Designed for learning

learning – teaching – research – design – technology

It’s out! Our edited book: Practical Design Patterns for Teaching and Learning with Technology

Book coverPractical Design Patterns for Teaching and Learning with Technology

Yishay Mor, Harvey Mellar, Steven Warburton and Niall Winters (Eds.)

“These are challenging times in which to be an educator. The constant flow of innovation offers new opportunities to support learners in an environment of ever-shifting demands. Educators work as they have always done: making the most of the resources at hand, and dealing with constraints, to provide experiences which foster growth. This was John Dewey’s ideal of education 80 years ago and it is still relevant today. This view sees education as a practice that achieves its goals through creative processes involving both craft and design. Craft is visible in the resources that educators produce and in their interactions with learners. Design, though, is tacit, and educators are often unaware of their own design practices. The rapid pace of change is shifting the balance from craft to design, requiring that educators’ design work become visible, shareable and malleable. The participatory patterns workshop is a method for doing this through engaging practitioners in collaborative reflection leading to the production of structured representations of design knowledge. The editors have led many such workshops and this book is a record of that endeavour and its outcomes in the form of practical design narratives, patterns and scenarios that can be used to address challenges in teaching and learning with technology.”

 

 

 

ISBN Paperback: 9789462095281 ($ 54.00)
ISBN Hardcover: 9789462095298 ($ 99.00)

Subject: Educational Technology

Number 8 of the series: Technology Enhanced Learning

pdfFree Preview Practical Design Patterns for Teaching and Learning with Technology

April 4, 2014 Posted by | Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Talk next Wednesday: Design inquiry of learning, the learning design studio, and a vision for future learning and teaching environments

I’m giving a talk next week at the University of Haifa. I’ll try to set up a google hangout on air, but the talk will be in Hebrew (and google translate doesn’t do audio as far as I know).

Synopsis:

Teacher training and professional development programs aim to provide practitioners with a structured basis of knowledge in psychology, pedagogy and subject matter, which they will apply in their educational work. However, research suggests that practitioners often fail to connect the abstract knowledge they acquire to the
concrete situations in which they work. Consequently, they are left frustrated with the offerings of educational science, and eventually abandon them in favour of what they perceive as good craft.

Two emerging approaches try to address this dissonance: Teacher Inquiry and Teachers as Learning Designers. The first applies Dewey’s ideals of inquiry learning to teachers’ professional development, the second follows the constructionist pedagogy of learning by design, resonating the ideals of Simon, Schon and Papert.

The Design Inquiry of Learning (DIL) combines these approaches, by modelling teacher inquiry after the practices and principles of educational design research. Learners follow a cycle of (1) defining their project, (2) investigating the context in which it is situated and identifying appropriate technopedagogical theories, (3) reviewing relevant cases, (4) conceptualizing a solution, (5) implementing a prototype of that solution, (6) evaluating it and (7) reflecting on the process. The Learning Design Studio is an implementation of the abstract DIL model which draws on the studio tradition in design education.

This talk will present the design inquiry of learning model, and the learning design studio format and review initial empirical results from their application. I will conclude with some theoretical observations and consider a possible vision of future classrooms as a design laboratories of learning.

Teacher training and professional development programs aim to provide practitioners with a structured basis of knowledge in psychology, pedagogy and subject matter, which they will apply in their educational work. However, research suggests that practitioners often fail to connect the abstract knowledge they acquire to the concrete situations in which they work. Consequently, they are left frustrated with the offerings of educational science, and eventually abandon them in favour of what they perceive as good craft. Two emerging approaches try to address this dissonance: Teacher Inquiry and Teachers as Learning Designers. The first applies Dewey's ideals of inquiry learning to teachers' professional development, the second follows the constructionist pedagogy of learning by design, resonating the ideals of Simon, Schon and Papert. The Design Inquiry of Learning (DIL) combines these approaches, by modelling teacher inquiry after the practices and principles of educational design research. Learners follow a cycle of (1) defining their project, (2) investigating the context in which it is situated and identifying appropriate technopedagogical theories, (3) reviewing relevant cases, (4) conceptualizing a solution, (5) implementing a prototype of that solution, (6) evaluating it and (7) reflecting on the process. The Learning Design Studio is an implementation of the abstract DIL model which draws on the studio tradition in design education. This talk will present the design inquiry of learning model, and the learning design studio format and review initial empirical results from their application. I will conclude with some theoretical observations and consider a possible vision of future classrooms as a design laboratories of learning.

