Brook, C. and Oliver, R. (2003). Online learning communities: Investigating a design framework. Australian Journal of Educational Technology, 19(2), 139-160. http://www.ascilite.org.au/ajet/ajet19/brook.html
Begins with a quick overview of some of the benefits of collaboration and community interaction in learning:
increased motivation
promoting learning achievement
enhanced perception of (and satisfaction with) skill development
nurturing, socialisation & support
“modern societies tending to develop more relational communities… or communities of the mind”
“a learning community is characterised by a willingness of members to share resources, accept and encourage new membership, regular communication, systematic problem solving and a preparedness to share success (Moore & Brooks, 2000)”
“Potentially negative influences include the need for members to conform and the subsequent loss of individuality… and the potential to hoard knowledge and thus restrict innovation… Also noteworthy is the potential for community structures to exert pressure on some individuals to engage in nonconforming rather than conforming behaviours, resulting in dissidents and the formation of sub-communities..”
“Sense of community is based on an attachment relationship and this relationship is not based on the interactions with any one member of the community but instead with any member (Hill, 1996)”
“Sense of community has been defined as ‘a sense that members have a belonging, members matter to one another and to the group and a shared faith that member’s needs will be met through their commitment to be together’(McMillan & Chavis, 1986p.9)
Strategies to support a good online community might include:
a common symbol system
establishing a common purpose
facilitating frequent and easy meetings
developing a sense of place
being non-judgemental
“Constructionism is seen as offering an important bridge between cognitive and sociocultural perspectives on cognitive development, by arguing that individual development cycles are enhanced by shared constructive activity in the social environment. Furthermore, social settings are enhanced by the cognitive development of the individual”
“It has been suggested that the social construction of knowledge in the online environment progresses through five sequential phases (Gunawardena, Lowe & Anderson, 1997):
Sharing and comparing of information: statements of opinion and observation and corroborating examples provided by one or more participants characterise phase one
The discovery of exploration of dissonance or inconsistency among ideas, concepts or statements: Phase two identifies and states areas of disagreement, and perhaps escalates conflict through reference to research or experience
The negotiation of meaning: exploration of meaning and the identifying of areas of agreement characterise phase three
Testing and modification of proposed synthesis or co-construction: phase four is characterised by testing the proposed synthesis against ‘received fact’; as shared by the participants and/or their culture
Agreement statements and the application of newly constructed meaning: metacognitive statements by the participants, illustrating their understanding that their new knowledge or ways of thinking have changed, characterise phase five.
People may participate in communities because of the perceived benefits even if their nature is to avoid such interactions – teachers may need to emphasise the benefits in ’selling’ the community
“Factors that may influence community development include policies…, the discipline and education level of the course…, the instructor… and the students. At a process level, influencing factors include the purpose the community serves in the lives of its members.., support for communication…, the nature of meetings… and the gathering place…”
Some ideas, tips and strategies:
“It has been suggested that the role of the instructor is pivotal in the development of online learning communities… The manner in which this role is approached depends on the characteristics and beliefs of the instructor…, including educational philosophies…, perceptions of self as either connected of separate… and perceptions of their role. Other considerations include the instructor’s online experience, the nature of the social environment they develop and the manner in which they manage the learning environment”
“The nature of the cohort, including the number of participants, may also influence community development strategies. In asynchronous environments, groups size is recommended to be no larger than 25, while 10 is suggested for the synchronous environment”
“Groups that are dominated by individuals who perceive themselves as separate are likely to be characterised by competition, while those dominated by connected individuals are likely to be characterised by cooperation”
“Essential in the formation of all communities is the purpose that the community serves in the lives of its members”
“Purpose may reflect the manner in which student participation is encouraged. Suggestions include mandated participation through the allocation of grades…, providing an increase in intellectual resources through guest experts…, presenting a problem or disorienting dilemma… and linking activities to the lived in world… The purpose and context may also be established through encouraging collaborative construction of knowledge…, facilitated through group work or projects… or by the instructor acting as an agent provocateur”
“An essential requirement for community development is regular and meaningful meetings… Communication may be encouraged through grading participation, based on the quantity or quality of communications…, requesting responses…, establishing a sense of positive outcome as a result of belonging… and encouraging members to pay their dues.”
