e-learning

Problem Based Blended Learning course next 6 weeks

Mariis3 Comments

Monday August 24th my colleague, Heilyn Camacho – also from e-Learning Lab at Aalborg University, and I kicked off a 6 week course on Problem Based Blended Learning (PBBL).  We have designed the course as part of an EU funded research project called COMmunity of integrated Blended Learning in Europe (COMBLE). In the COMBLE project my colleagues and I from Aalborg University work together with 3 other lead partners from Estonia (University of Tartu), Germany (The University of Applied Sciences Wildau)  and Poland (Marie Curie Sklodowska University).

Comble-1

We have all been offering the course to our affiliated partners which means that we have participants not only from the above mentioned countries, but also from Argentina and since Heilyn is from Costa Rica we really have an international cross-cultural setting. Most participants come from the academic sector, but we also have a few participants from the cooperate world. Besides this my colleagues, Thomas Ryberg and Jacob Davidsen will at some point bring in Danish on-campus 7th semester students from Human Centered Informatics.

The main objective of the course is to provide the participants with a combination of conceptual, theoretical and practical strategies with regards to designing, implementing and teaching/training courses of different duration in blended modality using an overall PBL approach. There is no consensus on how to define Blended Learning. We will, however use this definition from Sonja Trapp (2006:1) as a starting point:

Blended learning can be defined as the combination of multiple approaches to pedagogy or teaching, e .g. self-paced, collaborative, tutor-supported learning or traditional classroom teaching. Blended learning often refers specifically to the provision or use of resources which combine e-learning with other educational resources.

What makes this PBBL course particular interesting and challenging is the fact that there are no f2f activities for the adult participants – we only meet each other online in different platforms. For the on-campus students this of course will differ a bit, but as I understand it their main activities will also take place online. Heilyn and I have chosen Moodle as our main platform for the teaching and learning activities.

COMBLE-Moodle

Flexibility not only regarding place, but also time is a keyword in this course, and in our point of view Moodle provides a good environment for especially text-based, asynchronous activities. Our participants are located in different time-zones and should be able to contribute at any convenient time, but a far more important argument for using an asynchronous platform for the main activities can be found in our pedagogical foundation. We have chosen to blend Problem Based Learning with elements from Action Learning and in both strategies reflection is a keyword.

By and large the course design is heavily inspired by another course I run at the Masterprogramme in ICT and Learning (MIL), and based on my experience from that course we have also chosen to use Second Life (SL) as main platform for synchronous activities in this PBBL course. The course outline can be seen in the picture below:

CourseOutline

Since Aalborg University does not own land in SL – I only rent a small place on the Island Wonderful Denmark for my MIL course – our Polish partner has kindly let us use their Second UMCS Island for the course. Below is a picture of what the main teaching and learning area looked like, when we fist arrived there:

SeconUMSC
Second UMCS owner, UMCS Maximus, and I discussed the design of the area …

Mariis_Heilyn
Later Heilyn and I met to discuss the design …

Presenter_003
One of the first changes was replacing the existing presenter with The Clever Zebra presenter …

My dear friend, Coughran Mayo, recommended the CZ presenter and thanks to Fleep Tuque’s great video, I easily managed to set it up :-) Even though Heilyn, Thomas and I will use traditional presentations in our in-world lectures we still wanted the environment to better reflect our pedagogical foundations, so we also had the white chairs removed.

Island_003
Yeah! .. lots of empty space to play with …

This week of the course is preparation week meaning that the participants are expected to familiarize themselves with both Moodle and SL. Only a few of the participants have prior experience with SL, so this week has been spent on learning the basic features of SL. As a preliminary setting I put up a few objects to enable the participants to practice very basic, but important skills such as learning how to walk and sit:

Island2_003

I rezzed 5 chairs close to each other – trying to walk in between without bumping into any of them is not an easy task for newbies ;-) I also rezzed “The Opinionater”, created by Entropy Hax, which can be bought for the tiny sum of 99 Lindens at this location. Besides being a great tool for decision making I like the fact that “The Opinionater” is interactive making walking practice a bit more fun.

This week I’ve also held optional in-world “Get-off-to-a-good-start” meetings, and here are some pictures from those meetings:

TestisTour_1
Heilyn and I getting ready to embark the Testis Tour with participants Dido and Ina

TestisTour_2
Um, “immersed” inside a testis …

Womb
and outside a womb in Doctor Asp‘s (my regular landowner :-) amazing holodeck

Building
Participant, Hans and I trying to build Bears … LOL not easy, since the Bear is meant to wear!

