Annex5-D3-2-new Pedagogical Report · Pedagogical Strategy D3.2 (new ‐ 2010.12.01) 1/78 ECP‐2008‐EDU‐428037 LiLa – Library of Labs D3.2 – Pedagogical report Deliverable

Pedagogical Strategy D3.2 (new ‐ 2010.12.01)

1/78

ECP‐2008‐EDU‐428037

LiLa – Library of Labs

D3.2 – Pedagogical report

Deliverable number/name

D‐3.2 – Pedagogical report – new version

Dissemination level Confidential

Delivery date December 1, 2010

Status Final

Author(s) Jerry Andriessen, Thieme Hennis, Wim Veen, Pieter de Vries

eContentplus

This project is funded under the eContentplus programme1, a multiannual Community programme to make digital content in Europe more accessible, usable and

exploitable.

1 OJ L 79, 24.3.2005, p. 1.


2/78

Table of contents

Table of contents .................................................................................................... 2

1 Introduction ...................................................................................................... 3

2 Summary of task analysis (M3.1) ....................................................................... 4

3 Current Practices among the Lila Partners ......................................................... 63.1 Outline of this chapter .......................................................................................... 73.2 The interviews ...................................................................................................... 73.3 Conclusions and Recommendations .................................................................... 23

4 Examples of relevant portals ........................................................................... 264.1 Conclusions about existing portals ...................................................................... 28

5 Short overview of learning theories ................................................................ 295.1 Introduction ....................................................................................................... 295.2 Developments in learning theories ..................................................................... 305.3 Characteristics of effective learning environments .............................................. 345.4 Principles for effective learning ........................................................................... 36

6 Pedagogical Strategy ....................................................................................... 386.1 Networked Learning Model for LiLa .................................................................... 386.2 Pedagogical and design principles ....................................................................... 406.3 Pedagogical developers guide ............................................................................. 41

7 From scenarios towards storyboards .............................................................. 437.1 The assignment sent to the LiLa Partners ............................................................ 447.2 Summaries, comments and conclusions about received Storyboards .................. 467.3 General conclusions on the storyboards.............................................................. 487.4 Scripts and scenarios for pedagogically sound cases in the LiLa portal ................. 497.5 Suggestions for the functional design .................................................................. 53

8 The functional design of LiLa ........................................................................... 548.1 Design workshop LiLa ......................................................................................... 548.2 Social mechanisms and design choices ................................................................ 598.3 The LiLa interface ................................................................................................ 70

9 Concluding remarks ........................................................................................ 72

10 Literature ...................................................................................................... 72


3/78

1 Introduction InthisreportwepresentthetheoreticalpedagogicalframeworkunderpinningtheLiLaProject.TheobjectiveofthereportistodescribeandillustratethestrategyoftheLiLaprojectwithregardtopedagogyandfollowingfromthat:functionality.Inotherwords,howpeoplecanlearnandteachusingLiLaisdescribedinthisreport.Thestrategyisbasedonliteratureanalysis,interviewsamongLiLapartners,thedevelopmentofscenarios.ItformsthebasisforpedagogicaldesignprinciplesfortheLilaPortal.TheseprincipleswillguidethedefinitionofsomeofthefunctionalitiesandtoolstobeimplementedintheLiLaPortal.ThechosenpedagogicalconceptwillalsohelpdefininglearningandteachingprocessesbothforstudentsandteachersforusingthesimulationsandremoteexperimentsintheLiLaportal.Inaddition,thepedagogicalconceptcanguideindefininglearningsupportanddesiredlearningoutcomes,focusingonissuesconcerninglearningmaterials,learningactivities,tutoring,assessment,technologicalenvironments,andculturaldifferences.Inalargersense,thepedagogicalstrategyiscloselyrelatedtotheevaluationoftheLilaportal.Inthefinalchapterofthisdocument,wewilllinkthegeneralpedagogicalgoalstothedesignandevaluationoftheLiLaportal,includingthedesignofanexperimentinthefinalperiodoftheproject.Concreteevaluationcriteriaareformulatedtoassessthepedagogicalsuccessofourapproach.Thisactivitycarriesaneducationalevaluationofthepedagogicalapproach,learningprocessesandlearningeffects,includingmeasurementsofstudentactivitiesandsatisfaction.Thisdocumentdescribesthevariousinvestigativestepstaken. First,weconductedinterviewswithLiLapartners,whoareprovidersor

teachersofremoteexperiments.ThisisMilestone3.1,andformsthefirstpartofthisdeliverable.Theresultofthisinvestigationisasetofprinciplesforthedevelopmentofexperimentsandagreeduponbythepartners.Theseprinciplesareactive,authentic,andcollaborativelearning.

Secondly,wehaveresearchedothersimilarinitiativestodrawsomepreliminaryconclusionsandgenerateideasonthevariousapproaches.

Thirdly,wehaveconductedaliteratureanalysisaboutlearningtheories.Themostinfluentialandimportantapproachesarediscussed:behaviourism,cognitivism,constructivism,andconnectivism.ConnectivismisanimportanttheorythatrelatestotheinfluenceofICTonlearningprocesses.Thegoalofthissectionistorelatethecurrentpracticeswiththelearningtheories.TheresultswillbeusedtomakeacarefullyconsideredpedagogicalandfunctionaldesignfortheLibraryofLabsportal.Thischapterconcludeswithcharacteristicsofaneffectivelearningenvironment,andprinciplesforeffectivelearning.

Basedontheliteratureanalysisandtheinterviewsamongstpartners,wehavewrittenapedagogicalstrategy,somedesignprinciples,anda


4/78

pedagogicaldevelopersguideaimedatteacherscreatingorusingtheremoteexperiments.

Followingfromtheprevioussteps,weconductedseveralcase‐basedstudiesamongpartnerinstitutes.Basedontheexistingpracticesandtheliteratureanalysis,meanwhileacknowledgingthevarietyinlearningandteachingpracticesacrossuniversitiesinEurope,wedevelopedanumberofscenariosfortheseapproaches.Thesescenarioshaveresultedinstoryboards,whichhavebeenconsultedwithandcommentedonbythepartners.

Inconclusion,wedevelopedafunctionaldesignoftheLiLaportal,emphasizingthepartonlearningandlearningtools.BecausewecametotheconclusionthattheLiLaportalshouldnotbeonlyaplacewherepeoplecandownloadandexecuteexperiments,butinadditionshouldofferthetoolsandsupporttointeractanddiscuss,wehaveaddedaliteratureanalysisonmotivationandengagementinonlinecommunitiestoguidethedesignoftheportal.Basedallofthepreviousstepswedevelopedacompletefunctionaldesignthatrootedinliteratureandevaluatedbypartners.Thedesignsupportsavarietyoftraditionalandmodernlearningscenarios,andintendstoprovidesufficientmotivationforend‐userstoengageinself‐organizingprocessestomaintainqualityontheportal.Thereisnoobligationofauser(studentaswellasteacher)toconformtoaspecificpedagogicalscenario.Theportaldesignhostsanumberofinstrumentsthatallowsuserstodoteachingandlearningaccordingtotheirownstandardsandpedagogicalapproaches.Eventhoughthedesignofferssubstantiallevelsoffreedom,itstructuresandsupportsdifferentprocesseswithtips,microtrainings,andsupportpages.Thereis(embedded)supportforcontributingcontent,structuringcontentinlessons,andlearningfromexperiments.Thelatterisintheformofpeer‐supportbymeansofcomment,rating,andpeer‐assessmenttools.

2 Summary of task analysis (M3.1) Thedocumententitled“taskanalysis”originallyaimedatdocumentingthetypicalworkflowforremoteexperimentsandvirtuallabsatthevarioussitesthatofferedthem.Becausetherewerehardlyanyusesoftheseexperimentsandlabs,wefocusedalsoonthedepartmentanditssupport.Anumberofrecommendationswerelistedattheendofthereporttodrawattentiontothecurrentweaknessesandtheireffectonthegoalsettingoftheproject.Forconveniencewerepeatthemhere,andbrieflylinkthemtopedagogicalconcerns.Thisisretrievedfromthepreviousversion,soitmightseemoutdated.1:AsmallteamofLiLamembersdeveloplocalimplementationplans.Ourmainconclusionwasthatembeddinginlocalusercontextsisamainproblemandshouldbeaddressedbyallofthepartners.Wewanttostressthatlackofmanagerialsupportisoneofthemainobstaclesforlackofuse,butalso,thelackofanexplicitpedagogicalvisioncouldbearelatedobstacle.Therefore,weproposetoimplement(andcontextualize)ourpedagogicalapproachinlocalimplementationplans,dealingwiththelocaleducationalmodels.


5/78

ACTION:ThisrecommendationshasbeentakenfurtherintheDelftMeeting,October2009.Cambridgewillleadtheactivitiesinthismatterandiscurrentlyorganizingvirtualmeetingseveryfortnightinordertodrivedisseminationactivitiesateachofthepartnerinstitutions.2:Workpackage5(Evaluation)shouldproposeaplanforanalysingeffectivenessoftheexperimentsOneofthechallengesoftheLiLaprojectistofindouthowsimulationsandremoteexperimentsqualifyaseducationalmaterialfromateacherordomainexpertpointofviewandhowtoevaluatethis.Understandingoftheconceptofeffectivenessorusefulnessisrelatedtothepedagogicalviewonehas.ACTION:ThisconcernisbeingtakencareofinacollaborativeactionofThessalonikiandDelft.ItwillbepartoftheEvaluationPlanthatthesepartnersarecurrentlywriting.TheissuewillberaisedagaininthenextmeetinginMunichJanuary20103:Newexperimentsshouldbeselfdirected,authentic,collaborative.ACTION:Chapter6.3containsaworkingguideonhowtodesignapedagogicallyvalidsimulationorexperimentfortheLiLaportal,dealingwiththeauthenticity,collaborationandstudentautonomyconstraints.4:ItissuggestedthattheVirtualPortalshouldclassifyexperimentsACTION:Metadatadiscussionsarecurrentlytakingplaceinvirtualmeetings.5:Aworkingmodelneedstobedevelopedforasmallsetofexperimentsand simulations,showingallstepsforteachersandstudents(probablydifferentsteps)toundertakefromthemomenttheyhavereachedtheLiLaportal,findingtheappropriateexperiment,doingtheexperiment,andgettingtheresultsoutofthatexperience.Thiscouldbedoneusingdifferentdidacticalapproaches,forustoseewhattheconsequencesofvariouschoicesinthisrespectareforourproject.ACTION:ThePedagogicalStrategyDocumentwillsuggesttocreateawarenessandskillsinthefieldofpedagogicalapproachesbycreating‘showcase’experimentswithallcontentprovidingpartnersoftheconsortium.Chapter5providestheplan.6:WeshoulddevelopasharedviewonlearningACTION:TheDesignworkshopandthefollowingdiscussionontheLiLaPortalattheDelftMeetinghasgivenwaytocleartasksandactionsrelatedtothePortalArchitectureanditsfunctionaldesign.CurrentpartnersinvolvedareMadrid,leadingthecreationofthePortal,StuttgartandDelft.TheLiLaPortalhasbeencreated,runsonStuttgartservers,iscurrentlybuilt,Delfthasbeenaskedbycoordinatortodotheinterfacedesign.


6/78

7:Weshouldinvestigateotherportalsandsimilarinitiatives.Wehavedoneaninventoryofexistingportals,seechapter4.ACTION:Furtherworkonthebusinessmodelisneeded.Bychoosingforanetworkedlearningapproach,weinvolveusersintheuseandsustainabilityoftheportal.8:Agenericmodelforcollaborationbetweensiteswillbedeveloped.ACTION:Thepartnerswillstartworkinginsmalllocalteams,eachteamalsocommentingontheworkofanotherteam,todevelopthefirstsetofshowcases.9:WewilldevelopshowcasesofexperimentsACTION:ThishasbeendecidedduringtheDelftmeetingandrealisedbeforethenextmeetinginMunich.

3 Current Practices among the Lila Partners WP3servestodefinethepedagogicalgoalsoftheLiLaproject,whichrelatestosuccessfulimplementationineducationalpracticeaswellasmakingthehighestpossibleimpactonstakeholders.Inthisworkpackagedidacticalmodelsaredeveloped,usecasesofthevirtualportalandtheexperimentsareanalysed,andonlinecoursesanddesignguidesfortheuserinterfacesaredeveloped.Furtherweforeseetheimplementationofasystemthatintegratesexperimentsandremotelabsintoanonlinecourse,dealingwithuserneeds.Asuitablelearningapproach(theoryandpractice)needstobedeveloped,withfuturelearningarrangementsinmind.ThisapproachshouldencourageuniversitiestoparticipateinEurope‐widecommunitiesofteachersandstudentsusingtheLiLaportal.Thefirstphaseofthischallengingtaskistodocumentthecurrentsituationconcerningthetypicalworkflowofusingexperimentsandvirtuallabsinuniversitycourses.Weaddressedthesuppliersofeducationalmaterialwithdetailedinterviewsconcerningtheavailableexperiments,thecoursesinwhichthesewereembedded,includingthedidacticalset‐up,theattitudesandevaluationsofteachersandstudentsregardingtheuseofexperimentsandvirtuallabsintheircourses,andthevisionsandsupportfromeducationalmanagementintheinstitutions.TheresultsoftheseinterviewswouldprovideuswiththebaselineviewfromwhichtodesignthepedagogicalvisionoftheLiLaproject.Furthermore,wealsoinvestigatedtheideasabouttheLiLaportalandthesuccesscriteriaheldfortheprojectbyeachparticipant.


7/78

3.1 Outline of this chapter Thischaptercontainsinthefirstplacesummariesofeachoftheinterviewsheldatthepartner’spremises.Thesesummariesendinasectionwithshortconclusionsrelevantforthesiteconcerned.Theseconclusionssometimeshavetheformofrecommendationsorsuggestionsforactionstoundertake.Inthethirdsection,weprovidesomeoverarchingconclusions,whichhavebeenusedintheprojectmeetinginDelft,September2009andforthefunctionaldesignoftheportal.

3.2 The interviews

3.2.1 Linköping (june 26th 2009) Dept.ofComputerandInformationSciencePresent:PeterFritzson,KristianSandahl,MohsenTorabzadeh‐Tari,AdrianPop,KirstinJohansson,ChristophKessler,PeterDalineus,PeterAronsson(LinkopingUniversity);WimVeen,JerryAndriessen(TUDelft)WewouldliketothankMohsenTorabzadeh‐Tarifororganizingthisevent,andtheotherparticipantsfortheirtimeandtheirwillingnesstoanswerourquestions,inparticularthosethatreturnedfromtheirholidayresortsespeciallyforthisoccasion.

Summary of the Linköping experience

Overview of the current situation ThemaincontributionoftheXX‐LabtoLiLaisModelica,alanguagedevelopedforobjectorientedmodelingandsimulation.Thelanguageallowstheconstructionofexperiments,andcomeswithamanualandhundredsofmodelsandexamples.ModelicahasbeencompiledasasoftwarepackagecalledMathModelica,hasalargelivingusercommunity,andafreelibraryofexamples,whichisgrowingbytheday.TherearenoLiLapartnersmemberofthiscommunity.TheotherLiLapartnersmainlyusepreprogrammedsimulations.WillcontactStuttgartforusingMathModelicainaWonderlandcontext.Modelicaiscurrentlyappliedinonecourse,butthereareotherteachersinterestedinusingitintheirowncourses,evenifthisasksformodificationsoftheirteachingandthecourseorganization.Theseteachersstressedtheneedformoreproject‐basedwork,withassignmentsfocusingonprofessionalpracticeratherthanonunderstandingrulesandprocedures.RelevantcourseswereProductiontechnology,ProcessProductEngineering,BusinessDevelopmentforSME(Dept.ofManagementandEngineering)andsoftwaredevelopment.

Analysis of tasks BecauseoftheavailabilityofModelica,inprinciplethereisanendlesspossibilityofcreatingexperimentsandtasksfortheLiLaproject.However,creatingtheseexperimentsrequiressomeexpertiseinusingModelica,andthereisnoindexormetadataavailabletoclassifythelibraryofexamples.Whatisalreadythereisclassifiedwithinstandardlibraries(e.g.translation,rotation,spring,etc).Thereseemstobeaneedforwidelyacceptedclassifications,forteachingpurposes,andthefinecriteriaforhowtoapplythis.


8/78

Pedagogy and didactics Currently,thecourseModelingandSimulation(Ba‐level)usesasmallpartofthepossibilitiesofthelibraryofexperiments.Theformatofthiscourseisalecturewithadditionalexercisesthatthestudentscandowiththeirlaptopsduringthemeeting.Aneedisexpressedformoreuseinteaching,whichrequiresdevelopmentofmoreexercises,andusingelectronicbooktechnology.Modelicaiscurrentlybetterusedinindustryandresearchtheninteaching.WhatwouldittakeforGreekteacherstousethelanguage?Simpletypinginofequationsdirectlyfromthebook.Sothatyouwouldseemathandnotprogramminglanguage.Lilacouldcreatedemonstrators,examples,shouldhelpwiththefirsttutorialsteps.

Teacher’s interest Wespokewiththreeteachers,twowereveryfavorabletowardsusingModelicaintheirteaching,andalsohadexperienceworkingforcompanies,onewasquiteskeptical.Theneedforuniversityeducationtobetterpreparetheirstudentsforlaterprofessionalworkwasrecognized:needformoreproject‐basedlearning,withcasesderivedfromprofessionalpractice,developon‐lineinteractiveexperiments,simulateaCADproductionline,useitinacourseonmediumsizeenterprises.Inthedomainofsoftwareengineeringideasweretheretodevelopmaterialstobeusedinacourseaboutsimulationsofthesoftwaredesignprocess,Newwaysofevaluationwerediscussed.Currentlymostexamsarewritten,butattentionisalsoneededtothewayworkisorganizedingroupsinaprojectcontext,howtocoordinatepeople,maybeinaphasemodelofaproject.Bothteachersunderlinetheimportanceofrealtasksfromrealcustomers,withrealisticconstraints,suchastimeandlimitationsofavailableexpertise.TheLiLateamisambitiouswithrespecttotherestoftheuniversity,butdoesnothaveaclearstrategyhowtofosterdissemination.ItwassuggestedtodevelopshowcasesforcourseleadersandstudentsinordertoraiseawarenessofthepossibilitiesusingModelica.Theskepticalteacherveryclearlyformulatedhisconcerns.Hisconcernsrelatetopedagogicalissues,andorganizationalissuesinthedepartment.Whatwouldbetherequirementstouseaportalforvirtualexperiments?Studentsshouldbeabletoworkontheirown,andhedoesnotwanttogivemuchsupport.Onlineexperimentscouldonlybeofferedasanadditionalexercise,notdisturbingthelecturesandcontentofthecurrentcourse.Butherealizedthatinthatcasestudentswillnotusetheonlineexperiments;theydonotdoadditionalwork.Otherpedagogicalissueshementionedwere:Howcouldteachersverifythatsomeonehasdonetheexperimentbyhimself?Howwouldanexaminationbedealtwith?Howcanweavoidcheating?


9/78

Undergraduatecoursesareverycompact,therealsoarepracticalassignments,labassignments,andwhatastudentisdoinginacourseshouldnotcompetewiththispracticalwork,whichaimsforsomethingdifferent.Ateachercouldmakethelecturesmoreinteractive,butthiswilltakemoretime,wedonotwanttocutdownoncontentorincreasethenumberofhoursforstudents.Thisteacherwouldnotbeinterestedinreadingcollaborativediscussionsaccompanyingstudents’experimentsinanonlineenvironment.Hewouldnotmindcollaborationbetweenstudentsaslongasexaminationwillbeindividual.Inadditiontotheabovementionedpedagogicalconcerns,changinganythinginthecurriculumwouldtake2yearsduetodepartmentalregulations.After2yearsitisdiscussibletouseifitistechnicallyperfectandcontentwiseuseful.HesuggestedtotrytheexperimentsinaPhDcourse.

Support from management Thecoordinatorwespokewasinfavorofclearusefulpackagesofexperimentstobeappliedincourses.Reusabilityofmaterialsisanimportantissue.Packagesneedtohaveclearinputsandoutputs,forteacherstounderstand.Itcouldstartasanewofferforstudents.But:structuringandpackagingtakesalotoftime.Establishingaconsortiumofuniversitieswouldbeneeded.Thecoordinatorhadhisconcernsaboutthepossibilitiesofdisseminationoftheusesofexperimentswithinthedepartment.Eachteacherhashisteachingdutiesandisinchargeofhiscontent.Thedepartmentdoesnothaveacleareducationpolicywhereteachingisontheagenda.Thereusedtobeanannualteachingdaywherestaffmettodiscussathighlevelaboutteachinginanacademicenvironment.Butheconsidersithardtospreadoutideas,educationishardlydiscussed.ThereisnoeducationalpolicytosavePeterF.fromvanishinginsplendidisolation.Teacherswanttoreinventthewheel,usematerialintheirownway,butthistakestimewhichtheydonothave.Wediscussedsomeideas:haveavice‐chancellorforeducation;showcasegoodexamples;haveteacherworkshops(ideaforLiLa);usestudentstocoachteachers;Ourstudentsarechanging,theywanttobemoreincharge,controlandsteertheirownearningprocesses,andtheywanttochoose,decideandcreate..Succescriteria tohavecoursessupportedwithexperimentsin7coursesinLinkoping tohaveteachersinthedepartmentadoptingtheexperimentsintheir

teaching makeotherteachersinterestedincontributingexperiments

Conclusions from Linköping

Content of the experiments Thereisapowerfullanguageavailableforbuildingallsortsofexperimentsandsimulations,usingitrequiressomeexpertiseandwillingnesstoworkwithModelica.Thecurrentexperimentsavailablearenowbeingusedinteaching


10/78

settingthatcannotbeextendedinavirtualenvironmentformany.Thiswilldemandanadaptationoftheexperimentsinordertogetthemeasytoaccessandtouse.ItseemswhenusingModelicamanyexperimentscanbedevelopedbyacommunityofteachersEuropeanwideformanycoursesofdifferentlevels.Indeed,theimpressionisthatsuchprecisedevelopmentofexperimentsforparticularcourses,evenwithinthedepartment,stillhastobedeveloped.Inaddition,amaturemetalanguageforclassifyingpossibleusesofexistingexperimentsneedsfurtherdevelopment.

Local expertise ThereisalotofexpertiseintheteamthatcouldcontributetothesuccessoftheLiLaproject.Itiscommittedandhasmanyexperimentsonoffer,allbasedontheModelicalanguage.However,thereisnopedagogicexpertiseintheteam,necessaryforimplementingadvancedweb‐technologyforlearning,andalsonoexpertiseonadvancedpedagogysuchasproject‐basedlearningorcollaborativeproblembasedlearning.Wespoketotwoambitiousteachersthathadwelldevelopedreasonsforemployingthetechnology,alsoformodifyingthedidacticsoftheircoursesaccordingtodevelopmentsinprofessionalcontexts:problem‐based,collaborativeteam‐work.ItwouldbeagoodideatoconsulttheseteachersandmakeuseoftheirknowledgefortheLiLaproject.

Project goals Onlylocalprojectgoalswereexpressedinthefirstplace.Themaingoaloftheprojectwasdescribedintermsofinternaldissemination,howevertherewasnoconcreteplanforrealisingthatambitionyet.TheoverarchinggoalsoftheLiLaprojectdonotseemtobeattoplevelpriority.MoregeneralLiLaobjectivessuchassharingexperimentsandsupportingexternalusersisstilltobeconsideredbytheteam.

Support from Management AlthoughtheeducationalmanagerwasinfavourofsupportingthedisseminationofusingModelicainthedepartmenthealsoindicatedthelackofinstrumentstorealizethis.ApparentlythedepartmentdoesnothaveacleareducationalpolicyandthereforeitwasconsideredachallengetogetteachersfromthedepartmentinvolvedintheLiLaproject.ItwasexpectedthattheLiLaprojectwouldfurnishthatplan.Managementdoesnothavetheambitionnorthecapacitytomoveintothatdirection.

Technical infrastructure Becausethereisastrongproject‐orienteddevelopmentteam,atthismomentthereisnolackofsupport.However,atthedepartmentallevel,supportseemstobenon‐existentyet.WhenprofessorFritzsonwouldmovetoanotherplace,allwillbelostatthissite.


11/78

Suggestions 1. Developastrategyhowtomakethecurrentexperimentsavailablefor

studentsintheLiLaconsortium.Describethestepsthatshouldbetakentomaketheexperimentsaccessibleandusableforall,andasaconsequence,definethefunctionalitiesneededintheonlineenvironment,c.q.virtualportal.