“Setting an appropriate pace and schedule for participation that maintains active engagement, without dominating the learning experience, may provide further support”
“Strategies that promote connectedness include engendering the human elements of community… and establishing user profiles… Additional strategies include welcoming new members, sharing wisdom, resolving problems and sharing success…”
I think that the user profiles part in particular is important – the more you know about someone the more interested you are in what they have to say. Questions might also be framed in such a way that learners are encouraged to relate them directly to their experiences, bringing personal anecdotes to the discussion. An initial face-to-face orientation session is also a useful idea as a way of creating connections – maybe voice or even video chat (even avatar based) could add something. – Maybe a chat session in second life?
“Supporting communication includes assisting students in becoming proficient with the technology…, developing text based communication skills… and instituting a sequencing of activities…”
“Due to the more independent nature of the online learning environment, there is a need to support students in managing their own learning experience including setting goals and prioritising tasks… It is also useful to provide weekly reminders… and clearly state roles and responsibilities…”
“Given the importance of non-verbal factors in communication…, which are to a large extent absent in text based environments…, helping students develop text based communication skills may also support community development…”
The rather glaring alternative to this – or perhaps supplement – is to be less reliant on text for communication – again, audio, video, images and virtual world based communication might help level the playing field a little here. I’d say that half of the fellow students in my class have English as a second language and while you get the gist of what they are saying in text, it may well come across more effectively in other ways.
There’s a bit of other stuff about encouraging respect and trust with codes of conduct – I’d suggest that these be generated by the group and possibly even subject to regular review. It also talks about creating a greater sense of place by using welcoming messages (hmm maybe) and acknowledging individual contributions, making sure that trade in ideas and information is fair (some people will just lurk, it’s the nature of the boards) and avoiding anonymity and “electronic self”s
Quite a few interesting ideas which draw on a lot of research that has come before – I would have liked to have seen a few more specific strategies for encouraging contributions beyond the initial entry point but all in all, this is a useful piece of writing.
This is the design statement for my latest foray into game based learning. I’ve used FPS Creator once more to create a democratic learning environment which creates a simulation of the Education Development Centre here. Learners can access scenario tasks in the course of find out about the multitude of awesome services and knowledge we can provide
This is a fairly wordy section on a quite specific aspect of the process of designing interactive multimedia so I’m just going to scan for salient quotes. (I’m a little tired
“Given the capability of multimedia systems to house massive quantities of information and to construct complex delivery systems, it seems reasonable to encourage the development of instructional systems which contain mre than a single cognitive orientation. In this way, the designer can impose consistency between the cognitive orientation and different learning tasks, and also capitalise on the possibility of designing instruction which is compatible with learning styles and preferences”
I won’t quote it but there’s a pretty good summation of the differences between the behaviourist, cognitivist and constructivist philosophies and approaches in this chapter.
They then move on to look at options for specifying content.
“Many projects will result in a glut of information you need to organise. In fact, one can argue that instructional design is largely the process of organising rather than creating, opportunities for learning”
The Content Outline is a suggested approach, consisting of a set of objectives for the course, the content necessary to achieve them and the treatment that the the content might be given. (How it is presented)
From here, Design specifications are quite useful – simple things to ensure consistency across the multimedia product- These might be broken into technical standards, instructional formats and aesthetic considerations.
Technical standards could look at issues like:
Writing style
Screen format (eg a single idea to a screen of text)
Grammar (eg no contractions to be used)
Numbering
Layout restrictions
Abbreviations
Instructional formats could consider:
Strategy (e.g scenarios with background reading)
Menu Organisation (advanced organisers)
Length of segments (time allocated to activities)
Reading level
Test-like events
feedback
Aesthetic considerations:
Screen text (font + size)
Color
Computer vs video
music
illustrations
visual cues
From here, Misanchuk & Schwier see the next step as setting up the framework for the content.
This takes five forms.
