AbstractSeveral decades of research in technology-enhanced learning (TEL) have demonstrated the potential of digital technology to transform education. Yet the impact of TEL research on daily teaching-learning practices is still far from fulfilling this potential. Arguably, this is a gap in the capacity for learning design: educators need the tools and competencies which would allow them to identify educational challenges, describe the context in which they arise, identify the opportunities afforded by technology, project the insights derived from research, and devise new learning experiences. To address this gap, educators need tools and practices. Tools that would support them through the cycle of learning design – from conception to deployment of techno-educational innovations. Professional practices that use such tools to ensure the robustness and effectiveness of their innovations and make learning design a daily habit and part of their professional identity.The METIS project (http://metis-project.org/) aims to contribute to this aim, by providing educators with an Integrated Learning Design Environment (ILDE, see: Hernández-Leo, Asensio, Chacón, & Prieto, 2013) and a workshop package for training educators in using the ILDE to support effective learning design. Work Package 3, led by the OU (UK), is concerned with the design and development of the workshop package. The ILDE and the workshop package will be evaluated by 3 representative user groups, one from the training and professional development sector, a non-profit association targeting non-formal training and problems of social exclusion, and a university representing the higher education sector.In this paper we will describe the initial phases of research conducted to support the design of the METIS workshops. The aims of this research are:• To identify the constraints and requirements emerging from the specifics of the contexts in which they would be run, and the aspirations of the prospective participants and organising bodies.• To collate, compare and evaluate examples of similar workshops from the past so as to inform the design of the METIS workshops by building on existing knowledge e.g. OULDI and OLDS-MOOC • To propose a workshop structure that can be used and evaluated within the project(Brasher, A., Mor, Y., 2013).Will present the outcomes of work done over the first 7 months of the project in terms of an initial version of the METIS workshop structure, i.e. a “meta-design” which will need to be customized and specified for each user group. We will describe the rationale for the design, using evidence and examples from the data we have collected. In conclusion, we will describe plans for using the structure to develop and evaluate a series of ready-to-run workshop packages targeted at the 3 user groups.ReferencesHernández-Leo, D., Asensio, J. I., Chacón, J., & Prieto, L. P. (2013). METIS deliverable D2.1: Report 1 on meeting with stakeholders: early feedback on ILDE requirements.Brasher, A., Mor, Y., (2013) D3.1 Report 2 on meetings with user groups: Early feedback on candidate best practices for teacher training on learning design. METIS project deliverable, code 531262-LLP-2012-ES-KA3-KA3MP
Outputs … or why you could/should be interested.The focus of the OU’s work within the project is on the workshops. We are leading the work to design the workshop template.Workshop template is transferable design knowledge, for learning about learning design applicable to any topic.Learning Design is the act of devising new practices, plans of activity, resources and tools aimed at achieving particular educational aims in a given situation. In this sense, research around learning design within the ICT community has led to the proposal of (A) several technical specifications which can be used to create unambiguous representation of learning activities and, alongside these, (B) several software authoring tools, which enable users to create and enact learning designs, following different pedagogical methodologies.
Specifics of the ‘transferable approach’ will vary according to role in module team.E.g. within workshop structure academic might focus on selection of patterns based on pedagogic criteria, media developer focus on implementation issues of instances of patterns
This time line shows projects which focus on learning design as a whole. Learning design has been implicit in many other OU initiatives and projects.
Several decades of research in technology-enhanced learning (TEL) have demonstrated the potential of digital technology to transform education . Yet the impact of TEL research on daily teaching-learning practices is still far from fulfilling this potential (Mellar, Oliver, & Hadjithoma-Garstka, 2009). Teachers lack the necessary digital literacy skills (Jenkins, 2009) to harness the potential of new technologies. Arguably, this is a gap in the capacity for learning design: educators need the tools and competencies which would allow them to identify educational challenges, describe the context in which they arise, identify the opportunities afforded by technology, project the insights derived from research, and devise new learning experiences. To address this gap, educators need tools and practices. Tools that would support them through the cycle of learning design – from conception to deployment of techno-educational innovations. Professional practices that use such tools to ensure the robustness and effectiveness of their innovations and make learning design a daily habit and part of their professional identity.“The PREEL project demonstrated ways in which research can impact on practice,though direct interaction between researchers and practitioners was found to be less effective than mediating this relationship through an intermediary supporting practitioners in using the research: someone who was therefore not perceived as ‘conveying’ knowledge, but rather as facilitating a process of reflection and exploration informed by research. Research also impacted on the course redesign process by encouraging practitioners to reflect as researchers on their own modules. The thinking underlying the development of EvidenceNet (Sharpe and Oliver, 2007) also points to the importance of teachers working with research, rather thanjust receiving it”.(Mellar, Oliver, & Hadjithoma-Garstka, 2009)* Aim to facilitate a process of reflection and exploration informed by research, not just convey knowledge..
