The technical issue: will the solution work efficiently?The technical feasibility study has to evaluate to what degree the proposed solutions will workas required and whether the right people and tools are available to implement the solution. It“refers to the analysis of possible technical problems in the different solutions and who isappropriate to solve”.This involves several questions such as:
Does the technology needed for the system exist?
Should the solution be a bespoke development or an off-the-shelf solution?
How difficult will it be to build or to develop the new solution?
How much do we need to outsource? How much do we need to insource?
Does the organization (school, faculty, firm, etc.) have enough experience and/orneeded skills using that technology (computers, software, networks, etc.)?
Economic
The economic issue: will the new system cost more than the expected benefits?The economic feasibility covers the assessment of costs and benefits of different solutions inorder to select that who gives the best value. In other words the economic assessment has toanswer the question: “will the project (solution) be viable?“…you must have a basic idea about how much time and money it is going to take to put theconcept into a usable program. Doing neat blue-screen video1 effects like the folks atCognitive Arts is very slick and engaging, but that can get very expensive very quickly.Programming simulations is not an easy task either. Of course, the easy and cheap thing to dois dump lots of texts to the computer, and throw in multi-choice questions at the end. That hasto be one of the most unimaginative and most un-engaging type of learning experiences that alearner could encounter, never mind not having an instructional design behind it. As notedexpert in the field of educational technology, David Merrill emphasizes, "Information is notinstruction."7(Curtis L. Broderick, 2001).Said in maybe more concrete terms, the economic feasibility is the analysis of the differentcosts and benefits of implementing a new system. It should also assess the relative importanceof the new system in the comparison with other proposed solutions. Will the new system costmore than the expected benefits?Tangible and intangible costs and benefitsIn carrying out a cost-benefit analysis, both tangible and intangible costs and benefitsidentified and have to be taken into account.What differentiate tangible from intangible costs or benefits is whether or not it is possible toset a definite numeric value against an item. When, for instance, the item is the cost ofinstallation, it is possible to set such a numeric value, and the cost can be identified astangible.
Tangible costs are a measure of costs that can be calculated for each item of expenditure on ane-Learning system. For example, the purchase price of a router needed to install an internetnetwork, or the recruitment of tutors, are tangible costs.On the contrary, it is not possible to place a numeric value on intangible costs and benefits.For example, the user resistance that will occur due to the implementation of a new system orthe disruption of the network will have an effect on the overall organization performance butthey are difficult to measure.A definite measure of improvement can be calculated for each tangible benefit. For instance, areduction in costs of travels thanks to the e-Learning system is a tangible benefit. Theregistration, a subscription or the tuition fee is typically a tangible ‘benefit’. However, thebenefit of using computer animations instead of fixed images in a learning process is difficultto calculate. It has to be considered as a qualitative advantage, or intangible benefit.Accessing a broader range of contents through the Internet is also difficult to quantify, and isalso an intangible benefit.Assessing the costsA range of costs must be taken into account in the feasibility study. They include, amongothers: Technical costso Hardware, software and network equipment purchase costs;o Telecommunication costs;o LMS application;o Internet subscription;o Systems development staff costs if a bespoke or tailored solution isimplemented;o Installation costs including cabling, physically moving equipment and bringingin new furniture to house the computers;o Migration costs, such as transferring data from an existing system to the newsystem;o Operating costs: maintenance costs of hardware such as replacing parts orupgrading to new versions software; staff costs in maintaining the hardwareand the software and troubleshooting ; amount of energy and consumable used; Multimedia costs: audio and video production and editing; Human resource costs, especially when there is a need to hire new personnel or toinvolve free-lancers experts:o Instructional designero Teaching staffo e-Tutors,o Administrative staffo Content designers,o Experts and consultants,o Graphic designers,o Web designers,o Analysts and programmers,o Web master, etc
Training costs; Other costs.It is important to notice that the technical costs not only include the initial cost of purchase butalso the ongoing maintenance costs. These can be considerable and often exceed the costs ofpurchase. As stated by Bocij et al., p.358, (2006), “the cost of ownership of a software or ahardware product is potentially much higher than the purchase costs. This is mainly due to thecost of troubleshooting software bugs and hardware faults, phone support, installing upgrades,and paying for support and/or upgrades from vendors”. As a consequence, the cost ofownership of the selected equipment should also be factored into the cost-benefit analysis.Human resources are also an important cost factor in e-Learning instructional systems, notonly during the design and development phases but also during the implementation phase.Implementing an e-Learning solution for distance learning requires traditional teaching staffresources but also additional tutoring. The latter tends however to be neglected andunderestimated in the costs estimates.The cost of training and education and documentation of teaching staff should also beincluded with standard development costs of paying analyst and programmers.The various costs should be estimated after determining the requirements and scope of theproject and on the basis of the tasks defined in a work breakdown structure.Assessing the benefitsWhile the costs are relatively easy to identify, the benefits are harder to quantify and this fortwo key reasons:
They often are intangible;
They will occur in the future which means that they are dependent from a factor ofuncertainty.Benefits from the e-Learning system can be considered in terms of improvement in thelearning process and the quality of learning contents used to support these processes.Tangible benefits of e-Learning could be, for instance, the following:
Higher revenues due to higher number of beneficiaries (learners)
Reduction of renting classrooms;A way to identify tangible benefits of e-Learning could be based on considering the costs ofperforming a teaching process before introduction of e-Learning and comparing this to thecost after e-Learning implementation.Intangible benefits can include the following: Broader geographical dissemination of e-Learning;
Easier group work o a remote basis;
Easier access to learning content;
Intangible benefits will also include improvements to the quality of learning content in someof the following ways:
Improved usability (easier to understand and then act on information);
Improved utilization;
Improved availability and timeliness;
Improved accuracy;
Improved security of information;CommentsThe cost-benefit analysis has to occur at the very start of a project to implement a new e-Learning instructional system. Although all feasibility assessments for e-Learninginstructional systems should include a cost-benefit analysis, it might happen that someorganizations want to bypass this stage, because other factors are driving the change such asthe need to respond to the learner (or market) demand, or to counter a competitor threat.Implementing an e-Learning instructional system can be seen also as a strategic initiative togain experience aimed at ensuring success in the future when this form of learning becomesmore widely used, or to gain what is called in the business area “first-mover” advantage.It has to be noticed that assessing the costs and benefits of an e-Learning instructional systemis not an exact science. It is not easy to measure each benefit and cost accurately. And evenwhere the benefits and costs are quantifiable, the figures used are only based on an estimatepredicting several years into the future.
quarta-feira, 31 de março de 2010
domingo, 21 de março de 2010
Claroline
Marcel LEBRUN22describes the model as follows:”…this figure may act as a check-list in order to properly design or evaluate a largevariety of “devices” devoted to learning promotion :
textbooks (the nature, the structure, the attributes and the lay-out of theinformation),
pedagogical software (the context of the proposed activities or the directives tobe followed),
Educational Web sites (the activities proposed to the students or the place ofthe web site in the pedagogical scenario),
pedagogical plans (carefully considered individual and collaborative activities),students’ output …
This model may finally be used, to boost, design and evaluate innovation inside aninstitution” (Lebrun, 2002; Lebrun, 2005).“In the centre, the three rectangles are inspired by the constructivist approach: briefly,information is transformed into knowledge by the student activities and this newknowledge feeds the following process (systemic loop). This process is enabled bymotivational factors and sustained by interaction (from the environment - functionalinteraction) or from other students and from teachers (relational interaction)).”“Our model is in good agreement with the M. D. Merrill “first principles of instruction(Merrill, 2000).
Describing these principles is a good opportunity to illustrate again theopenness and wideness of our model:
1. Learning is facilitated when students are engaged in the solving of realproblems (information and motivation);
2. Learning is facilitated when prior knowledge is activated and questioned withnew contexts (information and motivation);
3. Learning is facilitated when new knowledge is explained, demonstrated andjustified (information, activities);
4. Learning is facilitated when new knowledge is applied by the learners(activities, productions);
5. Learning is facilitated when new knowledge is integrated into the learner'sworld (productions and motivation).”“Despite the fact that Merrill’s principles cover rather well our Learning components,mention should be made for the lack of the “interaction” part which makes usbelonging to socio-constructivism. In all cases, Merrill uses this model as a guidelinefor the development of pertinent pedagogical setup (5 star instructional design rating)… it’s also the way we intend to use our own model.The main components of our model are also coherent with expectations of variousactors for the competences needed in the society (information gathering, autonomy,communication, abilities for team work …) and may be undertaken with the toolsdeveloped on Claroline. (Evers et al., 1998, Knight & Yorke, 2004).”This model is learner-centered and focused on learning rather than on informationtechnology although the latter is enabling and favoring the whole learning process. Itis of course LMS platform independent. It can be put into practice using Claroline butalso with the use of any other LMS platform such as Moodle, Anaxagora, Blackboard,etc.
textbooks (the nature, the structure, the attributes and the lay-out of theinformation),
pedagogical software (the context of the proposed activities or the directives tobe followed),
Educational Web sites (the activities proposed to the students or the place ofthe web site in the pedagogical scenario),
pedagogical plans (carefully considered individual and collaborative activities),students’ output …
This model may finally be used, to boost, design and evaluate innovation inside aninstitution” (Lebrun, 2002; Lebrun, 2005).“In the centre, the three rectangles are inspired by the constructivist approach: briefly,information is transformed into knowledge by the student activities and this newknowledge feeds the following process (systemic loop). This process is enabled bymotivational factors and sustained by interaction (from the environment - functionalinteraction) or from other students and from teachers (relational interaction)).”“Our model is in good agreement with the M. D. Merrill “first principles of instruction(Merrill, 2000).
Describing these principles is a good opportunity to illustrate again theopenness and wideness of our model:
1. Learning is facilitated when students are engaged in the solving of realproblems (information and motivation);
2. Learning is facilitated when prior knowledge is activated and questioned withnew contexts (information and motivation);
3. Learning is facilitated when new knowledge is explained, demonstrated andjustified (information, activities);
4. Learning is facilitated when new knowledge is applied by the learners(activities, productions);
5. Learning is facilitated when new knowledge is integrated into the learner'sworld (productions and motivation).”“Despite the fact that Merrill’s principles cover rather well our Learning components,mention should be made for the lack of the “interaction” part which makes usbelonging to socio-constructivism. In all cases, Merrill uses this model as a guidelinefor the development of pertinent pedagogical setup (5 star instructional design rating)… it’s also the way we intend to use our own model.The main components of our model are also coherent with expectations of variousactors for the competences needed in the society (information gathering, autonomy,communication, abilities for team work …) and may be undertaken with the toolsdeveloped on Claroline. (Evers et al., 1998, Knight & Yorke, 2004).”This model is learner-centered and focused on learning rather than on informationtechnology although the latter is enabling and favoring the whole learning process. Itis of course LMS platform independent. It can be put into practice using Claroline butalso with the use of any other LMS platform such as Moodle, Anaxagora, Blackboard,etc.
point
1.1 Specifications that the e-Learning solution shall refer
Today “e-“learning” becomes one of the most up-to-date expressions. That is why it becomes very important to be aware of some didactical and technological aspects during the development process of any e-learning course. The strong expectations that high level technological tools will increase the quality of any e-learning course often follow to an underestimation of the educational objectives being set. The crucial dilemma is not about what technological tools are to be used during the development process of e-learning courses but how to design and plan an e-learning course that ensures the achievement of the educational objectives. All the e-learning related technologies advance very rapidly while the methodology on how to apply them drops behind. The didactical issues of e-learning can be split in two main directions: One considering the development of e-learning environments while the other attends to the development of learning content and implementation of e-learning courses. Nevertheless the European Committee underlines the necessity of pedagogically develop sound and practically useful standards and specifications. A modern e-learning environment not only has to offer the most recent technologies but it has to possess high level of usability also. In the didactical structure of more e-learning courses the educational objectives are described, but usually they are only described without a feed back with learning content and measurement of level of achievement of the set learning objectives. Technologies for education existed before the current ones. Most of the research on technology for education agrees on such findings as that the real potential of education cannot be found through a technological approach alone; the computer per se superimposed on traditional forms of teaching cannot improve the quality or productivity of teaching. The didactic advantages of the substrate offered by the media in contributing to and injecting enthusiasm into information, the simulation of micro-worlds, the transparency of the classroom walls allowing students to access information in any domain underline however, the lacunae in describing the pedagogic context in which the tools are to be used. The benefits for the use of technology should not be expected only inside the reduced cognitive sphere of knowledge. Despite the desired convergence between objectives, methods fostering learning and added-value use of ICT tools, one important element brought to light is the time and effort these in-depth reforms require. Experience shows that these changes from a traditional pedagogical mode to a new one, supported or not by technological tools, go through different phases: a phase of “assimilation” in which the new tools are used and a phase of “accommodation” in which the new tools find its particular domain. This movement between assimilation and accommodation demands time, effort, and a driving force. The availability of the tools and favourable circumstances such as the ones we have described here will not automatically lead to the reforms we have described. E-learning continues to grow at a tremendous and companies are springing up everywhere. The field is growing at an amazing rate and its standards have yet to be developed or even agreed upon. Training professionals who want to be seen as providing value to an organization must create programs that are tied to business problems and opportunities, and these links must be understood and supported by management. It is essential to link e-learning goals to business goals to ensure the ultimate success of the entire e-learning program. Without support from top management, an e-learning program will probably not survive. E-learning programs require significant resources for development and support and the cooperation of several departments within the organization. If the support from top management isn’t there, it needs to be developed. It is critical to include the IT department early in the development of an e-learning strategy. Often IT is not included until the actual implementation and this can lead to the failure of the e-learning program. The implementation of an e-learning program will require collaboration between the training department and the IT department. This collaboration will most likely be new to both departments, hence the need for establishing standards for working together considering that the standards should be established jointly, with both departments agreeing to expectations and roles. The courses to convert from traditional delivery methods to online delivery should be carefully chosen. The first courses must be successful to not endanger the entire program objectives and its further development and to achieve this one of the most important things is getting learners accustomed to technology if they are not already technically adept. One must start with a mall number of courses and create a plan for integrating e-learning into current training programs. The marketing on the other hand should include an introduction to the e-learning program, promoting it, and maintaining and increasing usage over time. Some ways to accomplish the marketing of e-learning program include the integration of e-learning programs into new employee orientation programs. Incorporating e-learning programs into employee development plans and performance improvement initiatives. Educating managers and supervisors about the program and how they can incorporate it in employee development and performance improvement. Using e-mail to promote e-learning and its benefits by promoting specific courses and providing information about the benefits of e-learning programs. Providing for recognition of employees who take e-learning courses. Evaluating e-learning programs in order to improve the areas that are weak.
Today “e-“learning” becomes one of the most up-to-date expressions. That is why it becomes very important to be aware of some didactical and technological aspects during the development process of any e-learning course. The strong expectations that high level technological tools will increase the quality of any e-learning course often follow to an underestimation of the educational objectives being set. The crucial dilemma is not about what technological tools are to be used during the development process of e-learning courses but how to design and plan an e-learning course that ensures the achievement of the educational objectives. All the e-learning related technologies advance very rapidly while the methodology on how to apply them drops behind. The didactical issues of e-learning can be split in two main directions: One considering the development of e-learning environments while the other attends to the development of learning content and implementation of e-learning courses. Nevertheless the European Committee underlines the necessity of pedagogically develop sound and practically useful standards and specifications. A modern e-learning environment not only has to offer the most recent technologies but it has to possess high level of usability also. In the didactical structure of more e-learning courses the educational objectives are described, but usually they are only described without a feed back with learning content and measurement of level of achievement of the set learning objectives. Technologies for education existed before the current ones. Most of the research on technology for education agrees on such findings as that the real potential of education cannot be found through a technological approach alone; the computer per se superimposed on traditional forms of teaching cannot improve the quality or productivity of teaching. The didactic advantages of the substrate offered by the media in contributing to and injecting enthusiasm into information, the simulation of micro-worlds, the transparency of the classroom walls allowing students to access information in any domain underline however, the lacunae in describing the pedagogic context in which the tools are to be used. The benefits for the use of technology should not be expected only inside the reduced cognitive sphere of knowledge. Despite the desired convergence between objectives, methods fostering learning and added-value use of ICT tools, one important element brought to light is the time and effort these in-depth reforms require. Experience shows that these changes from a traditional pedagogical mode to a new one, supported or not by technological tools, go through different phases: a phase of “assimilation” in which the new tools are used and a phase of “accommodation” in which the new tools find its particular domain. This movement between assimilation and accommodation demands time, effort, and a driving force. The availability of the tools and favourable circumstances such as the ones we have described here will not automatically lead to the reforms we have described. E-learning continues to grow at a tremendous and companies are springing up everywhere. The field is growing at an amazing rate and its standards have yet to be developed or even agreed upon. Training professionals who want to be seen as providing value to an organization must create programs that are tied to business problems and opportunities, and these links must be understood and supported by management. It is essential to link e-learning goals to business goals to ensure the ultimate success of the entire e-learning program. Without support from top management, an e-learning program will probably not survive. E-learning programs require significant resources for development and support and the cooperation of several departments within the organization. If the support from top management isn’t there, it needs to be developed. It is critical to include the IT department early in the development of an e-learning strategy. Often IT is not included until the actual implementation and this can lead to the failure of the e-learning program. The implementation of an e-learning program will require collaboration between the training department and the IT department. This collaboration will most likely be new to both departments, hence the need for establishing standards for working together considering that the standards should be established jointly, with both departments agreeing to expectations and roles. The courses to convert from traditional delivery methods to online delivery should be carefully chosen. The first courses must be successful to not endanger the entire program objectives and its further development and to achieve this one of the most important things is getting learners accustomed to technology if they are not already technically adept. One must start with a mall number of courses and create a plan for integrating e-learning into current training programs. The marketing on the other hand should include an introduction to the e-learning program, promoting it, and maintaining and increasing usage over time. Some ways to accomplish the marketing of e-learning program include the integration of e-learning programs into new employee orientation programs. Incorporating e-learning programs into employee development plans and performance improvement initiatives. Educating managers and supervisors about the program and how they can incorporate it in employee development and performance improvement. Using e-mail to promote e-learning and its benefits by promoting specific courses and providing information about the benefits of e-learning programs. Providing for recognition of employees who take e-learning courses. Evaluating e-learning programs in order to improve the areas that are weak.
weaknesses and threats
Threats
Some teachers may not be sensible to the needs related with pedagogy of sex education, and feel they don’t need training.
Teachers (trainees) may not adhere to the online format and prefer presential courses.
Authenticity of practical skills development may be questioned.
E-learning has some disadvantages related with loneliness, motivation and time management issues, depending on the trainees’ characteristics.
Technology has an ever-changing dynamic nature and raising costs.
There may occur technical problems during the course.
Lack of time to attend the course by the trainees
Frequent Law changings adding new requirements to teacher activities.
Distance mode may get less preference than contact mode.Need of getting programmes accredited.
Weaknesses
No adaptation of the course contents to the online format, all contents have to be developed.
Trainers may not have enough expertise to adapt the contents, there might be a need to search for help related to the content design.
No institutional teachers assessment plan except the general teachers evaluation law, no references about teachers performance on sex education classes.
Teachers different ICT skills.
Due to work teachers (trainees), may have problems following the course, as a result they may use a lighter approach to self-study.
Computers available for the teachers but they may feel some difficulties to access the course outside school, depending on their home equipments.
School’s wireless network has frequent bandwidth overloads.
School may not have enough funds to support unexpected expenses.
School depends on the General Council for decision making, which might delay the promptness of the project.
Some teachers may not be sensible to the needs related with pedagogy of sex education, and feel they don’t need training.
Teachers (trainees) may not adhere to the online format and prefer presential courses.
Authenticity of practical skills development may be questioned.
E-learning has some disadvantages related with loneliness, motivation and time management issues, depending on the trainees’ characteristics.
Technology has an ever-changing dynamic nature and raising costs.
