E-Training
Intelligent Tutoring Systems
Britain & Liber’s Framework
Learning Objects Model
IMS Learning Design
DialogPlus Project
Reload Project
CANDLE Project
Networked Learning Model (CSALT)
Conversational Framework (Laurillard)
Mayes & Fowler’s Framework
Computer Supported Intentional Learning Environments (CSILE Bereter & Scardamalia)
E-Tivities (Salmon)
Flexible Learning Approach (Collis & Moonen)
Extended Learning Objects Approach (OU IET)
Opencourseware Initiative (MIT)
April 06, 2006
Titles...
A TAXONOMY OF ELEARNING MODELS
A SOCIO-CULTURAL PERSPECTIVE ON THE INTERACTION OF LEARNERS AND THEIR ENVIRONMENT
THE PLATONIC ACADEMY AND THE REALM OF THE IPOD
ADDUCTION AND SEMANTICS: THE EVOLUTION OF PERSONALISATION
A CHANGE IS GONNA COME
EXPLOTATION OR IMPORTATION
A SOCIO-CULTURAL PERSPECTIVE ON THE INTERACTION OF LEARNERS AND THEIR ENVIRONMENT
THE PLATONIC ACADEMY AND THE REALM OF THE IPOD
ADDUCTION AND SEMANTICS: THE EVOLUTION OF PERSONALISATION
A CHANGE IS GONNA COME
EXPLOTATION OR IMPORTATION
Contextual Questions
Educational Development
• Can we learn how children handle information and use it constructively, collaboratively within an online environment
Constructivism
• The concept of social constructivism as a means to an end
Group Development
• Do we need to determine group structures / rules prior to engagement
Sub contexts
• Institutional VLE usage
o Can this be used as a driver to encourage / promote collaborative learning
• Active Learning
o The very nature of collaboration implies ‘actively’ seeking, establishing, constructing new knowledge, creating new learning environments
Semantic Web
• Is this the answer to ‘genuine’ knowledge collaboration.
• Is it simply another layer / lense to enable collaboration
• Can the study proceed if it is not readily available?
• Could we use this as leverage to use a pilot?
• Should we drop the ‘semantic’!?
• Can we learn how children handle information and use it constructively, collaboratively within an online environment
Constructivism
• The concept of social constructivism as a means to an end
Group Development
• Do we need to determine group structures / rules prior to engagement
Sub contexts
• Institutional VLE usage
o Can this be used as a driver to encourage / promote collaborative learning
• Active Learning
o The very nature of collaboration implies ‘actively’ seeking, establishing, constructing new knowledge, creating new learning environments
Semantic Web
• Is this the answer to ‘genuine’ knowledge collaboration.
• Is it simply another layer / lense to enable collaboration
• Can the study proceed if it is not readily available?
• Could we use this as leverage to use a pilot?
• Should we drop the ‘semantic’!?
A sense of Purpose
E-Learning A Collaborative Medium:
The Semantic Web and Shared Cognitive Development
Purpose of Research
• Elaborate the meaning of collaboration in an online environment
• Identify the potential of the semantic web
• Identify where / how collaboration occurs
• Measure the occurrence of shared cognition
Analyse;
• Is facilitation key to successful collaboration
• Is shared cognition pre-determined by teaching and learning methodologies
• Can a scaffold be used to achieve shared cognition
The Semantic Web and Shared Cognitive Development
Purpose of Research
• Elaborate the meaning of collaboration in an online environment
• Identify the potential of the semantic web
• Identify where / how collaboration occurs
• Measure the occurrence of shared cognition
Analyse;
• Is facilitation key to successful collaboration
• Is shared cognition pre-determined by teaching and learning methodologies
• Can a scaffold be used to achieve shared cognition
Leading Ideas and Questions
To develop a taxonomy of e-learning
To ascertain the experiences of the learner
To ascertain the experiences of the academic
To compare these two perceptions
To assess the effectiveness of chosen systems
To propose a developmental model that takes heed of future developments e.g. semantic web
How we do it right now: (perceptions and reality)
VLE to manage content, link with MIS, offer collective of tools.
F2F and additions. Didactic, socio-constructive, behaviourist etc
Training vs teaching vs learning – do they collide or converge?
Role of Uni and future of learning – mobility, professional needs,
Hierarchy of course roles: un-initiated (fresh out of school), mature learners, returning learners, professional needs
Does this actually equate to UG, G, PG?
How to deliver? Different needs/challenges.
Why do we insist on blended when we have ef2f?
Can we devise a new pedagogical theory that underpins the 21C rationale?
To ascertain the experiences of the learner
To ascertain the experiences of the academic
To compare these two perceptions
To assess the effectiveness of chosen systems
To propose a developmental model that takes heed of future developments e.g. semantic web
How we do it right now: (perceptions and reality)
VLE to manage content, link with MIS, offer collective of tools.
F2F and additions. Didactic, socio-constructive, behaviourist etc
Training vs teaching vs learning – do they collide or converge?
Role of Uni and future of learning – mobility, professional needs,
Hierarchy of course roles: un-initiated (fresh out of school), mature learners, returning learners, professional needs
Does this actually equate to UG, G, PG?
How to deliver? Different needs/challenges.
Why do we insist on blended when we have ef2f?
Can we devise a new pedagogical theory that underpins the 21C rationale?
The Research theme
ADDUCTION AND SEMANTICS: THE EVOLUTION OF PERSONALISATION
This paper explores the current use of educational technology and the realm of e-learning in particular in the light of the perceived challenges and threats of rationalisation and globalisation and proposes that their is a fundamental mis-representation of e-learning and its ability to change the methodologies of teaching and learning in current practice.
