Flex pedagog 06


Published on

Published in: Education, Technology
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Total views
On SlideShare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Flex pedagog 06

  1. 1. Flexible pedagogies fordisruptive technologies Dr Debra HovenSchool of Cultural and Language Studies in Education Queensland University of Technology d.hoven@qut.edu.au CALICO Symposium, Hawaii 2006 Riding the wave
  2. 2. Riding the wave …
  3. 3. of disruptive technologies …• What are disruptive technologies & how did they get this name? (Christensen vs Dvorak – 2004)“… defined as a low-performance, less expensive technology that enters a heated- up scene where the established technology is outpacing people’s ability to adapt to it. The new technology gains a foothold, continues to improve, and then bumps the older, once-better technology into oblivion.”
  4. 4. cf … educational contexts)• Social/human affordances and uses of new technologies …Technology that disrupts the traditional rules/norms of classes e.g. Mobile phones IM Chat rooms• How flexible can we be?• What can we be flexible about?
  5. 5. 10 insights from distance language teaching (Henrichsen, 2001)1. Different ICT options each have their own strengths (& weaknesses)2. Sophisticated ICT not necessarily better esp. in isolated areas/developing countries3. Regardless of technology, solid instructional design & effective teaching methods are crucial4. DE involves teaching & learning in new/ modified roles5. Teachers work as members of instructional/ technical team
  6. 6. 10 insights from distance teaching (Henrichsen, 2001) cont’d …6. Importance & difficulty of creating & maintaining active, interactive learning7. Importance of building a sense of community & overcoming isolation8. Design flexibility is crucial9. Evaluating students and program success is challenging10. Reducing attrition also a challenge
  7. 7. Critical features in online/flexible language teaching & learning• Communication (1-1, 1-many)• Social interaction• Meaningful exchange of information• Modelling of, & appropriating good/appropriate language• Getting and remaining on-task• Sense of community• … and appreciation of learners’ IDs & preferences
  8. 8. Evolving Pedagogical Approach to a conception that is:• Intentional• Flexible• Active• Contextualised/Situated• Experiential• Learner-shaped
  9. 9. Based on an emerging meld of:• Constructivism (cognitive & mediated)• Sociocultural approaches (socially constructed in context)• Task-based approaches• Ecological approaches (affordances)• Problem-solving approaches• Collaborative learning approaches• CSCL/WMCL
  10. 10. Finding the features of a pedagogy to maximise opportunities offered by(continuously evolving andemerging) communications technologies
  11. 11. Which way to fly?
  12. 12. Learning environments & changing roles• Learners (especially younger ones) are as comfortable if not more so than teachers with the newer (communications) technologies (Felix, 2001)• learners who communicate more frequently also use a wider range of media (Haythornthwaite,1999)• Learners prefer 1-1 over 1-many CMC interactions (Söntgens,1999)
  13. 13. Learning environments & changing roles 2• Social relationships are necessary before and in order for information sharing to take place (Haythornthwaite, 1999; Söntgens,1999; Appel & Gilabert, 2002)• After some familiarity and practice within an audio-enhanced CMC environment, learners appreciate the opportunity for real- time discussion of written and e-mail communication tasks (Kötter et al. 1999)
  14. 14. Modes of flexibility – a continuum• Teacher/institution-defined course & materials – Hybrid of on-line & hard copy – Hybrid of f2f & on-line – Fully on-line• Teacher/institution-defined tasks based on range of teacher/institution-defined online resources• Semi (guided)-exploratory – using on-line materials with teacher/institution-defined limitations or instructions & criteria
  15. 15. Modes of flexibility – a continuum 2• Collaborative & self- /group-managed – Under guidance of a teacher – Learner-teacher developed curriculum – Collectively constructed tasks – Collectively constructed evaluation – Collectively agreed deadlines• Exploratory/autonomous/learner-shaped – With or without teacher guidance – With or without formal enrolment
  16. 16. For language learning• Introducing the human element …• Audio/video technologies now provide learners with opportunity to practise, interact, achieve a sense of community while• Providing additional channels of communicating and• Working collaboratively with learners in other times and locations
  17. 17. And the social element:• Research shows that learners: – use specific technologies for specific purposes – that learners resist or become confused by register cross-over (e.g. social to educational contexts/purposes) – & use whatever means they are comfortable with to communicate
  18. 18. Some models …Kanuka & Anderson Radical pedagogy(1999)Blythe (2001) User-centred design paradigmMaor (2004) Pedagogy-technology bridge – pushing the comfort zoneAnderson (2005) Learning-centred designFarmer (2005) Reflective, individualized new knowledge environmentsMellow (2005) mLearning for digitalCochrane (2005) natives
  19. 19. Complemented by …Larsen- Chaos/Complexity Science &Freeman (1997) SLAKirschbaum Complex Systems(2002) - self-organization - non-linearity - order/chaos dynamic - emergent properties
  20. 20. The forest… & the trees & something else …
  21. 21. The course• Context – MEd: 2-years teaching experience – Balance of local & international students – Elective – 8 students + 2 visiting scholars (6 countries)• Reasons for change – Pedagogic • Content • Skills • Processes • Reflection – Pragmatic• Constraints
  22. 22. Course structure - blended Physical Pedagogical Assessment• 2 all-day • free-form Task 1: Blog, wiki,workshops (1st live, • learner-shaped chat, e-portfolio,SCMC tutorial) • responsive discussion forum• 1 hr drop-in COMMUNICATION • only constraint:sessions weekly Task 2: Webquest assessment items(f2f, IM or chat) by end of semester Task 3: create• 1 additional online module ofoptional w’shp (f2f tasksor virtual)