Core instruction: introductory segments (what’s to come, objectives) + core instruction (the primary content) + summary segments (reinforcing key points)
Complementary instruction: help segments (rephrasing or embellishing core instruction) + remedial segments (filling in scaffolding knowledge that should already be there) + additional information (enriching but not essential extra info). (Complementary instruction shouldn’t appear by default but should be easily accessible if it is needed)
Management elements: quizzes, games, scenarios which offer feedback (or assessment)
Navigation elements: easy access to all sections of content, global escape route, “you are here” type maps
Interactive elements: immediacy of response, non-sequential access of information, adaptability, feedback, options, bi-directionality and interruptability (pause and escape options and context sensitive help)
“For interaction to be dynamic, it is necessary to build content for the varied directions the instruction may follow.This means developing a great deal of content which any particular learner may never see.”
From here, Schwier and Misanchuk move on to the matter of allowing learners to practice their new knowledge in the multimedia environment. They outline some generalised principles for this:
practice during instruction should be varied, not constant
as familiarity with the learning task increases, so should the difficulty of practice increase
learners should be weaned from prompts as their facility with knowledge or skills increases
use practice often during the early stages of learning and gradually lengthen the space between practice sessions on a particular topic as instruction progresses
for some types of learning, practice should progress from accuracy to speed to automaticity
review segments can be used successfully in place of questions
feedback should identify the successful and the unsuccessful features of the interaction and describe why incorrect responses or omissions are insufficient
learners can benefit from memory or organisational strategies to make information more meaningful
practice events should require learners to use information and discover and derive new relationships in information
practice should be designed to motivate learners
Learner control:
There are a range of areas that learners might control in a multimedia product:
which content they access
the method it is presented in
whether they access supplementary material
the order they access the content
how much practice they undertake
level of difficulty of exercises undertaken
They finish up the chapter by looking at some different studies on what happens when learners use multimedia products in groups – some show that retention is the same for singles as pairs but drops off with 3 or more in the group while other studies don’t. (But the 2 vs 3+ thing seems to make a certain amount of sense – hard to cram three people around a screen for one thing)
Harper, B. (1992) Navigation Options in Interactive Multimedia. In J. G. Hedberg and J. Steele, Educational Technology for the Clever Country, Selected papers from EdTech’92,Conference of the Australian Society for Educational Technology. University of Adelaide-Australia, 1-3 October (pp 10-16). Belconnen, A.C.T. : AJET Publication for the Society.
This article, like many others, starts out with the usual rah-rah interactive multimedia is great, shift to learner-control, enriching the learning experience yada yada spiel. It’s all fairly true but it seems to be at the start of every article I’ve read for a while now.
Once it gets past this preliminary stuff though, it is actually fairly useful and contains a number of interesting approaches to designing navigation in multimedia. It’s a little unfortunate that the article is 15 years old though as you get the sense that there’s probably been a lot more work done since. It therefore requires a little extrapolation to move the concepts to the 3D game based environment that I’m thinking about (I think Wolfenstein 3D had only just been released at the time this was written)
My project is to develop a 3D game space that the learner walks through in first person perspective. It provides new teachers at CIT an orientation to the services and resources available within the Education Development Centre at CIT, which includes Curriculum, Teacher Education, the Library and Flexible Learning Solutions (the online learning unit).
It’s possible to run this as a multiplayer game which allows for real-time text chat interaction between a number of players.
I’ll run through some of the interesting ideas about multimedia navigation in the paper and how I might use them in my game.
(To begin, here is why good navigation design is important)
“… used effectively, the technology can allow users to interact in ways that the designers of the system did not plan… good instructional design of interactive multimedia materials makes it unnecessary to materials to be structured for the learner. Effective student use of unstructured materials however, will depend on the type of access to the information the users can obtain i.e. the navigation options available to the user. ”
“When a learner can branch down multiple paths and rapidly change the direction and focus of the learning sequence, there is possible interference with effective learning through the inappropriate application of information by the learner to their internal schemas”
Navigation options:
“the guide metaphor where a character is created and used by the author to link ideas and visual travel through the hypermedia materials” – this is certainly one approach to the game and could be done in several different ways.
A non-player-character is automated and sets the learner tasks to complete in the environment (although this isn’t a guide so much I guess) – there could be NPCs in hallways that can answer basic queries about where certain areas are. The other option is to have a live guide in the multiplayer version who runs a bit of an orientation – though this isn’t necessarily very practical or realistic.