The author proposes that it is no longer possible to simply ‘let pedagogy lead our use of technology’ but calls for a change of theoretical practice.
Since Plato established the Academy in the 4th Century BC offering a venue for original thinkers to come together (and as a reaction to the Sophists who were beginning to charge for their interpretations and teachings ) the basic premise of a University has essentially remained the same – the acquisition and promulgation of knowledge.
This paper proposes to initiate the exploration of current e-learning models in practice, discern their development and theoretical hereditary and plot a taxonomy of the current outcomes. Furthermore it hopes to establish a future line of exploration into the nature of learning within an online environment and offer the beginnings of a radical departure from the status quo in our current thinking and practice in the use of educational technology (ET).
A key issues raised in the use of ET is that it must be driven by pedagogy first, that technology offers us a way to improve our current methodologies and enhance our practice. It has been said that e-learning is merely enhanced learning , providing an explicit use of technology to further promote interaction and engagement of the learner.
It is apparent that there are many pedagogic models applicable to e-learning instances (e.g. Laurillard’s Conversational Framework, Salmons 5 Step Approach etc) however there are few if any all encompassing theoretical frameworks such as those that are representational of traditional teaching and learning practice (Behaviourism, Socio-Cultural Constructivism, etc.) that are genuinely valid for the realm of e-learning.
Historically we have acknowledged the increasing presence of e-learning tools (wikis, blogs, SMS, etc.) as a mere addition to our teaching armory. Rolling out where appropriate, that which can be of value at a given instance (e.g. SkypE for online communications), or being led by institutional direction as to the use of omnipotent ETs (such as the presence of VLEs) in the growing world market of education.
Lateral thinking in the area of curriculum design in recent years has proven a most fertile area in challenging our perceived beliefs about current entrenched practices. Biggs (1999) concept of constructive alignment offers a means by which we might reconsider and ground our practice so that a learner is not only central to our approach but implicitly involved in the dynamic of a process driven curriculum. However this offers a mere addendum to the way we might consider the use and manipulation of ET within our day-to-day practice.
With the advent of the concept of Personalised Learning Environments (PLEs) have we now an opportunity to lay down a path that will enable a theoretical shift on behalf of teaching practice for the 21C?
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Biggs, J. (1999). Teaching for Quality Learning at University, Open University Press.
The personal learning environments blog
http://www.cetis.ac.uk/members/ple
Mayes, T. D. F., S (2005). Review Of E-Learning Theories, Frameworks And Models. Jisc E-Learning Models Desk Study. Jisc.
Laurillard, D. (2002). Rethinking University Teaching: A Framework For The Effective Use Of Educational Technology London, Routledgefalmer
Salmon, G. (2000). E-Moderating: The Key To Teaching And Learning Online. London, Kogan.
This paper explores the current use of educational technology and the realm of e-learning in particular in the light of the perceived challenges and threats of rationalisation and globalisation and proposes that their is a fundamental mis-representation of e-learning and its ability to change the methodologies of teaching and learning in current practice.
The author proposes that it is no longer possible to simply ‘let pedagogy lead our use of technology’ but calls for a change of theoretical practice.
Since Plato established the Academy in the 4th Century BC offering a venue for original thinkers to come together (and as a reaction to the Sophists who were beginning to charge for their interpretations and teachings ) the basic premise of a University has essentially remained the same – the acquisition and promulgation of knowledge.
This paper proposes to initiate the exploration of current e-learning models in practice, discern their development and theoretical hereditary and plot a taxonomy of the current outcomes. Furthermore it hopes to establish a future line of exploration into the nature of learning within an online environment and offer the beginnings of a radical departure from the status quo in our current thinking and practice in the use of educational technology (ET).
A key issues raised in the use of ET is that it must be driven by pedagogy first, that technology offers us a way to improve our current methodologies and enhance our practice. It has been said that e-learning is merely enhanced learning , providing an explicit use of technology to further promote interaction and engagement of the learner.
It is apparent that there are many pedagogic models applicable to e-learning instances (e.g. Laurillard’s Conversational Framework, Salmons 5 Step Approach etc) however there are few if any all encompassing theoretical frameworks such as those that are representational of traditional teaching and learning practice (Behaviourism, Socio-Cultural Constructivism, etc.) that are genuinely valid for the realm of e-learning.
Historically we have acknowledged the increasing presence of e-learning tools (wikis, blogs, SMS, etc.) as a mere addition to our teaching armory. Rolling out where appropriate, that which can be of value at a given instance (e.g. SkypE for online communications), or being led by institutional direction as to the use of omnipotent ETs (such as the presence of VLEs) in the growing world market of education.
Lateral thinking in the area of curriculum design in recent years has proven a most fertile area in challenging our perceived beliefs about current entrenched practices. Biggs (1999) concept of constructive alignment offers a means by which we might reconsider and ground our practice so that a learner is not only central to our approach but implicitly involved in the dynamic of a process driven curriculum. However this offers a mere addendum to the way we might consider the use and manipulation of ET within our day-to-day practice.
With the advent of the concept of Personalised Learning Environments (PLEs) have we now an opportunity to lay down a path that will enable a theoretical shift on behalf of teaching practice for the 21C?
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Biggs, J. (1999). Teaching for Quality Learning at University, Open University Press.
The personal learning environments blog
http://www.cetis.ac.uk/members/ple
Mayes, T. D. F., S (2005). Review Of E-Learning Theories, Frameworks And Models. Jisc E-Learning Models Desk Study. Jisc.
Laurillard, D. (2002). Rethinking University Teaching: A Framework For The Effective Use Of Educational Technology London, Routledgefalmer
Salmon, G. (2000). E-Moderating: The Key To Teaching And Learning Online. London, Kogan.
September 27, 2005
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)