cognitive Engineering. In D.A. Norman & S.W. Draper. (Eds.). User Centred System Design. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

JILR 18/1page layout

28

11/9/06 11:25 AM

Page 28

Novak, Ponting, and Bhattacharya

Reigeluth, C. (1999). The elaboration theory: audience for scope and sequence decisions. In Reigeluth, C.M. (Ed.). Instructional design theories and models: A new paradigm of instruction theory. New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Shaffer, D. W., & Resnick, M. (1999). Thick authenticity: New media and authentic learning. Journal of Interactive Learning Research. 10(2), 195-215. Stake, R. (1995). The art of case research. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications. Talin. (1998). A summary of principles for user-interface design. Retrieved October 19, 2006, from http://escience.anu.edu.au/lecture/cg/Import/UserInterfaceDesign.en.html Wilson, B. (1997). Reflections on constructivism and instructional design. Retrieved October 19, 2006, from http://carbon.cudenver.edu/~bwilson/construct.html

Acknowledgements The authors would like to acknowledge the participants of the 186.757 Instructional Design and Learning Technologies in Distance and Online Education for their critical feedback, accessibility and support surrounding the events described in this article.

JILR 18/1page layout

11/9/06 11:25 AM

Page 29

The Safety of Crowds JON DRON Brighton University, United Kingdom [email protected] If we assume that learning is best achieved in a social setting, then a vital aspect of any learning environment is its ability to support the development of trust. Trust takes many forms, from helping to identify the validity or the effectiveness of a learning resource to feelings of safety and reliance on support from fellow learners and teachers. This article explores how the environment may support or diminish trust in several types of systems, situating them within a conceptual model of trust based on their social, cognitive, technical, interface and systemic features. It goes on to describe a learning environment called Dwellings, which uses a design based on Jane Jacobs’s observations of what makes city districts thrive or decay. Dwellings may be thought of as a cross between a wiki, a moo and a learning object repository. It is built to enable trust to develop, through a combination of safety through a “succession of eyes,” a fluid locus of control and social navigation approaches to collaborative recommendation. The article concludes with a discussion of issues that have arisen through the use of Dwellings and some thoughts on general features and future developments of learning environments that encourage the development of trust.

Introduction Safety in an e-learning environment is among the most important factors in building an effective learning community (Bonk, 2002). Safety is based on trust – trust of the teacher, trust of other members of the community, trust in the tools, trust in the environment. This article will discuss appropriate means of building e-learning environments that make the emergence of trust a more likely outcome. The word trust applies to a wide range of interactions between agents, both human and otherwise. This article follows Castelfranchi and Falcone’s

JILR 18/1page layout

30

11/9/06 11:25 AM

Page 30

Dron

translation of Gambetta’s definition that “trust is the subjective probability by which an individual, A, expects that another individual, B, performs a given action on which its welfare depends” (Castelfranchi & Falcone, 1998). Safety and Learning Teachers should make learning less scary but, by definition, make learners face the unknown, and we fear the unknown. Done right, teaching challenges learners to construct and examine new knowledge, to leave their comfort zones. To be effective, learners must trust the teacher to act as a guide or a light that shows the way ahead. As Bruner puts it, “Learning something with the aid of an instructor should, if instruction is effective, be less dangerous or risky or painful than learning on one’s own” (Bruner, 1966). It is generally important to trust that the transmitted knowledge provided or pointed to by a teacher is accurate. This is the default state, as teachers have been employed by those that we trust to have vetted them, subjected them to peer review, and quality control processes. Often, teachers in institutional learning exhibit behaviours that reinforce that perception, for instance by standing in an elevated position, wearing different clothing, talking loudly and authoritatively and so on. In a classroom, this may be amplified by the construction of the classroom itself: for example, the traditional tiered lecture theatre separates the teacher from the learner, making him or her the focus of attention. Students’ own knowledge of a subject may help to distinguish which teacher is spouting nonsense and which is an expert. If not, they converse with others who might. Each may know a part of the picture and spot the occasional weakness. Some students are recognised by their peers as gurus or experts. Their opinions are seen as more significant. As well as subject knowledge, learners must trust that teachers can teach. A wide range of personal factors affect learner perceptions of this ability, including, for example, the processes they employ, their personal magnetism, sympathy, awareness of student needs, style of delivery and so on. Students learn both first and second hand of this ability. If a teacher has helped them to learn in the past, they are more likely to trust that he or she will do so again. If the reports of their friends are positive, they are more likely to be trusting. Other factors such as pass rates, institutional or professional accolades and other success criteria may play a role. We trust our teachers will have our best interests in mind. There are many ways that this trust can be broken, for example by teaching us something we care nothing about, through harsh words, an apparent lack of interest, or worse. We should trust that they will see it through to the end – that they will not take a holiday when we need them most, or suddenly stop talking to us. We trust that the supporting infrastructure will remain intact, that classrooms will not collapse, that schools will not arbitrarily and suddenly close, that

JILR 18/1page layout

11/9/06 11:25 AM

Page 31

The Safety of Crowds

31

our classrooms will not be invaded by thugs, that there may be a base level of comfort and safety. Trust arises from a combination of social, cognitive, technical, interface and systemic features. A hypothetical example of how this might appear in a typical traditional face-to-face course is shown in Figure 1. Trust in E-learning Environments In a centrally managed online environment, the important features that enable trust are akin to those that give us assurance in face-to-face learning. Secure logon procedures, public key infrastructures and a perceived high level of teacher control over the content and structure of the environment create a technologically mediated space in which privacy, accountability and trust are designed from the top down (Korba, Yee, Xu, Song, Patrick, & El-Khatib, 2005). Unfortunately, a high level of control may have harmful effects by its implied distrust of the teacher, student or institution (Holt, 1977). It is still

Trust

Context

cognitive Other learners

social

Learner

interface

Teacher

technical Physical environment systemic

Figure 1. Hypothetical view of trust relationships in traditional face-to-face teaching

JILR 18/1page layout

32

11/9/06 11:25 AM

Page 32

Dron

less appropriate to a more open, constructivist approach, where the environment is a relatively unconstrained space for learning to occur (Jonassen, 1994). However, the more the constraints are lifted, the more uncertain and therefore the scarier and edgier the world may become. The absence of non-verbal cues and the depersonalisation of the online environment make trust of a teacher harder to ascertain. It is important to engage in explicit trust building dialogue, to compensate for these weaknesses (Palloff & Pratt, 1999; Salmon, 2000). A variety of techniques and processes can help to develop a sense of social presence, that is both reassuring and motivating (Rourke, Anderson, Garrison, & Archer, 2001). Technology can be a constraining and intimidating factor in a learning activity. Limitations on the ability to interact with software or hardware can seriously impact on the learner’s sense of safety and security. It is therefore important to ensure that learners are able to use the technology, that the technology works, and is as usable as possible (Simpson, 2002). Things that might help to reduce our trust may include lack of system reliability, perceived security, usability, accessibility, the level of control it provides, the colour scheme and so on. We may also base our level of trust on other factors beyond the immediate environment, such as its interaction with firewalls, its perceived susceptibility to attack, our perceptions of the operating system it runs on, its system administrators, its level of funding, its cost and so on, perhaps even its market share/our perceptions of the company that produces it. Tool, Medium and Environment In a face-to-face environment there is a clear distinction between the space and the interactions that take place inside it, although even here there may be a close relationship between space and programme (Tschumi, 1996). A virtual environment is also a tool and a medium, an active participant in the process, the means by which the process occurs and the place where that process happens. This recursive nature potentially reifies interaction so that form and process become almost indistinguishable (Boder, 1992; Dron, 2005c). A hypothetical model of how this recursiveness changes the trust relationships identified earlier is shown in Figure 2. In such an environment it is not enough to trust the teacher, the content and the process, but also the environment that mediates it. This is in keeping with a model of e-learning where software supports student-student, teacher-student, teacher-teacher, learner-content, teacher-content and (significantly) content-content interaction (Garrison & Anderson, 2003). The most important elements of a learning ecology in an e-learning environment are the people who contribute to the space’s creation, especially when the environment supports communication. In an online (or indeed any) learning environment where there is a need for collaboration, “students need to trust

JILR 18/1page layout

11/9/06 11:25 AM

Page 33

The Safety of Crowds

33

Context

Trust

social Teacher technical Virtual environment cognitive Other learners Learner interface

systemic

Figure 2. Hypothetical model of trust relationships in a mediated environment each other, feel a sense of warmth and belonging, and feel close to each other before they will engage willfully in collaboration and recognize the collaboration as a valuable experience” (Rourke, 2000). Nowhere is this more visible than in the various forms of social software. Social Software Social software has been defined by Clay Shirky as software for which the group is a first class entity within the system (Allen, 2004). Traditional communication systems are one to many or many to many. Social software mediates communication of many to one. In traditional collaborative environments, the greater the number of participants, the harder it gets. In social software, with a few pragmatic provisos relating to technical capacities of networks and computers, the greater the number of participants, the more useful the system becomes. Social software embodies Metcalfe’s law, that the usefulness of a network is the square of the number of users, extended by Reed’s law, which suggests there are still greater gains due to the effects of interactions with groups and clusters (Reed, 1999).

JILR 18/1page layout

34

11/9/06 11:25 AM

Page 34

Dron

Popular examples of social software include collaborative filters, social navigation systems, wikis and blogs (not so much the individual blogs themselves but the ways that they link together through blogrolls and trackbacks). Other more specialist social software includes popular systems such as del.icio.us, Flickr, Orkut, Furl, Digg and Ning. Social software underpins some of the most popular sites on the Web. Google’s PageRank employs latent human annotation (Kleinberg, 1998) to provide more reliable recommendations (Brin & Page, 2000). eBay uses the reputations of sellers, Amazon uses collaborative filters to recommend books, films and music, Slashdot uses karma points to identify reliable posters. The list goes on. Until recently, social software has been used surprisingly little in e-learning. However, this is changing. Blogs and wikis are increasingly significant tools (Anderson, 2006; Barker, 2005; Downes, 2004; Dron, 2003; Mejias, 2005). Collaborative filters have been developed for educational purposes for some time (Anderson, Ball, Boley, Greene, Howse, et al., 2003; Chislenko, 1997; Dron, Mitchell, Siviter, & Boyne, 1999; Recker, Walker, & Wiley, 2000) and social navigation systems (where past or present navigation behaviour influences the navigation of others) are not unknown (Brusilovsky, Chavan, & Farzan, 2004; Dron, 2005a; Kurhila, Miettinen, Nokelainen, & Tirri, 2002; Miettinen, Kurhila, Nokelainen & Tirri, 2005). Into the Unknown Social e-learning software raises new issues of trust. The further the teacher blends into the background, potentially the less secure the learning environment becomes. Left to their own devices, learners may paddle in the shallows, leading to what Kay (1996) describes as a chopsticks culture. Students are often wary of the risks of the blind leading the blind, and fear they may end up knowing less, albeit with the proviso that they might understand more (Evans, 1983). Knowles tells us, “Many students enter into a new learning situation feeling a deep need for the security of a clear structural plan – an outline, course syllabus, time schedule, and the like. They want teachers who know what they are doing, who are in charge” (Knowles, 1975). Conversely, if too much control is exercised, then it will stifle creativity, lead to boredom, a potentially poor fit to learning needs and learning styles. Social software mediates between the group and the individual, structuring the environment emergently as a result of the behaviour of its users, which in turn structures that behaviour. It begins to play the role, not just of the environment, but of the teacher. The many become the teacher of the one, who (recursively) is one of the many. If social software is to be effective in this role, then we must consider whether and to what extent it may be possible to embed the characteristics of trust that we have identified for the teacher in the design of the learning environment.

JILR 18/1page layout

11/9/06 11:25 AM

The Safety of Crowds

Page 35

35

Dwellings This article will consider one example of social software for e-learning called Dwellings, based on the dynamics of the city. Cities are a complex jumble of constraints, laws, economic, social and physical structures and people that, on occasion, organise effectively to create safe spaces for a rich variety of activities and uses. If it were possible to identify the factors that lead to their success, it is possible that they might provide useful lessons in the design of e-learning environments. The Death and Life of Great American Cities (Jacobs, 1961) is an examination of the features areas of cities that lead to their success or failure. Success revolves around a central dynamic: Under the seeming disorder of the old city, wherever the old city is working successfully, is a marvelous order for maintaining the safety of the streets and the freedom of the city. It is a complex order. Its essence is intricacy of sidewalk use, bringing with it a constant succession of eyes. (Jacobs, 1961) The succession of eyes that Jane Jacob describes is a phenomenon that neatly embodies the essence of social trust. As part of a community, the presence of others and awareness of their gaze makes us behave differently. The features that Jacobs identifies that enable a city area to thrive can be summarised in four interconnected rules: • Short blocks • Diverse primary uses • A mixture of old and new • A high density of people Dwellings was created as an attempt to discover whether Jacobs’s dynamics might apply in an online learning environment. The system mirrors city dynamics in the following ways: • Short blocks equate to high connectivity – in a successful space it should be easy to get from one place to another. • Diverse primary uses – a single-purpose e-learning environment is the norm, but greater diversity of uses might encourage greater safety. • A mixture of old and new – for Jacobs, old is cheap and new is expensive, which leads naturally to diversity of primary uses. In the context of a website, this might equate to the quick and easy (the wiki, for example) and the complex, expensive design (e.g., of a large website, a multimedia simulation and so on). • A high density of people – this recursive rule still applies.

JILR 18/1page layout

36

11/9/06 11:25 AM

Page 36

Dron

Dwellings is akin to a MUD (Multiple User Dimension) or a MOO (MUD Object Oriented), though to the end-user it appears more as a realtime collaborative web browser with elements of a wiki and a learning object repository. Inhabitants drag avatars around streets lined with buildings, on which they may, if they wish, write graffiti. Buildings are pointers to websites or pages that are created and modified using a WYSIWYG editor, which are displayed within an inline frame beneath the street when inhabitants drag their avatars onto them. Inhabitants may interact using a simple text chat, which shows both as a speech balloon and in a more traditional text window at the side of the page. Streets and buildings can be created and (by default) modified by every inhabitant. Creators of buildings and streets may optionally lock them, so that they cannot be edited by other inhabitants, although there is nothing to stop others daubing buildings with graffiti. As social software, Dwellings is replete with social navigation cues that operate at a number of levels and scales from the immediate to the temporary to the persistent: • Immediately, inhabitants are drawn to other inhabitants, and it is possible to see from afar which streets are currently most populous. • Temporarily, users leave footprints wherever they go, which fade after an hour or so, allowing others to see where there has been recent activity. • Permanently, visiting a building increases its emphasis, while reducing that of others on the same street. Similarly, the order in which streets are presented is affected by the number of visits they have received overall. Dwellings reifies interactions with it, so that every user’s interactions contribute to the emergent structure of the system. The process is completely transparent, a feature that Swearingen and Sinha (2002) identify as central to enabling trust in a collaborative filter. This has a number of consequences, the most important of which is that it provides control as an emergent feature of being controlled. If users wish to be influenced by others in their navigation, then they can be, but if not then they can choose their own paths and, in so doing, influence the paths of others. Dwellings may be constructed by a teacher who may lock streets and buildings down if he or she wishes, but can never entirely remove the influence of learners due to the social navigation cues and opportunities for graffiti and chat. Similarly, the teacher cannot prevent learners from creating their own streets which, if they wish, can be locked so that the teacher cannot change them. There is thus a balance of control throughout the system. Dwellings has been used in a blended learning environment as a content management system, with buildings playing the part of lecture slides. The benefit of this usage is that the interaction does not need to cease once the lecture is over. Learners can return, chat with each other and leave messages

JILR 18/1page layout

11/9/06 11:25 AM

Page 37

The Safety of Crowds

37

on the buildings. Where the teacher is trusting, learners can be allowed to make modifications to the content. Learners can also create their own content without the intercession of the tutor. In its first iteration, Dwellings had no locking mechanism. Anyone could make changes to anything, and many did. On the positive side, students competed to create more exciting streets, to draw people to them. However, an unforeseen side-effect was a series of minor skirmishes and wars, with students modifying and demolishing each other’s buildings and streets. Although often playful, for some it reduced their trust in the system and caused loss of pride in their work as they no longer felt that it belonged to them. After the creation of a locking mechanism, a group of students performing the same exercise on the same course the following year behaved quite differently. The skirmishes died out, students felt much happier that their work belonged to them and felt that things were under their control. Interestingly, this positive perception came despite the fact that only one of the six students locked anything, and then only to see what happened. The students expressed a strong sense of ownership, both collectively and personally, and claimed to feel secure within the environment (Dron, 2005b). CONCLUSIONS Trust is something that we learn to give. The single most effective way to ensure trust is to continually and consistently help the learner to learn, as easily and painlessly as possible. Having said that, there are many ways that we can cultivate trust, and equally many ways that we can thwart it. We may make some tentative conclusions about how trust may be embodied in the design of a learning environment that contains some self-organising features: A Succession of Eyes. The model of the wiki and the approach taken by Dwellings rely an awareness of the presence of others. Knowing that others have seen and (explicitly or tacitly) approved content is a great comfort in the great stuff swamp of the Internet. Transparency and Control. Any environment that seeks to gain trust from its users should clarify its inner workings. These workings should behave consistently and, at least in retrospect, predictably. The benefits will be enhanced if the environment allows learners to take control of that process. If we employ user models, then those models should be liable to inspection and, preferably, to change. Technical Control. Secure certificates, verified logins and the like can assure us that people and machines are who they say they are, while access control and logging can introduce accountability. Reliability and usability are vital factors in enabling learners to trust an environment. In an unreliable

JILR 18/1page layout

38

11/9/06 11:25 AM

Page 38

Dron

or unusable environment, learners may be left without help or guidance when they need it most. Control of Our Own Space. If we are to share our thoughts and opinions with others, a sense of ownership or, more accurately, the ability to take ownership is a useful feature of a learning environment. We should be able to choose whether and when to make our work public, and be able to retract it without fear, when to allow others to change it. The Promise Social software presents a range of unique challenges relating to learner control and trust, and is a rapidly evolving area. However, the challenge is worthwhile, as the promise of emergent structure is a use of networked computers that takes full advantage of their unique nature as simultaneously, tool, medium and environment. References Allen, C. (2004). Tracing the evolution of social software. Retrieved from the World Wide Web: http://www.lifewithalacrity.com/2004/10/tracing_the_evo.html Anderson, M., Ball, M., Boley, H., Greene, S., Howse, N., Lemire, D., & McGrath, S. (2003). RACOFI: A rule-applying collaborative filtering system. Paper presented at the COLA'03, Halifax, Canada. Anderson, T. (2006). Teaching a distance education course using educational social software. Retrieved 7th January 2006, from the World Wide Web: http://terrya.edublogs.org/2006/ 01/02/teaching-a-distance-education-course-using-educational-social-software/ Barker, P. (2005). Potential uses for weblogs in electroniccCourse delivery. Paper presented at E-Learn 2005, Vancouver. Boder, A. (1992). The process of knowledge reification in human-human interaction. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 8, 177-185. Bonk, C. J. (2002). Frameworks for research, design, benchmarks, training, and pedagogy in web-based distance education. In M. G. Moore & W. G. Anderson (Eds.), Handbook of Distance Education (pp. 331-348). New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Brin, S., & Page, L. (2000). The anatomy of a large-scale hypertextual web search engine. Retrieved from the World Wide Web: http://www-db.stanford.edu/pub/papers/google.pdf Bruner, J. S. (1966). Toward a theory of instruction. Cambridge MA: The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press. Brusilovsky, P., Chavan, G., & Farzan, R. (2004). Social adaptive navigation support for open corpus electronic textbooks. Paper presented at the AH 2004, Eindhoven. Castelfranchi, C., & Falcone, R. (1998). Principles of trust for MAS: Cognitive anatomy, social importance, and quantification. Paper presented at the 3rd International Conference on Multi Agent Systems. Chislenko, A. (1997). Collaborative information filtering and semantic transports. Retrieved November 19, 1999, from the World Wide Web: http://www.lucifer.com/~sasha/articles/ACF.html Downes, S. (2004). Educational blogging. Educause Review, 39(5), 14-26.

JILR 18/1page layout

11/9/06 11:25 AM

The Safety of Crowds

Page 39

39

Dron, J. (2003). The blog and the borg: A collective approach to e-learning. Paper presented at the E-Learn 2003, Phoenix, Arizona. Dron, J. (2005a). E-learning and the building habits of termites. Journal of Educational Multimedia and Hypermedia, 14(4), 321-342. Dron, J. (2005b). A succession of eyes: Building an e-learning city. Paper presented at the E-Learn 2005, Vancouver. Dron, J. (2005c). The way of the termite: A theoretically grounded approach to the design of e-learning environments. International Journal of Web Based Communities 2(1). Dron, J., Mitchell, R., Siviter, P., & Boyne, C. (1999). CoFIND - An experiment in n-dimensional collaborative filtering. Paper presented at the WebNet 99, Honolulu, Hawaii. Evans, C. (1983). Studies in French literature. In Gerald Collier (Ed.), The Management of Peer-Group Learning-Syndicate Methods in Higher Education. Guildford: Society ofr Research into Higher Education. Garrison, D. R., & Anderson, T. (2003). E-learning in the 21st century: A framework for research and practice. London: RoutledgeFalmer. Holt, J. (1977). Instead of education: Ways to help people do things better. Harmondsworth: Penguin. Jacobs, J. (1961). The death and life of great american cities. London, UK: Pimlico. Jonassen, D. H. (1994). Thinking technology: Toward a constructivist design model. Educational Technology, 34(4), 34-37. Kay, A. (1996). Revealing the elephant: The use and misuse of computers in education. The Educom Review, 31(4). Kleinberg, J. M. (1998). Authoritative sources in a hyperlinked environment. Paper presented at the 9th ACM-SIAM Symposium on Discrete Algorithms. Knowles, M. (1975). Self-directed learning. Chicago: Follett Publishing Company. Korba, L., Yee, G., Xu, Y., Song, R., Patrick, A. S., & El-Khatib, K. (2005). Privacy and trust in agent-supported distributed learning. In F. O. Lin (Ed.), Designing Distributed Learning Environments with Intelligent Software Agents (pp. 67-114). Hershey: Information Science Publishing. Kurhila, J., Miettinen, M., Nokelainen, P., & Tirri, H. (2002). Use of social navigation features in collaborative e-learning. Paper presented at the E-Learn 2002, Montreal, Canada. Mejias, U. A. (2005). A nomad’s guide to learning and social software, The Knowledge Tree. Miettinen, M., Kurhila, J., Nokelainen, P., & Tirri, H. (2005). OurWeb - Transparent groupware for online communities. Paper presented at the Web Based Communities 2005, Algarve, Portugal. Palloff, R. M., & Pratt, K. (1999). Building learning communities in cyberspace: Effective strategies for the online classroom. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Recker, M. M., Walker, A., & Wiley, D. (2000). An interface for collaborative filtering of educational resources. Paper presented at the 2000 International Conference on Artificial Intelligence, Las Vegas, Nevada, USA. Reed, D. P. (1999). That sneaky exponentia – Beyond Metcalfe's law to the power of community building. Retrieved January 12th 2006, from the World Wide Web: http://www.reed.com/ Papers/GFN/reedslaw.html Rourke, L. (2000). Operationalizing social interaction in computer conferencing. Paper presented at the Canadian Association for Distance Education 16th Annual Conference, Québec

JILR 18/1page layout

40

11/9/06 11:25 AM

Page 40

Dron

Rourke, L., Anderson, T., Garrison, D. R., & Archer, W. (2001). Assessing social presence in asynchronous text-based computer conferencing. Journal of Distance Education, 14(2). Salmon, G. (2000). E-moderating: The key to teaching and learning online. London: Kogan Page. Simpson, O. (2002). Supporting students in online, open and distance learning (Second ed.). London: Kogan Page. Swearingen, K., & Sinha, R. (2002). Interaction design for recommender systems, DIS2002. London: ACM. Tschumi, B. (1996). Architecture and disjunction. MIT Press.

JILR 18/1page layout

11/9/06 11:25 AM

Page 41

E-Learning Environments for Digitally-Minded Students DIANA ANDONE, JON DRON, LYN PEMBERTON, AND CHRIS BOYNE University of Brighton, United Kingdom [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] While most existing online learning environments cater for needs identified during the 1990s, a new generation of digital students has emerged in the developed world. Digital students are young adults who have grown up with digital technologies integrated as an everyday feature of their lives. Digital students use technology differently, fluidly (and often simultaneously) using instant messengers, mobile phones, the web, MP3 players, online games and more. If their use of technology is different, the kind of learning environment they will require is likely to be equally different. To identify these differences we ran an online survey in universities from the UK, Romania, Finland and Hungary, followed by focus groups, interviews and observations of students in traditional and online learning environments. As a result we have refined our initial definition of digital students, we identified the digitally-minded students, most notably to include recognition of such students’ need for control over their digital environment. From this analysis we have more clearly identified how a learning environment for these students should be constructed and used; an environment that contains a blend of Internet and mobile technologies which enhance student-tutor and student-student communication through multiple media channels, providing responsiveness, customizability and flexibility to adapt and be adapted to the students’ needs.