2. Formulateanimplementationplan,bothfortheofferingofservicestotheLiLaproject,andforimplementingLiLaservicesintotheowneducationalpractice.

3. Contactandnegotiatewiththeprojectcoordinator,bothonusingModelica,aswellasonlinkingMathmodelicatoWonderland.

3.2.2 Basel (june 30, 2009) BiocenterUniversityofBasel,Klingelbergstrasse50Participants:TiborGyalog(host&organiser,thanks!),HelmarBurkhart,SvenRizzotti(Basel);YvonneTetour(Stuttgart);PieterdeVries,JerryAndriessen(Delft).

Summary of Basel experience

Overview of the current situation TheuniversityofBaselhasexpensiveequipmentfordoingexperimentsinnano‐technology,withtoomanystudentstouseitinonecourse.ItparticipatesinthenetworkEUCOR(http://www.eucor‐uni.org/site/Accueil‐4.html),togetherwiththeuniversitiesFreiburg,Karlsruhe,Strasbourg,andMulhouseandworkedonaVirtualCampus.ItappearedthatmuchworkthisVirtualCampusplatformwasrelativelyunsuccessfulforthephysicsdomainbecausetheseuniversitieswererelativelyclosetoeachotheranditwaseasiertotravelthantosetupasystemforsharingresources.Advancingonthisrequiresmorefundamentalchangesineducationalviews.Thenano‐experimentswouldbenefitfromthat.Moreclientsfortheexperimentsareneeded,thispartnerunderstandsthatthisrequiresdevelopmentofnewcollaborationmodels,e.g.withThessaloniki.Industryisnotveryinterestedindevelopingadvancedteachingtosuittheirneeds,sofaronlyinthetechnicalinnovationsthataredevelopedinthislab.AnalysisoftasksThelaboratoryhasaverypowerfulpositioninnanotechnology,andtheexpensiveequipment(severalnano‐microscopeslinkedtosoftwarecontrols)forremoteexperimentsaswellasconstructsimulationsinthisdomain.Theexperimentalpossibilitiesinthisverycomplexdomainallowtasksthatareopenandexperimental,andincombinationwithsimulationsaffordcrossingthebordersbetweentherealandthevirtual,oftenwiththeconsequencethatstudentsdonotunderstandthefundamentaldifferencesbetweendoingsimulationsorworkingwiththeexpensiverealstuff.Nano‐domainhasaspectsrelevantforphysics,biology,chemistry.Thesimulationisbasedonajava‐framework,isopen‐sourceandcanbedownloadedatsourceforge.Thevisionsofarhasbeentoallowteacherstobuild


12/78

theirownexperimentsusingtheframework,butperhapsduetothecomplexityofthedomain,ortodidacticissues,hasnotbeenverysuccessful.

Pedagogics and didactics Thecoursesinwhichtheequipmentisusedaremoreadvancedthantraditionalteachingandadditionalexperiments.Theformatismorethatofaresearchlab,workinteamswithinterestforworkingpracticesinadditiontoinquirybasedlearning.Thereisnouniversalsolutionforprovidingfixedprogressinlearning.Studentshavetoworktogetherandorganizetheirownprogress.Examinationusuallyinvolveswritingreports.Groupsaresupportedbymoreexperiencedtutors(PhD‐students).Thereisapilot(thesis)abouttheuseofmobilephoneequipmentforsupportingaresearchproject.CollaborationbetweenEUCORinstitutionswasnotverysuccessful.TherewasaproductivecollaborationwithMadrid,butthisconcernedremoteuseoftheequipment,nottheformofthe(collaborative)learningprocessitself.Atthisstage,anewapproachforeffectivedistancelearningcanbedeveloped,technicalissueshavebeensolved.Supportisdesired.

Teachers interest Itseemsthatinthisgroupteachershaveawelldevelopedexperienceinteachingprojectbasedlearning.Itwasnotimplementedasordersfromhighermanagement,butistheresultofgradualchangesovertimebasedongrowinginsight.Studentsshouldbeactive,workonpracticalissuesandsolutions,thiswillmotivatethemmorethanjustlearningforunderstandingconceptsandprinciples.Ideally,studentsshouldbeinvolvedindevelopingtheLiLasite,extendingthedatabaseofLiLaexperiments.Useawiki,togettheirideas.Involvingstudentsinhighergoalswillmotivatethemevenmore.Newtechnology,mashups,werediscussed,allowingahighlevelofpersonalizedweb,usingpartsofweb‐pages,insertingexistingcontentintoone’sownenvironment.

Support from Management Wedidnothaveenoughtimetodiscusswithmanagement.LikeinLinköping,theyseemtobefavorabletonewteachingapproaches,buttheydonotexplicitlysupportcontinuationofinnovation.

Ideas for the portal Thereisaneedforaweb2.0environmenttomakeLiLawork.TheWonderlandmetaphorcouldwork,itshouldbevisuallystateoftheart,allowing3Dprojection,hotspots,calendar,reservation,tags,proximity,userprofiling.Maybethe‘airportmetaphor’couldworktoexplaintheapproach.Theportaliscrucialforshowingwhatthereistofindandhowtofindit.Itshouldbeawareofthewayusersaremotivatedtomakeuseofit.


13/78

Teacherneedsare:gettingeasyreportsofuse,nothavingtospendmuchtimeonpreparation,scriptsforgoodpractices,howtoemployanexperimentinrealpractice,awaytoorganizefeedback,waystoeasilyevaluatewhatusersdid,howtoestimate(alsointernationally)thelevelofresults,feedbacktoimprovetheexperiments.Aboveall,itshouldbeclearforteacherswhytheyshouldinvestinthis:forwhomaretheysavingmoneyandwhataretheeducational(andother)benefits?Example:JOVI,achannelofvirtualexperimentsinmedicinewhereonecandevelopyourownscenario,witharankingsystemandother‘bites’thatattractsusers,stakeholders,etc.Wehavetodevelopagenericmodelforcollaborationbetweensites,notonlyinvolvingtheLiLapartners.Onlyacommunitydrivenportalcansurviveaftertheendoftheproject.Baselhassomeexperiencewithnewformatsthatdiedafterthemainoriginatorleft.Somelinks SvenRizzottiphd:www.rizzotti.ch/syndicate www.p2.unibas.chfortheViLabsandViDi(pharmasquare) Courses.cs.unibas.ch/moodle→/werkzeugetheComputerScienceStuff www.ethz.ch–coreitem(ComprehensiveMathematics…) Physicapromedicis(Swissvirtualcampus(ppm.unibas.ch)

Success Criteria Basel’sinterestintheprojectistofurtherdeveloptheirinnovationin(e‐)learningbyworkingtogetherwithotheruniversities.ItisasuccesswhentheusercommunityextendsbeyondtheLiLapartners.

Conclusions from Basel

Content of the experiments Thereisapowerfulnano‐technologicalexperimentalsituationavailable,whichallowsforbothremoteexperimentationandforsimulationsinthisdomain.Ithasbeenusedonvariousoccasions,evenwithremoteusers(Madrid)butisnotofficiallyimplementedinanycourse.

Local expertise Thereislocalexpertisebothonthedomainknowledgeandaboute‐learning.Manyexampleswereshownbyateacher,whowaskeenonsharinghisideaswithusaboutpromotingstudentactivitybypresentingthemwithproblemsthatwouldconsistachallengetothemandnotsimplyfillingintheblanks.Alsotheneedforevaluationofstudentunderstandingwasconsidered,forexamplebythecarefuldesignofsmallassignmentsorquestions.

Project goals Althoughamaingoalclearlyistogetnew,andmanyusers,forthenanotechnologyexperimentsandsimulations,thereisagenuineandadvancedinsightintousingEuropean‐widenetworkstosharetechnologyandemployingadvancededucationalideas.


14/78

Support from Management Wehavenotspokentotheeducationalcoordinator,butatthebureaucraticlevelcontactsarenotadvanced,andsupportisonlytobeexpectedwhensomeresultsandgoodexamplescanbeshown.Inthissense,thereisthesamesituationasinSweden.

Technical infrastructure Thereisnorealissuehere,astheneededmaintenanceoftheapparatusisbeingdoneanyway.Itshouldbenotedthatlocalsupportoftheseremoteexperimentsistimeconsuming.Wehadinterestingdiscussionsaboutusingweb2.0technologiestoprovideaccesstotheLiLasiteintermsofteacherneeds(profiles,feelings,courses,contents).LiLacouldbecomeaGoogleforremoteexperimentsandvirtualsimulations.

Suggestions DuringthemeetingitwasalreadysuggestedandagreedthatBaselwouldcontacttheGreekpartnertodiscusstheirneedsandpossiblewaysofcooperation.Baselshoulddefinitelybeconsultedfortheirideasabouttheportal.WithintheLiLacontext,energyshouldbespentondevelopingadvancededucationalconceptsforuseofremoteexperimentsinopenprojectcontexts,orinmoreclosedproblem‐solvingassignments.Crucially,BaselshouldjointheteamdevelopingalongertermworkingmodelfortheLiLaproject,abouthowdifferentsiteswouldcollaborate,andmakethiscollaborationsurvivetheproject.

3.2.3 Berlin (july 2‐3, 2009) TechnischeUniversitätBerlin(TUD),InstitutfürFestkörperphysikParticipantsinBerlin:ChristianThomsen,SevakKhachadorian,HaraldScheel,LarsKnipping,SebastianGede(didacticaltutor),AndreasMoschini(technicaltutor);ThomasRichter,YvonneTetour(Stuttgart);SpirosKassavetis(Thessaloniki);PieterdeVries,JerryAndriessen(Delft).

Summary of Berlin experience

Overview of the current situation Berlinhasasite(Remotefarm:http://remote.physik.tu‐berlin.de/farm/index.php)withfreeaccesstoasetofremoteexperiments,availableona24/7basis.Userscomefromeverywhere,theyhavetosubscribeandcanuseit(browserplugin).Ifusersaretoomany,reservationmaybeneeded.Itseemssomecompaniesusetheremoteexperiments,butnoinformationfromthere.Theexperimentsarefullyeducational,thatis,theysimulateidealconditions.TheLiLaparticipationwouldrequiremorerealistic,butalsomorescientific,researchorientedexperiments.Ishighlyinterestedininternationalcooperation.


15/78

Analysis of tasks Thefocusisonremoteexperiments.Thereisasetofratherbasicexperiments,focusedonengineersfromotherfaculties.Experimentsaresetupbythestudents,alltogetherabout20setups.Theteamhasstarteddevelopingsimulationsfromtheexperiments.Recordeddatacanbestoredforfurtheranalyses.

Figure 1 - Berlin remote experiment

Pedagogics and didactics Eachexperimentcomeswithbasicinformationandanassignmentstructureonline,asascript,includingaWiki.Studentsworkinsmallgroups,butthemannerisleftuptothem.CoursesareorganizedusingMoodle,whichisgenerallyusedbythefaculty(https://www.isis.tu‐berlin.de/).Moodleismainlyusedfororganizingthecourse,lessforinteractiveandcommunitypurposes.Forumsareusedforbasicquestions,whichareansweredbytutors(advancedstudents).Eachtutorisresponsiblefor1or2experiments,therearetechnicaltutorsandeducationaltutors.Thelastarealsocoachingthestudentstowriteasuitablereport.Outcomesofexperimentsarenotautomaticallylinkedtoevaluation.Reportsareevaluatedbytheteacher.Anevaluationofthecourse,filledinby8students,isavailable.Itisgenerallypositive.Ofthe800availablestudents,only23dotheonlinecourse.Theonlinecourseisnotenoughpositionedasanalternative.Marketingthecourseisanissue.

Teachers interest Thereisalotofadministrativeburdeninvolvedinservingdifferentcoursesforvariousdepartments.Teachersdifferintheirevaluationofvarioustasksintermsofects.Theuniversityisratherlateinharmonizingthesysteminthisrespect.Mostteachersarejustputtingmaterialonline(inMoodle)withoutreflectingontheeducationalaspects.Thereisnofixedmodel,buttheconvictionthatmorecommunicationandlearningbydoingisneededtoreplacetraditionallectures.Maybedevelopmentofanewbachelorisawayouttocomeupwithnewteachingmethods:studentsdevelopingnewmaterialsforstudentsabroad.


16/78

Support from Management Thecurrentexperimentsneedlittlemaintenance,theteamcanhandlebuildingandmaintenancethemselves.Sometimesmaterialswearout.Inthelongerruntherearenofundsforextendingthesetofexperiments.

Technical infrastructure Withtheexistingexperimentsmanymorestudentscanbeserved.SimulationsarebuiltwithLabView.

Success Criteria Anaccessibleplatform,tobeabletoservetheinternationalcommunityonaroutinebasis.

Conclusions from Berlin

Content of the experiments Thecurrentsetofexperimentsarerathersimple,morecomplexmaterialsareneededtoservemoreadvancedstudents.ItisunclearifthesecancomefromotherpartnersinLiLa.Thisshouldbechecked.Thesystemwithtutoringbyexperiencedstudentsseemstoworkverywell.Ingeneral,theideaofusingstudentsforconstructingexperiments,technicalassistanceaswellascoachesofsmallstudentgroupsisanexcellentidea,forotherpartnerstoinvestigate.Thisseemstobeanaffordablemodelwhichservesmanygoalsatthesametime.

Local expertise ThereareteachersthathaveexperiencewithMoodle,mainlyasacourseorganizer,whichseemsagoodbasetoworkwith.Thewaytheexperimentsareembeddedinthecourse,usingMoodle,maybeabasistoworkfrombytheotherpartnersaswell.Sitesmaydifferintheuseofvariousfeatures,ofcourse.

Project goals Likewithallotherpartners,therearenotenoughusersfortheexperiments.TheinternationalaspectofLiLaishighlyfavoredandmaybeexploitedtoincreasetheuseaswellasthemotivationofusers.Itwouldbeagoodideatoworkwithsomepartnersonaplanformoreinternationalparticipation.

Support from Management Likewithallotherpartners,thereisnotenoughawarenessoftheadvantagesofremoteexperimentsandvirtualsimulations.Becausethereseemstobesomemovementinmanagementthinkingandstructuringatthemanagementlevel,LiLashouldbecomepartofthis,atsomepoint.

Technical infrastructure Thispartneristheonewhoismostadvancedwithintegratingfeaturesofe‐learningintheircurriculum.Studentsshouldknowwheretogo,accesscontrolworksinBerlin.

Suggestions TheLiLateamshouldreflectonthepossibilitiesofaMoodleportalatcourselevel,intermsoffunctionalities,eventuallyasanalternativeforWonderland.


17/78

3.2.4 Stuttgart (july 2 and 7, 2009) RechenzentrumUniversityofStuttgartWeinterviewedthispartnerduringourvisitinBerlin,andlaterduringavirtualconferencewhereexperimentsincombinationwiththeITSwereshown.ParticipantsinBerlin:LarsKnipping(Berlin);ThomasRichter,YvonneTetour(Stuttgart);SpirosKassavetis(Thessaloniki);PieterdeVries,JerryAndriessen(Delft).Participantsvirtualmeeting:ThomasRichter,YvonneTetour,TilmannRobbe(Stuttgart);JerryAndriessen(Delft).

Summary of Stuttgart experience

Overview of the current situation Thereisalargeset(90)ofexperimentsavailable,allsimulations,createdbyabasicdevelopmentenginewithjavaappletsthatcanbeusedforexperimentation.Simulationscanbesavedandanalysedbyothers.Therearenousers,thatis,thesimulationsarenotyetpartofanycourse.Thisisoneofthemaingoals:tofindusersfromeducation.

Analysis of tasks

Figure 2 - Stuttgart simulation

Thesimulationshavebeendevelopedasanaddendumtothelecture,suitableformultipleaudiences.Theuserscanworkwithandmanipulateappletswhichcorrespondtovariousproblemstatesatthemicro‐level.Manysimulationsworkwithatutoringsystemwhichguidestheusersthroughunderstandingthecomplexissues.Feedbackisbasedonwhatusersarecurrentlydoing.The


18/78

simulationcanbesharedbytwousers,butnoadditionalcommunicationfeaturesareafforded.Thereisnometadataavailable,simulationscanbefoundbytheirgeneraltitle.

Pedagogics and didactics Experimentscanbedescribedasproblemoriented,studentshavetoexperiencethesimulationanddiscoverwhatisthere.Thesupportsysteminwhichsomeoftheexperimentsareembeddedprovidesstructuretotheexperienceanduserscanmonitortheirprogressbyfeedbacktotheanswerstheyprovidetotestquestions.Thesystem‘knows’wherethestudentisandcanadaptitsquestionsandfeedbacktothatknowledge.

Success Criteria Itisclearthatthemaingoalistofindausefulaudiencefortheexperimentsandtoextendthesetofexperiments.LiLawouldbecomeasupermarketforallkindsofexperiments.Stuttgartisreadyforcollaborationwithallpartnerstodevelopastrongusercommunity.Educationalinnovationisnotthemaingoal,althoughweneedagoodconcept.

Conclusions from Stuttgart

Content of the experiments ThesetofexperimentsoffersarichandvariousstartfortheLiLadatabase.However,morereflectionisneededonwhoissupposedtousethemandforwhatreason.Theissuesarenotonlydidactical,butalsoamatterofprecisecontent:whatcoursesorwhatteacherneedscanbeservedhere?Thesimulationsandthecombinationwiththetutoringsystemhaveaclearviewonlearningasguideddiscovery,withanemphasisonstructuredguidance,byateacher,orbyatutoringsystem.Whilethisisoneformoflearningthatiswidespreadinacademics,itsuseisratherbasicanddevelopmentoftutoringforothersimulations(alsoforothersites)isnotaneasytask.Wedonotrecommendfocusingonthisdevelopmentfortheproject.However,furtherreflectionattheprojectlevelonsupportofindependentstudentlearningishighlyrecommended.Inaddition,developingsomewayofestimatingusabilityoftheexperimentsattheprojectlevelisneeded.Astandardmayhavetobedevelopedtoguaranteeusefulnessforlargegroupsofstudents.

Local expertise Itisclearthattheteamhasalotofexpertisewithdevelopmentofsimulations,andiswillingtoadaptexistingones,ordevelopnewones.Thedidacticsstillneedtobeshowntohaveadesiredeffect,andwiththiskindofstricttutoring,detailsmatter.

Project goals ThechallengeforLiLaistofindaninnovativeviewonusingexperimentsineducationthatistechnologicallysound,andthatisresistanttothefuture.Itmaybethatsettingupausercommunityisimportant.OneoptioncouldbeusingexistingFacebook(orstudivz)community‐software.


19/78

Suggestions BecauseStuttgartistheproject‐coordinator,andoriginatoroftheLiLaproposal,weshouldlookcloselyintotheoriginalconceptionoftheproposal,asitseemsthatnotallauthorsofthattextstillarememberoftheprojectteam.Thecurrentfocusseemstobeonmakingcontentavailable,butwithoutthecleardidacticalperspective,chancesforsuccessarenotveryhigh.Wewouldliketochallengethisteamtodevelopaworkingcaseofacourse,orpackagewithinacourse,tobeusedandtestedbystudentsinactualeducation.

3.2.5 Cambridge (july 8, 2009) DepartmentofChemicalEngineeringandBiotechnologyParticipants:MarkusKraft,AndreasBraumann,AmitBhave,Studentassistant,Sebastian,WimVeen

Summary of Cambridge experience

Overview of the Current Situation TheCambridgeteamhasinitslaboratoryonepieceofequipment,theProcessControlSystemSIMATICPCS7,whichhasbeeninstalledwithintheframeworkofaprojectandhasbeensponsoredbySiemens(como.cheng.cam.ac.uk/weblabs/reactors.html).ItiscurrentlyusedbyallCambridgestudents(around60)takingacourseintheir3rdyearofstudy.ThecourseisonReactionEngineeringandProcessDynamics,givenbyMarkus’group.Theequipmentconsistsofareducedmodelofareal‐lifesituationcontrolledbythreeSiemenscomputers.Theequipmentisusedonline,studentsworkingfromhome,beingabletomonitorthesystemvisuallythroughawebcaminstalledinthelab.Studentsdotheexperimentsasanintegratedexercisewithinthecourse.IntotalstudentshavetodofiveexperimentsonayearlybasistwoofwhichusingtheWebLab.

TheCambridgeWeblabasusedintwo3rdyearcourses

Analysis of Tasks Studentsworkinteamsofthreestudentsandreportindividuallyontheresultsoftheexperiment.Anexperimenttakes2hoursonanaverage.Studentsaresupportedbyinstructionalmaterialsavailableonline.Studentsshouldbeabletoworkindependentlyfromteachingstaff,however,astudent‐assistantisavailableforquestionsandsupport.Thestudentassistantisalsoresponsibleformaintainingthesystem,bothforthechemicalsandforthecomputersystemsto


20/78

run.Thestudentassistantreportsthatmanyquestionsofstudentsrelatetoissuestheymighthavesolvedontheirown,indicatingthatastudentassistantfosterspamperingstudents,ratherthanmakingthemself‐steeringlearners.AlltogethertheSIMATCIPCS7isinuseforabout3weeksayear.Duetotheamountoftimethesystemisoutofuse,theCambridgeteamhasinviteduniversitiestouseittheequipment.ImperialCollege,LoughboroughUniversity,NewCastleUniversity,MIT,BirminghamUniversityandsomeotherinstitutionshavebeenusingthesystemfortheirstudents.Asaconsequence,theCambridgeteamhasexperienceinprovidingaccesstothesystembyothertargetgroupsthantheCambridgestudents.Still,thereisnosystemofauthenticationfor‘foreign’studentsnoraplatformwheretheycanworktogether,exchangeexperiencesorcreateacommunity.TheCambridgestaffexpectstheLiLaProjecttoprovidethesefunctionalitiesintheVirtualPortal.

Pedagogics and Didactics Twopedagogicalstrongholdsunderpintheexperiment:a.simulationofareal‐lifesituation,andb.acollaborativeworkingapproach.Thepedagogyusedisaformofcollaborativelearning,studentsworkingingroupsofthree.Groupsoffourstudentshavebeentrialed,givingnegativeeffectssuchasfree‐ridingandlackofclarityoftasksamongthegroupmembers.Studentsdiscussusingachatfacilityoralsoface‐to‐face,butalwaysoutsidethelab.Astheyreportindividuallyontheirworkthereisnocollaborativeresultintheformofagroupreport.Asaconsequence,theassessmentofthestudentsistobemeasuredindividually,althoughthelearningprocessisorganizedonacollaborativebasis.Thelearningprocessandthelearningproductareseparated,andemphasisisonproductratherthanonprocess.Thetwoexperimentsrunningonthesystemsimulateareal‐lifesituationforchemicalengineering,thesystemrepresentingareducedmodelofreality.Theremoteexperimentsareintegratedinthestandardcurriculum,theyareexerciseseachstudenthastogothroughwithinawell‐definedtimeline.Theyarenotanadd‐onoroptionallearningactivity.Studentsusecustomizedonlinematerialsforcarryingouttheexperiments.Theymayaskforadditionalhelpthroughthechatfacility,astudentassistanthelpingthemout.Thestudentassistanthasbeensupportingthestudentsbyfillingthetanksinthesystem,checkingthepowerincriticalpartsofthesystem,andbygivinganswersonquestionsfromstudents.Beforebeingastudentassistanthehasbeenaregularstudenttakingthecourseandtheexperiments.Thestudentassistantisexplicitinhisviewonthemotivationalvalueoftheexperiments:‘Thisisdifferentfromotherexperiments,asyouhaveallinformationrealtimeathand,youcanseeboththecontrolpanelofthesystemthroughthewebcamandthecontrolscreenofthesystem,givingyouallthedetailsofwhatisgoingon.Itworksasifyourwerethereandyouareworkingonsomethingreal.It


21/78

isnotapaperandpenexercise,thisisreal.’Thestudentassistantconsidersthetwoexistingexperimentsassufficient.Evaluationsoftheusesoftheequipmenthavebeendone,aspartofastrictCambridgeregimeofevaluatingteachingactivities.Studentsarepleasedwiththeexperimentssimilarinsimilartermsasthestudentassistantmentionedabove.

Teachers Interest Astheequipmentisveryspecificinitsownchemicalengineeringfield,thereisnodrivetoengageotherteachersinthedepartmenttouseit.Asaconsequence,Markusdoesnotintendtoinvolveotherteachersastheyarenotteachingthesamesubjectheisteaching.

Support from Management Unfortunately,atthetimeofvisitthemanagingstaffwasnotavailableforinterviews.

