Main Arguments Learning objects LOs and learning design LD

1
Main ArgumentsLearning objects (LOs) and
learning design (LD)

• Useful for discovering, sharing and developing
  pedagogic strategies and designs.
• Introduction reveals existing pedagogic practice
  and values.
• Implicit model makes staff development almost
  inevitable

2
About the L2L project

• Part of the JISC Exchange for Learning Programme
  (X4L) - developing reusable learning objects to
  support learning/study skills.
• PEDAGOGIC FRAMEWORK
• Uses a pedagogic framework based on the work of
  Tom Shuell and ideas presented in the JISC funded
  report Effective Networked Learning in Higher
  Education (2000).

3
Capturing Pedagogy

• Aims to use a common vocabulary to describe
  pedagogic strategies by an existing community of
  practice - study skill tutors
• Good target group - dedicated and educationally
  savvy

4
Reality Therapy.

• Its teaching Jim - but not as we know it
• Whos we?
• Where teachers are in reality
• Using our Pedagogic Framework - 3 problems
• Discussion not common - various reasons
• Terminology is rebarbative
• Coming from outside

5
Shuells Pedagogic Framework Learning Functions
Every Learning Episode includes

• Define Learning Expectations
• Prior knowledge activation
• Motivation
• Combination, Integration Synthesis
• Attention
• Encoding
• Comparison
• Repetition
• Hypothesis Generation

Can be activated by Learner Teacher Resource
6
Our Experience

• Better to work outwards from teachers existing
  conceptions and terminologies
• Example - back to
• Prepare
• Teach
• Review

7


8
Building on Shuell

• A Bridge between Cog. Psy. and ID - important for
  the UK
• Possible lessons for uptake of Learning Design.
• Too abstract - for practitioners - but useful for
  designers
• Strongly implicit organisational model in LD
  LOs
• Industrial approach
• Division of Labour Team - Change of Roles
• Design Intensive - Share
• Design once run many

9
What a Learning Design Technologist Sees
The Learning Design Continuum A
B
C LD Levels A - Basics and
Sequence B- Properties and Conditions C -
Notifications
10
What a Teacher Sees
Many Continuums
11
Implications for the Future

• LD and LOs as Boundary Objects (Wenger) for CoPs.
• They Need to Carry some Context and offer
  possible Generalisations (Toshiba Software
  Factory, van Vliet)
• Lessons from AI Knowledge Elicitation for LD?

12
Getting from Here to ThereThe Bigger Picture
Where Teachers Are Operating at Levels 1, 2 3
of Ramsdens Model of HE teaching
Craft Style Communication with Artefacts and
Primitives
Semi - Structured Narrative
LD Tools
Structured Narrative
A(1) B (2) C(2.5)
3
13
Conclusions

• That we develop only intra-disciplinary
  libraries of learning objects is not a bad thing.
  It is simply so much less than what could be.  If
  we do develop these boundary spanning resources
  and strategies, there is a genuine opportunity
  for a critical revolution in knowledge
  production. 
•  Anderson 2003
• End
• References follow

14
References

• Shuell, T. (1992) Designing Instructional
  Computing Systems for meaningful Learning. P.
  Winne M. Jones (eds) In Adaptive Learning
  Environments Foundations and Frontiers, Springer
  Verlag, New York.
• Goodyear, p. et al (2001) Effective networked
  learning in higher education notes and
  guidelines Published by JISC-JCALT CSALT,
  Lancaster University. Available at
  http//csalt.lancs.ac.uk/jisc/guidelines_final.doc
  
• van Vliet, H. 1993. Chapter 16 Software
  Reusability in Software Engineering, Chichester
  John Wiley Sons
• Wenger, E. 1998 Communities of Practice,
  Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
• Ramsden, P., (2003 ) Learning to Teach in Higher
  Education, RoutledgeFalmer,, ISBN 0415303451
• Anderson.