The Bear was created by Danish resident, Kaj Bing, and can be found in Wonderful Denmark’s Freebie Factory, where you’ll also find my favorite SL object; The Pink Elephant created by Asp himself :-)

Marcus
Last night participant, Marcus and I met in my place …

Marcus is one of the participants with a couple of years experience in SL. BTW Marcus directed my attention to an interesting post written on this first week’s impressions by participant, Susanne from Germany :-)

Both Heilyn and I are using this PBBL course to collect empirical data for our PhD-projects and we will meet later today to assess this first week as part of our own Action Learning cycles. We will post our reflections in Moodle, so that the participants are able to see how we actually try to apply the chosen research and teaching and learning strategy in our own projects encouraging the participants to comment on our thoughts. Furthermore Heilyn and I will rearrange the teaching and learning area to match the next weeks’ activities …

And I will for sure return with more posts on this as the course progresses …

/Mariis

“Dialogic Spaces” – Dialogic Education and Research Group

Mariis4 Comments

On Monday June 22nd I had the pleasure of participating in the first meeting in a study group “Dialogic Spaces” aimed at exploring dialogue from various perspectives within educational research and practice. The group was initiated by Assistant Professor, PhD Thorkild Hanghøj and several of his colleagues all from Dept. of Curriculum research at the Danish School of Education. Thorkild specializes in educational gaming and will incidentially join me at the Master in ICT and Learning (MIL) in the fall in our ICT and Educational Design module. Coming from Aalborg University’s Dept. of Communication I’m very happy to get the opportunity to collaborate with this group of researchers who all have such very strong foci on educational research. Besides Thorkild the following people are part of the group:

  • Lars Birch Andreasen – E-learning; netbased education; virtual learning environments, Netmediated communication and collaboration.
  • Lisbeth Frølunde – Multimodality theory and visual culture, Design and development of digital learning and play materials.
  • Jeppe Bundsgaard – Educational Theory and Curriculum in relation to the Danish Subject and Information Technology, Critical Discourse Analysis.
  • Mads Haugsted – Mother tongue and didactics; verbal communication, colloquial language, speech skill.
  • Christian Brund – just started as a PhD Candidate with a project on the role of the teacher in relation to educational gaming … no link yet

Together we cover a wide range of research interests but with the concept Dialogic we have found a common denominator.  Dialogic is most commonly attributed to the work of the Russian philosopher, literary critic and scholar, Mikhail Mikhailovich Bakhtin and though his work will play an important role in our endeavors it isn’t an exclusive Bakhtinian group.  We spent our first meeting stating our interests in using Dialogic perspectives, defined the organization and goals of the group and finally discussed a couple of papers (Dysthe. 2006 & Wegerif. 2006) both focusing on the use of Bakhtin in educational research. So far we’ve decided to meet f2f once a month in the fall primarily to discuss literature hoping that these dialogues! will inspire all of us in our future work. Further down the line we hope to be able to hold public seminars and finally write an anthology covering especially, but not exclusively  Scandinavian Dialogic perspectives within educational research and practice which also means that we will invite international colleagues to come join us.

I was first introduced to Bakhtin in the early 90’ies when I studied literature for three years, but it has been years since I actually used his ideas and concepts more explicitly. In spite of this, I do find the Dialogic perspective interesting on multiple levels in relation to my current PhD research:

  • Ontological level – according to Bakhtin living is participating in an ongoing dialogue and I couldn’t agree more. Accepting dialogue as ontological premise naturally influences the main purpose and the main processes of education; empowerment as preparation for and – as it is the case in HE/FE –  continuation of democratic, participatory citizenship. This way of thinking and practicing education very much aligns with a Scandinavian approach to both education and research in general and with exploration of new social media in particular (e.g. Rheingold. 2008 on Participative Pedagogy for a Literacy of Literacies).
  • Epistemological level – as a consequence of the ontology it is through dialogue with both ourselves and the surrounding world that we’re able to create meaning. Thus, as educators we need to focus on teaching students how to engage in the dialogues through which knowledge is constantly being constructed, deconstructed and reconstructed (Wegerif. 2006:60). It’s also worth noticing that if we accept the dialogic premise, the main mechanism for learning is taking the perspective of another in a dialogue (ibid:64)!
  • Methodological level– up until now I’ve been reluctant to coin my methodological approach, usually just stating that I’m applying some sort of Action Research. However, I recently decided to try to apply and further develop a methodology called Dialogue Design which was developed by three of my colleagues from the MIL steering committee, Janni Nielsen, Lone Dirckinck-Holmfeld and Oluf Danielsen (2003) back in the late 90’ies in relation to a large European research and development project on Multimedia and Network in Co-operative Research and Learning (MANICORAL). This particular methodology, based on different types of Action Research, puts forward dialogue and mutual learning as guiding principles.  Dirckinck-Holmfeld and Nielsen are also my PhD supervisors, and I will be spending most of the fall with Nielsen at Copenhagen Business School focusing on this part of my PhD work.
  • Didactic/pedagogical level – as teaching and learning space SL offers many possibilities of engaging in dialogic activities. Communicating simultaneously via both text and voice, incl. via avatar (as embodiment) and context are probably the affordances I currently find most interesting and I anticipate Bakhtin’s polyphony concept and his ideas on intertextuality (both in multimodal variations) will be useful in my attempt to theorize/analyze and design for such phenomena.

