I'm starting to think I could spend the entire 120 hours for this particular master course on reading only - and then I still would have covered only a part of the available relevant literature. I bet the minute I'm typing this, somebody somewhere is submitting a report to a journal or uploading an article online that I cannot afford to omit in my study.
Last week I came across this SIG (Special Interest Group) on Mobile Learning, called Kaleidoscope. How come I didn't find out before? Anyway, they put out this 'Report on literature on mobile learning, science and collaborative activity' (main author Giasemi Vavoula), which means another 100 pages to read... Not to mention the 'CSCL Alpine Rendez-Vous' they organised, with (among other stuff) a 100 pages manual to a workshop called 'Beyond Mobile Learning'. All of these written by the best on mobile learning, I've come to recognise their names.
So I'm suffering from information overload and could do with a word from my coach. Christian, where are you? I need some guidance here to find a red thread, a theme to work on.
I am not being entirely honest here. I didn't just stumble upon the SIG. In my initial list of reports on mobile learning projects, there was one article about adult learners, dealing with 'intentional informal learning'. This means that the learning process and the learning goal are explicitly learner defined (within informal learning). A matrix to visualise a typology of learning as introduced by Vavoula was shown and this caught my attention.
Vavoula uses three types of learning:
intentional, formal learning - process and goal are explicitly teacher defined
intentional, informal learning - process and goal are explicitly learner defined
unintentional, informal learning - process is non-prescribed, goal is unspecified
I'm taking this a bit further next and hope to catch some important papers on this issue from the Kaleidscope SIG.
Friday, 5 February 2010
Friday, 29 January 2010
Transition or merely substitution - again
Upon reading through the various articles on mobile learning studies, it struck me how many still suffer from what I would call 'Ally-syndrome'. Mohamed Ally (Athabasca Uni, Canada) talks/writes about the benefits of transition when it comes to mobile learning but his many examples of accomplished projects show merely substitution of existing didactic materials onto a mobile medium.
I do like Ally's 'aspects of mobile learning', that seem to hint in the direction of a separate mobile didactic. Those aspects in ascending order of complexity:
object (using buttons)
linearity (putting things in order)
support
update (keeping track)
construct
reflective
simulation
hyperlinked (synthesise information)
non-immersive contextual
immersive contextual (virtual)
And so again I found mentions like 'for courses that offer Web-based materials, redesigning is necessary if they are to be accessed by mobile devices' (Thornton & Houser, 2005). Redesigning is substitution, from Web-based materials to mobile devices as much as from books to Web-based materials. Mobile learning is about more than just changing the medium. It could provide a starting point for a different view on learning and teaching.
Oh, and by the way - the concert last Wednesday was absolutely brilliant! Loved that world premiere of 'Impossible Things', you could hear a pin drop through all the 30 minutes of it, mesmerising and powerful stuff.
I do like Ally's 'aspects of mobile learning', that seem to hint in the direction of a separate mobile didactic. Those aspects in ascending order of complexity:
object (using buttons)
linearity (putting things in order)
support
update (keeping track)
construct
reflective
simulation
hyperlinked (synthesise information)
non-immersive contextual
immersive contextual (virtual)
And so again I found mentions like 'for courses that offer Web-based materials, redesigning is necessary if they are to be accessed by mobile devices' (Thornton & Houser, 2005). Redesigning is substitution, from Web-based materials to mobile devices as much as from books to Web-based materials. Mobile learning is about more than just changing the medium. It could provide a starting point for a different view on learning and teaching.
Oh, and by the way - the concert last Wednesday was absolutely brilliant! Loved that world premiere of 'Impossible Things', you could hear a pin drop through all the 30 minutes of it, mesmerising and powerful stuff.
Tuesday, 26 January 2010
Britten in America
A little diversion...
So looking forward to seeing Nico Muhly for the third time in just over two months! And in the beautiful Muziekcentrum in Eindhoven again (less than an hour's drive away), where Nico is composer-in-residence for a few years. More info here!
"A programme of music from both sides of the Atlantic that delves into the subtle and rich sonorities of strings and voice. This concert offers a rare opportunity to hear celebrated tenor, Mark Padmore paired with the exuberant and imaginative violinist Pekka Kuusisto in a new work by Nico Muhly. A protégé of Philip Glass, Nico Muhly is gaining a reputation as being one of the most impressive innovators of new music, effortlessly crossing the boundaries between classical and pop.(...)" Source
So looking forward to seeing Nico Muhly for the third time in just over two months! And in the beautiful Muziekcentrum in Eindhoven again (less than an hour's drive away), where Nico is composer-in-residence for a few years. More info here!