Talk Flyer – Design inquiry of learning, the learning design studio,
and a vision for future learning and teaching environments (25 Dec. 2013, University of Haifa)

December 19, 2013 Posted by | Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Resource cloud for MobiLearnFest

We are organising a “Mobile Learning Festival” (MobilLearnFest) as part of the “Ideas in Mobile Learning Symposium” (6th – 7th March 2014, Watershed, Bristol UK; submission deadline: January 5th 2014).

The MobiLearnFest will be an experimental, interactive, hands-on, open session which aims to give participants an opportunity to experience the ideas discussed at the Symposium and engage the general public in our conversation: http://cloudworks.ac.uk/cloud/view/8507

If you’re considering a submission for the MobiLearnFest, you might have a demo or activity already planned – which is fine, or you might want to offer a mobile learning experience which related to the local environment. In this case, we have prepared a resource cloud to help you prepare your submission: http://cloudworks.ac.uk/cloud/view/8519
Parts of this cloud are open for crowdsourcing (an editable map, a wiki, a social bookmarking site), so if you happen to have any relevant knowledge – we would appreciate your contribution!

December 12, 2013 Posted by | Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Steven Warburton’s “Tintin” model of PPW and LDS

I was talking to Steven Warburton the other day. He mentioned that he wanted to present PPW (the Participatory Patterns Workshop) and the LDS (Learning design studio) models at a recent talk he gave, and started thinking about how the two relate to each other.
We’ve talked about this in the past, but as always, its only when you need to present something that you really work it out in detail. So Steven came up with this diagram:

Steven Warburton’s “Tintin” model of PPW and LDS

When he showed it to his audience, someone said “Oh, that’s Tintin!” and so it will be for eternity. I like the picture, although I’ll have to ask Steven to walk me through it before I can explain it properly.

This got me thinking about the commonalities, synergies and differences between the two frameworks.

Participatory Pattern Workshops (PPW) Learning Design Studio (LDS)
Is a… Methodology for collaborative reflection on practice. Originally conceived as a device for educational design research, aimed at eliciting expert knowledge and structuring it in the form of design narratives, patterns and scenarios. Through use, emerged as a powerful form of professional development. Methodology for Design Inquiry of Learning. Developed explicitly as a device for supporting educational practitioners in their professional development through active inquiry of techno-pedagogical innovations.
Suitable for… Domain experts, seasoned practitioners, multi-disciplinary expert teams. Novices or experienced practitioners who wish to engage with new pedagogies or technologies or both.
Mood.. Reflective, semi-structured, analytical, critical Creative, productive, intuitive, iterative, emergent
Outputs.. Transferable educational design knowledge in the form of design narratives, design patterns, design scenarios, and theoretical contributions. Application of design knowledge in the form of documented and evaluated educational innovations.

I would be interested to hear from people who participated in workshops and courses based on these models how this maps to their experiences.

Mor, Y. & Mogilevsky, O. (2013), ‘The Learning Design Studio: Collaborative Design Inquiry as Teachers’ Professional Development’, Research in Learning Technology 21 http://www.researchinlearningtechnology.net/index.php/rlt/article/view/22054 (researchgate)

Mor, Y. & Mogilevsky, O. (2013), Learning design studio: educational practice as design inquiry of learning ‘Scaling up Learning for Sustained Impact’ , LNCS, 8095, Springer Berlin Heidelberg, pp. 233-245 (researchgate)

Mor, Y.; Winters, N. & Warburton, S. (2012), ‘Participatory Pattern Workshops: A Methodology for Open Collaborative Construction of Design Knowledge in Education’, Research in Learning Technology 20 http://www.researchinlearningtechnology.net/index.php/rlt/article/view/19197 (researchgate)

November 22, 2013 Posted by | design, design patterns, learning design | , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Webinar on the “Art and Science of Learning Design” special issue

Yesterday I participated in a webinar hosted by ALT, to introduce the recently published special issue of Research in Learning Technology on “the Art and Science of Learning Design“. That special issue, which emerged from the Art and Science of Learning Design workshop, includes 9 papers by 22 authors, on a variety of core issues, representations, practices and tools for learning design.

