Personalised Learning: a framework for e-learning
•Download as PPTX, PDF•
6 likes•1,431 views
Centre for Distance Education seminar conducted by James Ballard from the University of London Computer Centre on 25 May 2011.
Recommended
Recommended
More Related Content
Similar to Personalised Learning: a framework for e-learning
Similar to Personalised Learning: a framework for e-learning (20)
More from Centre for Distance Education
More from Centre for Distance Education (20)
Recently uploaded
Recently uploaded (20)
Personalised Learning: a framework for e-learning
- 1. WIRELESS PASSWORD: Uol-conferences Password: obuthe Personalised Learning A Framework for e-Learning James Ballard CDE Lunchtime Session
- 2. Overview Background: Personalisation Agenda Discussion: Ownership A Pedagogy for Personalisation A Framework for e-Learning What Next?
- 3. Personalisation ‘The logic of education systems should be reversed so that it is the system that conforms to the learner, rather than the learner to the system. This is the essence of personalisation’. Personalisation and Digital Technologies http://www.futurelab.org.uk/resources/documents/opening_education/Personalisation_report.pdf
- 6. Personalisation as Choice ‘Mass customisation’ gives users have a degree of choice over standardised modules. ‘Personalised timing’ allows individual timings of a user’s trip through a standard curriculum.
- 11. Ownership Developing empowering cultures requires skill, thought and a commitment to valuing and exploring processes, not just focusing on the ‘product’ - Haigh, 1999
- 12. Ownership Matrix Ownership introduces the understanding of both product and process and explores the extent to which ownership can be transferred.
- 13. Workshop Activity (15mins) Where does a volcano get its power? In groups of 2-3 design a personalised learning activity for this topic. Conole and Fill, 2004
- 14. 21st Century Learning? ‘It is a world in which knowing what and how to learn the next thing is as important as what has already been learnt.’ Jackson and Ward, 2004
- 16. Personalisation
- 17. Personalised e-Learning 2009 – Discourse based framework Professional National Assessment Institutional Portal VLE Portfolio Social PLP Personal
- 18. Implications
- 19. Process and Ownership Complexity Matrix - Process Customisation Matrix - Ownership Gilmore and Pine, 1997 Stacey, 2002
- 20. Assessing learners’ achievement and learning needs E-Assessment Pyramid Assessment Approaches Martin, 2008
- 22. A Framework for e-Learning
- 23. A Framework for e-Learning
- 24. A Framework for e-Learning
- 25. A Framework for e-Learning Transformative?
- 26. What Next: Learning Design GrainneConole http://cloudworks.ac.uk/cloud/view/4001
- 27. What Next: Learning Analytics Learning analytics starts with the learner. We need to make sure it gets back there again. Suthers & Rosen, 2011 http://www.slideshare.net/suthers/suthers-rosen-learning-analytics-and-knowledge-2011 Clow, 2011 http://dougclow.wordpress.com/2011/03/11/marx-and-learning-analytics-towards-a-praxis-of-educational-improvement/
- 28. Summary The framework does not proscribe particular software but instead positions technology as a cultural tool representative of complex processes Personalised learning may provide the context for assessing the capabilities of e-learning systems James Ballard j.ballard@ulcc.ac.uk @james_ulcc
Editor's Notes
- Excellence and Enjoyment – For Vygotksy learning is not always fun, where the government is legitimising continued accumulation through global competitiveness (‘excellence’) in a knowledge-based (‘creative’) society through an appeal to consumerism (‘personalisation’) and the nice emotions (‘enjoyment’) derived from it;Marketisation and Equity - values such as self-motivation, self-regulation, and educational progress, are not equally distributed among different classes and cultures in English society. Personalisation and Choice - choice of institution and learning experience may be mutually contradictory – those that need most help are least likely to seek it.
- For Vygotsky an independent learner is the result of learning rather than a premise for it.
- VLE is rational where progress is monitored against well defined learning outcomesILP is a judgemental process that offers a shared vision for future development which is not predetermined and can only be judged in relation to that visionAssessment is political process with outcomes derived from established frameworks that require negotiation to ensure these are shared by the learnerThe portfolio involves complex processes representative of creativity, reflection, and new modes of operating
- Dynamic assessment follows a test-teach-test paradigm using quantitative data and highly scripted teaching response to provide a more complete picture of actual and maturing cognitive structures and functioning;Formative assessment occurs within the ZPD during collaboration or instructional conversation and as a qualitative assessment aimed to optimise instruction it offers personalised non-scripted teacher response to variable tasks. To determine the contribution of instruction to learner development it is also necessary to assess independent performance in subsequent tasks. The student portfolio, as a narrative, operates as an authentic cultural tool. Authenticity of assessment is maintained through encouraging the learner to contribute their ideas to the discussion rather than present correct answers
- For Vygotsky an independent learner is the result of learning rather than a premise for it.
- what the learner already knows and is capable of demonstrating during independent activity (e.g. examination) gives little indication of the appropriate interventions to progress that learner to the next developmental level.
- what the learner already knows and is capable of demonstrating during independent activity (e.g. examination) gives little indication of the appropriate interventions to progress that learner to the next developmental level.