There may occur technical problems during the course.
Lack of time to attend the course by the trainees
Frequent Law changings adding new requirements to teacher activities.
Distance mode may get less preference than contact mode.Need of getting programmes accredited.
Weaknesses
No adaptation of the course contents to the online format, all contents have to be developed.
Trainers may not have enough expertise to adapt the contents, there might be a need to search for help related to the content design.
No institutional teachers assessment plan except the general teachers evaluation law, no references about teachers performance on sex education classes.
Teachers different ICT skills.
Due to work teachers (trainees), may have problems following the course, as a result they may use a lighter approach to self-study.
Computers available for the teachers but they may feel some difficulties to access the course outside school, depending on their home equipments.
School’s wireless network has frequent bandwidth overloads.
School may not have enough funds to support unexpected expenses.
School depends on the General Council for decision making, which might delay the promptness of the project.
eLearning with Claroline
Marcel Lebrun
IPM/ UCL
lebrun@ipm.ucl.ac.be
Claroline is a free LMS, online learning management system developed in PHP/MySQL, which is an Internet based database programming language. Originally developped in the IPM, Institut de Pédagogie universitaire et des multimedias of the UCL, Université Catholique de Louvain, it results now from a collaboration between the former and the ECAM, Institut Supérieur Industriel, both from Belgium.
A platform from teacher for teacher
The teacher training philosophy of IPM is to develop the teacher autonomy concerning pedagogy and, furthermore the good use of technical tools in pedagogy. This main objective was expected to be met by allowing teachers to make experimentations, to discover the need for a sound pedagogy and so to foster pedagogy in university teaching. IPM intended, 5 years ago, to use WebCT but the autonomy requirement failed behind the difficulties to develop courses with this platform. In a team meeting, we develop the idea that a large percentage of the teachers needs may be fulfilled with approximately five or six functionalities like : publishing documents and announcements, giving students tools to develop activities and to demonstrate their competences, allowing interactions between students and with teachers.
Simplicity of use and independence concerning pedagogical setup were the leitmotivs of the development and accompaniment teams. Yet, in our traditional university, the platform would allow traditional “lectures”, autonomous learning, blended learning or real distance learning. As far pedagogy is concerned, the possibilities will range from documents delivering to problem and project based learning with a special attention paid to collaborative eLearning. Also, this platform which supports evolution in the teachers uses may act as a catalyst for pedagogical innovation and faculty development.
A pedagogical model for eLearning
A wide variety of models concerning eLearning developments (or instructional design) exist but these are often scarce about pedagogical fundament. The purpose is not to constrain pedagogical considerations in one definitive model but to discern some pillars on which to build effective pedagogical setup.
The purpose of these educational tools is to promote learning but how to do that without a small knowledge about the nature and the conditions of learning ?
In searching for a dynamic model for learning, we have investigated many authors (Combs, 1976; Saljo, 1979; Biggs & Telfer, 1987; Savoie & Hughes, 1994) who attempt to describe this process. We have also tried to federate a lot of “learner-centered” factors derived from the American Psychological Association (APA, 1997). In addition, learning factors that are particularly well boosted by ICT and derived from educational technology research are embedded in this model (Means & Olson, 1994; Dijkstra et al., 2001). The figure below shows the results presented as a dynamic adaption of our five poles model (Lebrun, 1999) somehow provocating because oversimplified.
Figure 1. Dynamic representation of our learning model
As we will see, this figure may act as a check-list in order to properly design or evaluate a large variety of “devices” devoted to learning promotion : textbooks (the nature, the structure, the attributes and the lay-out of the information), pedagogical software (the context of the proposed activities or the directives to be followed), educational web sites (the activities proposed to the students or the place of the web site in the pedagogical scenario), pedagogical plans (carefully considered individual and collaborative activities), students’ output … This model may finally be used, to boost, design and evaluate innovation inside an institution (Lebrun, 2002; Lebrun, 2005).
In the centre, the three rectangles are inspired by the constructivist approach: briefly, information is transformed into knowledge by the student activities and this new knowledge feeds the following process (systemic loop). This process is enabled by motivational factors and sustained by interaction (from the environment - functional interaction) or from other students and from teachers (relational interaction)).
Our model is in good concordance with the M. D. Merrill “first principles of instruction (Merrill, 2000). Describing these principles is a good opportunity to illustrate again the openness and wideness of our model :
Learning is facilitated when students are engaged in the solving of real problems (informations and motivation)
Learning is facilitated when prior knowledge is activated and questioned with new contexts (informations and motivation)
Learning is facilitated when new knowledge is explicated, demonstrated and justified (informations, activities)
Learning is facilitated when new knowledge is applied by the learners (activities, productions)
Learning is facilitated new knowledge is integrated into the learner's world (productions).
Despite the fact that Merrill’s principles cover rather well our Learning components, mention should be made for the lack of the “interaction” part which makes us belonging to socio-constructivism. In all cases, Merrill uses this model as a guideline for the development of pertinent pedagogical setup (5 star instructional design rating) … it’s also the way we intend to use our own model.
The main components of our model are also coherent with expectations of various actors for the competences needed in the society (information gathering, autonomy, communication, abilities for team work …) and may be undertaken by the tools developed on Claroline. (Evers et al., 1998, Knight & Yorke, 2004).
Lets see how.
Tools to promote learning
In eLearning, the most important factor is not the “e” which comes from eLectricity or eLectronics as you like. In eLearning, the main point, for us, stays Learning and so we intend to go deeply in these learning enhancing factors .
The learning factors embedded in Claroline need to be enlightened in order to be useful for teachers. We will try to discern some considerations useful when one develop a pedagogical setup “around” Claroline.
What’s about information given as a starting point for learning ?
What will be the context (content source and setup) which will give the way knowledge is used, the objectives of the learning process, the competences to be acquired ?
What are the tools (analysis grid, experimental protocol, evaluation sheet …) given to the students in order they will be able to construct active new knowledge and useful new competences ?
Are the different work stages well balanced between collaborative work, individual appropriation and synthesis by teachers ?
Are the sudents aware about the objectives, the products, the conditions of learning … the signs of completed learning ?
Using the five poles or pillars of our mode, we will now give some very concrete advices deduced from our model :
Information
The different forms around « knowing » (knowing, knowing how to do, knowing how to be) are often reduced to knowledge and knowledge seems to be often confused with information. The information society is quickly (too quickly) become learning society. For a lot of teachers attracted by eLearning, the most important operation is still to provide information : publishing his PowerPoint seems to be the most common use of the « eLectricity learning ». But, we have seen that this use of the publication feature is somehow only one step in the discovery of the platform by the teacher. After some times and good training conditions, he will go deeper in innovation by using other available tools.
Montaigne, some centuries ago, said that « the student is not only one vase to be filled. It is a fire to be lit ».
What can be done ?
To transmit contents (only a first step)
To inform about the scenario, the pedagogical setup
To give learning objectives and evaluation criteria
To illustrate the context
To show the way from prior knowledge and competences to new ones
To give tools in order to assess new knowledge (grid, evaluation sheet …)
To provide resources with small granularities
To provide well chosen web links
Claroline tools like documents and links, announcements, agenda, home page of the course … are tools suitable for these purposes.
Motivation
There is a lot of motivation theories. These generally postulate the importance of contextual factors enabling the representation a student may have about the future situation and the work he has to perform in order to acquire new knowledges and competences.
Following Viau’s theory (Viau, 1994), important factors are : understanding of future competences to be acquired, interest and value of the task, feeling about the control over the tasks to be done … All these feelings originate in the scenario and the context of the activities. Learning effective activities are grounded in everyday and professional realities. The knowledge about the activities is important to develop a “security” feeling about the learning task.
What can be done ?
Underline prior knowledge and “already there” competences
Clarify objectives
Illustrate and underline the importance of new knowledge and competences
Enlighten the context of use of knowledge
State precisely instructions and agendas
Comment over the interest and the value of the task
What are the degrees of freedom and the controllable part of the activities ?
What are the elements of interaction, feedback ?
Claroline tools like course description, Documents and links, announcements, agenda, learning path, home page of the course … are tools suitable for these purposes.
Activities
Quality learning don’t arise only from transmissive methods (transferring contents from books to students head). Not even from collaborative or interpersonal work ! It needs a personal “internal” work to assimilate new knowledge into earlier cognitive structure. Humans don’t learn online, they learn “per se”. So a most important part of learning is not embedded in the technological tool, nor only in the pedagogical setup. It’s necessary to give students tools in order to facilitate this intrapersonal work, to figure out the achieved task and the work still to be done, to assess the efficacy of the acquired knowledge.
What can be done ?
Give a time scenario showing the different steps
Propose tools in order to work through informations (analysis grid, exercise, …)
Consider also activities out of the platform (library and Internet exist also outside the platform)
Be progressive, diversified and coherent over the different activities
Give tools (exercises mainly) in order to assess new knowledge
Alternate readings, exercises, problems, applications, cases
Give activities with the objective to produce or demonstrate something
Alternate individual (convergent) and collaborative (divergent) work
Claroline tools like course description, exercises, learning path, assignments, forums … are tools suitable for these purposes.
Interaction
For Cohen, quoted by Bourgeois and Nizet (1997), a collaborative task is defined as a set of activities divided in different operations or steps and aiming at the realisation of a goal. It should be complex (not easily achievable by one person) and open (different operations or steps are possible) and should request real exchanges between the participants. students’ learning. Furthermore, this influence seems to work rather at the affective level than at the “productive” one. The students need to be supported and to know that someone pays attention to their urges and expectations all the way through the project.
Generally speaking, there is collaboration when a “positive interdependence of goals” is achieved (one will reach his or her goal if everybody succeeds). Competition, in this way, is a “negative interdependence of goals”
What can be done ?
Choose appropriate tasks (needing really team work)
Produce group instructions and shape activities in order to promote interdependence
Acknowledge for multiple points of view
Give opportunity to exert critical thinking
Send feedbacks to students
Give time for personal appropriation
Find a good “middle point” between flexibility and constraints, between divergent thinking and synthesis
Take advantage of the use of writing (in forums)
Use properly advantages of synchronous and asynchronous tools
Claroline tools like users, forums, groups, chat, wiki but also agenda, announcements … are tools suitable for these purposes
Productions
Above all, learning is a process but products may not be discarded as important signs of achieved learning. Computers are tools, production tools. This means that a lot of productions may be developed outside the platform by using usual office tools. An important motivation tool is also to develop something of his or her own, to do his work in an open space.
What can be done ?
Produce and recognize new knowledge
Give the opportunity to build an object, a writing, a sign … a new knowledge
Provide time for publication, communication, sharing of findings
Design activities to evaluate objects with criteria
Design activities to elucidate acquired and missing knowledge and competences
Highlight new questions, new challenges
Make students curious and aware foe a new learning process
Claroline tools like assignments, exercises, forums but also documents, learning path … are tools suitable for these purposes
A synthetic model for eLearning with Claroline
As a check-list for pedagogical set-up development or evaluation, we propose the next picture with our learning model surrounded (and somehow activated) by the Claroline tools.
Marcel Lebrun
IPM/ UCL
lebrun@ipm.ucl.ac.be
Claroline is a free LMS, online learning management system developed in PHP/MySQL, which is an Internet based database programming language. Originally developped in the IPM, Institut de Pédagogie universitaire et des multimedias of the UCL, Université Catholique de Louvain, it results now from a collaboration between the former and the ECAM, Institut Supérieur Industriel, both from Belgium.
A platform from teacher for teacher
The teacher training philosophy of IPM is to develop the teacher autonomy concerning pedagogy and, furthermore the good use of technical tools in pedagogy. This main objective was expected to be met by allowing teachers to make experimentations, to discover the need for a sound pedagogy and so to foster pedagogy in university teaching. IPM intended, 5 years ago, to use WebCT but the autonomy requirement failed behind the difficulties to develop courses with this platform. In a team meeting, we develop the idea that a large percentage of the teachers needs may be fulfilled with approximately five or six functionalities like : publishing documents and announcements, giving students tools to develop activities and to demonstrate their competences, allowing interactions between students and with teachers.
Simplicity of use and independence concerning pedagogical setup were the leitmotivs of the development and accompaniment teams. Yet, in our traditional university, the platform would allow traditional “lectures”, autonomous learning, blended learning or real distance learning. As far pedagogy is concerned, the possibilities will range from documents delivering to problem and project based learning with a special attention paid to collaborative eLearning. Also, this platform which supports evolution in the teachers uses may act as a catalyst for pedagogical innovation and faculty development.
A pedagogical model for eLearning
A wide variety of models concerning eLearning developments (or instructional design) exist but these are often scarce about pedagogical fundament. The purpose is not to constrain pedagogical considerations in one definitive model but to discern some pillars on which to build effective pedagogical setup.
The purpose of these educational tools is to promote learning but how to do that without a small knowledge about the nature and the conditions of learning ?
In searching for a dynamic model for learning, we have investigated many authors (Combs, 1976; Saljo, 1979; Biggs & Telfer, 1987; Savoie & Hughes, 1994) who attempt to describe this process. We have also tried to federate a lot of “learner-centered” factors derived from the American Psychological Association (APA, 1997). In addition, learning factors that are particularly well boosted by ICT and derived from educational technology research are embedded in this model (Means & Olson, 1994; Dijkstra et al., 2001). The figure below shows the results presented as a dynamic adaption of our five poles model (Lebrun, 1999) somehow provocating because oversimplified.
Figure 1. Dynamic representation of our learning model
As we will see, this figure may act as a check-list in order to properly design or evaluate a large variety of “devices” devoted to learning promotion : textbooks (the nature, the structure, the attributes and the lay-out of the information), pedagogical software (the context of the proposed activities or the directives to be followed), educational web sites (the activities proposed to the students or the place of the web site in the pedagogical scenario), pedagogical plans (carefully considered individual and collaborative activities), students’ output … This model may finally be used, to boost, design and evaluate innovation inside an institution (Lebrun, 2002; Lebrun, 2005).
In the centre, the three rectangles are inspired by the constructivist approach: briefly, information is transformed into knowledge by the student activities and this new knowledge feeds the following process (systemic loop). This process is enabled by motivational factors and sustained by interaction (from the environment - functional interaction) or from other students and from teachers (relational interaction)).
Our model is in good concordance with the M. D. Merrill “first principles of instruction (Merrill, 2000). Describing these principles is a good opportunity to illustrate again the openness and wideness of our model :
Learning is facilitated when students are engaged in the solving of real problems (informations and motivation)
Learning is facilitated when prior knowledge is activated and questioned with new contexts (informations and motivation)
Learning is facilitated when new knowledge is explicated, demonstrated and justified (informations, activities)
Learning is facilitated when new knowledge is applied by the learners (activities, productions)
Learning is facilitated new knowledge is integrated into the learner's world (productions).
Despite the fact that Merrill’s principles cover rather well our Learning components, mention should be made for the lack of the “interaction” part which makes us belonging to socio-constructivism. In all cases, Merrill uses this model as a guideline for the development of pertinent pedagogical setup (5 star instructional design rating) … it’s also the way we intend to use our own model.
The main components of our model are also coherent with expectations of various actors for the competences needed in the society (information gathering, autonomy, communication, abilities for team work …) and may be undertaken by the tools developed on Claroline. (Evers et al., 1998, Knight & Yorke, 2004).
Lets see how.
Tools to promote learning
In eLearning, the most important factor is not the “e” which comes from eLectricity or eLectronics as you like. In eLearning, the main point, for us, stays Learning and so we intend to go deeply in these learning enhancing factors .
The learning factors embedded in Claroline need to be enlightened in order to be useful for teachers. We will try to discern some considerations useful when one develop a pedagogical setup “around” Claroline.
What’s about information given as a starting point for learning ?
What will be the context (content source and setup) which will give the way knowledge is used, the objectives of the learning process, the competences to be acquired ?
What are the tools (analysis grid, experimental protocol, evaluation sheet …) given to the students in order they will be able to construct active new knowledge and useful new competences ?
Are the different work stages well balanced between collaborative work, individual appropriation and synthesis by teachers ?
Are the sudents aware about the objectives, the products, the conditions of learning … the signs of completed learning ?
Using the five poles or pillars of our mode, we will now give some very concrete advices deduced from our model :
Information
The different forms around « knowing » (knowing, knowing how to do, knowing how to be) are often reduced to knowledge and knowledge seems to be often confused with information. The information society is quickly (too quickly) become learning society. For a lot of teachers attracted by eLearning, the most important operation is still to provide information : publishing his PowerPoint seems to be the most common use of the « eLectricity learning ». But, we have seen that this use of the publication feature is somehow only one step in the discovery of the platform by the teacher. After some times and good training conditions, he will go deeper in innovation by using other available tools.
Montaigne, some centuries ago, said that « the student is not only one vase to be filled. It is a fire to be lit ».
What can be done ?
To transmit contents (only a first step)
To inform about the scenario, the pedagogical setup
To give learning objectives and evaluation criteria
To illustrate the context
To show the way from prior knowledge and competences to new ones
To give tools in order to assess new knowledge (grid, evaluation sheet …)
To provide resources with small granularities
To provide well chosen web links
Claroline tools like documents and links, announcements, agenda, home page of the course … are tools suitable for these purposes.
Motivation
There is a lot of motivation theories. These generally postulate the importance of contextual factors enabling the representation a student may have about the future situation and the work he has to perform in order to acquire new knowledges and competences.
Following Viau’s theory (Viau, 1994), important factors are : understanding of future competences to be acquired, interest and value of the task, feeling about the control over the tasks to be done … All these feelings originate in the scenario and the context of the activities. Learning effective activities are grounded in everyday and professional realities. The knowledge about the activities is important to develop a “security” feeling about the learning task.
What can be done ?
Underline prior knowledge and “already there” competences
Clarify objectives
Illustrate and underline the importance of new knowledge and competences
Enlighten the context of use of knowledge
State precisely instructions and agendas
Comment over the interest and the value of the task
What are the degrees of freedom and the controllable part of the activities ?
What are the elements of interaction, feedback ?
Claroline tools like course description, Documents and links, announcements, agenda, learning path, home page of the course … are tools suitable for these purposes.
Activities
Quality learning don’t arise only from transmissive methods (transferring contents from books to students head). Not even from collaborative or interpersonal work ! It needs a personal “internal” work to assimilate new knowledge into earlier cognitive structure. Humans don’t learn online, they learn “per se”. So a most important part of learning is not embedded in the technological tool, nor only in the pedagogical setup. It’s necessary to give students tools in order to facilitate this intrapersonal work, to figure out the achieved task and the work still to be done, to assess the efficacy of the acquired knowledge.
What can be done ?
Give a time scenario showing the different steps
Propose tools in order to work through informations (analysis grid, exercise, …)
Consider also activities out of the platform (library and Internet exist also outside the platform)
Be progressive, diversified and coherent over the different activities
Give tools (exercises mainly) in order to assess new knowledge
Alternate readings, exercises, problems, applications, cases
Give activities with the objective to produce or demonstrate something
Alternate individual (convergent) and collaborative (divergent) work
Claroline tools like course description, exercises, learning path, assignments, forums … are tools suitable for these purposes.
Interaction
For Cohen, quoted by Bourgeois and Nizet (1997), a collaborative task is defined as a set of activities divided in different operations or steps and aiming at the realisation of a goal. It should be complex (not easily achievable by one person) and open (different operations or steps are possible) and should request real exchanges between the participants. students’ learning. Furthermore, this influence seems to work rather at the affective level than at the “productive” one. The students need to be supported and to know that someone pays attention to their urges and expectations all the way through the project.
Generally speaking, there is collaboration when a “positive interdependence of goals” is achieved (one will reach his or her goal if everybody succeeds). Competition, in this way, is a “negative interdependence of goals”
What can be done ?