Seven of the authors who contributed to the special issue joined me: Valérie Emin-Martinez, Helen Walmsley, Michael Derntl, Liz Masterman, Luis P. Prieto. The session was chaired by Caroline Greves, and supported behind the scenes by Martin Hawksey.

Inter alia, we introduced the LDSE Learning Designer, OpenGLM, ScenEdit,  the Metis project and its Integrated Learning Design Environment.

Supplement 1, 2013 – The art and science of learning design

Editorial: The art and science of learning design PDF HTML EPUB XML
Yishay Mor, Brock Craft, Davinia Hernández-Leo
Designing and researching technology-enhanced learning for the zone of proximal implementation PDF HTML EPUB XML
Susan McKenney
Sustaining learning design and pedagogical planning in CSCL PDF HTML EPUB XML
Francesca Pozzi, Donatella Persico
In medias res: reframing design for learning PDF HTML EPUB XML
Peter Goodyear, Yannis Dimitriadis
Forward-oriented design for learning: illustrating the approach PDF HTML EPUB XML
Yannis Dimitriadis, Peter Goodyear
Designing and evaluating representations to model pedagogy PDF HTML EPUB XML
Elizabeth Masterman, Brock Craft
Orchestrating learning activities using the CADMOS learning design tool PDF HTML EPUB XML
Mary Katsamani, Symeon Retalis
Learning design Rashomon I – supporting the design of one lesson through different approaches PDF HTML EPUB XML
Donatella Persico, Francesca Pozzi, Stamatina Anastopoulou, Gráinne Conole, Brock Craft, Yannis Dimitriadis, Davinia Hernández-Leo, Yael Kali, Yishay Mor, Mar Pérez-Sanagustín, Helen Walmsley
Learning design Rashomon II: exploring one lesson through multiple tools PDF HTML EPUB XML
Luis P. Prieto, Yannis Dimitriadis, Brock Craft, Michael Derntl, Valérie Émin, Mary Katsamani, Diana Laurillard, Elizabeth Masterman, Symeon Retalis, Eloy Villasclaras

November 20, 2013 Posted by | learning design | Leave a comment

Call for contributions: Ideas in Mobile Learning Symposium and mobiLearnFest, Bristol, 6th – 7th March 2014

John Cook has kindly invited me to co-chair the Ideas in Mobile Learning Symposium in Bristol. We thought we want a “proper” academic event, but also want to have some fun and challenge some practices. For example, do you also feel slightly amused when someone stands on a pulpit and shows a powerpoint about mobile collaborative learning? So we thought we’ll include a “mobiLearnFest” element in the event, which will take the symposium out to the streets. To make it even more interesting, we’re experimenting with an open review model for this element of the symposium.

Deadline is Jan. 5th, for a 1000 word abstract.

Oh, and John has also promised (threatened?) to play a live punk rock gig!

http://cloudworks.ac.uk/cloud/view/8498

The Ideas in Mobile Learning symposium invites papers around the broad themes of ‘innovation, creativity and sustainability’ for mobile learning. However, we have a strong preference that papers address at least one of the following three trends of mobile learning state-of-the-art research (click here for details):

  • Focus on new patterns of connected social learning and work-based practices.
  • Focus on designing for ‘mobile learning’ at scale.
  • Focus on the boundaries of learning that the ‘m’ in m-learning forces us to explore.

The symposium is a research off-shoot of the successful workshop ‘Towards sustainable mobile learning scenarios’ held in Bristol 9th-10th October, 2013. Requested contributions should offer any combination of conceptual, critical, design, empirical, theoretical or experimental work that relates in some way to the symposium’s broad themes and/or the three trends. Places are limited to 40 participants in order to enable a single track event where engaging, interdisciplinary conversational threads will be centre stage.

http://cloudworks.ac.uk/cloud/view/8507

mobiLearnFest is part of the “Ideas in Mobile Learning Symposium, 6th – 7th March 2014, Watershed, Bristol UK. It is an experimental, interactive, hands-on, open session which aims to give participants an opportunity to experience the ideas discussed at the Symposium and engage the general public in our conversation.

mobiLearnFest will showcase a selected number of mobile learning innovations and studies. Submission and selection of these works is completely open – see details below.

mobiLearnFest consists of three phases:

  • Demo sprint selected teams will have 150 seconds to present their work to the Symposium.
  • Mobile experiences each team will provide a mobile learning experience in the surrounding area, which would offer Symposium participants as well as the general public the oppurtunity to engage with their technology, ideas or research findings.
  • Collaborative reflection Symposium participants will reconvene to share their experiences, and consider emerging themes and questions.

