Visitor-Generated Content and Learning


Published on

Slides from presentation at iSay event "The Shape of Things"

  • Be the first to comment

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

No notes for slide

Visitor-Generated Content and Learning

  1. 1. VGC and museum learning Giasemi Vavoula University of Leicester
  2. 2. Learning  Historically accounts of learning evolved:  Behaviourist accounts: teacher has active, direct role and controls pace, sequence and content.  Cognitive accounts: cognitive structures constructed by individual learner • Trivial constructivism: construction of „correct‟ representations • Radical constructivism: knowledge in the construction • Postmodern constructivism: knowledge in the social, not in the individual
  3. 3. Learning  Piaget‟s socio-cognitive conflict theory  Contradiction between current understanding and (social) experience in the world  disequilibrium  person questions beliefs and tries out new ideas.  Vygotsky‟s socio-cultural theory  Learning and development take place in dynamic socio- culturally shaped contexts; are mediated by tools and signs; and lead to the internalisation of social interactions.
  4. 4. Learning  Social-constructivist learning:  The appropriation of socially derived forms of knowledge that are not simply internalised over time but are also transformed in idiosyncratic ways in the appropriation process (Palinscar 1998)  Occurs through processes of interaction, negotiation, and collaboration (ibid)
  5. 5. Social Constructivism  What it means for education (Palinscar 1998):  Active students, explaining ideas to one another, discussing disagreements, cooperating to solve complex problems  Teachers participate in the design and facilitation of these activities  Assessment is dynamic, providing prospective measure of performance, indicating developing abilities, and predicting future individual performance
  6. 6. Social Constructivism  Resonance with museum learning / visitor studies literature  Visitors‟ social agenda: motivations to attend to both social and exhibit contexts (McManus 1987)  Social interaction facilitates experiential learning by helping learner become conscious of and reflect upon experience (Litwak 1992)  Visitors actively negotiate exhibit meaning through talk with companions (Silverman 1990)  Cohesive, intimate visitor groups read more (labels) and talk more at exhibits (McManus 1988)  “Museum communications [are not] made to an individual … They are made to distinctive groups of people and the behaviour of these groups affects the individuals within them” (McManus 1988, p.43)  “Designers are a part of the communication situation at exhibits and … a part of a social situation in which people pass and construct messages to each other” (ibid p.40)
  7. 7. cognitive engagement academic non-academic Theorisingdeep learning Applying Relating Explaining Describingsurface learning Note-taking Memorising teaching Learner Learner method passive active “Good teaching is getting most students to use the higher cognitive level processes that the more academic students use spontaneously” (p. 58) (Biggs 1999)
  8. 8. Pedagogy 2.0 “[allows] learners … the freedom to decide how to engage in personally meaningful learning through connection, collaboration and shared knowledge building” (McLoughlin & Lee) Changing conceptions and forms of:  Content  Curriculum  Communication  Process  Resources  Scaffolds  Tasks
  9. 9. Critical success factors  To enable significant pedagogical change through Web 2.0 integration (Cochrane 2012): Pedagogical integration of technology into course and assessment Lecturer modelling of pedagogical use of tools Create supportive learning community Appropriate choice of technology Technological and pedagogical support Sustained interaction that facilitates ontological shifts for all involved, including reconceptualising the roles of teachers, learners and technology
  10. 10. emotional, sensory-perceptual, cognitive engagement focused (Falk et al. 2010), goal-oriented (Bitgoodengage Interpreting 2010), expert visitor (Simon Synthesising 2010) un-focused (Falk et al. Analysing 2010), stimulus-oriented (Bitgood 2010), casual visitor Discussingfocus (Simon 2010) Touching Taking photos Looking/Capture listening visitor Visitor Visitor experience passive active Good visitor experiences get most visitors to use the higher engagement level processes that the more focused visitors use spontaneously
  11. 11. Visitor Generated Content (What) (Who) (How) (Where) (When) Media TypeIndividual Author / create On- Before Text Keywords/tags (web)siteGroup - self- Expand / Off- During Photos/images News/eventsorganised augment / edit (web)siteGroup - Discover / share … After Video Views/opinionsassignedEvent attendee Remix Irrespectively Audio VotesWorkshop Judge … Polls/rating Feedbackparticipant scalesFrequent Perform / do Code Knowledge/infoInvited Play Paper AdviceFriend … … QuestionsCasual Real/virtual objectsStakeholder Messages… Performance/ actions Games Context / location …
  12. 12. Conclusion  Weave VGC into the fabric of visitors‟ social context  Scaffold and embed into visiting experience  Align with visitors‟ and institutional social agendas