“other suggested structures include those which are based on ideas such as sequential navigation (using cues to show how far you are along a path; the clues varying from a simple screen number of the total or some conceptual description of the sequence), visual navigation (using a plan of the possible paths) and hybrid navigation (mixtures of both) (Hedberg & Harper, 1991)”
This has given me some thoughts about ways to set up the activities – in recreational gaming I’m fairly partial to sandpit style games such as the Grand Theft Auto series, where you can take on missions or just explore the environment. (But you need to complete certain missions to unlock new missions or new parts of the environment). I could have the entire area explorable, with different kinds of resources accessible (including being able to chat to all the staff) as well as having a room where you can get your missions from. You could collect keys (or something) which allow you to unlock rooms which provide additional missions. You could measure your progress by looking at the rooms you’ve opened.
Techniques to provide navigation cues for users:
“using colour to identify the area or major learning path”
This actually works pretty well as we recently had the rooms in our area repainted and each dept went with a different colour scheme. I’m thinking that it would be useful to have a few “You are here” maps around the place and/or some signs which could be colour coded without too much difficulty.
“simple use of contextual clues, regular use of a standard format of basic word style format to indicate links with other sources of information”
Other than the fact that this seems like a fairly tortured sentence, what I got from it was that in the rooms, on the walls near the desks of the different people we could have text and icons that reflect their areas of expertise. These could also be replicated on the maps. (E.g an artists palette for our graphic designer)
“written directions which appear in separate areas or windows to the information required to learn the underlying concepts”
I agree with this idea although I’m not sure entirely how to put it into action in the software that I’m thinking of. (FPS Creator). If the player/learner had a key that they could toggle a PDA on and off, you could have this information there. It could be possible to have some computer screens that the player/learner could access this information from but they would need to go to the screen any time they wanted to check a detail. If it was a multiplayer game I guess the instructions could just sit in the chat window.
“enabling learning path maps to be modified highlighting the paths which have been travelled”
This comes back to my earlier point about knowing what you’ve done by what rooms you’ve unlocked. I’m a little unsure about this however as it goes against my desire to have an environment that people can wander around completely freely.
“creating new links by the learner using a series of tools which enable the package to be modified, either by adding new information or by adding new hypertext linkages based on the students’ own conceptual maps”
It would be great if there was some way to embed web access (and presumably a wiki) into a part of the game. As far as I’m aware, this isn’t an option but I’ll keep looking. A setup like the 3D browser called 3B would be good – it could live on the smartboard in the training/conference room part of the game.
Defining Navigation types:
This is another of those instances where the datedness of this article shows – the concepts are still sound, just behind the times.
“Materials can be designed to focus on the appropriate development of schema and hence improve learning efficiency. In effect, any navigational system must employ elements with as much intrinsic meaning as possible… this link can be enhanced through understandable and well chosen metaphors”
He goes on to list a few different options:
Modal (icon based)
Relational (stack maps)
Hierarchical (more like an organisational chart or a website map)
Sequential (basic back, forward and index buttons)
Geographical/Spatial (much closer to Florin’s info landscape model – and my 3d game)
Conceptual (metaphor + info landscape)
The Geographical/Spatial seems to reflect my approach with the game so I guess I’ll note the quote:
“selecting parts of a whole by an inherent physical/geographic relationship. This approach might be exemplified region by using a map as a link between objects” – or a navigable 3D environment.
I had a few other thoughts as I was reading this paper:
What about a bookshelf in every person’s area? (Or similar metaphor for stored info – maybe a pda?)
It would be good to be able to access the online pd courses from inside the game – again, in game web access is the key.
Hedberg, J. and Harper, B. (1997) Creating Motivating Interactive Learning Environments. Keynote address at EDMEDIA, Calgary, Canada, 1997.
This paper repeats a lot of the points covered in the last two.
It still contains a few interesting points though so I’ll try to sum them up as succinctly as I can. (As it’s getting late and wading through this hard to read ode to constructivism has fried my mind a little)
In essence:
learners use productivity tools to construct their own meaningful chunks of content that sum up the available information
In designing learning environments: 1. identify the information to be covered, how to structure it and what the target audience already knows about it 2. find a metaphor to shape the information structure 3. link the design ideas to an interaction structure
This next bit is actually worth quoting (I think):
” Each interaction consists of a node point which forms the basis of the interaction, a set of options which provide links to other nodes or additional information attached to the current node. One of the links must relate to earlier travelled or preferred paths through the materials and each choice must inform the user about what is likely to occur as the result of a choice.