November 6, 2013 Posted by | Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Design Inquiry of Learning

The Design Inquiry model (see Fig. 1) combines the iterative structure of educational design research with the principles of inquiry learning . Educational practitioners follow a cycle of:

  1. Defining their project
  2. Investigating the context in which it is situated and identifying appropriate techno-pedagogical theories
  3. Reviewing relevant cases
  4. Conceptualizing a solution
  5. Implementing a prototype of that solution,
  6. Evaluating it
  7. Reflecting on the process.

 DIL

Fig. 1. The Design Inquiry model

Although this cycle is presented as a neat linear progression, in reality project work is messy and iterative. Practitioners revisit various points as their understanding evolves.

Diana Laurillard (2013) argues that teaching should be repositioned as a design science, in line with paradigmatic distinction of between natural science which describes how the world is, and design science which is concerned with how it should be. Ideally, we would want teachers to adopt a design science stance towards their practice. However, it would be unrealistic to expect practitioners to allocate the resources required for rigorous and systematic scientific investigation. Instead, we propose a model of design inquiry – a projection of the ideal of design science into realistic settings.

define learning design as “the act of devising new practices, plans of activity, resources and tools aimed at achieving particular educational aims in a given situation”. In that sense, every learning design is a hypothesis about learning: when we design a learning activity, resource or tool we are implicitly claiming that within a given context, learners engaging with the designed artefact will achieve particular educational aims. Such a claim can be the seed hypothesis for a process of inquiry.

Recent studies (e.g. Voogt et al, 2011) demonstrate how training teachers as learning designers enhances not only their practical skills, but also their theoretical understanding . Positioning their design initiatives in an inquiry cycle can further enhance their development, by adding an extra layer of rigor, and connecting educational theory to concrete experiences.

The design inquiry of learning approach is at the core of the Learning Design Studio model , which has been used in several MA courses and in the recently conducted Open Learning Design Studio MOOC (Mor & Mogilevsky, 2013a; 2013b).

References

Laurillard, D. (2012), Teaching as a Design Science: Building Pedagogical Patterns for Learning and Technology. , Routledge, Taylor & Francis Group , 7625 Empire Drive, Florence, KY 41042

Mor, Y. & Mogilevsky, O. (2013a), Learning design studio: educational practice as design inquiry of learning, in ‘Scaling up Learning for Sustained Impact’ , Springer Berlin Heidelberg, , pp. 233–245

Mor, Y. & Mogilevsky, O. (2013b), ‘The Learning Design Studio: Collaborative Design Inquiry as Teachers’ Professional Development‘, Research in Learning Technology 21

Voogt, J.; Westbroek, H.; Handelzalts, A.; Walraven, A.; McKenney, S.; Pieters, J. & de Vries, B. (2011), ‘Teacher learning in collaborative curriculum design’, Teaching and Teacher Education27 (8) , 1235 – 124

October 30, 2013 Posted by | design, learning design | Leave a comment

Webinar: The Art and Science of Learning Design: a Supplement of Research in Learning Technology, 19th Nov, 15:00 GMT

I am a co-editor of the supplement on “The art and science of learning design”, recently published by “Research in Learning Technology”. This publication includes eight papers and an editorial, and provides a deep and broad overview of some of the current debates in the field, along with vivid insights into several emerging tools and representations.