Choose appropriate tasks (needing really team work)
Produce group instructions and shape activities in order to promote interdependence
Acknowledge for multiple points of view
Give opportunity to exert critical thinking
Send feedbacks to students
Give time for personal appropriation
Find a good “middle point” between flexibility and constraints, between divergent thinking and synthesis
Take advantage of the use of writing (in forums)
Use properly advantages of synchronous and asynchronous tools
Claroline tools like users, forums, groups, chat, wiki but also agenda, announcements … are tools suitable for these purposes
Productions
Above all, learning is a process but products may not be discarded as important signs of achieved learning. Computers are tools, production tools. This means that a lot of productions may be developed outside the platform by using usual office tools. An important motivation tool is also to develop something of his or her own, to do his work in an open space.
What can be done ?
Produce and recognize new knowledge
Give the opportunity to build an object, a writing, a sign … a new knowledge
Provide time for publication, communication, sharing of findings
Design activities to evaluate objects with criteria
Design activities to elucidate acquired and missing knowledge and competences
Highlight new questions, new challenges
Make students curious and aware foe a new learning process
Claroline tools like assignments, exercises, forums but also documents, learning path … are tools suitable for these purposes
A synthetic model for eLearning with Claroline
As a check-list for pedagogical set-up development or evaluation, we propose the next picture with our learning model surrounded (and somehow activated) by the Claroline tools.
sábado, 20 de março de 2010
Designing for active learning: A conversation
Abstract
There is much written on the benefits of applying reflective processes to unit developments for online learning and teaching. However, there is little information on how this can be done practically. This article presents a collaborative unit development between lecturer and educational designer, driven by a reflective action framework to provide a systematic process for designing an online Masters unit in the Faculty of Education. The framework, based on Kemmis and McTaggart’s action research spiral (1988), helped to strengthen the collaboration by promoting the need for a shared understanding of the development undertaken. Use of student feedback from previous years and principles of effective teaching were paramount in deciding upon the way the unit should be re-designed. This process was recorded in a working document and exchanged over a four month period, bringing together key elements, our ‘thematic concerns’, such as promoting student centredness, advocating reflective practice and designing for active learning. Development is still to be completed and the redeveloped unit will be delivered in first semester of 2005.
Background perspectives
Nowadays a team of professionals supports lecturers in the online learning and teaching context, one such role being that of the educational designer. Torrisi-Steele and Davis (2000) say that lecturers’ expectations and experiences of online materials development is critical in planning and structuring support to address their needs. Interactions with educational designers can culminate in positive changes to teaching practice.
The lecturer, Umesh, works in the Faculty of Education and has a background in inclusive and special education. He has delivered his units online for the past two years. He is computer literate and uses web page design programs and online learning management systems, with a small amount of support. Most of his students are working teachers in primary and secondary education, who have returned to study to enhance their understanding of and gain qualifications in special education and inclusion. Students are obliged to participate online and are most likely to be studying off-campus.
The educational designer, Margaret, works at the University’s Centre for Learning and Teaching Support, and has experience in developing online learning environments and supporting staff development activities in online learning and teaching. Umesh and Margaret share an interest in reflective teaching practice. It is this shared interest that sparked the emerging conversation captured in this article over a four month period and has informed the development of the online unit discussed.
Methodology
This paper highlights the more intangible elements of the collaborative relationship experienced between lecturer (Umesh) and educational designer (Margaret), by applying a reflective action framework to the unit development. The literature has emphasised the need for wider, more discerning application of learning and teaching practices that are underpinned by a shared understanding of sound pedagogical theory; for example, the use of reflective practices (McArdle & Coutts 2003, Boud & Walker 1998, Hardy & Benson 2002) and action research (Kemmis & McTaggart 1988, George 2002).
We employed Kemmis and McTaggart’s model of action research for reflective practice to develop a reflective action framework, a conversational framework that has provided us with a systematic approach to the unit development. Kemmis & McTaggart see reflection as analysing, synthesising, interpreting, explaining and drawing conclusions, based on a ‘thematic concern’ (1998:86). We were eager to capture our discussions as a way to highlight our thematic concerns, which were, designing for active learning and enhancing reflective practice in students as well as in our own professional development. Our points for discussion could be described as a series of ‘action steps’ as Kemmis and McTaggart (1988:86) affirm, to begin thinking about the implications for progressive action over time and deciding what to do next.
The key elements we discussed include active learning, the value of reflective practice as good teaching practice and promoting student centredness in online learning. Student centredness was informed by student feedback from the past two years in which the unit has been offered. The lecturer has encouraged students to provide him feedback in order to make improvements to the unit according to their needs, experiences and insights. Student feedback is a powerful catalyst in bringing about effective change in a unit, especially in online learning environments (Mason & Weller 2000, Torrisi-Steele & Davis 2000, Brown & Thompson 1997, Lefoe, et al. 2002, Bishop, 2002). One major concern students had was that the unit was not structured for active and meaningful interaction between students. Lack of peer interaction is a major concern for learners who participate in online learning environments (Fisher, et al. 2000, Mason & Weller, 2000). In order to address this and other concerns, a Unit Innovation Grant application was submitted to the faculty and subsequently approved.
The development is still to be completed and the redeveloped unit will be delivered in first semester of 2005. Figure 2 outlines our reflective action framework, highlighting the key elements that moved our discussions, and subsequent development decisions, forward.
Our conversation began with a discussion on active learning and reflective practice, informed by a number of readings, from which sprang our initial motivations to enhance good teaching practice. This intersected with our ongoing discussions on student centredness, informed by student feedback, placing value on the student voice throughout the unit development. Our methodology emerged from this, echoing Kemmis and McTaggart’s action research spiral, indicative of moments, or ‘action steps’, taken during the development process.
How can I make learning more active for students?
Umesh: The first question I asked Margaret was; how can I make learning more active for my students? Students had indicated to me that although they enjoyed the unit generally, they found the online environment boring and they didn’t engage with the material or each other for that matter.
Margaret: I was keen to find out more about the student cohort and to understand the background of the unit more generally, to begin development. I could see that Umesh had a clear idea of what he wanted to achieve in redeveloping his unit and he seemed very focused on making students’ learning more active.
Umesh: I wanted to ensure that students’ concerns were addressed when redesigning the unit, and to actively engage students in a motivating online environment. I have always provided activities, but didn’t feel that students were really committed to carrying out these activities.
Margaret: I shared Umesh’s concerns after I conducted a short review of the unit, seeing the need to move beyond the ‘read then do’ approach. From his initial unit structure, I could see that the activities mainly required students to read an article then post their thoughts to the online discussion forum. This usually occurred on a weekly basis.
We wanted to focus the unit development primarily on engaging students actively online. Active learning encourages students to act on information: putting ideas into written form; drawing ideas together and analysing them; interacting with others to further develop ideas. (Brown & Thompson 1997, online). We began our conversation by discussing the nature of the student group and the anecdotal feedback Umesh had collected from previous years. Students not satisfied with the unit in the past, cited the following reasons for their dissatisfaction:
no or limited knowledge of computers
boring environment- online learning is nothing more than a textbook online
limited interaction with students
hesitation to interact with other students
limited opportunity to meet with the lecturer
overwhelming number of online messages to respond to and
too many online readings.
However, there were some aspects of the unit that students thought were very good. We were careful not to lose these aspects already developed in the unit, as students stated that they were more able to:
examine their current teaching practice
be more reflective
consider the needs of students with disabilities
explore and critique a range of strategies to develop inclusive teaching practice
heighten their awareness of the implications for students with disabilities of any nature
undertake more active, critical questioning
see how the readings and assignments strengthened the case for inclusive teaching practice
develop their confidence to promote inclusion to others and
develop cooperative relationships with teachers and students in their work settings.
Students generally commented that overall, the unit was relevant, challenging and hard work. In an effort to develop the unit structure to enhance active learning, we are convinced that the design of online learning materials revolves around the student. A student centred approach encourages students to interact with the content (and with one another) in the learning environment, as opposed to more ‘traditional’ approaches where the transmission of content is more the focus (Torrisi-Steele & Davis 2000:285).
We considered Lefoe, Gunn and Hedberg’s (2002) eight recommendations for teaching in a distributed learning environment, as identified from the students’ point of view, to reconstruct the unit activities to engage students in more meaningful learning.
Set me clear role expectations
Talk to me
Provide opportunity to work and talk with other students
Choose the best medium for the task at hand
Teach me to use the technology
Provide resources I can use
Let me know what support is available and
Guide me through the administrative nightmare. (2002: paras. 25-37)
Umesh: Originally, I had set up weekly discussion topics to which students must post a response within that week. This meant little time for socialising elements, so students naturally felt a stranger to others in the unit.
Margaret: I believe socialisation is important to engage students who have not met face to face, yet are asked to interact with one another online. I was keen to re-design activities to include social elements and build a learning space for ongoing discussion between students.
Umesh: I could see, after working with Margaret, that the emphasis was on the task, with little context in which students could generate meaningful discussion with others, especially in the short time given to complete activities. These activities were also dislocated and didn’t connect together to form an overall learning experience.
Margaret: I often like to include some structured orientation to the online environment, providing students with help tutorials, tip sheets, audio help and links to student support services. This is important to help students feel more at ease with the technology, so it becomes less of a chore and they can focus on the essence of the learning instead.
Activity and active learning is often most effective when designed with moments and spaces for reflection and review. Sufficient time for thinking, as well as for reading, responding, reciprocating and formulating further responses, should be provided in structuring online activities. This promotes deeper levels of understanding; engaging in more abstract thinking, rather than superficial, didactic expressions, which usually results in a regurgitation of facts and figures or decontextualised quotations.
There seems to be a preconceived notion that communications within a formal educational setting should be devoid of social elements. Thankfully, this is far from the truth! Without developing elements of familiarity and trust amongst students, processes such as group work and group discussions, including online discussion forums, cannot become meaningful. We are inherently social beings and should not dismiss these elements as trivial, but essential to establishing meaningful environments for learning. By engaging students socially we encourage them to do so in their own teaching sites. In the unit development, we sought to have Umesh model what he hoped to see in his students. Modelling ‘good’ teaching is the first step to engaging others in good teaching practice.
How can I encourage reflective practice in online learning?
Umesh: I felt it was important for us to build a shared understanding of the literature on active learning while collaborating on the unit development. I asked Margaret for any readings that demonstrated reflective practice in education and active learning, in our first development meeting.
Margaret: I presented Umesh with a reading by McArdle & Coutts (2003) and also referred him to the work on action research by Kemmis & McTaggart (1988) and Grundy (1995). In return, Umesh provided me with readings on inclusive education. Although I had a teacher education background, I had not touched on inclusion specifically.
Umesh: It has been great to have Margaret as a ‘sounding board’ for refining ideas for the unit development. This is also evident in the literature (Torrisi-Steele & Davis 2000, Hardy & Benson 2002).
Margaret: I could tell that Umesh was interested in his teaching and in seeing his students learn. He also showed a personal preference for reflective processes, which I immediately connected with and so I suggested we capitalise on this and have Umesh model this in his teaching.
We wanted to capture the development process in order to reflect on the ‘action steps’, or changes, as they occurred, rather than on a specific end product. We recorded these changes in a document, which grew into a weekly unit outline. This document has helped us both to monitor the process of development, insofar as it has provided a common or shared ground on which the development is based. Kemmis and McTaggart talk of the need to change the social relationships, discourses, practices and forms of organisation, in order to truly improve education. It is through these changes that we can sustain improvement and by our reflections, steer our next ‘action steps’ in a process of continuous change (1988:44).
As we found early on, a useful, structured framework, which accounts for time, resources and some background information, informs those areas needing development. McArdle and Coutts (2003) describe the ‘good’ teacher as displaying a set of core qualities, which provide a basis for reflective practice. These are confidence, ballast, value maturity, strength and balance. These, together with a strong core of sense making, shape and are shaped by (shared) experiences. It could be said that apart from the practical elements that help to shape a ‘good’ online unit, these qualities must also be considered so as to produce an atmosphere of collaboration within which good unit design can occur. Understanding, willingness, openness, and positive expectations are all evidenced in ‘good’ teaching practice.
Sense making combines processes of reflection and meaning making, while arriving at judgements arising from, and applied to, professional practice. The key to this processing is that it allows connections to be made between different experiences and different forms of experience (McArdle & Coutts 2003:230).
In our attempts to make more sense of the ideas we discussed for the unit development, we put ourselves in the students’ shoes; empathising with, and valuing, their position. We took turns in acting out the student role, in the form of a short scenario, where the ‘student’ would complete a learning activity or navigate a unit web page. We found this useful to not only reflect on the students’ position in the learning environment, but also to be open to accommodate any changes or adaptations that emerged from our reflections on the scenario. We were also conscious of the need for students to make sense and meaning of the learning activity. We also wanted to be sure that the student voice be heard throughout the development process.
We involved other staff in the later stages of the unit development, including a multimedia developer and faculty technical support staff, in response to the needs that had arisen in the development process. Hardy and Benson (2002) espouse that the reflective process occurring in development teams promotes healthy relationships in the team. It can also be seen as playing an essential role in design and development (2002:2). Torrisi-Steele & Davis concur that ‘…“it takes time to ‘re-jig’ thinking”’ and to reach a shared understanding between educational designer and lecturer (2000: para.52). This is a critical point in determining the outcomes of the collaboration.
The unit outline evolved over the four months with the addition of a unit multimedia matrix, shared between the lecturer, the educational designer and the multimedia developer, mapping out the interactive multimedia components to be designed. It was necessary to present a clear, meaningful picture of the multimedia needs to the multimedia developer. The matrix was only developed after about three months of meetings between the lecturer and the educational designer.
How can a lecturer and an educational designer work well together?
Margaret: I was curious to know Umesh’s opinion of working with an educational designer. I asked him what he thought an educational designer brought to a collaborative arrangement such as the one we had established.
Umesh: I saw an educational designer as a catalyst to change the way I looked at how technology can be used to make online learning more active for students. This collaboration differed say to the collaboration I might have with my faculty colleagues, as educational designers focus more on the learning and teaching process than the unit content. Margaret showed she understood the theoretical underpinnings of learning and teaching theory and I hoped we could build this into the unit development.
Margaret: I thought it was useful that we set up regular meeting times, starting once a week and extending to once a fortnight, as our discussions progressed and the unit took shape. It meant we were able to commit to and prepare for upcoming meetings, based on previous discussions, thus maintaining connectivity between the ideas we discussed.
The opportunity to meet on a regular basis was a key ingredient in the collaboration, as we both understood the need to make a commitment to set aside time and space to generate meaningful discussion. Lecturers often have other commitments that impede their time to meet with educational designers on a regular basis.
In managing our time for development, we were also mindful of the time students need, not only to undertake learning activities, but to be able to develop deeper understanding of theoretical concepts covered in the unit. We attempted to create structured activities that engaged students’ interests, encouraged their participation and linked them with other students to flesh out these activities based on their teaching experiences. Therefore, we endeavoured to link social, interactive elements with the need to cover the unit objectives.
The unit, in its pre-developed form, is currently offered online through the university’s web based portal, an information and communication system developed to integrate the resources and services provided by the university for its staff and student community. Figure 3 shows the unit homepage, as seen by students when they first log in to the portal. Figure 4 shows an example of a weekly web page, which outlines the work students must cover in that week. Contrast this with the more structured weekly page, resulting from our unit development, shown in Figure 5. This layout evolved from the discussions on setting out the tasks students should cover in the week, coupled with learning objectives and often including graphical or multimedia elements.
imagem
Conclusion
Finally, the unit development has been a great learning experience for us both. The outcome of the collaboration is, hopefully, a much improved unit. However, unless students feel the same way, and the unit can positively change students’ attitudes towards inclusive education, the ultimate objective of redesigning the unit will remain unachieved. The use of the reflective action framework presented in the methodology was very helpful for us in developing the unit. A willingness to accommodate each other’s ideas and adapt our approach as needed, were two key elements we thought paramount to the overall development process. Some other strategies that helped us included:
a) exchanging a working document to discuss and progress ideas for the unit development (including weekly tasks and use of multimedia)
b) regular meetings (weekly or fortnightly) with a strong commitment to spending time on developing ideas
c) constant use of valuable student feedback (both positive and negative)
d) empathising with students by acting out the student role and reflecting on the outcomes of the scenario and
e) exchanging readings on effective design for online learning (by the educational designer) and inclusive education (by the lecturer), to reach a shared understanding that helped to take the unit development forward.
Other points lecturers might generally consider when approaching a unit development include:
a very good understanding of your learners and their learning settings
a commitment to take time to develop elements to their full potential
an expectation that you will most likely work with others, such as educational designers, in developing your unit and
a willingness to try out ideas, without constraints, or fear of repercussion from faculty or students!
How we frame unit developments can mean the difference between acquiring skills and changing the culture of learning and teaching. As George (2002) states, it is important to underpin staff and learning and teaching development with sound pedagogical models from the outset, rather than retro-fitting in hindsight.
This article captures the reflections and deliberations of two educational practitioners over a four month period. The unit development discussed here continues. It is hoped that this article brings to the surface some of the intangible elements required for successful and meaningful unit developments, with collaborative arrangements paramount in supporting such elements. The educational designer seeks to support lecturers to deliver units online or in a blended mode to students, with empathy for both student and lecturer. The students ultimately determine the success of a unit development, their learning experience and how they see their learning being encouraged and supported.
There is much written on the benefits of applying reflective processes to unit developments for online learning and teaching. However, there is little information on how this can be done practically. This article presents a collaborative unit development between lecturer and educational designer, driven by a reflective action framework to provide a systematic process for designing an online Masters unit in the Faculty of Education. The framework, based on Kemmis and McTaggart’s action research spiral (1988), helped to strengthen the collaboration by promoting the need for a shared understanding of the development undertaken. Use of student feedback from previous years and principles of effective teaching were paramount in deciding upon the way the unit should be re-designed. This process was recorded in a working document and exchanged over a four month period, bringing together key elements, our ‘thematic concerns’, such as promoting student centredness, advocating reflective practice and designing for active learning. Development is still to be completed and the redeveloped unit will be delivered in first semester of 2005.
Background perspectives
Nowadays a team of professionals supports lecturers in the online learning and teaching context, one such role being that of the educational designer. Torrisi-Steele and Davis (2000) say that lecturers’ expectations and experiences of online materials development is critical in planning and structuring support to address their needs. Interactions with educational designers can culminate in positive changes to teaching practice.
The lecturer, Umesh, works in the Faculty of Education and has a background in inclusive and special education. He has delivered his units online for the past two years. He is computer literate and uses web page design programs and online learning management systems, with a small amount of support. Most of his students are working teachers in primary and secondary education, who have returned to study to enhance their understanding of and gain qualifications in special education and inclusion. Students are obliged to participate online and are most likely to be studying off-campus.
The educational designer, Margaret, works at the University’s Centre for Learning and Teaching Support, and has experience in developing online learning environments and supporting staff development activities in online learning and teaching. Umesh and Margaret share an interest in reflective teaching practice. It is this shared interest that sparked the emerging conversation captured in this article over a four month period and has informed the development of the online unit discussed.
Methodology
This paper highlights the more intangible elements of the collaborative relationship experienced between lecturer (Umesh) and educational designer (Margaret), by applying a reflective action framework to the unit development. The literature has emphasised the need for wider, more discerning application of learning and teaching practices that are underpinned by a shared understanding of sound pedagogical theory; for example, the use of reflective practices (McArdle & Coutts 2003, Boud & Walker 1998, Hardy & Benson 2002) and action research (Kemmis & McTaggart 1988, George 2002).
imagem
We employed Kemmis and McTaggart’s model of action research for reflective practice to develop a reflective action framework, a conversational framework that has provided us with a systematic approach to the unit development. Kemmis & McTaggart see reflection as analysing, synthesising, interpreting, explaining and drawing conclusions, based on a ‘thematic concern’ (1998:86). We were eager to capture our discussions as a way to highlight our thematic concerns, which were, designing for active learning and enhancing reflective practice in students as well as in our own professional development. Our points for discussion could be described as a series of ‘action steps’ as Kemmis and McTaggart (1988:86) affirm, to begin thinking about the implications for progressive action over time and deciding what to do next.
