Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.

Designing Teaching to Enhance Learning in CrossActionSpaces (Informal-In-Formal)

As web-enabled mobile technologies become increasingly integrated into formal learning environments, a new kind of classroom emerge: CrossActionSpaces. These spaces can be characterized as informal-in-formal spaces in which learning takes place across traditional boundaries. The term provides a view on learning from the perspective of social sciences while emphasizing a change of human action: from inter-action into cross-action. Under these new conditions the questions are: how to design for learning, how can teaching enhance learning?  In this keynote, Isa Jahnke presents the framework of Digital Didactical Designs (DDD) which can be applied to study, evaluate and reflect on educational practices toward deep and meaningful learning expeditions.

Related Books

Free with a 30 day trial from Scribd

See all
  • Be the first to comment

Designing Teaching to Enhance Learning in CrossActionSpaces (Informal-In-Formal)

  1. 1. @isaja Designing Teaching to Enhance Learning in CrossActionSpaces (Informal-In-Formal) Prof. Dr. Isa Jahnke @(In)formal Learning Conference, #IFL2018
  2. 2. @isaja University of Missouri Established 1839
  3. 3. @isaja Educational Technology – fully online (1999 first online course) Information Experience Lab, IELab: User Experience Studies (UX) • Mobile microlearning apps • Health care technologies for older adults • Tool for strategic improvement planning at schools
  4. 4. @isaja Design for learning with technology
  5. 5. @isaja My research (selection) Higher education • InPUD, technology-embraced informal-in-formal learning (Germany, NRW grant: 2001-2004) study until 2009 (Jahnke, 2012)  Foster a learning community in which students feel like a valued member! • DaVINCI, creativity in higher education (BMBF grant, 2008-2011) (Jahnke, Haertel, & Wildt, 2015/7) • PeTEX, Remote labs in engineering education (EU grant, 2009-2011) (Jahnke et al., 2011; Terkowsky et at., 2012) • GoogleGlass project, dentistry education, Eva Marell-Olsson (Jahnke, Marell-Olsson, & Meitoft, 2015) • LeXMizzou, Learning Expeditions, games for learning apps (IIFund 2016-2017) (Ringbauer et al., 2016) K-12 schools • 1:1 Tablet classrooms in DK, SWE, FIN (VR, Swedish Research Council grant, 2014-2016) (Jahnke et al., 2017) Interdisciplinary: Social Sciences, HCI, Educational / Learning Sciences Intercultural: Germany, Sweden, USA
  6. 6. @isaja Who is using a device with Internet access? Perfect!
  7. 7. @isaja how we communicate, express, share, receive information, collaborate, connect, network, … Web-enabled Information Communication Technologies (ICTs) change conditions and ways of human interaction :
  8. 8. @isaja Human interaction  crossaction I look at interaction as a form of communication (N. Luhmann) Cross-action (example of conferences: participants using Twitter) • humans connect to each others’ resources • no clear difference between offline and online • at different places at same time (Instagram, Twitter, …) Photo: Ralf Jahnke-Wachholz L. Floridi, OnLIFE I. Jahnke, 2015
  9. 9. @isaja Classroom / Course Classroom / Course Digital classroom: Formal and Informal Spaces are merging We go to school/higher education because of getting access to learning processes Twitter, FB, GroupApps, … Interactive/Live Broadcasting, … Websites, Blogs, … and more Traditional classroom: Separation We went to school because of getting access to information CrossActionSpaces
  10. 10. @isaja Online Course (Canvas, Moodle) Online Course (Canvas, Moodle) Formal and Informal Spaces are merging Learners apply classroom themes and connect it to their physical world Twitter, FB, GroupApps, … Interactive/Live Broadcasting, … Websites, Blogs, … Material world Traditional classroom: Separation Online vs. offline/physical world CrossActionSpaces Material world
  11. 11. @isaja =CrossActionSpaces Physical classroom and web-enabled mobile devices are merging into new spaces: co-expanded co-located communication spaces Jahnke, 2015 (book) Routledge An alternative perspective –
  12. 12. @isaja What is ‘learning’ in CrossActionSpaces? Photo: Ralf Jahnke-Wachholz Reflections = people interact, make choices and decisions, and can explain why they are doing what they are doing, with ethical considerations, and why this is useful for their learning progress • reflective doing of multiple crossactions • reflective performance of crossactions • reflective communication
  13. 13. @isaja What ‘designs for learning’ are currently applied in the practice of online/hybrid or informal-in-formal crossactionspaces? Technology Embraced Informal-in-formal in: Jahnke, 2012 (ECTEL) RQ1 To what extent and in what ways/how do teachers support what kind of learning in media tablet classrooms? RQ2 What is learning from the student perspective?