Several of the supplement’s authors will convene for a webinar, in which they will highlight key points in their papers, discuss issues emerging from this publication and answer audience questions and comments. Attendance is free, but please register at; http://www.alt.ac.uk/events/webinar-art-and-science-learning-design-supplement-research-learning-technology

Presenters

Yishay Mor, Independent Consultant: learning; design; technology; research. Previously: Senior Lecturer in Educational Technology at the Institute of Educational Technology, The Open University UK. Teaching fellow at the Technologies in Education Graduate Programme, the Faculty of Education, University of Haifa. Senior research fellow, the London Knowledge Lab. Senior software engineer, Cisco systems. Owner, J Shop. Senior software engineer, AgentSoft.

Valérie Emin-Martinez, PhD in Computer Sciences at University Joseph Fourier (Grenoble 1), is a researcher at the Institut Français de l’Éducation in Ecole Normale Supérieure de Lyon, EducTice-S2HEP Laboratory. She coordinates since 2008 a research project on pedagogical scenario design in science and technique discipline. Her current research topics are “Pedagogical scenarios design”, “Game based learning” and “Design and uses of Serious Games” in real classrooms. She’s an associate member of GALA european network of excellence for Serious Games (http://www.galanoe.eu/).

Helen Walmsley, e-Learning Models Coordinator at Staffordshire University, UK. She provides support for academic staff developing blended and distance learning using the Best Practice Models. Current research topics are learning design, distance learning and using a community of practice to support professional development in e-learning.

Michael Derntl, Senior Research Associate at the Information Systems and Databases chair, RWTH Aachen University, Germany. He holds a PhD in information systems from the University of Vienna, Austria. He is currently researching in the FP7 network of excellence GALA in the area of serious games, in the FP7 integrated project Learning Layers on software architectures and infrastructures for informal workplace learning, as well as in the Lifelong Learning Project METIS on integrated learning design environments. In the last decade he has published numerous articles in journals, books and conference proceedings.

Liz Masterman, PhD in Educational Technology from the University of Birmingham, and has an interest in sociocultural approaches to the design and evaluation of technology-enhanced teaching and learning. She is currently a senior researcher with the Academic IT Services (Learning & Teaching) Group in Oxford University IT Services. Her main fields of research in recent years have been learning design, the student digital experience and into open academic practices in UK universities.

Luis P. Prieto, PhD in Information and Communication Technologies, is a post-doctoral researcher at the GSIC-EMIC group in the University of Valladolid (Spain), and has previously worked as research and development engineer in the telecom industry. His main research interests include learning design, the orchestration of TEL and CSCL activities by teachers, the use of professional development to support technological change, or the application of augmented reality, paper and tangible interfaces to education. Many of these research threads come into play in the EU Lifelong Learning Programme project he currently spends most time on: Metis (“Meeting teachers’ co-design needs by means of Integrated Learning Environments”).

Papers

Editorial: The art and science of learning design PDF HTML EPUB XML
Yishay Mor, Brock Craft, Davinia Hernández-Leo
Designing and researching technology-enhanced learning for the zone of proximal implementation PDF HTML EPUB XML
Susan McKenney
Sustaining learning design and pedagogical planning in CSCL PDF HTML EPUB XML
Francesca Pozzi, Donatella Persico
In medias res: reframing design for learning PDF HTML EPUB XML
Peter Goodyear, Yannis Dimitriadis
Forward-oriented design for learning: illustrating the approach PDF HTML EPUB XML
Yannis Dimitriadis, Peter Goodyear
Designing and evaluating representations to model pedagogy PDF HTML EPUB XML
Elizabeth Masterman, Brock Craft
Orchestrating learning activities using the CADMOS learning design tool PDF HTML EPUB XML
Mary Katsamani, Symeon Retalis
Learning design Rashomon I – supporting the design of one lesson through different approaches PDF HTML EPUB XML
Donatella Persico, Francesca Pozzi, Stamatina Anastopoulou, Gráinne Conole, Brock Craft, Yannis Dimitriadis, Davinia Hernández-Leo, Yael Kali, Yishay Mor, Mar Pérez-Sanagustín, Helen Walmsley
Learning design Rashomon II: exploring one lesson through multiple tools PDF HTML EPUB XML
Luis P. Prieto, Yannis Dimitriadis, Brock Craft, Michael Derntl, Valérie Émin, Mary Katsamani, Diana Laurillard, Elizabeth Masterman, Symeon Retalis, Eloy Villasclaras

October 29, 2013 Posted by | learning design | Leave a comment

The art and science of learning design – a supplement of the Journal of Research in Learning Technology

I’m very happy to share the fruits of a long and intensive collaborative efforts.