Success Criteria Havingaskedifmoreexperimentssuchastheexistingonesarebeingplannedfor,Andreassaidthiswasnotthecase.Thesystemcoversaspecificareainthecoursesinvolvedandtherearenoplansformoreequipmenttoinstall.ThereisanotherideaondevelopingnewstufflinkinganotherprojecttotheLiLaProject.InthisprojecttheCambridgeteamhasdevelopedasimulationthatstillneedstobeelaboratedforteachingpurposes,inparticular,teachingmaterialsgoingalongthissimulation.Havingdiscussedthepedagogicalapproachofthesematerials,weagreedthatmicro‐learningwouldbeanappropriatepedagogicalapproach,providingstudentswithmaterialsforshortlearningsequencesof10to20minutes.Thelearningsequencescouldbeused‘just‐in‐time’,andcouldbeorganizedinaWeb2.0approachenablinguserstocontributenewlearningcontent,hence,creatinglearningcommunitiesmakingtheLiLaProjectasustainablecommunityofpractice.CambridgedoesnothaveanyexperienceinthisfieldandwouldappreciatetocollaboratewithDelftincreatingsuchmaterialsasshowcasesfortheLiLaProject.ThisideawouldleadtomorecontentdeliveredbytheCambridgeteam,anditwouldenhancetheexpertiseofthewholeLiLaconsortiumincreatinginnovativelearningopportunitiesonline.

Conclusions from Cambridge

Content of the Experiments Thecontentofthecurrentexperimentsarewelldefinedandreadytouse.LimitedadjustmentsintheaccompanyingmaterialsaretobemadeforuseintheVirtualPortaloftheLiLaProject.Dependingonthepedagogicalapproachtobechosen,theseexperimentscanfunctionwithinvariouslearningculturesacrossEurope.Forgroupassessmentprocedures,however,newmaterialsshouldbedeveloped.ExistingexperiencewithstudentgroupsfrombeyondCambridgeUniversityhaveshowntheexperimentsaredoableatadistance.MaintainingthesystemdoesnotdemandintensivestaffsupportfromCambridge.


22/78

Otherstrongpointsoftheequipmentisthatitprovidesauthenticandhands‐onexercises,withoutanyrisksorsafetyissues.Theamountofexperiments,however,islimitedtotwoonlyandarenotgenericinthesensethatotherdisciplinesthanchemicalengineeringmightprofitfromthem.

Local Expertise TheteamhasaclearandtechnicallystableequipmentthathasproventofunctionwithinandbeyondthefacultyofChemicalEngineering.IdeasforfurtherdevelopmentofequipmentrelatedtotheSIMATICPCS7arenotatstakeastheequipmenthasbeenbuiltforveryfocusedandspecificexperiments.TheCambridgeteamiscurrentlydevelopingsimulationsthatcouldbeusedasvirtualexperimentsintheLiLaproject.

Project Goals AndreassaidhewouldconsidertheLiLaProjectasuccessifotherpartnerinstitutionswouldusetheavailableequipmentatCambridgeintheircourses.Markuscherishplansforfurtherdevelopmentofexperimentsusingthesimulationsthatarecurrentlyunderdevelopmentfortheautomotiveindustry.HeconsidersthisachancefortheLiLaProjecttodevelopnewcontentbasedoninnovatelearningapproaches,incollaborationwithLiLapartners.

Support from Management Withoutanyeducationalmanageravailable,thereisnoevidencethatthefacultyissupportingtheLiLaProjectanditsgoals.Itseemsthatnofurtherdisseminationoftheexperimentswithinthefacultyoruniversityisenvisaged,anddevelopingbusinessmodelsformakingtheequipmentavailableformany,isamatterofthegroupinwhichitiscurrentlyused.However,itiswisetoinvolveandcommitthefaculty’smanagementinfurtheractivitiesandmakethemawareoftheopportunitiesforparticipatinginEuropeanwideinitiativessuchasLiLaasthisprojectimpliesmanagerialdecisionsifitistobecomeasustainableproject.

Technical Infrastructure Thereisanissueattheleveloftheprogramminglanguagethathasbeenusedfortheexperiments.AstheequipmentandthecomputersystemshasbeensponsoredbySiemens,thelanguagemightbeaproblemfortheintegrationoftheexperimentsintotheVirtualPortalofLiLa.ThisissueisalreadyunderconsiderationbytheMadridteam.

Suggestions 1. Thecurrentequipmentisrunningfineandisavailableforusersfrombeyond

theCambridgeUniversity.ExperimentscouldbeprovidedastheyarewithintheVirtualPortal,usingtheexistingpedagogicalapproach.Otherwaysofusingthesystemcouldbeconsideredhowever,intheframeworkofinternationalcooperationintroducing‘peerlearning’asapedagogicalconceptwherestudentshelpeachotherinonlineenvironments.Thepurposeofsuchnewapproachesistotackletheproblemofdealingwithlargenumberofstudentswithoutanyadditionaldemandonstaffsupport.Fromexperiencesinonlineenvironmentsitiswell‐knownthatacommunityis


23/78

verysupportivefortheirmembersseekinghelp.Usingthesesocialprocessescanhelptomakeitfeasibletoprovidecontenttomanythousandsofstudents,withoutcreatingahugeproblemofsupportfromanyteacher.TheCambridgeteammightconsidertodevelopsuchpeerlearningapproachestogetherwithpedagogicalexpertsandthetechnicalstaffofMadrid.

2. AsnewcontentwillbecomeavailablefromotherLiLapartners,theCambridgeteammightwellconsiderhowtointegratesomeofthiscontentintotheirowncourses,anddefinetheconditionsforintegratingthemandnegotiatethesewiththeLiLapartners.

3. TheCambridgeteamiswillingtodevelopnewcontentusingasimulationthatisunderconstructionfortheautomotiveindustry.Thisinitiativeisstronglysupportedasitcreatesopportunitiestoprovideinnovativeauthenticlearningopportunitiesforstudents.ItwillalsohelptheLiLaProjectcreatingshowcasesthatcaninspirepartnersforfurtherdevelopmentofonlinecontent.

3.3 Conclusions and Recommendations

3.3.1 The Current Content Whenwespeakaboutexperiments,wemeanremoteexperimentsaswellasvirtualsimulations.Whenthedistinctionbetweenthetwoapplies,itwillbementionedexplicitly.AlthoughtheDelftteamlackstheexpertiseinphysicalsciencestobeabletopreciselyjudgethemeritsoftheexperimentswehaveseen,weassumethatthebelowmentionedlackofuseisnotaconsequenceofthelackofquality.Ontheotherhand,wecannotestimatehowtheexperimentsthatareofferedbyourLiLapartnersfarewhencomparedtointernationalstandardsinthearea.Weproposetohavethisatleastexaminedbyoneortwoindependentexperts.Thequestionsthatwehave,asaprojectcouldbe:1. Quality:aretheexperimentsthatareofferedbytheLiLapartnersofsufficient,

orevenexcellent,qualitywithrespecttothestandardsinthefield?,and2. Coverage:istheofferofexperimentsbytheLiLapartnerssuchthatwecan

claimtocoverthemostimportantareasinthefieldofphysics,andifnot,howcanwedescribetheareasthatwecover,andwherearethegapsthatcouldbefilledatsomelaterstage?

Inwhatfollows,weassumetheanswerstothesetwoquestionsarepositive.

3.3.2 Embedding in Educational Practice Theweakestaspectoftheproject,paradoxically,isthatthecurrentuseofexperimentsinthelearningprocessofstudentsislimitedevenatthesitesofthepartnerswevisited.Boththefrequencyofuseandthenumberofteachersinvolvedislimited.Itisunclearifthereisalackofurgencyorneedforusingthemamongteachersandstudents.Doteachersandstudentsthinktheycandowithout?Orisitignorance,notknowingwhatisavailable.Whateverthereasonmightbe,thereseemstobenoapparentneedforexperimentsintheteachingpracticeusingtechnology.Wecannotexpectthissituationtoautomaticallyimprovewiththeavailabilityofmoreexperiments.Moreonlineexperimentswill


24/78

notconvinceteacherstousethem.Communicationanddisseminationactivitiesatthefaculty’sandteachers’levelwouldbecriticalinordertostimulatecolleaguesandotherstousethecontent.TheLiLaProjectshouldcarefullyplanforactionstostriveatasustainabledevelopmentoftheportal.Itshouldbenoticedwevisitedthesitesofthepartnerswhoofferexperiments,notthoseofpartners(orstillunknownothersites)thatexplicitlyneedexperiments.Nevertheless,thelevelofmiddlemanagement(faculty,directorsofeducation)iscruciallyunawareofthepossibilitiesandimplicationsofusingsharedexperimentsandcombiningeducationalexpertisebetweendifferentsites.WithintheLiLaProjectweshoulddevelopexplicitstrategiesforaddressingthismanageriallevel,andprobablythelevelabove.1. ItissuggestedthatasmallteamofLiLamembers(withrepresentativesof

eachsite)developlocalimplementationplans.Anothercrucialpointrelatedtothecontentnotbeingusedintensivelyisthatwedonothaveclearinformationaboutthepresumedeffectsonlearning.Wemaybesellingexperimentsandsimulationsthatdonotworkforlearning.HowcanwetellnewusersthattheLiLacontentisofexcellentquality?Weneedtosetupsomewayof‘proving’thattheseexperiments,whenactuallyusedinsomeeducationalpractice,areeffectivetoolsforlearning,notingeneral,butwithrespecttoeachspecificcase.Onlythen,LiLacanclaimtobeabletomakeadifference,whenappropriatelyapplied,ofcourse.2. ItissuggestedthatWorkpackage5:Evaluationshouldcomeforwardwitha

systemhowtoprovideevidenceoneffectivenessoftheexperimentsforfutureusers.ThiscouldbepartoftheEvaluationPlan

3.3.3 Pedagogical Issues Wehaveseendifferenteducationalapproaches,differentlevelsofexpertiseaddressedbythematerials,differentlevelsofabstractionandrealityofthesituationsaddressed,andalsodifferentdegreesofvisualizationoftheinterfacesfortheremoteexperimentsandvirtualsimulations.Therefore,weconcludeitwouldbeunwisetoadvocateaunifieddidacticalapproach.Thiswouldforcepartnerstodeviatefromtheirusualworkingprocedures.However,mostmaterialswesawwerebasedonindividuallearning,asanadditiontoexistingcourses,addressingdeeperunderstandingofabstractrulesandprinciplesofphysicalscience.Incontrast,weobservedalackofrealisticand/ormultidisciplinarymaterialsaddressingcomplexproblemsolvingandcollaborativelearning,suchas,forconstructingacarengineoraskilift,orbuildingabridgeorarobotthatservestea.Inotherwords,wemissedapproachesinvolvingauthenticapplicationsofabstractconceptsandknowledge.(TheCambridgeexperimentsbeinganexceptiontothisobservation.)Thiskindofknowledgeisneededforstudentstounderstandthemeaningoftheabstractionsandapplythemintherealworldinprofessionalcontextsaswellasindailylife.Also,weassumethatsuchrealistic,collaborative,andconstructiveproblemswouldattractmorestudentsforthenaturalsciences,becauseitiscurrentlywellacknowledgedthatthisformatisbettersuitedtopreparestudentsforthefutureinprofessionalcontexts,andevenforresearch.


25/78

3. Itissuggestedthatnewexperimentsshouldbeproblemoriented,haveahighdegreeofauthenticityand/orshouldinclude,wherepossible,differentdisciplinesenablingstudentstocollaborateinteams.

Wethinktheimplicationofthisisthatalreadyconstructedexperimentsshouldnotbechanged,butthatwehavetobeclearaboutwhatpurposetheyserve,andabouttheirdidacticalapproachattheleveloftheportal.Oneoptioncouldbetopresentexperimentsinpackagesthatwouldbelongtocertainproblemareas(e.g.buildingsoftwareapplications),wouldbeespeciallysuitableforcollaborativeprojectswhichallowstudentstoconstruct(new)materialobjects(e.g.askiliftorwater‐cooker),orwhichbundledtogetherallowunderstandingbasicconceptsofasubdomain(e.g.thesecondlawofthermodynamics).4. ItissuggestedthattheVirtualPortalshouldclassifyexperimentsintermsof

pedagogicalapplication,contentdomain,authenticity,andformatofworking(alone,together,orasateam).Itshouldalsoprovideinsightineffectivenessandusersshouldbeenabledtorateandcommentontheexperiments.

5. Aworkingmodelneedstobedevelopedforasmallsetofexperimentsandsimulations,showingallstepsforteachersandstudents(probablydifferentsteps)toundertakefromthemomenttheyhavereachedtheLiLaportal,findingtheappropriateexperiment,doingtheexperiment,andgettingtheresultsoutofthatexperience.Thiscouldbedoneusingdifferentdidacticalapproaches,forustoseewhattheconsequencesofvariouschoicesinthisrespectareforourproject.

3.3.4 The Portal ThereissomeconsensusformakingtheportaladidacticentrancetotheLiLaworld.Wemightadoptasharedviewonexperimentallearning(learningbydoingexperimentsusingstrategiessuchastrialanderror)inmodernonlineenvironments(creatinglearningcommunitiesprovidingopportunitiestocontributeandco‐create).Powerfulconceptstobeusedinthissharedviewmightbe:

self‐directed,authentic,andcollaborative.Learningbeinganactiveprocessoflearnerstryingtoconstructmeaningfulknowledgecommunicatingwithothers.Thisdefinitionoflearningiscalledtheconstructivistpedagogy,currentlythemainstreampedagogicalviewonlearning.Inthispedagogy,learningmostlyisproblemorientedinvitingstudentstoconstructnewsolutionstopreferablyauthenticproblems,albeitsimpletomorecomplexproblems.6. TheissueofasharedviewonlearningwasdiscussedduringtheDelft

meetingonOctober1stand2nd,2009.Theresultsincludedesignrequirementsfortheportal,suchthepresenceofdiscussionfacilities,andfunctionalitythatsupportsthecreationofnewlearningmaterialswithorbasedontheavailablecontent.Thisprocessofcreatingnewmaterialsmustbeembeddedintheportalandguidedwithusefulsuggestionsonhowtodothat.

Theabove‐mentionedcommentaboutthequalityandcoverageofthesetofexistingexperimentsalsoappliestothevirtualportal.Whatothervirtualportals


26/78

havebeendevelopedinthisandotherrelevantdomains?Whathappenedtotheseandwhatwerethereasonsforsuccessorfailure?Dowehaveexpertiseintheprojecttoprovideuswiththiscrucialinformation?7. Itissuggestedthatasmallinventory‐teamshouldbeestablishedtoreporton

thisbytheendofSeptember2009.InitiativessuchasConnexionsandMITiLabsshouldbeincludedinthisreview.Thefollowingchapterwillincludeanoverviewofexisting,similarprojects.

3.3.5 Collaboration between LiLa Partners 8. Itissuggestedthatagenericmodelforcollaborationbetweensiteswillbe

developed,notonlyinvolvingtheLiLapartners.Weinvitepartnerstogettogetherinsmallteams,settingthisupfortheirmutualcases.

3.3.6 The Development of Showcases Asubstantialamountofmaterialsisavailableatpartnersites,however,practiceislimitedasnumberofusersare.Itwouldbeimportanttodevelopapackage(acourse,acoherentsetofexercises,aproblemwithassociatedexperimentsorsimulations),whichwecanshowtopotentialstakeholders.Theseshowcaseswouldworkfromaconsistentdidacticperspective(basedonactualneedsononeofoursites),woulddisplaythebestofourabilitiesinexperimentsandsimulations,andisofcoursebasedonsoundtechnicalinfrastructure.9. ItissuggestedthatLiLapartnerswillworkwiththeDelftteamtodevelop

showcasesofexperimentsthatmaystimulateourexpertisewithintheLiLaProjectandmayuseasexamplesofbestpracticeforfuturememberstocontributetotheVirtualPortal.Thecasesdescribedinthisdocumentmayberightforthis.

4 Examples of relevant portals Remotelabsextendaccesstolaboratoryexperiments,makingthemavailable24/7wheneverstudentswishtousethem.Theyalsoenablefacultytobringexperimentsintolecturetoexplorerealscenarios,withouttheneedforlaboratoryequipmentintheclassroom.Remotelabscanprovidelaboratoryexperimentswithdevicesthatotherwisewouldbeimpossibleforstudentstomanipulate.Sharingexpensivelaboratorydevicescanprovidestudentswithmoreopportunitiestointeractwithexperimentsandconfrontthemessinessofrealdata.Thisisacrucialstepiftheintentistogivestudentstheopportunitytoexperiencethedifferencebetweenmodellingtheworldversusunderstandinghowtherealworldactuallyworks.Yet,withallthispotential,thewideradoptionofremotelabshasbeenlimited,wheneverithasbeenattempted.Whyisthisso?ApaperbyLong&Ehrmann,fromCarnegie‐Mellon,asiteofanotherfailedattempt,givesussomeclues(Iiyoshi&Kumar,2008).


27/78

Figure 3 - iLabs architecture

OnereasonwhyiLabatCarnegieMellonfailedwasthefollowing.Typicalforacademe,eachlabwasbuiltbyateam,withaleadfacultymember(thedomainexpert),developersandtechnicalexperts(usuallystudents).Theyusedtheapproachmostfamiliartothem,withoutregardtotheotherteamsdevelopingremoteexperiments.Theycreatedusefulandfunctionallabs,buteachwiththeirown(reasonable)mechanismsforauthenticatingusers,authorizingaccess,andmanagingresultingdatasets.Thiswayofworkingmakesthenextexperimentnocheaperthanthepreviousone.Supportdependsontheleadfacultymember,becausedocumentationispoor,andeachsoftwareproductisunique.Sharingthiswithcolleaguesrequiresalotofadditionalwork:manageexternalaccounts,payingattentiontocourseschedules,differentlanguages,managingdatacreatedandstoredonservers.Thisisnotattractiveatall,becauseinstructorsareontightschedules.InadditionInstructorsarerarelyprepared,supported,orrewardedforfindingandadoptinginnovations.Formakingdecisionsaboutthesustainabilityofourattempts,someotherexampleswereinvestigated.Thefollowinglistmaybeseenasrepresentative.Notallexamplesare‘good’examples. PEMCWebLab(www.PEMCWebLab.com)offersasetofremotelycontrolled

realandvirtualexperimentsfromfieldsofelectricalengineeringmainlyfromPowerElectronics,ElectricalDrivesandMotionControlatDelftUniversity.Itisconstructedhierarchicallyincontentfieldsandmoduleswithinfields.Eachmoduleispresentedwithitslearningobjectives,ashortdescriptionoftheexperiment,andanumberofassignments.Also,thereisapictureofeachexperimentshowingtheapparatus.Itsclaritymakesthisaninterestingexampletofollowforourshowcases.

Theoercommons(www.oercommons.org)databaseprovidesa“referatory”oflessons,experimentsandmediaforallgradesandalldomains.Itisarepository,whichisalivebecausememberscanaddtheirmaterials.Thereisnoindicationofpedagogicalgoals,inordertofindsomethingtoyourtasteyouhavetocheckoutindividualitems.Subjectarea,gradelevel,mediatype,arethemostimportantmetadataforusers.Itisopenforeveryonetoaddlinksandmetadata.Userscantag,rateandreviewlessons.

LOREnet(www.LOREnet.org)isaninstrumentforteacherstoshareknowledgewithinandbetweeneducationalinstitutes.Teachingmaterialsarepublishedandmadeavailableforreuse.Theinitiative,despitehaving


28/78

receivedquitesomefundingandnews,didnotgainenoughtraction,andisnowmoreorlessabandoned.Wecannotfindanyevaluationontheprojectexplainingthefailure,butitisclearthatbothcontributionandreuseofeducationalmaterialsonthesitehasstopped.

OpenCourseware(www.opencourseware.org)isaninternationalinitiativeofmanyschoolsandinstitutestoshareeducationalmaterials.Thecommonapproachistoassistandsupportthepublicationofeducationalmaterialsbyteachersinatop‐down,centralizedmanner.Theseresourcesarethencollectedandreusedthroughwebsitesaswww.oercommons.organdothers.Someoftheinitiatives(suchasatUtahStateUniversity),becauseofcostsavings,havestoppedpublishingandupdatingmaterials.Theseprocessesarequitecostly,bothfromafinancialpointofview,andfromtheteacherpointofview.

Merlot(www.merlot.org)isamultimediaeducationalresourcedatabase.Theapproachtowardqualityinthisinitiativeisthroughpeerreviewing.Anyonecanpublishmaterials,butthereareeditors/reviewerswholookat(asmuchaspossible)resourcesandwriteaqualitativereviewusingastandardformat.Theseresourcescanbefoundaspeerreviewedmaterials.Anotherstrongpointisformedbythecommunitiesinwhichmaterialsareadded,aggregated,peerreviewedanddiscussed.

Connexions(www.cnx.org)isanotherinitiativethatallowsanyonetocontributecontent.Theirapproachtosustainingqualityisalsodistributed:personsandorganizationscanstartoneormorelenses.Theownerofthelens(anorganizationorperson)canthenallowpersons(forexampletoaddcontenttothelenses.Inthatway,thelensownerendorsescontent.Lensestypicallyfocusonqualityorontopic(orboth)andcanhavetheirowninterface.Forexample,travellersintheMiddleEasthavealistofabout40textsintheirlens.Atagcloudshowsthecontentsofthesematerials,makingiteasytofindrelevantmaterialsaboutthetaggedconcepts.

Nixty(www.nixty.com)isacommunity‐basedsiteforpeoplethatwanttolearn.Memberscanstartnewcommunitiesaboutanything.Thereisanauthorityindexforeverycontribution.Existingonlinecontentcanbeorganizedbyanyoneusinganintuitivelessonandcourseauthoringenvironment.

OpenStudy(http://openstudy.com/)isanothercommunity‐basedinitiativesupportedbytheOCWconsortiuminprovidingasociallayerontopoftheOCWcoursesandothercontent.Studentsandteacherscaninteractwitheachother,createandmanageso‐called‘studypads’,andfollowwhatishappeningandbeingsaid.Answeringquestionsandsupportingeachotheristhecoreofthiscommunity.

4.1 Conclusions about existing portals TheaboveportalswerereviewedbeforeandduringtheDelftmeeting.Thesharedviewcanbesummarisedasfollows.Top‐downstructures,relyingonanumberofkeypersons,haveasmallbasisthatmaybetoosmall.Inadecentralisedstructureanyonecanbeacontributor,andtheend‐usersareempoweredwithtoolsandtutorialstosustaintheenvironment.individualsareabletocontribute,review,commenton,rate,andaddmetadatatoresourcesthemselves.Onthesesites,suchasLabSpace,Connexions,OERCommonsand


29/78

MERLOTend‐usersaregiventoolsandexplanationonhowtodothis,butnoorlittlecentralizedsupport.PEMCWebLabprovidesasimpleandclearsolutiontothepresentationoftheexperiments,butitisnotacommunitymodel.Anetworkedlearningmodel,explainedinthenextchapter,meetsmostoftheconstraintsputforwardinthecurrentchapterandmayhavethebestsustainability.

5 Short overview of learning theories Thisliteraturereviewintroducesseveraltraditionalandrecentviewsonlearning.Basedonthisoverview,itdescribesanapproachtolearningthatismostapplicabletotheprojectandtakesintoaccountthemostrecentdevelopmentsinthefieldoflearningandeducation.TheresultsoftheanalysisareusedinthedevelopmentoffunctionalrequirementsforthedesignandimplementationoftheLiLaportal.Inspecific,thisliteraturereviewconnectslearningtheoriesandopportunitiesenabledbytheWeb.LiLa,beingaweb‐basedonlineenvironment,shouldbedesignedaccordingtotheselatestviewsonlearningandpedagogy.Thischapterwillshowhowthecurrentpracticesalignwiththeseviews,andwhattheroleofLiLacanormustbe.