  23. 23. Class Wikihttp://collaborate.ci.qut.edu.au/techllwiki/index.php/ Main_PageClass member blogshttp://LifeNtheUniverse.blogspot.comhttp://sascha-blog.blogspot.com/http://yuhsu.blogspot.com/http://kazucorner.blogspot.com/http://owenlangdale.blogspot.com/http://robeebajar.blogspot.com/http://hncyliyu.blogspot.comhttp://nontravelblog.blogspot.com/
  24. 24. The study• Pre-course questionnaire: – Biographical information – Computer experience – Computer competence – Computer skills – Computer confidence – Learning styles – Learning strategies – Course expectations
  25. 25. The studyPre-course Focus Student artifactsQre groups Blogs-Biographical Problem- Wiki pagesinfo based Webquests-Computer skills Scenarios Discussion forums-Computer Small-group Instructional CALLcompetence Videoed projects-Computer Transcribed Chat room logsconfidence-Learning styles
  26. 26. Pre-course questionnaire 1• All students had learnt at least one other L2• 75% (6) rated themselves as average overall computer competence: 25% (2) rated themselves as above average• 1 had used blogs before• None had used computers to create their own webpages• None had used computers to create their own web-based lessons
  27. 27. Pre-course questionnaire 2• All acknowledged average to high confidence in: – most common computer applications and skills – Using Help functions – Using email – Sending attachments – Surfing the Internet
  28. 28. Pre-course questionnaire 3• All (but 1) acknowledged no to average confidence in: – Designing webpages – Creating a webpage – Recording sound on computer
  29. 29. Pre-course questionnaire 4• All acknowledged no to average confidence in: – Recording & editing video – Adding sound or video to webpages – Creating on-line learning activities
  30. 30. Comments about using computers to help learn a language:• Quite interesting: audio & visual possibilities• No experience, excellent way for learners to control their own learning – don’t know much• Quite comfortable• Excited – but how to avoid the glitches??• Good for individual preparation prior to immersion• Good for private study but prefer f2f• Requires autonomy which doesn’t suit my learning style• Don’t feel comfortable using blogs, discussion forums etc – too permanent
  31. 31. Overall impressions• Saw computers mainly as instructional CALL• Wary of CMC• Wary of web presence• Learning style data not analysed yet, but half claimed to: – Be not good autonomous learners – Be not good in isolated environments – Need f2f contact for learning
  32. 32. Focus group questions• Problem-based scenarios• Discussion/advice questions – What suggestions can you give this student? – What do you see as being this student’s problems in this unit? – What can they do now to complete this unit? – How would suggest they tackled things differently if they could start again? – If you could have given this student some advice before they enrolled in this unit, what would you say?
  33. 33. Focus groups - friendly, quiet young manScenario 1: Han - taught in a couple of Asian countries - good at English - worries that his proficiency not good enough to get the job he wants -uses his mobile phone to send text messages and make calls -keeps in touch with his family back home using chat and his webcam - enrolled in 618 because he felt comfortable using the technology and that good university jobs require technology experience -having trouble finishing his 618 assignments - not sure how to adapt the technology to teaching purposes
  34. 34. Focus groups - enthusiastic man in his late-20sScenario 2: Josh -taught in a few different countries -wants to get high-paying job in education -feels confident he has the teaching experience -realises communication and job- seeking technology can also probably be used to teach -wants his piece of paper -taking a full workload -2 part-time jobs to pay for fees and living expenses -started out well and feels confident -slipping behind though “helping out” others
  35. 35. Focus groups - young woman from traditionalScenario 3: Shinta educational background -came straight from an 18-month job in a private English school where she taught discrete-skill classes using a set textbook and materials -never participated in planning or organising classes -enrolled in this program to help her get promotional positions -having trouble working out what to do and is falling behind -worried that she is running out of time to learn the skills and even to get the work done -other subjects are very demanding and have strict deadlines
  36. 36. Focus groups -quite a bit older than many of theScenario 4: Jeni other participants -taught mainly in poorly resourced migrant education programs in Australia -taught in a couple of Asian countries -some broad experiences of different cultures and teaching conditions -about time she tackled this “technology thing” to use the sorts of tools that her children and some of her students are quite familiar with -earlier in the semester advised younger students about time management and planning -Now struggling with technical skills -panics and loses confidence
  37. 37. Focus group directions• Confidence through doing• Need prior preparation with computing skills• Need more structure & deadlines• Take advantage of peer mentoring opportunities (communities of practice)• Take advantage of multiple opportunities for mutual support (affordances)• Need constant practice to improve: – Computing skills – Study skills – Time-management skills – Prioritising tasks
  38. 38. External Environment Networks Communication Teachers Learners Exploration Collaboration Physical Soft resources resources Instructional CALL
  39. 39. Flexible pedagogies fordisruptive technologies Dr Debra HovenSchool of Cultural and Language Studies in Education Queensland University of Technology d.hoven@qut.edu.au CALICO Symposium, Hawaii 2006