  14. 14. @isaja Theoretical lens – Design for Learning Design is the act of giving a form to something. Teaching is the ’design act’ of creating conditions for learning. More specific: it is the act of modelling sociotechnical-pedagogical processes to enable student learning Bonderup-Dohn & Hansen, 2014 Jahnke, Norqvist, & Olsson, 2014
  15. 15. @isaja Information Delivery Delivery of Structured Knowledge Teacher Student Interaction Facilitation of Under- standing Supporting Conceptual Change and Intellectual Development (behavior change) I II III IV V From surface to deep learning David Kember, 1997 •Topic oriented •Problem solving Deep, meaningful learning •Teacher-centered •Content-oriented surface levels David Kember, 1997 Johannes Wildt, 2012
  16. 16. @isaja Characteristics of meaningful learning activities with technologies – Informal-In-Formal Howland, Jonassen, & Marra, 2012
  17. 17. @isaja 3 layers affect (hinder or support) designs for meaningful Learning ICT ICT ICT ICT Student Teacher Content Teaching goals Pro.-Assessment/ Feedback Learning activities Academic staff development Curriculum developmentInstitutional strategies 1 Didactical Interactions 2 Digital Didactical Design 3 Didactical Conditions
  18. 18. @isaja Teaching goals Intended Learning Outcomes Learning activities Process-based Assessment Feedback/guided reflections (by peers, teachers, self-reflections) social relations/roles Web-enabled technologies Digital Didactical Design - 5 components
  19. 19. @isaja ICT/ media tablets Teaching goals Teaching activities Process-b. reflections (guided by the teacher) Learning goals ICT/ media tablets social relations/roles Learning activities Process-b. reflections (guided by the students) social relations/roles
  20. 20. @isaja 2 DDD component Description of Coding scheme Character of Teaching goals/ILO and intended/expected learning outcomes: clear and visible? TA/ILO 1= Not clear, not visible, no communication about teaching aims or learning intentions; focus on content 2= 3= Oral communication 4= 5= Teaching aims are clear and visible for students; intended learning outcomes in forms of development of skills; a source is available where the students can go and read aims and objectives; at best, co-aims of students are included, students know the criteria for learning progress (available right form the start). Character of Learning activities: towards producing in engaged, authentic, deep, open settings? LA 1= Students hear what teachers read from the textbook (surface learning only; e.g. remembering/ repetition of facts); theoretical problems without connecting it to a real world problem 2= 3= In-between (…) – signs are: students are not so engaged, too much time for doing other things (e.g. playing cards instead) 4= 5= Learning activities have a range from surface to deep learning: students produce something, engaged classrooms, collaboration with peers; the activities are connected to the students world and include a real-world problem (e.g. everyday experience); a real audience, students critically reflect on existing content (e.g. evaluating/creating/making), relate knowledge to new knowledge; “organize and structure content into coherent whole” (Marten & Säljö, 1979), students are engaged in producing, using the Internet or other sources beyond the physical school walls (signs of crossactions) Character of assessment: process-based? ASM 1 = Feedback only at the end (summative feedback); character of the feedback is rather summative, not formative 2= 3= Feedback during the class (not only technical help) by coincidence; teacher only gives feedback when they ask for support; passive support 4= 5= Criteria for a learning progress are visible for students from the beginning of the learning process; Feedback/feed- forward at the end but mainly process-based assessment for learner’s development; a plan exists for how the teacher creates pro-assessment (formative evaluation); a range of forms such as self-assessment; peer-reflective learning and feedback by the teacher, e.g. students document learning (electronically; a map or text, etc.), the teacher asks them to go back and reflect. Character of Social relations: multiple roles (not only consumers?)