These can translate into the traditional concept of results (correct or incorrect) or performance support enhancement such as suggested hints (maybe you could have levels of hints?) or revision of the underlying concept/principle which might be employed to make the choice.
Depending on the instructional strategy chosen, another element might include the concept of duration, either time or the limit of options based up previous choices or paths taken.”
“The range and extent of user interaction with the data in the software increases as the user is given more freedom to navigate, access, determine the format of information representation and manipulate the data using cognitive and metacognitive tools”
You can have more than just text in the information presented.
In interaction, “it is important that the user is required to think before a response is possible”
“Being able to store and report thoughts and impressions derived from media experiences by using the media itself (actual video/audio and pictures, not just text representations of the media) provides a more powerful means of ‘reformulating’ (Schroeder & Kenny, 1994, p 965)”
Simulations can be powerful tools – “which provides support for the solution to one of the embedded problems by mimicking a “real world process”"
Good idea to allow learners to share and compare the products that they create – particularly to compare them against the work of experts in the field – “learning can occur through the resolution of multiple responses to the same task”
Harper, B. & Hedberg, J. G. (1995). Exploration of Information Landscapes Through Networks. In Connecting the systems: Australian Telecommunication Networks & Applications Conference. Sydney, Australia, 11-13 December 1995 (pp 141-149). Clayton, Vic.: Monash University.
This paper says much the same as the others:
new technology offers new opportunities and requires new approaches
relevant authentic activities that draw on a pool of well organised data are important
learners construct their own knowledge from experiences and by socially negotiated meaning
provide a hierarchical set of problems to solve
It does manage to make a few more points however – heavily focussed on good design practices for information landscapes.
There are four key factors to consider:
interface design
navigation options
learning support for the user
instructional strategies to tie together underlying knowledge structures.
Inert knowledge is “knowledge which can usually be recalled when people are explicitly asked to do so but which is not used spontaneously in problem solving even though it might be relevant.”
“Situated learning has, as its main idea, the notion that “the activity in which knowledge is developed and deployed… is an integral part of what is learned”(Brown, Collins & Duguid, 1989, p32)”
” “Legitimate peripheral practice”… refers to the engagement of a novice in a socially-based practice in which they can perform the same range of skills as an expert. Interactive multimedia provides an ideal structured environment which allows the novice to work with problems and learning situations which are some distance (peripheral) from the core of the expert’s world. As the novice begins to practice more as a full practitioner, the skills and shared experiences overlap more with those who are acknowledged as expert.”
This sounds like a good application of simulations and scenarios to me.
The design of the activities (how real & relevant they are) is just as important as the aesthetics (fancy graphics etc) used in creating immersion.
“The use of systems which can be given a set of attributes and defined rules of relating can prove a great boon for working with a particular information landscape or microworld… The question is, therefore, can we place all ideas into a microworld of objects, attributes and relationships?”
“A second aspect of immersion is the conceptual congruence between user actions and their understanding of the concepts embodied in the learning context. Much educational software doesn’t link the response of the user to progress toward the goal… Within the interactive multimedia environment the action of the learner will lead to a conceptual understanding directly about the context in which they are learning”
“…there has to be a learning environment which intrinsically motivates the participant to work within the context”
Avoid the “pedestrian point and click strategy”
“Active participation in Exploring the Nardoo has been supported through the user “guides” that directly address and challenge the user from the initial entry to the package. This challenge to actively participate in problem-solving and investigation is based around a group of researchers, who advise users on problems to investigate and provide graded hints on how to investigate specific case-based problems”
“Cognitive apprenticeships – using the terms modelling, coaching and fading to explain a sequence of activities beginning with the apprentice repeatedly observing the master who models the target process. This is followed by an attempt on the part of the learner to execute the process with guidance from the master (coaching) and finally a reduction in participation of the master (fading) as the apprentice demonstrates a grasp of the skill “
Harper, B. (1997) Building Technology Supported Learning Environments. Paper presented at the Techno Expo, Professional Development Day, Catholic Education Centre, Parramatta. 2 May, 1997.