JILR 18/1page layout

42

11/9/06 11:25 AM

Page 42

Andone, Dron, Pemberton, and Boyne

Introduction In the last quarter-century the digitization of virtually all aspects of life – something Negroponte has called the “change of atoms into bits and pixels” (Negroponte, 1996) – has had an impact on us all. However, for the generation born after 1980, the digital world is the only world they know. They are the digital ones or the N-Gen – Net Generation (Tapscott, 1998). Significantly, most students in higher education now belong to this group. This article is an investigation of how adaptive and adaptable e-learning spaces might influence and be influenced by these digital students’ learning attitudes and abilities. The main purpose is to define an e-learning environment aimed at their needs As part of this process, online surveys in universities from the UK, Romania, Finland and Hungary, followed by focus groups, interviews and observations of students in traditional and online learning environments, were used to investigate the level of e-literacy of young adult students in an attempt to identify the unique features of digital students, to search for the digitally-minded, as a move towards building a an e-learning environment customised to their needs. Digitally-Minded Students Digital students possess a mentality in tune with the new media, take the availability of email, instant messaging and text messaging for granted, and use unlimited online resources. The digital world has had a significant impact on their cognitive functions (Barone, 2003). They expect to try things rather than hear about them. They want to learn by doing – usually just by trying things out (Tapscott, 1998) from which they develop understanding by synthesis. They tend to learn visually and socially (Livingstone & Bovill, 2001). Using technology to organize and integrate knowledge feels natural to them. As a result of their “digitalness,” they will have very specific needs and expectations from their learning environments. They will enjoy enhanced interactivity and connectivity with others, and expect to learn in groups which may be physical or virtual. Papert (1996) says that young people’s “access to information is more interactive and non-sequential” and they learn for “the pleasure and benefit of discovery”. As a result of their fluid access to digital media and to the endless information on the Internet they have learned to access facts and to assess them in particular ways; and to be able to process so much data, they need to synthesize (Andone, Boyne, Dron, & Pemberton, 2005a; Seely Brown, 2000) Their learning expectations are different due to new cognitive patterns that they have developed over their school years. As Bob Woods says, They rely on the ‘Net to help them with completing their schoolwork. They use it for research, collaboration with other students, and as a

JILR 18/1page layout

11/9/06 11:25 AM

Page 43

E-Learning Environments for Digitally-Minded Students

43

resource for information passed on to them by other students or teachers. Students also use it as a virtual guidance counsellor and as a way to store important school-related materials. (2002) Electronic collaboration is an area of great potential for digital students. Using instant messaging, e-mail and text messages via mobile phones, they are able to create, join, leave and rejoin at will what the Pew Internet group calls “virtual study groups” (Jones & Madden, 2002). These groups can be synchronous or asynchronous but the feeling is of instant communication. This has led to a continuous need for instant feedback which is also found in their learning attitudes. Despite the traditionally restrictive educational settings in which they often have to function, today’s students perceive their learning environments as boundless. They tend to use physical space differently from prior generations and they blur the boundaries between physical and cyber space and between mine, yours, ours, and everyone’s (Andone, Boyne, Dron, & Pemberton, 2005b). Our students simply think differently and are becoming increasingly digital. However in reality, most people do not display all the traits that we associate with the term digital student to the same degree. For instance, some older people exhibit distinctly digital behavior. We therefore choose to use the term digitally-minded to represent a tendency in this direction. The Survey We developed a survey as the first strand of a multi-faceted research effort to generate a digitally-minded student profile. An online questionnaire was created using standard research techniques (Blaxter, Hughes, & Tight, 1998). The survey’s focus was on Technology in Education; it attempted to collect information from a relatively random sample of a specific target population of young students and was conducted during September-November 2004. Themes covered were digital literacy, Internet use, mobile phone use, learning attitudes, visual use, and IT expectations. The initial target group was young students 18-21 years old in universities from Great Britain, Romania, Hungary, and Finland (Andone et al., 2005a; 2005b; Andone, Dron, Boyne, & Pemberton, 2006). In fact, the sample included some older students and was not entirely random, since taking the questionnaire was entirely voluntarily and the fact that it was online implies at least some level of digital ability. Also, the answers were often expressions of preference and there was some latitude for different interpretations of what the questions meant. For that reason, we prefer to think of this study as an investigation of digitally-minded students, which have not always grown up with ubiquitous internet and mobile phone use. Various strategies were used for analysing the results (Andone et al., 2005b; Blaxter et al., 1998). This was an exploratory survey, not an experiment, and the results should only be con-

JILR 18/1page layout

11/9/06 11:25 AM

Page 44

44

Andone, Dron, Pemberton, and Boyne

sidered as indicative. Later, we will describe the focus group, interviews, and scenario analysis based on issues the survey identified. RESULTS A full analysis of the UK survey is presented in (Andone et al., 2005b) and of all four surveys in (Andone et al., 2006). Now we present the differences and similarities between the different countries, with the purpose of identifying the general characteristics of digitally-minded students, and to present the conclusions and the expected impact on the e-learning environment development. The results are analysed following four main strands: the use of technology, communication, the need for control and the use of elearning environments. The Use of Technology The results show a high level of technology use (computer, Internet, mobile phone) and that technology is firmly embedded in the students’ lives, a large majority describing themselves as at least intermediate in computer competence (Figure 1). This accords with official Eurostat results in 2003 (Eurostat, 2003; 2004) and with EDUCASE results (Livingstone & Bovill, 2001). This result shows that the use of multiple media and technologies is directly connected to their use in education, home and entertainment (Figure 1 and Figure 2). The results indicate that the students from the Western European countries have a higher, more constant use of computer and Internet than their

Figure 1. The use of technology

JILR 18/1page layout

11/9/06 11:25 AM

Page 45

E-Learning Environments for Digitally-Minded Students

45

Figure 2. Online access colleagues from Central and Eastern Europe, which accords with the country statistics of ICT penetration (Eurostat, 2003; 2004). All students tend to use the mobile phone more for sending text (SMS) or playing than for calling, probably due to the relative low cost. It is part of their education and also of their social life, both as individuals and at group level (Andone et al., 2006). Communication Using technology for communication is part of students’ life-styles. The results show an increased need for synchronous communication, but with asynchronous communication still playing a significant role (Figure 1 and Figure 3). If email, SMS and instant messaging are part of the daily routine (Andone et al., 2006), using forums is a less regular occurrence, with a higher percentage being used by women (Livingstone & Bovill, 2001). The high daily use of browsers indicates a strong emphasis on search methods, which can be expected to modify the students’ cognitive approach to information retrieval and implicit to their learning process and also their expectations about the learning environment – which should include powerful search engines, not just indices or glossaries. Synchronous communication is preferred when students contact one another, while for educational contacts with their professors the asynchronous model is preferred. SMS is increasingly becoming the preferred communication tool because of its users’ need for instant response and feedback. Comments such as, “the quicker the better” and “instant response” were common

JILR 18/1page layout

46

11/9/06 11:25 AM

Page 46

Andone, Dron, Pemberton, and Boyne

Figure 3. The use of online communication among students’ responses. Students’ ability to select the right communication tool for different purposes also shows their need for control and the development of independent skills (Andone et al., 2005a; Andone et al., 2006). The survey reveals that Hungarian and Romanian students are more inclined to use the Internet in cafés as part of their social activity (Andone et al., 2006). Students from UK and Finland make more use of online communication tools, but the gap between them and their Eastern colleagues is smaller then expected, with one tool (chat) being more used by the latter. Control Our results suggest that digitally-minded students’ need to control their online and e-learning environment is directly associated with their high use of technology (Andone et al., 2005a). When accessing websites these students want better interaction and they want to be able to change and control it. They are less interested in controlling the general design than of the functionality (Figure 4). Our surveys also lead us to suspect that their level of control is also dependent on their strategic thinking, developed by their experience in playing games (55-69% – as an average from all countries surveyed – often played computer games). E-learning Students showed enthusiasm for direct participation and control over certain aspects of the educational process (Figure 5). The need for personalized delivery and instant feedback, together with the lack of interest in writing or

JILR 18/1page layout

11/9/06 11:25 AM

Page 47

E-Learning Environments for Digitally-Minded Students

47

Figure 4. Desire for control over the web control over content delivery, suggests that digitally-minded students want information fast but they want it presented visually and interactively (Andone et al., 2005a). They prefer being involved in subject-related activity, learning by doing, discovery or practice (Andone et al., 2005a). The results show a preference for a learning environment where the online mate-

Figure 5. Desire for control over e-learning

JILR 18/1page layout

48

11/9/06 11:25 AM

Page 48

Andone, Dron, Pemberton, and Boyne

rials contain hyperlinks, which Beasley claims to have the educational advantage of allowing students greater control over the order in and depth to which they explore a topic, allowing for more reflection and active gaining of knowledge (Beasley, 2004). From a combined analysis of Figures 1, 3, 4 and 5 we infer that an increased use of online tools and of new technologies is associated with an increase in the desire for control over the technology and what is done with it. This correlation appears consistent across students from each country that we studied. Scenario-Based Design Following the survey and associated interviews, we used scenario-based design methods (Carroll, 2000) as a means of defining suitable e-learning environments for digitally-minded students. Using scenarios can help achieve the goal of creating useful and usable products by encouraging designers “to explore the larger design space of many possible design challenges, to review the technical feasibility and likely payoffs of the different approaches and only then begin considering the normal design issues” (Carroll, 2000). Scenario building is used to explore new forms of interaction in which the physical environment is able to react to human behaviour using technologies as a mediator, for identifying, refining and verifying what digitally-minded students need and then managing the development of the environment to meet those needs by constantly determining how it can be refined to meet them better. Based on a conceptual meta-model fed by the results of our initial surveys, we developed a scenario that we have christened DIMPLE (Digital Internet and Mobile Phone e-learning Environment). This allows defining relationships between (1) learning objectives, (2) roles of staff and learners in the learning process, (3) performed activities and (4) environment and resources necessary to the educational situation installation (Lejeune & Pernin, 2004). DIMPLE was a learning scenario, a description of the progress of the learning situation intended to ensure the appropriation of a precise set of knowledge, formulated a priori as an abstract scenario. It was an open, adaptable scenario which allowed modification or completion by the students who were involved in the focus groups. Focus Groups Two focus groups were run in March 2005 to gather in-depth, qualitative information, opinions and attitudes about the students’ characteristics and the proposed DIMPLE scenario. Fourteen participants took part in the study, in two groups, of six in the UK and eight in Romania. Participants were selfselecting, all of them having previously answered the survey. The three female and eleven male participants were aged 18 to 24, five nationalities (English, Greek, Indian, Romanian and Hungarian), all studying ICT-related subjects, of varying degrees of ICT competence. The interviewer moderated

JILR 18/1page layout

11/9/06 11:25 AM

Page 49

E-Learning Environments for Digitally-Minded Students

49

the discussion using an outline based on the same topics as the survey (digital literacy, Internet use, mobile phone use, learning attitudes, visual use, and IT expectations) and on the proposed scenario. The informal discussion lasted two hours and was recorded on video and audio for further analysis. Focus Group Results A large number of desirable attributes for e-learning environment emerged, some of them contradictory. For instance, while participants generally want to have things coming to them in a rapid, fast way, receiving unrequested learning objects disturbs them. It was clear that no single approach would be likely to satisfy all requirements, and an e-learning environment for digitally-minded student will need to use complementary methods and technology and leave the power of choice of the right one to the student. All the students from both focus groups reported a high use of different technologies for different purposes. They tend to use the World Wide Web to search both for educational purposes and for information about their hobbies and interests. They use SMS (mobile text messaging) extensively for contacting their friends and colleagues, as well as online they will use IM instant messaging. They perceive email as an “official thing, for which you contact professors or other people.” As one of the UK students said, “I do not like email as I never know when people read it and when they receive it.” A Romanian student observed, “to read my email I need to get to my computer at home or university when my mobile is always with me and it is open also during classes.” As they all learn in a traditional university with limited technological support they have found ways to develop their own supporting network: they contact each other via SMS and IM to get assignments done, to support each other in finding resources (mainly on the web), to meet face-to-face as well as to get last minute information about timetables, classes or university activities. One UK student established a Yahoo briefcase and a mailing group for his group so they could all share the same resources. At the same time, several technical attributes are used less: few students synchronise their mobile phones with their computers. “It’s a class differentiation; just us techies are doing it,” said one student from Romania. UK students’ critiques of the university’s centrally-managed e-learning environment highlighted several redundant services and “things which you never use,” pointing again to their strong need of control and independence. They seek control over functionality, not visual aspects: a typical comment was, “I want tools as IM and SMS and to see when my colleagues are online, to choose the length of text of a course, to have interactive activities, less interested to change colours more interested to change the text size and the links.” As a general perception the proposed DIMPLE scenario was considered very useful and its learning functionality “is going to be efficient, you are not duplicating information it is all linked.” In the focus groups opinions about

JILR 18/1page layout

50

11/9/06 11:25 AM

Page 50

Andone, Dron, Pemberton, and Boyne

identification with the scenario subject were frequently expressed: “I’m like David. I think everybody will like that. I do this all the time.” An adaptable learning environment was seen as very desirable: “It’s good to have the note;” (to make a note in the learning material), “It’s quite confined to what is given is not expandable so you can’t add info which I will like to do;” and collaborative environments are attractive: “If I find something useful I will like to share it with my colleagues.” But the scenario was recognised more as a possible e-learning environment as a supplement or for an education later in life, as all prefer the face-to-face interaction that the traditional university provides. The following scenario evolved from these focus groups. DIMPLE Scenario David, nineteen years old, is a student in computer science in a European university. He started to use computers when he was eight and has been actively online since he was twelve. Now he owns his own laptop, mobile phone and iPod. In his first days at the university he took photos using the built-in camera of his mobile phone of all the interesting adverts, location of the buildings, labs and of some of his colleagues. At home he posted these on his own study area of the e-learning environment (DIMPLE). He also set up reminders of all important dates on his mobile phone. From DIMPLE he transfers into his mobile phone his specific calendar, assignments dates and contact details of his peers and tutors. All of these are mirrored on his laptop, updated when he connects his mobile to his laptop, and he gets any changes in calendar and assignments he receives directly from DIMPLE as a text message to his mobile phone. When logged into DIMPLE he establishes his preferred environment by setting up the colours palette, the font types and size. He arranges his links (e.g., his courses), his colleagues’ links, and the links for other areas (e.g., library) according to his needs. He chooses what he wants to be sent to him via SMS regularly (schedule, major announcements, major communication with his tutor/colleagues) and via email (announcements, assignments, group work projects). He also sets up all the major announcements to be sent via SMS to his mobile and also as emails, and the less important ones just as email. He customizes his profile in the Instant Messaging section so he can easily get in touch with his colleagues and tutors. Out of his customized profile, DIMPLE will recognize which is the most important information to him, and will adapt to this pattern. David knows that if his preferences change or he doesn’t feel comfortable with some of the initial choices he can change them anytime, and DIMPLE will re-adapt. He can search DIMPLE for all the information inside the environment by using its search engine, which allows him advanced search using different variables of words, time and date of the published material and subject area. He can find out about examples of other students work.

JILR 18/1page layout

11/9/06 11:25 AM

Page 51

E-Learning Environments for Digitally-Minded Students

51

When accessing a course he can choose between 3 levels: the general view of the lessons (course module), those lessons which are important for the quick overview of the curriculum, and those lessons which exceed the basic curriculum. During his lesson he can take notes in a separate file (and save it), make comments and see also where exactly he is and how much he has to do in order to finish the course. Some of these notes which he considers relevant for his colleagues he chooses to share with them. As his first assignment was a group work project, he established the first meeting with his colleagues via SMS and during the first meeting they split the work between them. Everybody posted their research results on the common working group area so that all could see it and comment on it via instant messaging. They started writing the first draft of their project online, sharing the same file and were in constant touch via the instant messaging service. At the end, DIMPLE emailed each of them the final result of their work. During the last faceto-face meeting they just agreed on the final content. They were pleased that they could share the same work and that they have done it in a short time. They enjoyed getting in touch and knowing each other. Now, on Friday evening, when they want to meet socially they know which is the best way of getting in touch and which communication method each prefers. IMPLICATIONS AND CONCLUSIONS We have refined the concept of the digitally-minded student and therefore (by extension) the digital student to include the need for control and independence in the use of e-learning environments. Our study revealed the digitallyminded students, which not always have grown up with ubiquitous Internet and mobile phone use, but now uses extensively and have similar characteristics with the new digital students. This is a major outcome of the study. It has direct implications for the design of an e-learning environment which ought to include adaptable elements wherever possible, under direct student control, rather than those controlled by the tutor or the system. The study results played a key role in directing the overall e-learning strategy and influenced some major decisions. One such decision concerned the appropriateness of formal learning structures for Internet and mobile phone based services. Many scenarios for this type of learning have concentrated on formal learning, presented in a traditional university setting, possibly even in the context of an undergraduate curriculum or class (Beasley, 2004; Tretiakov & Kinshuk, 2005). Our study suggests that DIMPLE may be more suitable for life long learning than institutional learning, or as part of a blend of face-toface and e-learning strategies. The scenario responds to many of the requirements of the focus group, students can choose to take advantage of one device without the other, and scaffolding learning opportunities can be provided to suit learner motivation and knowledge level.

JILR 18/1page layout

52

11/9/06 11:25 AM

Page 52

Andone, Dron, Pemberton, and Boyne

Technology makes it possible to design learning situations that actively engage and guide learners while allowing them to choose their style of learning and organize their knowledge outcomes. This conceptualization of the learning environment allows learners to make the transition from learning in a physical space such as the lab or lecture theatre, to learning in a studentcentered learning environment in cyberspace. As our interest is in broad trends we believe that technology integrated with methods for communicating knowledge can enhance and stimulate learning. However, we should express a sign of caution: it is at least possible that learners' preferences may be for modes of learning that are ineffective and counter-productive. The trend away from predominantly analytic knowledge towards primarily synthetic knowledge implies a loss as well as a gain (Seely Brown, 2000). We are currently implementing the DIMPLE system based on our findings and will be exploring whether giving digitally-minded students what they want will also give them the rich learning experience that they need. References Andone, D., Boyne, C., Dron, J., & Pemberton, L. (2005a, 19-22 October 2005). Digital students and their use of e-learning enviroments. Paper presented at the IADIS WWW/Internet 2005, Lisbon, Portugal, pp. 302-306. Andone, D., Boyne, C., Dron, J., & Pemberton, L. (2005b). What is it to be a digital student in a British university? Paper presented at the ICALT 2005 5th International Conference on Advanced Learning Technologies, Kaohsiung, Taiwan, pp. 925-927. Andone, D., Dron, J., Boyne, C., & Pemberton, L. (2006). Digital students across Europe. Paper presented at the ED-MEDIA 2006, Florida, USA, pp. 1741-1749. Barone, C. (2003). Meeting the needs of today's internet-defined students. AAHEBulletin (May). Beasley, N. (2004, 2004-06-07). Lessons Learned from Students’ use of an Online Learning Environment. Elearning Europa Info. http://www.elearningeuropa.info/index.php?page= doc&doc_id=5076&doclng=6&menuzone=1 Blaxter, L., Hughes, C., & Tight, M. (1998). How to research. Open University Press. Carroll, J. M. (2000). Five reasons for scenario-based design. In Interacting with Computers (pp. 43 - 60). Carroll, J. M. (2000). Making use: Scenario-based design of human computer interactions (Vol. 1). Massachusetts: The MIT Press. Eurostat. (2003, 2004). Science and technology in Europe - Data 1990-2004. http://epp.eurostat. cec.eu.int/portal/page?_pageid=1073,46587259&_dad=portal&_schema=PORTAL&p_pr oduct_code=KS-EA-06-001 Jones, S., & Madden, M. (2002). The Internet goes to college: How students are living in the future with today's technology. Pew Internet & American Life Project. http://www.pewinternet.org/PPF/r/71/report_display.asp Lejeune, A., & Pernin, J.-P. (2004). A taxonomy for scenario-based engineering. Paper presented at the Cognition and Exploratory Learning in Digital Age CELDA 2004) Proceedings, Lisboa, Portugal, pp. 249-256.

JILR 18/1page layout

11/9/06 11:25 AM

Page 53

E-Learning Environments for Digitally-Minded Students

53

Livingstone, S., & Bovill, M. (2001). Children and their changing media environment: A European comparative study. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Negroponte, N. (1996). Being digital. First Vintage Books. Papert, S. (1996). The connected family: Bridging the generation gap. Longstreet Press. Seely Brown, J. (2000). Growing up digital: How the web changes work, education, and the ways people learn. Change Magazine, 11-20. Tapscott, D. (1998). Growing up digital: The rise of the net generation. New York: McGraw Hill. Tretiakov, A., & Kinshuk. (2005, 28-30 November 2005). Creating a pervasive testing environment by using SMS messaging. Paper presented at the IEEE International Workshop on Wireless and Mobile Technologies in Education WMTE, Tokushima, Japan, pp. 62-66. Woods, B. (2002, August 16, 2002). A digital divide between students and educators? Instant Messaging Planet. www.instantmessagingplanet.com/public/article.php/10817_1447791

JILR 18/1page layout

11/9/06 11:25 AM

Page 54

JILR 18/1page layout

11/9/06 11:25 AM

Page 55

Design of Virtual Learning Environments for Deep Learning MIKE MIMIRINIS Middlesex University, United Kingdom [email protected] MADHUMITA BHATTACHARYA Massey University, New Zealand [email protected] Although the advent of VLEs (Virtual Learning Environments) promised more flexible and independent learning, concerns have also been raised about the quality of their pedagogical effects. This article presents the results of a case study which endeavoured to explore the relationship between approaches to learning and studying, and perceptions of use of a VLE in a Higher Education taught module. Literature review focuses on the theory of approaches to learning and studying, which advocated that students’ positive perceptions of the academic environment are linked to desirable learning outcomes and proposed the existence of three distinct approaches to learning: the deep, the strategic and the surface approach. The results of the study are presented and the relationship between approaches to learning and use of the VLE is explored. The article consequently investigates the requirements for appropriate design of of VLEs. Recommendations are aiming to highlight the importance of specific elements in the design and delivery of online courses through VLEs. Reflection, inquiry, analysis and synthesis are key characteristics which play a crucial role in the demonstration of desirable approaches to learning in an online context.

Introduction Recent changes in Higher Education (HE) have been characterised by increased expectations from large-scale use of Information and Communication Technology (ICT). In that context, Virtual Learning Environments

JILR 18/1page layout

56

11/9/06 11:25 AM

Page 56

Mimirinis and Bhattacharya

(VLEs), also referred to as Learning Management Systems (LMSs), Content Management Systems (CMSs) or online learning environments, were launched as a way of responding to the new set of educational demands. VLEs have been defined as learning management software systems that synthesise the functions of computer-mediated communications software and online methods of delivering course materials (Britain & Liber, 2004). One of the most important reasons given for the large-scale investment in webbased technology is their potential to enhance teaching and learning (Jenkins, Browne & Armitage, 2001), as well as to encourage the development of student-centered, independent learning (Pahl, 2003) and to foster a more deep approach to learning (Collis, 1997). Enhancement of learning was previously proposed to be linked with the adoption of student-centered approaches to teaching and learning in traditional HE contexts. Education researchers approached an understanding of students’ learning by assessing students' experiences of learning and how they made sense of the individual approach to the tasks prescribed by their course of study. Marton and Saljo (1976) had first identified a deep and a surface level of processing, each of them corresponding to contrasting focuses of attention. The term approach included intention, which is what the learner was looking out for but also process, which is how that intention was carried out. It was evidenced that a deep approach was likely to result from a relevance to students' interests (Fransson, 1977), the interest and support of the instructor and where students had an opportunity to manage their own learning (Ramsden & Entwistle, 1981). Conversely, a surface approach was more likely to emerge when assessment methods rewarded reproducing information, or due to anxiety and a heavy workload (Ramsden & Entwistle, 1981). Further work identified another component; the strategic approach which derives from an intention to obtain the highest possible grades and involves focusing on assessment requirements and task demands, as well as adopting well-organised and efficient study methods (Entwistle, 1992). Overall, it was proposed that a relationship existed between higher quality learning outcomes and a deep approach to learning (Marton & Saljo, 1997), and between a deep approach to learning and a student-focused approach to teaching (Trigwell, Prosser & Waterhouse, 1999). Since the introduction of VLEs, it has been unclear whether these findings apply also to web-enhanced learning environments. It has been argued, however, that a transfer of traditional teaching methods to the online context may ignore pedagogical issues and also that the central provision of VLEs promotes a degree of ‘pedagogical inflexibility’ (Konrad, 2003). Despite the introduction of evaluation methodologies for learning technologies (Oliver, 2000), others claimed that the role of the individual learner and the dynamic characteristics they bring into this particular learning situation, was widely overlooked (Richardson, 2001; Hoskins & van Hooff, 2005).

JILR 18/1page layout

11/9/06 11:25 AM

Page 57

Design of Virtual Learning Environments for Deep Learning

57

Some studies attempted to explore the relationship between students’ approaches and use of VLEs and provided a basic overview of the subject. In one of those studies, the Approaches and Study Skills Inventory for Students (ASSIST) (Tait, Entwistle & McCune, 1998) had been used, with the aim of examining whether the students’ approach to learning affects their perception of the value of the VLE. It was concluded that students who adopted a deep approach to learning showed a preference for independent studying and perceived positively the use of the VLE. On the contrary, students who developed a surface approach complained about lack of time and had not completed the online tasks set (Jelfs & Colbourn, 2002). A similar study in the same university, found that there was a negative correlation between a surface approach and the rating of the VLE (Enjelvin & Sutton, 2004). Adopting a different perspective on the issue, an investigation with Social Sciences students questioned to what extent the use of a VLE could contribute to the demonstration of a deep approach to learning. Participants in discussions had higher deep learning scores whilst non-participants had higher surface approach scores. Evidence was also reported that strategic learners demonstrated their approach by their choice of online activities, which required flexibility in learning and organisational skills (Gibbs, 1999). Finally, in a most recent study, Hoskins and van Hooff (2005) reported that strategic approach was associated with more extended use of bulletin boards. Exploring the Relationship Between Approaches to Learning and Perceptions of VLE Use The findings presented in this article derive from a study in a physiology module of first year students in a British HE college. The module was part of a degree in sports studies and students used the ‘Blackboard’ VLE. The module leader was inclined to use learning technologies and coordinated a group of module tutors. The group extensively used the VLE for different purposes like uploading of learning resources, online assessments, synchronous and asynchronous communication, assignments and laboratories reminders, and there was integration with the students’ record system. Focus of attention was placed on what were the most suitable ways to collect the data. An earlier discussion on learning technology research methods highlighted potential pitfalls in terms of population validity (Gill & Johnson, 1997). Cairncross, Mannion and McEwan (2003) noted that in some experiments, the analysis of examination performance suggested that learners who participated in the trials tended to do better in the examinations. A distribution of a paper-based version of the questionnaire was thus estimated to have several advantages compared to online data collection. The study aimed to provide an understanding of learners’ perceptions of the VLE and to ascertain whether there are any significant relationships between approaches to learning and students’ perceptions. The questionnaire com-

JILR 18/1page layout

11/9/06 11:25 AM

Page 58

58

Mimirinis and Bhattacharya

prised of two parts; one part with eighteen items on students perceptions of the VLE and a second part with a revised version of the ASSIST inventory. The sample was highly homogeneous; almost all of the participants belonged to a typical entry age group and were predominantly white of British origin. There was also a fairly even distribution between male and female users. RESULTS Fifty-one students completed the ASSIST questionnaire, representing 68% of the students who were registered for the module. Scores on each scale and subscale are obtained by adding the scores of the relevant items. Table 1 presents descriptive statistics from the inventory. Table 1 Descriptive statistics for the subscales of the Revised ASSIST Inventory Subscales

Mean

Standard deviation

Coefficient alpha (_)

Deep approach Strategic approach Surface approach

49.94 51.66 47.10

8.40 9.14 7.45

0.82 0.83 0.73

Note: The possible score on all subscales is from 4 to 20.