Friday, 22 January 2010
Struggling with the matrix of dependent/independent
Reading through reports of mobile learning projects, I find more questions than answers regarding my intended framework. To establish whether a setting is dependent or independent, one has to know what 'setting' stands for. Location can mean many things; it can have a geographical connotation or perhaps be more about demographics.
A mobile language learning project in Japan could only work there because of the very high percentage (99 percent) of students using their mobile phones for e-mailing (at very low costs, compared to the US & Europe). Does that make it setting dependent? The same project could be used anywhere but would require a lot more preparation and additional funds. What exactly is 'setting' when context is everything? (Sharples, 2008).
Same with devices. Is a mobile learning project considered 'device dependent' if it can be used on a mobile phone only? Or should this be narrowed down so that it's 'device dependent' if it can only be used on e.g. a Nokia n900?
Of course the element of didactic dependency/independency is even more complicated. How is didactics defined?
There's a contradiction in the notion of 'Ad Hoc & Mobile Classrooms'(Chang et al, 2003). 'Ad Hoc and mobile' points to setting independency, while 'classrooms' indicates didactic dependency, purely from its terminology. The teacher and pupils are provided with all learning aids they have in a normal classroom setting. It's like a snake biting its own tail because if the setting is the same in both mobile and normal classroom, then the project is setting dependent.
Looking into different ways of categorizing next, very interesting insights there.
A mobile language learning project in Japan could only work there because of the very high percentage (99 percent) of students using their mobile phones for e-mailing (at very low costs, compared to the US & Europe). Does that make it setting dependent? The same project could be used anywhere but would require a lot more preparation and additional funds. What exactly is 'setting' when context is everything? (Sharples, 2008).
Same with devices. Is a mobile learning project considered 'device dependent' if it can be used on a mobile phone only? Or should this be narrowed down so that it's 'device dependent' if it can only be used on e.g. a Nokia n900?
Of course the element of didactic dependency/independency is even more complicated. How is didactics defined?
There's a contradiction in the notion of 'Ad Hoc & Mobile Classrooms'(Chang et al, 2003). 'Ad Hoc and mobile' points to setting independency, while 'classrooms' indicates didactic dependency, purely from its terminology. The teacher and pupils are provided with all learning aids they have in a normal classroom setting. It's like a snake biting its own tail because if the setting is the same in both mobile and normal classroom, then the project is setting dependent.
Looking into different ways of categorizing next, very interesting insights there.
Friday, 15 January 2010
A different framework
About this different framework, used by Frohberg, Goeth and Schwabe (Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 2009), to categorise Mobile Learning projects. First they claim to have searched every relevant project to date, where I will only review a limited number of projects (due to limited time for the module). Then they start from the Task Model for Mobile Learners (Taylor, 2006 and Sharples 2007), designed to structure and analyse Mobile Learning. What the model does (more so than the activity theory it was rooted in), is taking into consideration the complex interdepencies and dialectic of learning and technology. Which is exactly what I aim to do when using either didactic & setting or didactic & device together with dependent/independent in my framework (which looks quite simplified compared to the framework Frohberg et al. use).
Can't seem to be able to copy the model here but it comprises of a triangle with 'Tool' at the top corner and 'Control' & 'Communication' at the base corners. There are lines from each corner to the middle of the opposite triangle side and on these 3 new points are placed 'Subject' (between Tool & Control), 'Context' (between Control & Communication) and 'Object' (between Communication & Tool). That way, all 6 factors are connected. All items are viewed from a technological as well as a semiotic angle. Hope you get an idea from this description (draw it!).
Frohberg et al. then move on to make tables for all 6 factors, arranging the reviewed projects on Mobile Learning on a scale from 1 to 5. For example, for the factor 'Control'(regarded as responsibility for learning process and goal), the scale ranges from 'Full teacher control' to 'Full learner control', while for the factor 'Tool', the scale ranges from 'Content delivery' tot 'Content construction'.
The number of projects is mentioned for each category of the scale accordingly. It comes as no surprise that most projects are to be found in the lower categories but Frohberg doesn't leave it at that. He argues why and how a lot could be gained by having more projects in the higher categories (apart from the factor 'Control' which would have its optimal level in between both extremes), and goes on to give examples of projects for each category.
I hope I will be able to use some of this in my own framework. Some more reading to do...
Can't seem to be able to copy the model here but it comprises of a triangle with 'Tool' at the top corner and 'Control' & 'Communication' at the base corners. There are lines from each corner to the middle of the opposite triangle side and on these 3 new points are placed 'Subject' (between Tool & Control), 'Context' (between Control & Communication) and 'Object' (between Communication & Tool). That way, all 6 factors are connected. All items are viewed from a technological as well as a semiotic angle. Hope you get an idea from this description (draw it!).