The Journal of Research in Learning has recently published a supplement on “the art and science of learning design“, of which I am a co-editor. This supplement includes eight papers and an editorial. The work on this collection started at the “art and science of learning design” workshop. Some of the papers are direct descendants of contributions presented at the workshop, others are reflections and commentaries on the ideas discussed there, and two – Rashomon I and Rashomon II are new pieces of research proposed at the workshop’s concluding session.

Research and practice in learning design aims to make the tacit practices of design for learning explicit, provide suitable textual, visual and computational representations to support these practices, and suitable tools to manipulate them and share them. The editorial begins by considering the meaning of design, and the rationale for positioning education as a design practice.  We argue that whatever your interpretation of “learning” or “education”, it always concerns change – from an existing pattern of action or intentional state to a preferred one. This fits with Herbert Simon’s notion of design: “Engineers are not the only professional designers. Everyone designs who devises courses of action aimed at changing existing situations into preferred ones. “. We then expand the discussion, by considering Ertmer, Parisio, and Wardak definition of design, and Latour’s 5 “advantages” of design.

We argue (provocatively?) that the “grand challenge of learning design” can be summarised by three words: language, practice and tools. Language refers to the representational systems used in the act of learning design. Language also refers to the scientific and professional discourse about learning design. Representing educational practice is one of the central themes of learning design. A growing body of literature raises the questions of representing, understanding and advancing the practices of learning design themselves. Finally, effective design practices need to be supported by powerful learning design tools. Such tools need to support the expression of design knowledge in a range of languages. Thus, tools connect practice, language, and knowledge.

The other papers in this supplement speak to these challenges. While all papers touch on the three themes of language, practice and tools – each one has a different balance of attention among them.

McKenney’s Designing and researching technology-enhanced learning for the zone of proximal implementation presents a case for technology-enhanced learning research and development that focuses more on what is practical today than on what could be effective in theory in the future. The paper proposes methodological considerations for the design of clear, value-added and tolerant innovations aligned with the real needs of today’s implementation contexts. This perspective calls researchers to include in their studies attention to broad factors focused on how innovations are understood and used by teachers and schools.

Pozzi and Persico Sustaining learning design and pedagogical planning in CSCL focus on learning design in the Computer Supported Collaborative Learning (CSCL) domain. In particular, the paper discusses diverse existing approaches to design, represent, refine and visualise collaborative learning designs, and proposes a unifying model for pedagogical planning in the CSCL design process, with a strong focus on supporting decision making. The unifying design model considers the four dimensions of Task, Teams, Time and Technology.

Goodyear and Dimitriadis, in In medias res: reframing design for learning, go beyond considering design as a significant task of the teaching practice and focus on the role of design as a relevant means of helping people learn. The paper discusses why it is important to have a theory of design for learning and set out some of its elements. Key issues addressed in the paper are around the different actors involved in a framework of design for learning (people creating designs which can help other people learn, the learners, teachers supporting people learn) or the kinds of things that can be designed and re-designed, and how they may relate to multiple learning layers and goals. In Forward-oriented design for learning: illustrating the approach Dimitriadis and Goodyear turn to the recent design for learning literature to illustrate their forward-oriented design approach. They focus on two key facets of the approach, design for orchestration and design for reflection, and identify key points for reflection upon their design approach. They then draw upon fieldwork from two case studies to highlight how their approach addresses important design problems and provides suitable solutions.

Masterman and Craft (Designing and evaluating representations to model pedagogy) further emphasise the importance of theoretical grounding, turning their emphasis to the problem of the selection of representations of learning designs. To capture learning designs requires representing them in some way, both during and after the design process. The authors propose using a framework for epistemic efficacy adapted from the cognitive psychology literature, to aid in evaluating the effectiveness representations. To illustrate this, they show how the framework can be applied to the evaluation of one pedagogic planning also, the Learning Designer.