At first glance there’s not a lot new in this paper – a reasonably well argued pitch of constructivist philosophy and the need to embrace new learning strategies to make best use of new technologies. From there though it does stimulate some interesting thought about the kinds of learning environments we can now create with technology.
Unfortunately, like a lot of the papers we seem to be reading in this class, 10 years of internet time has passed (which is like 30 years of real time) and it become necessary to extrapolate current tools (such as wikis) to the ideas in the paper, which aren’t able to dig into the potential of these things.
Harper (looking into the research) found that learning environments making use of technology had more use of:
more project work
more extensive projects
more motivation for the writing process
more group work and cooperative learning
more interdisciplinary activities
more opportunities for students to make choices
teachers with a different philosophy of teaching.
He draws some interesting points from Dwyer (1995):
“…technology plays a catalytic role in opening the minds of teachers to new ideas about children, learning and their own role in the education process.”
This makes me think that the key to selling eLearning to resistant teachers is by showing how teaching with technology is different, new and exciting. (Useful for the 916 case study)
Harper goes on to talk about visual metaphors for learning environments -
“With graphical and vidusal display coupled with large databases of resources, it is possible to explore an information space in whatever sequence appeals as appropriate to the user or to the specific task”
Which makes me ask – what if the learning space itself was customisable or at least selectable? – learners could choose their own metaphor from a set e.g a circus or an office or a swamp or a castle. Where is (or is there) the balance point between a “fun” metaphor vs a useful, authentic re-creation of a learning context. How much more useful/engaging is an office vs a castle?
Another question raised is that of giving learners access to rich multimedia resources but then always expecting them to construct their assessment items as text document.
What if learners had options to present their project products in a number of different multimedia forms. – not just the actual multimedia project components but their reflection elements? Why shouldn’t a podcast be as relevant as an essay?
Harper sums up the constructivist push part of his paper by saying:
“… the key to success will be developing opportunities and situations where children can gather information, analyse the information collected, construct new knowledge from this information and then reflect on the outcomes”
In looking at how we can develop technology supported constructivist environments, Harper looks at some instructional design goals from Marcy Driscoll. The following one sparked a question in me about feedback:
2. Provide for social negotation as an integral part of learning to allow insights to emerge through the group process that may not come about otherwise
Is there a difference between the feedback provided by a group to people’s work as individuals compared to their contributions to team projects. Are they less inclined to be critical in a group project as it means that they will have to redo something or will they be more critical as it can impact on their mark. I’ve noticed that the handful of comments that appear in our course forum are generally entirely positive and encouraging – is this because everyone’s right, noone wants to get into a stoush or people are more comfortable providing feedback when they agree with something.
Harper goes on to examine some case studies as good examples of learning environments – Exploring the Nardoo raises some interesting approaches:
“In order to offer these facilities to learners, a sophisticated personal digital assistant was developed, allowing users to collect and save the full range of multimedia resources in the package including video, audio and graphic resources. Additionally genre templates were included to support students in their knowledge construction endeavours”
“The information landscape uses a geographic metaphor based upon a Water Research Centre and a navigable river environment”
The PDA tool allows the learner to assemble their resources in a way that makes the most sense to them – be they text, images, audio or video. There is also a capacity to create their own text notes. The logical next step is the ability to create image, audio and video resources.
Providing templates offers learners guidance on structure for their presentation, which seems pretty sensible.
This model sounds a bit like a Wiki precursor and makes me think that there might be new ways to approach the use of wikis.
What if you had a wiki where everyone had ownership of a particular area and others could make suggested edits but these would have to first be moderated by the area owner? Might you have a reputation system allowing the community to vote on who provides useful additions or suggestions? This is potentially rortable but worth considering.
This also makes me think of something on a slight tangent – a scoring system for online debate. Points for logical arguments, new ideas, expresssion, etc, points against logical fallacies, abuse and so on.
So yeah, there are some interesting ideas here but more in the way they’ve helped me to wander down a few sidetracks.