Building on experience of OU learning design experience and experience of partners. The learning design tools and workshops will be evaluated in three contexts:HE represented by the OU, vocational training represented by KEK ΕUROTraining , and non-formal training represented by Agora.ΕUROTraining SA is a Vocational Training Centre specialising in the sectors of Finance & Management, IT and Tourism. The centre’s seminars are aimed at people wishing to upgrade their qualifications and abilities in the labour market. The Association of participants Àgora is a non-profit making organization of adults who do not have any academic degree and is dedicated to the non-formal training of lifelong learners, especially those who are socially excluded, i.e. people coming from scholastic failure, immigrant people, elder people, disabled people, etc. It was created in 1986 to cover the lack of educational and cultural services addressed to these collectives in the neighbourhood. Àgora provides a daily educational setting for about 1600 participants, more than 120 volunteers and four hired staff. It offers a wide range of activities, including language learning, basic literacy, ICT training groups and dialogic literary circles among many other workshops. Àgora acts in METIS as user group focused on adult education.
Figure 1 Table showing data collection methods used. The numbers indicate the order in which the data collection occurred, the surveys being the first to occurAs shown in Figure 1 information has been sought from 3 different groups. Learning design experts as represented by those METIS partners with a background in research and development of learning design tools and methods (i.e. partners UVa, RWTH. UPF, OU, ULEIC, ITD). Representatives of METIS user group partners, i.e. individuals from the three METIS partners who represent teaching institutions at different levels (i.e. OU/Higher Education, KeK/vocational training, Agora/adult education). These organisations will be trailing the ILDE and workshops. To contrast with the information collected from the OU we also collected information from UVa so as to include a representative of conventional (i.e. not distance learning) universities. Representatives of user groups, i.e. Organisations belonging to the same educational levels as the user group partners but coming from other nationalities, cultural differences and learning paths to be tackled. Three representative user groups were selected ,as a reasonable compromise between time available to conduct and report on the interviews, and the extent of the coverage of cultures and learning paths offered by these three.An iterative process has been followed, in which the results from one stage in the process have been used to inform the form of the next stage. The process began with a survey of the learning design experts within consortium, and the results from this were used to develop the questions asked in structured interviews of user groups. The overall findings from these two stages were used to inform the questions and activities at the face-to-face workshops amongst user group partners and Learning Design Experts, and the questions asked in a structured interview of representatives of one of the user group partners.The questions asked in the survey are shown in appendix 1, and those in the structured interviews in appendices 2 and 3. The face-to-face workshops amongst user group partners and Learning Design Experts focused on the development of personas and scenarios. These scenarios are informed by and will inform the scenarios developed in WP 2 (Hernández-Leo, Asensio, Chacón, & Prieto, 2013). Representatives from KEK, Agora, CARDET, OU and UVa worked in teams to develop personas of potential participants in the learning design workshops they would run. These personas were then discussed in a plenary, to gain a shared understanding of our target audiences. Next, the teams continued to extract factors and concerns from these personas (concerns – what the participants and other stakeholders wish to achieve or avoid in the workshops, factors – elements in the existing setting which could assist or inhibit the fulfilment of these concerns).