? RO 1= Teacher is in the traditional role of the expert only; students are only seen as consumers (of solving closed questions and tasks where only one correct answer is possible) 2= 3= Teacher is in 1-2 roles but spends majority of time as expert; teacher does not support student engagement to be active 4= 5= TEACHER plays different roles, e.g., expert, process mentor, learning-companion, coach, she fosters students to be in different roles such as consumers, producers, collaborators, critical reflectors, etc.; teacher engages students; teacher activates the students to change their roles; STUDENTS are in several roles, e.g. teachers for their peers, finding own learning aims, creating own learning tasks, etc., teacher supports student reflection of roles and development of new roles. Character of Web-enabled technology/ tablets for crossactions? TAB 1= Low extent, drill and practice; students work primarily alone when using technology, not related to the real world (e.g., technology is substitute for pen and paper) 2= 3= Medium extent (e.g., new technology is substitute for existing media; for example, tablet substitutes a laptop) 4= 5= High extent, multimodal, beyond writing texts, camera app, digital paintings, apps for collaborative creation; students construct, share, create, publish their knowledge (to a real audience); students use online resources, actively select topics beyond the limitations of even the best school library, signs of crossaction (using online world to solve a learning activity).
  21. 21. @isaja Scale (5) (4-3-2) (1) A. Teaching / learning goals visible… …not B. Student activities meaningful… …surface C. Process-based assessment formative… …summative D. Technology integrated… …no/low extent E. Relationships/Roles (Humanizing Spaces) multiple roles… only More than 100 tablet classrooms DK, SWE, FIN, NO, USA (2012-2017) Jahnke, Bergström, Mårell-Olsson, Häll & Kumar (2017). In: Computers & Education (journal). Design of Teaching and Learning Practice Denmark: iPads for 7 public middle schools, 2,000 students, 180 teachers, all got iPads
  22. 22. @isaja Social Relations, Multiple Roles: From 1 to many & From consumer to producer Learning activities: (From shallow to deep learning) Teaching goals: From unclear to clear and visible Outer circle=5 Inner circle=1 From teacher-led classrooms (inner circle) to meaningful learner-centered practice (outer circle) Mobile Technology Integration: From substitution to multimodal Process-based Assessment: From summative to formative
  23. 23. @isaja
  24. 24. @isaja Learning activities Process-based Assessment iPad integration Social Relations, Roles Teaching goals ID 11 Physics class
  25. 25. @isaja ID 12 creating a digital pres (geography) Learning activities Process-based Assessment iPad integration Social Relations, Roles Teaching goals
  26. 26. @isaja ID 19 creating a timeline Learning activities Process-based Assessment iPad integration Social Relations, Roles Teaching goals
  27. 27. @isaja Cluster A (23 in total) new teaching practice toward meaningful learning by crossaction; new instructional designs Cluster B (21 cases) on the way but sticky Cluster C (20 in total) conflicting, trapped in traditional designs 3 clusters...