Harper does manage to move on a bit further though after a couple of pages
In the constructivist philosophy, meaning is derived from the experiences gained while undertaking activities/tasks which are scaffolded by course content. The process of reflecting on these experiences and contextualising them with existing experiences helps to develop knowledge.
Feedback is a vital part of the reflection process as it introduces external ideas and extends the range of experiences and information that the learner is exposed to. It stands to reason then that the broader the range of feedback that a learner receives, the richer their reflection will be. Social web tools offer the possibility of feedback from a global audience.
Oliver (2004) points out that “Students involved in self evaluation are more interested in the criteria and substantive feedback than the grades achieved. The interest is piqued by the need for honesty in the application of the criteria for others (peer assessment) and to their own work as well as being able to defend opinions through evidence over subjective judgements.”
Brown & Voltz (2005) go on to say that “Experience becomes knowledge through reflection, which is enhanced by timely and appropriate criticism”.
On a practical level, “the range of available feedback strategies is vast, including reflective responses to prescribed questions, semi-automated responses by the system to student actions and work, shared comments in online forums and blogs and personal responses via email, telephone and post.”(Brown & Voltz, 2005).
It can be used in such a way that learners complete an initial draft of assessment work, post it publicly as an RFC (request for comment) and then incorporate feedback from the community into an updated final version.
Networked based learning offers opportunities for feedback from beyond the usual teacher and fellow students spectrum. The growth of the social web adds the notion of audience to the pool of sources of feedback – learners can now publish the work that they produce in class to the world and receive unvarnished feedback instantly which expands the range of knowledge being drawn on exponentially.
This notion of audience has been used in the Schools News Project. “The feedback from the community will inform the student teams of the quality of the product, its story telling qualities and its social responsibility in terms of ethical treatment of those whose stories have been included in the news items.” (Lockyer, Brown & Blackall, 2003).
The addition of information from the real world is one of the most exciting things about using the social web in education as it brings greater authenticity to the learning experience which heightens motivation.
It also has a useful side effect of developing greater levels of information, technological, critical and media literacy.
Practitioners (particularly those in the K-12 schools sector) considering making use of the social web will need to be mindful of the fact that it is a relatively uncontrolled environment and conscientious moderation of communication may be required. School and government policies may also determine the level of access learners are given to social web sites.
Lockyer, L., Brown, I. & Blackall, D. (2003). A learning design to support multi-literacy development in K-12 contexts. In A. Rossett (Ed.). Proceedings of E-Learn 2003 World Conference on E-Learning in Corporate, Government, Healthcare and Higher Education. (pp.1703-06) Norfolk, VA: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education.
Oliver, R. (2004). Moving beyond instructional comfort zones with online courses.. In R.Atkinson, C. McBeath, D. Jonas-Dwyer & R. Phillips (Eds), Beyond the comfort zone: Proceedings of the 21st ASCILITE Conference (pp. 713-723). Perth, 5-8 December. http://www.ascilite.org.au/conferences/perth04/procs/oliver-r.html
Using authentic activities that reflect the situations and cultures in which learners will use new knowledge and skills makes course content more enjoyable, more relevant to them and easier to recall. In scenario based learning, learners are placed into a fictional setting where they take on roles that relate to the material being covered.
According to Brown and Voltz, “an interesting scenario will make extensive use of humour, imagination, reward, anticipation, or drama to enhance the activity. It will have topics and themes likely to be relevant and interesting to the target audience. It will make the learning activity seem like an obvious or necessary thing to undertake, given the situation presented by the scenario. “ (2005)
Brown, Collins and Duguid (1989) strongly emphasise the idea that concepts exist in a particular context which helps to shape the concept into useful knowledge. Presenting this information in a form related to its use in the real world, ideally in a form which requires the learner to act as though they are also in that context (i.e. As a historian or an educational designer), adds important layers of additional cultural meaning to the information being shared.
This is a useful strategy for me as an instructional designer as I recently worked on a project with a teacher which focused on a competency called Practice within legal and ethical parameters. This teaches nurses about legal and ethical issues within nursing practice, the law and their responsibilities. In the past, it had been taught essentially as a list of laws and policies that nurses needed to be aware of.
We created a detailed case study simulation in which nurses make decisions based on developments in a particular patient’s case, consultation with colleagues and other available information.