5.1 Introduction TheInternetandthenumerousonlinecommunitiesofpracticeandprofessionalnetworksprovideopportunitiesforinformal,self‐regulatedandnetworkedlearning.Aboveall,theopencharacteroffersrelativelycheapaccessforindividuallearnersworldwidetoconnectwithpeopleandfindrelevantcontent.TheInternetisanenvironmentinwhichskillscanbedevelopedthatareneededinatechnologydriven,andrapidlychangingsociety(J.S.Brown&Adler,2008).Theskillsthatlearnersdevelopinregulareducationsystemsaredifferentfromthosedevelopedinpeer‐basedcommunities(Soekijad,Huisin’tVeld,&Enserink,2004;GStahl,2003;EtienneWenger,2000).ThefirstpartofthischapterwillfocusonlearningtheoriesandtherelevanceoftheInternetforlearning.Thesecondpartofthischapterfollowsfromthefirstpart,whereweconcludeandproposeaspecificpedagogicalapproachforLiLa.Basedonthisapproach,wefocusononlinecommunitiesasaplaceforlearnersandteacherstoadvancetheirknowledgeandconnect.Thecomingdecades,wewillseetheemergenceofinstitutionsandsystemsthatsustainhigh‐qualitylearninginonlinecommunities(D.A.Wiley&Edwards,2002).Inordertocreatesustainableonlineenvironmentsforlearnerstoengageinpeer‐basedlearning,wemustrecognizeandaddressboththeopportunitiesandchallengesfacingus.Qualitymanagement,assessmentandrecognition,andmotivationtocollaborateortoshareinformationarejustafewofthechallenges(Caswell,Henson,Jensen,&D.Wiley,2008;Davidson&Goldberg,2009;Hylén,2007;Hylén,2006;Iiyoshi&Kumar,2008;Klotz,1999;Pascualetal.,2006;Veen,Staalduinen,&Hennis,2010).


30/78

Thefinalpartofthischapterdrawsconclusionsfromliteratureonengagementandmotivationtodeterminedesignrequirementsdescribestheroleofsocialmechanisms.

5.2 Developments in learning theories Below,abriefoverviewofthedevelopmentoflearningtheoriesisgiven,basedonBransfordetal.(Bransford,A.Brown,&Cocking,1999).Drawingontheempiricisttradition,behavioristsconceptualizedlearningasaprocessofformingconnectionsbetweenstimuliandresponses.Motivationtolearnwasassumedtobedrivenprimarilybyinternaldrives,suchashunger,andtheavailabilityofexternalforces,suchasrewardsandpunishments(e.g.,(Skinner,1950;Thorndike,1913)).Alimitationofearlybehaviorismstemmedfromitsfocusonobservablestimulusconditionsandthebehaviorsassociatedwiththoseconditions.Thisorientationmadeitdifficulttostudysuchphenomenaasunderstanding,reasoning,andthinking—phenomenathatareofparamountimportanceforeducation.Overtime,radicalbehaviorismgavewaytoamoremoderateformofbehaviorismthatpreservedthescientificrigorofusingbehaviorasdata,butalsoallowedhypothesesaboutinternal"mental"stateswhenthesebecamenecessarytoexplainvariousphenomena.Inthelate1950s,thecomplexityofunderstandinghumansandtheirenvironmentsbecameincreasinglyapparent,andanewfieldemerged—cognitivescience.Fromitsinception,cognitivescienceapproachedlearningfromamultidisciplinaryperspectivethatincludedanthropology,linguistics,philosophy,developmentalpsychology,computerscience,neuroscience,andseveralbranchesofpsychology(Newell&Simon,1972;Norman,1980).Newexperimentaltools,methodologies,andwaysofpostulatingtheoriesmadeitpossibleforscientiststobeginseriousstudyofmentalfunctioning:totesttheirtheoriesratherthansimplyspeculateaboutthinkingandlearning(see,e.g.,(Anderson,1982;Ericsson&Charness,1994;deGroot,1965;Newell&Simon,1972),and,inrecentyears,todevelopinsightsintotheimportanceofthesocialandculturalcontextsoflearning(e.g.,(B.R.Cole,1996;Lave,1988;Lave&E.Wenger,1991;Rogoff,1990;Tudge&Rogoff,1999).

5.2.1 The social nature of learning Constructivismisthepsychologicaltheory,whicharguesthathumansconstructknowledgeandmeaningfromtheirexperiences(Bruner,1991;Piaget&Cook,1952;Vygotsky&M.Cole,1978).Constructivisteducationaltheoryfocusesonconceptdevelopmentanddeepunderstanding,ratherthanbehaviorsorskills,asthegoalsofinstruction(Amory&Seagram,nd).Personaldevelopmentanddeepunderstandinghappensthroughtheconstructionofmeaningbythelearnerself,notthroughtransmissionfromoneperson(theteacher)toanother(thelearner).Thefundamentalprincipleofconstructivismisthatlearnersactivelyconstructknowledgethroughinteractionswiththeirenvironment(Hout‐Wolters,Simons,&Volet,2000)(Rieber,1996).Thereforelearnersareviewedasconstructingtheirownknowledgeoftheworld.Foreffectivelearning,knowledgeshouldbeuniquelyconstructedbypeoplethroughplay,explorationandsocialdiscoursewithothers.Learningobjectives


31/78

presentedinconstructivistlearningenvironmentsshouldbefirmlyembeddedincontext,andshould,atleastinsomeway,representeverydaylifesituations.Learnersshouldalsoacceptresponsibilityfortheirownlearningandbeself‐motivatedtoexploredifferentknowledgedomains.(Amory&Seagram,nd)Thecentralpointofsocial‐constructivismisanindividual'smakingmeaningofknowledgewithinasocialcontext(Vygotsky&M.Cole,1978).Learningasasocialpracticeiswellestablishedanddialogueisoneofthecornerstonesofsocialconstructivism.Thismakesonlinecommunitiessuchpotentiallyeffectiveplacesforlearning.Theinteractionsinonlinecommunitiesisbeingmaintainedthroughasenseofcommunityandsocialcapitalthroughinformationflow,altruism,reciprocity,collectiveaction,identities,andsolidaritytosupportthedevelopmentofdemocracy(Ackermanetal.,2004;Boumanetal.,2007;Kollock,1999;McLure‐Wasko&Faraj,2005a).Thesearecentralelementsthatneedattentioninanonlinesociallearningcontext.Theillustrationbelowshowsdevelopmentoflearningtheoriesinthe20thcentury.Thesethreeapproachesareacknowledgedasthethreetraditionalstrandsinpedagogy.Thefollowingparagraphswillelaborateonmorerecentdevelopments.

Figure 4 - Traditional strands in learning and pedagogy (van Der Zanden, 2009)

5.2.2 Learning in communities Theterm‘situatedlearning’locateslearningintheprocessofco‐participationandinthefieldofsocialinteraction,notintheheadofindividualstogetaninter‐subjectiveunderstandingandmeaningofsomething(Lave&E.Wenger,1991).Incommunities,learningmeansmovingfromtheperipheral(lurking,beingintroducedintoprocesses,people,etc)intothecenter(sharingexpertise,makingdecisions).Peripheralparticipantsdonotaccumulateknowledgeandskillsbut

Behaviourism(from1920)• Learninghappenswhenacorrectresponseisshownfollowingaspecificenvironmentalstimulus• Learningisdetectedbyobservingapersonoranimalovertime• Emphasisisonobservableandmeasurablebehaviour• Learner’smindisablackbox;whathappensinsideisunknown• Emphasisisonrelationshipsbetweenenvironmentandbehaviour• Instructionmakesuseofeffectsandreinforcersforlearningbehaviour• Instructionisbasedonchangeofbehaviourforbetterpurpose• Cuesaretriggerstochangebehaviouranditsconditionsarearranged.

Cognitivism(from1940)• Learningisthechangeofaknowledgestateofthemind• Knowledgeacquisitionisamentalactivitywhichisencodedandstructuredinternallybythelearner• Learnerisviewedasanactiveparticipantinthelearningprocess• Emphasisisonlearningbodiesofknowledge• Emphasisonstructuring,organisingandsequencinginformationtofacilitateoptimalprocessing• Focusisonlearners’memoryExaminesthementalstructureandprocessesrelatedtolearning• Learningisviewedasanactiveprocessthatcanbeinfluencedbythelearner

Constructivism(from1970)• Learnersbuildspersonalconstructbasedonexperiencesandinteractions• Knowledgeisembeddedintheappliedcontext(authentictasksinmeaningfulrealisticsettings)• Creatingnewandsituationspecificunderstandingsbybindingknowledgefrommultiplesourcesontothetask• Assumptionthatmanyways(multipleperspectives)ofstructuringmaybefollowed• Assumptionthatthelearner’smeaningisuniqueratherthananexistingobjectonitself


32/78

areintroducedinprocesses,routines,networks,relevantissues,andapproacheswithinthecommunity.“Theindividuallearnerisnotgainingadiscretebodyofabstractknowledgewhich(s)hewillthentransportandreapplyinlatercontexts.(…)Thereisnonecessaryimplicationthatalearneracquiresmentalrepresentationsthatremainfixedthereafter,notthatthe‘lesson’taughtconsistsitselfinasetofabstractrepresentations”(Allert,2004).LearningasknowledgecreationisseenastheepistemologicalfoundationofCSCL,ComputerSupportedCollaborativeLearning.Paavola,LipponenandHakkarainenexplainthe“knowledge‐creation”metaphoroflearningasfollows;“Learningisseenasanalogoustoprocessesofinquiry,especiallytoinnovativeprocessesofinquirywheresomethingnewiscreatedandtheinitialknowledgeiseithersubstantiallyenrichedorsignificantlytransformedduringtheprocess”(Paavola,Lipponen,&Hakkarainen,2004).Hence,learninggoesbeyondtheinformationgiven.Sincetraditionalmodelsofdistancelearninghavenotinspiredresearchersandteacherstodevelopinnovativepedagogicalpractices,currentresearchanddevelopmentworkinthefieldhasturnedtowardscreatingmulti‐facetedpedagogicalpractices,utilizingICT,thatcansupportlearnersintheireffortstoengageindeeper‐levellearningandinteraction(GStahl,2003).Allertwritesthatinmodernknowledgesocieties,thereisaneedforscenariosthatfocusoncollaborativeprocessesofcreatinginnovativeknowledge(Allert,2004).Thistypeoflearningcomprisesofopen,ill‐structuredproblemsolvingprocesses,focusesoncommunicationandcollaboration.Stahlemphasizesthatmeaningiscollaborativelyproducedinaculturalcontext,embodiedinaphysicalorsemanticartefact,andissituationallyinterpretedwithinacommunityorsocialsystem(GStahl,2003).Hereferstolearningassharedmeaningmaking,whichisnotunderstoodasapsychologicalprocesswhichtakesplaceinindividuals'mindsbutasan"essentiallysocialactivitythatisconductedjointly‐collaboratively‐‐byacommunity,ratherthanbyindividualswhohappentobeco‐located".Meaningisnottransferredfromonethinkertoanother,butisconstructed.Processesofknowledgeconstructionandsharedmeaningmakinghappenincreasinglyinvirtualenvironments,suchasgames,onlinecommunitiesandforums.CSCLaimsatsupportingthistypeoflearningthroughthedesignofpowerfullearningandcommunicationenvironmentsintegratingcollaborativelearningandtheuseofICT(GerryStahl,Koschmann,&Suthers,1999).Socialmechanismsthataddressinternalcohesionandsenseofcommunityareimportantforlearningandoverallsustainabilityofasociallearningenvironment,butsoaremechanismsthatimpactinteractionwiththeexternalenvironment(Hennis&Kolfschoten,2010),includingreputationandrecognition.

5.2.3 Learning with understanding Historically,educationhasfocusedmoreonmemorythanunderstanding.Anemphasisonunderstandingleadstooneoftheprimarycharacteristicsofcurrent


33/78

theoriesoflearning:itsfocusontheprocessesofknowing(Piaget&Cook,1952;Vygotsky&M.Cole,1978).Humansareviewedasgoal‐directedagentswhoactivelyseekinformation.Theyenteralearningprocesswitharangeofpriorknowledge,skills,beliefs,andconceptsthatsignificantlyinfluencewhattheynoticeabouttheenvironmentandhowtheyorganizeandinterpretit(Lave,1988;Lave&E.Wenger,1991).This,clearly,canhavebothpositiveandnegativeconsequencesforthelearningprocessandtheirabilitiestoremember,reason,solveproblems,andacquirenewknowledge.Effectivelearningenvironments,effectivesupportsystemsforlearning,andeffectiveteachersthereforetakeintoaccountthebackgroundofalearner.

5.2.4 Control over learning Newdevelopmentsinthescienceoflearningalsoemphasizetheimportanceofhelpingpeopletakecontroloftheirownlearning.Sinceunderstandingisviewedasimportant,peoplemustlearntorecognizewhentheyunderstandandwhentheyneedmoreinformation.Effectivelearningenvironmentthereforefocusonsense‐making,self‐assessment,andreflectiononwhatworkedandwhatneedsimproving(Paris&Winograd,2003;Siemens,2005;GStahl,2003;GerryStahl,Koschmann,&Suthers,1999).

5.2.5 Networked learning Learningisbecomingalifelong,self‐directedandcollaborativeeffort,inwhichoneengageswithpeopleandfindsresourcesonline.Learninginstitutionsshouldfocusonsupportingthisprocess,andguidestudentsinassessingandevaluatingknowledgetheyencounteronline.Leadersatlearninginstitutionsneedtoadoptamoreinductive,collectivepedagogythattakesadvantageofthecollaborativeandparticipativespiritofoureraandthepotentialoftheinternettoconnectpeople,linkinformationsources,andsupportcreativity.Ratherthanindividuallearningbasedoncompetitionandhierarchy,isamorenetworkedmodeloflearningpreferred,becauseitallowslearningfrompeers,andstimulatescooperation,partnering,andmediation(Davidson&Goldberg,2009).Networkedlearningfocusesoninterconnectednessbetweenpeopleandbetweenpeopleandresources(M.D.E.Laat&Lally,2003;M.D.Laat,2006;Veldhuis‐Diermanse,Biemans,Mulder,&Mahdizadeh,2006;Vries,2008).Technologyisusedtointegratedeliveryofknowledgewithinteraction,communicationandapplication(Jones&Steeples,2001).TheearliermentionedconceptofCommunitiesofPractice(EtienneWenger,2000)isintegratedinNetworkedLearning,becauselearningpracticesandsocialpracticesareinterconnected,thelearningpracticesemergefromparticipantsratherthanbeimposedbyfacilitators,learnersareinvolvedinconcretepracticalactionstogether,learningisnotdesigned,ratherdesignedfor,variationinlevelsofexpertisecanexpandthegroup’slearning,networkedlearningneedstosupportvisitsto“otherness”(Paavola,Lipponen,&Hakkarainen,2004).

5.2.6 Connectivism Widelyadoptedlearningtheoriesbehaviorism,cognitivism,andconstructivism,andcombinationsofthem,donotsufficientlyexplaintheeffectoftechnologyinourlivesandlearningactivities.GeorgeSiemensandStephenDowneshave


34/78

attemptedtoexplainlearninginadigitalagebycombiningandenhancingdifferentlearningviews,anddevelopedConnectivism(Downes,2005;Siemens,2005;2006).Animportantdistinctionfromsocialconstructivismistheemphasisonthefactthatknowledgedoesnotneedtobeinternalizedandemphasizesthatlearningalsohappensoutsideaperson’smind.SiemensarguesthatintheInformationAgethelearningprocessconcernsactivitiessuchassynthesizingandrecognizingpatterns,meaningmaking,andformingconnectionsbetweenspecializedcommunities.Know‐howandknow‐whatissupplementedwithknow‐whereastheunderstandingofwheretofindtheknowledgeneeded.Connectivismaddresseslearningoutsidetheperson,knowledgestoredindatabasesorotherelectronicinformationholdersaccessiblethroughstheInternet.Itdescribesaformofknowledgeandapedagogybasedontheideathatknowledgeisdistributedacrossanetworkofconnectionsandthatlearningconsistsoftheabilitytoconstructandtraversethosenetworks.Thisimpliesapedagogythatseekstodescribe'successful'networks,asidentifiedbytheirproperties,suchasdiversity,autonomy,openness,andconnectivity;andseekstodescribethepracticesthatleadtosuchnetworks,bothintheindividualandinsociety(Downes,2005).Connectivismextendsthenotionoflearningasapersonal,internalchange(Illeris,2003)toanetworkchange:Non‐humanelementsactasactorsinthenetworkandthemediumitselfispartofwidernetworks.

5.3 Characteristics of effective learning environments Fourperspectivesonthedesignoflearningenvironments—thedegreetowhichtheyarestudentcentred,knowledgecentred,assessmentcentred,andcommunitycentred—areimportantforthedevelopmentoftheseenvironments.

Figure 5 - Design of learning environments

Afocusonthedegreetowhichenvironmentsarelearnercentredisconsistentwiththestrongbodyofevidencesuggestingthatlearners'usetheircurrentknowledgetoconstructnewknowledgeandthatwhattheyknowandbelieveat

Align different focus points in

designing learning environments

Knowledge• curricula

design

Student• previous

knowledge• culture, beliefs

Assessment• feedback

Community• norms• home, school

and wider community


35/78

themomentaffectshowtheyinterpretnewinformation.Sometimeslearners'currentknowledgesupportsnewlearning,sometimesithamperslearning:effectiveinstructionbeginswithwhatlearnersbringtothesetting;thisincludesculturalpracticesandbeliefsaswellasknowledgeofacademiccontent.Learner‐centredenvironmentsattempttohelpstudentsmakeconnectionsbetweentheirpreviousknowledgeandtheircurrentacademictasks.Parentsareespeciallygoodathelpingtheirchildrenmakeconnections.Teachershaveahardertimebecausetheydonotsharethelifeexperiencesofeachoftheirstudents.Nevertheless,therearewaystosystematicallybecomefamiliarwitheachstudent'sspecialinterestsandstrengths.Effectiveenvironmentsmustalsobeknowledgecentred.Itisnotsufficientonlytoattempttoteachgeneralproblemsolvingandthinkingskills;theabilitytothinkandsolveproblemsrequireswell‐organizedknowledgethatisaccessibleinappropriatecontexts.Anemphasisonbeingknowledgecentredraisesanumberofquestions,suchasthedegreetowhichinstructionbeginswithstudents'currentknowledgeandskills,ratherthansimplypresentsnewfactsaboutthesubjectmatter.Whileyoungstudentsarecapableofgraspingmorecomplexconceptsthanwasbelievedpreviously,thoseconceptsmustbepresentedinwaysthataredevelopmentallyappropriate.Aknowledge‐centredperspectiveonlearningenvironmentsalsohighlightstheimportanceofthinkingaboutdesignsforcurricula.Towhatextentdotheyhelpstudentslearnwithunderstandingversuspromotetheacquisitionofdisconnectedsetsoffactsandskills?Curriculathatemphasizeanexcessivelybroadrangeofsubjectsruntheriskofdevelopingdisconnectedratherthanconnectedknowledge;theyfitwellwiththeideaofacurriculumasbeingawell‐wornpathinaroad.Analternativemetaphorforcurriculumistohelpstudentsdevelopinterconnectedpathwayswithinadisciplinesothatthey"learntheirawayaroundinit"andnotlosesightofwheretheyare.Issuesofassessmentalsorepresentanimportantperspectiveforviewingthedesignoflearningenvironments.Feedbackisfundamentaltolearning,butopportunitiestoreceiveitareoftenscarceinclassrooms.Studentsmayreceivegradesontestsandessays,butthesearesummativeassessmentsthatoccurattheendofprojects;alsoneededareformativeassessmentsthatprovidestudentsopportunitiestoreviseandhenceimprovethequalityoftheirthinkingandlearning.Assessmentsmustreflectthelearninggoalsthatdefinevariousenvironments.Ifthegoalistoenhanceunderstanding,itisnotsufficienttoprovideassessmentsthatfocusprimarilyonmemoryforfactsandformulas.Manyinstructorshavechangedtheirapproachtoteachingafterseeinghowtheirstudentsfailedtounderstandseeminglyobvious(totheexpert)ideas.Thefourthperspectiveonlearningenvironmentsinvolvesthedegreetowhichtheypromoteasenseofcommunity.Ideally,students,teachers,andotherinterestedparticipantssharenormsthatvaluelearningandhighstandards.Normssuchastheseincreasepeople'sopportunitiestointeract,receivefeedback,andlearn.Thereareseveralaspectsofcommunity,includingthecommunityoftheclassroom,theschool,andtheconnectionsbetweentheschoolandthelargercommunity,includingthehome.Theimportanceofconnectedcommunitiesbecomesclearwhenoneexaminestherelativelysmallamountoftimespentinschoolcomparedtoothersettings.Activitiesinhomes,community


36/78

centres,andafter‐schoolclubscanhaveimportanteffectsonstudents'academicachievement.Finally,thereneedstobealignmentamongthefourperspectivesoflearningenvironments.Theyallhavethepotentialtooverlapandmutuallyinfluenceoneanother.Issuesofalignmentappeartobeveryimportantforacceleratinglearningbothwithinandoutsideofschools.Goodteachersarelearnercentredinthesensethatteachersbuildontheknowledgestudentsbringtothelearningsituation.Theyareknowledgecentredinthesensethattheteachersattempttohelpstudentsdevelopanorganizedunderstandingofimportantconceptsineachdiscipline.Theyareassessmentcentredinthesensethattheteachersattempttomakestudents'thinkingvisiblesothatideascanbediscussedandclarified,suchashavingstudents(1)presenttheirargumentsindebates,(2)discusstheirsolutionstoproblemsataqualitativelevel,and(3)makepredictionsaboutvariousphenomena.Theyarecommunitycentredinthesensethattheteachersestablishclassroomnormsthatlearningwithunderstandingisvaluedandstudentsfeelfreetoexplorewhattheydonotunderstand.

5.4 Principles for effective learning Theprevioussectionsdescribethedevelopmentsinlearningtheoriesandmorerecentpedagogicalapproaches.WhenteachersorstudentsmakeuseoftheLiLaportalorthecontenthostedonit,theymustnotbeforcedintoanyofthedescribedpedagogicalapproaches.Evenwhenresearchpointsoutthatsomeapproachescanbemoreeffectivethanothers,theaimoftheprojectisnottochangepedagogicalpracticesaroundtheworld.Rather,ithopestofacilitateasmuchlearningaspossibleinanyeducationalorpedagogicalcontext.Basedontheprevioussections,weproposesomeprinciplesforeffectivelearning.People’sabilitiestotransfer(e.g.applyorrelate)whattheyhavelearneddependsuponanumberoffactors:1. Peoplemustachieveathresholdofinitiallearningthatissufficienttosupport

transfer.Thisobviouspointisoftenoverlookedandcanleadtoerroneousconclusionsabouttheeffectivenessofvariousinstructionalapproaches.Ittakestimetolearncomplexsubjectmatter,andassessmentsoftransfermusttakeintoaccountthedegreetowhichoriginallearningwithunderstandingwasaccomplished.

2. Spendingalotoftime("timeontask")inandofitselfisnotsufficienttoensureeffectivelearning.Practiceandgettingfamiliarwithsubjectmattertaketime,butmostimportantishowpeopleusetheirtimewhilelearning.Conceptssuchas"deliberatepractice"emphasizetheimportanceofhelpingstudentsmonitortheirlearningsothattheyseekfeedbackandactivelyevaluatetheirstrategiesandcurrentlevelsofunderstanding.Suchactivitiesareverydifferentfromsimplyreadingandrereadingatext.

3. Learningwithunderstandingismorelikelytopromotetransferthansimplymemorizinginformationfromatextoralecture.Manyclassroomactivitiesstresstheimportanceofmemorizationoverlearningwithunderstanding.Many,aswell,focusonfactsanddetailsratherthanlargerthemesofcausesandconsequencesofevents.Theshortfallsoftheseapproachesarenot


37/78

apparentiftheonlytestoflearninginvolvestestsofmemory,butwhenthetransferoflearningismeasured,theadvantagesoflearningwithunderstandingarelikelytoberevealed.

4. Knowledgethatistaughtinavarietyofcontextsismorelikelytosupportflexibletransferthanknowledgethatistaughtinasinglecontext.Informationcanbecome"context‐bound"whentaughtwithcontext‐specificexamples.Whenmaterialistaughtinmultiplecontexts,peoplearemorelikelytoextracttherelevantfeaturesoftheconceptsanddevelopamoreflexiblerepresentationofknowledgethatcanbeusedmoregenerally.

5. Studentsdevelopflexibleunderstandingofwhen,where,why,andhowtousetheirknowledgetosolvenewproblemsiftheylearnhowtoextractunderlyingthemesandprinciplesfromtheirlearningexercises.Understandinghowandwhentoputknowledgetouse—knownasconditionsofapplicability—isanimportantcharacteristicofexpertise.Learninginmultiplecontextsmostlikelyaffectsthisaspectoftransfer.