The key elements we discussed include active learning, the value of reflective practice as good teaching practice and promoting student centredness in online learning. Student centredness was informed by student feedback from the past two years in which the unit has been offered. The lecturer has encouraged students to provide him feedback in order to make improvements to the unit according to their needs, experiences and insights. Student feedback is a powerful catalyst in bringing about effective change in a unit, especially in online learning environments (Mason & Weller 2000, Torrisi-Steele & Davis 2000, Brown & Thompson 1997, Lefoe, et al. 2002, Bishop, 2002). One major concern students had was that the unit was not structured for active and meaningful interaction between students. Lack of peer interaction is a major concern for learners who participate in online learning environments (Fisher, et al. 2000, Mason & Weller, 2000). In order to address this and other concerns, a Unit Innovation Grant application was submitted to the faculty and subsequently approved.
The development is still to be completed and the redeveloped unit will be delivered in first semester of 2005. Figure 2 outlines our reflective action framework, highlighting the key elements that moved our discussions, and subsequent development decisions, forward.
imagem
Our conversation began with a discussion on active learning and reflective practice, informed by a number of readings, from which sprang our initial motivations to enhance good teaching practice. This intersected with our ongoing discussions on student centredness, informed by student feedback, placing value on the student voice throughout the unit development. Our methodology emerged from this, echoing Kemmis and McTaggart’s action research spiral, indicative of moments, or ‘action steps’, taken during the development process.
How can I make learning more active for students?
Umesh: The first question I asked Margaret was; how can I make learning more active for my students? Students had indicated to me that although they enjoyed the unit generally, they found the online environment boring and they didn’t engage with the material or each other for that matter.
Margaret: I was keen to find out more about the student cohort and to understand the background of the unit more generally, to begin development. I could see that Umesh had a clear idea of what he wanted to achieve in redeveloping his unit and he seemed very focused on making students’ learning more active.
Umesh: I wanted to ensure that students’ concerns were addressed when redesigning the unit, and to actively engage students in a motivating online environment. I have always provided activities, but didn’t feel that students were really committed to carrying out these activities.
Margaret: I shared Umesh’s concerns after I conducted a short review of the unit, seeing the need to move beyond the ‘read then do’ approach. From his initial unit structure, I could see that the activities mainly required students to read an article then post their thoughts to the online discussion forum. This usually occurred on a weekly basis.
We wanted to focus the unit development primarily on engaging students actively online. Active learning encourages students to act on information: putting ideas into written form; drawing ideas together and analysing them; interacting with others to further develop ideas. (Brown & Thompson 1997, online). We began our conversation by discussing the nature of the student group and the anecdotal feedback Umesh had collected from previous years. Students not satisfied with the unit in the past, cited the following reasons for their dissatisfaction:
no or limited knowledge of computers
boring environment- online learning is nothing more than a textbook online
limited interaction with students
hesitation to interact with other students
limited opportunity to meet with the lecturer
overwhelming number of online messages to respond to and
too many online readings.
However, there were some aspects of the unit that students thought were very good. We were careful not to lose these aspects already developed in the unit, as students stated that they were more able to:
examine their current teaching practice
be more reflective
consider the needs of students with disabilities
explore and critique a range of strategies to develop inclusive teaching practice
heighten their awareness of the implications for students with disabilities of any nature
undertake more active, critical questioning
see how the readings and assignments strengthened the case for inclusive teaching practice
develop their confidence to promote inclusion to others and
develop cooperative relationships with teachers and students in their work settings.
Students generally commented that overall, the unit was relevant, challenging and hard work. In an effort to develop the unit structure to enhance active learning, we are convinced that the design of online learning materials revolves around the student. A student centred approach encourages students to interact with the content (and with one another) in the learning environment, as opposed to more ‘traditional’ approaches where the transmission of content is more the focus (Torrisi-Steele & Davis 2000:285).
We considered Lefoe, Gunn and Hedberg’s (2002) eight recommendations for teaching in a distributed learning environment, as identified from the students’ point of view, to reconstruct the unit activities to engage students in more meaningful learning.
Set me clear role expectations
Talk to me
Provide opportunity to work and talk with other students
Choose the best medium for the task at hand
Teach me to use the technology
Provide resources I can use
Let me know what support is available and
Guide me through the administrative nightmare. (2002: paras. 25-37)
Umesh: Originally, I had set up weekly discussion topics to which students must post a response within that week. This meant little time for socialising elements, so students naturally felt a stranger to others in the unit.
Margaret: I believe socialisation is important to engage students who have not met face to face, yet are asked to interact with one another online. I was keen to re-design activities to include social elements and build a learning space for ongoing discussion between students.
Umesh: I could see, after working with Margaret, that the emphasis was on the task, with little context in which students could generate meaningful discussion with others, especially in the short time given to complete activities. These activities were also dislocated and didn’t connect together to form an overall learning experience.
Margaret: I often like to include some structured orientation to the online environment, providing students with help tutorials, tip sheets, audio help and links to student support services. This is important to help students feel more at ease with the technology, so it becomes less of a chore and they can focus on the essence of the learning instead.
Activity and active learning is often most effective when designed with moments and spaces for reflection and review. Sufficient time for thinking, as well as for reading, responding, reciprocating and formulating further responses, should be provided in structuring online activities. This promotes deeper levels of understanding; engaging in more abstract thinking, rather than superficial, didactic expressions, which usually results in a regurgitation of facts and figures or decontextualised quotations.
There seems to be a preconceived notion that communications within a formal educational setting should be devoid of social elements. Thankfully, this is far from the truth! Without developing elements of familiarity and trust amongst students, processes such as group work and group discussions, including online discussion forums, cannot become meaningful. We are inherently social beings and should not dismiss these elements as trivial, but essential to establishing meaningful environments for learning. By engaging students socially we encourage them to do so in their own teaching sites. In the unit development, we sought to have Umesh model what he hoped to see in his students. Modelling ‘good’ teaching is the first step to engaging others in good teaching practice.
How can I encourage reflective practice in online learning?
Umesh: I felt it was important for us to build a shared understanding of the literature on active learning while collaborating on the unit development. I asked Margaret for any readings that demonstrated reflective practice in education and active learning, in our first development meeting.
Margaret: I presented Umesh with a reading by McArdle & Coutts (2003) and also referred him to the work on action research by Kemmis & McTaggart (1988) and Grundy (1995). In return, Umesh provided me with readings on inclusive education. Although I had a teacher education background, I had not touched on inclusion specifically.
Umesh: It has been great to have Margaret as a ‘sounding board’ for refining ideas for the unit development. This is also evident in the literature (Torrisi-Steele & Davis 2000, Hardy & Benson 2002).
Margaret: I could tell that Umesh was interested in his teaching and in seeing his students learn. He also showed a personal preference for reflective processes, which I immediately connected with and so I suggested we capitalise on this and have Umesh model this in his teaching.
We wanted to capture the development process in order to reflect on the ‘action steps’, or changes, as they occurred, rather than on a specific end product. We recorded these changes in a document, which grew into a weekly unit outline. This document has helped us both to monitor the process of development, insofar as it has provided a common or shared ground on which the development is based. Kemmis and McTaggart talk of the need to change the social relationships, discourses, practices and forms of organisation, in order to truly improve education. It is through these changes that we can sustain improvement and by our reflections, steer our next ‘action steps’ in a process of continuous change (1988:44).
As we found early on, a useful, structured framework, which accounts for time, resources and some background information, informs those areas needing development. McArdle and Coutts (2003) describe the ‘good’ teacher as displaying a set of core qualities, which provide a basis for reflective practice. These are confidence, ballast, value maturity, strength and balance. These, together with a strong core of sense making, shape and are shaped by (shared) experiences. It could be said that apart from the practical elements that help to shape a ‘good’ online unit, these qualities must also be considered so as to produce an atmosphere of collaboration within which good unit design can occur. Understanding, willingness, openness, and positive expectations are all evidenced in ‘good’ teaching practice.
Sense making combines processes of reflection and meaning making, while arriving at judgements arising from, and applied to, professional practice. The key to this processing is that it allows connections to be made between different experiences and different forms of experience (McArdle & Coutts 2003:230).
In our attempts to make more sense of the ideas we discussed for the unit development, we put ourselves in the students’ shoes; empathising with, and valuing, their position. We took turns in acting out the student role, in the form of a short scenario, where the ‘student’ would complete a learning activity or navigate a unit web page. We found this useful to not only reflect on the students’ position in the learning environment, but also to be open to accommodate any changes or adaptations that emerged from our reflections on the scenario. We were also conscious of the need for students to make sense and meaning of the learning activity. We also wanted to be sure that the student voice be heard throughout the development process.
We involved other staff in the later stages of the unit development, including a multimedia developer and faculty technical support staff, in response to the needs that had arisen in the development process. Hardy and Benson (2002) espouse that the reflective process occurring in development teams promotes healthy relationships in the team. It can also be seen as playing an essential role in design and development (2002:2). Torrisi-Steele & Davis concur that ‘…“it takes time to ‘re-jig’ thinking”’ and to reach a shared understanding between educational designer and lecturer (2000: para.52). This is a critical point in determining the outcomes of the collaboration.
The unit outline evolved over the four months with the addition of a unit multimedia matrix, shared between the lecturer, the educational designer and the multimedia developer, mapping out the interactive multimedia components to be designed. It was necessary to present a clear, meaningful picture of the multimedia needs to the multimedia developer. The matrix was only developed after about three months of meetings between the lecturer and the educational designer.
How can a lecturer and an educational designer work well together?
Margaret: I was curious to know Umesh’s opinion of working with an educational designer. I asked him what he thought an educational designer brought to a collaborative arrangement such as the one we had established.
Umesh: I saw an educational designer as a catalyst to change the way I looked at how technology can be used to make online learning more active for students. This collaboration differed say to the collaboration I might have with my faculty colleagues, as educational designers focus more on the learning and teaching process than the unit content. Margaret showed she understood the theoretical underpinnings of learning and teaching theory and I hoped we could build this into the unit development.
Margaret: I thought it was useful that we set up regular meeting times, starting once a week and extending to once a fortnight, as our discussions progressed and the unit took shape. It meant we were able to commit to and prepare for upcoming meetings, based on previous discussions, thus maintaining connectivity between the ideas we discussed.
The opportunity to meet on a regular basis was a key ingredient in the collaboration, as we both understood the need to make a commitment to set aside time and space to generate meaningful discussion. Lecturers often have other commitments that impede their time to meet with educational designers on a regular basis.
In managing our time for development, we were also mindful of the time students need, not only to undertake learning activities, but to be able to develop deeper understanding of theoretical concepts covered in the unit. We attempted to create structured activities that engaged students’ interests, encouraged their participation and linked them with other students to flesh out these activities based on their teaching experiences. Therefore, we endeavoured to link social, interactive elements with the need to cover the unit objectives.
The unit, in its pre-developed form, is currently offered online through the university’s web based portal, an information and communication system developed to integrate the resources and services provided by the university for its staff and student community. Figure 3 shows the unit homepage, as seen by students when they first log in to the portal. Figure 4 shows an example of a weekly web page, which outlines the work students must cover in that week. Contrast this with the more structured weekly page, resulting from our unit development, shown in Figure 5. This layout evolved from the discussions on setting out the tasks students should cover in the week, coupled with learning objectives and often including graphical or multimedia elements.
imagem
Conclusion
Finally, the unit development has been a great learning experience for us both. The outcome of the collaboration is, hopefully, a much improved unit. However, unless students feel the same way, and the unit can positively change students’ attitudes towards inclusive education, the ultimate objective of redesigning the unit will remain unachieved. The use of the reflective action framework presented in the methodology was very helpful for us in developing the unit. A willingness to accommodate each other’s ideas and adapt our approach as needed, were two key elements we thought paramount to the overall development process. Some other strategies that helped us included:
a) exchanging a working document to discuss and progress ideas for the unit development (including weekly tasks and use of multimedia)
b) regular meetings (weekly or fortnightly) with a strong commitment to spending time on developing ideas
c) constant use of valuable student feedback (both positive and negative)
d) empathising with students by acting out the student role and reflecting on the outcomes of the scenario and
e) exchanging readings on effective design for online learning (by the educational designer) and inclusive education (by the lecturer), to reach a shared understanding that helped to take the unit development forward.
Other points lecturers might generally consider when approaching a unit development include:
a very good understanding of your learners and their learning settings
a commitment to take time to develop elements to their full potential
an expectation that you will most likely work with others, such as educational designers, in developing your unit and
a willingness to try out ideas, without constraints, or fear of repercussion from faculty or students!
How we frame unit developments can mean the difference between acquiring skills and changing the culture of learning and teaching. As George (2002) states, it is important to underpin staff and learning and teaching development with sound pedagogical models from the outset, rather than retro-fitting in hindsight.
This article captures the reflections and deliberations of two educational practitioners over a four month period. The unit development discussed here continues. It is hoped that this article brings to the surface some of the intangible elements required for successful and meaningful unit developments, with collaborative arrangements paramount in supporting such elements. The educational designer seeks to support lecturers to deliver units online or in a blended mode to students, with empathy for both student and lecturer. The students ultimately determine the success of a unit development, their learning experience and how they see their learning being encouraged and supported.
sexta-feira, 19 de março de 2010
Assignment 3
Needs to meet
(refer to the
needs analysis)
Specifications to
satisfy
Contextual
Constraints
Description of the e-Learning system proposal
Risk definition
Didactic solution
Technological
solution
Organizational
solution
(refer to the
needs analysis)
Specifications to
satisfy
Contextual
Constraints
Description of the e-Learning system proposal
Risk definition
Didactic solution
Technological
solution
Organizational
solution
Assignment03 - Instructions
Instructional design for ‘e-Learning’: design of the e-Learning solution foryour project work.
a) Start from the group joint proposal;
b) Read the documents published in Topic 5: ‘Introduction toInstructional Design for e-Learning’;
c) Read the documents published in Topic 5: “A dynamic e-Learningmodel” by Marcel LEBRUN;
d) Access and browse the referred web sites in Topic5 (Claroline,Idaho State University);
e) Focus your work on the local context of the teaching/learningenvironment;
f) Write a paper of about 5 pages maximum, handling the followingissues:
a. Problem definition in terms of learning and teaching;
b. Refer to the outcomes of the needs analysis carried out inAssignment02: ‘Which are the needs?’
c. Specifications for the e-Learning solution: whichspecifications should the solution satisfy? Express thosespecifications in:
1) Didactical terms,
2) Technological terms
3) Organizational terms.
d. Constraints specification (e.g.: time scale, human resources,infrastructure, etc.);
e. Design of the e-Learning solution referring to:
1) the “Constructive Alignment” model (objectives,methods, tools, context)
2) and to the “Dynamic e-Learning system” model(Information, motivation, activities, interaction,production), (cfr. The Marcel Lebrun model);
f. Specify the added value of e-Learning solution;
g. Identify the risks related to the proposed solution;
h. Fill out the table below in order to summarize your work andadd it to your assignment paper; this table should help you toshow:
1) if the designed e-Learning solution is consistent withthe users’ needs and the expressed specifications;
2) and if the contextual constraints have been taken intoaccount;
3) if the risks related to the proposed solution have beenidentified;
i. Add any relevant document in appendices to yourassignment paper;
g) Publish the paper of your group in MS-Word format on the Moodlecourse web site in the “Assignment03 – Instructional Design for e-Learning” folder;
h) Assessment - grades:a. Maximum grade: 20 pointsb. Group work portfolio: 50% of total grade.
i) Use the forum “Assignment03”, topic “Instructional Design”, forquestions and comments;
j) Deadline for submission: Wednesday 24 March 2010
a) Start from the group joint proposal;
b) Read the documents published in Topic 5: ‘Introduction toInstructional Design for e-Learning’;
c) Read the documents published in Topic 5: “A dynamic e-Learningmodel” by Marcel LEBRUN;
d) Access and browse the referred web sites in Topic5 (Claroline,Idaho State University);
e) Focus your work on the local context of the teaching/learningenvironment;
f) Write a paper of about 5 pages maximum, handling the followingissues:
a. Problem definition in terms of learning and teaching;
b. Refer to the outcomes of the needs analysis carried out inAssignment02: ‘Which are the needs?’
c. Specifications for the e-Learning solution: whichspecifications should the solution satisfy? Express thosespecifications in:
1) Didactical terms,
2) Technological terms
3) Organizational terms.
d. Constraints specification (e.g.: time scale, human resources,infrastructure, etc.);
e. Design of the e-Learning solution referring to:
1) the “Constructive Alignment” model (objectives,methods, tools, context)
2) and to the “Dynamic e-Learning system” model(Information, motivation, activities, interaction,production), (cfr. The Marcel Lebrun model);
f. Specify the added value of e-Learning solution;
g. Identify the risks related to the proposed solution;
h. Fill out the table below in order to summarize your work andadd it to your assignment paper; this table should help you toshow:
1) if the designed e-Learning solution is consistent withthe users’ needs and the expressed specifications;
2) and if the contextual constraints have been taken intoaccount;
3) if the risks related to the proposed solution have beenidentified;
i. Add any relevant document in appendices to yourassignment paper;
g) Publish the paper of your group in MS-Word format on the Moodlecourse web site in the “Assignment03 – Instructional Design for e-Learning” folder;
h) Assessment - grades:a. Maximum grade: 20 pointsb. Group work portfolio: 50% of total grade.
i) Use the forum “Assignment03”, topic “Instructional Design”, forquestions and comments;
j) Deadline for submission: Wednesday 24 March 2010
domingo, 14 de março de 2010
- Formação de agentes educativos (educadores, professores, profissionais de saúde, psicólogos escolares, auxiliares de acção educativa ...) para ser capaz de agir de forma adequada e consistente em resposta às preocupações e as expressões das crianças e jovens sobre sua sexualidade;
- Abordagem pedagógica de temas da sexualidade humana, feita em contextos curriculares e extracurriculares, numa lógica interdisciplinar, com ênfase no grupo do espaço e as diferentes necessidades das crianças e jovens;
- Apoio às famílias na educação sexual de crianças e jovens, nomeadamente através do seu envolvimento no processo de ensino e aprendizagem e / ou promoção de acções de formação específicas dirigidas aos pais ou impulso para eles;
- Estabelecer mecanismos de apoio individualizado e específico para crianças e jovens que dele necessitam, através da criação e manutenção de parcerias dentro das escolas e outros serviços comunitários, incluindo serviços de saúde - materializada, por exemplo, o bom funcionamento dos cuidados de Psicologia e Orientação nas escolas e o estabelecimento de formas de articulação e dinâmica desses centros com a sua saúde. (1)7B6B953A14% http://www.portaldasaude.pt/Portal/Templates/Generic.aspx?NRMODE=Published&NRNODEGUID =-8D5C-4C14-9129-DD40481B3773% 7D & NRORIGINALURL =% 2Fportal% 2Fconteudos% 2Finformacoes%% 2Buteis 2Fsaude% 2Bescolar% 2Feducacaosexual. htm & NRCACHEHINT = Guest
"O Objectivo último da escola é uma construção de sujeitos livres e Responsáveis, e que a educação sexual e dos afectos é parte essencial do processo que Conduz ao reconhecimento do outro como sujeito de direitos." (2)
Educação Sexual em Meio Escolar - Linhas Orientadoras
- Conhecer os mecanismos da resposta sexual, da reprodução, da contracepção e da prática de sexo seguro.
- Actualizar os conhecimentos sobre educação sexual.
- Compreender os objectivos de uma educação para a sexualidade.
- Justificar os problemas de saúde - e as formas de prevenção - ligados à expressão da sexualidade, em particular as gravidezes não desejadas, as infecções de transmissão sexual, os abusos e a violência sexuais.
- Aplicar a legislação, os direitos, os apoios e recursos disponíveis na prevenção, acompanhamento e tratamento dos problemas relacionados com a educação sexual.