Table 2 Significant Correlations: Approaches to Studying and Perceptions of Use of the VLE Deep approach VLE and development of interest in the subject Positive to attend other modules that use the VLE Use of VLE to examine the understanding of the meaning of concepts meaning of concepts VLE can not replace face-toface contact with my tutor

r Sig.(2-tailed) r Sig.(2-tailed) r Sig.(2-tailed)

.353* .012 .311* .028

r Sig.(2-tailed)

.324* .022

Strategic approach

Surface approach

.312* .027

.415** .003

-.282* .047

Note: N=50, ** Significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed), p<0.01,*Significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed), p<0.05)

JILR 18/1page layout

11/9/06 11:25 AM

Page 59

Design of Virtual Learning Environments for Deep Learning

59

Coefficient alpha was .82 for the deep, .83 for the strategic, and .73 for the surface scale. The scores on the subscales of each approach were added and the total score was treated as an independent variable. Table 3 displays all the significant correlations at 0.05 and 0.01 level. The strongest correlation that emerged was between the scores on the strategic approach and use of the VLE with the aim of examining the understanding of concepts’ meaning (r= +.415). The same variable correlated with the scores on the deep approach scale (r=+.311). Significant correlations also emerged with regard to perceptions of the role of the VLE as opposed to face-to-face contact with the tutor. There was a positive correlation between the scores on the deep approach scale and a perception that the role of the tutor can not be replaced by the VLE. Conversely, there was a negative correlation between the scores on the surface approach scale and the perception of the role of the tutor. The scores on the strategic approach scale correlated with the item that was questioning the role of the VLE in developing interest for the subject (r= +.312). Patterns in the Perceptions of Use An exploratory principal component analysis of the items of the perceptions of use section of the questionnaire, revealed three significant factors (52.9% of the variance) and their loadings are displayed in Table 3. Table 3 Significant Loadings of Perceptions of Use Variables

I

Using VLE to develop my understanding on the subject Usefulness because of covering what needs to be known Dislike of VLE Developing my interest in the subject Efficient organisation of time schedule Useful because of catching up on missed lectures Positive stance to attend other modules that use the VLE Easy to use VLE is just another task for the course Face to face contact with tutor irreplaceable by the VLE VLE most useful as a revision help before the exams Contribution to become independent learner

.816 .597 -.687 .615 .618 .519

Overall positive contribution to learning

.828

.519

Factors II

III

.505

.560 -.524 -.624 .569

.533 .744

.554 .513

Note: Method – principal component analysis, variance: 52.9%, N=50, all loadings smaller than .50 in absolute magnitude were suppressed.

JILR 18/1page layout

11/9/06 11:25 AM

Page 60

60

Mimirinis and Bhattacharya

Factor I shows significant positive loadings on nine variables and a negative significant loading on the Dislike the VLE variable. The strongest loadings on Factor I appear on the perception of positive contribution to learning’ variable (.828) and the use of the VLE ‘developing learners’ understanding on the topic’ (.816). Positive loadings also appear on other variables, including ‘usefulnes because of catching up on missed lectures’, ‘covering content’, ‘revision help before the exams‘ and ‘development of interest in the subject’. Factor II accounted for 12.8% of the variance and displayed three positive loadings on the following variables: ‘control over what to learn and when’, ‘face-to-face contact with tutors can not be replaced by the VLE’, ‘he VLE is most useful as a revision help before the exams’ and ‘dislike of the VLE’. Finally, the third factor (III) showed moderately strong loadings; two positive loadings (on ‘usefulness because of catching up on missed lectures’ and ‘the VLE is just another task for the course’ items), and one negative loading (on positive attitude towards ‘attending other modules on the VLE’). ANALYSIS The analysis of the results confirmed that there was a positive perception of the use of the VLE. for the majority of the modules. Students had an appreciation of the VLE as a learning support mechanism with a particular emphasis on flexibility and independent learning. The most significant correlation was between the strategic approach and use of the VLE to examine the understanding of the meaning of concepts. The correlations between a strategic approach and perceptions of use of the VLE was in line with findings from previous studies which suggested that students who were inclined to develop a strategic approach were more in favour of the VLE facilities and participated more actively (Gibbs, 1999). A deep approach to learning slightly correlated with willingness to attend other modules on the VLE and also a preference towards face-to-face contact with their tutor rather than facilitation of learning through the VLE. In contrast, the scores on the surface approach scale demonstrated a slightly positive correlation with the prospect of their tutor being replaced by a VLE. This could be attributed to their indifference to the role of their tutors or could be attributed to fear of contact with their module leaders. It is believed that certain factors contribute to the relatively high levels of positive perceptions presented in the results section. A new generation of users with increased competency in IT skills and the provision of efficient support eliminate the frustration caused by incompetence and low quality service which was reported as a discouraging factor in usability evaluations (Storey, Phillips, Maczewski & Wang, 2002). It can also be proposed that as the VLE was an integral part of the learning process, this imposed a greater sense of responsibility on students who realised that successful use of it was part of their overall success.

JILR 18/1page layout

11/9/06 11:25 AM

Page 61

Design of Virtual Learning Environments for Deep Learning

61

This study also proposes a classification of attitudes towards VLEs based on the analysis of students’ responses. Positive perceptions of the VLE were associated with effective use of certain facilities. Other interrelated attitudes are those of negative perceptions of the VLE and difficulties in use as well as a narrow understanding of the value of the tool. A group of users also appeared to believe that face-to-face contact with their tutor could not be replaced by the VLE and thus formed the core of the resistant attitudes to online teaching. Design and Practice for Deep Learning The case study illustrates that the approaches which students use in response to academic tasks may be diverse and so do their perceptions of the VLE when used for the delivery of HE teaching. VLEs are shaped in many ways and most importantly by their designers. It has been indicated that VLEs are not value-free (McNaught & Lam, 2005) and that there are specific values inherent not only in their design philosophy but also in their implementation and use. The argument highlights the significance of informed choices in the process of design and use of VLEs, particularly with regard to the enhancement of deep approaches to learning and the achievement of high quality learning outcomes. If the benefits of deep learning in a conventional teaching context may apply to an online learning environment, it could be contended that design and appropriate practice may also encourage student motivation and promote deep learning through appropriate use of VLEs. In this respect, there are certain parameters which need to be acknowledged. The advantages of technologies that enable collaboration, inquiry and flexibility have been extensively discussed (Hakkarainen, Lipponen & Jäärvelä, 2002; Jonassen, 2001). The role that meaningful activities could play in engaging students needs to be emphasised. Jonassen (2001) identifies the following elements of a learning environment which promote meaningful learning: active, constructive, collaborative, intentional, complex, contextual, conversational, and reflective. Certain aspects of this categorization, such as the complexity of the learning environment, may be particularly useful if deep learning is to be encouraged. It was also previously noted that excessive workload could lead to undesired approaches to learning and poor learning outcomes (Ramsden & Entwistle, 1981). Educational practitioners need to be aware of the danger of providing students with too many hyperlinks, resources, multimedia or other materials within the VLE. A rich online environment does not necessarily guarantee the improvement of the student learning experience. An excessive list of materials could hinder students’ effort to make an understanding of the learning process and thus reproduce a surface approach. The principle of supply and demand may also be applied in this case; hyperlinks and other resources could be provided according to students’ requirements and may need to correspond to their progress.

JILR 18/1page layout

11/9/06 11:25 AM

Page 62

62

Mimirinis and Bhattacharya

Student collaboration and communication through the use of Computer Mediated Communication (CMC) tools could play a crucial role in the development of a deep approach to learning. Online learning communities and networks of learners should be an aspect of all subjects in this mode of delivery. Focused discussion groups and groups of people working towards common goals are practices which could potentially encourage deep learning. Regarding assessment, it is argued that appropriate strategies should reward reflection, inquiry, analysis, synthesis and critical thought rather than memorisation of information. It has also been suggested that Multiple Choice Questions (MCQs) have certain limitations and that they may potentially encourage surface approaches to learning (Biggs, 2003; Ramsden, 2003). Scouller (1998) also provides evidence of open-ended assignments as contributors to a deep approach to learning compared to short-essays or MCQs. Certain VLE designers appear to give priority to MCQs. Although, MCQs may be beneficial for some purposes, (e.g., content coverage), it is proposed that open essays are in most cases conducive of a deep approach to learning. Designers and practitioners need to pay attention to the desired use of online assessment and relevant adjustments should be considered where necessary. Electronic Portfolios also provide a useful means of promoting and assessing student learning over time. They could link reflective practice with products and performances, which indicate a hands-on and applied acquisition of practical skills and knowledge involving learning technologies (Bhattacharya, 2001). A process of action-reflection helps individuals to develop more appropriate and effective ways of engagement to learning. Moreover, it develops independent learning, and fosters a problem-solving, solution-orientated approach to the learning process. CONCLUSIONS Practitioners do not always understand how to engage students, how to moderate their online sessions or how to integrate these aspects of the course with other existing learning activities. Subsequently, their efforts when using a VLE often have limited impact on students’ learning (Britain & Liber, 2004). On the other side, students’ perceptions of their learning are clearly affected by the situation and by the intellectual demands being made of them. By providing the results of the case study, the authors attemted to reveal the associations between approaches to learning and studying and the way students utilise VLEs for their learning. However, it is acknowledged that further research needs to include more aspects of the environment and possibly investigate the interplay between the components of the traditional learning methods and the VLE. Overall, it is stressed that appropriate design and extensive use of existing system features may promote facilities conducive of higher quality learning and teaching in academic institutions.

JILR 18/1page layout

11/9/06 11:25 AM

Page 63

Design of Virtual Learning Environments for Deep Learning

63

References Bhattacharya, M. (2001). Electronic portfolios, student reflective practices, and the evaluation of effective learning [Online], 19-10-2006, Available: http://www.aare.edu.au/01pap/bha01333.htm Biggs, J. (2003). Teaching for quality learning at university. What the student does. Second edition. Maidenhead: Society for Research into Higher Education & Open University Press. Britain, S., & Liber, O. (2004). A Framework for the Pedagogical Evaluation of Virtual Learning Environments. Report 41, JISC Technology Applications Programme. [Online], 19-10-2006, Available: http://www.cetis.ac.uk/members/pedagogy/files/4thMeet_framework/VLEfullReport Cairncross S., Mannion, M., & McEwan, T. (2003). Learning technology research in practice: Reflections from the field. In Communities of Practice: Research Proceedings of the 10th Association for Learning Technology Conference (ALT-C 2003) Association for Learning Technology, pp. 70–81. Collis, B. (1997). Tele-learning in a digital world: The future of distance learning. London: International Thomson Computer Press. Enjelvin, G., & Sutton, A. (2004). Let’s ask the students for a change. Investigating student learning approaches to, and perceived gains from VLE-novation. UCN Working Papers Series, Vol. 1. Entwistle, N. (1992). The impact of teaching on learning outcomes in higher education: A literature review, Committee of Vice-Chancellors and Principals of the Universities of the United Kingdom, Universities, Staff Development Unit (CVCP-USDU). Fransson, A. (1977). On qualitative differences in learning. IV - Effectives of motivation and test anxiety on process and outcome. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 47, 244- 257. Gibbs, G. (1999). Learning to learn in a virtual learning environment for philosophy. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 15(3), 221-231. Hakkarainen, K., Lipponen, L., & Jäärvelä, S. (2002). Epistemology of inquiry and computersupported collaborative learning. In T. Koschmann, R. Hall & N. Miyake (Eds.), CSCL2: Carrying forward the conversation (pp. 129-156). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Hoskins, S. & van Hooff, J. C. (2005).Web-based learning: Predictors of student use and achievement. British Journal of Educational Technology, 36, 177-192. Jelfs, A., & Colbourn, C. (2002). Virtual seminars and their impact on the role of the teaching staff. Computers and Education 38, 127-136. Jenkins, M., Browne, T., & Armitage, S. (2001) Management and implementation of Virtual Learning Environments. Report. UCISA. [Online], 19-10-2006, Available: http://www.ucisa.ac.uk/ groupstlig/vle/VLEReport.doc Jonassen, D. H. (2001). Design of constructivist learning environments, [Online], 19-10-2006, Available: http://www.coe.missouri.edu/~jonassen/courses/CLE/index.html Konrad, J. (2003). ‘Review of educational research on virtual learning environments [VLE] implications for the improvement of teaching and learning and access to formal learning in Europe’. Paper presented at the European Conference on Educational Research, University of Hamburg, 17-20 September. Marton, F., & Saljo, R. (1976). On qualitative differences in learning I. Outcome and process. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 46: 4-11. Marton, F., & Saljo, R. (1997). Approaches to learning. In: F. Marton, D. Hounsell and N. Entwistle, eds. The Experience of Learning. Edinburgh: Scottish Academic Press, 39-58.

JILR 18/1page layout

64

11/9/06 11:25 AM

Page 64

Mimirinis and Bhattacharya

McNaught, C., & Lam, P. (2005). Building an evaluation culture and evidence base for e-learning in three Hong Kong universities. British Journal of Educational Technology, 36(4), 629-642. Oliver, M. (2000). An introduction to the evaluation of learning technology. Educational Technology & Society, 3(4). [Online], 19-10-2006, Available: http://ifets.ieee.org/periodical/vol_4_2000/ intro.html Pahl, C. (2003). Managing evolution and change in web-based teaching and learning environments. Computers in Education, 40. 99-114. Ramsden, P., & Entwistle, N. J. (1981). Effects of academic departments on students’ approaches to studying. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 51, 368-383. Ramsden, P. (2003). Learning to Teach in Higher Education. Second Edition. London: RouteldgeFalmer. Richardson, J. (2001). An evaluation of virtual learning environments and their learners: Do individual differences affect perception of virtual learning environments, Interactive Multimedia, 3: 38-52. Scouller, K. (1998). The influence of assessment method of students’ learning approaches: Multiple choice question examination versus assignment essay. Higher Education 35: 453-472. Storey, M-A., Phillips, B., Maczewski, M., & Wang, M. (2002) Evaluating the Usability of Web-based Learning Tools. Educational Technology & Society 5(3). [Online] 19-10-2006, Available: http://ifets.ieee.org/periodical/vol_3_2002/storey.html Tait, H., Entwistle, N. J., & McCune, V. (1998). ASSIST: A reconceptualisation of the approaches to studying inventory. In: C. Rust, ed. Improving student learning: Improving students as learners. Oxford: Oxford Brookes University, The Oxford Centre for Staff and Learning Development, 262-271. Trigwell, K., Prosser, M., & Waterhouse, F. (1999). Relations between teachers' approaches to teaching and students' approaches to learning. Higher Education, 37: 57-70.

JILR 18/1page layout

11/9/06 11:25 AM

Page 65

EDUCO: Social Navigation and Group Formation in Student-Centred E-Learning JAAKKO KURHILA University of Helsinki, Finland [email protected] MIKKA MIETTINEN AND PETRI NOKELAINEN Helsinki Institute for Information Technology, Finland [email protected] [email protected] HENRY TIRRI Nokia Research Center, Finland [email protected] EDUCO is a system that enhances the sense of other users in a collaborative learning environment by making the other users and their navigation visible to everyone else in the environment in real-time. This article presents EDUCO and empirical results from two university courses where EDUCO was used as a learning environment. In the first study we utilized the logged data for observing the effects of social navigation; in the second study we analyzed the formation of groups. The results of the first study do no indicate a heavy reliance on social navigation but suggest that real-time social navigation can have a positive impact on the feeling of a learning community in a web-course. The results from the second study suggest that group formation does not affect the grades received, even if the motivational profiles of the students are different.

Introduction Emerging trends in higher education include a shift from traditional, teacher-oriented lecturing towards student-centred learning (SCL). SCL means that communicating course material does not rest solely on the shoul-

JILR 18/1page layout

66

11/9/06 11:26 AM

Page 66

Kurhila, Miettinen, Nokelainen, and Tirri

ders of a teacher (e.g., Felder & Brent, 1996). A wide variety of different teaching and learning approaches fit into SCL. Examples include active learning, project-based learning, problem-based learning, case-based learning, and even more recent approaches such as learning by inquiry. Learning tasks in SCL include such techniques as substituting active learning experiences for lectures, holding students responsible for material that has not been explicitly discussed in class, assigning open-ended problems which require both critical and creative thinking, and using self-paced cooperative learning. The research findings of educational literature prove convincingly that properly implemented SCL fosters motivation and elicits a deeper understanding toward the subject being taught (Felder & Brent 1996; 2001, Dillinger 2001). At the same time, another trend witnessed in higher education has been to promote web-based education. The potential benefits of web-based education are tempting, but producing effective web-courses has proven to be resource-intensive; relying on pre-made learning materials and/or online lectures or tutoring have been costly activities. As SCL means that communicating course material does not rest solely on the shoulders of a teacher, ready-to-use learning material is not a necessity in SCL. In addition, SCL naturally gives an active role to the students reducing the need to extrinsically motivate the students and use extensive amounts of time to guide or advise each student individually. However, the concept of social navigation plays an important role when trying to bring the sense of other learners into a learning environment. When Dourish and Chalmers introduced social navigation, they stated it to be “navigation because other people have looked at something” (Dourish & Chalmers 1994). The concept has evolved since then (see e.g., Munro, Höök & Benyon, 1999 for an overview of the topic), and various categories of social navigation have emerged (direct - indirect (Dieberger 1999), intended - unintended (Forsberg 1998)). Today, many of the systems incorporating social navigation use collaborative filtering. It means that these “systems provide the user with recommendations of their likely interest in data items on the basis of ‘interest matches’ derived from ratings from the set of users” (Dourish 1999). Examples of such recommender systems include various web-stores, where a product is recommended to a customer based on the actions of previous customers. In the area of web-based learning, recommender systems based on collaborative filtering can have a positive impact on the overall learning process. However, these systems do not address the problem of the feeling of being alone in a web-course. Commercial or even research-level course delivery systems (Brusilovsky & Miller, 2000) have rarely taken this into consideration. There are various collaborative virtual environments (Churchill, Snowdon & Munro, 2001) that include the feeling of other users, but the solutions

JILR 18/1page layout

11/9/06 11:26 AM

Page 67

EDUCO: Social Navigation and Group Formation in Student-Centred E-Learning

67

are not necessarily directly applicable to web-based learning. EDUCO is a system that visualizes other live users currently present in the learning environment (Kurhila, Miettinen, Nokelainen & Tirri, 2002). Navigation and initiating synchronous or asynchronous discussions have been made as simple as possible. The movement from one document to another in the environment is updated for every participant in real-time, thus adding to the feeling of truly live action. Social navigation is different from the concept of workspace awareness (Gutwin & Greenberg, 1999; 2002). Awareness support in groupware often means that certain collaborative activities are explicitly enabled and supported. Examples of groupware with workspace awareness are many, ranging from specific purpose-built tools (e.g., Froelich & Dourish, 2004; Hupfer, Cheng, Ross & Patterson, 2004) to more general 3D environments (Dyck & Gutwin, 2002). Social navigation is biased towards recommendation: the user is aware of the actions of others and can use this often somewhat implicit visual information for his or her benefit. In addition to this, real-time social navigation creates a feeling of live learning companions in the environment and adds to the sense of a learning community (Kurhila et al., 2002). The EDUCO Learning Environment An example of a student-centered web-course could be as follows. The teacher has selected a collection of appropriate research articles on the course topic to serve as background material. As usual, the course covers various topics each week. A weekly assignment means that the students have to form a group to prepare a report on the subject. The students use some of the research articles as a starting point for the reports. The finalised student reports constitute the course portfolio covering the course contents, maybe supplemented with a learning diary where the students have reflected their learning process during the weekly reports. This type of a course uses many of the typical methods of SCL: preparing a report is an active experience compared to lectures, students are responsible for material that has not been explicitly discussed in class, and producing reports on a topic is open-ended problem solving in groups. EDUCO is a collaborative learning environment designed on the basis of this kind of a scenario. In addition to providing a shared collection of background material and basic communication tools, it explicitly attempts to improve awareness and enable social navigation. Two different versions of the system were used in the empirical evaluations. The first evaluation focused on real-time awareness conveyed by synchronous social cues. The features present in the first evaluation are referred to as core functionality in the description below. In the second evaluation we had also asynchronous social cues, improved communication facilities and a tool for forming groups. These are described in the section titled additional features.

JILR 18/1page layout

68

11/9/06 11:26 AM

Page 68

Kurhila, Miettinen, Nokelainen, and Tirri

Core Functionality The user interface of EDUCO consists of six views of which only one is visible at a time. The views are map, chat, search, alarm, preferences and help. The screen layout when using EDUCO is presented in Figure 1. The six views of EDUCO are presented in a tool resembling a handheld computer (upper-left corner in Figure 1, now in “map” view). The largest area is reserved for viewing the documents gathered into EDUCO (right-hand side of the web-browser in Figure 1). The space below the EDUCO tool is for the comments provided by the users. The comments are associated with the currently visible document, and open automatically in the designated frame. Map view presents the documents organized into clusters in EDUCO. Every document is visible, and the clusters are distinct. Documents are presented as paper-icons. The users of EDUCO are presented as coloured dots.

Figure 1. EDUCO user interface showing Map view, open document and related comments

JILR 18/1page layout

11/9/06 11:26 AM

Page 69

EDUCO: Social Navigation and Group Formation in Student-Centred E-Learning

69

The dot is located next to the document the user is currently viewing. When the user places the mouse pointer on top of a document or a dot representing a user, a tool tip text appears showing the name of the person or the document. Double-clicking on a document icon opens the document into the right-hand side of the browser window and moves the dot representing the user to a corresponding location on the map view. Every user in EDUCO sees the dot changing locations. Document icons in the map view of EDUCO can each represent a collection of student reports. Otherwise, the space for documents in the map could be overwhelmed with student reports. The red rectangle in the map view in Figure 2 is a magnifying glass included in the map view. The purpose of the magnifying glass is to make it easier for the users to click on the dots or documents while navigating. The colours of the dots indicate different group memberships or types of user profile. The groups are assigned according to a metric the administrator of the EDUCO wishes to choose, and can either stay the same throughout the course or be changed based on the activities of the users. An example of a grouping could be teachers, tutors, observers, and students. By representing different groups with different colours, the participants can have extra information when selecting their study partners or teams for group work

Figure 2. Map and Chat views of EDUCO

JILR 18/1page layout

70

11/9/06 11:26 AM

Page 70

Kurhila, Miettinen, Nokelainen, and Tirri

When in map view, clicking once on a user or a document symbol selects it for further use. The further use can, for example, be a Chat, which is the second view (Figure 2). Any user can easily initiate a chat discussion with other users simply by clicking the corresponding user symbol and then clicking the Connect button in the chat view. The chat can be initiated with one or more other users. The restriction is that one person can be involved in only one chat channel at a time. The functionality of the chat is somewhat restricted when compared to many commonly used chat services. However, the chat in EDUCO is targeted to a small exchange of ideas when searching for a team member for group work. Chat is a form of synchronous communication in EDUCO. Depending on the situation, asynchronous discussions might sometimes be more useful. Therefore, every user in EDUCO has the possibility to write a comment when viewing a document. The comment is visible to users navigating to that document, (i.e., the comments are document-specific). Other users can comment on the comment, thus continuing the chain of comments as illustrated in Figure 1. The third view is Search. Users can search for other users and documents in EDUCO. When a user searches another user or a document, the results are shown textually in search view (Figure 3) and graphically in map view by highlighting the corresponding user or document (the same effect as clicking a user or a document once in map view). The highlighting is illustrated in Figure 2 where the magnifying glass shows one highlighted document symbol among the other two document symbols. In addition to finding documents on the map, the operation of the search makes it easy to initiate a chat with a specific user. Finding team members to complete an assignment is often obligatory in SCL. When searching for a companion for group work, a regular search is useless unless a student already knows the person he or she is willing to team up with. However, another type of search can be used for the purpose. EDUCO’s alarm offers each user a possibility to set “triggers” into the documents, groups and the overall system. In other words, a user can set EDUCO to alarm when certain conditions occur. This feature is useful in a case where a user searches for a companion (possibly from a certain group) showing interest for a certain document or topic, or wants to contact a particular person when he or she enters the system. The alarm function also enables making combinations of triggering events. Figure 3 shows an example of a combination of triggers: the alarm will go off if “Miikka Miettinen” or “somebody from group 3” enters the system. The last two views are Preferences and Help. While viewing Preferences, the user is allowed to change personal settings in the system. The settings include preferred nickname within the chat (in case the user wants to stay anonymous in the chat), and whether the user is visible to other users. If the

JILR 18/1page layout

11/9/06 11:26 AM

Page 71

EDUCO: Social Navigation and Group Formation in Student-Centred E-Learning

71

Figure 3. Search and Alarm user chooses to make her own navigation invisible in EDUCO, it automatically means that she cannot see the other users. Help view provides information about the system in general. Additional Features The documents change their colour on the map depending on how much they have been read in relation to the other documents. The colours range from bright (heavily read) to dimmed (infrequently read), as presented in Figure 2. This way the users can get the “footprint” information at a glance and do not have to stay online and constantly watch where the other users navigate. An important feature in EDUCO is the support for forming groups. Alarms, chat and navigational patterns can be used when screening for potential partners for group work. Another feature is a list of available (i.e., not yet in any group) participants in the environment. Every user can start a group by clicking a button Add a new group. Other people can join such a group, or they can start a new group and try to persuade people to join. After producing a joint work, such as a report or the draft of a report, it can be published for comments in EDUCO by submitting the URL of the work. In addition to the synchronous discussions described above, EDUCO has a