6. Transferoflearningisanactiveprocess.Learningandtransfershouldnotbeevaluatedby"one‐shot"testsoftransfer.Analternativeassessmentapproachistoconsiderhowlearningaffectssubsequentlearning,suchasincreasedspeedoflearninginanewdomain.Often,evidenceforpositivetransferdoesnotappearuntilpeoplehavehadachancetolearnaboutthenewdomain—andthentransferoccursandisevidentinthelearner'sabilitytograspthenewinformationmorequickly.

7. Alllearninginvolvestransferfrompreviousexperiences.Eveninitiallearninginvolvestransferthatisbasedonpreviousexperiencesandpriorknowledge.Transferisnotsimplysomethingthatmayormaynotappearafterinitiallearninghasoccurred.Forexample,knowledgerelevanttoaparticulartaskmaynotautomaticallybeactivatedbylearnersandmaynotserveasasourceofpositivetransferforlearningnewinformation.Effectiveteachersattempttosupportpositivetransferbyactivelyidentifyingthestrengthsthatstudentsbringtoalearningsituationandbuildingonthem,therebybuildingbridgesbetweenstudents'knowledgeandthelearningobjectivessetoutbytheteacher.

8. Sometimestheknowledgethatpeoplebringtoanewsituationimpedessubsequentlearningbecauseitguidesthinkinginwrongdirections.Forexample,youngchildren'sknowledgeofeverydaycounting‐basedarithmeticcanmakeitdifficultforthemtodealwithrationalnumbers(alargernumberinthenumeratorofafractiondoesnotmeanthesamethingasalargernumberinthedenominator);assumptionsbasedoneverydayphysicalexperiencescanmakeitdifficultforstudentstounderstandphysicsconcepts(theythinkarockfallsfasterthanaleafbecauseeverydayexperiencesincludeothervariables,suchasresistance,thatarenotpresentinthevacuumconditionsthatphysicistsstudy),andsoforth.Inthesekindsofsituations,teachersmusthelpstudentschangetheiroriginalconceptionsratherthansimplyusethemisconceptionsasabasisforfurtherunderstandingorleavingnewmaterialunconnectedtocurrentunderstanding.Theideathatalllearninginvolvestransferfrompreviousexperiencesmustincludemorethanananalysisoftheindividualconceptsandbeliefsthatstudentsbringwiththem;itmustincludeananalysisofculturalpractices.Manyaspectsofschoolfailurecanbeexplainedasamismatchbetweenwhatstudentshavelearned


38/78

intheirhomeculturesandwhatisrequiredofthemintheschoolculture.Issuesofculturalpracticeareextremelyimportantforunderstandingthemultiplewaysthatstudentslearnandforhelpingthemachievelearningfluency.

Theaboveanalysisisstilltoogenerictocometoadetailedpedagogicalstrategy.WethereforedevelopedanumberofscenariosandrelatedstoryboardsinordertomaketheabovemorespecificfortheLiLaproject.Thesestoryboardshavebeencreatedinclosecollaborationwiththepartners.

6 Pedagogical Strategy Ontheonehand,learninghastobedesigned,ontheotherhand,learningoutcomesdependontheactionsofthelearner.Learningneedstofocusonunderstandingratherthanmemorization,andpreferablyshouldbeapplicableinmultipleareasinpractice.Learningisalwayscontextualisedandwhatislearneddependsonpreviousexperiences.Studentsmustbestimulatedtolinkthelearningmaterialstowhattheyalreadyknow,aswellastowhatisimportantinthedisciplineandinthecommunityofprofessionalsinwhichtheywanttofunction.Assessmentmustbeinlinewiththelearninggoalsalearnerhaswhendoinganassignmentorseriesoftasks.ThecharacteristicsofeffectivelearningenvironmentsandtheprinciplesforeffectivelearningasdiscussedinthecurrentchapterarethemainframeofreferencefortheselectionofthecomponentsthatareusedforthedevelopmentofthepedagogicalmodelfortheLilaportal.Thismodeliscalled‘NetworkedLearning’andabusinessversionhasbeendevelopedandputinpracticein2008.Themodelwillnowbere‐engineeredfortheLilasettingandisexplainedbelow.

6.1 Networked Learning Model for LiLa TheLiLaportalneedstobedesignedaccordingtothelatestinsightsinlearningandtechnologyforscienceeducation.Thisstartswiththedesignofthehomepage,andalsoconcernsthedesignoftheenvironment,taggingofthecontents(conceptualaswellaspedagogical),thesearchengine,ratingsandusageinformation.Inthecurrentsection,wedescribeapedagogicalapproachforpresentingthecontentoftheLiLaportal,wherebyweasmuchaspossiblerespectwhatisgoingonatthesitesoftheparticipatingpartners.TheapproachiscalledtheNetworkedLearningmodel,proposedinpapersfromDelftUniversity(Veen,Lukosch,&Vries,2008),seeFigure6.WewillfirstexplainthemodelandtheimplicationsforthepedagogicaldesignoftheLiLaexperimentsandsimulations.Inthechapterthatfollowsafterthat,wepresentaconcretescenariofordevelopingthepedagogicalembeddingofasimulationorremoteexperimentfortheportal,employingtherecommendationsfromtheNetworkedLearningmodel.


39/78

Figure 6 - Components of the Networked Learning model (Veen)

NetworkedLearningreferstoacontextinwhichinternet‐basedinformationandcommunicationtechnologiesareusedtopromoteconnections:betweenparticipants;betweenparticipantsandexternalexperts;betweenalearningcommunityanditslearningresources,sothatparticipantscanextendanddeveloptheirunderstandingandcapabilitiesinwaysthatareimportanttothem,andoverwhichtheyhavesignificantcontrol.WecanseetheLiLaportalasfacilitatingthelearningofacommunityofusers.Wespeakaboutacommunityofusersbecausewethinkthatinthenetworkedsocietyusersmustsharesomeresponsibilityforthewell‐beingoftheportal.Usersarestudentsaswellasteachers.Teachersuseresources,supportlearners,developandadaptlearningmaterials(simulationsandremoteexperiments),andmaybeavailableasexpertstoconsultbystudents.Studentsuseresources,supportotherusers,evaluatetheuseoflearningmaterialsandcanactaspeertutorsforotherstudents.TheingredientscomponentsoftheNetworkedLearningmodel(figure2)areorganizedintofourcomplementaryareasthatplayanimportantroleinknowledgedevelopment.Eachofthecomponentselementsthatareconnectedtotheseareasisrelevantforthisdevelopmentprocessinwhichthetechnologyisamajorfacilitatorfortheprocessesofcommunication,forinformationretrievalandinformationsharing.Theareasare:Profiling,Connectedness,KnowledgeandBusinessDevelopment. ‘Profiling’istheareadescribingacollectionofsocialandorganizational

aspectsofhowusersintheirowncontext,andinthecontextoftheLiLaportal.Itstatesthatindividualusersshouldtakeownershipoftheirprofessionaldevelopment,ICTenablingthemtodothisthroughsocialsoftwaretools.OneoftheaspectsoftheeffectofusingLiLatoolsshouldbefoundintheareaofprofiling.Awayforteachersofprofilingisactasatutor(individualonlinesupport,forexampleinforums),coach(generalsupporton

Learning: Active,

Producing, Informal,

Situated, Self regulated

Profiling• Self expression• Professional

development• Ownership• Empowerment• Multiple identities

Knowledge• Aggregated• Collective• Shared• Discontinued• Distributed

Business development• Innovation• Creativity• Productivity• Sustainability

Connectedness• Fluidity• Extension of self• The Net as

Oxygen• Peers as reference• 24/7


40/78

specificareas),orscaffold(provideshandheldsforstudentstobringthemfurther),andinstructor(writesinstructionsandmanuals).Studentscanalsoprofiletheirpresenceashelperandpeer‐tutor,orasacriticalbutpresentlyevaluatoroflearningmaterials.

‘Connectedness’standsfortheconnectionbetweenpeopleandpeopleandresources.Itrelatestosocialnetworksandthewayinteractionandhumanrelationsarerelevantforpeopletoperformincommunities.Thesecommunitiesarefluent;youcantakepartforsometimedependingonthepurposeofthecommunityandleavewhentheneedisgone.Communitiesarebasedonpeerreferencesandarenotlimitedtoofficehours.

‘Knowledge’istheareathatdefinescontentandinformationintheNetworkLearningModel.Thiscontentisdistributedanddiscontinuous,storedindatabases.Learnershavetoaggregatebitsandpieces(modules)intoameaningfulwhole.Theydothiscollaboratively,sharingtheirexpertisewithothers.

‘BusinessDevelopment’istheareathatdescribesthemajorcompanies’businessgoals,whattheyofferandforwhatpurpose.Thesegoalsarethereferenceframeworkwithinwhichlearningtakesplace,itprovidestheorganizationalcontext(e.g.Dept.ofPhysics,Univ.ofThessaloniki).BusinessmodelsinLiLaarethelocalcurriculumorfacultymakinguseofsomeoralloftheaffordancesoftheLiLaportal,andcollaboratingwithothertodevelopstandardsandcreditsthattransfertheboundariesofindividualpartners.

6.2 Pedagogical and design principles TheNetworkedlearningmodelandthechapteronlearningleadustoproposethefollowingpedagogicalrequirementsfortheLiLaportalandembeddedcontent,asanetworkedlearningmodel:1. AnyuserenteringtheLiLaportalisenteringaworldofknowledge,inwhich

otherusersarepresent.Otheruserscanbeotherstudents,butalsoexpertsandteachers,fromvariousnationalities.Knowledgeisembeddedinsimulations,remotelabsandothereducationalresources(instructions,links,media).Allthisshouldbeimmediatelyclearwhenenteringtheportal,andwhenenteringtheareaforasimulationorremotelab.

2. Usersthatparticipateinthecommunityshouldregisterandhaveaprofile,bothasteacher(expertise,availability,specificownershipofsimulationsandexperiments)andasstudents(expertise,experimentsandsimulationsvisited,availableastutorfor…,hasevaluated…).

3. Everyexperimentandsimulationislinkedtoacommunityofusersofthatparticularexperimentorsimulation.Theauthororauthoringinstitutionisindicated,aswellasthecoursesinwhichithadafunction,andprofilesoftheprevioususers.Whenfinished,usershavetoleavesomeevaluationorcommentabouttheuse.

4. Experimentsandsimulationseachhaveexplicitlearningobjectives,adaptedforvariouslearnergroups,authenticity,individualorcollaborativeuse,andinstructionsallowingindependentuseorwhomtoaddressincaseofproblems,andotherresources,ifavailable.

5. Materialsdevelopedforcollaborative,and/orauthenticassignmentswiththesimulations/remotelabshavetopromotesharingexpertisewithothers,andhavetobeembedthesimulationorremotelabinarealisticpractical


41/78

context.Learningactivityproducessomeknowledgeartefactthatcanbeusedandevaluated.

6. Materialsdevelopedforindividualuseofthesimulations/remotelabshavetopromoteactivelearning(studentlearnsthroughexplorationandself‐regulation),notneedingtoomuchguidanceandpredefinedanswers.Learningactivityproducessomeknowledgeartefactthatbeevaluated.

7. Teachersthatuseexperimentsandsimulationsinanewway,developingtheirownlearningmaterials,areinvitedtoshareinstructionalmaterialswiththecommunity,sothattheamountofassignmentsaroundeachsimulationsandremotelabswillcontinuetogrow.

8. Participantorganisationscommittothesustainabilityoftheportal,andareinvitedtoproposetheirgoalsonusingandfurtherdevelopmentoftheLiLaportal.

9. NeworganisationscanjointheLiLaportal,undertheconditionthattheycontributewithoneormoresimulationsorremotelabs.Theseorganisationsarealsoinvitedtoformulategoalsonuseanddevelopmentoftheportal.

6.3 Pedagogical developers guide Inthissectionwefurtherdevelopthepedagogicalprinciplesforthedesignofthepedagogicallayerofsimulationsandremoteexperiments.Forthisguide,wehavethedevelopmentofshowcasesinmind,meaningthatwesupposethatthesimulationsandremoteexperimentsalreadyexistatthepartnerssite,andneedembeddingintheLilapedagogicalmodel.Also,wedonotdiscusstechnicalrequirements,althoughtheyareanobviouscollateraltowhatwepropose.Hence,weproposeanextversionofthisguidewithamendmentsfromtechnicalexpertsandotherdevelopers(portal,evaluation),whenavailable.Figure7belowsketchesthepedagogicalelementsforashowcaseintheLiLaportal.ItisbasedontheDelftPemcweblabportal,andinnowayrepresentstheactualLiLaportal.Webrieflydiscusstheelements.

Module 3.3: DC Motor�(developed by the partner P12 - Technical University, Trencin, Slovak Republic)

LearningObjectives•VerifythebasicprinciplesofDCmachinery•ShowtheprinciplesofDCmotorwithshuntexcitation•Demonstratetheinfluenceofappliedmechanicalloadonvaluesofcurrentsupply•Understoodthepossibilities,advantagesanddisadvantagesofDCMachinerywithshuntexcitation

AssignmentsofDCMotor

•ControltheDCmotorspeed•Controlandchecktheexcitationcurrentandarmaturecurrent•Controlthemechanicalloadonmotorsshaft•Measuretheoutputvoltageandcurrent•Controlofoutputvoltage•Calculationandevaluationofsecondaryparametersasinputandoutputpower,efficiency


42/78

ExperimentDescription

UserisabletosetthespeedofshuntexcitedDCmotor.AfterreachingtheobtainedvaluethemechanicaltorquecanbeappliedonmotorsshaftandtheresponseofDCmotor(changeofsupplycurrent)canbeobtained.

Communitycommentsfromteacherscommentsfromstudentsrelatedexperiments

Figure 7 - Example of pedagogical elements in the LiLa portal

Ascanbeseenwepropose(inadditiontoatitle,andanowner)fourdifferentpedagogicalelementsandapictureforeachsimulationorexperiment:1. Learningobjectives:whatareuserssupposedtolearnwhentheydothis

experimentorworkwiththissimulation?Learningobjectivescancoverknowledge,understandinganduseofconcepts,and/orprocesses,butalsoacquiringcertainskills.Specifyinglearningobjectivesisnoteasytodooutofcontextofacourseorproject.Therefore,objectivesareusuallylinkedtoassignmentsandcoursesinwhichtheyareembedded.Nevertheless,tryandformulateobjectivesthatservetheexperimentorsimulationasstand‐alone.Objectiveswithincontextarepartoftheassignments/taskssection.

2. Descriptionoftheexperiment/simulation:afactualdescriptionofwhathappens,orissupposedtohappenincaseofsuccessfuluse,sothatthepotentialusercanrealisticallyestimateandunderstandwhathe/sheisupto.Ifsomething(anartefact)isproduced,itshouldbeclearwhatitis.Wecanimaginealinktoashortmoviehere.

3. Assignments/tasks:thematerialdoesnotrunbyitself,buthasapurpose,andespecially,acontext.Thiscontextcanbeacourseinwhichitisembedded,oraseriesofexperiments,aproject,amanual,etc.So,herewecouldhavedescriptionsofthecourse,theseries,theproject,orlinkstothecorrespondingweb‐site,orMoodlepages.Foranyuser,beforetheclickitshouldbeclearwhattheassignmentswillbelike.Ifisolatedexperimentscanbedone,thisistheplacetofindthemanual,andwheretostoretheresults.Itshouldbecleariftheuserisateacherorastudent,asinstructionalmaterialforeachmaybequitedifferent.Thematerialforteachersshouldcontaininformationonthecontextualconstraintsoftheassignmentorsimulation,thelevelofrequiredexperience,andthekindofsupportthatisneededoravailable.Atthislevelalso,weshouldknowiftheassignmentisindividualorcollaborative.

4. Community:usersaresupposedtoleavetracesoftheiruse,andheretheycanfindthelinkstotheforum,usergroup,evaluationwiki,ormailaddressinordertosharetheirideas.Also,relevantexperiencesbyformeruserscanbefoundhere.Bothstudentsandteachersneedtobeservedhere.This‘community‐based’partisexplainedinmoredetailinthefinalchapterofthisreport,becauseitisembeddedinthefunctionaldesignoftheportal.

Allthisisstillthefrontmatter.Whentheuserhasenteredtheexperiment,throughtheassignmentportal,itshouldalsobeclearwhathappenswiththe


43/78

resultsoftheactivity,wheretosendthescoreortheknowledgeartefactthatisproduced.So,probably,someentryformisneeded.Theassessmentisacrucialelementforreachingthepedagogicalgoals,butitisparticularforeachusercontext.Wesupposeherethatsomedataofusearebeingrecorded,andsometimesanartefactisbeingcreatedthatcanbeevaluatedinsomeway,andallthisneedstobespecifiedforeachsimulationorexperiment.Stepstotake:answerordevelopthefollowingquestions1. MakeapicturerepresentingthesimulationorexperimentfortheLiLaportal2. Makeashortmovieinwhich(workof)thesimulationorexperimentis

shown3. Describetheexperiment/simulationinwords.4. Inwhatcourseisthesimulationorremotelabbeingused?5. Describetheassignmentforthesimulationorexperiment.6. Whatarethelearningobjectives?7. Isitindividualorcollaborative?8. Whatisthelevelofrequiredexperience?9. Whatkindofsupportisneededoravailable?10. Howarethelearningobjectivesofthesimulation/remotelabassessed?Is

thereaproductthatcanbeevaluated(e.g.,report,paper),orafixedoutcomeorendscoretoachieve?Thinkalsoofwaystoassesstheprocess:whatuser‐dataarerecorded?

11. Whatothercourses/area’scouldbenefitfromusingthesimulation/experiment?

12. Whatarepracticalitiesthatneedtobeconsideredwhenusingthesimulationorremotelab?

13. Inwhatwaycanauserorteachermakeuseoftheotherpractitionersandstudentsconnectedonlinethroughtheexperiment?

Thelastpointrelateswiththecommunity‐related,web‐basedpartofdoinganexperiment.WehavedevelopedafunctionaldesignfortheLiLaportalbasedontheliteratureanalysis,theresultsoftheinterviewsandadesignworkshopwithLiLaparticipants(October2009).Thisisdiscussedafterthenextchapter.

7 From scenarios towards storyboards The“LibraryofLabs”isauniqueaccesstovirtuallaboratories,remoteexperiments,transferservices,know‐howtransferandopportunitiesforcooperationopentoallEuropeancountries.Thisisespeciallyofbenefittothosecountriesandinstitutionsthatdon’thavethefinancialcapacitiestodevelopvirtuallaboratoriesortosetupremoteexperimentsthemselves.TheembeddingoftheexperimentsinthecurriculaensuresaverysustainableuseoftheeLearningcontent.Theuniversitiesoftheconsortium(andaswesupposeothersaswell)willhavegreatinterestinthenewinfrastructuresinceitwillontheonehandimprovethequalityofthephysicsandengineeringeducationandontheotherhandreducethecostsoftheexperimentsforeverysinglepartner.


44/78

Thus,partnershaveanintrinsicinterestinusingandsupportingtheLiLainfrastructurebeyondtheterminationofCommunityfunding.WithinWP3wehavedevelopedacontemporarypedagogicalphilosophyfortheproject,tosubstantiatetheaimoftheLiLainfrastructuretocontinueafterprojecttermination.Thisinfrastructureshouldontheonehandbeflexibleenoughtoaccommodateexistingeducationalscenarios,butalso,offeropportunitiesforcollaborativeknowledgecreationinacommunityframework.Atthesametime,giventhetimeandbudgetlimitationsofthisproject,wehavetobepragmaticandnotmakingeverythingpossible.Therefore,WP3hasdevelopedalimitednumberoffiveeducationalscenariosonthebasisofcurrentusesofonlineexperimentswithinthedifferentpartnerinstitutions.Thescenarioshasbeenworkedoutin‘todo’activitiesforteachersandstudents,calledstoryboards.DuringtheMunichmeetingthesestoryboardshavebeendiscussedanditwasagreedthatLiLapartnerswouldfurtherconcretizethestoryboardsaccordingtotheirexistingteachingpractices.Withthispartners’inputdetailedfunctionalitiesandrequirementsfortheLiLasystemscanbedefined,meta‐vocabularycanbeextended,andpartnerswillbeabletoworkonthefirstshowcasestobereadywithinafewmonths.Thischaptersummarizesthepartners’inputtothesuggestedstoryboardsandprovidesanoverviewforallpartnersofthecurrentteachingpracticesandtheneedforlookingaheadoncetheLiLaPortalwillbeimplemented.Thefirstsectionpresentstheassignmentsenttoallpartners.Then,briefly,thepartners’inputisdiscussed,includingtheconsequencesforthedesignoftheLiLaPortal.Italsoshowsseveralpedagogicallysoundscenariosinlinewiththefeedbackfrompartnerinstitutes.Finally,youwillfindareflectionandrecommendationsforthedesignoftheportal.7.1 The assignment sent to the LiLa Partners Belowthelettertopartners;DearAll,ItwasaveryfruitfulmeetinginGermany!AllDelftmembersenjoyedtheenthusiasmofallofyouandwehavebeenworkingtowardstangibletasks.Oneofwhichwewouldliketofollowuponnow.Astimeisflying,wewouldliketohelpyoumeetingthedeadlines!WehavebeendiscussingtheStoryboarddocument((SURFgroepen,shareddocuments,WP3,Storyboards3a).Inthisdocumenttherearefivedifferentscenariotemplates,eachcoveringapedagogicalperspective.Foreachscenariotemplate,thereisastoryboard,inwhichuseractions(andsystemrequirements)canbelisted.Asafirstapproximationthereisastoryboardfilledinforeachscenario.Itisnotmeanttobefinalandcomplete,butneedstobeworkedoutand


45/78

adaptedbyyou,relativetoyoursituationi.c.theuseofthesimulation/experimentthatyouwanttoofferasashowcase.Wehaveagreedthateachofthecontentprovidingpartnerstakesone(mostfitting)scenarioandconsequentstoryboard,adaptsittoforeseenneedsinaconcretecontextandmakesconcretewhatusersofthesimulationorexperiment,giventheselectedpedagogicalscenario,woulddo(andthereforeneed)whenusingtheLiLaportal.Forunderstandingthelearningeffectsofusersworkingwithasimulation/remoteexperiment,theactionsoftheuserwhenactuallydoingthesimulation/experiment,needtobespecified,oratleastwrittendownasdetailedaswecan.Theimportantthingtorealizeisthatatleastthemostimportantactionsoflearnerswiththesimulations/experimentsneedtobeeasytodo,andmaybeinsomewaysupportedbyinstructions,interactivetools,orfeedbackoptions.Theassignmentisasfollows: Chooseascenarioandfillinadetailedstoryboard,describingindetailthe

actionsoftheteacherandstudents,asyoumightseeteachersandstudentstoworkforyourcase.Yourassignmenthereis:whatshouldtheteacherdoandwhatshouldthestudentdowhenusinganexperimentwithinachosenscenario?Usethefirst2columnsasprovidedbytheStoryboarddocument.Bydoingthisyouwillcomplement,adaptorredesignthestoryboardforyourshowcase.

ChooseaspecificexperimentyouhaveonofferforLiLa,andtakeyourstoryboardastepfurtherbyexecutingtheactionsyouhavedesignedinstep1.E.g.youwillwritetheaccompanyingtextwiththeexperiment,thelearningobjectives,theassignmentsgoingwiththeexperiment,thepowerpointorvideoclipthatstudentscanwatchbeforestartingtheexperiment,etc.

Uploadyourstoryboard(step1)ANDthematerialscomingfromstep2intheSURFgroepenenvironmentatthelatestonFebruary5th.

Thepurposeofthewholeexerciseistwofold:Tolinkthepedagogytotheworkpackagesonmetadata,thedesignoftheinterface,andtheaffordancesoftheportalingeneral.Withcompletedstoryboards,wehaveanoverviewonfurtherrequirementsfortheinterfaceandportal.BecauseworkontheinterfaceisexpectedtoleadtoafirstversionbyhalfFebruary,ourassignmentsshouldbeavailablebytheendofnextweek.ToprepareyourfirstshowcaseforthefirstversionoftheLiLaportal.Thiswillgiveusinsightinhowwecanmakethesystemaneasy‐to‐useenvironmentforteachersandstudentsalike.ItmightbegreatfuntohavesomeoftheexperimentsalreadyuploadedintheportalduringourMadridmeeting.Ifyouneedhelpwiththeassignment,pleasemailtheDelftteam,wecanarrangeAdobeConnectmeetingsonyourrequest.Lookingforwardtoyourstoryboards!Cheers


46/78

WimVeenAlexanderVerbraeckPieterdeVriesJerryAndriessenThiemeHennisBorisShishkov

7.2 Summaries, comments and conclusions about received Storyboards WereceivedstoryboardsfromStuttgart,Berlin,andLinkoping.Basel&CambridgehavecollaboratedonaquiteinterestingversioninMunich.ForeachofthepartnerswehavebeenharvestingsuggestionsforfunctionalitiesoftheLiLaPortal.ItshouldbementionedherethatsomeofthehomeworkseemstohavebeenwrittenfromtheperspectiveofthecurrentsituationwheretheLiLaPortalisstillunavailable.Theauthorshaveinterpretedthepartners’inputfromthefuturesituationwherethePortalcouldenhancethepossibilitiesofworkingandcollaboratingofstudentsandteachersinaEuropeanwidesystem.