- Analisa dados relevantes na educação para a sexualidade (percentagem de jovens grávidas, de doenças sexualmente transmissíveis, de abortos,…)
- Formula um projecto de intervenção para uma turma ou para um ano de ensino, na área da educação para a sexualidade.
- Debater questões da sexualidade em diferentes contextos - disciplinar, social e cultural.
- Analisar diferentes perspectivas e modelos pedagógicos no âmbito da educação sexual.
- Analisar investigação educacional centrada nesta temática.
- Reflectir /Debater sobre as práticas educativas intencionais em educação sexual.
- Contribuir para a promoção de acções e iniciativas na Escola.
- Reflexão fundamentada sobre questões relacionadas com a educação sexual em contexto escolar.
- Concepção de estratégias de inovação curricular no âmbito da educação sexual.
- Capacidade de pesquisa, com especial incidência nos campos da sexualidade e educação sexual.
- Análise crítica de trabalhos de investigação centrados nas temáticas em estudo.
- Colaboração com recurso às Tecnologias de Informação e Comunicação.
- Abordagem pedagógica de temas da sexualidade humana, feita em contextos curriculares e extracurriculares, numa lógica interdisciplinar, com ênfase no grupo do espaço e as diferentes necessidades das crianças e jovens;
- Apoio às famílias na educação sexual de crianças e jovens, nomeadamente através do seu envolvimento no processo de ensino e aprendizagem e / ou promoção de acções de formação específicas dirigidas aos pais ou impulso para eles;
- Estabelecer mecanismos de apoio individualizado e específico para crianças e jovens que dele necessitam, através da criação e manutenção de parcerias dentro das escolas e outros serviços comunitários, incluindo serviços de saúde - materializada, por exemplo, o bom funcionamento dos cuidados de Psicologia e Orientação nas escolas e o estabelecimento de formas de articulação e dinâmica desses centros com a sua saúde. (1)7B6B953A14% http://www.portaldasaude.pt/Portal/Templates/Generic.aspx?NRMODE=Published&NRNODEGUID =-8D5C-4C14-9129-DD40481B3773% 7D & NRORIGINALURL =% 2Fportal% 2Fconteudos% 2Finformacoes%% 2Buteis 2Fsaude% 2Bescolar% 2Feducacaosexual. htm & NRCACHEHINT = Guest
"O Objectivo último da escola é uma construção de sujeitos livres e Responsáveis, e que a educação sexual e dos afectos é parte essencial do processo que Conduz ao reconhecimento do outro como sujeito de direitos." (2)
Educação Sexual em Meio Escolar - Linhas Orientadoras
- Conhecer os mecanismos da resposta sexual, da reprodução, da contracepção e da prática de sexo seguro.
- Actualizar os conhecimentos sobre educação sexual.
- Compreender os objectivos de uma educação para a sexualidade.
- Justificar os problemas de saúde - e as formas de prevenção - ligados à expressão da sexualidade, em particular as gravidezes não desejadas, as infecções de transmissão sexual, os abusos e a violência sexuais.
- Aplicar a legislação, os direitos, os apoios e recursos disponíveis na prevenção, acompanhamento e tratamento dos problemas relacionados com a educação sexual.
- Analisa dados relevantes na educação para a sexualidade (percentagem de jovens grávidas, de doenças sexualmente transmissíveis, de abortos,…)
- Formula um projecto de intervenção para uma turma ou para um ano de ensino, na área da educação para a sexualidade.
- Debater questões da sexualidade em diferentes contextos - disciplinar, social e cultural.
- Analisar diferentes perspectivas e modelos pedagógicos no âmbito da educação sexual.
- Analisar investigação educacional centrada nesta temática.
- Reflectir /Debater sobre as práticas educativas intencionais em educação sexual.
- Contribuir para a promoção de acções e iniciativas na Escola.
- Reflexão fundamentada sobre questões relacionadas com a educação sexual em contexto escolar.
- Concepção de estratégias de inovação curricular no âmbito da educação sexual.
- Capacidade de pesquisa, com especial incidência nos campos da sexualidade e educação sexual.
- Análise crítica de trabalhos de investigação centrados nas temáticas em estudo.
- Colaboração com recurso às Tecnologias de Informação e Comunicação.
c) What is the concrete learning or teaching problem to be addressed?a. What kind of problem? Access?b. What scope? Wide? Reduced?c. Which scale? Large? Small?d. A clear and precise description of the problem will ease the search ofan appropriate solution.
d) What are the stakes of the project?In faculty/school: improved learning processes; official recognition; etc.In company: better skilled work force, increased quality of the production,increased competitiveness, etc
d) What are the stakes of the project?In faculty/school: improved learning processes; official recognition; etc.In company: better skilled work force, increased quality of the production,increased competitiveness, etc
Profiling
Simple documentation templates can be created for recording and developing user needs statements from an interview or focus group. Questions and discussion might be used to gather information on the student group: – Students’ availability or preference of study environments – Student characteristics: entry qualifications, employment aspirations, language, disability, etc. – Current student problems or concerns – Refining an existing methods or provision – Establishing what students see as appropriate or helpful activities Recording such information systematically over time helps develop a culture of considering student needs and experiences as well as gauging successes of a new course or method.
Curriculum design
A needs analysis for a new method or course is likely to include a review of overall teaching strategies. E-learning facilitates a whole range of teaching and learning activities – see CAP e-guide ‘E-learning solutions for teaching and learning’. However, a learning activity does not take place in isolation to the teaching and study environments, assessment tasks, tools used and so forth. It is therefore important to ensure that all components of the curriculum, including any uses of e-learning methods or materials, are properly integrated and the purpose of a particular component is then clear to the student.
Pedagogical models are useful for making explicit the intentions of the e-learning approach. The needs of the tutors and students will be different in each case.
Looking at needs across different types of development models, Robin Mason (1998) contends that:
“Current approaches to teaching and learning in higher education are dominated by the following: the importance of interactivity in the learning process, the changing role of the teacher from sage to guide, the need for knowledge management skills and for team working abilities, and the move towards resource-based rather than packaged learning.”
She suggests three development models:
1. CONTENT SUPPORT MODEL
Course content and tutorial support are dealt with separately, particularly used where content does not change significantly or where courses are tutored by external staff. Collaborative activity (peer commenting, online assessment, computer conferencing) amongst students is rudimentary, in most cases less than 20% study time, and added onto the course as supplementary rather than core. With increasing use of the web for delivering content, there is more scope to extend the balance of content to collaborative activity.
2. WRAP-AROUND MODEL
The course content consists of tailor made materials (study guide, activities and discussion) wrapped around existing materials (textbooks, CD-ROM resources or tutorials) and representing around 50% study time. The remaining 50% is comprised of online interactions and discussions, including real time online events and screen sharing with increasing audio/video components. The tutor role is more extensive as less of the course is pre-determined and students take more responsibility for their learning.
3. INTEGRATED MODEL
The third model is at the opposite end of the spectrum from the first. The heart of the course involves collaborative activities, learning resources and joint assignments. These take place online through discussion, accessing and processing information and carrying out tasks. The course contents are fluid and dynamic as they are largely determined by the individual and group activity. In a sense, the integrated model dissolves the distinction between content and support, and is dependent on the creation of a learning community. Matching e-learning methods to needs “Learning is not a spectator sport. Students do not learn much just sitting in classes listening to teachers, memorizing prepackaged assignments, and spitting out answers. They must talk about what they are learning, write reflectively about it, relate it to past experiences, and apply it to their daily lives. They must make what they learn part of themselves.” (Ehrmann, 1995)
The range of technologies that encourage active learning is staggering. Many fall into one of three categories: tools and resources for learning by doing, time-delayed exchange, and real-time conversation.
Building on existing course models, it can be useful to map tools and technologies onto learning activities and to consider how these enhance or enrich what you already do.
A simple list to use might look like this:
– Lecture presentation
– Knowledge dissemination
– Communication with and between students
– Assessment for feedback and monitoring
– Labs and tutorial activities
– Course management Pedagogically, you might consider what learning theories are being supported (see E-Guide Pedagogies for E-Learning).
For instance:
– Instructivist
– Constructivist
– Situated learning Or more specifically, for example:
– Knowledge of facts and figures
– Problem-based learning
– Work-based learning
– Practice-based learning
– Critical thinking skills
– Analytical skills
– Creativity The appropriateness of tools that are orientated towards content, communication or collaboration then (hopefully) starts to become more obvious.
Reviewing your course An initial course design review is likely to include the following questions:
1. What is the course or module? Identify/clarify the aims, objectives, format, student capabilities to be developed, core content etc.
2. What are the student group characteristics? Identify/clarify student numbers, backgrounds, special needs or languages, IT literacy, access to computer/network, UG/PG, level etc.
3. What is the development project intended to achieve? Identify/clarify the main aims and objectives for what you wish to develop, intended benefits and outcomes, sources of background literature.
4. What are the implications for the technologies and tools selected?
If possible, identify existing examples of use of the technologies you are proposing to integrate, particularly those available locally, such as application type, access/availability of licences, robustness, network requirements, usability issues, any costs of developing or extending software programs.
5. What skills do I need to develop to be an effective teacher using these tools and online environments?
Simple documentation templates can be created for recording and developing user needs statements from an interview or focus group. Questions and discussion might be used to gather information on the student group: – Students’ availability or preference of study environments – Student characteristics: entry qualifications, employment aspirations, language, disability, etc. – Current student problems or concerns – Refining an existing methods or provision – Establishing what students see as appropriate or helpful activities Recording such information systematically over time helps develop a culture of considering student needs and experiences as well as gauging successes of a new course or method.
Curriculum design
A needs analysis for a new method or course is likely to include a review of overall teaching strategies. E-learning facilitates a whole range of teaching and learning activities – see CAP e-guide ‘E-learning solutions for teaching and learning’. However, a learning activity does not take place in isolation to the teaching and study environments, assessment tasks, tools used and so forth. It is therefore important to ensure that all components of the curriculum, including any uses of e-learning methods or materials, are properly integrated and the purpose of a particular component is then clear to the student.
Pedagogical models are useful for making explicit the intentions of the e-learning approach. The needs of the tutors and students will be different in each case.
Looking at needs across different types of development models, Robin Mason (1998) contends that:
“Current approaches to teaching and learning in higher education are dominated by the following: the importance of interactivity in the learning process, the changing role of the teacher from sage to guide, the need for knowledge management skills and for team working abilities, and the move towards resource-based rather than packaged learning.”
She suggests three development models:
1. CONTENT SUPPORT MODEL
Course content and tutorial support are dealt with separately, particularly used where content does not change significantly or where courses are tutored by external staff. Collaborative activity (peer commenting, online assessment, computer conferencing) amongst students is rudimentary, in most cases less than 20% study time, and added onto the course as supplementary rather than core. With increasing use of the web for delivering content, there is more scope to extend the balance of content to collaborative activity.
2. WRAP-AROUND MODEL
The course content consists of tailor made materials (study guide, activities and discussion) wrapped around existing materials (textbooks, CD-ROM resources or tutorials) and representing around 50% study time. The remaining 50% is comprised of online interactions and discussions, including real time online events and screen sharing with increasing audio/video components. The tutor role is more extensive as less of the course is pre-determined and students take more responsibility for their learning.
3. INTEGRATED MODEL
The third model is at the opposite end of the spectrum from the first. The heart of the course involves collaborative activities, learning resources and joint assignments. These take place online through discussion, accessing and processing information and carrying out tasks. The course contents are fluid and dynamic as they are largely determined by the individual and group activity. In a sense, the integrated model dissolves the distinction between content and support, and is dependent on the creation of a learning community. Matching e-learning methods to needs “Learning is not a spectator sport. Students do not learn much just sitting in classes listening to teachers, memorizing prepackaged assignments, and spitting out answers. They must talk about what they are learning, write reflectively about it, relate it to past experiences, and apply it to their daily lives. They must make what they learn part of themselves.” (Ehrmann, 1995)
The range of technologies that encourage active learning is staggering. Many fall into one of three categories: tools and resources for learning by doing, time-delayed exchange, and real-time conversation.
Building on existing course models, it can be useful to map tools and technologies onto learning activities and to consider how these enhance or enrich what you already do.
A simple list to use might look like this:
– Lecture presentation
– Knowledge dissemination
– Communication with and between students
– Assessment for feedback and monitoring
– Labs and tutorial activities
– Course management Pedagogically, you might consider what learning theories are being supported (see E-Guide Pedagogies for E-Learning).
For instance:
– Instructivist
– Constructivist
– Situated learning Or more specifically, for example:
– Knowledge of facts and figures
– Problem-based learning
– Work-based learning
– Practice-based learning
– Critical thinking skills
– Analytical skills
– Creativity The appropriateness of tools that are orientated towards content, communication or collaboration then (hopefully) starts to become more obvious.
Reviewing your course An initial course design review is likely to include the following questions:
1. What is the course or module? Identify/clarify the aims, objectives, format, student capabilities to be developed, core content etc.
2. What are the student group characteristics? Identify/clarify student numbers, backgrounds, special needs or languages, IT literacy, access to computer/network, UG/PG, level etc.
3. What is the development project intended to achieve? Identify/clarify the main aims and objectives for what you wish to develop, intended benefits and outcomes, sources of background literature.
4. What are the implications for the technologies and tools selected?
If possible, identify existing examples of use of the technologies you are proposing to integrate, particularly those available locally, such as application type, access/availability of licences, robustness, network requirements, usability issues, any costs of developing or extending software programs.
5. What skills do I need to develop to be an effective teacher using these tools and online environments?
What is a needs analysis?
Needs analysis is an element of designing (or reviewing) a curriculum. Its purpose is to establish key learning outcomes and requirements in the design and delivery of a course or learning activity. The needs relate to the characteristics, concerns and potential constraints of the students (or any other relevant stakeholders). The analysis seeks to match possible or proposed techniques and materials to these needs and thus identify whether the design is appropriate to the intended goals. Good course design should separate ends from means. “We are constantly making the mistake of specifying the means of doing something rather than the results we want. This can only limit our ability to find better solutions to real problems.” (Gilb, 1988) In most cases, reviewing a course and responding to current need is perhaps something done intuitively and without formal procedures. However, there is increasing pressure to update curriculum purposes and methods in response to changing government requirements (such as accessibility, employability and information and IT skills agendas). Developing a new course or changing an existing teaching approach is likely to feel daunting, time-consuming and risky, especially when technology is involved. These risks and concerns are likely to be significantly diminished if a more explicit approach is taken to evaluating needs. There is certainly the usual need to justify limited time available and to be aware of likely technical requirements.
How it aids design and planning
A needs analysis is an effective means of identifying objectives and requirements for e-learning development. Understanding students’ needs (not to mention your own!) is crucial to the successful design or redesign of any course or learning activity. Needs analysis for learning is also one of the most difficult things to do well. The use of templates or models, as well as availability of training and support in e-learning, can reduce the risk and isolation of trying out new methods. If needs or requirements are unclear the ‘specification’ for what you are developing will be wrong. If the specification is wrong then the design will be wrong. If the design is wrong … the students will be dissatisfied or not achieve what you/the course intends. These four ‘real world’ scenarios have common features
– aside from ambiguity.
– The University is concerned about equal opportunities in the curriculum. The present induction course is out of date. As a result, a working group is established to ‘rejig’ the existing awareness programme for departments.
– At a departmental meeting, the Chair says: “We have all these new skills policies. We need to make sure all curricula are explicit about what employable skills are being developed by our students. We need all tutors to review their courses in terms of using e-learning to support skills development.
– A lecturer has just been given a set of multimedia web materials that support students’ in critically evaluating X (problem/issue/topic). S(he) is now tasked to ensure they know how to use it and what to do with it.
– A course team are keen to use e-learning to encourage collaborative learning. They are planning to use online discussion tools to support an existing course taught with face-to-face lectures and web resources. A needs analysis will assist in all of these scenarios in terms of identifying/clarifying staff or students needs and producing clear and measurable outcomes as indicators of success of the (e-learning) development. Further aims of a needs analysis are to support the selection of approaches that achieve one or more of the following: – are likely to save time or costs
– are valuable and viable
– are scalable and sustainable. It is fairly well accepted that e-learning developments that are valuable and sustainable in the longer term are those based on the use of small-scale, incremental, non-revolutionary technologies, i.e. mainstream worldware tools (Ehrmann, 2000).
These require far lower investment in terms of cost, maintenance, updating and skills. In today’s climate, the Web is the ultimate worldware tool; this includes web-based communication tools, but also analysis type applications, such as spreadsheets, maths tools, design software etc.). The challenge to the lecturer then is to package these basic tools in pedagogically viable ways. This is where needs analysis can assist in providing diagnostic evaluation
– that is, scoping out the objectives of what your development seeks to achieve against the requirements of the intended end-users.
What should be considered
A needs analysis is worth spending some time on so you go about things in a systematic manner. Evaluation should ideally be planned at the outset of any new development or modification. Your initial plan is likely to include aims, questions, tasks, stakeholders, timescales and instruments/methods. It should define “that which you are trying to investigate but also how you are going to go about it” (Crompton, 1997). Generally speaking, the areas to consider in embedding e-learning effectively into a course include issues around:
1. Learning- is the pedagogy appropriate?
2. Infrastructure – will the environment support my needs?
3. Technology – is the technology appropriate and can I/students use it? Identifying and analysing preconceptions and assumptions prior to use can ensure potential barriers to access or effectiveness are accounted for appropriately in development design and planning A preliminary review is likely to include: – Student and curriculum needs analysis tasks
– Constraints, resources and costs
– Identifying one’s own professional development needs
– Identifying evaluation criteria (indicators of success)
– Creating a statement of purpose (for the development project)
Addressing stakeholder needs
Needs analysis is closely linked with evaluation and dissemination. Firstly, it is the crucial ‘diagnostic’ part of an effective evaluation (see CAP e-learning guide “Evaluating e-learning developments”). The purpose of evaluation is to offer a means to investigate, provide evidence, learn, share and make judgements about what we do and how we do it. Secondly, there are inevitably links with feedback gathered from dissemination activities, as you may engage with stakeholders who can inform the choices you make in your development. A needs analysis is the starting point for defining the criteria against which judgements about success can be made. It will include a close scrutiny of the pedagogical rationale and outcomes of the curriculum and assessment design, which the planned e-learning (activity or environment) is intending to support or enhance. Some of the areas your needs analysis should address may be determined by your stakeholders (those who are influenced or benefited by the development). Primarily, this is most likely to be your students (whose learning you are aiming to enhance), it may be yourself in terms of developing your own skills. However, there may well be other, perhaps departmental, concerns or questions which you might choose to include for others treading a similar path.
Involving students
Involving students in the needs analysis process helps you to engage with them as the main beneficiaries (or sufferers!) of any new e-learning approaches you put in place. It can encourage more active participation in the development process. You might consider holding an initial focus group with students explaining your aims and the e-learning being developed and ask for their ideas and feedback as things progress. The students can also propose areas for investigation and can give feedback on the effectiveness of your evaluation questions. Many techniques are available for eliciting student (user) needs. One problem is that students often do not know or cannot articulate what they want in the course context For example, new students who have not studied a subject beforehand may not have the necessary language/terminology. They may lack the knowledge that comes from experience of using technology: selecting those that have experience of e-learning activities. Often students who volunteer for focus groups or interviews or return questionnaires are the technophiles, the technophobes not wishing to publicise their lack of skills. This can skew your analysis considerably. Selection of students to involve in a needs analysis therefore requires careful thought, to ensure you obtain responses that are reasonably representative of the whole student group. You may have to use elicitation techniques that build knowledge as well as keep a focus on the users own needs.