Frohberg et al. then move on to make tables for all 6 factors, arranging the reviewed projects on Mobile Learning on a scale from 1 to 5. For example, for the factor 'Control'(regarded as responsibility for learning process and goal), the scale ranges from 'Full teacher control' to 'Full learner control', while for the factor 'Tool', the scale ranges from 'Content delivery' tot 'Content construction'.
The number of projects is mentioned for each category of the scale accordingly. It comes as no surprise that most projects are to be found in the lower categories but Frohberg doesn't leave it at that. He argues why and how a lot could be gained by having more projects in the higher categories (apart from the factor 'Control' which would have its optimal level in between both extremes), and goes on to give examples of projects for each category.
I hope I will be able to use some of this in my own framework. Some more reading to do...
Monday, 11 January 2010
Proposal - the second part
Resuming where I left off:
There are recurring themes of overall flexibility, immediacy and continuous ‘fluidity’ discernible throughout the aforementioned eight principles. Nothing is predisposed or fixed; the user/learner decides. Not only does the learner expect method and means to be adaptable to the given task (and vice versa), he also interacts with, and adapts to both method and means himself. This relates to a study currently conducted by Dirk Börner (CELSTEC Lab) on the "Educational problem of mobile learning”.
I would like to research whether this ninth principle of "Iterative negotiating in context” might be the specific principle to mobile learning in education. My main research question is: What is specific to mobile learning in education?
9. Iterative negotiating in context: Adjusting and revising task as well as means, in a cyclic process of negotiation and mutually dependent development.
Method
In order to find out what is specific to mobile learning in education, I will conduct a literature survey into the use of these eight principles in existing publications. There are three dimensions to mobile learning: didactic, device and setting, and publications on the subject will relate to any of these dimensions or not (dependent or independent). I will choose two dimensions and categorise publications into four quadrants, according to possible combinations of these features (e.g. didactic & setting, as below). This way, I hope to identify patterns (or gaps) in existing literature about mobile learning.
The four quadrants are:
didactic dependent/ setting dependent
didactic independent/ setting dependent
didactic dependent/ setting independent
didactic independent/ setting independent
Furthermore, I will explore current studies on this subject and technologies used at the CELSTEC Lab. Clustering of these findings will enable me to prepare relevant questions for interviews with experts in the Lab. After processing the information data from the expert interviews and relating these once more to the patterns emerging from the dimensions matrix, I will be able to answer my research question on what is specific to mobile learning in education.
Process
1. Literature Study into distinction between digital learning didactics an mobile learning didactics, with a focus on the selected dimensions
2. Integration with the educational problems study done by the CELSTEC Lab - exploring technologies on site
3. Clustering the findings for preparing the expert interviews
4. Guideline-based expert interviews at the lab, focusing on the clusters identified in step 1 and 2.
Course goals
- gain insight into digital didactics and their underlying principles
- find distinctions between didactics for digital learning and mobile learning
- establish what is specific for mobile learning and possible usefulness and validity of the ninth principle
Learning goals
- developing and applying an original idea in a research context (the ninth principle)
- applying problem solving abilities in an unfamiliar environment (mobile learning, media labs)
- demonstrating the ability to integrate knowledge and handle complexity (comprehensive research coupled with hands-on activities & questioning)
- communicating conclusions (publication) and underpinning knowledge (comprehensive research report) to specialist and non-specialist audiences
- studying in a largely self-directed or autonomous manner (using a weblog to inform and reflect: http://masteringthings.blogspot.com/)
Products to be assessed
- proposal - adding to eight existing principles of digital/mobile learning didactics, a ninth principle as being specific for mobile learning (2 pages)
- comprehensive report - research into usefulness and validity of eight existing principles and ninth proposed principle of mobile learning didactics (16 pages max)
- article (e.g. for OnderwijsInnovatie) about ninth principle of mobile learning didactics, taking into consideration the eight existing principles and the way they differ from digital didactics (3-4 pages)
I have already started collecting literature about mobile learning projects and stumbled upon a very interesting article that claims to give 'a critical analysis of the state of the art'. The interesting part is mostly in the framework used for categorising mobile learning projects, which is quite different from the one I aim to use. More about this later!
There are recurring themes of overall flexibility, immediacy and continuous ‘fluidity’ discernible throughout the aforementioned eight principles. Nothing is predisposed or fixed; the user/learner decides. Not only does the learner expect method and means to be adaptable to the given task (and vice versa), he also interacts with, and adapts to both method and means himself. This relates to a study currently conducted by Dirk Börner (CELSTEC Lab) on the "Educational problem of mobile learning”.