7.2.1 Stuttgart Theconcreteexampleisanoptionalsetofexercises(virtualsimulations)forstudentstoimprovetheirunderstanding,butarenotgraded,norevaluated.ThefocusofthestoryboardistheworkdonebytheteacheroutsidetheLiLainfrastructure.Mostoftheinstructionalmaterialsarebeingpreparedandpresentedinthelearningmanagementsystem,fromwhichhyperlinkstoLiLaareleadingtothevirtuallabs.Theteacherhasselectedthesimulationsbeforehand.Simulationsaredownloadedonthestudent’spersonalcomputer,notrunfromwithintheportal.ThisisthecurrentsituationwheretheLiLaPortalisstillunavailable.OncetheLiLaPortalisavailableteachersshouldbeabletodotheabove‐mentionedactivitieswithinthePortal.FuntionalitiesfortheLiLaPortal: Toolforuploadinganddownloadinginstructionalmaterialsthatbelongtoan

specificexperimentbyusers(teachersandstudentsalike) ToolforselectionofexperimentsfromtheLiLaPortal Systemrecordingselectionsofexperiments Toolforstudentstouploadnotesandcommentsrelatedtoaspecific

experiment. Toolforstudentstoratetheexperiment(thumbup–thumbdownora5star

ratingsystem)

7.2.2 Berlin TheconcreteexampleBerlinhasbeenworkingoutisanexistingexercisetoberunontheRemoteFarmaboutanoscillatorycircuit.Herealso,themainplatformforthecourseiscurrentlyalearningmanagementsystem,wheretheteacherhaspreparedmaterialsandlinks.Berlinhasremoteexperiments,whichrequiretheuseofabookingsystem,andasaconsequence,theuseoftheseexperimentswouldrunintheLiLaPortal.StudentslogintoLiLatoreador


47/78

downloadinstructions,bookatimeslot,performtheexperiment,discusseswithothers,makesnotes,searchesfeedback,andproducesasolution(report)onLiLa.FunctionalitiesfortheLiLaPortal: Toolrecordingexperimentsselectedbyteachers ToolrecordingthenumberofstudentsselectingexperimentX Tooltouploadanddownloadinstructionalmaterialbelongingtoan

experiment Bookingsystemoftimeslotsforremoteexperiments Toolforstudentstouploadnotes,comments,reports(finalsolution),and

downloadinstructionalmaterialbelongingtoanexperiment Toolforstudentstolocateotherusers,orcoachestodiscuss(synchronousor

asynchronous) Toolforcommunicationbetweenstudent&teacherformakingappointments

andlinktorelevantmaterials Systemrecords#andcontentofinteractionswithotherusersandcoaches,

workingtimespentoncase,#uploadingand#downloading Systemrecordstimelagbetweenquestionandanswer(asynchronous) Systemrecords#teachers#studentsusinginstructionalmaterialsfrom

teacherX Systemrecords#students#teachersloggingin Relationbetweenstudentdata(ofuseoffunctionalities)andgradeis

computed Systemrecords#ofloadsand#usageofcases(perhour)

7.2.3 Linkoping Linkopinghasworkedoutthreedifferentoptions,noneofwhichrequireintensiveuseoftheLiLainfrastructure.ThissituationrelatestothefactthattheSwedishpartnersareworkingwiththeModelicaplatformforwhichtheaddedvalueoftheLiLaPortalremainstobedecided.MaterialsfromthispartnerrequireusingOpenModelicaasasoftwareplatform.Inthefirstoption,onlydownloadoftheplatformfromtheexistingDrModelicasiteisneededandcasescanbeperformedlocally.Inasecondoption,awebbrowserisusedtorunsimpleexperiments.InathirdoptionanOpenModelicaplugincanbeused,supportingtheHTMLformat.

7.2.4 Basel/Cambridge ThiswastheresultoftheworkshopinMunich,whereacaseofcollaborativelearningwasdeveloped.Inthiscase,teachersdonotdeveloporselectconcreteexercises,butamoregeneral,relevantproblemforthestudentstosolve.Thisisclassroomwork,inthefirstplace.Asaresult,nofixedassignmentscanbeprepared,butweneedaflexibleenvironmentallowingstudentstosearchandselect.Ofcourse,technically,thismayimplynodifferentrequirements,butthereshouldbeoptionsforstudentsthatintheothercaseswereonlyavailableforteachers.FunctionalitiesfortheLiLaPortal:


48/78

Toolforstudentstouploadanddownloadinstructionalmaterialbelongingtoanexperiment

Toolforstudentstosearchandselect,andlinktocommunityforum Tooltoopenacaseinjointwindow(ondifferentcomputers) Communicationtoolforcommunicationandinteractiveproblemsolving

7.3 General conclusions on the storyboards Mostofstoryboardsthatweresentbythepartnersseemtoassumethatteacherswillcontinuetoworkwiththeircurrentlearningmanagementsystem(Moodle,ISIS,Blackboard…)inwhichteachingcontent(instructions,explanations,assignments…)isprovidedandtheinteractionbetweenstudentsandteachersistakingplace.IfthiswayofworkingwillbecomecommonpracticeoncetheLiLaPortalwillbeavailable,theauthorsthinktheLiLaprojectisgoingtomissoutatremendousopportunitytobecomeapartneramongmanyotherinitiativestryingtoshareonlineexperiments.ThePhetinitiativeoftheColoradoUniversityissuchanexample.TheLiLaPortalshoulddefinitelynotbecomeameredatabaseforteacherstodownloadanexperimentasthisviewisalreadysurpassedbyfarthroughotherexistingprojects.WhatmakesthePhetinitiativechallengingisthatteacherscaneasilystepintothesystem,uploadtheirmaterialsandshareexperienceswithothers.Popularexperimentsarebeingtranslatedforfreebyusersintomanylanguagesandsearchoptionsforusersaresimpleandclear.Phetsupportstheexchangeofdifferentapproachesofexperimentsbyotherteachersorstudents,andprovidesanever‐growingenvironmentwhereteachingstafffindideasandnewperspectives.TherearemanyargumentsformakingLiLaanevenbetterenvironment: Experimentsrequireonlineaccesswhichcanonlybemanagedremotelyfrom

theLiLaportal.Thiscannotbehandledbyalearningmanagementsystem.Thesolutionspresentedonlyworkforvirtualsimulations.

Teachingguides,teachingideas,specialassignmentsshouldfindtheirplaceinLiLa.Theseeducationalmaterialsshouldinspireotherstoaddnewonesorgivefeedbacktotheoriginalauthors.

Itcannotbeexpectedthatallourmaterialisperfectalltheway.Onthecontrary,weexpectthatinalivingenvironment,improvementsandupdates,oradditionsfornewscenarioswillincreasesustainability.

Andforcollaboration:howisacollaborativesessionsetup,whoistakingcareofsynchronousactivitiesonacase?Doweexpectteachersorstudentstomanageallofthisthemselves?

Whodoesthetagging(metadata)?Dowereallyassumethatoneexperimentfitsonlyonetypeofscenario?Orthatsimulationscanalwaysbetiedtoonespecifictypeofeducationalscenario?Andifnot,whatmetadatashouldbeused?

Forevaluation:LiLashouldprovidetracinginformationonactivitiesofstudentsinordertoknowwhattheactualusesare.LiLashouldprovidetheinformationwhichexperimentsareevaluatedpositively,whichonesdoteachbest,whattherelevantlearningepisodesforthesimulationsare.Thisinformationiscrucialforteacherswhowanttoensurethequalityandreputationoftheirteaching.


49/78

Atthecommunitylevel:Howisusagesharedandupdated?Onwhatbasisaresimulationsandremoteexperimentsofferedandrevised?HowwillLiLabesustainedifitdoesnotlookaliveanddeveloping?

7.4 Scripts and scenarios for pedagogically sound cases in the LiLa portal Theaboveconclusionshavebeenmergedintoasmallsetofpedagogicallysound(example)casesfortheLiLaportal.Thissectionisanextensiontoandfurtherconcretizationofthepreviouslyproduced‘pedagogicaldevelopersguide’(D3.2)andtheprevioussections.ItaimstoprovideconcretetipsforthefunctionaldesignoftheLiLaportal.ItextendsthepedagogicalstrategybecausewetryandexplainmoreconcretelythepedagogicaloptionsforaproperintegrationofacaseintheLiLasystem.ItisanextensiontothefirstdraftoftheLiLaportalaswetryandexplainmoreconcretelywhatisbehindtheoptionsforusersandhowacasecanmakeclearwhatitisaboutandwhatnot,intermsofpedagogy.Itmightatthispointbecomenecessarytodescribe,oratleastconstrain,theconceptpedagogic.Pedagogiccomprisesallactivitywhich,inprinciple,involves,supports,orleadtolearning.Inprinciplecanbeinterpretedasalooselystructuredsequencewithanexplicitlearninggoalinmind.Activitycomprisesteacherandlearneractions,aswellasactivityembeddedinthedesignoftheenvironmentandthelearningtask.Suchactivityispedagogicasitdoesnotmerelyconcerncorrectexecutionofproceduresorapplicationofknowledge,butgainingnewunderstandingfromthatactivityasmuchaspossible.Pedagogicactivitycomesinvariouskinds.First,itistheactivityofteachers,traditionallythemainsourceofinformation,instruction,feedbackandevaluationinalearningprocess.Teachersexplain,instruct,direct,coach,andsometimesevenunderstandtheirstudents.IntheLiLapedagogicalvision,teachersareimportantandwehavetoclearaboutwhatteacheractivitiesweimagineforeachcaseintheportal.Ofcourse,wecannottellteacherswhattodo,butwecansuggestandrecommend,offeringsolutionsforvarioustypesofteacheractivity.AnexampleofteachercentereduseofLiLaexperiments,andespeciallysimulations,isasdemonstrationsduringacourse,orassmallexercisestodeepenunderstandingduringacourse,asisthecaseintheModelicacourseinLinkoping.Second,wehavelearneractivities,thatis,thoseactions(actionsaremicro‐levelactivities,activitiesasweusethetermrefertoestablishedpracticesinalearningsession,suchasalessoncomprisingvariousactions)bylearners(students)thatarepartoftheirlearningprocess.Inourvision,learneractivities(andnotteacheractivities)definethelearningprocess.Inthatvision,certainactivitiesareconsideredmoreimportantthanothers:listeningislessactivethanansweringquestions,findingasolutionismoreactivethanreadingwhatthesolutionis,creatingaknowledgeartefactismoreactivethancreatingasolution,andlearninginrealisticsituationswouldbemorecompletethanlearningtosolveanisolatedproblem.Moreactive,morecomplete,moreconstructiverefertopositiveconnotationsofalearningoutcome.


50/78

Wedistinguishathirdkindofpedagogicactivitywhichisalsobylearners,andthatisgroupactivity,learningbygroupsthatcollaborateonsolvingproblems,creatingknowledge,preferablyinauthenticsituations.Simulationsandexperimentscanfigureinsuchactivitiesinvariousways,eitherunderthecontrolofateacher,oraspartofactivitiesunderstudentresponsibility.Inourvision,groupactivitiescanbemostconstructive,andmoreconstructivethanindividuallearneractivities,whenembeddedinanappropriatepedagogicalsetting.Acommunity‐basedsetting,whereeducationispartofalargersphereoflivingandworking,extendingtofuturegoalsandcollectiveinterests,wouldbethemostfertilegroundforanylearningenvironmenttosurviveitsinitialstages.Inthefollowingsections,wedevelopprototypescenariosofuseofLiLamaterialavailableintheportal.ThisshouldserveasaguidefortypesofLiLacasesintheportal.TheLiLapedagogicstrategyfavorsthecollaborativeandcommunity‐basedscenarios.

7.4.1 Scenario 1: Teacher‐led problem solving Forexample:teacherfromCambridgeworkingwithLinkopingmaterials.General description In this ‘classic’ teacher led learning method the teacher verbally

explains a subject to a group of students. He uses the blackboard/whiteboard to illustrate his story. The LiLa simulations are used as tool to help explore the problem or principle at hand, during class time. Besides the classically performed simulations, the teacher can use the LiLa portal to create a lab of experiments and exercises for the students to solve similar problems on their own or to prepare for the next class.

Objective type Content type

List of course objectives Conceptual knowledge, rules & procedures

Materials

Modelica tutorial and software; teacher selected lab of experiments

Activities Teacher Students 1. Orientation Talk & illustrate Listen 2. Execution

Propose exercises Answer & ask questions

Solve exercises Ask & answer questions

3. Review Examination Answer questions Guidelines for Lila Set of exercises: LiLa should afford individual teachers to create a

group of simulations/experiments belonging to the same course/session, and to be graded together. These exercises should closely match the desired objectives for the teacher. A frame for report of results should be developed. For this activity probably the following classes should apply: success, part-success, unfinished, failure.

Issues: Because exercises closely follow an existing textbook, it remains to be seen whether they would serve in isolation or with other methods. The pedagogical ontology should be quite specific here. This activity can be made more interactive with on-line (part-time) peer tutors available. An option to record teacher lectures and power points in the LiLa portal would enhance this scenario. Our pedagogical strategy would also recommend use of feedback features of the materials: evaluations, classifications, and discussions.


51/78

7.4.2 Scenario 2.1: Independent student learning Forexample:studentfromGreeceworkingwithBerlinremoteexperimentGeneral description As part of a course in classical physics a teacher recommends his

students to visit the LiLa portal to do experiments with [topic X]. Example http://remote.physik.tu-berlin.de/farm/index.php?id=160&L=1 Objective type Content type

Understanding of topic X, which is a part of a larger course with multiple topics. Conceptual information, rules and procedures, level bachelor 2

Materials

Course manual and literature, including topic X. Preferably the teacher has prepared a set of exercises for each topic, corresponding to entries in the LiLa portal.

Activities Teacher Students 1. Orientation Set of exercises Read 2. Execution

Student visits the LiLa portal, studies the experiment, tries the exercises and produces a report

3. Review

Examination questions Answer questions

Guidelines for Lila The topic should be easily located from the portal, and the teacher has prepared by identifying the experiment as suitable for this particular objective. If properly prepared by the teacher, (s)he could verify the quality of the report of the experiment, and/or verify the answers to relevant examination questions. It should be quite easy for students to find an appropriate exercise

Issues This scenario means more preparation activity for the teacher than in the previous scenario, where a course and manual, and the appropriate exercises are already developed. The teacher could also leave it up to the students to deepen their understanding of a particular topic. In that case, the reporting (from the system) of student activity, and the level of that activity must be clear and obvious. Scrutiny of the exercise by the teacher is advisable, including reporting his/her estimations and evaluations. An option to record teacher lectures and power points in the LiLa portal would enhance this scenario. Our pedagogical strategy would also recommend use of feedback features of the materials: evaluations, classifications, discussions, communities. This version is not very interactive. The next activity (1.2) is an example with peer tutoring, as currently happens in Berlin.

7.4.3 Scenario 2.2: Independent student learning with (peer) coaching Forexample:studentfromGreeceworkingwithBerlinremoteexperiment.General description As part of a course in classical physics a teacher recommends his

students to visit the LiLa portal to do experiments with [topic X]. Example http://remote.physik.tu-berlin.de/farm/index.php?id=160&L=1 Objective type Content type

Understanding of topic X, which is a part of a larger course with multiple topics. Maybe also asking questions and argumentation could be among the objectives. Conceptual information, rules and procedures, level bachelor 2

Materials

Course manual and literature, including topic X. Preferably the teacher has prepared a set of exercises for each topic, corresponding to entries in the LiLa portal.

Activities Teacher Students 1. Orientation Set of exercises Read


52/78

2. Execution

Teacher can monitor progress on the forum. The teacher can answer questions, but answering can also be done by experienced students.

Student visits the LiLa portal, studies the experiment, tries the exercises and produces a report; questions can be asked on an electronic forum, some are answered by the teacher, some are commented on or solved by other students from the course. Ideally, questions are dealt with within a day

3. Review

Examination questions, or evaluate report

Answer questions or produce report

Guidelines for Lila The topic should be easily located from the portal, and the teacher has prepared by identifying the experiment as suitable for this particular objective. If properly prepared by the teacher, he could verify the quality of the answers to relevant examination questions, to be corroborated by discussing student performance with the peer coaches. Indeed, the nature of student activities may matter here.

Issues The step to collaborative learning is not very big when students are asked to solve exercises as a group. Of course, in that case equal contributions and complexity of exercises must be somehow monitored. Our pedagogical strategy would also recommend use of feedback features of the materials: evaluations, classifications, discussions, communities.

7.4.4 Scenario 3.1: Collaborative student learning General description Assignments that need to be solved in a small group. Objective type Content type

Collaborative understanding of domain knowledge, collaboration Conceptual, procedural, strategic, collaborative

Materials Collaborative exercises within a course manual Activities Teacher Students 1. Orientation Set of exercises Read 2. Execution

Teacher can monitor progress on the forum. The teacher can discuss with students, but this can also be done by experienced students.

Students visit the LiLa portal, study the experiment, try the exercises and produce a report; questions can be asked on an electronic forum, some are answered by the teacher, some are commented on or solved by other students from the course. Ideally, questions are dealt with within a day

3. Review

Examination questions, or evaluate report

Answer questions or produce report

Guidelines for Lila A group with individual members should be identifiable (common space) Teachers (and group members) should get an overview of activities in the portal by other members Experiments and simulations that are more frequently used in previous group activities should be clearly identifiable.

Issues For an activity to be truly collaborative, some added value of collaboration must be obvious: distributed knowledge and information, joint construction, and, ultimately, joint goals superseding individual objectives. This requires open exercises of sufficient complexity.


53/78

An option would be to have small communities formed around complex actual questions, linked to relevant simulations and experiments. These independent groups try and solve or move ahead in the context of these problems. Scientists could also be part of the problem solving group.

7.4.5 Scenario 3.2: Collaborative student learning by knowledge creation General description Students receive a commission to (collaboratively) construct or

create some knowledge object (apparatus, machine, tool, etc), preferably to be actually used in the real world. The assignment comes as a project during which (by the coach or by the students themselves) several subtasks are carried out. These subtasks may also concern knowledge objects created by other teams.

Objective type Content type

Knowledge creation Conceptual, rules, procedural, application, collaboration, regulation

Materials

Various An expert team (teacher, domain experts)

Activities Teacher Students 1. Orientation Discussion about commission

and planning Discussion about commission and planning

2. Execution

Coaching and monitoring Various experiments, produce knowledge object

3. Review

Evaluation of report and product

Construction of report (joint or individual) and product

Guidelines for Lila A group with individual members should be identifiable Teachers (and group members) should get an overview of activities in the portal by other members Experiments and simulations that are more frequently used in previous group activities should be clearly identifiable Reports and knowledge objects should be available for further use

Issues For knowledge creation, members should have a joint objective of constructing something (new). A (virtual) space for discussing and storing intermediate results should be available. A community site would be prerequisite, as well as links to other relevant communities.

7.5 Suggestions for the functional design HowcanwemaketheLiLaPortalanattractiveenvironmentthatisuptodatewiththecurrenttrendsanddevelopments,withinthetimeframeworkoftheproject?

7.5.1 Simplicity WethinkthatsimplicityshouldbeatthebasisofthePortal.Usersshouldbeabletoexploretheenvironmenteasily,andtheprocedureforteacherstouploadcontentshouldbecristalclearandnotoverloadedbychoicesofpossiblepedagogicalapproaches.

7.5.2 The Content Upload Tool Werecommendtoimplementa4stepsproceduretouploadcontenttothePortal.Step1:Uploadingthelearningobjectivesoftheexperiment.Step2:Uploadtheexperiment,includingcheckboxes‐indicatingifitisasingleplayerormultiplayerexperiment‐indicatingifitismeantforselfdirectedlearningorteacherledlearningStep3:Uploadtheassignmentsforthestudents


54/78

Step4:Uploadtheaccompanyingmaterials,includingtests.

7.5.3 The Evaluation Tool Teachersandstudentsalikeshouldbeabletoaddevaluationstospecificexperiments.Thistoolshouldenableuserstowriteshortcomments.

7.5.4 The Experience Sharing Tool Thistoolenablesteacherstouploadtheirexperiences,approaches,teachingmaterialsforsharingwithothers.

7.5.5 The You Need Help Tool Thistoolshoulddotwothings:itshouldenablestudentstooffersupportforaspecificexperimentanditshouldenablestudentstoaskforthissupport.Thistoolshouldcontributetooneoftheenvisagedcashflowsofthesystem,usingmicropayments.Thelatterpaymenttoolcanbedesignedlater.

7.5.6 The Rating Tool Thistoolgivesthepossibilityforuserstorateanexperiment,andshouldprovidetheaveragescorestousers.Wesuggestthislistoftoolstobeimplementedforthefirstseriesofshowcases.Thenextpartwilldescribethefunctionaldesignprocessandresults,includingscreenshotsoftheactualInterfaceDesignoftheportal.

8 The functional design of LiLa ThefunctionaldesignoftheLiLaportalisbasedonthepedagogicalstrategy,thescenariosandstoryboards,aworkshopheldinDelft(October2009),andanotherliteraturereviewthatfocusedonengagementandparticipationinonlinelearningcommunities.Thefirsttwopillarsofthefunctionaldesignhavebeendiscussedinthepreviouschapters.Below,wewillfirstdescribethesetupandresultsoftheworkshop.

8.1 Design workshop LiLa ThissectionsummarizestheworkshopheldinDelfton1October.Intheworkshop,theparticipants(consistingofthemajorpartoftheprojectmembers)collaborativelydesignedanddiscussedseveralpagesoftheLiLaportal.Doingthat,wedevelopedasharedviewonhowtheportalshouldlooklike,whatfunctionalityitneedstocontain.

8.1.1 Workshop setup Theworkshopwasstructuredintwoactivitiesofonehour,explainedbelow.Hour1:Introductionofworkshopandgroupdiscussionsaboutpersonas.Personasarefictitiouscharacterscreatedtorepresentthedifferentusertypeswithinatargeteddemographicthatmightuseasiteorproduct.Personasareusefulinconsideringthegoals,desires,andlimitationsoftheusersinordertohelptoguidedecisionsaboutaproduct,suchasfeatures,interactions,andvisualdesign.Personasaremostoftenusedaspartofauser‐centereddesignprocessfordesigningsoftwareandarealsoconsideredapartofinteractiondesign(IxD),


55/78

howevertheyarealsousedinindustrialdesign.Auserpersonaisarepresentationofthegoalsandbehaviorofarealgroupofusers.Inmostcases,personasaresynthesizedfromdatacollectedfrominterviewswithusers.Theyarecapturedin1–2pagedescriptionsthatincludebehaviorpatterns,goals,skills,attitudes,andenvironment,withafewfictionalpersonaldetailstomakethepersonaarealisticcharacter.Foreachproduct,morethanonepersonaisusuallycreated,butonepersonashouldalwaysbetheprimaryfocusforthedesign.(Source:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Personae)Becauseoftimeconstraints,5personaswerepre‐formulated,andtheparticipantshadtobuildonthedescriptionsgivenanddefinethepersonasinmoredetailandcongruentwiththeirownopinionsandideas.Afteranhour,theparticipantscamebackandwediscussedthedifferentpersonas.AppendixAshowsthedescriptionhandedout,andreactionsofthediscussion.Themostimportantissuesemergingfromthediscussionare; Supportforteachersonhowtoimplementoruseexperimentsintheirown

teaching(includingpedagogicalsupport); Supportforteachersonhowsharetheirownlabresources; Accesscontrolandstatisticstoseewhohasdonecertainexperimentsand

controllingtheinformation; Findingpeersoracommunityofpracticetoshareexperiencesandgetto

knowcolleagueswhomayhelpyou; Clearhow‐topagesormanualshelpteachersandstudentsusingtheonline

content; Communicationtoolssostudentscancommunicateaboutexperimentsand

discussresults; Translationisaverydifficultandchallengingissue.Hour2:UsingthepersonasindesigningoneortwoLiLawebpagesThesecondhourthesamegroupsmadeasketchofoneortwowebpages.Bydiscussingtheresultingdesigns,allintheappendix,wehavebeenabletoconstructasharedvisionofthefunctionalityandvisionoftheLiLaportal.