Needs analysis is an element of designing (or reviewing) a curriculum. Its purpose is to establish key learning outcomes and requirements in the design and delivery of a course or learning activity. The needs relate to the characteristics, concerns and potential constraints of the students (or any other relevant stakeholders). The analysis seeks to match possible or proposed techniques and materials to these needs and thus identify whether the design is appropriate to the intended goals. Good course design should separate ends from means. “We are constantly making the mistake of specifying the means of doing something rather than the results we want. This can only limit our ability to find better solutions to real problems.” (Gilb, 1988) In most cases, reviewing a course and responding to current need is perhaps something done intuitively and without formal procedures. However, there is increasing pressure to update curriculum purposes and methods in response to changing government requirements (such as accessibility, employability and information and IT skills agendas). Developing a new course or changing an existing teaching approach is likely to feel daunting, time-consuming and risky, especially when technology is involved. These risks and concerns are likely to be significantly diminished if a more explicit approach is taken to evaluating needs. There is certainly the usual need to justify limited time available and to be aware of likely technical requirements.
How it aids design and planning
A needs analysis is an effective means of identifying objectives and requirements for e-learning development. Understanding students’ needs (not to mention your own!) is crucial to the successful design or redesign of any course or learning activity. Needs analysis for learning is also one of the most difficult things to do well. The use of templates or models, as well as availability of training and support in e-learning, can reduce the risk and isolation of trying out new methods. If needs or requirements are unclear the ‘specification’ for what you are developing will be wrong. If the specification is wrong then the design will be wrong. If the design is wrong … the students will be dissatisfied or not achieve what you/the course intends. These four ‘real world’ scenarios have common features
– aside from ambiguity.
– The University is concerned about equal opportunities in the curriculum. The present induction course is out of date. As a result, a working group is established to ‘rejig’ the existing awareness programme for departments.
– At a departmental meeting, the Chair says: “We have all these new skills policies. We need to make sure all curricula are explicit about what employable skills are being developed by our students. We need all tutors to review their courses in terms of using e-learning to support skills development.
– A lecturer has just been given a set of multimedia web materials that support students’ in critically evaluating X (problem/issue/topic). S(he) is now tasked to ensure they know how to use it and what to do with it.
– A course team are keen to use e-learning to encourage collaborative learning. They are planning to use online discussion tools to support an existing course taught with face-to-face lectures and web resources. A needs analysis will assist in all of these scenarios in terms of identifying/clarifying staff or students needs and producing clear and measurable outcomes as indicators of success of the (e-learning) development. Further aims of a needs analysis are to support the selection of approaches that achieve one or more of the following: – are likely to save time or costs
– are valuable and viable
– are scalable and sustainable. It is fairly well accepted that e-learning developments that are valuable and sustainable in the longer term are those based on the use of small-scale, incremental, non-revolutionary technologies, i.e. mainstream worldware tools (Ehrmann, 2000).
These require far lower investment in terms of cost, maintenance, updating and skills. In today’s climate, the Web is the ultimate worldware tool; this includes web-based communication tools, but also analysis type applications, such as spreadsheets, maths tools, design software etc.). The challenge to the lecturer then is to package these basic tools in pedagogically viable ways. This is where needs analysis can assist in providing diagnostic evaluation
– that is, scoping out the objectives of what your development seeks to achieve against the requirements of the intended end-users.
What should be considered
A needs analysis is worth spending some time on so you go about things in a systematic manner. Evaluation should ideally be planned at the outset of any new development or modification. Your initial plan is likely to include aims, questions, tasks, stakeholders, timescales and instruments/methods. It should define “that which you are trying to investigate but also how you are going to go about it” (Crompton, 1997). Generally speaking, the areas to consider in embedding e-learning effectively into a course include issues around:
1. Learning- is the pedagogy appropriate?
2. Infrastructure – will the environment support my needs?
3. Technology – is the technology appropriate and can I/students use it? Identifying and analysing preconceptions and assumptions prior to use can ensure potential barriers to access or effectiveness are accounted for appropriately in development design and planning A preliminary review is likely to include: – Student and curriculum needs analysis tasks
– Constraints, resources and costs
– Identifying one’s own professional development needs
– Identifying evaluation criteria (indicators of success)
– Creating a statement of purpose (for the development project)
Addressing stakeholder needs
Needs analysis is closely linked with evaluation and dissemination. Firstly, it is the crucial ‘diagnostic’ part of an effective evaluation (see CAP e-learning guide “Evaluating e-learning developments”). The purpose of evaluation is to offer a means to investigate, provide evidence, learn, share and make judgements about what we do and how we do it. Secondly, there are inevitably links with feedback gathered from dissemination activities, as you may engage with stakeholders who can inform the choices you make in your development. A needs analysis is the starting point for defining the criteria against which judgements about success can be made. It will include a close scrutiny of the pedagogical rationale and outcomes of the curriculum and assessment design, which the planned e-learning (activity or environment) is intending to support or enhance. Some of the areas your needs analysis should address may be determined by your stakeholders (those who are influenced or benefited by the development). Primarily, this is most likely to be your students (whose learning you are aiming to enhance), it may be yourself in terms of developing your own skills. However, there may well be other, perhaps departmental, concerns or questions which you might choose to include for others treading a similar path.
Involving students
Involving students in the needs analysis process helps you to engage with them as the main beneficiaries (or sufferers!) of any new e-learning approaches you put in place. It can encourage more active participation in the development process. You might consider holding an initial focus group with students explaining your aims and the e-learning being developed and ask for their ideas and feedback as things progress. The students can also propose areas for investigation and can give feedback on the effectiveness of your evaluation questions. Many techniques are available for eliciting student (user) needs. One problem is that students often do not know or cannot articulate what they want in the course context For example, new students who have not studied a subject beforehand may not have the necessary language/terminology. They may lack the knowledge that comes from experience of using technology: selecting those that have experience of e-learning activities. Often students who volunteer for focus groups or interviews or return questionnaires are the technophiles, the technophobes not wishing to publicise their lack of skills. This can skew your analysis considerably. Selection of students to involve in a needs analysis therefore requires careful thought, to ensure you obtain responses that are reasonably representative of the whole student group. You may have to use elicitation techniques that build knowledge as well as keep a focus on the users own needs.
domingo, 7 de março de 2010
b) For each of the three cases, assign a value on a scale going from 0 up to 20 toeach of the e-Learning profile components, as they are presented in the “e-Learning concept” syllabus;
c) Discuss the issue within your group;
d) For each assigned value, justify your choice;
e) To do this use the “Google Documents” server to create the table of values,save the file in the Excel format (<*.xls>;
f) Use the MS-Excel software to create for each case a radar type chart with theMS-Excel-Chart feature;
g) Submit the group work paper of 3 pages maximum with comments, charts,and conclusions in a MS-Word format.
h) Publish a copy of your group work on the ‘Moodle’ course Web site in thefolder named “Assignment01-Task2”.
i) Assessment - grades: 20 points; part of the group work portfolio (group workportfolio: 50% of total grade).
j) Use the forum “Assignment01”, topic “Task2”, for questions and comments;
c) Discuss the issue within your group;
d) For each assigned value, justify your choice;
e) To do this use the “Google Documents” server to create the table of values,save the file in the Excel format (<*.xls>;
f) Use the MS-Excel software to create for each case a radar type chart with theMS-Excel-Chart feature;
g) Submit the group work paper of 3 pages maximum with comments, charts,and conclusions in a MS-Word format.
h) Publish a copy of your group work on the ‘Moodle’ course Web site in thefolder named “Assignment01-Task2”.
i) Assessment - grades: 20 points; part of the group work portfolio (group workportfolio: 50% of total grade).
j) Use the forum “Assignment01”, topic “Task2”, for questions and comments;
sexta-feira, 5 de março de 2010
1. Iniciar
O finlandês da Universidade Virtual iniciativa foi delineada na estratégia nacional para a educação da sociedade da informação e pesquisa para os anos 2000-2004 adotada pelo Ministério da Educação e do governo finlandês. Com base na análise da situação mundial do finlandês HE, a visão de melhoria através HE indo virtual foi descrito eo plano de execução é lançada:
Até o ano de 2004, uma alta qualidade, ética e economicamente sustentável rede modelo baseado de organizar o ensino ea investigação terá sido consolidados.
Haverá criação de uma universidade virtual, até 2004, com base em um consórcio de várias universidades, empresas privadas e institutos de pesquisa. Ela vai produzir e oferecer internacionalmente competitivos, de alto padrão de serviços educacionais.
Os objectivos têm evoluído a partir dos documentos originais em ações e metas como
para ativar a rede de ensino, estudo e investigação
para desenvolver um novo modelo de rede, de base da cooperação universitária
diversificar os estudos universitários
desenvolver currículos universitários
para melhorar a qualidade do ensino e estudo no ensino superior
fazer uma melhor utilização das redes de TIC e
• Para melhorar a competitividade da academia finlandesa.
2. A implementação
A Universidade Virtual será estabelecida em etapas. Na fase inicial, a força-tarefa ministerial Universidade Virtual coordenou o projeto. No âmbito das negociações sobre os resultados-alvo entre o ministério e as universidades, na Primavera de 2000, as universidades empenhada em estabelecer o consórcio universidade virtual.
O Ministério da Educação escolheu, então, com base nos pedidos das universidades, cerca de vinte outros projectos específicos universitário a ser financiado até 2003. Estes projectos estão previstos para desempenhar um papel-chave na definição dos serviços da universidade virtual e um número considerável de líquido exemplar baseada cursos e programas de estudo.
A unidade de desenvolvimento foi criado em agosto de 2000 para coordenar a fase de arranque e serviços emergentes. O acordo de consórcio entre as universidades se inscreveram, o comitê gestor eleito eo plano de acção aprovado pelo consórcio no início de 2001.
A estratégia da universidade virtual foi exaustivamente debatido entre as universidades e foi adotado pelo consórcio no início de 2003.
Todos os estudantes (alunos de graduação, pós-graduados ou estudantes de universidade aberta) de qualquer membro da universidade serão elegíveis para os estudos na Universidade Virtual ou para ser mais preciso para os estudos em qualquer universidade membro do consórcio Universidade Virtual. Os alunos podem fazer cursos relacionados a seus programas de grau na Universidade Virtual, mas é a universidade de origem, que vai conceder o diploma.
O distintivo principal do FVU em comparação com outras iniciativas de universidade virtual é o seguinte:
• É uma iniciativa nacional que envolve todas as universidades do país;
• É definida no contexto de uma estratégia nacional da sociedade da informação para melhorar a qualidade de ensino e aprendizagem nas universidades e oferece aos alunos um maior acesso e flexibilidade através da integração de tecnologia.
»Não é exclusivamente orientadas para o desenvolvimento e / ou comercialização de cursos totalmente on-line para alunos fora das suas fronteiras ou para responder a uma ameaça de concorrência e
»Apesar de ainda não percebeu ou totalmente planejado, a FVU tem uma visão abrangente de incluindo o ensino, bem como pesquisa e serviços de apoio.
Um FVU eficaz foi projetado para oferecer as seguintes vantagens:
maior flexibilidade de tempo e lugar
programas flexíveis / cursos individuais e as possibilidades de estudos adicionais
intercâmbio internacional de material educativo
trabalho de cooperação e coordenação do desenvolvimento
poupança de espaço e instalações
Uso eficiente do tempo »
A FVU também foi visto como uma oportunidade para corrigir as deficiências de carácter mais geral no sistema de ensino superior da Finlândia, como a falta de uma tradição em colaboração entre universidades e uma lenta progressão de estudos para estudantes.
Devido aos grandes gastos necessários para desenvolver programas da universidade virtual, houve a necessidade de reunir recursos limitados para atingir economias de escala, conectando o trabalho entre as universidades finlandesas. Para além da obtenção de economias de escala, a FVU se destina a tratar de barreiras à aprendizagem on-line aplicações, incluindo aspectos técnicos, pedagógicos, sociais, administrativas e regulamentares. O pessoal envolvido com a FVU enfatizar que a iniciativa não exigir ou promover a virtualidade completo como o único modelo. A maioria das pessoas que conheceu durante o programa de visita foram muito resistentes à idéia de oferecer alternativas totalmente online.
3. Os Desafios
Aumentando a percentagem de alunos que freqüentam HE na Finlândia (como em todas as partes da Europa), aumentando o número de alunos em determinadas áreas populares, enquanto algumas áreas sofrem de escassez de alunos, exige novas soluções pedagógicas. Cada vez mais heterogêneo estudante procura grupos para melhor didática. Going virtual e satisfazer as necessidades mais complexas dos estudantes é uma forma de tentar resolver esses problemas.
HE instituições estão enfrentando sérios problemas de recursos. Todos esses desafios têm de ser cumpridos com orçamentos limitados. Dedicado financiamento adicional abrange apenas a fase de pilotagem.
Esses fatos colocam demandas totalmente novo no desenvolvimento de HE. Net educação baseada foi saudada por muitos como, se não uma panacéia para todos os problemas, mas para trazer alívio substancial ou, pelo menos, soluções alternativas para muitas doenças e os desafios do HE. Educação on-line, no entanto, não é de forma renderização soluções fáceis. Por outro lado, não há nenhuma maneira fácil de resolver os problemas pertinentes que está enfrentando, continuando a desenvolver campus educação baseada quer. Face a educação presencial não é nem barato, nem o custo-benefício. Assim educacional decisores políticos têm de vir a enfrentar os mesmos problemas fundamentais da educação se procurar soluções a partir da rede ou no interior do campus.
De acordo com o plano de acção principais questões que serão abordadas e esperemos que para ser transformado em fatores de sucesso serão as seguintes:
Apoio ao projeto colaborativo e entrega de rede baseado em cursos
Resolver as questões de DPI
Integração dos diferentes modos de instrução
Tutoria on-line
A mobilidade virtual de alunos
»Encontrar um modelo sustentável de operação.
Estas questões estão atualmente em trabalho ativo, por exemplo através de uma série de projectos inter-universitária. O objetivo desses projetos é não só para a concepção de cursos excelentes para ser executado na rede com êxito. Espera-se que eles servem também como exemplos de boas práticas para ser ampliados. Além disso, espera-se que eles vão lançar as sementes de um novo tipo de colaboração acadêmica entre os profissionais através de instituições, faculdades e paradigmas de investigação. A falta de apoio pedagógico e técnico adequado também apela para a partilha de recursos entre as instituições.
As questões de propriedade intelectual não pode ser resolvido adequadamente dentro de um projeto nacional, devido à sua natureza global. A Universidade Virtual acaba de publicar um conjunto de modelos contratuais aplicáveis. Neste esforço procurará FVU combinado com outras instituições educativas sob a tutela do Ministério da Educação, que previa a melhor assistência jurídica na elaboração de modelos de contratos e esperamos dar certo nível de consultoria on-line também.
FVU não é destinada a virtualidade plena na oferta de cursos. Consequentemente a atenção também será pago a melhoria do ensino em curso e estudar as práticas através de incorporação de elementos em linha em qualquer curso quando for o caso. Esperemos que dê origem a uma nova prática optimização da utilização e do mix de ensino e aprendizagem diferentes modalidades de uma forma flexível. Isto dá aos alunos a oportunidade de escolher entre vários métodos de entrega do curso e realização diferentes fases do processo de aprendizagem. Flexibilidade deverá ser estendido aos seus limites máximos para permitir a personalização e personalização dos ambientes de aprendizagem e modalidades de ensino.
Um certo nível de tutoria on-line já está disponível para abrir estudantes universitários. As soluções desenvolvidas há uma rica fonte de adopção e adaptação a prática para os estudantes grau de ensino. Acredita-se que os serviços de tutoria será amplamente distribuído e entre as universidades membros e os serviços centralizados fornecidos pelo portal nacional vai ser muito magro no começo. No longo prazo, quando as ofertas projeto do curso eo curso será fornecido em grande escala e quando os sistemas de informação e bases de dados será de pleno direito, não haverá possibilidades de prestação de serviços mais abrangente.
As universidades finlandesas são pequenas. Isto significa oportunidades limitadas para os estudantes no seu campus de origem. Independentemente das altas taxas de mobilidade dos estudantes, não há necessidade de expandir dramaticamente a mobilidade virtual dos estudantes. Estudantes Proporcionar oportunidades flexíveis para pegar os cursos de outras universidades sem a necessidade de envolver em um monte de tempo e dinheiro viajando de consumo, existe um enorme potencial para a prestação do serviço FVU. Uma força-tarefa foi recolhida para enfrentar os desafios administrativos da mobilidade virtual com as transferências a crédito, operações financeiras, estudante registrar etc
Mesmo que a iniciativa da universidade virtual está no foco da estratégia do finlandês da sociedade de informação do governo, não é executado de cima para baixo. Nem é executado de baixo para cima. É claramente rede baseada e gerida. Todas as universidades são as partes interessadas. As atividades e serviços são assim definidas, concebido e será executado por inovadores e entusiasmados redes acadêmicas assistida pelo Ministério da empresa estatal, a CSC, que é responsável pela rede da universidade finlandesa e computação científica. O atual modelo organizacional certamente vai precisar de muitas modificações para executar o serviço HE virtual com sucesso no futuro. Resta também a ser visto, assim como o consórcio vai conseguir atrair parceiros não-acadêmicos e alargar as suas actividades para além das fronteiras nacionais.
4. O finlandês Universidade Virtual Financiamento e Governação
O Ministério da Educação finlandês, comprometeu o financiamento aos FVU até o final de 2004. A FVU tem financiamento de cerca de 10 milhões de Euros para o primeiro ano de seu desenvolvimento. Cerca de metade do montante que foi atribuído a cada uma das universidades para o seu desenvolvimento ea outra metade para a inter-selecionados 20 projetos de rede da universidade. O financiamento adicional de 1 milhão de Euros foi levantado para o desenvolvimento do portal FVU. O Ministério da Educação finlandesa tenciona fazer a FVU um programa permanente e consolidar a prestação de serviços desenvolvidos por esta iniciativa e os projetos dentro do programa.
Todas as 21 universidades na Finlândia aderiram ao consórcio que está a desenvolver e gerir a FVU. Projetos, como a comunidade científica nacional Electronic Library FinELib e da universidade finlandesa aberto, Suvi, será estreitamente integrado na iniciativa nova e destina-se a colaboração com o Instituto Politécnico Virtual Initiative.
O consórcio é um importante mecanismo para discutir e propor soluções para problemas práticos, tais como direitos de propriedade intelectual, o apoio técnico necessário no trabalho de desenvolvimento, eo desenvolvimento de professores, conhecimentos e competências relativas à educação online.
Para realizar o desenvolvimento de práticas e trabalhos de construção, em 2000, a Universidade Virtual Unidade de Desenvolvimento foi criado como uma unidade de serviço comum para as universidades. As atribuições da Unidade de Desenvolvimento, que agora tem uma equipe de cerca de 10 profissionais, incluem:
• Fase de desenvolvimento das atividades e da estrutura administrativa do consórcio universidade virtual
Concepção da política »e planejamento estratégico para funções de FVU
Dar apoio »aos projetos iniciados por universidades e pelo consórcio
»Investigar e informar sobre as atividades do FVU, acompanhamento e avaliação desenvolvimentos relevantes em outros países e divulgar relatórios sobre as actividades da Universidade Virtual e manter contactos com os parceiros do projecto, a fim de desenvolver atividades conjuntas
»Assegurar o funcionamento eficiente dos serviços a nível prático
»Elaboração de modelos de acordos para os membros (por exemplo, os acordos para as redes de parceiros, direitos autorais e transações financeiras)
A Unidade de Desenvolvimento trabalha em estreita cooperação com o Ministério da força Virtual de Educação da Universidade de tarefas e com um comité de direcção de um subconjunto de representantes do consórcio. A Unidade de Desenvolvimento também cria e mantém contactos a nível internacional, recolha e divulgação de informações sobre as tendências globais, a fim de reagir rapidamente a mudanças no ambiente, reforçando a capacidade operacional da rede.