Our aim is to capture these best practices in the form of transferable design knowledge, which can then be applied to the core generic workshop design, used in the process of customising this design to the needs of the user groups, and could also be shared with anyone who wishes to design their own learning design workshops. To achieve this aim, we choose to represent this design knowledge using a combination of overview descriptions, design narratives, design principles and design patterns. This approach is based on the SNaP! Methodology (Mor, 2013) and the PPW methodology (Mor, Warburton and Winters, 2012).A design narrative is an “account of critical events in a design experiment from a personal, phenomenographic perspective” (i.e. design narratives are derived form experts' personal experience of running LD workshops / training activities). A design pattern “describes a recurring problem, or design challenge, the characteristics of the context in which it occurs, and a possible method of solution”. A design principle is “…an intermediate step between scientific findings, which must be generalized and replicable, and local experiences or examples that come up in practice.” (Bell et al, 2004, p. 83, in Kali, 2009). Together with the overview descriptions, these cover a full arc from the pedagogical framework, through the high-level design, and down to specific activities.The design principles will be declared upfront in our workshop design documentation and serve as a pedagogical contract between the workshop designers, facilitators and participants: defining a set of mutual expectations regarding the roles and interactions between them. We will review the general flow of the workshop as well as the individual activities to ensure that they are compliant with these principles. The design patterns will be used to mold specific activities, or even elements of activities. They will also be offered as a resource for workshop facilitators as an aid in customizing the workshop design, and as a resource for participants as an illustration of an exemplar learning design process.http://www.ld-grid.org/resources/representations-and-languages/design-narrativeshttp://www.ld-grid.org/resources/representations-and-languages/design-patternsIn: http://www.ld-grid.org/resources/representations-and-languages/design-principlesMor, Yishay (2013). SNaP! Re-using, sharing and communicating designs and design knowledge using scenarios, narratives and patterns. In: Luckin, Rosemary; Puntambekar, Sadhana; Goodyear, Peter; Grabowski, Barbara L.; Underwood, Joshua and Winters, Niall eds. Handbook of Design in Educational Technology. London, UK: Routledge, (In press).Mor, Yishay; Warburton, Steven and Winters, Niall (2012). Participatory pattern workshops: a methodology for open learning design inquiry. Research in Learning Technology, 20
Conceptialization tools include the Module Map from
Structure for workshop on learning design of ‘X’. Can be run as one whole day or two half days.
Summary of what we have produced so far, and what we will produce
Iterative research and development of teacher training in learning design
Iterative research and developmentof teacher training in learning designFindings from the METIS project http://www.metis-project.org/Andrew Brasher, Chris Walsh, Patrick McAndew, Yishay Mor
METIS aims• Workshop template for learning about learning designapplicable to any topice.g. collaborative learning, project basedlearning, assessment design• Customised workshop packages• An integrated set of tools for designing learning“Learning design is the act of devising newpractices, plans of activity, resources and tools aimed atachieving particular educational aims in a given situation”(METIS project, 2012)
What’s in it for you?• Module team member• Module team chairA transferable approach to thedetailed design of activitiesFocus on needs of a moduleFocused and guided journeythrough latest EU researchon learning designSome examples
Aim: to maximise the potential oftechnology enhance learning• “Higher education practitioners tend not to capitalise oneducational research: decision-making tends to be based onpersonal experiences (Locke, 2009; Scott, 2000; Shattock, 2003;Teichler, 2000)” (Price & Kirkwood, in press)• Science of design (Simon, 1996)Design is “concerned with how things ought to be, with devisingartifacts to attain goals”• Seek to facilitate a “process of reflection and exploration informedby research” (Mellar, Oliver, & Hadjithoma-Garstka, 2009)
Conclusionsa. overviews of existing frameworks (complete)b. examples of best practice, in the form of designnarratives (in progress)c. transferable design knowledge extracted from these, inthe form of design principles and patterns (in progress)d. an applied manifestation of these principles andpatterns in the form of our workshop design (dueSeptember 2013).
Next steps• Testing of workshops design• Refinement, elaboration and substantiation of the designpatterns and design principles• Identifying the implications of the design patterns andprinciples for the ILDE, workshop enactment andworkshop evaluation• Applying final patterns and principles to workshopdesign
References• Jenkins, H. (2009). Confronting the Challenges of Participatory Culture: Media Education for the 21stCentury The John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation Reports on Digital Media and Learning (pp.146). Retrieved fromhttp://mitpress.mit.edu/sites/default/files/titles/free_download/9780262513623_Confronting_the_Challenges.pdf• Mellar, H., Oliver, M., & Hadjithoma-Garstka, C. (2009). The role of research in institutionaltransformationTransforming Higher Education through Technology-Enhanced Learning. York, UK: HigherEducation Academy. Retrieved fromhttp://www.heacademy.ac.uk/assets/York/documents/ourwork/learningandtech/Transforming.pdf.• METIS Consortium. (2012). Detailed description of the project. METIS project proposal, code 531262-LLP-2012-ES-KA3-KA3MP Retrieved 6/3/2013, from https://sites.google.com/a/metis-project.org/metis-internal/official-documentation/submitted-proposal• Price, L., & Kirkwood, A. T. (in press). Using technology for teaching and learning in higher education: Acritical review of the role of evidence in informing practice. Higher Education Research & Development.• Simon, H. A. (1996). The Sciences of the Artificial (3rd ed.). Cambridge, Massachusetts: MIT Press.