In applying a Dialogic perspective on my PhD I’ve got a sense of coming full circle and I’m really looking forward to an inspiring fall with extended readings and lots of dialogue … yeah :-) It also means that I’m in the process of editing my PhD page here on the blog … it’ll be back sometime during the summer.

/Mariis

References

Dysthe, O. (2006): Bakhtin og pedagogikken – Kva ein tidlegare ukjend artikkel fortel om Bakhtins pedagogiske praksis. IN: Norsk Pedagogisk Tidsskrift. 06/2006

Nielsen, J.; Dirckinck-Holmfeld, L. & Danielsen, O. (2003): Dialogue Design – with Mutual Learning as Guiding Principle. IN: International Journal of Human-Computer-Interaction. 15(1)

Wegerif, R. (2006): Dialogic education: what it is and why do we need it? IN: Education Review, vol. 19, no 2.

BTW

Stephen Downes recently directed my attention to a post on Streams vs. Blogs written by Jay Cross. In this post Cross reflects on blogs stating that:

Blogs are author-centric in a world that’s increasingly about relationships. Blogs are slanted toward me, me, me, me, me; the net is inexorably moving to us, us, us, us, us. Dialog trumps monolog.

While I do agree that some blogs tend to be very author-centric the few blogs/bloggers I chose to follow on a regular basis are highly Dialogic in my point of view. Adapting a Bakhtinian view engaging in dialogue with oneself can be very fruitful and furthermore the very nature of blogs (the intertextuality and the multiple voices coming forward through extensive linking) exemplifies a connected perspective on relationships and dialogue in a networked world.  The mere fact that I learned about Cross’ post via Downes shows my point. Granted that the premises for dialogue have changed dramatically, it still is dialogue to me … Nonetheless, I do agree with Cross that new services gradually will change the way we communicate, but like Downes I will not stop blogging any time soon – it’s just one way of communicating among others ;-)

Community of Inquiry (COI) in Virtual Worlds study

Mariis1 Comment

Early this spring Ross McKerlich, Terry Anderson & Brad Eastman invited me to participate in a research study on the usefulness of the Community of Inquiry (COI) model as evaluation tool in virtual worlds. Originally the COI model was developed in the late 1990’ies as framework for evaluating educational experience in text-based online environments by D. Randy Garrison, Terry Anderson and Walther Archer:

Central to the study introduced here is a model of community inquiry that constitutes three elements essential to an educational transaction – cognitive presence, social presence, and teaching presence. Indicators (key words/phrases) for each of the three elements emerged from the analysis of computer conferencing transcripts. The indicators described represent a template or tool for researchers to analyze written transcripts as well as a guide to educators for the optimal use of computer conferencing as a medium to facilitate an educational transaction.

communitymodel_small(COI website)

The COI model was developed as part of a Canadian Social Sciences and Humanities research funded project entitled “A Study of the Characteristics and Qualities of Text-Based Computer Conferencing for Educational Purposes”. Further details on that project, including papers describing the theoretical and methodological underpinnings of the model can be found on the COI website.

Given the COI model’s wide spread use in different educational settings it is by no means coincidental that one of the original founders, Terry Anderson, has found it important to explore the applicability of the model in new immersive environments such as the 3D virtual world, Second Life (SL). Together with McKerlich Anderson conducted a preliminary, qualitative exploratory study in SL in 2007 and basically confirmed that the model also can be used in assessing educational experience in immersive environments (McKerlich & Anderson. 2007).  Not unexpectedly, they did however also find that some adjustments would be appropriate – e.g. extending categories demonstrating social presence. This 2007 study did not allow for the authors to examine methodological issues such as validation deeply. Furthermore McKerlich and Anderson found the phenomenological experience of both learners and teachers would be worth further investigation.

Based on these preliminary findings, McKerlich and Anderson now together with Brad Eastman have initiated a new more quantitative oriented study – and this is also the study I’ve been invited to participate in. Unfortunately, I’ve not been able to contribute with very much so far due to a longer personal leave of absence from my work in general.  Nevertheless, during my absence they have successfully finished the work on developing an evaluation tool – in the shape of a survey intended for students with educational experience in immersive environments – based on original and new indicators of respectively social, cognitive and teaching presence.  The tool was publicly launched last week on several mailing lists relevant for educators using immersive worlds and the data have started to accumulate. We would of course like as many answers as possible though, so if this has caught your interest please have a look at the survey here.