5. O status do projeto FVU
Paralelo ao trabalho da Unidade de Desenvolvimento FVU, projetos conjuntos entre universidades foram iniciadas e que irá produzir os cursos de primeira linha e forma a base para as atividades do FVU. Estes projectos incluem redes regionais 3, 5 projetos conjuntos visando a prestação de serviços ( "meta-projetos"), e 11 redes de disciplinas específicas, variando de assistência social (SOSNET) para um programa de treinamento de pós-graduação de faculdades de direito. Além disso, o financiamento concedido diretamente às universidades tem sido usado para contratar part-time ou full-time de pessoas de apoio para ajudar na formação e apoio de professores e funcionários que estão desenvolvendo materiais de aprendizagem online. Os primeiros programas iniciados durante o ano lectivo 2001-2002.
Um portal FVU é outro componente importante aqui. O portal destina-se como um portal funcional e adaptável à rede FVU serviços baseados com as funções e serviços necessários para o ensino ea aprendizagem, incluindo:
Seleção de cursos »
Informações sobre o curso », incluindo motor de busca
Ferramenta de registo »
Serviços de apoio »(estudante de orientação, consultoria e serviços de informação, gestão de carteira)
Canais de informação e de contacto »
• Para acessar os serviços nacionais de biblioteca eletrônica
»Fóruns de discussão e áreas de colaboração para os professores
»Serviços de apoio, incluindo ferramentas de avaliação versátil.
O portal será personalizado para os vários utilizadores. O portal também terá uma ferramenta para a definição de perfis de professores perícias que podem ser utilizados para a definição individual, de equipe e organização necessita de formação específica.
O grande desafio previsto na implementação do portal é o desenvolvimento e financiamento da camada de meados de funcionalidade, onde as responsabilidades das universidades e da unidade de desenvolvimento se cruzam.
O primeiro conjunto de funcionalidades do portal foi lançado no Outono de 2001, com funcionalidade adicional acrescentado no final de 2002. O portal como está actualmente previsto é estimado para ser totalmente funcional, no Outono de 2004.
Enquanto a FVU se destina a facilitar todas as atividades acadêmicas, incluindo a investigação, esses serviços ainda não foram elaborados.
6. Implementação Benefícios e Armadilhas
Embora apenas lançado oficialmente em janeiro de 2001, a FVU tem sido objecto de um processo de planejamento muito maior, que incluiu um plano de execução de tarefas força que estava pronto no final de 1999. A FVU já teve um grande impacto na Finlândia, nos seguintes aspectos:
Construção de conhecimento da utilização de redes de computadores para o ensino
É evidente que o anúncio da FVU e concessões de financiamento aumentaram a consciência e interesse entre os professores da universidade e do pessoal na prática e da investigação sobre o uso de redes de computadores para a aprendizagem. Existe alguma confusão sobre o significado dos termos "curso virtual" ou "universidade virtual" e uma crença geral de que um cara-a-face componente será sempre necessária. No entanto, a FVU já teve um impacto benéfico em destacar as oportunidades oferecidas pela aprendizagem on-line e incentivar a discussão eo debate.
Colocar o foco no ensino e aprendizagem
O objetivo principal do FVU é melhorar o ensino ea aprendizagem em universidades finlandesas. Através da discussão do uso da linha de ensino e aprendizagem de modelos, há evidências de maior enfoque no ensino e na aprendizagem.
Criação de redes de colaboração, mais rápida difusão das melhores práticas, ea aceleração da capacitação de pessoal
Cada um dos projetos FVU que foi financiado ligou professores e funcionários através de um número de universidades finlandês. Por exemplo, um projeto chamado Kasvi links das oito faculdades de ensino na Finlândia. Vários projectos têm organizado oficinas e algumas das oficinas atraíram várias centenas de participantes.
Alguns dos meta-projectos, em particular poderia ter um grande impacto benéfico. Os objetivos das quatro meta-projetos estão resumidos a seguir:
IT PEDA: Apoiar as universidades o desenvolvimento de estratégias para as atividades da universidade virtual, incluindo a criação e apoio de uma rede de centros pedagógicos nas universidades participantes. O projeto também é responsável por seminários para administradores sobre o desenvolvimento da estratégia.
Tie Vie: Formação de professores na utilização pedagógica das tecnologias de informação e comunicação.
IQ Forma: Criar instrumentos através dos quais os estudantes podem aprender sobre si mesmos como aprendizes e adquirir habilidades para se tornar mais eficazes os alunos em cursos virtuais
OVI: Projeto para o desenvolvimento do ambiente virtual de avaliação e estudo de aconselhamento dos alunos, incluindo a melhoria dos conhecimentos e habilidades necessários para os estudos com êxito, aconselhamento de carreira, gestão e estudo.
Criar um fórum para discussão de questões-chave entre os administradores
Reunindo os principais administradores de todas as universidades na Finlândia, como parte do consórcio teve um impacto imediato com muita promessa para o futuro. As questões levantadas nas reuniões do consórcio vão desde os serviços de apoio necessários para as atividades da universidade virtual para questões de direitos autorais. Grande parte dos temas em discussão não são restritos às questões Universidade Virtual e terá impacto sobre as políticas institucionais para o ensino em sala de aula, como a cessão de crédito e direitos de autor.
Criação de economias de escala para o desenvolvimento de conteúdos, distribuição de programas, serviços de apoio e críticas
Participação em uma das reuniões dos projectos FVU, a Leste do projeto FVU, claramente justificadas as vantagens ea necessidade da partilha de recursos e esforços, dada a capacidade limitada e os orçamentos de cada instituição. Este projeto reúne três das pequenas universidades da Finlândia para oferecer cursos em conjunto projetado, ampliar a oferta de cursos, e garantir uma melhor qualidade e melhor utilização dos recursos locais e especializados.
Não há dúvida de que a FVU enfrentará importantes desafios, especialmente tendo em conta os recursos limitados e um complexo e difícil de mudar o ambiente operacional. Diversas grandes questões e desafios na implementação da visão da rede FVU são identificados.
Gerenciando Expectativas
O anúncio da FVU ea concessão de financiamento suscitou uma enorme expectativa, apesar do financiamento relativamente limitado para a realização da iniciativa e uma falta de história e conhecimento amplo de como implementar aprendizagem on-line na Finlândia. O número de funcionários a tempo inteiro dedicado ao FVU é baixa eo sucesso dependerá do esforço contínuo de outros especialistas, como bem e na boa vontade. Há expectativas também diferentes e diferentes definições de virtualidade ou efetiva aprendizagem virtual entre os muitos participantes. O impacto da FVU será provavelmente superestimou a curto prazo e, se for bem sucedido, subestimados no longo prazo.
Para abordar a questão da gestão das expectativas, a FVU precisa imediatamente:
• Identificar os vários grupos de interessados, incluindo grupos de financiamento e definir as suas expectativas quanto quantitativamente quanto possível
• Desenvolver e implementar um plano de comunicação e estratégia de relações públicas que inclui súmulas curto abordar o que a FVU é eo que não é. Ilustrar o nível de financiamento através de comparações com os investimentos feitos em outros países e
»Continue a utilizar a FVU pessoas de contato em cada uma das organizações participantes FVU para informar as universidades e grupos de interesse local e trazer equívocos frente e preocupações.
Liderança compromisso institucional e estratégica
O nível de conhecimento e compromisso dos administradores universitários em instituições participantes varia. Para muitos, o eLearning é visto como uma boa demonstração de inovação ou de uma fonte de algum financiamento para escorar departamentos fraco. Em alguns casos, os cursos da universidade virtual ou programas são vistos como uma parte integrante da missão primária da instituição ou uma parte de uma solução de conjunto para resolver um problema desafiador. Em parte, a falta de atenção e compromisso de financiamento pode ser devido ao ambiente cada vez mais difícil orçamental para as universidades finlandesas.
A FVU começou a abordar os requisitos para aumentar o conhecimento dos gestores universitários
Liderança no equilíbrio eficaz entre as práticas pedagógicas, administrativas e de TIC
A intenção do Ministério é colocar a pedagogia na vanguarda de todos financiados e iniciativas associadas da FVU. A FVU Unidade de Desenvolvimento está a ter uma abordagem mais equilibrada colocar para além das práticas pedagógicas de administração e práticas das TIC para a grande figura do FVU. Há alguma resistência a "importação" de modelos de outros países, há um interesse legítimo na adopção de práticas que podem não ser compatíveis com a cultura finlandesa.
A maioria das instituições finlandês ter tido algumas experiências julgamento no desenvolvimento e oferta de cursos on-line com o foco em classes de videoconferência ou publicando notas do curso e recursos do curso útil como oposição à execução em actividades de aprendizagem. Os departamentos técnicos de universidades como a Universidade de Tecnologia de Helsinki e Tampere University of Technology tiveram experiência prévia com ofertas baseadas na web.
A FVU será no futuro fundo e incentivar projetos e atividades que se aproveitam de situações onde a aprendizagem online pode adicionar valor real. Uma série de projetos são de expansão de vídeo-conferência ou classes oferecendo uma opção on-line para um frente-a-face a atividade em sala de aula, sem examinar esse valor acrescentado ou factor melhores áreas de aplicação.
A FVU irá desenvolver um plano para disseminar práticas eficazes.
Learner Focus
Há uma investigação promissoras que incide sobre os alunos, como de QI FORMA, e um inquérito foi realizado para determinar e analisar as necessidades do aluno para o portal. Um maior acompanhamento foi planejado por um estudante e um painel de pessoal para avaliar o projeto do portal.
Internacional Alianças Estratégicas
Com a sua reputação na indústria sem fio, as organizações finlandês receber uma boa recepção de organizações em todo o mundo. As universidades finlandês está feliz em ter a oportunidade de ligação com outros países da UE em projectos de investigação e divulgação.
Dado o trabalho envolvido na celebração e execução de alianças estratégicas, a FVU Unidade de Desenvolvimento incidirá em entrar em alguns arranjos formais a cada ano. Estes acordos podem incluir pós-doc de cooperação e de intercâmbio da faculdade, no conhecimento e na troca de ferramentas em áreas como repositórios de objetos de aprendizagem, e professores, visitas de peritos. Maiores informações serão postadas no site da FVU em outras línguas com projetos incentivados a fornecer resumos e atualizações para postagem.
Avaliação
Dada a importância da avaliação na gestão de expectativas e de alimentação para a melhoria contínua dos investimentos do FVU's FVU desenvolveu uma estratégia de avaliação para a iniciativa. Este é um processo contínuo e irá expandir a partir da avaliação inicial da web arranjo para a plena escala de avaliação FVU pelas mesmas organizações que avaliam as universidades convencionais e as suas operações.
7. Os últimos desenvolvimentos e Lições Aprendidas
Um dos paradigmas básicos por trás do finlandês Universidade Virtual foi a idéia de dar aos alunos uma oportunidade de aumentar seu portfólio com cursos de aprendizagem de outras universidades na Finlândia. Isto foi conseguido por
»A criação de um acordo para incluir todas as universidades finlandesas, como os estudos são flexíveis
o planejado
O acompanhamento
O aceite
O gerenciado
o financiados
• construindo um sistema de informação para apoiar estas actividades
»Arranjar financiamento extra do Ministério da Educação para cobrir os custos iniciais destas actividades extra
»Extensa formação de estudantes, professores, funcionários administrativos, etc sobre a nova abordagem.
Há muitos desenvolvimentos na universidade virtual configuração que pode ser considerado inovador e algo a considerar também no exterior. O elemento chave é o serviço de aprendizagem para facilitar o desenvolvimento de cursos online e programas de incentivo:
1. alunos através de um balcão com uma vasta gama de informações, recursos e serviços;
2. instituições participantes e seus professores, juntamente com uma oportunidade de aproveitar as economias de escala, tornando disponível uma vasta gama de serviços, conhecimento e recursos para apoiar o desenvolvimento de cursos online e programas; e
instituições participantes a oportunidade de tirar partido das sinergias e economias de escala na comercialização de seus cursos e programas em casa e no exterior.
8. Referências
Curry, J.; O finlandês Universidade Virtual: Lições e intercâmbio de conhecimentos Oportunidades de Informação Pan-Planos Canadense. Preparado para O Information Highway Advisory Branch, Indústria do Canadá. 2001. 22 p.
Kess P. O finlandês Universidade Virtual. 4 º Encontro de Negócios em Hagenberg, Áustria
28.-29.6.2002. 4 p.
Kess P., A Criação do finlandês Universidade Virtual - dois primeiros anos. Conferência Internacional sobre a Educação Nova benefícios das TIC em Educação. Rotterdam, 2-4.9.2002.
Kess P., finlandês Universidade Virtual. Nordic Information Literacy Seminário: Information Literacy como um objetivo para o ensino em universidades e faculdades., Vaasa 7.2.2003.
Kess P., estado finlandês e finlandês Universidade Virtual: a partir do estado para a universidade e da universidade para o estado. Conferência lounching estoniano eUniversity, Tartu, 21.2.2003.
Kess P., O finlandês Vitual University - lições aprendidas com o desenvolvimento. NVU-konferansen 2003, Stavanger, 24.2.2003.
Kess P., O finlandês Vitual University, Preprints da ACE 2003 - 6th IFAC Symposium on Advances in Control Education, Oulu junho 16-18, 2003. pp 37 ... 43.
Kess P., O finlandês Universidade Virtual - algumas mudanças no trabalho acadêmico. Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Emerging Technologies and Applications Telecomunicações e da 4 ª Conferência sobre a Universidade Virtual (ICETA 2003), Košice, 11-13.9.2003. pp. 39 ... 43.
Sinko, M., TIC no ensino superior finlandês: impacto sobre a aprendizagem ao longo da vida. Workshop sobre "Aplicação das tecnologias de informação e comunicação na aprendizagem ao longo da vida" Catania, 6 - 8 de Abril de 2000
http://www.virtualuniversity.fi/
www.eadtu.nl / e-Bolonha / ... / EADTU_Kess_Finlandês_Virtual_.doc
O finlandês da Universidade Virtual iniciativa foi delineada na estratégia nacional para a educação da sociedade da informação e pesquisa para os anos 2000-2004 adotada pelo Ministério da Educação e do governo finlandês. Com base na análise da situação mundial do finlandês HE, a visão de melhoria através HE indo virtual foi descrito eo plano de execução é lançada:
Até o ano de 2004, uma alta qualidade, ética e economicamente sustentável rede modelo baseado de organizar o ensino ea investigação terá sido consolidados.
Haverá criação de uma universidade virtual, até 2004, com base em um consórcio de várias universidades, empresas privadas e institutos de pesquisa. Ela vai produzir e oferecer internacionalmente competitivos, de alto padrão de serviços educacionais.
Os objectivos têm evoluído a partir dos documentos originais em ações e metas como
para ativar a rede de ensino, estudo e investigação
para desenvolver um novo modelo de rede, de base da cooperação universitária
diversificar os estudos universitários
desenvolver currículos universitários
para melhorar a qualidade do ensino e estudo no ensino superior
fazer uma melhor utilização das redes de TIC e
• Para melhorar a competitividade da academia finlandesa.
2. A implementação
A Universidade Virtual será estabelecida em etapas. Na fase inicial, a força-tarefa ministerial Universidade Virtual coordenou o projeto. No âmbito das negociações sobre os resultados-alvo entre o ministério e as universidades, na Primavera de 2000, as universidades empenhada em estabelecer o consórcio universidade virtual.
O Ministério da Educação escolheu, então, com base nos pedidos das universidades, cerca de vinte outros projectos específicos universitário a ser financiado até 2003. Estes projectos estão previstos para desempenhar um papel-chave na definição dos serviços da universidade virtual e um número considerável de líquido exemplar baseada cursos e programas de estudo.
A unidade de desenvolvimento foi criado em agosto de 2000 para coordenar a fase de arranque e serviços emergentes. O acordo de consórcio entre as universidades se inscreveram, o comitê gestor eleito eo plano de acção aprovado pelo consórcio no início de 2001.
A estratégia da universidade virtual foi exaustivamente debatido entre as universidades e foi adotado pelo consórcio no início de 2003.
Todos os estudantes (alunos de graduação, pós-graduados ou estudantes de universidade aberta) de qualquer membro da universidade serão elegíveis para os estudos na Universidade Virtual ou para ser mais preciso para os estudos em qualquer universidade membro do consórcio Universidade Virtual. Os alunos podem fazer cursos relacionados a seus programas de grau na Universidade Virtual, mas é a universidade de origem, que vai conceder o diploma.
O distintivo principal do FVU em comparação com outras iniciativas de universidade virtual é o seguinte:
• É uma iniciativa nacional que envolve todas as universidades do país;
• É definida no contexto de uma estratégia nacional da sociedade da informação para melhorar a qualidade de ensino e aprendizagem nas universidades e oferece aos alunos um maior acesso e flexibilidade através da integração de tecnologia.
»Não é exclusivamente orientadas para o desenvolvimento e / ou comercialização de cursos totalmente on-line para alunos fora das suas fronteiras ou para responder a uma ameaça de concorrência e
»Apesar de ainda não percebeu ou totalmente planejado, a FVU tem uma visão abrangente de incluindo o ensino, bem como pesquisa e serviços de apoio.
Um FVU eficaz foi projetado para oferecer as seguintes vantagens:
maior flexibilidade de tempo e lugar
programas flexíveis / cursos individuais e as possibilidades de estudos adicionais
intercâmbio internacional de material educativo
trabalho de cooperação e coordenação do desenvolvimento
poupança de espaço e instalações
Uso eficiente do tempo »
A FVU também foi visto como uma oportunidade para corrigir as deficiências de carácter mais geral no sistema de ensino superior da Finlândia, como a falta de uma tradição em colaboração entre universidades e uma lenta progressão de estudos para estudantes.
Devido aos grandes gastos necessários para desenvolver programas da universidade virtual, houve a necessidade de reunir recursos limitados para atingir economias de escala, conectando o trabalho entre as universidades finlandesas. Para além da obtenção de economias de escala, a FVU se destina a tratar de barreiras à aprendizagem on-line aplicações, incluindo aspectos técnicos, pedagógicos, sociais, administrativas e regulamentares. O pessoal envolvido com a FVU enfatizar que a iniciativa não exigir ou promover a virtualidade completo como o único modelo. A maioria das pessoas que conheceu durante o programa de visita foram muito resistentes à idéia de oferecer alternativas totalmente online.
3. Os Desafios
Aumentando a percentagem de alunos que freqüentam HE na Finlândia (como em todas as partes da Europa), aumentando o número de alunos em determinadas áreas populares, enquanto algumas áreas sofrem de escassez de alunos, exige novas soluções pedagógicas. Cada vez mais heterogêneo estudante procura grupos para melhor didática. Going virtual e satisfazer as necessidades mais complexas dos estudantes é uma forma de tentar resolver esses problemas.
HE instituições estão enfrentando sérios problemas de recursos. Todos esses desafios têm de ser cumpridos com orçamentos limitados. Dedicado financiamento adicional abrange apenas a fase de pilotagem.
Esses fatos colocam demandas totalmente novo no desenvolvimento de HE. Net educação baseada foi saudada por muitos como, se não uma panacéia para todos os problemas, mas para trazer alívio substancial ou, pelo menos, soluções alternativas para muitas doenças e os desafios do HE. Educação on-line, no entanto, não é de forma renderização soluções fáceis. Por outro lado, não há nenhuma maneira fácil de resolver os problemas pertinentes que está enfrentando, continuando a desenvolver campus educação baseada quer. Face a educação presencial não é nem barato, nem o custo-benefício. Assim educacional decisores políticos têm de vir a enfrentar os mesmos problemas fundamentais da educação se procurar soluções a partir da rede ou no interior do campus.
De acordo com o plano de acção principais questões que serão abordadas e esperemos que para ser transformado em fatores de sucesso serão as seguintes:
Apoio ao projeto colaborativo e entrega de rede baseado em cursos
Resolver as questões de DPI
Integração dos diferentes modos de instrução
Tutoria on-line
A mobilidade virtual de alunos
»Encontrar um modelo sustentável de operação.