JILR 18/1page layout

72

11/9/06 11:26 AM

Page 72

Kurhila, Miettinen, Nokelainen, and Tirri

possibility for asynchronous bulletin board postings, which play an important role in collaborative knowledge building (Scardamalia & Bereiter, 1994) taking place in a student-centered web-course. The discussion is always document-specific. A discussion chain for a report document published by a student group working together for a weekly assignment is typical hierarchical discussion chain, where previous discussion can be quoted and new discussion chain can be started. For example by publishing an early version of a report for an assignment, and soliciting comments from other course participants. METHOD Our empirical evaluation consists of two separate studies with somewhat different focus. In both cases the data was gathered in three stages. At the beginning of the course, the students completed a questionnaire that measured their motivational level and learning strategies. Each student was assigned one of the three motivational profiles, which were characterised verbally and appeared in EDUCO as colours of the dots representing the users. During the course, log data was accumulated in EDUCO. In the first study we utilised the data for observing social navigation and in the second study for analysing the formation of groups. At the end of the course, there was another questionnaire with open questions for gathering information about the subjective experiences of the students. In the first study this was an e-mail survey with a fixed set of questions to be answered; the second study relied on learning diaries with no specified structure. In statistical analyses, we applied Bayesian modeling (Congdon, 2001) as it (1) is parameter-free (no additional user input is required apart from the data), (2) works with probabilities (i.e., with discrete data containing nominal and ordinal attributes), (3) has no limit for minimum sample size, (4) assumes no multivariate normal model, and (5) allows the analysis of both linear and non-linear relationships between variables. First Study The first empirical study was conducted during a course entitled webBased Learning given at the University of Helsinki, Finland. The course is an advanced course in Computer Science (CS) studies. Twenty-four students participated in the course, some of them adult learners with varying backgrounds and degrees but most of the students were CS majors. The type of the course was seminar, which means that the students pick a topic, prepare a ten-page paper on the topic and present it to the teacher and the other students in the course. In addition, there were some short weekly assignments to complete. There were only two face-to-face meetings during the course. The first was an initial meeting where the structure and requirements of the course

JILR 18/1page layout

11/9/06 11:26 AM

Page 73

EDUCO: Social Navigation and Group Formation in Student-Centred E-Learning

73

were explained and the EDUCO system was introduced. The second face-toface meeting was the final meeting where the students presented their papers. Everything else between the initial and final meeting was conducted online using EDUCO. Only the real-time social cues were present in the system. Because of the small student population participating in the course, a primary time slot was scheduled to make sure that there would be people in EDUCO at the same time. However, the time slot was not restrictive in any way. Forty-three documents were first gathered into EDUCO to serve as a starting point for studying the topics of the course. The documents were clustered according to the six general areas to be covered: history of web-based learning, society and web-based learning, research findings, teaching and studying in a web-based course, course delivery systems, and providing adaptation in educational systems. Pre-test. The motivational profiling included in the study is based on the Motivated Strategies for Learning Questionnaire (MSLQ), which was developed on the basis of the motivational expectancy model (Garcia & Pintrich, 1994). MSLQ measures both motivational factors and learning strategies. The motivation section (A) of MSLQ consists of 17 items that were used to assess students' value for the course, their beliefs about their ability to succeed in the course, and their anxiety about tests in the course. A 5-point Likert-scale ranging from 1 (“Not at all true of me”) to 5 (“Very true of me”) was used for all items. The theoretical model of motivation (Ruohotie, 2000) is composed of a six factor solution: (1) Intrinsic goal orientation, (2) Extrinsic goal orientation, (3) Meaningfulness of studies, (4) Control beliefs, (5) Efficacy beliefs, and (6) Test anxiety (Ruohotie, Nokelainen, Tirri & Silander, 2001). We expected to find similar structure in the sample data and thus be able to construct useful motivational groups. Users’ actions during the course. A log file (with time stamp, user id, and action on each row) was accumulated in EDUCO during the course (duration of eight weeks). The file contained 1832 navigation actions, which were included in the analysis in order to assess the effect of the visibility of the other users on navigation. The main level question was operationalised into the following two sublevel propositions: firstly, did the users in general prefer occupied (someone else viewing the document) documents over unoccupied (the document is free from other users) ones? Secondly, did the preference differ between the motivational groups identified in the pre-test? Post-test. An email survey consisting of 17 open propositions was conducted two weeks after the course. Propositions measured users’ experiences and

JILR 18/1page layout

74

11/9/06 11:26 AM

Page 74

Kurhila, Miettinen, Nokelainen, and Tirri

expectations towards web-based education together with attributes related to EDUCO (usability issues, user interface, functionality, etc.). RESULTS Pre-test. The analysis of the A section of the motivational pre-test questionnaire was carried out with a Bayesian dependence modeling tool named BCourse (Nokelainen, Silander, Tirri, Tirri, & Nevgi, 2001). The results indicated that the theoretical model of six factors (Ruohotie et al., 2001) was a viable solution for this small data set. Based on the motivational level scores on six dimensions, respondents were divided into three groups: • Group 1 (“Red”, n=10) characteristics: (2) Extrinsic goal orientation, (6) test anxiety and (3) meaningfulness of studies. • Group 2 (“Blue”, n=8) characteristics: (5) Efficacy beliefs, (1) intrinsic goal orientation and (3) meaningfulness of studies. • Group 3 (“Green”, n=6) characteristics: (4) Control beliefs and (1) intrinsic goal orientation. The classification accuracy of the theoretical model (Ruohotie, 2000) was evaluated with Bayesian classification modeling (Silander & Tirri, 1999): 87.5% of original and 75.0% of cross-validation cases were correctly classified. There was no statistically significant difference between the group memberships of male and female respondents. The group descriptions with clear verbal explanations were published on the course website for all the participants, so that the students were able to use the information when choosing a study partner for the weekly assignments. Users’ actions during the course. After filtering out the entry document from the log file, the analysis of the data (total number of logged navigation events = 1832) indicated that the users preferred unoccupied documents (943 requests, 51.5%) over occupied ones (889 requests, 48.5%). The number of simultaneous readers in occupied documents varied from one to six with the following request frequencies: one reader (501 requests, 56.5%), two readers (268 requests, 30.2%), three readers (75 requests, 8.5%), four readers (35 requests, 3.9%), five readers (7 requests, 0.8%), and six readers (1 request, 0.1%). The results revealed no gender-related differences. The results indicated (_2 = 13.29, p=0.01) that the respondents selected documents based on their pre-test motivational group membership (Figure 4). Members of the Blue group preferred unoccupied documents (N=496, 55.5%) over occupied ones (N=398, 44.5%). Students belonging to the Green group made no distinction between documents. Members of the Red group preferred occupied documents (N=234, 55.1%) over unoccupied ones (N=191, 44.9%) indicating a tendency towards social navigation.

JILR 18/1page layout

11/9/06 11:26 AM

Page 75

EDUCO: Social Navigation and Group Formation in Student-Centred E-Learning

75

Figure 4. Preference towards unoccupied and occupied documents for different groups The third part of the log file data analysis focused on the viewing times per document. The values of the Time variable were categorised into six classes: 0-2, 2-5, 5-10, 10-30, 30-60 and 60-90 minutes. Viewing times over 90 minutes were excluded from the analysis. This part revealed interesting group specific results. Members of the Blue group spent the least time (x=2.7 min) per document compared to other groups (_2 = 19.38, p=0.04). This result supports the result-oriented label of the group members. There was no difference in viewing times between the Red (x=3.2 min) and the Green (x=3.6 min) group. Post-test. The third phase of this study was to analyse the propositions of the post-test (the total number of propositions was 17). The total number of answers to the post-test questionnaire was 17 (71%) out of 24. The sample data consisted of five female and twelve male students. Results of the post-test show that EDUCO was seen as a useful tool in mat-

JILR 18/1page layout

76

11/9/06 11:26 AM

Page 76

Kurhila, Miettinen, Nokelainen, and Tirri

ters like adaptation to respondents’ learning, cognitive and motivational strategies, and means to implement collaborative actions. The quotes have been translated from Finnish to English. “It was very useful to see what documents other users were reading, it gave me many hints and saved time.” “It was truly nice to be able to see what the most interesting document at the moment is and who is reading it.” “Actually, in several cases I wanted to start a chat conversation with someone reading the same document with me … I guess this is social navigation?” EDUCO's tools for seeking work mates (group membership, search function) were reported to be useful: “I was in a blue group, and when another blue was looking for a mate, I replied instantly. He had already chosen an article, I glanced at it and found that it was suitable for me too.” “I had a group proposal via email message. As my forthcoming work mate had the same colour as I did, it was easy to make the decision to start collaboration. Afterwards I thought that I agreed so quickly because of the same motivational group, normally it takes more consideration. But to be honest, the topic was the most important factor.” Second Study In the second empirical evaluation, EDUCO was equipped with the additional features mentioned earlier: footprint information, group-forming tools and the possibility to engage in hierarchical discussions over documents produced by the users. Although the courses were slightly different in some aspects (time span, credits awarded, number of participants, emphasis of assignments), the way EDUCO was used was the same. The aims of the second study were also different from the first study. The second study examined self-organization of the groups, how the students viewed the group work, and the effect of different group formations to the learning outcomes. It should be noted that EDUCO does not include any automatic or proactive group forming functions (e.g., Wessner & Pfister, 2001); instead, EDUCO supports self-organizing groups by social navigation features (alarm triggers, chat, visibility in navigation) and easy initiation of a group as well as easy joining into a group. The second study with EDUCO was an advanced course in Computer Science titled Computer Uses in Education with a subtitle of Web-Based Learn-

JILR 18/1page layout

11/9/06 11:26 AM

Page 77

EDUCO: Social Navigation and Group Formation in Student-Centred E-Learning

77

ing. The course was given at the Department of Computer Science, University of Helsinki, Finland, by the same instructor as the course in the first study. Typically, all courses (except for the seminars) at the department have been more or less traditional lecture-based courses, so the approach was unique to most of the students. There was no final exam but the students had nine weekly reports to produce from nine different topics in varying teams. Team sizes were not restricted, but groups of two or three were recommended. Moreover, the groups were not allowed to stay the same during the course. A student had to be involved with at least three different groups. Forty-six students actively participated in the course (i.e., produced at least one weekly report). Some of the students were adult learners with varying backgrounds and degrees but most of them were computer science majors. The documents in the EDUCO map discussed the issues covered during the first eight weeks. Also in the map there were collections of student reports as single document icons. The documents were organized into eight different clusters, each associated with a common theme. The themes were close to the weekly topics but not completely the same. The document cluster sizes varied from two to ten, giving a total of approximately 40 documents. The exact number of documents varied during the course, since new resources were added or replaced occasionally. The course included only two face-to-face meetings. The first was an initial meeting where the structure and requirements for the course were explained. The second face-to-face meeting was organized the next day, and participants had an opportunity to get familiar with EDUCO. After that, all communication took place in EDUCO apart from some email announcements. The course relied heavily on peer-commenting, since the teacher and the teaching assistant were not able to extensively guide or comment the reports of the student groups. The first eight topics covered different aspects of webbased learning, such as platforms, learning theories, interaction and adaptive educational systems. The assignment for the last week was to evaluate all the reports produced during the first eight weeks and choose the most significant one from every week. Because of the nature of the last assignment, it was recommended to do that assignment alone. Pre-test, data logging and post-test. Exactly the same pre-test was used in the second study. The grouping was as follows: • Group 1 (“Red”, n=20) characteristics: (2) Extrinsic goal orientation, (6) test anxiety and (3) meaningfulness of studies. • Group 2 (“Blue”, n=11) characteristics: (5) Efficacy beliefs, (1) intrinsic goal orientation and (3) meaningfulness of studies. • Group 3 (“Green”, n=11) characteristics: (4) Control beliefs and (1) intrinsic goal orientation.

JILR 18/1page layout

78

11/9/06 11:26 AM

Page 78

Kurhila, Miettinen, Nokelainen, and Tirri

The classification accuracy of the theoretical model was confirmed with both linear and nonlinear discriminant analysis. There was no statistically significant difference between the group memberships of male and female respondents. Users’ actions were logged similarly to the first study. A post-test was replaced by a mandatory learning diary. The quotes in this section are excerpts from the students’ learning diaries with no specific questions given beforehand. The quotes have been translated from Finnish to English. RESULTS Group formation. The learning diaries of the students revealed different types (subjective) of behaviour for group formation. Active participants started a group and tried to persuade other members to join in. Hopeful participants started a group but did not actively try to find other members; they just waited for people to join in. Scared participants formed groups with people they knew outside the environment. Rude participants joined a group without asking permission. Picky participants carefully evaluated the quality of the previous work of others before asking to join a group. Planners made agreements into the future with a particular group to ensure that there is a safe backup group if no better alternative comes along. These types of behaviours evolved throughout the course so that every student was acting according to a different behaviour in different stages of the course. It was typical that students stayed with their friends for the first assignment (or, in a case where the student did not know anyone from the course, asked the first person visible in the system to be his or her study companion). As their confidence grew, many of the students started to use different strategies for selecting study companions, as can be seen in this quote: “Forming groups was stressful at first, but one got used to it quickly, and it didn’t cause any problems.” It is important to note that the logged data revealed that there were no clear leaders or followers (always starting a group or always joining an existing group). However, some students saw this differently: “I noticed such behaviour that some students wanted to start their own group even though there were groups of one already.” In many cases, where the study group was perceived to function well, group members agreed to come back together to complete at least one weekly report at some point of the course: “I would like to be a part of this group also next week, but I think that these two members of my group are just on leave from their ‘actual’

JILR 18/1page layout

11/9/06 11:26 AM

Page 79

EDUCO: Social Navigation and Group Formation in Student-Centred E-Learning

79

groups, so that they fulfill the requirement of participating in different groups. […] I also wonder if we, who do not know anyone or do not succeed in finding a good group right from the start, are we just drifting from one group to another every week?” Only a few students consciously used the work produced by others as a basis to evaluate potential group members. However, when using EDUCO as a learning environment, the actions of everyone are highly visible to everyone else, so the reports and comments made are likely to influence the learners’ behaviour, consciously or not. The number of study companions for each participant during the course varied heavily. The lowest possible amount of study companions (when acting according to the course requirements) was 2. Five students chose to have only 3 companions. On the other hand, one student had 11 study companions, and the average number of study companions was 6.05. The number of companions did not have any effect on the course grade, as can be seen in Table 1. Overall, students valued the self-organizing and self-evolving groups: “There were few groups, whose composition did not change much during the course. I wonder if they get as much out of the course? I think that forming groups [without the teacher] was educational. You had to learn teamwork skills, since my groups were very different in character.” About the motivational groups. It is clear from the student learning diaries that in the beginning, many of the students did pay attention to the motivational groups of others, and used the color of the dot as one factor for group formation. In the end, no one admitted that color was a significant factor. Nevertheless, the motivational groups were seen as one additional piece of information characterizing fellow students: Table 1 Number of Study Companions, Size of Clusters, and Average Amount of Points for Each Cluster Type Amount of companions

n

Points (average)

3 4 5 6 7 8 9 11

5 8 9 5 6 6 2 1

30.2 30.9 28.3 29.2 29 32.2 30 30

JILR 18/1page layout

11/9/06 11:26 AM

80

Page 80

Kurhila, Miettinen, Nokelainen, and Tirri

“Color [of a dot on the map view] gave a student a personal character, which was nice compared to just a name.” Generally, differences in the motivational profiles were not seen as important as differences in timetables and study habits. This view is also supported by the final grading results. Study groups with students with the same motivational profile (the entropy of the group as defined in information theory is 0; there were 36 such groups) averaged 4.3 points per assignment, whereas groups with the greatest variety in motivational profiles (entropy 1.58) scored 4.6 points on average (Table 2). We divided the entropy of the groups into five (0.00, 0.81, 0.92, 1.00, 1.58) and three (0.00, 0.81-1.00, 1.58) classes and used the Kruskal-Wallis test to examine if the distribution functions would differ in terms of the average points per assignment. The results showed no statistically significant differences between groups classified into five (χ2 (4)=1.931, p=0.748) or three groups (χ2 (2)=1.232, p=0.540). CONCLUSIONS This article presented EDUCO, a tool for student-centered web-based courses, and described how it was used in two university-level courses in authentic learning situations. We acknowledge the limitations of the design and that the described courses offer just one possibility to harness the system into webbased education. The student responses and the learning outcomes were, however, strongly encouraging. Noticeable issues considering the research reported are that the students felt this type of student-centered learning to be meaningful, yet the workload for teachers was significantly lower compared to the web-courses relying to pre-made course material with quizzes and exercises. Strong reliance on peer-based learning and the feeling of building knowledge together enabled by the social navigation functions of EDUCO were factors reported to be contributing to these issues in the student feedback. Table 2 Degree of Heterogeneity of Motivational Profiles Within Groups, Number of Such Groups and Average Amount of Points Received by the Groups Entropy

n

Points

0.00 0.81 0.92 1.00 1.58

36 1 41 26 8

4.3 5 4.6 4.5 4.6

JILR 18/1page layout

11/9/06 11:26 AM

Page 81

EDUCO: Social Navigation and Group Formation in Student-Centred E-Learning

81

The results suggest that the synchronous social cues provided by EDUCO were more important for the atmosphere of the learning environment than for social navigation. The same conclusion was also reached in a controlled experiment reported in (Miettinen, Nokelainen, Kurhila & Tirri, 2005). The atmosphere and the feeling of a learning community during the course can be described with this extract from a learning diary of a student in the second study: “The students started to comment freely on each other’s reports during the course. Legendary characters rose from the participants […] Persons behind their names started to get ‘faces’ although the majority remained faceless. Emergence of group spirit was clearly noticeable, especially during the last few days when everyone was looking thru the reports and tried to find the best ones. I didn’t chat with anyone in EDUCO, but seeing other students around the documents gave a feeling that there are people tackling the same tasks.” Another interesting finding is that the motivational profiles appearing in EDUCO had some significance for group formation at the beginning of the course, but other factors became dominant over time. This suggests that additional and perhaps more explicit encouragement might help the students overcome their hesitations to collaborate with each other. The comments show that during the course, at least some students began to form social systems to support their individual learning processes. We believe that collaborative activities between learners, such as peer-to-peer annotation, promote individual learning and could thus be linked to Wengerian thinking about communities of practice where learners membership roles evolve during collaborative work in conjunction with the expected life span (for example potential, coalescing, active, dispersed, and memorable) of the community (Wenger, 1998). References Brusilovsky, P., & Miller, P. (2001). Course delivery systems for the virtual university. In: T. Tschang and T. Della Senta (eds.), Access to Knowledge: New Information Technologies and the Emergence of the Virtual University. Amsterdam: Elsevier Science, 167-206. Churchill, E., Snowdon, D., & Munro, A. (2001). Collaborative virtual environments. Springer. Congdon, P. (2001). Bayesian statistical modeling. London: John Wiley & Sons. Dieberger, A. (1999). Social navigation in populated information spaces. In A. Munro, K. Höök & D. Benyon (Eds.), Social Navigation of Information Space, 35-54. London: Springer. Dillinger, M. (2001). Learning environments: The virtual university and beyond. In F. Tschang and T. Della Senta (Eds.), Access to Knowledge – New Information Technologies and the Emergence of the Virtual University. Oxford: Pergamon Press. Dourish, P., & Chalmers, M. (1994). Running out of space: Models of information navigation. In Proceedings of HCI'94.

JILR 18/1page layout

82

11/9/06 11:26 AM

Page 82

Kurhila, Miettinen, Nokelainen, and Tirri

Dourish, P. (1999). Where the footprints lead: Tracking down other roles for social navigation. In A. Munro, K. Hook and D. Benyon (Eds.), Social Navigation of Information Space, 15-34. London: Springer. Dyck, J., & Gutwin, C. (2002). Groupspace: A 3D workspace supporting user awareness. In CHI '02 Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems. ACM Press, New York, NY, 502-503. Felder, R. M., & Brent, R. (1996). Navigating the bumpy road to student-centered instruction. College Teaching, 44, 43-47. Felder, R., & Brent, R. (2001). Effective strategies for cooperative learning. Journal of Cooperation & Collaboration in College Teaching, 10(2), 69-75. Forsberg, M., Hook, K., & Svensson, M. (1998). Footprints in the Snow. Position paper for 4th ERCIM Workshop User Interfaces for All. http://ui4all.ics.forth.gr/UI4ALL-98/forsberg.pdf Froehlich, J., & Dourish, P. (2004). Unifying artifacts and activities in a visual tool for distributed software development teams. In Proc. of the 26th International Conference on Software Engineering (ICSE'04), 387-396. Garcia, T., & Pintrich, P. (1994). Regulating motivation and cognition in the classroom: The role of self-schemas and self-regulatory strategies. In D.H. Schunk and B.J. Zimmerman (Eds.), Self-Regulation of Learning and Performance: Issues and Educational Applications. Hillsdale, N.J.: Lawrence Erlbaum. Gunawardena, C. (1995). Social presence theory and implications for interaction and collaborative learning in computer conferences. International Journal of Educational Telecommunications, 1(2/3), 147-166. Gutwin, C., & Greenberg, S. (1999). The effects of workspace awareness support on the usability of real-time distributed groupware. ACM Trans. Comput.-Hum. Interact, 6(3), 243-281. Gutwin, C., & Greenberg, S. (2002). A descriptive framework of workspace awareness for realtime groupware. J. Computer Supported Cooperative Work, 11, 411-446. Hupfer, S., Cheng, L.-T., Ross, S., & Patterson, J. (2004). Introducing collaboration into an application development environment. In Proc. ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work, ACM Press, 444-454. Kurhila, J., Miettinen, M., Nokelainen, P., & Tirri, H. (2002). EDUCO - A Collaborative Learning Environment using Social Navigation. In Proc. Adaptive Hypermedia and Adaptive Web-Based Systems (AH 2002), Springer.LNCS, 242-252 Miettinen, M., Nokelainen, P., Kurhila, J., & Tirri, H. (2005). Evaluating the effect of social cues with automated experiments. Elektrotechnik & Informationstechnik, 122(12) , 477-481. Munro, A., Höök, K., & Benyon, D. (1999). Footprints in the snow. In A. Munro, K. Höök & D. Benyon (Eds.), Social Navigation of Information Space, 1-14. London: Springer. Nokelainen, P., Silander, T., Tirri, H., Tirri, K., & Nevgi, A. (2001). Modeling students’ views on the advantages of web-based learning with Bayesian networks. In Proceedings of the 10th International PEG2001 Conference, pages 202-211. Ruohotie, P. (2000). Conative constructs in learning. In P. Pintrich and P. Ruohotie (Eds.) Conative Constructs and Self-Regulated Learning, 1-30. Saarijarvi: Learning and Change Series of Publications.

JILR 18/1page layout

11/9/06 11:26 AM

Page 83

EDUCO: Social Navigation and Group Formation in Student-Centred E-Learning

83

Ruohotie, P., Nokelainen, P., Tirri, H., & Silander, T. (2001). Modeling student motivation and self-regulated learning with Bayesian networks. In P. Ruohotie, P. Nokelainen, H. Tirri and T. Silander (Eds.) Modeling Individual and Organizational Prerequisites of Professional Growth, 174-195. Saarijarvi: University of Tampere. Silander, T., & Tirri, H. (1999). Bayesian classification. In P. Ruohotie, H. Tirri, P. Nokelainen & T. Silander, Modern Modeling of Professional Growth, 1, pp. 61-84. Saarijärvi: Research Centre for Vocational Education, University of Tampere. Wenger, E. (1998). Communities of practice: Learning as a social system. Systems Thinker, June 1998. http://www.co-i-l.com/coil/knowledge-garden/cop/lss.shtml. Wessner, M., & Pfister, H. (2001). Group formation in computer-supported collaborative learning. In C. Ellis and I. Zigurs (Eds.) Proc. ACM SIGGROUP Conference on Supporting Group Work GROUP '01. ACM Press, New York, NY, 24-31.

JILR 18/1page layout

11/9/06 11:26 AM

Page 84

JILR 18/1page layout

11/9/06 11:26 AM

Page 85

Understanding Topical Science Issues – A Learning Design Approach TREVOR BILLANY Charles Darwin University, Australia [email protected] MAGGIE HARTNETT Massey University, New Zealand [email protected] MADHUMITA BHATTACHARYA Massey University, New Zealand [email protected] This article presents a description of the design of a learning environment focussed on topical scientific issues in an online and distance education setting. The subject area, genetic modification (GM), is a controversial and complex subject, of interest to a wide target audience. The focus of the learning design is to provide learners with a broad understanding of the underlying science involved, using this as a basis for informed debate on the risks and benefits of its use. The learning design model used is based on a model initially developed for multimedia design (Kommers, 2001) which incorporates a four stage process where the first two stages, conceptual and metaphorical, are emphasised. The subsequent structural and navigational stages develop as a natural extension from these. The authors, themselves working at a distance, used a collaborative approach during the instructional design process. A variety of learning approaches and underlying learning theories that encapsulated the requirements of online and distance learning and the principles for the teaching of science were considered, including constructivism, problem based learning, situated cognition and cooperative learning, before a strategy and method that best supported meaningful learning was determined. During the development of the learning design solution the relationship between the four stages of the design process was analysed and a refinement of the model proposed.

JILR 18/1page layout

86

11/9/06 11:26 AM

Page 86

Billany, Hartnett, and Bhattacharya

Introduction Appropriate learning environment design is crucial for effective implementation of any course in distance and online education (Dalgarno, 2001; Naidu, 2003). This article presents a description of the design of such a learning environment focussed on scientific issues specifically genetic modification (Cauthron, n.d.; Scope Research Group, 2005). This subject is of current interest to a wide range of the general population as it is a controversial subject; however, it involves complex underlying scientific principles. Therefore the design of the learning environment was particularly critical in order to meet the needs of the target audience identified as scientific novices. As part of the process the authors collaborated in the design of this learning environment in a distance and online setting. “The uses of technology in education are boundless and are only as good as the principles that underlie their design” (Lajoie, 2003). However, there is an extensive range of theories, principles and models related to human learning and instruction (Kearsley, 2005; Ryder, 2005) which appears to be growing with the increasing use of technology. It was decided to base the development process on a model developed by Kommers (2001), as this seemed like a model that all members of a multimedia production team could follow and use. Underlying Learning Design Model The design model for WWW-based hypermedia design, shown in Figure 1 was used as the basis for the development of the learning environment on genetic modification. Kommers (2001) developed this model and identified four stages in the design of Internet-based environments, namely conceptual, metaphorical, structural and navigational where each stage ideally follows sequentially from the previous one as shown in Figure 1. Kommers (2001) describes the conceptual stage as the “generation of good ideas” and “the imagination of the ideal product.” The use of concept mapping, and in particular concept mapping software, is emphasised and influenced the authors’ decision to use Inspiration® as the software tool for the design process.

