Symeon Retalis Design Practice


Published on

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

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

No notes for slide
  • Να γίνει αναφορά στη λειτουργία του Moodle
  • Symeon Retalis Design Practice

    1. 1. Designing Learning Sessions Using Design Patterns University of Piraeus, Department of Digital Systems Computer Supported Learning Engineering Laboratory Symeon Retalis (, P. Georgiakakis This project is partially funded with support from the European Commission. This presentation reflects the views of the partners and the Commission cannot be held responsible for any use which may be made of the information contained therein.
    2. 2. Overview  Motivation of our work  Supporting Teachers/Practitioners  Designing effective scripts for supporting the computer supported collaborative creative (CSCC) process  Learning Flow Design Patterns  Variations of Design Patters  Adding recommendations to tools to support CSCC scripts  Concluding remarks idSpace project on Tooling and Training for collaborative product innovation
    3. 3. Need for better pedagogy  Explicit, dedicated pedagogical strategies to enhance of active learning should be communicated to practitioners (Baruah and Paulus, 2008).  ExamplesQ  Collaborative Strategies: Jigsaw, TPS, Pyramid, Role Playing, eARMA  Creativity Strategies: Six Hats, SCAMPER, 5H1W
    4. 4. Collaborative Learning… Source: Michael Beyerlein (2006), Keynote Address at American Creativity Association International Conference 2006 Unfocused activities and free collaboration does not necessarily produce effective learning outcomes
    5. 5. Creative & Collaborative strategies/techniques  Collaborative Strategies like Jigsaw, TAPS advocate that there is no collaboration without communication  Groups need not only communication, but also share information, resources and knowledge Source:
    6. 6. Needs when designing learning situations  Dynamic learning scenarios need for:  Structured designs of collaborative creative problem solving situations  Flexible customizable designs of computer supported collaborative creativity situations (CSCC) 6 Activity level (macro): Collaborative learning flow, i.e., sequence of activities that make up a learning process Action level (micro): Detailed learning actions within an activity
    7. 7. CL Flow Patterns  Broadly accepted techniques repetitively used by practitioners (best /good practices)  Codified  as patterns for the design of (potentially effective) CSCL scenarios (scripts)  so that they can be reused in different situations / content / disciplines
    8. 8. TPS CLFP Thinking, forming pairs and sharing Source:
    9. 9. Problem Solving Steps 1. Definition of the problem 2. Constructing a strategy 3. Organizing information 4. Allocation of resources 5. Monitoring the solving process 6. Evaluating the solving process and outcomes (Sternberg, 2003) eARMA CLFP for collaborative problem solving
    10. 10. The CLFP design pattern format Element Explanation Name Name of the FDP Context Environment type in which the CLFP could be applied Problem Learning problem to be solved by the CLFP Solution Description of the proposal by the CLFP for solving the problem Actors and Actions Description of the actors involved in the collaborative activity described by the CLFP as well as their activities Types of Tasks Description of the types of groups of learners identified and how they are related, types of tasks, together with their sequence, performed by the actors involved in the activity. Example A real-world learning activity capable of being structured according to the CLFP Related patterns Names of other interrelated patterns References List of resources for further reading
    11. 11. Variations of a strategy in a CLFP  A new element needs to be added, entitled “variations”.  This element will specify what to change and under which conditions in the sequence of activities, the resources or the tools.  All these changes need to be justified in order to illuminate the rationale behind these variations.  to give advice to designers on how to make effective mixtures of strategies without harnessing the basic educational philosophy and added value
    12. 12. Example of Variations  Instead of the Sternberg’s model a teacher may select the IDEAL problem solving model (Bransford & Stein, 1984 which includes five steps.
    13. 13. Variations of a strategy in a CLFP – Preparation of a cocktail  During the preparation of a cocktail,  the cornerstone is an understanding of the relationships between strong and weak, sour and sweet  in CSCL, a designer should blend the phases, the resources, and the tools (i.e. the ingredients) together cautiously.  Otherwise, this scenario will resemble a weak or watery development like a cocktail with inappropriate flavour, texture and colour. Source:
    14. 14. Recommendations during the design process  Higher order, which will help a practitioner to choose among the most suitable creativity strategy for a specific scenario/case. This choice will be based on elements such as the type of learning objectives need to be accomplished, the complexity of implementing a strategy as a whole and as per activities of the strategy.  Organisational recommendations which will involve decisions about the formation of groups, leadership schema, etc.  Technological recommendations which will concern the use of specific tools, features for the implementation of the strategy into a real specific scenario/case.
    15. 15. Selection criteria based on the operations types and activities  Learning objectives. An example TAPPS strategy can help in accomplishing the procedural objective of “promoting analytical reasoning skills”.  Types of problems that are best served with the strategies. For example, Jigsaw is most appropriate when a problem to be solved is “complex and can be easily divided into sections or independent sub- problems”.  Complexity or risk in terms of collaborative learning experienced needed. For example Jigsaw is complex and is probably more appropriate for experienced participants
    16. 16. Selection criteria  complexity: low|high  type-of-problem: closed|open  physical-requirements: yes|no  emotions-dependent: yes|no  interactive: low|high  supporting-action: exporation|combination|transformation|evaluation // characterization by Boden  distance: short|long // the distance between an given input and the possibly resulting idea  moderator: yes|no  expert_participants: yes|no
    17. 17. Recommendations in computable format
    18. 18. The example of the eARMA strategy The example eARMA strategy:  complexity: high  type-of-problem: closed  physical-requirements: no  emotions-dependent: no  interactive: high  supporting-action: exploration, combination, evaluation  distance: short  moderator: no  expert_participants: no
    19. 19. Open Issues…  Not all recommendations can be computable (e.g. bulding trust or the group size, etc.)  However advice is needed  Building recommender systems  Usable & effective for novice designer s/ practitioners  Creating systems for supporting collaborative creativity processes
    20. 20. Designing Learning Sessions Using Design Patterns The present work was carried out as part of • the LdV Transfer of Innovation project “A Framework for Preparing Teachers to Teach with ICT” (ref LLP-LdV-TOI-09-CY-167918) Symeon Retalis ( This project is partially funded with support from the European Commission. This presentation reflects the views of the partners and the Commission cannot be held responsible for any use which may be made of the information contained therein.