Further down the line we’ll start processing the data and evaluate the tool – also by conducting in-world observations. Participation in this kind of study is quite exciting but also very challenging for me coming from a highly qualitative oriented research background. But I’m also pretty sure that I’ll learn a lot and that we’ll have some interesting discussions :-)

/Mariis

Networked Learning Conference 2010 – Cfp

Mariis1 Comment

At Aalborg University we’re very proud to host the 7th international conference on Networked Learning 3rd & 4th May, 2010.

The Networked Learning Conference is an international, research-based conference. Since its inception in 1998 the conference has developed a strong following by international researchers. In addition it is well supported by practitioners, managers and learning technologists interested in contributing to and hearing about research in this area. The conference is considered a major event in the international ‘technology enhanced learning’ conference circuit. Conference papers are peer reviewed by international researchers in the field, and published in proceedings and online.

Keynote Speakers
The 2010 conference features keynote presentations and discussions by two leading international researchers: Yrjö Engeström & Etienne Wenger.

Yrjo
Etienne

Conference themes
The conference is an opportunity to participate in a forum for the critical examination and analysis of research in networked learning i.e. learning and teaching carried out largely via the Internet/Web which emphasizes dialogical learning, collaborative and cooperative learning, group work, interaction with on-line materials, and knowledge production.

Papers critically reporting on the results of research and evaluation in Networked Learning are invited on the main themes of:

  • Understanding, Designing and Facilitating Learning in a Networked World
  • Theories and Methodologies for Research in Networked Learning
  • Impact on Learning of Networked Technologies
  • Learning in Social Networks and Networked Learning
  • Participation and Alienation in Networked Learning
  • Embedding Networked Learning in Public and Private Organizations
  • Formal and Informal learning in Networked Learning
  • Work Based Networked Learning and Knowledge Management
  • Problem Based Networked Learning
  • Practice Based Research for Professional Development
  • Issues of Social Justice and Social Responsibility in Networked Learning
  • Globalization and Interculturality in Networked Learning
  • Networked Learning and International Development

Conference papers will be peer reviewed by international researchers, and published in electronic proceedings and online. The conference steering committee will be supporting symposium organizers in publishing selected papers in special issues of refereed journals.

Submission date
Last date for submission of full papers for review: Friday 13th November, 2009

More details on submission

Further information about Networked Learning
You may find inspiration in the conference proceedings from previous years, and here I’ve copied a definition of networked learning from the British “Networked Learning in Higher Education” project:

Networked Learning:
learning in which C&IT is used to promote connections: between one learner and other learners, between learners and tutors; between a learning community and its learning resources.

Questions about the conference?
Please note that I’m not personally involved in the organization of this conference – questions should be directed to NLC Committee Administrator, Alice Jesmont, Educational Research Department, County South, Lancaster University, Lancaster. LA1 4YD. UK

nlc2010@lancaster.ac.uk

Symposium on Second Life in networked distance education
I would like to use this opportunity to invite 2-3 other distance educators using SL to participate in creating a suggestion for a symposium on the use of SL in networked distance education – if this has caught your interest please contact me for further elaborations in-world or on regular e-mail: mil01mr@hum.aau.dk

I’m hoping to see many Danish and International colleagues at this conference :-)

/Mariis

COMBLE meeting in Poland

Mariis2 Comments

Tomorrow my ELL colleague, Heilyn Camacho and I will be going to Poland to meet our partners from the COMBLE project. As part of the COMBLE project Heilyn and I are responsible for developing, implementing and testing a course that aims at educating future trainers in blended learning, and we will be giving a stat on our work and ideas:

We’ve chosen Problem Based Learning (PBL) as the overall pedagogical strategy for the course, and this is by no means a coincidence. When Aalborg University was founded in 1974 it was based on ideas of learning-by-doing and experiential learning that has evolved into a  strategy called Problem Oriented Project Pedagogy (POPP), which can be seen as a particular branch of PBL. The strategy is fundamentally based on group work, and it will be especially interesting to watch how this strategy works in a pure online course. This is also one of the main reasons for using SL in the course, because we hope SL will give the participants a strong sense of presence and co-presence in the learning environment that also consists of Moodle and different web 2.0 technologies.

The course is set to kick-off mid April and Heilyn and I will be working on setting up the Moodle environment and finding relevant places/people to visit in SL. It has not yet been decided where the main teaching and learning activites in SL will take place, but our Polish partners own an island, which we might use.

This course is the second case in my PhD, and in contrast to the MIL course I will not be the only teacher, since we’ve planned that some of my ELL colleagues, incl. Heilyn will teach in-world. This will give me an opportunity to get some feedback and different perspectives on teaching in-world, which I think will be very valuable for my PhD work, so I’m really looking forward to running this course :-)

/Mariis