Figure 1. Four stages in WWW-based hypermedia design (Kommers, 2001)

JILR 18/1page layout

11/9/06 11:26 AM

Page 87

Understanding Topical Science Issues – A Learning Design Approach

87

The metaphorical stage is described as “a compact image of the task or topic to be understood” while the structural stage requires the “identification of the global structure of the program”. Finally the navigational stage “concerns the control of the user upon the program’s behaviour” (Kommers, 2001). Kommers' model as mentioned previously is actually a model for multimedia design. This model was analysed and interpreted by M. Bhattacharya (personal communication, October 4, 2005) and the following learning design model interpretation was developed (see Figure 2). From this, the authors were able to take the four stages of the Kommers model and correlate them to the equivalent steps for learning design. However, before proceeding to the next stage of actually design the learning environment it was necessary to explore the underpinning theories of learning appropriate to the topic under consideration. Integration of Learning Theories From the inception of this project, the authors were committed to adopting a developmental approach that would engage learners and encourage them to explore the science and the issues in some detail and from a number of angles within the context of an authentic learning environment. Given the complexity of the scientific material to be covered and the potential lack of prior knowledge of the learners, the learning environment needed to be as accessible as possible. Four important metaprinciples have been identified by Bell (2004) in order to teach scientific issues effectively, namely: make science accessible; make things visible; help students learn from others; promote autonomy and lifelong learning.

Figure 2. Underlying learning design model

JILR 18/1page layout

88

11/9/06 11:26 AM

Page 88

Billany, Hartnett, and Bhattacharya

Learning theories that underpin these metaprinciples and support the design intentions of the authors include andragogy, constructivist theory, social development theory, cooperative learning, situated cognition, and problem based learning. In this learning environment the main target audience comprises adult learners and therefore Knowles’ (1984) theory of andragogy – the art and science of adult learning – is of particular importance. The foundation of Knowles’ andragogical theory is that adults are self-directed learners. Knowles reasoned that learners who were involved in the entire learning process tended to learn, retain and use what they had learned to a greater degree than those students who relied totally on the teacher for learning. He also argued that as adults matured they took increasing responsibility for their own lives and self-directed learning reflected this growing autonomy. Constructivist theory (Bruner, 1996) states that learning is an active process in which learners construct new ideas or concepts based upon their current/past knowledge. Constructivist theory sees the student at the centre of the learning process (student-centred), and actively involved in knowledge construction. Broad principles of constructivist pedagogy include: • Each learner develops their own understandings of knowledge; • Learning occurs through the learner’s active exploration of the learning environment which involves making sense or meaning of the information within the environment (McInerney and McInerney, 1997); • Learning occurs within a social context, and interactions between learners, peers and the teacher is a necessary part of the learning process which is closely aligned to social development theory (Vygotsky, 1978 cited in Kearsley, 2005). In order for learning to occur within an environment that emphasises social interaction, cooperative learning (Felder & Brent, 2001) is needed. This requires certain characteristics of a group including: positive interdependence, individual accountability (where each group member is required to contribute), interpersonal skills (communication, trust, leadership, decision making, and conflict resolution), interaction, and processing (reflecting on how well the team is functioning). In addition to the above, problem based learning (PBL) (Bridges, 1992) is a developmental and instructional approach built around ill-structured problems, which are complex in nature; require inquiry, information-gathering, and reflection and have no simple, fixed “right” solution and therefore mirror reallife problems such as those associated with genetic modification (GM). Related to PBL is the theory of situated cognition (Brown, Collins & Duguid, 1989) which argues that the activities of a domain are framed by its culture. Their meaning and purpose are socially constructed through negotiations among its members. Authentic activities are defined as the ordinary

JILR 18/1page layout

11/9/06 11:26 AM

Page 89

Understanding Topical Science Issues – A Learning Design Approach

89

practices of the culture and therefore for learning to be authentic it needs to be framed within the context of the cultural environment. Having identified the underlying theories of learning it was then necessary to integrate these with the learning design model as well as the other requirements of the learning environment (such as learners, topic and context). Integrating the appropriate learning theories also led the authors to conceive different stages of the learning environment design. STAGES OF LEARNING ENVIRONMENT DESIGN Conceptual Stage The learning design process began with the conceptual stage which in essence provides an overall picture of the topic to be taught including, for example, details of the broad aims and purpose of the learning, the target audience, and learning objectives as shown in Figure 3. The focus of the learning design (Gagné, Wager, Golas & Keller, 2005) was to provide learners with a broad understanding of the science involved in GM using this as a basis for more informed debate on the risks and benefits of its use. This topic was chosen because it is of common interest to the authors and is a very topical and controversial subject of interest to a wide cross section of the population. The primary focus of this module is the learners who were identified as adults (Knowles, 1990) with ideas, opinions and beliefs but little or no scientific background (Simonsen, Smaldino, Albright & Zvacek, 2003) who have an interest in genetic modification and are likely to have preconceived ideas about the pros, cons and ethics of this field. Another implication of targeting this particular audience is the possible range of differences in prior scientific knowledge amongst the group of learners. These issues are reflected in the level of the learning objectives. Learning objectives were developed based on this broad goal (Bloom, 1956; Reigeluth, 1999). The authors were careful not to limit the learning to one specific area of genetic modification as a major objective was to allow learners to pursue areas that were of interest to them for example, GM food, medicine, biotechnology (Knowles, 1990). Opportunities for interaction via discussion and debate were embedded into the module (VanSickle, 2003), as these are important both from an online learning perspective and to provide an authentic learning environment (Bruner, 1996) that simulated the real world where GM discussions are the source of ongoing and often heated debate. Typical examples of the online resources available for this subject were identified – for example, the website of The South African Agency for Science and Technology Advancement (SAASTA, n.d, a & b). Links to other subject areas were identified and thus highlight that this subject is likely to

90

11/9/06 11:26 AM

Page 90

Billany, Hartnett, and Bhattacharya

Figure 3. Conceptual stage diagram

JILR 18/1page layout

JILR 18/1page layout

11/9/06 11:26 AM

Page 91

Understanding Topical Science Issues – A Learning Design Approach

91

open up a multitude of other avenues of interest for students. It is important to note at the conceptual stage that as many ideas and suggestions, both from the authors and via peer review, were incorporated in order to provide as many alternative solutions as possible prior to a more detailed approach at the structural stage. Metaphorical Stage The next step of the model was the metaphorical phase, which starts to examine the possible learning approaches that could be used for the different aspects of this topic and the development of metaphors to convey the overall method of these approaches shown in Figure 4. Initially the authors developed two metaphors that provided the learning design with a sense of cohesiveness. The first was the zooming metaphor which represented the learning from general overview level initially then zoomed in to particular details such as the structure and function of DNA (Cold Spring Harbour Laboratory, 2002) and demonstrated how the micro view impacts and relates to the macro view (Clark, 1991; Reigeluth, 1999; Thompson, Simonson & Hargrave, 1996). For example, a learner may decide to investigate the issues associated with GM in medicine. The focus may be on a particular genetically inherited disease which becomes the start-

Figure 4. Metaphorical stage diagram

JILR 18/1page layout

92

11/9/06 11:26 AM

Page 92

Billany, Hartnett, and Bhattacharya

ing point for examining underlying scientific concepts (zooming in to the micro view). This in turn provides a basis for understanding the nature of the disease and how GM technology is being used to find potential cures (zooming out to the macro view). The second idea was the debating the issues metaphor where all learning is presented from both sides of the argument. In this way, the learning is situated in an authentic setting (Kindley, 2005; Merrill, 1991) – a strategy that is conducive to learning (Wilson, 1995). The specific learning objectives that related to each metaphor were identified and from this, appropriate instructional models were suggested (Driscoll & Carliner, 2005; Patsula, 1999). When thinking and discussing the idea of a metaphor as part of the peer review process that accompanied each phase of the learning design process, it became quite apparent that there were two distinct but interwoven strands of learning; namely the underlying science that allows learners to gain insight into the process of genetic modification, and the debate that surrounds the use of the technology itself. As these two strands are so closely interwoven it was thought that a single metaphor would better suit the learning environment. Therefore, the use of the DNA double helix where Hbonds (hydrogen bonds) provide the links and stability between the two strands can be viewed metaphorically as the connections between the science and the controversy – interwoven and intersecting. Taking the previous example of a genetically inherited disease, once the learner has some understanding of the underlying science it must then be placed into societal context. This provides an authentic learning environment for raising both ethical and morals issues involved as well highlighting the risks and benefits in pursuing such technology (debate metaphor). For each of the metaphors, a selection of possible learning approaches and models was brainstormed to suit the requirements of the target audience, the type of content being taught, and the learning outcomes. The selection of these approaches was based on what had been used previously for this and similar topics, and what was considered to be suitable based on learning models and theories for these strands. Structural Stage Following on from the metaphorical stage, where a theme to convey the overall learning approach was developed, comes the structural stage where it was necessary to decide on a particular instructional model for the chosen topic shown in Figure 5. After much discussion a form of webquest was chosen as it met a number of important requirements. Firstly, it is a method that was specifically developed for the delivery of web-based learning and not one that has been adapted from use in other media (Dodge, n.d.). Secondly, the adoption of an approach that would engage learners and

JILR 18/1page layout

11/9/06 11:26 AM

Page 93

Understanding Topical Science Issues – A Learning Design Approach

93

Figure 5. Structural stage diagram encourage them to explore the science and the issues in some detail and from a number of angles (as represented by the combined DNA metaphor) was considered a high priority. Thirdly, given the complexity of the scientific material to be covered and the potential lack of prior knowledge of the learners, navigation through the learning environment needed to be as straightforward as possible. Four important metaprinciples have been identified by Bell (2004) when teaching science. Each metaprinciple is broken down further into subprinciples that provide specific guidelines for instructors as shown in Table 1. In addition to the metaprinciples related to the subject matter, the learning theories that underpin a webquest were identified (Dodge, n.d.). These include social development theory (Vygotsky, 1978); situated cognition (Brown, Collins & Duguid, 1989); constructivist theory (Bruner, 1996); problem based learning (Bridges, 1992); cooperative learning (Felder & Brent, 2001); and in this case because the main target audience comprises adult learners, andragogy (Knowles, 1984).

JILR 18/1page layout

11/9/06 11:26 AM

Page 94

94

Billany, Hartnett, and Bhattacharya

Table 1 Metaprinciples and Subprinciples for Teaching Science (Bell, 2004) Metaprinciple

Subprinciples

Make science accessible

• Build on student ideas • Connect to personally relevant problems • Communicate the diversity of inquiry Make things visible • Model the inquiry process • Scaffold the process of generating explanations • Use multiple visual representations from varied media Help students learn from others • Encourage learners to listen to others • Promote productive interactions • Scaffold the development of classroom norms • Employ multiple social activity structures Promote autonomy and lifelong learning • Encourage reflection • Engage learners as critics • Engage learners in varied, sustained projects • Establish a generalized inquiry process

Those learning theories correlated well to the metaprinciples for teaching science, therefore confirming that the adoption of a webquest (Dodge, n.d. ; Holmes, 2001; March, 2005; Teacher Education Institute, n.d.) instructional design approach provided a good fit with the identified metaprinciples. Finally, the use of specific and relevant multimedia features was linked to each of the four metaprinciples. This in turn ensured that all principles and learning theories were addressed in the structural design and formed the basis for the final navigational stage. Where possible, for each multimedia feature, for example video, was linked to a possible tool such as streaming video (.mov, .wmv, .ma), and a relevant use within the webquest, for example recorded interviews with experts. Navigational Stage Once the decision was made to approach the learning from the perspective of a webquest, the general structure was predetermined that is, the basic building blocks for a webquest are introduction, task, process, evaluation and conclusion (Dodge, n.d.). In addition the webquest format lends itself well to the inclusion of the metaprinciples for teaching science (Bell, 2004) identified at the structural stage – see Figure 6. From the beginning, one of the main requirements was that learners were able to choose an area within genetic modification that interested them rather than concentrating on a single issue, such as GM foods, as this encourages internal motivation (Knowles, 1984), and this was emphasised at the introduction stage of the webquest. The task for the students is provided in the form of a scenario where each

11/9/06 11:26 AM

Page 95

Understanding Topical Science Issues – A Learning Design Approach

95

Figure 6. Navigational stage diagram

JILR 18/1page layout

JILR 18/1page layout

96

11/9/06 11:26 AM

Page 96

Billany, Hartnett, and Bhattacharya

student is a member of a small investigative journalist team (two or three people) interviewing a panel of experts about a specific area of GM. This allowed the achievement of this learning objective as well as situating the learning within an authentic context (Bruner, 1996) dealing with complex problems (Bridges, 1992) in a cooperative, social, learning environment (Felder & Brent, 2001; Vygotsky, 1978). Farmer (2005, p.1) states that the good use of blogs in education is “to assist people to…represent themselves online, interact with their peers as part of an organic community and manage their own digital content and identity,” therefore the authors chose to use a blog for this purpose. As this is a controversial subject, there is always a chance than an outside person will come across one or more of the blogs and make a valuable unsolicited contribution. Use of the blogs will also allow the teacher to provide formative feedback and guidance to the students (Instone, 2005; Luca & McLoughlin, 2005). Planned assessment is ongoing throughout the course in the form of quizzes, peer and instructor review and self-reflection, culminating in the presentation and questioning of the panel of experts. The range of questions must show an understanding of the science as well as the issues. In an online and distance environment the communication between the teacher and the students is limited by the capabilities of the tools available, therefore the use of intelligent agents functioning within the system can provide that additional support to both the students and the teacher. According to Jafari (2002), these agents can be conceptualized in three main types based on their role and whether they are supporting the teacher or the student. The main agent recommended to support the students is the Digital Tutor which, for example, can suggest an appropriate path through the learning materials based on the learning outcomes and the profile of the student. It would also have a role in providing timely technical support to the students (Johnson, Rickel & Lester, 2000; Slater, 2000). Other intelligent agents include the Digital Teaching Assistant which supports the teacher by, for example, reporting on particular student inactivity, and the Digital Secretary which provides administrative support to both the teacher and the students. The proposed navigation allows the learner flexibility in the order in which they access the resources and undertake the exercises; however, in any web-based delivery a suggested route is always implied by the provision of a menu to the various sections of the web site. Students will be kept on target by the provided timelines, interactions within teams, feedback from the teacher through the blogs, and the ability to access a log of their activities through the Support Agent. The distinction between where the role of the instructional designer ends and the roles of the other team members in the production of learning mate-

JILR 18/1page layout

11/9/06 11:26 AM

Page 97

Understanding Topical Science Issues – A Learning Design Approach

97

rials begin are often variable between institutions. But regardless of this the detail, analysis and description of the learning design model, learning theories and the different stages of learning design presented here would definitely assist web and multimedia developers to commence the next phase, namely the development of the learning environment. Underlying Learning Design Model Revisited During the application of this model to the design process it became obvious that even though the actual steps or stages were valid, the structure of the process was not represented accurately in the initial figure. Figure 7 shows the central metaphorical and structural stages involved the greatest amount of work therefore the authors redefined the learning design model and represented these as bigger slices of a circle which in turn reflects the cyclical nature of the process. The arrow signifying the development of the learning design indicates the spiral or cyclical nature of the process where revising previous stages were continually revised as a result of feedback and the development of deeper understanding of each stage. CONCLUSION This article has presented a description of the design of a learning environment focussed on topical scientific issues in an online and distance education setting. Following a model for the development of multimedia allowed the authors to create an interesting and challenging method for the delivery of a complex and controversial subject, that of genetic modifica-

Figure 7. Underlying Learning Design Model revisited

JILR 18/1page layout

98

11/9/06 11:26 AM

Page 98

Billany, Hartnett, and Bhattacharya

tion. The four stages in that method allowed for systematic decisions to be made on the learning theories and approaches to be used. Linking the choices of the learning theories with the requirements of the target audience and the principles for teaching science gave a clear indication of one of the most suitable approaches for learning in an online and distance environment. References Bell, P. (2004). The educational opportunities of contemporary controversies in science. In M.CLinn, E.A.Davis and P.Bell (Eds.). Internet Environments for Science Education. Mahwah, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Bloom, B. S. (1956). Taxonomy of educational objectives, handbook I: The cognitive domain. New York: David McKay Co Inc. Bridges, E. M. (1992). Problem based learning for administrators. ERIC Clearinghouse on Educational Management, Eugene. Brown, J. S., Collins, A., & Duguid, P. (1989). Situated cognition and the culture of learning. Education Researcher, 18, 32-42. October 19, 2006, from http://www.sociallifeofinformation.com/Situated_Learning.htm Bruner, J. (1996). The culture of education, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Cauthron, C. (n.d.). Tinkering with mother nature: Genetically modified foods. Retrieved October 19, 2006, from http://gmhsscience.com/GMO/index.htm Clark, R. E. (1991). When researchers swim upstream: Reflections on an unpopular argument about learning from media. Educational Technology, 51(2), 34-40. Cold Spring Harbour Laboratory. (2002). DNA from the beginning. Retrieved October 19, 2006 from http://www.dnaftb.org/dnaftb/ Dalgarno, B. (2001). Interpretations of constructivism and consequences for computer assisted learning. British Journal of Educational Technology, 32(2), 183-194. Dodge, B. (n.d.). The WebQuest page at San Diego State University. Retrieved October 19, 2006, from http://webquest.sdsu.edu/ Driscoll, M., & Carliner, S. (2005). Advanced web-based training strategies (pp.48-49). San Francisco, CA: Ffeiffer Farmer, J. (2005). How you should use blogs in education. Retreived August 19, 2005, from http://blogsavvy.net/how-you-should-use-blogs-in-education Felder, R. M., & Brent, R. J. (2001). Effective strategies for cooperative learning. Cooperation & Collaboration in College Teaching, 10(2), 69-75. Gagné, R., Wager, W., Golas, K., & Keller, J. (2005). Principles of instructional design (fifth edition). California: Thomsen Wadsworth. Holmes, S. R. (2001). GE food - Friend or foe? An Internet webquest on GE foods. Retrieved October 23, 2005 from http://home.earthlink.net/~spcemonk/webquest.html Instone, L. (2005). Conversations beyond the classroom: Blogging in a professional development course. In H. Goss (Ed.), Balance, fidelity, mobility: Maintaining the momentum? Proceedings of the 22nd Annual Conference of the Australasian Society for Computers in Learning in Tertiary Education (pp. 305-308). Brisbane: Teaching and Learning Support Services, Queensland University of Technology.

JILR 18/1page layout

11/9/06 11:26 AM

Page 99

Understanding Topical Science Issues – A Learning Design Approach

99

Jafari, A. (2002). Conceptualising intelligent agents for teaching and learning. Educause Quarterly, 25(3), 28-34. Johnson, W. L., Rickell, J. W., & Lester, J. C. (2000). Animated pedagogical agents: Face-to-face interaction in interactive learning environments. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education, 11, 47-78. Kearsley, G, (2005). Explorations in learning & instruction: The theory into practice database. Retrieved 5 January, 2006, from http://tip.psychology.org/ Kindley, R. (2005). Instructional Design of Situational Learning (Online presentation). Retrieved August 10, 2005, from http://home .learning times .net/lta?go=919195 Knowles, M. (1984). The adult learner: A neglected species (3rd Ed.). Houston, TX: Gulf Publishing. Knowles, M. (1990). Self-directed learning. A guide for learners and teachers. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice Hall/Cambridge. Kommers, P. (2001). Conceptual stage in designing multimedia for tele-learning. Report for Maten Project. Lajoie, S. P. (2003). Enhancing learning and teaching with emergent technologies. Keynote speech, ED-MEDIA 2003 World Conference on Educational Multimedia, Hypermedia & Telecommunications. Retrieved 5 January, 2006, from http://www.aace.org/conf/edmedia/speakers/lajoie.htm Luca, J., & McLoughlin, C. (2005). Can blogs promote fair and equitable teamwork? In H. Goss (Ed.), Balance, fidelity, mobility: Maintaining the momentum? Proceedings of the 22nd Annual Conference of the Australasian Society for Computers in Learning in Tertiary Education (pp. 379-386). Brisbane: Teaching and Learning Support Services, Queensland University of Technology. March, T. (2005). Best webquests. Retrieved October 10, 2005, from http://bestwebquests.com/ McInerney, D. M., & McInerney, V. (1997). Educational psychology: Constructing learning. Sydney: Prentice Hall. Merrill, M. D. (1991). Constructivism and instructional design. Educational Technology, May 45-53. Naidu, S. (2003). Designing instruction for e-learning environments. In M. Moore and W. G. Anderson (Eds.). Handbook of distance education. Mahwah, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Patsula, P. J. (1999). Applying learning theories to online instructional design. Retrieved April 19, 2005, from http://www.patsuk.com/usefo/webbasedlearning/tutorial/learning_theories_ full_version.html Reigeluth, C. M. (1999). The elaboration theory: Guidance for scope and sequence decisions. In C. M. Reigeluth (Ed.), Instructional design theories and models: A new paradigm of instructional theory, volume II, (pp.425-453). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Inc. Ryder, M. (2005). Instructional design models. Retrieved October 15, 2005, from http:// carbon.cudenver.edu/~mryder/itc_data/idmodels.html Scope Research Group. (2005). GM food: Controversies surrounding the risks and benefits of genetically modified food. Retrieved October 19, 2006, from http://scope.educ.washington.edu/gmfood/ Simonsen, M., Smaldino, S. Albright, M, & Zvacek, S. (2003). Teaching and learning at a distance: Foundations of distance education, pp.143-164. Columbus, Ohio: Merrill Prentice Hall.

JILR 18/1page layout

100

11/9/06 11:26 AM

Page 100

Billany, Hartnett, and Bhattacharya

Slater, D. (2000). Interactive animated pedagogical agents: An introduction to an emerging field. Study Guide notes from ED324/G345, Stanford University. Retrieved October 19, 2006, from http://ldt.stanford.edu/~slater/pages/agents/ Teacher Education Institute. (n.d.). Teaching with Web Quests. Retrieved October 19, 2006, from http://www.teachereducation.com/webout.html The South African Agency for Science and Technology Advancement (SAASTA). (n.d., a) Public understanding of biotechnology. Retrieved October 19, 2006, from http://www.pub.ac.za/ The South African Agency for Science and Technology Advancement (SAASTA). (n.d., b) Genetic modification debate. Retrieved October 19, 2006, from http://www.pub.ac.za/links/gmdebate.html Thompson, A., Simonson, M., & Hargrave, C. (1996). Education technology: A review of the research (2nd ed). Washington, D.C.: Association for Educational Communications and Technology. VanSickle, J. (2003). Making the transition to teaching online: Strategies and methods for the first-time, online instructor. ERIC Digest. ERIC No: ED479882. Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Wilson, B. G. (1995). Situated instructional design: Blurring the distinctions between theory and practice, design and implementation, curriculum and instruction. In M. Simonson (Ed.), Proceedings of selected research and development presentations. Washington, D.C.: Association for Educational Communications and Technology.

Acknowledgement The design of this learning environment formed part of the assessed coursework for the 187.757 Instructional Design and Educational Technologies paper, a compulsory component of the Masters of Education programme in Distance and Online Education.

JILR 18/1page layout

11/9/06 11:26 AM

Page 101

Conceptual Model of Learning to Improve Understanding of High School Chemistry FAGUELE SUAALII AND MADHUMITA BHATTACHARYA Massey University, New Zealand [email protected] [email protected] The results from our previous investigations support the literature in relation to the frustration that chemistry educationists have been through in the last two decades. Teaching and learning approaches have been developed; unfortunately the growth of misconceptions and learning difficulties became increasingly high. Students’ prior expectations, existing schema and conceptions about the topics being taught and their understanding hinder their conceptual development in chemistry. In spite of the several attempts to reshape education systems and chemistry curriculum in order to promote understanding, students tend to ignore chemistry. The development of the model for learning reflects different learning theories as well as various approaches to learning such as student-centred, inquiry-based, collaborative, and contextual learning. Theories of learning play important roles in the design and development of Learning Environment that facilitates meaningful learning. However, educators tend to overlook the significance of the learning environment. In this article, the authors developed a model to emphasise the importance of the links: learning environment, learning process, and learning achievement, towards the design of meaningful learning environment.