As the nurse progresses through the story, ethical and legal complications arise with the patient which highlight key areas of content.
This added hospital and nursing culture issues to the learning and allowed nurses to connect more personally with the course content, which to that point was considered fairly dry and boring. My approach was to use online multimedia resources to better visually represent the scenario context – something that Agostinho, Meek and Herrington (2005) didn’t emphasise, believing that “cognitive realism to the real-life task was of more significance”. (p. 231)
I have an interest in the use of games in learning, which is why this area interests me specifically and I’m currently in the process of creating an immersive 3D environment which is based around our umbrella dept at work, the Education Development Centre. A scenario based approach to this “game” seems like an effective way of structuring user interaction with it.
One factor to consider from the Agostinho et al (2005) research is that “use of scenario should be more flexible, to allow students with appropriate real-life contexts to substitute their own evaluation needs while still fulfilling the requirements of the course. (p. 241)
Brown, J., Collins, A., & Duguid, P. (1989). Situated cognition and the culture of learning. Educational Researcher, Jan/Feb, 32-42.
Brown A.R., & Voltz B.D. (2005) Elements of Effective e-Learning Design, International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning. http://www.irrodl.org/index.php/irrodl/article/view/217/300
The discussion board is a highly useful tool in network based learning, offering learners (and teachers) a space to collaborate and share information and opinions about course content and class work. As an asynchronous form of computer mediated communication, it provides flexibility, accessibility and a level playing field for learners who might not normally feel comfortable speaking up in a face-to-face class.
It’s important to recognise however, that an effective discussion board – one with regular, meaningful posts from a majority of the class – doesn’t run itself and it is the responsibility of a moderator (generally the teacher) to “initiate and sustain the interaction in a networked learning community”(Levin, 1999).
This is done initially through orientation and socialisation (Salmon, 2004) and by providing clear objectives and guidelines (Graham, Cagiltay, Lim, Craner & Duffy, 2001) for the use of the board.
Graham et al (2001) offer a number of practical suggestions for this:
“Discussions should be focused on a task”
“Learners should receive feedback on their discussions”
“Instructors should post expectations for discussions”
“Instructors can still give prompt feedback on discussion assignments by responding to the class as a whole instead of to each student”
This might involve contacting the learners individually at the start of the course to ensure they are able to access the discussion board, running a face-to-face orientation session to the technology, encouraging them to make a brief post about themselves (and comment on others) and offering clear information about the role discussion plays in subject assessment.
It could also involve driving discussion by posting relevant topics or “sparks” (Salmon, 2004) and responding to queries in a timely manner.
In my role as an educational multimedia designer, I regularly work with teachers at CIT (Canberra Institute of Technology) who don’t understand why their students aren’t making use of the discussion boards in their WebCT courses. Frequently it’s because the learners have been told that the board is there and have then been left to their own devices with it. Other times teachers regularly post discussion questions but don’t always follow up with feedback.
I must admit that the first time I had my multimedia students use individual blogs for their work/process journal with the aim of stimulating critical reflection, half of them thought they had to set up a new blog account each week and I’d offered no real guidelines on post length, specific content or frequency – so I am aware that it’s an area that requires a certain amount of thought as a designer.
Gilly Salmon’s 2004 book “e moderating – the guide to teaching and learning online” is a great resource for teachers looking for practical guidelines. She offers a 5 stage scaffolded model which moves from Access and Motivation to Online Socialisation to Information Exchange to Knowledge Construction and finally to Development, where learners largely drive discussion on their own.
Levin, J. (1999). Understanding the Lifecycles of Network-based Learning Communities. Paper presented at Symposium 6.29 “Indicators of Change in Computer-Based Community Building” Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association,Montreal, April 1999 . Retrieved 10 July 2006 from http://faculty.ed.uiuc.edu/j-levin/Levin-Cervantes.final.html
Salmon, G (2004) emoderating – the key to teaching and learning online (2nd ed.) London, UK. Taylor and Francis books ltd.
Graham, C., Cagiltay, K., Lim, B-R., Craner, J., & Duffy, T. M. (2001). Seven principles of effective teaching: A practical lens for evaluating online courses. The Technology Source Archives at the University of North Carolina
