• Share
  • Email
  • Embed
  • Like
  • Save
  • Private Content
E jozef colpaert_lyon2010_colpaert[1]
 

E jozef colpaert_lyon2010_colpaert[1]

on

  • 206 views

 

Statistics

Views

Total Views
206
Views on SlideShare
204
Embed Views
2

Actions

Likes
0
Downloads
0
Comments
0

1 Embed 2

http://www.ua.ac.be 2

Accessibility

Upload Details

Uploaded via as Microsoft PowerPoint

Usage Rights

© All Rights Reserved

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Processing…
Post Comment
Edit your comment

    E jozef colpaert_lyon2010_colpaert[1] E jozef colpaert_lyon2010_colpaert[1] Presentation Transcript

    • Designing a CALL course in teacher training: focus on design research Prof. dr. Jozef Colpaert Lyon, April 27th 2010
    • Background
      • Vice-chairman of the Institute for Education and Information Sciences (IOIW)
      • Director R&D Linguapolis Language Institute
      • Editor CALL Journal (Taylor & Francis)
      • CALL R&D projects since 1986
      • Organizer biennial Antwerp CALL Research Conferences
      • Father of five children
      WiAOC 2009
    • Teacher education at UA
      • Within Institute for Education and Information Sciences (IOIW)
      • All disciplines represented (avg. 400 students)
      • Theoretical component / practical component / on- the-job
      • New 2-year masters
      • Courses:
        • ICT & language learning
        • Design of multimedia environments
        • Instructional Design*
        • Educational Technology*
    • CALL & teacher education
      • Challenges:
        • Students’ attitude & expectations
        • In-service training
        • Technology evolves quickly
        • Enough theory/findings available?
      • My goal:
        • Turn students into creative, reflecting, self-evaluating and research-aware teachers
    • Research ?
      • Research on CALL in teacher education
        • How to ?
        • Which methodology ?
        • How do we learn more / faster ?
      • My approach:
        • Engineering approach
          • “ turn your daily work into research”
        • Integrate research in my course
    • Integration of research
      • Students:
        • contribute to knowledge corpus of the course (wiki & team teaching)
        • contribute to literature surveys on specific topics (theoretical validation)
        • participate in data gathering
        • are confronted with current projects (cases) or give feedback on project proposals
        • participate in empirical validation of my hypotheses:
          • design a language learning environment of their choice
          • re-design my course
    • My research
      • Technology as Support System
      • Educational Engineering as Research Method
      • Distributed Learning as Design Model
      • Personal Goals as Design Concepts
    • Technology as support system
      • Design the language learning/teaching environment first !
      • LLE = ecology of all interacting actors and factors geared toward realizing goals of learners and teachers
      • The role of technology is to contribute to this goal, to create powerful LLEs more efficiently and effectively
      • Design of technology is derived from design of LLE
      • Consequence for CALL evaluation
    • EE as research method
      • Builds hypotheses on theory and practice
      • Staged, cyclic, lifecycle approach
      • Holistic, comprehensive
      • Focuses on design processes
      • Current research: how to measure effect?
      • Different form Action Research treatment/analysis
    • Educational engineering Analysis Development Implementation Evaluation conceptualization specification prototyping Design Theory Technology
    • DL as Design Model
      • Distributed Learning (DL) is a conceptual and methodological framework for designing and evaluating effective learning environments.
        • LS (learning situation) = what is
        • LE (learning environment) = what can/should be created
      • currently in phase of theoretical and empirical validation
    • DL as Design Model
      • Analysis: identify factors amenable to improvement
      • Design:
        • Conceptualisation: identify goals for the learning environment
        • Specification:
          • Architecture
          • Pedagogy
          • Content
          • Technology
      • Development, Implementation, Evaluation
    • PG as design concepts
      • Practical goals as hypothetical compromise between personal and pedagogical goals
      • Pedagogical goals:
        • Curricula, programmes, textbooks ....
        • Clearly formulated, easy to identify
        • But: one can adopt the best possible pedagogical approach, if personal goals are not respected ...
      • Personal goals:
        • Difficult to detect, to elicit
        • Detection: through focus groups, interviews ...
    • Personal goals
      • Step 1: detection through identification of negative feeling
        • Questions: what disturbs/irritates ... while learning/teaching
        • Answer: aspect x, aspect y
        • Analysis:
          • I feel bored, alienated, overcommitted, stressed, anxious, alone, useless, not respected, undervalued, not competent, underpaid, …
          • I’d rather go out, play soccer, do research, write a paper, submit project proposals ...
    • Personal goals
      • Step 2: reformulation of negative feelings in positive assertive (but often hidden) will
        • I want to feel valued, competent, respected, ...
        • I want to spend my time in the most efficient way
        • I want to make quick carreer moves
    • Personas
      • Pedagogical goals are the same for students and teachers
      •  Formulation of a limited number of archetypes based on a clustering of personal goals
        • Type A = Jan
        • Type B = Maaike
        • Type C = Pol
      •  Formulate axes for representation of the population
    • Practical goals
      • Key to conceptualisation
      • Hypothetical compromise between often conflicting pedagogical and personal goals
      • Synthesis: difficult exercise
      • Focus on:
        • acceptance
        • commensurate effort
    • The UA learning environment min max max max competence autonomy relatedness
    • Examples
      • Examples
    • Evaluation
      • Evaluation:
        • Initial problems with student satisfaction
        •  better explain purpose of my design
    • Thank you !
      • XIV International CALL Research Conference
        • Motivation and beyond ( 18-20 August 2010 )
        • www.antwerpcall.be
      • LINGUAPOLIS Summer School: A Toolbox for Design-Based Research (22-27 August 2010).
      • Article: Jozef COLPAERT. 2010. Elicitation of language learners’ personal goals as design concepts, Innovation in Language Learning and Teaching , in print.