Introduction The aim of chemical education is to help students develop a deeper understanding of abstract concepts. Although many teaching and learning strategies have been developed to facilitate this process, there is a wide range of factors that influence its ultimate success. Factors which have been shown to influence student learning are student motivation and understanding by the teacher of what the learner is doing, rather than what the teacher

JILR 18/1page layout

102

11/9/06 11:26 AM

Page 102

Suaalii and Bhattacharya

is doing (Biggs, 1999). These ideas follow the studies done by Piaget (1929) and Ausubel (1968). They suggested that as children mature, particular stages of development occur that influence the way they can learn increasingly abstract concepts. It is also well recognised that students have existing schema or alternative conceptions (misconceptions) which can be personal in nature, highly resistant to change, may exist alongside new conceptions and sometimes be contradictory (Coll & Taylor, 2002). In a class, it is likely that students hold a wide range of ideas related to chemical phenomena. Studies have shown that these and misconceptions can be specific, very stable and related to other ideas or they can be general and not coherently related to others. Previous studies of the structure, bonding and related properties of diamond and graphite (Suaalii & Bhattacharya, 2005) identified more than 50 percent of the participants from year 13 (final year of school in New Zealand) chemistry students had misconceptions. Further studies on the same concepts categorised the revealed (mis) conceptions into nine groups: dimensions and lattice; structure and bonding; valence electrons, delocalised electrons, organic compounds, isotopes, and isomers. The last three groups were identified as irrelevant to the question. On the basis of previous findings, the authors recommended teaching and learning approaches and strategies to correct already existing misconceptions and to promote conceptual understanding in chemistry. Authors have proceeded further to design a model which integrates a series of learning approaches to improve conceptual understanding. The model is based on the underlying principles of student centered, inquiry based, collaborative, and contextual approaches to learning, and theories of learning with particular reference to Constructivists approaches. Constructivists Theories of Learning After careful examination of the results from previous investigations (Suaalii & Bhattacharya, 2005), the conclusion was made that educators need to revisit the learning theories to identify crucial elements of teaching and learning that are often overlooked. Constructivists believe that learning originate on the premise that, by reflecting on experiences, students construct their own understanding of the world they live in (Silverthorn, 1999). Since people construct their own knowledge individually, students may at times develop chemical concepts that differ from the one that the teacher holds and has tried to present in lessons. The work of Piaget also shows that the developing child builds cognitive structures – in other words, mental maps, schemes, or networked concepts – for understanding and responding to physical experiences within his or her environment (Silverthorn, 1999). Vygotsky claimed that culture is the prime determinant of individual development. Humans are the only species to have created culture, and every human child develops in the context of a culture1. Therefore, students’ learn-

JILR 18/1page layout

11/9/06 11:26 AM

Page 103

Conceptual Model of Learning to Improve Understanding of High School Chemistry 103

ing development is affected in ways large and small by the culture – including the culture of family environment – in which they are enmeshed. Vygotsky’s focus was rather on the role of nurture in children (McDevitt Teresa, & Ormrod, 2002). Nurture includes the classroom environment, which will encourage positive growth in the student. From the Literature Previous research on students understanding of chemistry concepts focussed on students problem solving (Claesgens & Stacy 2004). However, the more interesting question remains unexplored: what is the knowledge that students bring to class as they try to understand the concept and what limitations develop that hinder their understanding based on this prior knowledge (Coll & Taylor, 2002)? In fact, one of the most important factors influencing learning is prior knowledge, as learning can be regarded as the connection between what is already known and the current educational experience (Chinn & Maholtra, 2002). Often, students observe in experiments, only what they expect, based on their preconceptions (as all sensory information is processed by the brain according to one’s current cognitive structures). If these preconceptions (Johnstone 1993) are incorrect, students only process chemical information on a surface level and often have little motivation or confidence to study and understand chemistry. The extent of students’ understanding of the foundations of chemistry strongly influences their learning of further chemistry. Studies have shown that students may hold numerous misconceptions in many areas of chemistry and many of these misconceptions are not changed by further instruction due to students’ inability to interpret and understand the chemical phenomena at a sub-microscopic level of representation (Treagust, Chittleborough & Mamiala 2003). There is a considerable amount of literature from studies that could inform research into learning in science/chemistry. Yet this important area has not been a focus of inquiry in science education. Learning science/chemistry is an active process in which the learner uses sensory input and constructs meaning out of it. The more traditional formulation of this idea involves the terminology of the active learner2 stressing that the learner needs to do something; that learning is not the passive acceptance of knowledge which exists “out there” but that learning involves the learner’s engaging with the world (Smith, 2005). These important processes are collectively organised in a model that would be of significance in improving conceptual understanding of chemistry. Conceptual Model of Learning In order to effectively integrate this model for the development of conceptual understanding, there is a need to understand its real purpose. The building blocks of the proposed model are organised in a bottom-up

JILR 18/1page layout

11/9/06 11:26 AM

Page 104

104

Suaalii and Bhattacharya

approach consisting of three tiers in which the first tier examines the Learning Environment. The second and third tiers are the Learning Process and Learning Achievement respectively. According to developmentalists’ ideas, learners go through a series of conceptual stages associated with intellectual growth and learners construct their own understanding through interaction with the environment in many different ways (Piaget, 1972), which justify the design of the model. Learning Environment The basis of the first tier is equilibration (Piaget, 1972) where the learner constructs a balance between himself/herself and the environment. When a learner experiences a new chemistry concept, disequilibrium sets in until s/he is able to assimilate and accommodate the new information and thus attain equilibrium. Equilibration is the major factor in explaining why some children advance more quickly in the development of logical intelligence than others (Piaget, 1972). In an effective learning environment, teachers engage students in complex problem solving and exploring ideas and issues, and classroom activities draw on students’ experiences, and knowledge (North

Conceptual Understanding LEARNING ACHIEVEMENT Experience Facilitator Cooperative

Prior-Knowledge Approaches/Strategies Technology

Resources

Information

Self-evaluative Assessment

LEARNING PROCESS Social

Active Meaningful

Collaborative Contextualised Constructive

Discovery-oriented LEARNING ENVIRONMENT

Figure 1. Conceptual Model for Learning

JILR 18/1page layout

11/9/06 11:26 AM

Page 105

Conceptual Model of Learning to Improve Understanding of High School Chemistry 105

Central Regional Educational Laboratory, n.d.). At-risk students, in particular, need environments that engage them in authentic tasks and offer them learning opportunities to develop conceptual understanding of chemistry. The attributes of effective learning environment are Active, constructive, contextualised, discovery-oriented, social, meaningful, and collaborative. Attributes of the Learning Environment • An Active environment encourages the learner to explore and manipulate (Bhattacharya, Narita & Mino, 2004) by doing and observing. It promotes learning through experiencing situations and solving problems, instead of being told the answers by someone else. An active environment focuses on conceptual understanding. • A Constructive environment (Jonassen, 1999) is established by teachers and students to promote constructive learning. Constructive learning means that knowledge and cognitive strategies are constructed by the learner and that learning involves qualitative restructuring and modification of schemata, rather than just the accumulation of new information in memory. • A Contextualised environment (Bhattacharya et al., 2004) ensures that learners do not learn isolated facts in some abstract ethereal land of the mind separate from the rest of their lives: they learn in relationship to what they already know, what they believe, their prejudices and their fears. • A Discovery-Oriented environment (Driscoll, 1994) improves the quality of instruction by changing the focus and making it very much discovery oriented. It provides students with an attitude away from, “Do this measurement because that’s what we always do,” to “This is the range of possibilities, explore it and see if we can identify any trends.” This type of environment supports the benefits of Active Thinking and Discovery Learning. • A Social environment allows the learning process to intimately associate with the learners’ connection with other human beings, their teachers, peers and the community. • A Meaningful environment (Bhattacharya et al., 2004) provides the learners with characteristic features that will stimulate and support classroom activities that engage learners in thinking. • Collaborative learning environment promotes grouping and pairing of students for the purpose of achieving an academic goal. At the same time, students are responsible for one another’s learning as well as their own. Thus, the success of one student helps other students to be successful.

JILR 18/1page layout

106

11/9/06 11:26 AM

Page 106

Suaalii and Bhattacharya

Learning Process Learning is a process of acquiring knowledge, skills, attitudes, or values, through study and experience, that causes a change of behaviour that is persistent, measurable, and specified or allows an individual to formulate a new mental construct or revise a prior mental construct (conceptual knowledge such as attitudes or values) (Smith, 2003). The two fundamental processes of intellectual growth, assimilation and accommodation, are considered to be important in the second tier (Piaget, 1972). Assimilation focuses on using and transforming the environment so that it can be placed in pre-existing cognitive structures while the latter involves changing cognitive structures in order to accept something from the environment (Piaget, 1972). To incorporate the attributes of the second tier (Assessment, Approaches/Strategies, Cooperative, Experience, Facilitator, Prior Knowledge, Resources, Selfevaluative, Technology, and Information) teachers need to employ skills such as concentration, perception, memory, and logical thinking (Strydom & Remedium, 2000-2005). • The learner is taught how to focus his attention on something and to keep his attention focused on this something for some length of time. If a learner focuses his attention for any length of time, we refer to it as concentration (Strydom & Remedium, 2000-2005). • Perception is where the learner is encouraged to become aware of anything through senses; usually see or hear. Subsequently the learner has to interpret what has seen or heard. In essence then, perception means interpretation. Of course, lack of experience may cause a person to misinterpret what he has seen or heard (Strydom & Remedium, 2000-2005). • Memory refers to the learner’s ability to remember and recall information. • Logical Thinking is a process which involves taking the important ideas, facts, and conclusions involved in a problem and arranging them in a chain-like progression that takes on a meaning in and of itself (Strydom & Remedium, 2000-2005). Attributes of Learning Process • Assessment results have important implications for instruction. The primary aim of assessment is to foster learning of worthwhile academic content for all students (Wolf, Bixby, Glenn, & Gardner, 1991). It should be an ongoing process based on student’s performance. • The uses of a variety of Approaches/Strategies accommodate learners’ differing learning abilities. Teachers need to be flexible in the use of strategies, because not every strategy works for everyone. • Cooperative methods share the idea that students work together to learn, and are responsible for one another’s learning as well as their own. All

JILR 18/1page layout

11/9/06 11:26 AM

Page 107

Conceptual Model of Learning to Improve Understanding of High School Chemistry 107

cooperative methods involve having students work in small groups or teams to help each other in learning. • Most students generate their own ideas and concepts about phenomena they observe based on their own background and Experiences. Frequently, many of these ideas are different from the accepted scientific view and are therefore referred to as alternative conceptions or misconceptions. Therefore teachers need to be aware of the learners’ experiences. • To be successful in a constructivist learning activity, it is important for the teacher to be a good Facilitator. The teacher should encourage students to make discoveries for themselves while conducting active discussions, using a variety of strategies/approaches. • Prior Knowledge can be explained as a combination of the learner’s pre-existing attitudes, experiences, and knowledge. Conceptual understanding is often hindered by prior knowledge and/or experiences, which may contradict with the new knowledge. Therefore the teachers need to be aware of the learner’s prior knowledge and link it to the new knowledge. • Resources: Learning is a process that requires the use of appropriate resources to connect new understanding to prior knowledge. • Self-evaluative promotes self-directedness. It is a mode of appraisal that can be used successfully throughout life. It allows students to gain the ability to analyse their own skills, attitudes, behaviours, strengths, needs, successes in achieving objectives, and to develop feelings of personal responsibility as they assess the effectiveness of individual and group efforts. • Technology is referred to as a tool to support knowledge construction (Bhattacharya et al., 2004). Today’s classrooms are using increasingly sophisticated technologies to facilitate all aspects of learning. There is a tremendous need for teachers to have guidance in how to incorporate these new tools into existing curricula in a practical way. According to Grabe and Grabe (1998), technology is functioning as a catalyst for how schools restructure and use technology within existing frameworks. • The concept of Information is closely related to notions of data, form, instruction, knowledge and meaning. It is the result of processing, manipulating and organising of data in a way that adds to the knowledge of the person receiving it. Learning Achievement Learning achievement as in this presentation refers to the level of intellectual growth that the learner has accomplished while undertaking the learning process. According to this model, the highest level is considered to

JILR 18/1page layout

11/9/06 11:26 AM

Page 108

108

Suaalii and Bhattacharya

be reaching Conceptual Understanding. During the school years the students learn to investigate and explore, think and reason, and solve problems. These skills depend on the relationship between the learning process and learning environments. If this learning achievement does not occur, future learning is jeopardised. • Conceptual Understanding involves being able to represent and translate chemical problems using three forms of representation – macroscopic, sub-microscopic, and symbolic (Treagust et al. 2003). It implies knowledge of the idea, and how it relates to already acquired ideas. It also requires an understanding of the contexts within which the idea is applicable, as well as its limitations. Conceptual understanding enables a person to apply and adapt an idea flexibly to new situations. It is much more than just following learned procedures in familiar situations. DISCUSSION The model of learning is arranged in levels, which illustrate a systematic approach to learning design. The ideological agenda underlying this model is that teachers need to see the relationship between learning environments and the learning process. Another way of looking at this model is [T1+T2 ⇒ T3] or greater where T stands for tier and the numerical value for the level. If T1 does not meet the expectation of the learning environment, then the equation will be [T1+T2 ⇒ T3]. That means teachers need to make sure that the learning environment is developed in a way that is effective and be able to support learning. The learning process is another important element in this development. If teachers consider the attributes of the learning process together with those of the learning environment as discussed earlier, they will be able to provide conducive learning environments which enrich and improve students’ understanding. Teachers need to come together as teams to create learning environments where different instruction strategies, techniques and tools, could be combined to facilitate learning for conceptual understanding and more. CONCLUSION AND FUTURE WORK The Model for Learning focuses primarily on improving the learner’s conceptual understanding and therefore the three levels must be implemented successfully. It is obvious from the discussion, that the learner must be presented with a learning environment that is effective, purposeful and meaningful. Vykotsky’s focus on ‘nurture’ includes an environment which encourages positive growth in the learner. The learning process should be a combination of approaches, methods, skills and knowledge that appreciate the learner’s prior knowledge and experiences.

JILR 18/1page layout

11/9/06 11:26 AM

Page 109

Conceptual Model of Learning to Improve Understanding of High School Chemistry 109

In the near future, we intend to implement this model in teaching and learning in schools and in tertiary education. In the first instance we will target high school chemistry education. This study will inform us about the strength and weaknesses of the model, for future research and development. References Ausubel, D. (1968). Subsumption theory. Retrieved October 19, 2006, from http://tip.psychology.org/ausubel.html Bhattacharya, M., Narita, S., & Mino, T. (2004). Conceptual design of a web-based constructivists tool for collaborative learning. The Journal of School Education, 16, 129-136. Biggs, J. B. (1999). Teaching for quality learning at university. Society for research into higher education, Milton Keynes: Open University Press. Chinn, C., & Malhorta, B. (2002). Children’s Responses to Anomalous Scientific Data: How Is Conceptual Change Impeded? Journal of Educational Psychology, 94. 327-343. Claesgens, J., & Stacy, A. (2004). Moles! Moles! Moles! Berkeley: University of California. Coll, R. K., & Taylor, N. (2002). Alternative conceptions of chemical bonding held by upper secondary and tertiary students. Research in Science and Technological Education, 19(2), 171-191. Dr. Strydom, J., & Remedium. (2000-2005). Four cognitive skills for successful learning. Retrieved October 19, 2006, from http://www.audiblox2000.com/cognitiveskills.htm Driscoll, M. P. (1994). Psychology of learning for instruction. Needham Heights, MA: Allyn & Bacon. Grabe, M., & Grabe, C. (1998). Integrating technology for meaningful learning. Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin. Hein, (1991). Retrieved October 19, 2006, from www.exploratorium.edu/IFI/resources/ constructivistlearning.html Johnstone, A. H. (1993). The development of chemistry teaching: A changing response to changing demand. Journal of Chemical Education, 70(9), 701-705. Jonassen, D. H. (1999). Designing constructivist learning environments. In, Reigeluth, C. M (Ed.), Instructional design theories and models, Vol. 2. Lawrence Erlbaum. McDevitt, H., Teresa, M., & Ormrod, J. E. (2002). Child development and education. New Jersey: Pearson Education, Inc. North Central Regional Educational Laboratory. Retrieved October 19, 2006, from http://www.ncrel.org/sdrs/areas/issues/students/atrisk/at6lk16.htm Piaget, J. (1972). To understand is to invent. New York: The Viking Press, Inc. Piaget, J. (1929). Genetic epistemology. Retrieved October 19, 2006, from http://tip.psychology.org/piaget.html Silverthorn, P. (1999). Jean Piaget’s theory of development. Retrieved October 19, 2006, from http://chd.gse.gmu.edu/immersion/knowledgebase/theorists/constructivism/Piaget.htm Smith, M. K. (2003). Learning theory. Retrieved October 19, 2006, from http://www.infed.org/biblio/b-learn.htm Smith, M. K. (2005). John Dewey. Retrieved October 19, 2006, from http://www.infed.org/thinkers/et-dewey.htm

JILR 18/1page layout

110

11/9/06 11:26 AM

Page 110

Suaalii and Bhattacharya

Suaalii, F., & Bhattacharya, M. (2005). Conceptual understanding of the structure and bonding in graphite and diamond: cause and remedies [Abstract] Retrieved on October 19, 2006, from http://www.massey.ac.nz/~fsuaalii/abstract1.html Treagust, F. D., Chittleborough, G., & Mamiala, L. (2003). The role of sub-microscopic and symbolic representation. In chemical explanations. International Journal of Science Education, 25(11), 1353-1368. Wolf, D., Bixby, J., Glenn, J., III, & Gardner, H. (1991). To use their minds well: Investigating new forms of student assessment. Review of Research in Education, 17, 31-74.

Notes Importance of Culture. Retrieved October 19, 2006, from http://facultyweb.cortland.edu/andersmd/VYG/CULTURE.HTML 2 Dewey’s contribution lies along experience and reflections and democracy and community and to environment for learning. http://www.infed.org/thinkers/et-dewey.htm 1

JILR 18/1page layout

11/9/06 11:26 AM

Page 111

Designing for Learning Effectiveness Across Borders in a Multicultural Context KRISHAN LALL KUMAR University of Botswana, Botswana [email protected] MADHUMITA BHATTACHARYA Massey University, New Zealand [email protected] Technological developments in Information and Communication Technology (ICT) supporting distance teaching-learning strategies, (e.g., one and two-way video tele-conferencing, web conferencing, etc.) have made it possible to reach out far and wide without distortion of signal and consequent loss of message. There are, however, further challenges posed by the socio-cultural scenarios in different countries, which manifest in terms of different learning styles, interactivity, mutual respect, authority consciousness, hesitation, fear and gender sensitivity, which can be clubbed into multicultural context. Factors behind multicultural differences include local cultures, tradition, religion, beliefs, socioeconomic levels, modernity and psychological and background barriers. This article draws upon case studies of courses conducted by the authors; one-way video teleteaching within a country with no trans-cultural factors and two other courses, one each via twoway-video conferencing and web conferencing between Africa and a European country. Designing for effective learning across national borders, requires prior knowledge of all of the above factors to select appropriate teaching-learning activities. It is recommended to employ a design methodology, such as preparing a problem statement and a design brief, employing appropriate teaching methodology and audiovisual resources in relation to the multicultural environment. Lessons are drawn in order to ensure teaching-learning effectiveness across borders.

JILR 18/1page layout

112

11/9/06 11:26 AM

Page 112

Kumar and Bhattacharya

Introduction It is well recognised that information technology has now come of age to be used effectively in order to reach out to students anywhere and anytime. Fortunately for some of us, Information and Communication Technologies (ICT) are available but there are so many parts of the world isolated by digital divide. The unfortunate part is that they are the ones who need more education for larger numbers of students in their countries. It is not so much a divide by continents but by regions in the same continent. For example, Botswana, Tanzania and South Africa in the South African Development Community (SADC) region are far better placed in terms of resources than some other countries like Kenya, Democratic Republic of Congo, Sudan, Angola, Ethiopia and Liberia to name a few. Likewise, India may be gaining ground at an enviable pace but Bangladesh and Nepal remain to lag far behind in the same continent. An example of excellence in educational technology in India is the setting up of Centres for Educational Technology at the Indian Institutes of Technology which have resulted in several publications and research (Bhattacharya, 1996) including books (Kumar, 1996 – the book devoted a chapter on Frontiers in Educational Technology and predicted the leading role of interactive video, Internet, educational software and other emerging technologies, particularly for the developing world), video programmes (Kumar, 2003) and multimedia packages (Bhattacharya, Akahori & Kumar, 1999) . There are several opportunities offered by the first world countries like US, UK and Europe to sponsor educational projects. The chances of getting grants increase if there are collaborative projects across borders and even greater if the collaboration includes the sponsoring country. The ICT development at Botswana, Tanzania and some other countries has been through collaborations with US and European Development Community. It is all the more reason that the infrastructure should be used to reach out to other parts of the world and make an attempt to overcome the digital divide. While doing so, socio-economic scenarios pose some problems, but the same can also be taken care of at least if the outreach is in the same region. Knowledge of socio-cultural environment and people’s preferred methods of teaching and learning can result in effective courses across borders. It is with these thoughts that some pilot studies have been conducted, which are reported in this article. Multicultural Parameters It is well understood that social and cultural factors influence all aspects of user behaviour. Roberts (2001, 2003) argued that cultural values in design are often taken for granted or even viewed as being incontestable. Cultural and social factors become important to designers when they develop product and process characteristics, functionality, interaction and form, especial-

JILR 18/1page layout

11/9/06 11:26 AM

Page 113

Designing for Learning Effectiveness Across Borders in a Multicultural Context

113

ly for a particular user group (Roberts 2001, 2003). But recognising these issues in the first place is a basic problem. Socio-cultural factors can be so innate, so assumed, that even when they are articulated, one may fail to grasp their uniqueness (Moalosi, Popovic, Hudson & Kumar, 2005). According to Kotler (1997), social-cultural factors include reference groups, family, roles and status. Social class and social factors are clearly influenced by cultural factors. This means that designers must factor socio-cultural considerations into their work; the subtle, hard to describe but critical issues surrounding the identity and behaviour of any particular user group. One might argue that the socio-cultural human factors research should begin with the assumption that processes succeed when they resonate with users’ values and behaviours. Alben (1996) and Roberts (2001, 2003) argued that when a product or a process appeals to an individual, it does so relative to that individual’s cultural framework, worldview and experience of daily life. This means designers must work with knowledge derived from their experiences of the world around them. These experiences shape the conception and perception of their environment. At a social level, designers interpret their experiences as they compare those to societal norms and at conscious level, they express deeply assumed values and perceptions specific to their own cultures. However, Alben (1996) and Roberts (2001, 2003) did not explain that cultural constructs place general parameters around design ideas, indicating ways in which products will be positioned within value systems and identifying how quickly users’ worldviews may need to change for the acceptance of new products (Moalosi et al, 2005). In the context of this article, the product is the learning environment design using presently available tools and technologies. Socio-cultural factors are deeply ingrained, but they are also constantly changing. As a result, products that openly conflict with socio-cultural factors may either secure strong counter-cultural users or no users at all. It is, therefore, important to develop a socio-cultural approach to product and process analysis that relates more adequately to the needs of contemporary product design than emulating Western design form and substance that do not reflect the local culture and needs. Bourdieu (1986) underscored that designers have to embody culture in the products they design and become the key cultural intermediaries. In a study conducted at the University of Botswana for a research project undertaken by the University of Brisbane in Australia, (Moalosi, Popovic & Hudson, 2004; Moalosi et al, 2005) a set of socio-cultural variables are identified under the following categories (Figure 1). It is noticed that the needs in the society are rooted in social practices. Users are not in a position to perform certain tasks to their maximum satisfaction. Therefore, appropriate manipulation of material factors in designed products or learning environment can assist users to perform social practices easily or it enhances the performance of particular social tasks. Some of the social practices are not easily identified but they can be embedded within the

JILR 18/1page layout

11/9/06 11:26 AM

114

Page 114

Kumar and Bhattacharya

Figure 1. Socio-cultural variables learning environment design (techniques and strategies) or material products (tools for learning, e.g., concept mapping tools). It is through the use of such products that they become noticeable. There are other factors such as emotions and pleasure associated with the design of the tools and techniques suitable for different socio-cultural groups. Learning tools provide a platform for social interaction where learners are participating in a social language. Goodman & Cohen (2003) underscored that products may represent a memory of users past, a sign of users’ current identity or a symbol of what they hope to be. They argue that "cultural sensitive products makeone connect with history or his/her roots." Therefore, it is a challenge for the instructional designers to come up with tools appropriate for learning and interaction among people from varied socio-cultural background. A schematic followed to construct the meaning of artifacts and derivation of socio-cultural variables which are in turn translatable into products (Figure 2). This might lead to designers designing cultural sensitive processes as the pinnacle of good innovation and personalized and suitable learning environment. Impact of Culture on Teaching Styles It is possible to adopt the types of teaching methods and styles which do not threaten the socio-cultural backgrounds of the learners. Teaching methods vary all the way from teacher-centring in which teachers remain at the centre stage to student-centring where students are made to interact a great deal with others, staff members and the resources on their own. A typical example of basic cultural barrier to interaction exists in some religious beliefs where students are not supposed to ask questions or where female students are not supposed to unveil their face and speak in front of others. The other extreme of cultural barrier is in "all of us being equal" in communication and mutual respect. A teacher from a more advanced country may not talk to his/her students as subordinates. Even the cleaners and workers in laboratories wish to be treated equally as human beings even if they are

JILR 18/1page layout

11/9/06 11:26 AM

Page 115

Designing for Learning Effectiveness Across Borders in a Multicultural Context

115

Try ?

Ho w?

Figure 2. A schematic to translate socio-cultural values into products not educated. Their culture makes them feel equal to any other human being; they see any form of subordination as being scornful to them. In some cultures, wide consultations are the norm before taking any decision. In some African countries, the Kgotla system of long and sustained meetings is held to thrash out any point and any new development taking place. In Asia, the Panchayat system does the equivalent. Basically, these are traditional forms of two-way communication. People brought up in such scenarios are usually uncomfortable if any decision is taken without their involvement. In education, a teacher must agree about an assignment being given to students and the date of submission must be agreed. In some societies, Saturdays are reserved for family matters, funerals and other functions. In some cultures, Sundays are exclusive for prayers to the complete exclusion of any educational engagement. Therefore, teachers can not expect every student to complete their homework on the weekends! One-Way Video Teleteaching in India: Limited Multicultural Effects The one-way video teleteaching course on Innovations in Teaching Methodology for Higher Order Learning in India was sponsored by the All India Council of Technical Education. The course was offered to a sizeable sample of faculty members in Science and Engineering across the country and it opened up new avenues of implementing the Modular Programme of Faculty Development on the one hand, and of offering further Continuing Education Courses on emerging technologies and thrust areas on the other.

