Instructional conceptions

1
Instructional conceptions

• Their nature and impact
• Jan Elen, Rebecca Léonard, Geraldine Clarebout
  Joost Lowyck
• CIPT, K.U.Leuven
• TECFA, Université de Genève
• 12-02-04

2
Introduction

• Instructional conceptions definition
• (general and specific) ideas of students about
  (aspects and / or components of)
• learning environments

Prototypical example Salomon (1984) television
is easy print is tough
3
Introduction

• Related constructs / approaches
• cognitional knowledge for classroom teaching and
  learning (Peterson, 1988)
• beliefs about pedagogy (Van Etten, Van Etten,
  Pressley, 1997)
• attitude toward educational use of the Internet
  (Ness, Duggan, Morgan, Kim Wilson, 1999)
• beliefs about how teaching should take place
  (Kember, 2001)
• preference what students hope for (Sander,
  Stevenson, Kind Coates, 2000)

4
Structure

• Why?
• Theoretical framework
• Nature of instructional conceptions
• BooiZ-study methodological essentials
• Discussion and conclusions

General Own studies BooiZ
Substance
Rel. Other variables
Development
Impact
5
Why study instructional conceptions ?
Instructional devices not (adequately) used
Growing importance in ID of process variables
Kabisa 2004 Martens et al.
Learners become co-designers (open learning
environments CSCL, learning communities)
6
Theoretical framework (simplified)
Instructional conceptions
Learning Activities/ Processes
Perceptions
Learning Environment
7
The nature of instructional conceptions

• Particular category of (metacognitive) knowledge
  (Elen, Proost, Lowyck, 1996)
• declarative (elements, demands, affordances)/
  procedural (function attribution, use)
• Mediates perceptions (e.g., Trigwell Prosser,
  1999)
• Moderates impact of instructional environment
  (e.g., Elen, 1995)

8
The nature of instructional conceptions

• Different objects
• general (high quality instruction)
• goals
• role of students / instructional agents
• specific
• tools / approaches (characteristics, functions)
• features (tools / approaches)
• not included task

9
BooiZ-study methodological essentials

• Questionnaire
• 2 parts
• instructional conceptions (3 educational goals
  descriptions of LE, 41 features)
• perceptions / activities
• N 2132 / 8 departments (1st, 3rd (5th) year)
• Construction task
• students are asked to design a course
• 6 categories / 52 instances
• N 41 / 8 departments (1st, 3rd (5th) year)

10
Substance some findings

• Van Etten et al. (1997)
• crucial role that instructors play in the
  educational process
• Kember (2001)
• distinction between didactic/reproductive and
  facilitative/transformative view
• Stebler Reusser (1996)
• clear ideas about benefits of small-group
  collaborative work

11
Substance own studies

• Essay-type (Elen Lowyck, 2000a) qualitative
  study, 244 freshmen
• good education when instructional agent
  considers needs of students and directs them
• distinction between learning and studying
• specific ideas about quality features specific
  instructional elements
• University college study (Elen et al., 1999
  Clarebout, et al., 2000) quantitative (n 414)
  sophomores 2 universities, 2 colleges, 9
  programs
• 2 scales encompassing support (9 items alpha
  .75) gt encouraging independent work (2 items,
  alpha .67)

12
Substance own studies

• Efficiency effectiveness study (Elen Lowyck,
  1998 Elen Lowyck, 2000b) quantitative n 489
  / university
• 2 scales contribute to reduction of study time
  / contribute to study results
• different results on both scales for specific
  interventions
• highest scores for traditional interventions
  (lectures, practical sessions, exercises) lowest
  for new type of interventions (looking up on the
  Internet, going to the library)

13
Substance BooiZ

• Factor analysis on 41 items
• Two-factor solution (41,32 explained variance)
• Two scales
• a learning environment with safe
  challenges-scale
• 40 items, loadings gt .40 ? .96
• the students memorize a lot of information
• 1 item, loading .56