I would like to research whether this ninth principle of "Iterative negotiating in context” might be the specific principle to mobile learning in education. My main research question is: What is specific to mobile learning in education?
9. Iterative negotiating in context: Adjusting and revising task as well as means, in a cyclic process of negotiation and mutually dependent development.
Method
In order to find out what is specific to mobile learning in education, I will conduct a literature survey into the use of these eight principles in existing publications. There are three dimensions to mobile learning: didactic, device and setting, and publications on the subject will relate to any of these dimensions or not (dependent or independent). I will choose two dimensions and categorise publications into four quadrants, according to possible combinations of these features (e.g. didactic & setting, as below). This way, I hope to identify patterns (or gaps) in existing literature about mobile learning.
The four quadrants are:
didactic dependent/ setting dependent
didactic independent/ setting dependent
didactic dependent/ setting independent
didactic independent/ setting independent
Furthermore, I will explore current studies on this subject and technologies used at the CELSTEC Lab. Clustering of these findings will enable me to prepare relevant questions for interviews with experts in the Lab. After processing the information data from the expert interviews and relating these once more to the patterns emerging from the dimensions matrix, I will be able to answer my research question on what is specific to mobile learning in education.
Process
1. Literature Study into distinction between digital learning didactics an mobile learning didactics, with a focus on the selected dimensions
2. Integration with the educational problems study done by the CELSTEC Lab - exploring technologies on site
3. Clustering the findings for preparing the expert interviews
4. Guideline-based expert interviews at the lab, focusing on the clusters identified in step 1 and 2.
Course goals
- gain insight into digital didactics and their underlying principles
- find distinctions between didactics for digital learning and mobile learning
- establish what is specific for mobile learning and possible usefulness and validity of the ninth principle
Learning goals
- developing and applying an original idea in a research context (the ninth principle)
- applying problem solving abilities in an unfamiliar environment (mobile learning, media labs)
- demonstrating the ability to integrate knowledge and handle complexity (comprehensive research coupled with hands-on activities & questioning)
- communicating conclusions (publication) and underpinning knowledge (comprehensive research report) to specialist and non-specialist audiences
- studying in a largely self-directed or autonomous manner (using a weblog to inform and reflect: http://masteringthings.blogspot.com/)
Products to be assessed
- proposal - adding to eight existing principles of digital/mobile learning didactics, a ninth principle as being specific for mobile learning (2 pages)
- comprehensive report - research into usefulness and validity of eight existing principles and ninth proposed principle of mobile learning didactics (16 pages max)
- article (e.g. for OnderwijsInnovatie) about ninth principle of mobile learning didactics, taking into consideration the eight existing principles and the way they differ from digital didactics (3-4 pages)
I have already started collecting literature about mobile learning projects and stumbled upon a very interesting article that claims to give 'a critical analysis of the state of the art'. The interesting part is mostly in the framework used for categorising mobile learning projects, which is quite different from the one I aim to use. More about this later!
Friday, 1 January 2010
Happy New Year!
Finally got around to rewriting my proposal for the capita selecta master course, ah - the holiday season taking its toll... Here's the first part.
Proposal for Capita Selecta course – Master Active Learning
Introduction
In 2003, Simons introduced seven principles (aspects, pillars) of didactics for digital learning. These seven principles were converted to principles for mobile learning didactics by Pols (2008), and one more didactic principle exclusive for mobile learning was added by Rubens (2005). For this course, I would like to elaborate on the eight existing principles of didactics for mobile learning and their distinction from those for digital learning.
Principles
1. Relating - Digital didactics: Identifying and creating relationships and roles, social interaction. Consulting sources and experts, peer-to-peer feedback.
Mobile didactics (extras): Finding relevant information just-in-time, in formal as well as informal settings. Rating and voting systems.
2. Creating - Digital didactics: Actively creating knowledge and constructing meaning, individually as well as together. Research. Stimulating reasoning and argumentation.
Mobile didactics (extras: Creating knowledge just-in-time and wherever, individually as well as together. Making IT-applications more accessible.
3. Sharing - Digital didactics: Publishing and sharing learning outcomes. Broadening audience by applying products as learning objects.
Mobile didactics (extras): Digital testing and assessing.
4. Making transparent - Digital didactics: Visualising patterns of social interaction and thinking processes. Schematising.
Mobile didactics (extras): Offering teachers better information about students’ abilities and knowledge.
5. Learning to learn - Digital didactics: Enhancing meta cognitive development through peer-to-peer feedback, online reflection and visible learning processes.