Continuing the theme of design representations, in the next paper, Katsamani and Retalis’ Orchestrating learning activities using the CADMOS learning design tool discusses the tension between formal representations of learning designs (such as IMS-LD) and the concerns of educational practitioners, who are not versed in technical formalisms but need intuitive visual and textual representations which are easy to share and manipulate. They compare five popular LD tools (MOT+, Compendium, WebCollage, OpenGLM, and LAMS) using five criteria: usability, guidance, formalisation, pedagogical neutrality and design flexibility. They argue that no single tool satisfies all five criteria. They propose CADMOS as a tool which aims to address these concerns, by guiding practitioners in a design process which is based on the principle of “separation of concerns”: maintaining two parallel models of the design – a conceptual model and a flow model. They discuss the results of a user evaluation of the tool, and map its future development.

As the number of learning design tools and representations continues to grow, it becomes more difficult to keep track of them and to engage with them. Therefore, not many researchers or practitioners have time to try more than a few tools, and they are unlikely to use several different tools to author the same design. They are perhaps even more unlikely to take into consideration different approaches to the learning design process, itself. This is especially true for practitioners, who must cope with the day-to-day demands of teaching. Hence, the motivation for the concluding two papers in this supplement. We take our inspiration from the internationally acclaimed film, Rashomon (1950) by the late Japanese film director, Akira Kurosawa. Rashomon is notable not only because it introduced Japanese cinema to Western audiences, but also because of the novel plot device used by Kurosawa, in which the same narrative (a mysterious murder) is revealed from the perspectives of three different characters. We hope to provide the same benefit of multiple viewpoints in the papers Rashomon I and Rashomon II. As a result, these two concluding papers are rather different to the traditional research literature, but we believe they provide compelling perspectives on the contemporary opportunities and challenges in our field.

In Rashomon I Persico et al. consider the tensions and possible synergies between different approaches to LD by examining a single activity – the PI project Healthy Eating activity (Anastopoulou et al2012) through the lens of five different design approaches, each supported by particular representations and tools. These approaches are the 4SPPIces Model, the 4Ts, the e-Design Template, the Design Principles Database and the Design Narratives. The authors compare the various approaches according to their underlying pedagogical assumptions, their mode of use, and their advantages to the designer and educator. Each approach guides the designer through key decisions in the design process (or in the case of Design Narrative – in post-hoc reflection on it). The comparison does not claim to be extensive, or to conclude that one approach is superior to another. Its value is in exposing the reader to the diversity of the field and allowing her to form an understanding of what would serve her best in particular situations.

In the companion paper Rashomon II, Prieto et al. take the approach of modelling the same activity using five different tools. The authors use the same “healthy eating” activity from the PI project and describe how this inquiry-based learning scenario is implemented in all five tools, providing illustrations and a detailed discussion for each. They are thus able to uncover key differences and similarities among the tools. These entail differences in their use and usefulness, their audiences, and pedagogic specialties, among others. This comparative approach therefore also illustrates some of the key contemporary challenges for the field of Learning Design.

We hope this contribution is useful not just for the learning design community, but for all researchers and practitioners engaged in educational innovation.

October 7, 2013 Posted by | design, design patterns, learning design, technology | , | Leave a comment

CfP: BJET special issue on Learning Analytics, Learning Design and Teacher Inquiry (Deadline: 7 Oct)

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/store/10.1111/(ISSN)1467-8535/asset/homepages/Teacher-led_enquiry_call_for_papers__updated___2_.pdf?v=1&s=f77fb8ad51f9538144f7f31d131945f31f90b852
Teacher-led inquiry, learning design and learning analytics:  a virtuous circle
Guest editors: Dr Yishay Mor, Dr Rebecca Ferguson and Professor Barbara Wasson
This special issue, BJET Volume 46, Issue 1, will be published in January 2015. This issue seeks to explore the synergy between teacher-led inquiry into student learning (TISL), learning design, and learning analytics.  For learning design to be effective, it should be informed and evaluated by teacher inquiry or should form part of a process of inquiry. For TISL to be meaningful, it should support the design of activities and resources. Together, these suggest an integrated dynamic model of teaching as design inquiry of learning. The recent emergence of learning analytics as a field offers to equip learners and teachers with powerful new tools that can support their inquiry into learning practices.

September 18, 2013 Posted by | Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 1,514 other followers