JILR 18/1page layout

116

11/9/06 11:26 AM

Page 116

Kumar and Bhattacharya

The course was organized by simulating the classroom situation with the all-time availability of a chalkboard, a whiteboard, overhead projection and provision for slide projection, video clippings and computer-image projection as and when desired. The resource persons used their normal classroom styles of presentation and role-played the desirable teaching practices and methodologies they professed. Highlights of the course included teaching by objectives, demonstration of multi-skill microteaching and peer-evaluation for self improvement, models of teaching and their effectiveness for higher order learning, innovative methods of laboratory experimentation and writing reports, media spectrum, quality management, evaluation and research on teaching learning strategies. A panel session with invited experts looked at the potential and avenues of educational technology for higher-order learning at the university level. An online test was conducted, tentative correct responses were discussed and the response sheets of the participants were marked, all within a total of 40 minutes in the concluding session of the course. Mark-sheets prepared by the coordinators from all regional centres were faxed to Delhi. Analysis of pretest and posttest scores revealed an average relative percentage gain of 71.4%. It represents a significant improvement in cognition at 0.05 level of confidence. Other indicators such as comments of the resource persons, feedback from the participants and visible signs of satisfaction are also a pointer to the success of the course (Bhattacharya & Kumar, 1997). The participants from different parts of the country had varied backgrounds. It is well known that there are 14 recognised Indian languages and therefore, as many sub-cultures in the country. Their socio-cultural backgrounds were different in many ways; some believed in detailed discussions whereas others took the word of the teacher as gospel. Some preferred to learn undisturbed while others had strong reactions to anything being taught from a distance. Some talked back without hesitation, while others wanted to see the teacher and his/her reaction during talking and even declined to speak! However, the high rating for the course as above shows that they accepted a nationwide scenario for teaching and learning. A Short Course via Internet from India: Multicultural Setting The assessment of the effectiveness of offering a short course via Internet (Kumar, 1999) was taken up in India. The reason for doing the same was based on the feeling that several universities have started offering courses via Internet for the sake of marching ahead and for the love of technology. They have, however, assumed that such courses would be effective for distant learners. The author undertook a study to evaluate the effectiveness of a short course on a topic of general interest, Project Your Visuals via Internet by designing, offering, implementation and monitoring the course. The course was offered free of charge from the Internet website (www.netx-

JILR 18/1page layout

11/9/06 11:26 AM

Page 117

Designing for Learning Effectiveness Across Borders in a Multicultural Context

117

pertsindia.com/netprof) for a period of three months. With the view to generalize the results of the study, the course was designed to be as instructional and interactive by employing HTML and JAVA applets as are most contemporary courses offered via Internet. It was complete with registration formalities, an online pretest, assignments, emails, Internet chat sessions and guidance for surfing in addition to built-in instruction followed by an online posttest. The course was accessed and attended all over the globe by a large number of participants. The effectiveness of the course has been assessed by comparing the posttest and pretest scores of a sizable random sample of participants. Questions for the two tests were mutually matched while being related to the content and the expected learning outcome of the course. Fifty participants with their records on two randomly selected data sheets constituted the sample. Ironically, six of them scored less in the posttest than in the pretest, both tests have been offered online, perhaps due to lack of interest in the learning aspect of the course. The substantive sample of 44 participants showed pretest-posttest gain of 50.1% with a standard deviation of 18.9%. in terms of relative gain defined as posttest minus pretest scores as a percentage of 100 minus pretest score, they gained by 61.7% with a standard deviation of 19.8%. Application of the students’ t-test revealed that the gain on both measures was significant at 0.05% level. Ratings on ten questions to evaluate the course on a five-point scale by a similarly selected random sample of respondents revealed that they considered it worthwhile, instructive and appropriate to offer such courses to distant learners. On being asked if they would like to participate in another short course, they responded positively and indicated their preferences of courses via Internet. It was concluded that, in the present scenario, approximately 12% of those who access free-of-charge courses may not have come to learn but the remaining 88% stand to gain appreciably and that they are convinced about the potential of well-designed courses offered via Internet. Since the course was offered globally, socio-cultural factors did not creep in to any disadvantage. It was, however, noted that most participants went through the course just because they liked to do so. The Internet format was least threatening to them and they suited their preferred styles, time and pace of learning. The format of the course suited the multicultural setting (here the authors have regarded multiculture in its wider context), permitting them freedom to access as, when and how they liked. Two way Video Conferencing: Africa and Estonia This is a relatively recent experience of one day teaching through video conferencing (Kumar, 2005) of a topic from the videoconferencing room at the University of Botswana to a group of students from different universities in Estonia and staff members at the University of Tartu in Estonia.

JILR 18/1page layout

118

11/9/06 11:26 AM

Page 118

Kumar and Bhattacharya

A two-way video conferencing session was held between the participants from the University of Botswana and University of Tartu in Estonia. This session was a part of the summer school held in Tartu (Bhattacharya & Mimirinis, 2005). The topic of the session was Selection, Design and Delivery through Different Media for Deep Learning. The Participants in Estonia consisted of doctoral students and postgraduate students of educational technology students at the University of Tartu and invited researchers from United United Kingdom and Finland. Since the topic was of wider interest to student teachers and UB staff, students of their final year in Design and Technology education and Mathematics and Science education attended. Selected staff members from faculties of Engineering and Technology and Education also participated in the event. The session, with full and clear audio and vision, both ways, commenced with a mutual introduction and proceeded by way of specific objectives. It was a simulated experience of all participants to be at one place and time through video conferencing. It was made possible by the three PolyCom video cameras, which the instructor (one of the authors of this article) controlled switching between views of audiences, graphics and other visuals, as are normally used in a face-to-face teaching session. The room is also equipped with a projection system for local participants and two large size monitors to display the two-way transmitted images. Provision of multiple images on monitors allows more than two sites to be connected. Mutual visibility and audibility of the teacher and students at all locations is, therefore, assured. Some special features of the session included an assignment handed over to all students at both sites simultaneously. This was arranged by sending the assignment through email in advance to the facilitator in Estonia. There was as good a freedom for question/answers as is normally done in face-to-face class. Questions and answers were floated to students at both ends. Finally, a short post-session test was instituted by giving out test sheets at both places. Multicultural backgrounds of the participants did not pose any serious problems at Botswana because the students and staff were informed about the socio-cultural background of Estonian participants before the event and the session started with a mutual ice-breaking introduction. However, participants at Estonia came from different backgrounds and they had some initial mental blocks, too. Multicultural barriers could not appear during the session because the staff at Botswana and at Estonia were both aware of socio-cultural scenarios and took care by their openness in teaching methodology, use of resources and lively interaction. Excitement was visual on the faces of participants as the session passed without a glitch! It was proposed that such a powerful global facility existing at UB should be used more often for teaching and seminars, not only within Botswana, but also across the multicultural borders in the region and across the globe.

JILR 18/1page layout

11/9/06 11:26 AM

Page 119

Designing for Learning Effectiveness Across Borders in a Multicultural Context

119

E-Learning and WebCT Courses in Botswana Botswana has become a cradle of e-learning by virtue of setting up a Centre for Academic Development (CAD) in the University of Botswana. In addition to a formal e-learning club and frequent discussion groups organised by the CAD, a server has been apportioned to install WebCT courses in different subjects. There are over 25 such existing courses and further developments are taking place. Several Smart classrooms have been set up, some of which are equipped with a large number of computers, one for each student, and others with state-of-the-art facilities for teaching by employing the latest ICT. One such course is designed and being implemented (Kumar, 2002). The Contents page of the course is shown in Figure 3. The WebCT course has the potential of being offered across borders, to people with varied cultural scenarios because it can be accessed by individuals to proceed in their own preferred styles and sequences. WebCT courses, by their very nature are complete with introduction of the author, foreword to the course, objectives and detailed content outlines. Each module is self-sufficient so that a student may proceed in any order but there is a linear recommended path for best understanding if one has little background in the subject before starting learning. The course employs basic guidelines of designing multimedia packages (Bhattacharya, Akahori & Kumar, 1999). It offers a great deal of instruction but more importantly, it directs a learner to a large number of resources, particularly relevant websites at the Internet,

Figure 3. Content page of a course in WebCT

JILR 18/1page layout

120

11/9/06 11:26 AM

Page 120

Kumar and Bhattacharya

where the learner may reach by clicking the hypertext provided throughout the course. Then there are assignments, chat discussions and mutual email facilities for communication and submission of assignments and so on. A student may, however, skip some directions and complete a module the way he/she likes with his/her cultural background but one would eventually get to know others and interact mutually and use all possible resources! CONCLUSION: COURSES IN A MULTI CULTURAL CONTEXT Planning, preparation and teaching of courses in the multicultural context should take into account the background of the participants. Anything foreign is not easily acceptable by some people in some cultures. The background parameters are difficult to understand and to interpret. However, once studied, it is necessary to incorporate those parameters in terms of learner preferences in styles of teaching and delivery of lessons across borders. Authors’ experiences of one-way teleteaching, Internet conferencing and two-way videoconferencing shows that the learning environment designers need to consider the socio-cultural factors associated with the multimedia design, and design and uses of digital tools. Instructors will have to be open-minded and be careful about the sensitive cultural issues associated with different cultures while dealing with people from different countries in an online learning environment. References Alben, L. (1996). Quality of experience: Defining criteria for effective interaction design. Interactions, ACM, 3(3), 11-15. Bhattacharya, M. (1996). Effectiveness of faculty development programmes for science education, Unpublished PhD, University of Delhi, Delhi. Bhattacharya, M., & Mimirinis, M. (2005). News from the distributed learning environment and multicultural issues special interest group (SIG): Present and future activities of the SIG. AARE News, p. 9. Retrieved October 19, 2006, from http://www.aare.edu.au/news/newsplus/news52.pdf Bhattacharya, M., Akahori, K., & Kumar, K. L. (1999). Evaluation of multimedia packages on pedagogical design and display of visuals. International Journal of Educational Technology, : 1(1). Retrieved October 19, 2006, from http://smi.curtin.edu.au/ijet/v1n1/madhumita/index.html Bhattacharya, M. & Kumar, K.L. (1997). Faculty development through video teleteaching. Proceedings of the Commonwealth of Learning conference. Educational Technology 2000: A Global Vision for Open and Distance Learning (pp. 79-83).Vancouver: Commonwealth of Learning. Bourdieu, P. (1986). Distinction – A social critique of the judgment of taste. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul. Goodman, D. J., & Cohen, M. (2003). Consumer culture: A reference handbook. New York: ABC-CLIO. Kotler, P. (1997). Marketing management, analysis, planning, implementation and control. New York: Prentice Hall.

JILR 18/1page layout

11/9/06 11:26 AM

Page 121

Designing for Learning Effectiveness Across Borders in a Multicultural Context

121

Kumar, K.L. (1996). Educational technology (1st ed.). New Delhi: New Age International Kumar, K. L. (1999). Assessment of the effectiveness of a short course via Internet. [Japan] Journal of Educational Technology Research, 22, 27-33. Kumar K. L. (2002). Impact of new technology on teaching and learning in technology education. Paper presented at the International Design and Technology Research Conference, Coventry, UK Kumar, K.L. (2003). Educational technology (2nd ed.). New Delhi: New Age International. Kumar, K.L. (2005, August). Video conferencing teaching session between UB and Tartu: Report and recommendations, University of Botswana News Letter, pp. 9-10. Moalosi, R., Popovic, V., & Hudson, A. (2004). Socio-cultural factor that impact upon humancentered design in Botswana. In Redmond, J., Durling, D. and De Bono, A. (Eds.) Proceedings of Design Research Society International Conference, Future ground, Mebourne: Monash University. Retrieved October 19, 2006, from http://eprints.qut.edu.au/archive/00002740/01/2740.pdf Moalosi, R., Popovic, V., Hudson, A., and Kumar, K.L. (2005). Product analysis in relation to the socio-cultural perspective of Botswana. In Proceedings International Conference on Design Education: Tradition and Modernity, Ahmedabad: National Institute of Design. Retrieved October 19, 2006, from http://eprints.qut.edu.au/archive/00002739/01/Product_analysis_in_relation_to_the_socio-cultural_perspective_of_Botswana.doc Roberts, M. (2001). Border crossing: The role of design research international product development. Retrieved October 19, 2006, from http://www.id.iit.edu/papers/Roberts-Border_Crossing_2001.pdf Roberts, M. (2003). Border crossing: The role of design research international product development. AIGA Journal of Interaction Design Education, 7. Retrieved October 19, 2006, from http://loop1.aiga.org/content.cfm?Alias=robertsucd

JILR 18/1page layout

11/9/06 11:26 AM

Page 122

JILR 18/1page layout

11/9/06 11:26 AM

Page 123

Integrated Approach to Learning Environment Design for Secondary Science Teachers MADHUMITA BHATTACHARYA AND LONE JORGENSEN Massey University, New Zealand [email protected] [email protected] Authors argue that effective integration of different technological tools into the curriculum is not possible if the subject matters are taught in isolation independent of each other. In this article, authors have developed a model for designing learning environments which would emphasize the concept of integration in its true sense by identifying the basic knowledge, skills and values in different subject areas and by discussing different learning tools and techniques. The article focuses on the integrative education and on preparing lifelong learners. Finally the authors confer the role of a teacher as that of guiding and facilitating learning in a technologyenhanced learning environment.

Introduction In the past, technology-enhanced learning has been developed around the transmission and retention of information through taught knowledge and skills. The instructional design models for these conventional computermediated learning strategies have been built upon behaviorist and objectivist views of knowledge, and expressed through the decontextualized acquisition of passive, inert knowledge (Young, 2003). The assumption was that reading, watching videos or controlling a button on these easy to deliver, flashy page-turners constituted active learning (Jona, 2000; Jonassen, Carr & Yueh, 1998). These models rarely bridged the gap between theory and practice. In many cases they failed to recognize the need for application in order to understand how to effectively utilize knowledge (Jonassen, 1994). The use of computer instruction to teach irrelevant subject matter that is easily tested, and is measured using inappropriate assessment, has resulted in many missed technological opportunities (Lefoe, 1998).

JILR 18/1page layout

124

11/9/06 11:26 AM

Page 124

Bhattacharya and Jorgensen

Gradually this view of learning has shifted to our current understanding that knowledge is constantly advancing. The level of advancement of built knowledge can be seen to directly relate to a society's economic viability (Scardamalia & Bereiter, 1999). “During the past several decades a mismatch has been evident in many countries between the skills imparted by the national education system and those demanded by the workplace” (UNESCO, 2002 p.5). Old educational approaches based on traditional thinking aimed at specialization and standardization, are no longer appropriate. An education system needs to reflect the needs of the learner, be contextually relevant and prepare the learner for a changing society (Esbin, 2002). The traditional skills are no longer all-important. Neither is straight knowledge. New basics are being defined (Matters, 2004) to encompass more than literacy, numeracy, some cognitive, affective and social skills. Students should also be taught to think about the interrelatedness of life, its component parts and their own role in it (Esbin, 2002). Education systems worldwide have attempted to come to terms with this perceived need for a wider, integrated knowledge/skills base. One of these is the New Basics programme in Queensland, Australia (State of Queensland, 2004). The overall report on the success of such a change in approach to teaching includes the following statement from Matters (2004, p.2), “…large numbers of teachers shifted the nature of their students’ work towards high-level, intellectually engaging tasks”. Such results mean that many educationalists are starting to scaffold this new level of analysis of our learning environments, questioning the kind of education that best prepares students for life in the knowledge society. Literature consistently supports the theory that preparation for this new knowledge is most effective when students are able to work towards specific, authentic and intrinsic goals where they have choice and must take responsibility for their creation and building of knowledge (Jona, 2000). When these instructional strategies are applied to the use of educational technologies there is a decisive shift from computer-based instruction where students learn from the technology, to the application of computers to create cognitive tools and constructivist environments where students learn with the technology. This requires a shift in the thinking of teachers towards an acceptance of the need to plan for contextual, meaningful activities, using appropriate pedagogies and rooted in sound teaching theories. The New Basics programme mentioned above does this with rich tasks and productive pedagogies, a triangulation of concepts that ties together the educational philosophies, the approaches to teaching and the teachers’ development (Matters, 2004). Review of the New Zealand School Curriculum In the 1980s, New Zealand went through considerable neo-liberal economic reforms. In response to political pressure, skills for the workplace were to be emphasized and curriculum reform was to reflect this. A new cur-

JILR 18/1page layout

11/9/06 11:26 AM

Page 125

Integrated Approach to Learning Environment Design

125

riculum Technology was to be introduced and other curricula were rewritten to reflect the new philosophies. After much debate the New Zealand Curriculum Framework (NZCF) was published in 1993. One of the key statements in the foreword to this document is: If we wish to progress as a nation, and to enjoy a healthy prosperity in today’s and tomorrow’s competitive world economy, our education system must adapt to meet these challenges. We need a learning environment which enables all our students to attain high standards and develop appropriate personal qualities. As we move towards the twenty-first century, with all the rapid technological change which is taking place, we need a work-force which is increasingly highly skilled and adaptable, and which has an international and multicultural perspective (Ministry of Education, 1993b, p.1). Together with the new framework and curriculum documents supporting eight essential learning areas: Languages, English/Te Reo, Mathematics, Science, Technology, Social Sciences, The Arts, Health and Physical Wellbeing, there was an assessment revision and revolution which is outside the scope of this article. The C-A-P (curriculum-assessment-pedagogy) triad is an intertwined Venn Diagram. The pedagogy component in this triad has largely been left to individual teachers (Hargreaves, 2002) We argue that this component is crucial in the planning of meaningful contexts and cannot be left to individual teachers interpreting individual curriculums. None of the subject curricula supporting the curriculum framework were knowledge specific. Concepts were considered important, not the example that the concept was embedded in. For example, the concept of hermaphrodism could be taught using any example of a hermaphroditic organism, such as the earthworm or the snail. Such openness was seen as both an advantage and a disadvantage. The advantage accrued to the knowledgeable teacher, and to the students who could be taught in a meaningful context. The disadvantage fell to the teacher with limited knowledge and his/her pupils. Computer technologies, to some extent, hid the gap experienced by teachers in the latter situation. Teachers could design projects where students were asked to access the Internet and to write reports which supported the belief that the learner was getting it. We argue that such learning is largely invalid and does not lead to the deep learning of concepts. The openness of the curriculum itself led to widespread criticism based on old-fashioned ideals of what sort of education would support economic growth. In particular, education in years 9-13 have been debated widely as to how to encourage deep learning as well as useful skills for the future of these students. In the thirteen years since the curriculum framework with its supporting documents were published, they have been through a “stock-

JILR 18/1page layout

126

11/9/06 11:26 AM

Page 126

Bhattacharya and Jorgensen

take” in the recognition of the difficulty of teaching a crowded curriculum well. International work by the OECD (2002) inspired another look at the essential skills set out in the NZCF. Generic skills were re-examined and defined as those appropriate for learners now and for their future lives, for society and for the economy and, in particular, for the culture in which the learner is embedded. At present, the NZCF establishes eight essential skills which span the seven essential learning areas. Some of these skills were seen by teachers to be emphasized in some learning areas more than in others (Ministry of Education, 1993a; Brewerton, 2004): Communication Skills (English, Social Studies and Technology) Numeracy Skills (Mathematics) Information Skills (Science and Social Studies) Problem-solving Skills (Technology, Science and Mathematics) Social and Cooperative Skills (Social Studies) Self-management and Competitive Skills Physical Skills Work and Study Skills The OECD reports and the curriculum stocktake showed that key competencies are an aggregate of essential skills, attitudes and values. Rather than the descriptive list presently given, the essential skills and attitudes can be grouped and the values incorporated into the framework without presenting them prescriptively (Ministry of Education, 2003, p.32, cited in Brewerton, 2004 p.5). The philosophy underpinning the attempt to define key competencies is that tasks in real life are carried out using an aggregation of skills, that such competencies are holistic and integrative, and that they are transferable from one task to another (Brewerton, 2004). Simultaneously with the discussion of the essential skills, attitudes and values, a move towards curriculum integration was occurring. Planning integrated curriculum work units recognized common skills and concepts by teachers from different learning areas working on common contexts (Nolan & McKinnon, 1991, 2003; McKinnon, Nolan & Sinclair,1997; Nolan, Kane & Lind, 2003; Nolan & Brown, 2001, 2002; Nolan, Brown, Stewart & Beane, 2000 ). The philosophy for integration is rooted in Beane’s work on curriculum integration (Beane, 1996), and the educational theory that people possess multiple natural intelligences (Eggen & Kauchak, 2004 pp.118121), which can be applied either in an individual setting or as part of a cooperative group project. If the learner is encouraged to utilize these in various contexts (Esbin, 2002), learning is enhanced. Teaching to only one of these intelligences and deprive the rest. How then will an integrated approach to teaching the concepts expressed by the subject curriculum documents express itself? It is important to acknowledge

JILR 18/1page layout

11/9/06 11:26 AM

Page 127

Integrated Approach to Learning Environment Design

127

the cognitive and emotional developmental stage of the learner and to scaffold experiences through these stages by, for example, using some form of cognitive development hierarchy, such as for example Bloom’s Taxonomy (Eggen & Kauchak, 2004 p.466), when planning the tasks. This enables the planner to insert the learner on the appropriate step on the learning spiral in our model (Figure 1). Importantly, the learner can be on varying levels of this spiral for various aspects of the context he/she is working within. All subject curriculums in New Zealand describe how the essential skills will be taught in that subject. Further than that, the curriculums state specifics for that subject (i.e., the knowledge about). It is these specifics that critics of curriculum integration fear will be lost in student centered project planning. We acknowledge that this is a possibility, but that careful planning with clearly stated outcomes will negate this problem. For example a contextual unit planned for a year 9/10 class integrating science, technology, mathematics, English and social studies could be an examination of vaccination for meningitis in New Zealand. Such a project includes the science in the New Zealand curriculum: Living World strand. But most importantly it offers the opportunity to develop scientific skills and attitudes (i.e., to observe, hypothesize and carry out fair testing). These skills underpin all the sciences. The unit will also include aspects of the social studies curriculum: social organization and culture and heritage strands. Understanding social implications of actions are important skills underpinning all the social sciences. The statistics strand in the mathematics in the New Zealand Curriculum, will be taught in a meaningful setting. Communication skills will be taught throughout the unit, but particularly in the presentation of the final reports thus supporting the written and oral language strands in the English in the New Zealand curriculum. The health component will form the main thrust of the unit and the health and physical education learning area will thus also be covered (i.e., an integrated unit such as this will support five of the seven essential learning areas) (Ministry of Education, 1992, 1993a, 1994, 1995, 1997, 1998). This leads us to concept of integrative education and preparing students for lifelong learning. Integrative education, Shoemaker (1989 cited in Walker, 1996) states, “cuts across subject-matter lines, bringing together various aspects of the curriculum into meaningful association to focus upon broad areas of study.” It reflects the interdependent real world, and involves the learner's body, thoughts, feelings, senses, and intuition in learning experiences that unify knowledge and “provide[s] a greater understanding than that which could be obtained by examining the parts separately.” The cognitive levels are clearly demarcated in the curriculums and a good planner will use these levels interchangeably so that each student can work within each learning area at the level suited to their own cognitive and emotional development in that area. This suggests that a student may take a multi-layered position within the cone described in our model (Figure 1). Integrative education bases its practices on the characteristics of the human learner and on the

JILR 18/1page layout

11/9/06 11:26 AM

Page 128

128

Bhattacharya and Jorgensen

Figure 1. Integrative Learning Model interdependent nature of reality. Instead of artificially dividing the world into subjects and using textbooks and seat work, integrative education immerses students in an enriched environment that reflects the complexities of life. This provides a holistic context for learning that leads to a greater ability to make and remember connections and to solve problems (Kovalik and Olsen, 1994 cited in Walker, 1996). Bhattacharya and Jorgensen, 2006 suggests that curriculum designers should consider the dimensions of diversities of learners’ skills and abilities to create successful learning environment design. The Model of Integrative Learning In this article we have presented a model for designing effective learning environments. The model (Figure 1), which describes the process of teaching and learning in a collaborative learning environment, has been generated from the Model for Project Based Learning (Bhattacharya, 2002). It represents a three dimensional learning space where learning in three domains of learning (Bloom, 1956 cited in Kumar, 1996, p.23) can be represented as shown in Figure 2 (adopted from Kumar, 1996, p.23). In the following paragraphs we will discuss the model by describing its individual components. The complete model has been shown in Figure 1. The spiral inside the cone describes the process of learning. Each of these learning spirals, shown in Figure 1, follows the steps of an Activity-Reflection cycle (Bhattacharya & Richards, 2001). Learning in one particular instance as show by the spiral (Figure 1) can be presented by the slope from P to P` (shown in Figure 2).

JILR 18/1page layout

11/9/06 11:26 AM

Page 129

Integrated Approach to Learning Environment Design

129

Y

COGNITIVE

Learning

P’

P

PSYCHOMOTOR AFFECTIVE

O

X

Figure 2. Three domains of learning shown in a three dimensional space The conical shape of the overall learning process indicates learning taking place both vertically and horizontally. Collaboration and communication bound by trust and emotional support is the backbone (string/spike) which holds the spirals (shown by the upward arrow which becomes wider as the students move upward showing better collaboration and communication, more trust and emotional support. The model is flexible enough to accommodate different ability groups. The shape of the cone varies (steep and flatter cones) with the abilities of different members of a group and the learning approach followed by them. In a group learning environment one large cone with a spiral representing group learning, can have smaller spirals inside representing individual members learning. Now the question is: how are these smaller individual spirals connected with each other and with the large group learning spiral? This connection between different spirals can be achieved by interaction among the members of a group through discussion, sharing, peer-review, decision making, questioning, argumentation and negotiation. The conical model consists of a number of triangular plates which represent the learning taking place in different areas of the curriculum as well as the learning necessary for lifelong learning. This model also provides an opportunity to use and develop multiple intelligences as mentioned earlier in

JILR 18/1page layout

11/9/06 11:26 AM

Page 130

130

Bhattacharya and Jorgensen

Report writing, presentation, feedback, evaluation, critical analysis, reflection,… Analysis of data, comparing results, decision making, reasoning, justification, questioning,…….. Investigation, measurement, observation, creating graphs, tables, models,…… Formulating the problem statement, planning, identifying and selecting the resources,….. FIdentifying / choosing the scenario, brainstorming, perceiving the problem,…..

Figure 3. Development of cognitive, psychomotor, affective and interpersonal skills in a PBL environment

this article. All these individual plates intermingle and form the cone with a spiral known as the Integrative Learning Model. In order to move forward in a student-centered learning environment the learners will have to engage in different activities as shown in Figure 3. The teacher will need to create the learning environment which will facilitate developing knowledge and skills in an integrated fashion along with the interpersonal skills and development in the affective domain. The tools, techniques and strategies used in a traditional classroom can be used for the implementation of this model. Figure 3 is an example of activities to be carried out at different stages of learning in a Problem Based Learning environment. Teachers may devise, design or implement different strategies and techniques to foster higher order cognitive and interpersonal abilities, (e.g., metacognitive skills, decision making skills, and, critical and reflective thinking skills) by identifying what, when and why of their teaching-learning process. CONCLUSION The following excerpt from a student in preservice teacher training provides a suitable support and conclusion to this article. The student comments on our approach to teaching-learning.