  28. 28. @isaja 5 Elements Data: Range… • Teaching goals (ILO): Students know vs. S. don’t know them • Student learning activities: Learner-centered vs. Teacher centered • Assessment: Formative/Process-b. vs. Summative • Roles and relationships: Pro-sumer vs. Consumer • iPad usage/apps: Producing vs. individual subject app Findings (DK, SWE, FIN 2012-2015) Design of Teaching and Learning Practice new digital designs (DDD) for meaningful learning conflicting, student frustration, trapped in traditional designs
  29. 29. @isaja Students transform the problem into a new context 2nd grade Transformation of existing “math stories”: students got the task to create a new story (comic)
  30. 30. @isaja Peer-Reflective Learning 7th grade Students write something from their childhood and reflected in peer-reviews their writing skills Process-based feedback from peers and teacher Facebook style
  31. 31. @isaja • 9th grade • Students create video-recorded experiments • collaborative production of experiments • in Physics and Chemistry Science, STEM
  32. 32. @isaja Digital Humanities and Arts 8th grade Students collect ‘provocative’ painting in a museum; Assignment: to analyze and discuss what the audience could say and writing a collaborative report in small groups
  33. 33. @isaja Language learning • 6th grade • Students read a book • Created book trailers • An movie evening with the community, invited them to the school Example
  34. 34. @isaja Students learn language skills by making short ’videos’ (screencasting tool + recording own voice) 4th grade Students explain what a “verb” , “adjective” and “noun” is • Students created storyboard and showcase incl. sound and visualization (product is a brief animated video) • App Explains Everything • Small teams “outdoors”
  35. 35. @isaja Students learn math strategies by making short screencasting products supported by voice recording 3rd graders use Educreation for applying different math strategies in small groups
  36. 36. @isaja Students develop reading and writing skills by making digital book reviews • Preschool class: Students read a traditional book and write a book review; they use Bookcreator to make a review (recording the own voice, paintings and writings)
  37. 37. @isaja DDD is useful for analyzing tablet classroom practices (research): • Classroom observations reveal meaningful, semi-integrated and shallow learning. • A third of the classrooms achieve meaningful learning with mobile devices. DDD also can help teachers! (practice) • Education/teachers can use the DDD coding scheme to evaluate teaching/learning with tablets. • DDD developed a new framework that may guide education in the digital age. Implications
  38. 38. @isaja PeTEX (Terkowsky et al., 2013 CSCL@Work)
  39. 39. @isaja Level/ Roles Target group Learning approach What students do What teachers do Input by teachers, PeTEX Feedback by teachers, PeTEX Cooperative learning, PeTEX Self-directed learning, PeTEX Be- ginner B.A. Instruction -based approach Students apply knowledge: 1.remembering 2.understandin g, 3.applying Tasks, instructions, input and feedback are given by the teacher +++ + Self-assessment by learning modules; Feedback by teachers after the experiments + Cooperative learning: peer- reviewing activities after experiments + Inter- mediate M.A. (juniors) employee s at work- place (newbies) Problem- based learning Students find solutions for a given real world problem (1.-3. and 4. analyzing, 5. evaluating) Real scenario problem Feedback is given by the teacher ++ ++ During the problem solving process and at the end ++ Cooperative learning: communication with peers during problem solving and peer-review ++ Ad- vanced M.A. (seniors); PhD, employee s at work- place (experien ced) Research- based learning Students find “gaps”, research questions (RQ) and solutions; finding problem and solution (1- 5 and 6. creating) Feedback is given by the teacher + +++ Feedback required after finding the RQ, during problem solving process and at the end +++ Cooperative learning: communication with peers during problem finding, solving and peer- review +++
  40. 40. @isaja trad. Course Design vs. Process Design Element for organizing learning is a) meeting place b) regular meetings Element for organizing learning is the process that supports learners to achieve learning goals (competencies) What activities? What resources? What roles? When, where? Anders Norberg • 2011, A time‐based blended learning model • 2017, From blended learning to learning onlife: ICTs, time and access in higher education
  41. 41. @isaja Designing for learning Design the process! **Do not** organize learning around textbooks or meetings points, but: design the process.  Where the answer is not known! (G.Fischer) Students are pro-sumers or designers. Traditional course design: Textbook driven Content driven Location/place-based driven the answer is known Students are consumers
  42. 42. @isaja Backward design • Set learning goals, ”After course completion, students are able to do ….” • Create assignments/tasks • Set criteria (how to assess) • Crucial: design for social relations/interactions Wiggins & McTighe, Understanding by Design
  43. 43. @isaja From traditional course-based learning to meaningful learning expeditions Learning expeditions stand for rather open-ended, problem-based learning paths and processes which include aims-oriented learning to master X, or explore and understand the implications of N, in which the learning methods and instruments are very open, that take place in CrossActionSpaces with reflecting peers where process-based assessment (criteria and guided reflection) supports the learning progress. Jahnke, Norqvist, Olsson, 2014 Norberg & Jahnke, 2013 No straight-ahead process but loops, back and forth: detours!
