2010 CRC PhD Student Conference



 Supporting Reflection about Web Resources within Mash-
               Up Learning Envi...
2010 CRC PhD Student Conference



coming from evaluation research (Thierau and Wottawa 1990), especially of
qualitative (...
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in …5
×

Ullmann

505 views

Published on

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

  • Be the first to like this

Ullmann

  1. 1. 2010 CRC PhD Student Conference Supporting Reflection about Web Resources within Mash- Up Learning Environments Thomas Daniel Ullmann t.ullmann@open.ac.uk Supervisors Peter Scott Fridolin Wild Department/Institute Knowledge Media Institute – The Open University Status Fulltime Probation viva Before Starting date October 2010 The proposed PhD thesis addresses the problem of how to empower users to reflect about resources, helping them to make informed decisions. The goal of the PhD is to develop a framework of a mash-up learning environment that takes into account the reflection of users about resources. Mashups are usually seen as software applications that merge separate APIs or data sources (Zang, Rosson, and Nasser 2008). They compose new applications based on existing data services and user interfaces. Mashups are “a combination of pre-existing, integrated units of technology, glued together to achieve new functionality, as opposed to creating that functionality from scratch” (Hartmann, Doorley, and Klemmer 2006). They are the manifestation of the programmable web (Maximilien, Ranabahu, and Gomadam 2008). Learners looking at the wealth of available learning resources need strategies to deal with its complexity. The abilities to reflect about information, to rate, and to review it, seem to be important skills to cope with this. Many tools are available on the web addressing these challenges. For example, search engines, one of the major backbones of the web, deliver a ranked result set of more or less relevant information. Recommendation services aggregate opinions of users to top lists of items or use collaborative filtering mechanisms to make predictions about future interests of users. While these services lack connectivity and do not explicitly address reflective practice, Mashup Personal Learning Environments (MUPPLEs) (Wild, Mödritscher, and Sigurdarson 2008) enable learners to construct their own learning space through facilities to mash up services and tools from different sources to support collaborative and individual learning activities. Research carried out in the context of reflection (e.g. (Dewey 1933); (Boud, Keogh, and Walker 1985); (Schön 1983); (Moon 1999)(Moon 2004)) finds its application in mash-up personal learning environments in form of indicators (Glahn 2009). Indicators are usually small widgets embedded in a learning system, which represents information for the learners for example about their activity level or performance measure. While indicators focus on the visualization of interaction footprints, methods Page 108 of 125
  2. 2. 2010 CRC PhD Student Conference coming from evaluation research (Thierau and Wottawa 1990), especially of qualitative (Stake, Denzin, and Lincoln 2005) and quantitative (Neuman 2005) research are considered as possible reflection points about (web) resources. The goal is to provide users these functionalities in a mash-up environment. In order to reflect about a topic the proposed system takes into account manually added indicators as well as automatically added criteria fostering reflection. The later are partly derived from the data services and tools of the Science 2.0 infrastructure ((Wild and Ullmann 2010) and (Wild and Ullmann 2009)) for researchers in technology- enhanced learning. References: Boud, David, Rosemary Keogh, and David Walker. 1985. Reflection: Turning Experience into Learning. Routledge, April 1. Dewey, J. 1933. How we think: A restatement of the relation of reflective thinking to the educative process. DC Heath Boston. Glahn, Christian. 2009. Contextual support of social engagement and reflection on the Web. http://dspace.ou.nl/handle/1820/2062. Hartmann, Björn, Scott Doorley, and Scott R Klemmer. 2006. Hacking, Mashing, Gluing: A Study of Opportunistic Design and Development. http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/summary?doi=10.1.1.66.1603. Maximilien, E.M., A. Ranabahu, and K. Gomadam. 2008. An Online Platform for Web APIs and Service Mashups. Internet Computing, IEEE 12, no. 5: 32-43. doi:10.1109/MIC.2008.92. Moon, Jennifer A. 1999. Reflection in learning & professional development. Routledge. ———. 2004. A handbook of reflective and experiential learning. Routledge, June 15. Neuman, W. L. 2005. Social research methods: Quantitative and qualitative approaches. Allyn and Bacon. Schön, D. A. 1983. The reflective practitioner. Basic Books New York. Stake, R. E, N. K. Denzin, and Y. S. Lincoln. 2005. The Sage handbook of qualitative research. Sage Thousand Oaks, CA. Thierau, H., and H. Wottawa. 1990. Lehrbuch Evaluation. Bern, Stuttgart, Toronto: Huber. Wild, Fridolin, Felix Mödritscher, and Steinn Sigurdarson. 2008. Designing for Change: Mash-Up Personal Learning Environments. eLearning Papers 9. http://www.elearningeuropa.info/files/media/media15972.pdf. Wild, Fridolin, and T. D. Ullmann. 2009. Science 2.0 Mash-Ups. STELLAR Deliverable 6.3. http://www.stellarnet.eu/kmi/deliverables/20100120_stellar___d6-3.pdf. ———. 2010. The STELLAR Science 2.0 Mash-Up Infrastructure. In Accepted paper for the 10th IEEE International Conference on Advanced Learning Technologies. Sousse, Tunisia. Zang, Nan, Mary Beth Rosson, and Vincent Nasser. 2008. Mashups: who? what? why? In CHI '08 extended abstracts on Human factors in computing systems, 3171-3176. Florence, Italy: ACM. doi:10.1145/1358628.1358826. http://portal.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=1358826. Page 109 of 125

×