Mobile didactics (extras): Immediate feedback and reflection.
6. Competences first - Digital didactics: Assessing competences online (e.g. through 360 degree feedback). Digital portfolios to visualise development of competences.
Mobile didactics (extras): Enhancing accessibility. Digital testing to clarify competence directed assessment.
7. Increasing flexibility - Digital didactics: Independency regarding time, space, learning conditions, learning styles, tempo and occasion.
Mobile didactics (extras): Even more so! Motivation through ownership learning process. Adapting to students’ personal environment.
8. Organising learning - Mobile didactics: Designing organisation of learning more efficiently and effectively. Synchronising.
Subject and research question
Towards a ninth principle of didactics for mobile learning
The previous principles do not fully reflect the specific usage of mobile devices in education. Therefore, a ninth principle might be based on user interaction with a mobile system, similar to what is described in the ‘Task-Artefact Cycle’ (Carroll et al, 1991).
A given task sets requirements for the design of an artefact to help an individual perform the task. The resulting artefact, in turn, creates new or unexpected possibilities or poses new constraints on the performance of the task. These possibilities and/or constraints often suggest a revision of the original task for which the artefact was made. The new task sets new requirements for the redesign of the artefact and so on and so on). The task-artefact cycle is in other words an iterative process of continuous, mutually dependent development between task and artefact, a process that will never reach an optimum state.
http://www.interaction-design.org/encyclopedia/task_artifact_cycle.html
I would like to research whether this ninth principle might be the specific principle to mobile learning in education. My research question is: What is specific to mobile learning in education?
More of this when the proposal is finished.
Proposal for Capita Selecta course – Master Active Learning
Introduction
In 2003, Simons introduced seven principles (aspects, pillars) of didactics for digital learning. These seven principles were converted to principles for mobile learning didactics by Pols (2008), and one more didactic principle exclusive for mobile learning was added by Rubens (2005). For this course, I would like to elaborate on the eight existing principles of didactics for mobile learning and their distinction from those for digital learning.
Principles
1. Relating - Digital didactics: Identifying and creating relationships and roles, social interaction. Consulting sources and experts, peer-to-peer feedback.
Mobile didactics (extras): Finding relevant information just-in-time, in formal as well as informal settings. Rating and voting systems.
2. Creating - Digital didactics: Actively creating knowledge and constructing meaning, individually as well as together. Research. Stimulating reasoning and argumentation.
Mobile didactics (extras: Creating knowledge just-in-time and wherever, individually as well as together. Making IT-applications more accessible.
3. Sharing - Digital didactics: Publishing and sharing learning outcomes. Broadening audience by applying products as learning objects.
Mobile didactics (extras): Digital testing and assessing.
4. Making transparent - Digital didactics: Visualising patterns of social interaction and thinking processes. Schematising.
Mobile didactics (extras): Offering teachers better information about students’ abilities and knowledge.
5. Learning to learn - Digital didactics: Enhancing meta cognitive development through peer-to-peer feedback, online reflection and visible learning processes.
Mobile didactics (extras): Immediate feedback and reflection.
6. Competences first - Digital didactics: Assessing competences online (e.g. through 360 degree feedback). Digital portfolios to visualise development of competences.
Mobile didactics (extras): Enhancing accessibility. Digital testing to clarify competence directed assessment.
7. Increasing flexibility - Digital didactics: Independency regarding time, space, learning conditions, learning styles, tempo and occasion.
Mobile didactics (extras): Even more so! Motivation through ownership learning process. Adapting to students’ personal environment.
8. Organising learning - Mobile didactics: Designing organisation of learning more efficiently and effectively. Synchronising.
Subject and research question
Towards a ninth principle of didactics for mobile learning
The previous principles do not fully reflect the specific usage of mobile devices in education. Therefore, a ninth principle might be based on user interaction with a mobile system, similar to what is described in the ‘Task-Artefact Cycle’ (Carroll et al, 1991).
A given task sets requirements for the design of an artefact to help an individual perform the task. The resulting artefact, in turn, creates new or unexpected possibilities or poses new constraints on the performance of the task. These possibilities and/or constraints often suggest a revision of the original task for which the artefact was made. The new task sets new requirements for the redesign of the artefact and so on and so on). The task-artefact cycle is in other words an iterative process of continuous, mutually dependent development between task and artefact, a process that will never reach an optimum state.
http://www.interaction-design.org/encyclopedia/task_artifact_cycle.html
I would like to research whether this ninth principle might be the specific principle to mobile learning in education. My research question is: What is specific to mobile learning in education?
More of this when the proposal is finished.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)