Estas questões estão atualmente em trabalho ativo, por exemplo através de uma série de projectos inter-universitária. O objetivo desses projetos é não só para a concepção de cursos excelentes para ser executado na rede com êxito. Espera-se que eles servem também como exemplos de boas práticas para ser ampliados. Além disso, espera-se que eles vão lançar as sementes de um novo tipo de colaboração acadêmica entre os profissionais através de instituições, faculdades e paradigmas de investigação. A falta de apoio pedagógico e técnico adequado também apela para a partilha de recursos entre as instituições.
As questões de propriedade intelectual não pode ser resolvido adequadamente dentro de um projeto nacional, devido à sua natureza global. A Universidade Virtual acaba de publicar um conjunto de modelos contratuais aplicáveis. Neste esforço procurará FVU combinado com outras instituições educativas sob a tutela do Ministério da Educação, que previa a melhor assistência jurídica na elaboração de modelos de contratos e esperamos dar certo nível de consultoria on-line também.
FVU não é destinada a virtualidade plena na oferta de cursos. Consequentemente a atenção também será pago a melhoria do ensino em curso e estudar as práticas através de incorporação de elementos em linha em qualquer curso quando for o caso. Esperemos que dê origem a uma nova prática optimização da utilização e do mix de ensino e aprendizagem diferentes modalidades de uma forma flexível. Isto dá aos alunos a oportunidade de escolher entre vários métodos de entrega do curso e realização diferentes fases do processo de aprendizagem. Flexibilidade deverá ser estendido aos seus limites máximos para permitir a personalização e personalização dos ambientes de aprendizagem e modalidades de ensino.
Um certo nível de tutoria on-line já está disponível para abrir estudantes universitários. As soluções desenvolvidas há uma rica fonte de adopção e adaptação a prática para os estudantes grau de ensino. Acredita-se que os serviços de tutoria será amplamente distribuído e entre as universidades membros e os serviços centralizados fornecidos pelo portal nacional vai ser muito magro no começo. No longo prazo, quando as ofertas projeto do curso eo curso será fornecido em grande escala e quando os sistemas de informação e bases de dados será de pleno direito, não haverá possibilidades de prestação de serviços mais abrangente.
As universidades finlandesas são pequenas. Isto significa oportunidades limitadas para os estudantes no seu campus de origem. Independentemente das altas taxas de mobilidade dos estudantes, não há necessidade de expandir dramaticamente a mobilidade virtual dos estudantes. Estudantes Proporcionar oportunidades flexíveis para pegar os cursos de outras universidades sem a necessidade de envolver em um monte de tempo e dinheiro viajando de consumo, existe um enorme potencial para a prestação do serviço FVU. Uma força-tarefa foi recolhida para enfrentar os desafios administrativos da mobilidade virtual com as transferências a crédito, operações financeiras, estudante registrar etc
Mesmo que a iniciativa da universidade virtual está no foco da estratégia do finlandês da sociedade de informação do governo, não é executado de cima para baixo. Nem é executado de baixo para cima. É claramente rede baseada e gerida. Todas as universidades são as partes interessadas. As atividades e serviços são assim definidas, concebido e será executado por inovadores e entusiasmados redes acadêmicas assistida pelo Ministério da empresa estatal, a CSC, que é responsável pela rede da universidade finlandesa e computação científica. O atual modelo organizacional certamente vai precisar de muitas modificações para executar o serviço HE virtual com sucesso no futuro. Resta também a ser visto, assim como o consórcio vai conseguir atrair parceiros não-acadêmicos e alargar as suas actividades para além das fronteiras nacionais.
4. O finlandês Universidade Virtual Financiamento e Governação
O Ministério da Educação finlandês, comprometeu o financiamento aos FVU até o final de 2004. A FVU tem financiamento de cerca de 10 milhões de Euros para o primeiro ano de seu desenvolvimento. Cerca de metade do montante que foi atribuído a cada uma das universidades para o seu desenvolvimento ea outra metade para a inter-selecionados 20 projetos de rede da universidade. O financiamento adicional de 1 milhão de Euros foi levantado para o desenvolvimento do portal FVU. O Ministério da Educação finlandesa tenciona fazer a FVU um programa permanente e consolidar a prestação de serviços desenvolvidos por esta iniciativa e os projetos dentro do programa.
Todas as 21 universidades na Finlândia aderiram ao consórcio que está a desenvolver e gerir a FVU. Projetos, como a comunidade científica nacional Electronic Library FinELib e da universidade finlandesa aberto, Suvi, será estreitamente integrado na iniciativa nova e destina-se a colaboração com o Instituto Politécnico Virtual Initiative.
O consórcio é um importante mecanismo para discutir e propor soluções para problemas práticos, tais como direitos de propriedade intelectual, o apoio técnico necessário no trabalho de desenvolvimento, eo desenvolvimento de professores, conhecimentos e competências relativas à educação online.
Para realizar o desenvolvimento de práticas e trabalhos de construção, em 2000, a Universidade Virtual Unidade de Desenvolvimento foi criado como uma unidade de serviço comum para as universidades. As atribuições da Unidade de Desenvolvimento, que agora tem uma equipe de cerca de 10 profissionais, incluem:
• Fase de desenvolvimento das atividades e da estrutura administrativa do consórcio universidade virtual
Concepção da política »e planejamento estratégico para funções de FVU
Dar apoio »aos projetos iniciados por universidades e pelo consórcio
»Investigar e informar sobre as atividades do FVU, acompanhamento e avaliação desenvolvimentos relevantes em outros países e divulgar relatórios sobre as actividades da Universidade Virtual e manter contactos com os parceiros do projecto, a fim de desenvolver atividades conjuntas
»Assegurar o funcionamento eficiente dos serviços a nível prático
»Elaboração de modelos de acordos para os membros (por exemplo, os acordos para as redes de parceiros, direitos autorais e transações financeiras)
A Unidade de Desenvolvimento trabalha em estreita cooperação com o Ministério da força Virtual de Educação da Universidade de tarefas e com um comité de direcção de um subconjunto de representantes do consórcio. A Unidade de Desenvolvimento também cria e mantém contactos a nível internacional, recolha e divulgação de informações sobre as tendências globais, a fim de reagir rapidamente a mudanças no ambiente, reforçando a capacidade operacional da rede.
5. O status do projeto FVU
Paralelo ao trabalho da Unidade de Desenvolvimento FVU, projetos conjuntos entre universidades foram iniciadas e que irá produzir os cursos de primeira linha e forma a base para as atividades do FVU. Estes projectos incluem redes regionais 3, 5 projetos conjuntos visando a prestação de serviços ( "meta-projetos"), e 11 redes de disciplinas específicas, variando de assistência social (SOSNET) para um programa de treinamento de pós-graduação de faculdades de direito. Além disso, o financiamento concedido diretamente às universidades tem sido usado para contratar part-time ou full-time de pessoas de apoio para ajudar na formação e apoio de professores e funcionários que estão desenvolvendo materiais de aprendizagem online. Os primeiros programas iniciados durante o ano lectivo 2001-2002.
Um portal FVU é outro componente importante aqui. O portal destina-se como um portal funcional e adaptável à rede FVU serviços baseados com as funções e serviços necessários para o ensino ea aprendizagem, incluindo:
Seleção de cursos »
Informações sobre o curso », incluindo motor de busca
Ferramenta de registo »
Serviços de apoio »(estudante de orientação, consultoria e serviços de informação, gestão de carteira)
Canais de informação e de contacto »
• Para acessar os serviços nacionais de biblioteca eletrônica
»Fóruns de discussão e áreas de colaboração para os professores
»Serviços de apoio, incluindo ferramentas de avaliação versátil.
O portal será personalizado para os vários utilizadores. O portal também terá uma ferramenta para a definição de perfis de professores perícias que podem ser utilizados para a definição individual, de equipe e organização necessita de formação específica.
O grande desafio previsto na implementação do portal é o desenvolvimento e financiamento da camada de meados de funcionalidade, onde as responsabilidades das universidades e da unidade de desenvolvimento se cruzam.
O primeiro conjunto de funcionalidades do portal foi lançado no Outono de 2001, com funcionalidade adicional acrescentado no final de 2002. O portal como está actualmente previsto é estimado para ser totalmente funcional, no Outono de 2004.
Enquanto a FVU se destina a facilitar todas as atividades acadêmicas, incluindo a investigação, esses serviços ainda não foram elaborados.
6. Implementação Benefícios e Armadilhas
Embora apenas lançado oficialmente em janeiro de 2001, a FVU tem sido objecto de um processo de planejamento muito maior, que incluiu um plano de execução de tarefas força que estava pronto no final de 1999. A FVU já teve um grande impacto na Finlândia, nos seguintes aspectos:
Construção de conhecimento da utilização de redes de computadores para o ensino
É evidente que o anúncio da FVU e concessões de financiamento aumentaram a consciência e interesse entre os professores da universidade e do pessoal na prática e da investigação sobre o uso de redes de computadores para a aprendizagem. Existe alguma confusão sobre o significado dos termos "curso virtual" ou "universidade virtual" e uma crença geral de que um cara-a-face componente será sempre necessária. No entanto, a FVU já teve um impacto benéfico em destacar as oportunidades oferecidas pela aprendizagem on-line e incentivar a discussão eo debate.
Colocar o foco no ensino e aprendizagem
O objetivo principal do FVU é melhorar o ensino ea aprendizagem em universidades finlandesas. Através da discussão do uso da linha de ensino e aprendizagem de modelos, há evidências de maior enfoque no ensino e na aprendizagem.
Criação de redes de colaboração, mais rápida difusão das melhores práticas, ea aceleração da capacitação de pessoal
Cada um dos projetos FVU que foi financiado ligou professores e funcionários através de um número de universidades finlandês. Por exemplo, um projeto chamado Kasvi links das oito faculdades de ensino na Finlândia. Vários projectos têm organizado oficinas e algumas das oficinas atraíram várias centenas de participantes.
Alguns dos meta-projectos, em particular poderia ter um grande impacto benéfico. Os objetivos das quatro meta-projetos estão resumidos a seguir:
IT PEDA: Apoiar as universidades o desenvolvimento de estratégias para as atividades da universidade virtual, incluindo a criação e apoio de uma rede de centros pedagógicos nas universidades participantes. O projeto também é responsável por seminários para administradores sobre o desenvolvimento da estratégia.
Tie Vie: Formação de professores na utilização pedagógica das tecnologias de informação e comunicação.
IQ Forma: Criar instrumentos através dos quais os estudantes podem aprender sobre si mesmos como aprendizes e adquirir habilidades para se tornar mais eficazes os alunos em cursos virtuais
OVI: Projeto para o desenvolvimento do ambiente virtual de avaliação e estudo de aconselhamento dos alunos, incluindo a melhoria dos conhecimentos e habilidades necessários para os estudos com êxito, aconselhamento de carreira, gestão e estudo.
Criar um fórum para discussão de questões-chave entre os administradores
Reunindo os principais administradores de todas as universidades na Finlândia, como parte do consórcio teve um impacto imediato com muita promessa para o futuro. As questões levantadas nas reuniões do consórcio vão desde os serviços de apoio necessários para as atividades da universidade virtual para questões de direitos autorais. Grande parte dos temas em discussão não são restritos às questões Universidade Virtual e terá impacto sobre as políticas institucionais para o ensino em sala de aula, como a cessão de crédito e direitos de autor.
Criação de economias de escala para o desenvolvimento de conteúdos, distribuição de programas, serviços de apoio e críticas
Participação em uma das reuniões dos projectos FVU, a Leste do projeto FVU, claramente justificadas as vantagens ea necessidade da partilha de recursos e esforços, dada a capacidade limitada e os orçamentos de cada instituição. Este projeto reúne três das pequenas universidades da Finlândia para oferecer cursos em conjunto projetado, ampliar a oferta de cursos, e garantir uma melhor qualidade e melhor utilização dos recursos locais e especializados.
Não há dúvida de que a FVU enfrentará importantes desafios, especialmente tendo em conta os recursos limitados e um complexo e difícil de mudar o ambiente operacional. Diversas grandes questões e desafios na implementação da visão da rede FVU são identificados.
Gerenciando Expectativas
O anúncio da FVU ea concessão de financiamento suscitou uma enorme expectativa, apesar do financiamento relativamente limitado para a realização da iniciativa e uma falta de história e conhecimento amplo de como implementar aprendizagem on-line na Finlândia. O número de funcionários a tempo inteiro dedicado ao FVU é baixa eo sucesso dependerá do esforço contínuo de outros especialistas, como bem e na boa vontade. Há expectativas também diferentes e diferentes definições de virtualidade ou efetiva aprendizagem virtual entre os muitos participantes. O impacto da FVU será provavelmente superestimou a curto prazo e, se for bem sucedido, subestimados no longo prazo.
Para abordar a questão da gestão das expectativas, a FVU precisa imediatamente:
• Identificar os vários grupos de interessados, incluindo grupos de financiamento e definir as suas expectativas quanto quantitativamente quanto possível
• Desenvolver e implementar um plano de comunicação e estratégia de relações públicas que inclui súmulas curto abordar o que a FVU é eo que não é. Ilustrar o nível de financiamento através de comparações com os investimentos feitos em outros países e
»Continue a utilizar a FVU pessoas de contato em cada uma das organizações participantes FVU para informar as universidades e grupos de interesse local e trazer equívocos frente e preocupações.
Liderança compromisso institucional e estratégica
O nível de conhecimento e compromisso dos administradores universitários em instituições participantes varia. Para muitos, o eLearning é visto como uma boa demonstração de inovação ou de uma fonte de algum financiamento para escorar departamentos fraco. Em alguns casos, os cursos da universidade virtual ou programas são vistos como uma parte integrante da missão primária da instituição ou uma parte de uma solução de conjunto para resolver um problema desafiador. Em parte, a falta de atenção e compromisso de financiamento pode ser devido ao ambiente cada vez mais difícil orçamental para as universidades finlandesas.
A FVU começou a abordar os requisitos para aumentar o conhecimento dos gestores universitários
Liderança no equilíbrio eficaz entre as práticas pedagógicas, administrativas e de TIC
A intenção do Ministério é colocar a pedagogia na vanguarda de todos financiados e iniciativas associadas da FVU. A FVU Unidade de Desenvolvimento está a ter uma abordagem mais equilibrada colocar para além das práticas pedagógicas de administração e práticas das TIC para a grande figura do FVU. Há alguma resistência a "importação" de modelos de outros países, há um interesse legítimo na adopção de práticas que podem não ser compatíveis com a cultura finlandesa.
A maioria das instituições finlandês ter tido algumas experiências julgamento no desenvolvimento e oferta de cursos on-line com o foco em classes de videoconferência ou publicando notas do curso e recursos do curso útil como oposição à execução em actividades de aprendizagem. Os departamentos técnicos de universidades como a Universidade de Tecnologia de Helsinki e Tampere University of Technology tiveram experiência prévia com ofertas baseadas na web.
A FVU será no futuro fundo e incentivar projetos e atividades que se aproveitam de situações onde a aprendizagem online pode adicionar valor real. Uma série de projetos são de expansão de vídeo-conferência ou classes oferecendo uma opção on-line para um frente-a-face a atividade em sala de aula, sem examinar esse valor acrescentado ou factor melhores áreas de aplicação.
A FVU irá desenvolver um plano para disseminar práticas eficazes.
Learner Focus
Há uma investigação promissoras que incide sobre os alunos, como de QI FORMA, e um inquérito foi realizado para determinar e analisar as necessidades do aluno para o portal. Um maior acompanhamento foi planejado por um estudante e um painel de pessoal para avaliar o projeto do portal.
Internacional Alianças Estratégicas
Com a sua reputação na indústria sem fio, as organizações finlandês receber uma boa recepção de organizações em todo o mundo. As universidades finlandês está feliz em ter a oportunidade de ligação com outros países da UE em projectos de investigação e divulgação.
Dado o trabalho envolvido na celebração e execução de alianças estratégicas, a FVU Unidade de Desenvolvimento incidirá em entrar em alguns arranjos formais a cada ano. Estes acordos podem incluir pós-doc de cooperação e de intercâmbio da faculdade, no conhecimento e na troca de ferramentas em áreas como repositórios de objetos de aprendizagem, e professores, visitas de peritos. Maiores informações serão postadas no site da FVU em outras línguas com projetos incentivados a fornecer resumos e atualizações para postagem.
Avaliação
Dada a importância da avaliação na gestão de expectativas e de alimentação para a melhoria contínua dos investimentos do FVU's FVU desenvolveu uma estratégia de avaliação para a iniciativa. Este é um processo contínuo e irá expandir a partir da avaliação inicial da web arranjo para a plena escala de avaliação FVU pelas mesmas organizações que avaliam as universidades convencionais e as suas operações.
7. Os últimos desenvolvimentos e Lições Aprendidas
Um dos paradigmas básicos por trás do finlandês Universidade Virtual foi a idéia de dar aos alunos uma oportunidade de aumentar seu portfólio com cursos de aprendizagem de outras universidades na Finlândia. Isto foi conseguido por
»A criação de um acordo para incluir todas as universidades finlandesas, como os estudos são flexíveis
o planejado
O acompanhamento
O aceite
O gerenciado
o financiados
• construindo um sistema de informação para apoiar estas actividades
»Arranjar financiamento extra do Ministério da Educação para cobrir os custos iniciais destas actividades extra
»Extensa formação de estudantes, professores, funcionários administrativos, etc sobre a nova abordagem.
Há muitos desenvolvimentos na universidade virtual configuração que pode ser considerado inovador e algo a considerar também no exterior. O elemento chave é o serviço de aprendizagem para facilitar o desenvolvimento de cursos online e programas de incentivo:
1. alunos através de um balcão com uma vasta gama de informações, recursos e serviços;
2. instituições participantes e seus professores, juntamente com uma oportunidade de aproveitar as economias de escala, tornando disponível uma vasta gama de serviços, conhecimento e recursos para apoiar o desenvolvimento de cursos online e programas; e
instituições participantes a oportunidade de tirar partido das sinergias e economias de escala na comercialização de seus cursos e programas em casa e no exterior.
8. Referências
Curry, J.; O finlandês Universidade Virtual: Lições e intercâmbio de conhecimentos Oportunidades de Informação Pan-Planos Canadense. Preparado para O Information Highway Advisory Branch, Indústria do Canadá. 2001. 22 p.
Kess P. O finlandês Universidade Virtual. 4 º Encontro de Negócios em Hagenberg, Áustria
28.-29.6.2002. 4 p.
Kess P., A Criação do finlandês Universidade Virtual - dois primeiros anos. Conferência Internacional sobre a Educação Nova benefícios das TIC em Educação. Rotterdam, 2-4.9.2002.
Kess P., finlandês Universidade Virtual. Nordic Information Literacy Seminário: Information Literacy como um objetivo para o ensino em universidades e faculdades., Vaasa 7.2.2003.
Kess P., estado finlandês e finlandês Universidade Virtual: a partir do estado para a universidade e da universidade para o estado. Conferência lounching estoniano eUniversity, Tartu, 21.2.2003.
Kess P., O finlandês Vitual University - lições aprendidas com o desenvolvimento. NVU-konferansen 2003, Stavanger, 24.2.2003.
Kess P., O finlandês Vitual University, Preprints da ACE 2003 - 6th IFAC Symposium on Advances in Control Education, Oulu junho 16-18, 2003. pp 37 ... 43.
Kess P., O finlandês Universidade Virtual - algumas mudanças no trabalho acadêmico. Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Emerging Technologies and Applications Telecomunicações e da 4 ª Conferência sobre a Universidade Virtual (ICETA 2003), Košice, 11-13.9.2003. pp. 39 ... 43.
Sinko, M., TIC no ensino superior finlandês: impacto sobre a aprendizagem ao longo da vida. Workshop sobre "Aplicação das tecnologias de informação e comunicação na aprendizagem ao longo da vida" Catania, 6 - 8 de Abril de 2000
http://www.virtualuniversity.fi/
www.eadtu.nl / e-Bolonha / ... / EADTU_Kess_Finlandês_Virtual_.doc
Subscrever:
Mensagens (Atom)