8.1.2 Results of the workshop Belowyoucanfindpreliminarydesignsbasedontheoutcomesoftheworkshop.Lateron(inthefollowingsections),amoreelaboratefunctionaldesignwillbepresentedinaLiLafunctionaldesignreport.Bumperpage;message,sloganThebumperpageisnothinglessthanthefirstimpressionoftheLiLasite.Itcontainsthemostimportantmessage,andforwhomtheportalis.


56/78

Figure 8 - Design by LiLa partners

TwomostimportantaspectsofLiLaaretousethecontentavailableonthesite,ortocontributenewcontent.Thelargeimage/videoandsloganshowthatthesiteisaboutdoingexperiments;“Remoteandvirtualexperimentsforstudentsandlecturers”.Inthepicture,alistofexperimentsisshowninamovingbanner.Youcanruntheexampleexperimentdirectlyfromthebumperpage.Thelinks“UseLila”and“ContributetoLiLa”gotothe“Homepage”and“How‐to/Support”page.

Homepage Thehomepageisastartingpointtostartdiscoverinterestingcontentandpeople,orfindingtheanswertoaquestion.ItisalsoaplacewherenewsaboutLiLaanditsusersisshown,throughactivitystreamsandPickoftheWeekvideos.Itgivesanoverviewofwhat’sgoingon,notonlyintheactivitystreams,butalsointhetagcloud,whichrepresentskeywordsofthecontentonthesite.Preferably,thehomepageispersonalized,suchthatthelinksitcontainslinktorelevantexperimentsorgroups(withpersonalizedlinksorthroughtagging),andtheactivitystreamcontainsmessagesabouttheexperimentsoneisdoing,orgroupinofoneismember.Someoftheelementsthatwesawinthedesignswere; Signup/loginforusers:teachersorstudents News/broadcasting Activitystream Tagcloud Forum;specific(perexperiment)andgeneral(support/aboutLiLa) Search(incategories)pluslinktodifferentCategories NewonLiLa(people/experiments) Top10experiments/Experimentoftheday MyLab;containinglabpagesonLiLayouareworkingon Experiment(video)plusinformation Successstories(onYouTube) Webcamtoalivesetupofalab RSSfeedtofollowwhatishappeningonthesite


57/78

Inthepicturebelow,youcanfindastructuredoverviewofthesefunctionalitiesandrequirementsintegratedintoonedesign.ThiswascreateddirectlyaftertheworkshopusingthesoftwarepackageOmnigraffle.Itmustbeclearthatitdoesnotrepresenttheeventualinterface.

Figure 9 - Mockup 1 based on the design workshop

Experiment page Whenauserisloggedin,he/shehasmoreoptionsforinteractingwithandusingexperiments.Thewebpageonwhichtheexperimentisshown,thereforeisdifferentforuserswhoarenotloggedin,thanforuserswhoare.Differencesmaybeinstoringanexperimentforlater,reservingatimeslot,ordoingasimulationorexperiment.Wediscussedthefollowingelements, Supportfortechnicalissues Wikiforeditingcontentabouttheexperiment Listofteachersandstudentswhodoordidtheexperiment


58/78

Discussion/ForumontheexperimentAndmore,tobeseeninthedesignbelow

Figure 10 - Mockup 2 based on design workshop

Search; metadata, filters, results, interface Howpeoplesearchismuchinfluencedbythewayhowtheyareallowedtosearch.Whichmetadatafieldsaresearchable,andhowthesearchpagepresentsdifferentoptionstosearchthewholesystem,oronlypartially.Itisavery


59/78

difficultmattertodefinethemostimportantsearchfields,andthefiltersthatshouldapply.Wetalkedaboutdifferentoptions,andthefollowingwassaid.The2searchpagesthatweredeveloped,showthefollowingresult.

Figure 11 - Designs by LiLa partners

Ascanbeseenintheabovedesigns,usersmustbeabletosearchonsubject,level,andkeyword/tag,andfiltertheresultsbasedonpopularityandrating.Additionally,weseeinbothdesignsapreviewofthefirstorselectedresult,alreadyshowingascreenshot,description,etc.andsomeoptions(visitpage,downloadexperiment,makereservation,saveforlater).Resultscaninclude; Simulationsandexperiments Experiencesbyothers Groups/Communities(suchasdescribedinthepersonas)Thefollowingsectionswillfocusoncreatingamorecompletefunctionaldesign,includingliteratureresearchonmotivation&participationinonlinecommunities,sustainabilityoftheseinitiatives,andlinkstootherworkpackages,suchasevaluationandmetadata.Thisfinalliteratureanalysis,inadditiontoallthepreviousstepsandactions,wethinkwehavegroundedthedesignoftheLiLaportalsufficientlyinliteratureaswellasthedesiresandexpectationsofpartnersandend‐users.

8.2 Social mechanisms and design choices Aswehaveseeninalloftheprevioussections,weacknowledgetheimportanceofsocialinteractionbetweenlearnersontheportalinordertofostereffectivelearning.Onlineinteractioniskeytosomeofthepedagogicalscenarioswehavedescribed,butthisiseasiersaidthandone.ThefollowingtextsarebasedonapaperwrittenfortheCALconference2011,UK(Hennis&Lukosch,2011)and


60/78

showshowcertaindesignchoicesaremadebasedonliteratureonengagementandmotivation.Italsoshowswherewecanimprovewiththeprojectfromatechnologicalorprocessperspective.Wewillshowsomeofthedesignswehavedevelopedinordertogiveabetterideaofhowtheportalwilllooklike.ItmustbesaidthattheseareNOTscreenshotsoftheportal.Thedesignsareinthefinalphaseofdevelopments,sothefinalinterfaceandlayoutwillnotdiffermuchfromwhatisrepresentedhere.

8.2.1 Motivation in online learning processes Self‐organizationandpeer‐basedlearninginonlinecommunitiescanbecomeanimportantandeffectivemodeforlearning.Supportingpeopletocreatenewcommunitieshasthepotentialtoimprovecommunicationandsupportsharingofcriticalinformationandknowledge.Italsoalignswithnewerorganizationalviews:movingfromcommandandcontroltomorecompetency‐basedvirtualcommunities(Koh,Kim,B.Butler,&Bock,2007).Despitethepopularityofonlinesocialnetworkingsites,mostinitiativesfailtoreachmomentumandfadeawayshortlyafterinception,becauseindividualslackthemotivationtobeactive(B.S.Butler,1999;Hennis,2009a;2009b).Inmanyonlinecommunitiesandwebsitesthatrelyoncommunityparticipation,themajorityofthecontributionsaredonebyaverysmallpercentageofmembers(Ortega,Gonzalez‐Barahona,&Robles,2008).AccordingtoBonkandReynolds(1997),onlinelearningshouldcreatechallengingactivitiesforlearnerstoconnectnewinformationtoold.Learninginonlineenvironmentsisthusheavilyinfluencedbysocialinteraction.Motivationplaysanimportantroleinonlinelearningenvironments,understoodasbehaviorreferringtothechoicespeoplemakeandthedegreeofeffortlearnersarewillingtoexert.Thus,theconceptofmotivationisdefinedastheorganizedpatternofaperson’sgoals,beliefs,andemotionsthatthepersonisstrivingfor(Ford,1992).Inonlinelearningenvironments,motivationisaforcetoarouse,givedirectionto,continue,andchooseaparticularbehavior(Wlodkowski,1985).Coursedesign,availableinteractionandtheroleofthefacilitatorseemtobefactorsinfluencinglearner’smotivation(Bonk&Reynolds1997).Furthermore,rewardssuchasgradesandfeedbackseemtobeimportantinmattersofmotivation(Rotter,1990;Lepper&Malone,1987).Insummary,overallunderstandingofthefactorsthatinfluencemotivationofindividualsinonlineknowledgeenvironmentscanbeusedtoincreasewillingnesstoinvesttimeandshareknowledge.Thefollowingsectionsummarizesmechanismsthatinfluencemotivationofindividualsinonlineknowledgeenvironments,andtheirwillingnesstoinvesttimeandshareknowledge,basedon(Hennis&Kolfschoten2010).

8.2.2 Social Mechanisms of the LiLa portal to foster motivation Inthefollowing,wedescribesocialmechanismsthatcanbeaddressedinordertoincreasemotivationtoparticipateinOpenEducationalResources(OER)projects.WehaveappliedthisframeworkintothedesignofprocessesandtechnologyoftheEU‐fundedprojectcalledLiLa,LibraryofLabs.Theportal


61/78

disseminatesandaggregatesremoteexperiments,learningresources(includingassignments),andlessons.AlessonisasetoflearningactivitiesthatcontainLiLacontent,suchasexperimentsandlearningresources.

Objectives, relevancy and fit: Who are the users? Oneofthemostimportantthingsinthedesignofanonlinecommunityisitsalignmentwiththeinterestsoftheintendedparticipants,andthecollectivecharacteristicsofthecommunity(Preece&Maloney‐Krichmar,2003;2005).Apersononlycontributeswhenthisefforthelpstosatisfyaneed(i.e.psychologicalneeds)(Kollock,1999).Ifapersonperceivesasifatechnologybringspersonalbenefit,participationwillbemorelikely(Garfield,2006;Pearson,2007;Rashidetal.,2006).Itisthereforerequiredtoknowtheproblemsandobjectivesof(future)users.Whenpotentialusersandcontributorscanrelatethistotheirownneeds,thereishigherprobabilityofparticipation(Preece&Maloney‐Krichmar,2003).Forexample,aclearstatementofthesite’spurposeisacommonwaytocommunicateitsobjectivesandrelevancy.Otherpossibilitiesincluderegularreminders,feedbackmessages,supportiveandexplanatorynotifications,onlinestatisticsandemailnewsletters.Inaddition,itisimportantthattheonlineenvironmentandfunctionalitiessupportpractice,likelearningprocesses,identitybuilding,andnetworking(Boumanetal.,2007).Itshouldalsobeeasyforpeopletostartparticipatingandmakeuseoftheofferedtechnology.Thetechnologyshouldfitinboththementalmindsetofanorganizationoraperson,aswellasthephysicalworkflowandorganizationalprocesses.Thenorms,values,language,technologyandinterfacemustcorrespondwiththeworldviewoffutureusersandproblemsmustsolvereal‐worldproblems,suchasinabilitytofindrelevantpeopleandlearningresources.Existingstructuresmustbeintegrated.


62/78

Figure 12 - Homepage of the LiLa portal

Thehomepageoftheportalshowsdirectlywhatwecanexpectfromit.Thereareexperiments,Lessons,andDiscussions.TheprimaryaudienceofLiLaconsistsofuniversityteachersandstudents.Becauseitisan“openresource”,anyonecouldmakeuseofit,butpreferentialtreatmentregardingtheuseofscarceresources(popularorexpensiveremoteexperiments)isgiventopartneringinstitutes.Theuseofexperimentsineducationrangesfromteacher‐centerededucationtostudent‐lededucation.Awholerangeoflearningscenarioscanbethoughtofwithinthetwoendsofthespectrum.Thestrategywechosetoaccommodatethedifferentlearningscenariosisbyofferingtoolsthatsupportbothteacher‐andstudent‐ledlearning.Twoexamplesaregivenbelow:1. 1.SCORMcompliancy.Remoteexperiments,andotherLiLamaterialsare

packagedasLLO‐files(LiLaLearningObjects)thatareSCORM‐compliant.SCORMisthemostwidelyusededucationalmetadatastandard.LLOscanthereforeeasilybeintegratedintopopularlearningmanagementsystems,suchasBlackboardandMoodle.

2. 2.Activelearningandpeerassessment.Studentscanpersonalizetheirlearninginembeddedforums.Eachlessonallowsforuserstoaskquestionsandgiveanswers.Inaddition,wedesignedapeer‐assessmenttooltosupportstudentstoassesseachother.


63/78

Nextto“consumers”ofLiLacontent,wehavethecontentproviders,whoaretheinstitutesandindividualexperimentowners(teachersetc.)whopotentiallywanttosharetheirremoteexperimentsonline.ThesamemotivationsforpeopletoshareOER(Hylén,2006)seemtoapplytoremoteexperiments.Potentialcontentprovidershavereactedenthusiasticallyonthepossibilityofsharingtheirremoteexperiments,whichtheyhavebeendevelopingovertheyears,withaglobalaudience.Withsufficientsupport,andhighqualityfeedback,andtheabilitytomakeuseofotherLiLaresources,contributionislikelytooccur.Currently,awidespreadsurveyisbeingdoneinordertofindoutmoreaboutpotentialcontentprovidersandtheirwillingnesstocontribute.

Leadership & Roles Leadersinonlinecommunitiescanbeimportantforthesuccessofthecommunity.Inaddition,leadershipisanenablerforknowledgesharing(Ardichvili,2008).Leaderssupportandengagepeople,formconnections,discussstrategies,choosecontentandtechnology,andshowexemplarybehaviour(Koh,Kim,B.Butler,&Bock,2007;EWenger,McDermott,&Snyder,2002).Onlinecommunitiestypicallyproviderolessuchasanadministrator.Oftentimes,communitiesdoadoptspecificnamestoassigntocommunity‐specificroles.Forexample,adiscussionleaderinaforumonboatscouldbecalled“Captain”.Atypicalroleisthetechnologysteward,whoissomeonewithenoughexperienceoftheworkingsofacommunitytounderstanditstechnologyneeds,andenoughexperiencewithtechnologytotakeleadershipinaddressingthoseneeds.Stewardshiptypicallyincludesselectingandconfiguringtechnology,aswellassupportingitsuseinthepracticeofthecommunity(EtienneWenger,White,&Smith,2009).LiLamembershaveapersonalpagewheretheycanaddtheirfieldofexpertise.Inaddition,userscanindicatetheirroleasastudentorteacher.Roledefinitionandprocessesareanimportantissuethatremainstobeaddressed.Inaddition,wehaveafunctionalitycalled“Ask‐an‐expert”,whichmakesuseofthisindicateddomainofexpertise.Students(orteachers)whohaveaquestionaboutaspecifictopic,canaskthatanduserswhohaveindicatedthistopicintheirprofilewillbenotifiedofthequestion.

Organization Withregardstoorganization,sustainableonlinecommunitiesshouldofferservicesalongfourdimensions:self‐management(facilitationofcreationandmanagementofpresenceandresources),self‐organization(facilitateinteractionandknowledgeconstruction),self‐categorization(supportclassificationandevaluationofcontributions),andself‐regulation(offertoolstomanageprivacyandspam)(Berlanga,Rusman,Bitter‐Rijpkema,&Sloep,2009).Thereismuchdebateaboutthesustainabilityoftheprojectfromtheorganizationalperspective.Relianceonacentralorganizationseemscostlyandlessfeasible.Therefore,thedesignofLiLafocusesonthedecentralizationofadding,managing,andlearningfromLiLacontent.Oneexampleofdecentralizationisgivenbelow.Teachersandstudentsareabletoguide


64/78

themselvesthroughthesite,andarerecommendedother,possiblyrelevantexperiments,basedonthelocationandinterests.Informationabouttheuseandusersofexperimentsisshown,tosupportthedecisionprocessofanindividualaboutwhetherornothe/sheshoulddotheexperiment.Inaddition,teachersandstudentsareabletorateandcommentonresources,aggregatethemintouniquelessons,addkeywords,andevencontributematerials.

Figure 13 - Self-organization through rating and recommending technologies

Heterogeneity Uniquenessandsocialcomparisoncanencourageparticipationandsharingofinformation(Chen,Harper,Konstan,&Li,2009;Ludford,Cosley,Frankowski,&Terveen,2004).Generallyspeaking,heterogeneityisanimportantfactorforknowledgecreationinonlinecommunities.Inordertobringtogetherdifferentperspectives,therehastobeanopendialogue,anddifferentlevelsofparticipationmustbeaccepted.Largeandsmallcontributions(suchascomments)areneededtosustainandcreatenewinteraction.Becausetruemembershipgrowsovertimeandwithinteractions,passivemembersmayovertimebecomeactiveandengaged(Berlanga,Rusman,Bitter‐Rijpkema,&Sloep,2009;EWenger,McDermott,&Snyder,2002).Italsomeansthatdifferentpeoplemustbeaddressedindifferentways(Kollock,1999).LiLaisaEuropeanproject,whichmeansthatdifferentpartnershavedifferentculturesandbackgrounds.ThefutureusersofLiLawillhavedifferenteducationalandculturalbackgrounds,andarelearningorareexpertsindifferentscientificdomains.Aswewroteinanearlierchapter,wewrotethatthisheterogeneityshouldbeutilizedinthelearningprocess.Forexample,collaborativeassignmentscanbedesignedthatrequireinputfromdifferentdisciplines.Also,heterogeneityisaccommodatedinthemetadata,whichallowsfortranslationofcontent.

Learning & Networking Wementionedrelevancyasrequirementsforanonlinecommunitytobecomesuccessful.Oneimportantincentiveforpeopletojoinandparticipateinlearningcommunities,isofcourse,theirabilitytohelpyoulearnsomething(Boumanetal.,2007).Learningcanrelatewithheterogeneityinexpertise,supportforquestions,andgettingusefulrecommendations(automaticandsocial).Anotheressentialmotivationforpeopletojoinonlinecommunitiesisnetworking.Networkingleadstonewtrustrelationshipsandcollaboration.Itisespecially


65/78

effectivewhenonlineandofflineinteractionsreinforceeachother(Koh,Kim,B.Butler,&Bock,2007;EWenger,McDermott,&Snyder,2002).Relationshipsareestablishedthroughsocialpresence,empathy,andtrust,possiblybymeansofcommunitymanagersormoderators(Preece&Maloney‐Krichmar,2003).LearningisthecoreofLiLa.Aswementionedbefore,weaccommodatedifferentlearningscenarios,fromtraditionalclassroomteachingtoactiveandnetworkedlearning.Inthedesign,wefocusedonsupportingthedownloadprocess,thereservationprocess,andprovidingtemplatesforteachersonhowtousethematerialsintheirownteaching.Additionally,tosupportonlinelearning,wehavedevelopedanumberoftools,includingrecommendingtechnologies,ratingandpeer‐supportthroughforumsandaspecializedtutoringsystemtosupportlearnersduringlearningactivities.Also,automaticemailsaresentthatcontaininterestingcontributionsandcommentsoncontentonefollows.Thepicturebelowshowsa‘lesson’,oneofoursuggestedtools.


66/78

Figure 14 - Example lesson page

Thelessonpageoffersanyregisteredusertocreateanaggregationorsetofactivities.TheseactivitiescancompriseanIntroduction,Assignment,Assessment/Test,Groupdiscussion,andResources.Theserathergenericelementscanbecombinedintoalessonbyanyoneinanintuitiveauthoringinterface.Userscanthenmakeuseofthelesson,rateit,andrecommendittoothers,andthisinformationisbeingusedinordertoInordertomaintainthequality


67/78

StudentsandteacherswillonlykeeponvisitingLiLa,iftheybenefitfromit.Thebenefitsmayrelatewithlearning,butanimportantincentiveforOERprovidersisalsotheabilitytoconnectwithpeersandgetfeedback.Online,youareabletofollowpersons,soifsomeoneyoufindinterestingaddsanewresource,youwillbenotified.Offline,weorganizeseveralmeetingsandvisitconferencestoincreaseandimprovetheLiLanetwork.

Reputation & Identity ReputationrelatestotheconceptofonlineidentityandtrustandisaprimaryresearchfocusinWebscience2.Overviewofpastactionsandparticipantidentificationhelpstocreateandsustaintrustrelationshipsincommunities(Moore&Serva,2007).Trustformsthebasisofarelationshipandisoneofthemostimportantenablersofcommunityparticipation(Ardichvili,2008)andsharingknowledge(Choi,Kang,&Lee,2008).Reputationisusedasvirtualcurrency(WorldofWarcraft),canbeaconduitfortrust(eBay),andtheinformationstoredinreputationprofilesisusedforrecommendationsofpeopleandcontent.HowardRheingolddescribesstatus,recognitionorprestigeasakeymotivationofindividuals'contributionstothegroup(Rheingold,1993).Thisisespeciallytrueinknowledge‐sharingcommunities,andformsanimportantmotivationforpeopletocontribute(Lampel&Bhalla,2007;Pearson,2007).Recognitionsatisfiesaperson’sneedforself‐esteem,asdepictedinMaslow’shierarchyofneeds(Kollock,1999).Peopletendtocontributeknowledgewhenitenhancestheirprofessionalreputations(McLure‐Wasko&Faraj,2005a;McLure‐Wasko,Teigland,&Faraj,2009).Increasedrecognitionalsosupportsidentitybuildingandbelonging(Boumanetal.,2007).Visibilityofcontributionsissimilarlyimportant:ifpeopleseetheircontributionsbeingusedandre‐shared,theyaremoreinclinedtosharemoreinformation,especiallywhenthereissomerecognitionorpraiseorencouragement(M.L.Endres,S.P.Endres,Chowdhury,&Alam,2007).Manycommunitieshavethereforefeaturesthatshowthelevelofcontributionofindividualsinrankingorincreasedvisibility.InOpenSourcecommunities,programmersaremotivatednotonlybyintrinsicaspects,i.e.engaginginanactivityoutofpurepleasure,butalsohaveinmindthesignalingknowledgetopotentialemployersofprofit‐orientedcompanies(VonHippel,2005).ThemotivationofmanagersinOSSprojects,aswellasofprogrammerscanbetracedbacktocareerplans,whichmakesthereputationonehaswithinacommunitysoessential(Lattemann&Stieglitz,2005).Wesuggestareputationarchitecturethatmotivatesindividualstobeengagedinprocessesthatultimatelycontributetothesustainabilityoftheportal.ForLiLa,wearguethattheseincludeorganizationalprocessesofqualitymanagement,contributionandaggregationofcontent,creationofknowledge,andmanagingdiscussions.Also,helpingoutpeoplewithquestionsandprovidingfeedbackonrequestsareattributed.Thereputationarchitecturemonitorstheinteractions


68/78

andcontributions,andcreateshumanreadableprofilesofsomeone’sonlineactivityontheportal.Theinterpretationofthisactivitycanbedonebyteachers,students,orothers,andwilldependontheobjectivesforinterpretation.

Reciprocity & Feedback Inadditiontoreputation,thereisreciprocity,thesocialnormthatdescribestheexpectationofpeopletorespondtoeachotherinkind,bothinapositiveandnegativesense.Peopleexpectsomethingtogetinreturnfromothers.Eventhoughreciprocityisnotalwaysanessentialelement(McLure‐Wasko&Faraj,2005b),manyonlinecommunitiesandsocialnetworksitesencouragereciprocitywithrewardsandacknowledgehelpfulresponses(Preece&Maloney‐Krichmar,2003).Wehavesuggestedafeedbacktoolforteacherstosharetheirexperiencesonexperimentsandpedagogy.Teachers,asconsumersofremoteexperiments,areaskedtoreviewtheusefulnessandqualityofthedownloadedmaterials.Themanagementofqualityofonlineresourcesisembeddedinthedownloadprocess:theteacherisaskedtogivesomeinformationaboutcourseandhowhe/shecanbecontacted.Throughfeedbackbyteachers,goodresourcesaremoreeasilyfoundthanthebadones.Studentscanaskquestionsandengageindiscussionsabouttheoreticalorpracticalissues.RegisteredLiLamembersarenotifiedofchangesandnewdiscussions,responses,andaddedcontent.Ifsomeonepostsaquestion,heorsheexpectstogetaresponseintime.Hence,eachpersonhasapersonalWatchlist,andisnotifiedthroughe‐mailwithaweeklydigestofwhathappenedonLiLa.Dependingontheresultsofthesurveyamongstpotentialcontentproviders,wewilldevelopstandardizedcontractsforcontentproviders.Thesecontractswillincluderulesforpreferentialtreatmentwithregardtotheuseofotherremoteexperiments

Common ground Commongroundtheoryprovidesaframeworkforunderstandinghowtwopeopleorasmallgroupdevelopsharedunderstandinginaconversation(ClarkandBrennan,1991).Groundingistheprocessofacquiringcommonunderstanding,whichisimportantforcreatingtrustandestablishingeffectivecommunication.Co‐presence,visibility,audibility,co‐temporality,simultaneity,sequentiality,reviewability,andrevisabilityarefactorsthatinfluencethegroundingprocess(Preece&Maloney‐Krichmar,2003).Itisthereforeinfluencedbyboththecommunicationtaskandthemedium.Forinstance,inachatprogramitcanbedifficulttotaketurns,whichisclearerinamorestaticdiscussionboard.Organizingofflinemeetingsisanimportantinstrumenttoestablishcommongroundandincreaseparticipation,socialcohesionandbelonging.Eachcommunityhastofinditsownrhythmofofflineevents,onlinemeetings,newinformation,andfinditsappropriatepaceovertime(P.Johnson‐Lenz&T.Johnson‐Lenz,1991).