JILR 18/1page layout

11/9/06 11:26 AM

Page 131

Integrated Approach to Learning Environment Design

131

I now see the positive side to constructivist learning and am now the wiser for also knowing that if students are struggling to construct learning, then guidance should be given to avert the negative feelings I and many other students felt. This doesn't necessarily mean transmission of knowledge, but prompting, open-ended questions, guidance, feedback and confirmation that you are on the right track, etc. Maybe this knowledge is worth more than what I might get out of the assignment itself! This student has learnt the hard lesson that being told is not synonymous with learning. As a teacher this is a very important step to take, as it empowers the teacher to become a “hands-off” facilitator of the knowledge/skills acquisition, and to encourage the students’ own journey towards becoming resilient and skilled problem solvers able to survive anything life might throw at them. References Beane, J. (1996). On the shoulders of giants! The case for Curriculum Integration. Middle School Journal. 28(1), 6-11. Bhattacharya, M., & Jorgensen, L. (2006). Dimensions of diversities in IT classroom onground and online. In G. Trajkovski (Ed.). Diversity in Information Technology Education: Issues and Controversies (pp. 1-14). Hershey: Information Science Publishing. Bhattacharya, M., & Richards, C. (2001). Innovative Course design as action research: Instructional technology for teacher education, In Price, J., & Wallis, D., & Davis, N., Willis, J. (Eds.) Proceedings of 12th International Conference of Society for Information Technology and Teacher Education (Vol. 2, pp.1052-1057), Norfolk, VA: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education. Bhattacharya, M. (2002, May). Creating a Meaningful Learning Environment Using ICT. CDTL Brief. 5(3), 3-5. Singapore: National University of Singapore. Retrieved October 19, 2006, from http://www.cdtl.nus.edu.sg/brief/Pdf/v5n3.pdf Brewerton, M. (2004). Reframing the essential skills implications of the OECD defining and selecting key competencies project. A background paper. Ministry of Education. Retrieved October 19, 2006, from http://www.tki.org.nz/r/nzcurriculum/ Eggen, P., & Kauchak, D. (2004). Educational psychology: Windows on classrooms (6th ed.). Ohio: Merrill Prentice Hall. Esbin, H. (2002) Basic education and TVET. Technical and Vocational Education and Training in the Twenty-first Century. New Roles and Challenges for Guidance and Counselling (pp. 6784). Paris: United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization. Hargreaves, D. H. (2002) A future for the school curriculum. Retrieved October 19, 2006, from http://www.qca.org.uk/ca/14-19/dh_speech.asp Jona, K. (2000). Rethinking the design of online courses. Paper presented at the 17th annual conference of the Australasian Society for Computers in Learning in Tertiary Education (ASCILITE), Coffs Harbour, Australia. Retrieved September 17, 2003, from http://www.ascilite.org.au/conferences/coffs00/papers/kemi_jona_keynote.pdf

JILR 18/1page layout

132

11/9/06 11:26 AM

Page 132

Bhattacharya and Jorgensen

Jonassen, D. H. (1994). Thinking technology: Towards a constructivist design model. Educational Technology, 3(4), 34-37. Jonassen, D. H., Carr, C. & Yueh, H. P. (1998). Computers as mindtools for engaging learners in critical thinking. TechTrends, 43(2), 24-32. Kumar, K.L. (1996). Educational Technology. New Delhi: New Age International Publishers Lefoe, G. (1998). Creating constructivist learning environments on the web: The challenge in higher education. Paper presented at the 15th annual conference of the Australasian Society for Computers in Learning in Tertiary Education (ASCILITE), Wollongong, Australia. Retrieved October 19, 2006 from http://www.ascilite.org.au/conferences/wollongong98/asc98pdf/lefoe00162.pdf Matters, G. (2004, October 18). Summary of the new basics research findings. Brisbane: Queensland Department of Education and the Arts. Retrieved October 19, 2006, from http://education.qld.gov.au/corporate/newbasics/pdfs/summaryfindings.pdf Ministry of Education (1998). Health and Physical Education in the New Zealand Curriculum. Learning Media. Wellington. Ministry of Education (1997). Social Studies in the New Zealand Curriculum. Learning Media.Wellington. Ministry of Education. (1995). Technology in the New Zealand Curriculum. Learning Media. Wellington. Ministry of Education (1994). English in the New Zealand Curriculum. Learning Media. Wellington. Ministry of Education (1993 a). The New Zealand Curriculum Framework. Learning Media Wellington. Ministry of Education (1993 b). Science in the New Zealand Curriculum. Learning Media. Wellington. Ministry of Education (1992). Mathematics in the New Zealand Curriculum. Learning Media.Wellington. McKinnon, D. H., Nolan, C. J. P., & Sinclair, K. E. (1997). Curriculum innovation involving subject integration, field-based learning environments and information technology: A longitudinal case study of students’ attitudes, motivation and performance, (ERIC Document No. ED 408350). Nolan, C. J. P., Kane, R.G, & Lind, P. (2003). Approaching and avoiding the middle: Teacher preparation in New Zealand. Andrews, G.A., and Anfara, V. A. (Eds.) Leaders of a Movement - Professional Preparation and Development of Middle Level Teachers and Administrators: Volume III of the Handbook of Research in Middle Level Education. Greenwich: Information Age Publishing Inc. Nolan, C. J. P., & McKinnon, D. H. (2003). Enhancing the middle in a New Zealand secondary school: Integration, experiential learning and using computers. International Journal of Educational Reform, 12(3), 230-243. Nolan, C. J. P., & Brown, M. A. (2002). The fight for middle school education in New Zealand. The Middle School Journal, 33(4), 34-44. Nolan, C.J.P. and Brown, M.A. (2001, November). Educating students in the middle: Directions for secondary schools. The SPANZ Journal, 21-25. Nolan, C. J. P. & Brown, M. A. (2001). Educating students in the middle: Getting it right with or without middle schools. SET: Research Information for Teachers. 3: 25-28. Nolan, C. J. P., Brown, M. A., Stewart, D. J., and Beane, J. (2000). Middle Schools for New Zealand: A direction for the future. Median 6, 4-6. Nolan, P., & McKinnon, D. (1991). Case study of curriculum integration in New Zealand: The freyberg integrated studies project. Palmerston North: Massey University.

JILR 18/1page layout

11/9/06 11:26 AM

Page 133

Integrated Approach to Learning Environment Design

133

OECD (2002). Definition and selection of competences (Deseco): Theoretical and conceptual foundations. Strategy Paper. Directorate for Education, employment, labour and social affairs education committee. Governing Board of the CERI. Retrieved October 19, 2006, from http://www.portal-stat.admin.ch/deseco/deseco_strategy_paper_final.pdf Scardamalia, M., & Bereiter, C. (1999). Schools as knowledge-building organizations. In D. Keating & C. Hertzman (Eds.), Today's children tomorrow's society: The developmental health and wealth of nations (pp. 274-289). New York, NY: Guildford. State of Quensland (n.d.). Productive Pedagogies. Retrieved October 19, 2006 from http://www.teachers.ash.org.au/liswelden/productive_pedagogies.htm UNESCO (2002). Technical and vocational education and training in the twenty-first century. New Roles and Challenges for Guidance and Counseling. Paris: United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization. Walker, D. (1996). Integrative Education. Retrieved October 19, 2006, from http://www.sarasta. k12.fl.us/g2k/16.htm Young, L. D. (2003). Bridging theory and practice: Developing guidelines to facilitate the design of computer-based learning environments. Canadian Journal of Learning and Technology, 29(3).

JILR 18/1page layout

11/9/06 11:26 AM

Page 134

JILR 18/1page layout

11/9/06 11:26 AM

Page 135

Managing Technological Constraints and Educational Aspiration in a Multicultural E-Learning Environment Design LAÏLA OUBENAÏSSA-GIARDINA CIRTA-Centre of Interuniversity Research on Tele-learning Applications Canada [email protected] MADHUMITA BHATTACHARYA Massey University, New Zealand [email protected] People in social systems engage in design in order to devise and implement systems, based on their vision of what those systems should be. Or, they may redesign their system in order to realize their changing aspirations and the expectations of the environments (Banathy, 1998, p.51).

Information and Communication Technology (ICT) allows us to create technology-mediated learning environment which provides opportunities for interactions through online environments. There is no doubt that it gives learners richer experience of sharing and exchange with other learners and the teacher. However, it does create concerns due to the non-availability of design tools that consider learners’ perspectives, beliefs, and how those elements affect the learners’ socio-cognitive and metacognitive interaction. Therefore, it is clear that we need to understand how interactions are affected by personal and cultural differences. In this article, we have presented a conceptual model for developing a learning environment which takes multicultural aspects into consideration. The learning environment designed based on the findings of our future research could provide directions to make online interactions and communications more successful in developing learners’ critical thinking and epistemological skills.

JILR 18/1page layout

136

11/9/06 11:26 AM

Page 136

Oubenaïssa-Giardina and Bhattacharya

Context of this Study Today’s teachers face many external pressures and challenges in their practice and in their assumed roles. Due to ICT integration in the work place, the way of teaching, the way of apprehending knowledge, and the practice of teaching and supervision has revolutionised. The teacher’s role is not only to provide information or knowledge in age of Internet, but also to invent new ways and strategies to deliver knowledge which are more skill oriented and based on personal experiences. This will allow the teachers to manifest their expertise by coaching, monitoring, guiding and facilitating. There lacks a theory of online learning (Anderson, 2004) and a valid e-learning model which take into account the aspects of language and ways of communicating. Language and communication are the two aspects which constitute the essence of culture (Vygotsky, 1978; Wertsch, 1985). Therefore, we reiterate that existing online instructional designers and instructors are living in a time of transition, but, are not embracing the shifting paradigm. There has always been a large gap between theory and practice in education. There are only few valid research outcomes on the effectiveness of elearning. Therefore it is difficult to convince and motivate people to practice e-learning. In addition, e-learning practices have rarely drawn on evidence. Moreover, there is an assumption that ICT brings a new way of learning and teaching, so it should accompanied by new pedagogies and new approaches and strategies (Sutherland et al., 2004). Consequently there has been a rapid change in present day education which has brought about innovative ways and approaches to teaching and learning, based on individual craftsmanship; therefore, these practices are not valid in a wider context (Design-Based Research Collective, 2003; Clark & Estes, 1999). They are not explicit and transmittable. Most of them have not been based on valid pedagogical principles and systemic instructional design approaches and therefore, are difficult to reproduce or re-use. In an online environment we are able to reach a large number of people which was previously not possible so the effect of good or bad teaching was minimal. This means, that along with transferring resources and using technology, we are also transmitting cultures, values and educational methodologies. We may, therefore, argue that ICT as technology is seldom neutral. Some researchers and philosophers consider education and the use of technology “as a means of favouring parental ways of knowing, which favour particular economic systems” (Biraimah, 2005). Thus providing finance for educational reforms makes education a vehicle for achieving economic ends, implementing economic models and controlling educational agendas. Biraimah (2005) also states that the transfer of technology is also means of transferring of the Western model without exploiting and incorporating the richness and diversity of varied teaching methods, student ways of

JILR 18/1page layout

11/9/06 11:26 AM

Page 137

Managing Technological Constraints and Educational Aspiration

137

knowing, indigenous cultures, educational structures and philosophy of learning environment designs. With the enhancement of technology, we are privileged to access the wealth of culture, diverse thinking, different ways of teaching, and so on. Therefore, it is our foremost responsibility to further discover the spirit of cultural diversities as mentioned by Bhattacharya and Jorgensen (2006). We educators need to work towards culture’s intellectual management in terms of exploitation, enrichment and reinvestment through the process of interaction and communication (see Figure 1). We may conclude that e-learning depends on the involvement, consideration and constraints that come from two distinct worlds: the economic and labour markets and the world of human sciences. The future challenges of elearning will be to create a balance between these two worlds. Present Status of E-Learning We will discuss the present status of e-learning under the following headings: The New E-Learning/Teaching Competencies Advancements in ICT have provided us with tools and technologies to share, communicate and interact within a rich and a complex environment. This richness and complexity is the source of several emerging issues, concerns and requires specific competencies to exploit the possibilities of the learning environment. Present technology is building a new context of inter-

Figure 1. Different emphasis on e-learning: Labour market economy versus educational system.

JILR 18/1page layout

138

11/9/06 11:26 AM

Page 138

Oubenaïssa-Giardina and Bhattacharya

action and communication that is constituted by a mosaic of subjects, cultures, interests, and distinct learning profiles, along with a new way of building and interacting with information and knowledge. This context brings many challenges for learners, learning designers, and teachers, (e.g., an evolution and refinement in learning outcomes specificity) (Jonassen and Tesmer, 1997; Haynes, 2004; Hung & Cheah, 2005), as well as a mastery of the art of framing guidance as mentioned by Hargrove “Masterful coaching is a journey, not just a destination” (2003, p.16). In the transmission-of-knowledge model, the process is mainly associated with the metaphor of acquisition. In the present social knowledge-building model the process is associated with a participative metaphor which is based on a sense of negotiation (Stahl, 2005). However, the standardized testing in use is still related to traditional transmission type pedagogy, so there is a mismatching between the methodology used to measure effect and the type of learning being promoted (InfoDev, 2005). Moreover, technologies are now providing multiple ways of knowing and communicating, and are starting to be seen as a means for discovering social identity when teaching diverse populations. The present technology is bringing an emancipated voice to express social identity more than ever before (Walther, 1997; Kitsantas & Talleyrand, 2005). However, this multicultural context and multi-diverse target students pose monumental challenges to the teacher in terms of competencies. Recent research shows that e-learning and e-teaching expect a clear understanding of cultural domains. The teacher should be able to take into account, when managing and monitoring students, the tacit variables that could affect human cognition, identity, and people’s modes of perception (Lee & Krugly-Smolska, 1999). In term of skills and abilities, this means: • Multicultural competency for teachers and learners (Bennett, 2001) that could bring a cross-cultural understanding, fewer emotional and behaviour problems (Gazda, Ginter & Horme, 2001; Salzman & D'Andrea, 2001) and higher level of academic achievement (Gay, 2002) • Teachers’ skills for cultural responsive teaching practices (Gay, 2002), to be able to take into consideration students’ experiences, cultural characteristics, and perspectives as a medium for providing effective teaching. However, even if the great political reforms, such as UNESCO and other education organizations, aspire to those objectives, less research and attention has been given to the impacts of ICT on the psychological, emotional, and cultural issues of teaching and learning (InfoDev, 2005). Only a few studies have been conducted with the goal of identifying cultural learning characteristics, behavioural patterns, and communication styles that facilitate multicultural learning and interaction.

JILR 18/1page layout

11/9/06 11:26 AM

Page 139

Managing Technological Constraints and Educational Aspiration

139

The Gap Between the Theory and the Practice Some research results underline that e-learning promotes more positive attitudes mainly due to learner control over learning, authenticity and diversity of learning activities, tasks and interactivity allowed by these environments (Howards-Jones & Martin, 2002; Katz, 2002; Thomas, 2002). Other researchers have mentioned that the complexity of the e-learning is the source of several emerging issues, including the issue of cognitive overload resulting from the nonsequential nature of hypertext (Herring, 1999), the difficulty of managing interactions in a collaborative context (De Laat & Lally, 2004), and the lack of mastery of the skills needed to understand independent and diffused thinking styles (Chou and Liu, 2005). Recent research on the use of computers and the characteristics of domain innovations clearly show that even in practice, research is still mainly descriptive and exploratory. When research is prescriptive, it is often superimposed with value judgments about what constitutes high-quality practice, and the criteria within the framework may provide contradictory pictures of practices (Twining, 2002, p.100). For many researchers, the gap between theory and practice, and the separation between the domain of practice and research era, are two of the greater challenges in education (Winter & Richemond, 2005; Chou, 2005, Design-Based Research Collective, 2003). Sutherland, Robertson, and John, (2004) mentioned that practitioners are not drawing on research evidence when it exists. In a report by the National Research Council (1999) another parameter associated with the use of technology was discussed: What is not yet fully understood is that computer-based technologies can be powerful pedagogical tools – not just rich sources of information, but also for social interaction supporting learning…technology resources for education function in social environments mediated by learning conversations with peers and teachers (p.218). Furthermore, there is a need to recognise the fact that technology would not be critical to some learning and its use should be motivated by pedagogical intentions (Butler & Sellbom, 2002; Otero et al., 2005). Unfortunately, we find the reverse when using technology in education; that is to say, educational planners and technology advocates first think of technology and only later investigate the educational applications of this technology (InfoDev, 2005), thus contributing to existing cleavage between the technological engine of innovation and the pedagogical engine of innovation. In addition, we also generate issues which either need another kind of technology or another educational theory (Oubenaissa-Giardina, 2005).

JILR 18/1page layout

140

11/9/06 11:26 AM

Page 140

Oubenaïssa-Giardina and Bhattacharya

Main Goal of the Research The motivation for this work is to explore if and how the learners’ personal characteristics, particularly their cultural characteristics, interfere in the learning process when adopting a problem-based learning (PBL) approach in a distributed learning environment. The researchers intend to investigate: • What kind of actions, transactions, and interaction, could be related to certain cultural aspects? • What kind of support should be designed to help students and teachers to exploit the diverse interpretative patterns that could emerge in a multicultural environment? • What are the educational designing skills that teachers should acquire to teach in a multicultural environment? The main goal of the research is to investigate the design approaches that attempt to establish a coherent bridge between the established knowledge and the new knowledge (through this research) and integrate the research findings to refine interaction dynamics in a distributed multicultural environment. The research project involves reviewing and analysing recent research literature regarding of the possible influence of cultural characteristics on the learning process. In order to undertake this research, we are aware of the of need an underpinning conceptual model to guide us in analysing the data gathered. This article focuses on the conceptual model conceived by the researchers as the first step in the world of the unknown. Conceptual Model Firstly, the conceptual model is important to comprehend, visualize and translate our observations, our mental models, our assumptions and our queries in functional terms of concepts and dynamics. Secondly, the flexibility of the conceptual model allows us to organize and to anticipate elements and important events which could give us a deeper understanding of the phenomenon and permit us to progressively perceive the emerging pattern of events and their importance. Critical analysing of the available research literature we were able to envisage two distinct systems and one interface for learning design in multicultural environments (Figure 2): • Cultural and Personal Characteristics. (Existing learners’ system external to that of teachers). In this research, we will focus our observations and analyse to the manifested values, beliefs, norms, personal perceptions and learner-preferred or expressed learning styles. • Higher-order Learning Activities. (External learner system and the activities structured by teacher). In the DPBL (Giardina, Oubenaïssa, &

JILR 18/1page layout

11/9/06 11:26 AM

Page 141

Managing Technological Constraints and Educational Aspiration

141

Bhattacharya, 2002), the main activities relate to collaborative learning, learning as problem solving and independent learning. • Interface. (The interaction between 1 and 3). The socio-cultural interaction/communication dynamics enhanced by the learning activity systems create an interface in which the external manifestations of the learners’ cultural and personal characteristics may be apparent. Manifestations as mentioned in the interface could be in terms of a) behaviours, incidents, events, b) interaction cycles: specifics and/or recurrent which could take the form of a confrontation of points of views, a cognitive tension, or a biased perception of a fact. In terms of process, manifestations could be associated with sociocognitive processes and activities, such as argumentation and negotiation, or more cognitive and metacognitive activities related to knowledge refinement. We should regard the multicultural context as an opportunity to develop and enhance learners’ epistemological skills and critical thinking skills. Particular attention should be given to the interface as described above. A profound understanding of the interface should generate pedagogical and educational designing principles other than those presently in use, which are mainly centred on the physical management of the learning environment.

Figure 2. Conceptual model for Distributed Problem-Based Learning Activity in a multicultural context

JILR 18/1page layout

142

11/9/06 11:26 AM

Page 142

Oubenaïssa-Giardina and Bhattacharya

Conclusion and Future Research Education today is more than ever the theatre of a conflict and shift of paradigms. The research, based on the conceptual model discussed in this article, will adopt an ethnographic approach. This will allow us to collect qualitative data from multiple sources, and therefore, increase the validity and reliability of the results by the process of triangulation (Miles & Huberman, 1994). By exploring new aspects related to e-learning, this approach offers the opportunity to understand the research participants in their own context and establish a trusting relationship. The ethnographic approach permits the flexibility to explore all the e-classroom dynamics by observing, making notes, asking for clarifications and identifying critical elements as they arise during the research process. The research project is expected to convey a formal image of how the Distributed Problem-Based Learning (DPBL) approach unmasks cultural characteristics, behaviours, and cognitive and sociocognitive acts. The research findings will also guide professionals to conceive appropriate tools, technologies, and strategies for designing e-learning environments in a multicultural context. References Anderson, T. (2005). Theory and practice of online learning. In T. Anderson and F. Elloumi Eds. Toward a theory of online learning (chp.2). Athabasca University, Canada’s Open University, Creative Commons. http://cde.athabascau.ca/online_book/ Banathy, B. H. (1998). Designing education as a social system. Educational Technology, Nov-Dec., 51-56. Bennett, C. (2001). Genres of research in multicultural education. Review of Educational Research, 71, 171-217. Bhattacharya, M., & Jorgensen, L. (2006). Defining Dimensions of Diversity. In Trajkovski, G. (Ed) Diversity in Information Technology Education: Issues and Controversies (pp. 1-14). Hershey: Information Science Publishing. Biraimah, K. (2005). Achieving equitable outcomes or reinforcing societal inequalities? A critical analysis of UNESCO’ Education For All and the United States’ No Child Left Behind Programs. Educational Practice and Theory, 27(2), 25-34.. Butler, D. L., & Sellbom, M. (2002). Barriers to adopting technology for teaching and learning. Educause Quarterly, 25(2), 22-28. Chou, S. W. (2005). Designing good instructional contexts for innovation in a technology-mediated learning environment. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 21, 269-280. Chou, S-W., & Liu, C-H. (2005). Learning effectiveness in a web-based virtual learning environment: a learner control perspective. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 21, 65-76 Clark, R. E., & Estes, F. (1999). Technology or craft? What we are doing? Educational Technology, 38, 55-11.

JILR 18/1page layout

11/9/06 11:26 AM

Page 143

Managing Technological Constraints and Educational Aspiration

143

De Laat, M., & Lally, V. (2004). It's not so easy: Researching the complexity of emergent participant roles and awareness in asynchronous networked learning discussions. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 20, 165-171. Design-Based Research Collective (2003). Design-based research: An emerging paradigm for educational inquiry. Educational Researcher, 32(1), 5-8. Gay, G. (2002). Preparing for culturally responsive teaching. Journal of Teacher Education, 53, 106-116. Gazda, G. Ginter, E., & Horme, A. (2001). Group counselling and group psychotherapy. Boston: Allyn & Bacon. Giardina, M., & Oubenaïssa, L.(2004). Projet d'apprentissage/enseignement en ligne. Numéro spécial: Technologies et Formation à Distance. Richard Hotte and Pascal Leroux (ed.). Giardina, M., Oubenaïssa, L., & Bhattacharya, M. (2002). Design of a framework for the implementation of situated on-line collaborative problem based activity, operating within a local and multi-cultural learning context. International Journal on E-Learning, 1(3), 2002. Hargoove , R. A. (2003). Transforming individuals. The journey: what is masterful coaching? In Masterful coaching. Published by Jossey-Bass/Pleiffer. Haynes, F. (2004). Seeing education as metaphorical relation. Change Transformations in Education, 7(2), 35-47. Howards-Jones, P. A., & Martin, R. J. (2002). The effect of questioning on concept learning within a hypertext system. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 18, 10-20. Hung, D., & Cheah, H. M. (2005). Distinguishing between facilitating and coaching in problem based learning: Issues in problem and process authenticity. Educational Technology, January-February, 61-64. InfoDev (2005). Knowledge maps ICTs in education. What we know about the effective use of information and communication technologies in education in developing countries. Information for Development program. http://www.infodev.org/files/2907_file_Knowledge_Maps_ ICTs_Education_infoDev.pdf Jonassen, D., & Tesssmer, M. (1997). An outcomes-based taxonomy for instructional systems design, evaluation, and research. Training Research Journal, 2, 11-46. Katz, Y. J. (2002). Attitudes affecting college students' preferences for distance learning. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 18, 2-9. Kitsantas, A., & Talleyrand, R. M. (2005). The use of online resources to promote multicultural competencies among K-12 preservice teachers: A model for self-regulatory learning. Education, 125(4), 627-635. Lee, M., & Krugly-Smolska, E. (1999). Cultural understanding in prospective overseas teachers. Canadian and International Education, 28(1), 1-16. Miles, M. B. & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis. London: Sage. National Research Council. (1999). How people learn: Brain, mind, experience, and schools. Washington, DC: National Academy Press. Otero, V., Peressini, D., Ford, P., Garvin, T., Harlow, D, Reidel, M., Waite, B., and Mears, C. (2005). Integrating technology into teacher education. A critical framework for implementing reform. Journal of Teacher Education, 56(1), 8-23.

JILR 18/1page layout

144

11/9/06 11:26 AM

Page 144

Oubenaïssa-Giardina and Bhattacharya

Oubenaissa-Giardina, L. (2005). E-learning design: Learning modes, pedagogical principles, and educational designing skills. In Richards, G. (Ed.), Proceedings of World Conference on ELearning in Corporate, Government, Healthcare, and Higher Education 2005 (pp. 22702273). Chesapeake, VA: AACE. Salzman, M., & D’Andrea, M. (2001). Assessing the impacts of a prejudice prevention project. Journal of counselling and Development, 79, 341-346. Stahl, G. (2005). Group cognition in compute-assisted collaborative learning, Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 21, 79-90. Sutherland, R., Robertson, S., & John, P. (2004). Interactive education: Teaching and learning in the information age. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 20, 410-412. Sutherland, R., Armstrong, V., Barnes, S., Brawn, R., Breeze, N., Gall, M., Matthewman, S., Olivero, F., Taylor, A., Triggs, Wishart, J., and John, P. (2004). Transforming teaching and learning: Embedding ICT into everyday classroom practices. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 20, 413-425. The Design-Based Research Collective (2003). Design-based research: An emerging paradigm for educational inquiry. Educational Researcher, 32(1), 5-8. Thomas, M. J. W. (2002). Learning within incoherent structures: The space of online discussion forums. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 18, 351-366. Twining, P. (2002). Conceptualising computer use in education: introducing the computer practice framework (CPF). British Educational Research Journal, 28(1), 95-109. Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher mental process. Cambridge. MIT. Harvard University Press. Wertsch, J. W. (1985). The social formation of mind: A Vygotskian approach. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Winter, E. C., & McGhie-Richmond, D. (2005). Using computer conferencing and case studies to enable collaboration between expert and novice teachers. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 21,118-129.