14
Substance BooiZ

• Second factor analysis on 40 items
• Six-factor solution (53,62 explained variance)
  oblique rotation
• Six scales (factor loadings gt .40)
• a student-centred LO-scale (9 items, ? .87)
• a challenged LO-scale (5 items, ? .76)
• an individualized LE-scale (2 items, ? .73)
• an active contribution LE-scale (2 items, ?
  .73)
• an exercise-item (1 item, factor loading .71)
• a teacher-centred LO-scale (6 items, ? .80)
• gt 25 items 15 items removed
• intercorrelation .36 - .70

15
Substance BooiZ

• questionnaire

16
Substance BooiZ

• Pearson correlations between the six scales

17
Substance BooiZ

• Construction task

18
Relationship with other (process) variables some
findings

• Kember (2001)
• beliefs about teaching closely linked to beliefs
  about the nature of knowledge and conceptions of
  learning

19
Relationship with other (process) variables own
studies

• Parents study (Clarebout, Elen, Goolaerts,
  2003) quantitative 536 parents questionnaire
  50 items
• Instructional conceptions and epistemological
  beliefs in same scales (modern vs. classical
  beliefs)
• University - college study
• Instructional conceptions - perceived goal
  orientation
• encompassing support less important when goal
  relates to acquisition of meaningful / applicable
  knowledge
• 15 of variance in encompassing support-scale
  explained by learning style scales

20
Relationship with other process variables BooiZ

• Questionnaire
• sign. influence of study behavior on memorizing
  (small ES)
• Sign. influence of goal orientation on memorizing
  (big ES)

21
Development Some findings

• Kember (2001) beliefs do change over time
• it does appear necessary to confront students
  with the incompatibility of their current
  beliefs. They cannot come to appreciate a
  facilitative/transformative model of the teaching
  and learning process unless exposed to teaching
  based upon these premises. (p. 218)
• Stebler Reusser (1996)
• clear agreements among students and teachers of
  the same class (benefits of small-group
  collaborative work)

22
Development own studies

• Short-term
• ParlEuNet-project (Elen Clarebout, 2001)
  quantitative, 139 students (aged 15-17)
• after participation less favorable towards
  collaboration and use of technology
• Long-term
• University - college study
• Encompassing support regarded to be less
  important by university students
• differences between institutions
• Engineering lt communication-education, economics
  lt biomedical for encompassing support

23
Development BooiZ

• Questionnaire
• sign. influence of department on ALL scales
  (small to big ES)
• sign. influence of study year on safe
  challenges LE, memorizing, SCLE en activity
  (small ES)
• Construction task
• Indications of development

24
Impact Some findings

• Hess et al. (1999)
• behavioral correlates for attitudes towards
  Internet e.g., favorable attitude associated (no
  causal relationship !) with
• choosing classes that use the Internet,
• greater frequency of Internet use both in general
  and for educational purposes,
• greater number of reasons for using the Internet
  for education,
• greater number of Internet features used

25
Impact Some findings

• Kember (2001)
• It was found that the attitudes to and ability
  to cope with study were influenced by a coherent
  set of beliefs about knowledge and the process of
  teaching and learning

26
Impact BooiZ

• Questionnaire
• sign. influence of instructional conceptions on
  perceptions (small ES)

27
Discussion and conclusions

• Lack of consistent and generally agreed upon
  theoretical framework
• No research agenda ad hoc research highly
  descriptive
• Lack of clear definition (distinction between
  instructional conceptions, instructional beliefs,
  instructional perceptions)
• Mixture of research instruments

28
Some forthcoming studies

• Unified theoretical framework
• Unified instrument
• Systematic studies on impact

29
Some forthcoming studies

• Impact on use of adjuncts aids (South-Africa)
  with F. Louw
• Moderating role of instructional conceptions on
  effects of PLE versus traditional LE (Ghana)
  with F.K. Sarfo
• Impact on tool use in LE for complex learning,
  interaction with pedagogical agent (Belgium)