69/78

CreatingacommongroundisadifficultissueforaninternationalendeavourasLiLa.Groundingoccursattypical“commongrounds”,suchasduringtraditionaleducationatuniversities.TheLiLaportalshouldofferthepossibilitytocreategroupswithcommunicationtoolsinordertohaveprivateconversations.

Privacy Communityspacesandsocialnetworkingsitestypicallyallowuserstomanagetheironlinepresence.Theycanestablishprivateorsemi‐publicgroupstodiscussinarestrictedsetting,startprivatediscussions,andareabletohidespecificdatafromnon‐membersorspecifiedusers(EWenger,McDermott,&Snyder,2002).Groundingandtheexplorationofeachother’sinterests,anddiscoveryofsimilaritiesissupportedbyprivatespacesandthementioningofpeople’sexpertiseonthepersonalprofilepage.

Sense of community & Accountability A“senseofcommunity”hasdifferentdimensions,includingfeelingsofmembership,feelingsofinfluence,integrationandfulfilmentofneeds,andsharedemotionalconnection(McMillan&Chavis,1986).Thepopularityofsocialnetworkingsitesshowthatpeoplearelikelytoconnectwithpeopletheyknoworfeelaffiliatedwiththroughasharedinterest.Onthetechnicallevel,thisrequiresnetworkingpossibilities,andpeopletodisclosetheirpersonalinformation.BecausenoteveryoneishappywithpersonalinformationbeingavailableontheInternet,privacyissuesareveryimportant.Manysitesofferthepossibilitiestoindicatecontactpreferencesandthevisibilityofpersonalinformation.Havingapersonalprofilealsomeansthatmisbehaviourcanbetracedback,andtheculpritsremovedfromtheenvironment.Obviously,inordertoengageinconversationsonLiLaandtocontribute,onehastoregister.Personalprofilingfacilitatesbothnetworkingandaccountability.Withsufficienthigh‐qualitycontentinadomain,asenseofcommunitywillemergethatwillsetstandardsonqualityandbehaviour.

Newcomers Inmanyonlinecommunities,mostactivitycomesfromofasmallcoregroupofexperiencedpeople.Itcanbedifficultfornewcomerstoparticipateandtohaveenoughconfidencetocontribute(self‐efficacy,seenextparagraph).Newcomers,therefore,shouldbetreatedcarefullyandgivenconsiderableattention.Administratorsortechnologyshouldbefocusedonsupportingearlyinteractions(Burke,Marlow,&Lento,2009).Newcomerswhowitnessfriendsorrelativescontributing,becomeaccustomedtosharingcontent(inasocialandtechnicalsense)andcontinuetocontributethemselves.Whenpeoplesignup,inLiLaweaskforsomeinformation,includingbackgroundandaffiliation.Usingtheaffiliationofaperson,wecanconnectnewcomerswithactivemembersandothernewcomers,makingnewcomersmorecomfortable.Also,wedevelopedastaticinformationpagescontainingtherelevantinformationtobeabletocontributeormakeuseofLiLa.


70/78

Self‐efficacy & Social comparison Theperceptionpeoplehaveaboutthemselvesandtheirabilitytoperformaspecifictaskiscalledself‐efficacy.Self‐efficacyisthecentralcognitivemediatorofthemotivationalprocess(Bandura,1997).Inotherwords,ifapersondoesnothaveapositiveperceptionabouthisorherabilitytodoorcontributesomething,the(s)hewillnotdoit.Thisalsoappliestoknowledgesharing(M.L.Endres,S.P.Endres,Chowdhury,&Alam,2007).Peoplearemorelikelytoshareknowledgewhentheyseepeersdoingit.Also,insocialcomparisons,self‐efficacymayincreaseandtherewiththelikelinessofsharing.Nexttoone’sperceptionofownskills,beliefineachother’sskillsandexpertiseincreasestheintentiontoshareindividualknowledge(Chen,Harper,Konstan,&Li,2009;Ludford,Cosley,Frankowski,&Terveen,2004).Theearliermentionedrecognitionandpraiseissimilarlyimportant.LiLamembersmustbeabletocontributeinsmall,easysteps.Forexample,addingacommentisveryeasy,andcangivesomeonetheconfidenceofstartingadiscussion,orreviewingasolution.Additionally,userscansimplyindicatethattheyfindaresource,commentorexperimentuseful.Whenpeoplegetpositivefeedback,andarerecognizedfortheircontributions,theyaremorelikelytocontribute.

8.2.3 Conclusions Intheabove,weuseaframeworkofsocialmechanismstogivedirectiontothedesignoftheLiLaportal.Theframeworksupportsdesigningformotivationbyfocusingonsocialandpsychologicalfactorsthatinfluencethewaypeoplebehaveandshareinformationonline.InprojectswhereOpenEducationalResourcesmustcontinuouslybecontributed,created,updated,managed,relianceonacentralauthorityiscostlyandsometimesnotfeasible.Welinkedthisproblemwithcurrentapproachesonlearning,whichaddressamoreactive,creative,andconversationalwayoflearning.Inadditiontosupportforindividualstoconnect,discuss,assessandcreatelearningmaterials,anOERprojectmustalsoaddresstheirmotivationtocommunicate,collaborateandlearn.Withsocialmechanisms,wecanlookforsolutionsandsupportourdesignchoices.InourfurtherresearchonLiLa,wewillfocusonevaluatingtheeffectivenessofanddefiningthesocialmechanisms.Evaluatingtheuseoftheportalandthebehavioroftheuserswillbecomeacrucialpartoftheonlineenvironmentitselfandthusanadditionalfunctionalitytofostermotivationwithprovidingfeedbacktotheusers.

8.3 The LiLa interface Intheprevioussections,wehaveseenhowtheLiLaportalwilleventuallylooklike.Thedarkcolorsshowtradition,whichisputinamodernjacket.Scienceisaseriousdiscipline,butwemightaswellmakeitfunandattractive.Theplacementofmenusandcombinationsofcolorsiswell‐thoughtouttogivetheend‐useragoodfirstimpression.Wesawthatintheprevioussectionthatthatisveryimportant.


71/78

BelowweshowonemorepagedesignmadebythegraphicaluserinterfacedesignerintheDelftteam.

Figure 15 - Explore Lila page


72/78

9 Concluding remarks TheresponsibilitiesofWP3includethedevelopmentofpedagogicalstrategiesandguidelinesfordesigning,developingandusinglearningactivities.Thisincludesthecreationofastyleguideandauniforminterfaceforthedifferentelementsandfunctionalitiesintheportal.Didacticalguidelinesaredevelopedandmodelstosupportthecreationandadaptationoflearningcontent.Wehavefocusedondevelopingadesignfortheportal,functionalaswellasgraphical,thatsupportsteachersandstudentstocreateandsharenewmaterials,discussaboutthem,andtoexplorenewcontent.Wealsodevelopedadeveloper’sguidetoassistteachersandstudentassistantsinsettingupaneffectivelearningenvironmentorremoteexperimentfortheirstudents.Muchofthetipswillbesharebymeansofdownloadabledocumentsaswellasembeddedasmicro‐teachingentitiesintheportal.Forexample,intheauthoringenvironmentwhereusersareabletocreatelessons,tipscanbeshowntohelpthelessoncreatorfromapedagogicalperspective.Wehavenotexcludedanypedagogicalapproach,anddevelopedtoolsthatsupportmostcommontraditionalandmorerecentandcollaborativelearningscenarios.InthissecondversionofthepedagogicaldeliverablewehavedescribedthevariousstepswehaveundertakentocometoapedagogicallysoundandacceptedframeworkanddesigntoimplementtheLiLaportal.

10 Literature

Ackerman,M.,Carroll,J.M.,Demichelis,G.,Huysman,M.,Wellman,B.,&Wulf,V.(2004).CommunitiesandTechnologies:AnApproachtoFosterSocialCapital?CSCW04,406‐408.

Allert,H.(2004).CoherentSocialSystemsforLearning:AnApproachforContextualizedandCommunityCentredMetadata.JournalofInteractiveMediainEducation,2,1‐30.

Amory,A.,&Seagram,R.(n.d.).Educationalgamemodels:conceptualizationandevaluation.JournalofHigherEducation,17(2),206–217.

Anderson,J.R.(1982).Acquisitioncognitiveskills.Psychologicalreview,89(4),369‐406.doi:0033‐295X/82/8904‐0369.

Ardichvili,A.(2008).LearningandKnowledgeSharinginVirtualCommunitiesofPractice:Motivators,Barriers,andEnablers.AdvancesinDevelopingHumanResources,10(4),541‐554.doi:10.1177/1523422308319536.

Bandura,A.(1997).Self‐Efficacy:TheExerciseofControl(1sted.).WorthPublishers.


73/78

Berlanga,A.,Rusman,E.,Bitter‐Rijpkema,M.,&Sloep,P.(2009).GuidelinestoFosterInteractioninOnlineCommunities.InR.Koper(Ed.),LearningNetworkServicesforProfessionalDevelopment(pp.27‐42).Berlin,Heidelberg:Springer.doi:10.1007/978‐3‐642‐00978‐5_3.

Bouman,W.,Hoogenboom,T.,Jansen,R.,Schoondorp,M.,Bruin,B.de,&Huizing,A.(2007).Therealmofsociality:notesonthedesignofsocialsoftware.Amsterdam.

Bransford,J.,Brown,A.,&Cocking,R.(1999).Howpeoplelearn:Brain,mind,experience,andschool.WashingtonDC:NationalAcademiesPress.

Brown,J.S.,&Adler,R.P.(2008).Mindsonfire:Openeducation,thelongtail,andlearning2.0.EducauseReview,43(1),16.Educause.

Bruner,J.(1991).Thenarrativeconstructionofreality.Criticalinquiry,18(1),1–21.JSTOR.

Burke,M.,Marlow,C.,&Lento,T.(2009).Feedme:motivatingnewcomercontributioninsocialnetworksites.Proceedingsofthe27thinternationalconferenceonHumanfactorsincomputingsystems(p.945–954).ACM.

Butler,B.S.(1999,November).WhenisaGroupNotaGroup:AnEmpiricalExaminationofMetaphorsforOnlineSocialStructure.Pittsburgh.doi:10.1111/j.1467‐629X.1980.tb00220.x.

Caswell,T.,Henson,S.,Jensen,M.,&Wiley,D.(2008).OpenEducationalResources:Enablinguniversaleducation.InternationalReviewofResearchinOpenandDistanceLearning,9(1),1‐11.

Chen,Y.,Harper,F.M.,Konstan,J.,&Li,S.X.(2009).SocialComparisonsandContributionstoOnlineCommunities:AFieldExperimentonMovieLens.AmericanEconomicReview,1‐51.

Choi,S.Y.,Kang,Y.S.,&Lee,H.(2008).Theeffectsofsocio‐technicalenablersonknowledgesharing:anexploratoryexamination.JournalofInformationScience,34(5),742‐754.doi:10.1177/0165551507087710.

Cole,B.R.(1996).CharacterizingOn‐lineCommunication:AFirstStep.

Davidson,C.N.,&Goldberg,D.T.(2009).Thefutureoflearninginstitutionsinadigitalage.TheMITPress(p.81).Cambridge,MA:TheMITPress.

DerZanden,P.van.(2009).TheFacilitatingUniversity.books.google.com(p.311).Delft:EburonUitgeverijBV.

Downes,S.(2005).E‐learning2.0.eLearn,2005(10),1.doi:10.1145/1104966.1104968.


74/78

Endres,M.L.,Endres,S.P.,Chowdhury,S.K.,&Alam,I.(2007).Tacitknowledgesharing,self‐efficacytheory,andapplicationtotheOpenSourceCommunity.JournalofKnowledgeManagement,11(3),92‐103.

Ericsson,K.A.,&Charness,N.(1994).Expertperformance:Itsstructureandacquisition.Americanpsychologist,49(8),725–747.

Garfield,S.(2006).Tenreasonswhypeopledonʼtsharetheirknowledge.KMReview,9(2),10‐11.

Groot,A.de.(1965).ThoughtandChoiceinChess(rev.translation).MoutonandCompany,TheHague.

Hennis,T.A.(2009a).Platformvoorpromovendi‐Valkuilenopdewerkplaats.IntellektueelKapitaal,(3),40‐42.Rotterdam.

Hennis,T.A.(2009b).Platformvoorpromovendi‐Lessonslearnedleidttotachtstappenplan.IntellektueelKapitaal,(4),36‐40.Rotterdam.

Hennis,T.A.,&Kolfschoten,G.L.(2010).UnderstandingSocialMechanismsinOnlineCommunities.InG.D.Vreede(Ed.),GroupDecisionandNegotiation2010(p.153).Delft,theNetherlands.

Hennis,T.A.,&Lukosch,H.(2011).SOCIALMECHANISMSTOMOTIVATELEARNINGWITHREMOTEEXPERIMENTS‐Designchoicestofosteronlinepeer‐basedlearning(unpublished).CSEDU2011.

Hout‐Wolters,B.V.,Simons,R.,&Volet,S.(2000).ActiveLearning:Self‐directedlearningandindependentwork.InR.‐J.Simons(Ed.),Springer(pp.21‐36).KluwerAcademicPublishers.

Hylén,J.(2007).GivingKnowledgeforFree:TheEmergenceofOpenEducationalResources.Paris.

Hylén,J.(2006).Openeducationalresources:Opportunitiesandchallenges.OpenEducation(p.11).Paris.

Iiyoshi,T.,&Kumar,M.(2008).Openingupeducation:thecollectiveadvancementofeducationthroughopentechnology,opencontent,andopenknowledge.(ToruIiyoshi&M.S.V.Kumar,Eds.),478.Cambridge,MA:MITPress.

Illeris,K.(2003).Towardsacontemporaryandcomprehensivetheoryoflearning.InternationalJournalofLifelongEducation,22(4),396–406.Routledge.

Johnson‐Lenz,P.,&Johnson‐Lenz,T.(1991).Post‐mechanisticgroupwareprimitives:rhythms,boundariesandcontainers.InternationalJournalofMan‐Machinestudies,34(3),395‐417.


75/78

Jones,C.,&Steeples,C.(2001).Perspectivesandissuesinnetworkedlearning.Networkedlearning(p.14).Springer‐VerlagNewYork,Inc.

Klotz,U.(1999).ThechallengesoftheNewEconomy,1‐24.

Koh,J.,Kim,Y.G.,Butler,B.,&Bock,G.W.(2007).Encouragingparticipationinvirtualcommunities.CommunicationsoftheACM,50(2),68‐73.ACM.

Kollock,P.(1999).TheEconomiesofOnlineCooperation:GiftsandPublicGoodsinCyberspace.InM.Smith&P.Kollock(Eds.),Communitiesincyberspace.

Laat,M.D.E.,&Lally,V.I.C.(2003).Complexity,theoryandpraxis:Researchingcollaborativelearningandtutoringprocessesinanetworkedlearningcommunity,7‐39.

Laat,M.D.(2006).NetworkedLearning.

Lampel,J.,&Bhalla,A.(2007).TheRoleofStatusSeekinginOnlineCommunities:GivingtheGiftofExperience.JournalofComputer‐MediatedCommunication,12(2),article5.

Lattemann,C.,&Stieglitz,S.(2005).FrameworkforGovernanceinOpenSourceCommunities.Proceedingsofthe38thAnnualHawaiiInternationalConferenceonSystemSciences,00(C),192a‐192a.Ieee.doi:10.1109/HICSS.2005.278.

Lave,J.(1988).Cognitioninpractice:Mind,mathematics,andcultureineverydaylife.CambridgeUnivPr.

Lave,J.,&Wenger,E.(1991).Situatedlearning:Legitimateperipheralparticipation.CambridgeUnivPr.

Ludford,P.J.,Cosley,D.,Frankowski,D.,&Terveen,L.(2004).Thinkdifferent:increasingonlinecommunityparticipationusinguniquenessandgroupdissimilarity.ProceedingsoftheSIGCHIconferenceonHumanFactorsincomputingsystems(pp.631‐638).NewYork:ACM.doi:http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/985692.985772.

McLure‐Wasko,M.,&Faraj,S.(2005a).WhyshouldIshare?Examiningsocialcapitalandknowledgecontributioninelectronicnetworksofpractice.MISQuarterly,29(1),35‐57.

McLure‐Wasko,M.,&Faraj,S.(2005b).WhyShouldIShare?ExaminingSocialCapitalandKnowledgeContributioninElectronicNetworksofPractice.MISQuarterly,29(1).

McLure‐Wasko,M.,Teigland,R.,&Faraj,S.(2009).Theprovisionofonlinepublicgoods:Examiningsocialstructureinanelectronicnetworkofpractice.


76/78

DecisionSupportSystems,47,254‐265.Elsevier.doi:10.1016/j.dss.2009.02.012.

McMillan,D.,&Chavis,D.(1986).Senseofcommunity:Adefinitionandtheory.JournalofCommunityPsychology,14(1),6‐23.

Moore,T.D.,&Serva,M.A.(2007).UnderstandingMemberMotivationforContributingtoDifferentTypesofVirtualCommunities:AProposedFramework.SIGMIS‐CPR’07:Proceedingsofthe2007ACMSIGMISCPRconferenceon2007computerpersonneldoctoralconsortiumandresearchconference(pp.153‐158).NewYork:ACM.doi:http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/1235000.1235035.

Newell,A.,&Simon,H.A.(1972).Humanproblemsolving.EnglewoodCliffs,NJ:Prentice‐Hall.

Norman,D.a.(1980).TwelveIssuesforCognitiveScience.CognitiveScience,4(1),1‐32.doi:10.1207/s15516709cog0401_1.

Ortega,F.,Gonzalez‐Barahona,J.M.,&Robles,G.(2008).OntheinequalityofcontributionstoWikipedia.Proceedingsofthe41stAnnualHawaiiInternationalConferenceonSystemSciences.

Paavola,S.,Lipponen,L.,&Hakkarainen,K.(2004).ModelsofInnovativeKnowledgeCommunitiesandThreeMetaphorsofLearning.ReviewofEducationalResearch,74(4),557‐576.doi:10.3102/00346543074004557.

Paris,S.,&Winograd,P.(2003).Theroleofself‐regulatedlearningincontextualteaching:Principlesandpracticesforteacherpreparation.PreparingTeacherstoUseContextualTeachingandLearningStrategiestoImproveStudentSuccessinandbeyondSchool.

Pascual,M.,Geser,G.,Gruber,A.,Forschungsgesellschaft,S.R.,Baumgartner,P.,Naust‐,V.,etal.(2006).Theconceptofopeneducationalresourcesasinstrumentforimplementinglifelonglearningstrategiesathigherandfurthereducationinstitutions.Source,1‐8.

Pearson,E.(2007).Digitalgifts:ParticipationandgiftexchangeinLivejournalcommunities.FirstMonday,12(5).

Piaget,J.,&Cook,M.(1952).Theoriginsofintelligenceinchildren.InternationalUniversitiesPressNewYork.

Preece,J.,&Maloney‐Krichmar,D.(2003).Onlinecommunities:focusingonsociabilityandusability.InJ.Jacko&A.Sears(Eds.),Handbookofhuman‐computerinteraction(p.596–620).Mahwah,NewJersey:LawrenceErlbaumAssociatesInc.Publishers.


77/78

Preece,J.,&Maloney‐Krichmar,D.(2005).Onlinecommunities:Design,theory,andpractice.JournalofComputer‐MediatedCommunication,10(4).

Rashid,A.M.,Ling,K.,Tassone,R.D.,Resnick,P.,Kraut,R.,&Riedl,J.(2006).Motivatingparticipationbydisplayingthevalueofcontribution.ProceedingsoftheSIGCHIconferenceonHumanFactorsincomputingsystems‐CHI’06(p.955).NewYork,NewYork,USA:ACMPress.doi:10.1145/1124772.1124915.

Rheingold,H.L.(1993).VirtualCommunitiesandtheWELL.GNNMagazine,(1).

Rieber,L.P.(1996).Seriouslyconsideringplay:Designinginteractivelearningenvironmentsbasedontheblendingofmicroworlds,simulations,andgames.Educationaltechnologyresearchanddevelopment,44(2),43–58.Springer.

Rogoff,B.(1990).Apprenticeshipinthinking:Cognitivedevelopmentinsocialcontext.

Siemens,G.(2005).Connectivism‐Alearningtheoryforthedigitalage.InternationalJournalofInstructionalTechnologyandDistanceLearning,2(1),3–10.Citeseer.

Siemens,G.(2006).Knowingknowledge.Lulu.com.

Skinner,B.(1950).Aretheoriesoflearningnecessary?.Psychologicalreview,57(4),193–216.

Soekijad,M.,Huisin’tVeld,M.aa,&Enserink,B.(2004).Learningandknowledgeprocessesininter‐organizationalcommunitiesofpractice.KnowledgeandProcessManagement,11(1),3‐12.doi:10.1002/kpm.191.

Stahl,G.(2003).Meaningandinterpretationincollaboration.InB.Wasson,S.Ludvigsen,&U.Hoppe(Eds.),DesigningforChangeinNetworkedLearningEnvironments:ProceedingsoftheInternationalConferenceonComputerSupportforCollaborativeLearning(CSCL’03)(pp.523‐532).Bergen:KluwerAcademicPublishers.

Stahl,Gerry,Koschmann,T.,&Suthers,D.(1999).Computer‐supportedcollaborativelearning:Anhistoricalperspective.InS.Sawyer(Ed.),Cambridgehandbookofthelearningsciences(Vol.8).Cambridge,UK:CambridgeUniversityPress.

Thorndike,E.L.(1913).Anintroductiontothetheoryofmentalandsocialmeasurements.TeacherʼsCollege,ColumbiaUniversity.

Tudge,J.,&Rogoff,B.(1999).Peerinfluencesoncognitivedevelopment:PiagetianandVygotskianperspectives.LevVygotsky:Criticalassessments.


78/78

Veen,W.,Lukosch,H.,&Vries,P.D.(2008).ImprovingorganizationallearningthroughNetworkedLearning.GI2008(pp.22‐31).

Veen,W.,Staalduinen,J.‐P.V.,&Hennis,T.A.(2010).Informalself‐regulatedlearningincorporateorganizations(submitted).InG.Dettori&D.Persico(Eds.),FosteringSelf‐regulatedlearningthroughICTs(forthcoming).Genova,Italy:InstituteforEducationalTechnologiesItalyʼsNationalResearchCouncil.

Veldhuis‐Diermanse,A.E.,Biemans,H.J.A.,Mulder,M.,&Mahdizadeh,H.(2006).AnalysingLearningProcessesandQualityofKnowledgeConstructioninNetworkedLearning.TheJournalofAgriculturalEducationandExtension,12(1),41‐57.Routledge.doi:10.1080/13892240600740894.

VonHippel,E.(2005).Democratizinginnovation(1sted.,p.202).Cambridge,MA:theMITPress.

Vries,P.D.(2008).NetworkedLearningforLifelongLearners.Journalofdocumentation(p.26).Delft.

Vygotsky,L.,&Cole,M.(1978).Mindinsociety:Thedevelopmentofhigherpsychologicalprocesses.

Wenger,E,McDermott,R.,&Snyder,W.(2002).Cultivatingcommunitiesofpractice:Aguidetomanagingknowledge(p.304).Boston,MA:HBSPress.

Wenger,Etienne.(2000).Communitiesofpracticeandsociallearningsystems.Organization,7(2),225‐246.

Wenger,Etienne,White,N.,&Smith,J.D.(2009).DigitalHabitats;StewardingTechnologyforCommunities(1sted.,p.250).Portland:CPsquare.

Wiley,D.A.,&Edwards,E.K.(2002).Onlineself‐organizingsocialsystems:Thedecentralizedfutureofonlinelearning.QuarterlyReviewofDistanceEducation,3(1),33.

Documents

Annex5-D3-2-new Pedagogical Report · Pedagogical Strategy D3.2 (new ‐ 2010.12.01) 1/78 ECP‐2008‐EDU‐428037 LiLa – Library of Labs D3.2 – Pedagogical report Deliverable