  44. 44. @isaja Learning ExpeditionsExample LeXMizzou Learners use classroom themes and connect them to the material world in which they are living Students with the digital tour felt more like a member of the university than without
  45. 45. @isaja LeXMizzou – location-based AR interactive games with a purpose Why me? e-guide of MU campus tour - students learn about its history, features and landmarks LibWay a library learning experience to promote participation in a library system , e.g., going to the reference desk, understanding call number systems and successfully finding a book. MizzouHunt traverses the Mizzou campus answering questions to collect letters: Question of the Month Mystery Ethics Game navigate through campus, protecting children while also navigating difficult ethical situations, questioning the very nature of right and wrong. Will you make the right choice?
  46. 46. @isaja Technology Integration Matrix (UF, Florida) Interactive Online Site! Role of technology “Technologies need to engage learners in articulating/communication and representing their understanding, not that of teachers.” (p. 4).
  47. 47. @isaja Mobile learning and creativity Julia Liebscher, 2017, dissertation empirical study of 24 seminars/lectures how teachers/professors in higher education design for teaching/ learning with mobile technologies (e.g., tablets)
  48. 48. @isaja Mobile learning and creativity b) Mobile learning can contribute to a new way of teaching and learning, but only when the benefit of the technologies and the Didaktik elements are designed in such a way that students see a benefit for the learning process. c) 3 Digital Didactical Design types connected to creativity • Connected design (Vernetztes Design) – Lectures with feedback channels • Interwoven design (Verzahntes Design) – Learning spaces outside the university • Formative design (Gestaltendes Design) – Students are creative makers/prod. a) Creativity = not an explicit design element in teachers’ design for learning, however, university teachers use 7 other design elements (teaching goals, teaching and learning activities, technologies, social relations, feedback, examination) and align these elements in a new way that leads to “creative forms of Didaktik” and fosters learning 'when the answer is not known’
  49. 49. @isaja Case study Liebscher & Jahnke, 2012 Industrial Project Management, IPM 23 students in engineering education •Teaching goal: To apply what they have learnt in IPM 1 •Assignment: students got the task by a firm: find a solution to a problem •Mobile devices to support cooperation/communication Results •Students did not use mobile devices (or just very little use) •Students preferred to meet face-to-face Why that?
  50. 50. @isaja Creativity was not included in the DDD – not mirrored in the digital didactical design 1. Remembering 2. Understanding 3. Applying 4. Analyzing 5. Evaluating 6. Creating Bloom’s Taxonomy Anderson & Krathwohl (2001) Didactical Design IPM - what it was Didactical Design IPM - what teacher wanted, but not designed for New 7. Collaborative creativity
  51. 51. @isaja Empirical studies in Denmark Teachers are jongleurs/jugglers of the elements; complexity of teaching/learning increased through technical breakdowns which affected their pedagogical plan Isa Jahnke, Niels V. Svendsen, Simon K. Johannsen, & Pär-Ola Zander (2014). The Dream About the Magic Silver Bullet – the Complexity of Designing for Tablet-Mediated Learning. In: ACM GROUP 2014 conference proceedings.
  52. 52. @isaja CrossActionSpaces "require teachers to undertake more complex reasoning than before in their planning and practice" (Webb & Coxx, 2007) Traditional teaching is conceptualized as a routine activity; It is turning into a design project Teachers are learners at the workplace (Goggins, Jahnke, & Wulf, 2013) Implications
  53. 53. @isaja In the university of the future - … teacher teams across existing disciplines (our study with Eva Mårell’s GoogleGlas with three different study programs) … design for learning processes: learning by topic / not by subject … enable meaningful learning within crossactionspaces … don’t forget to ”humanizing the online space!” „knowledge is not the destination but an ongoing activity” (Jonsson et al., 2013)
  54. 54. @isaja The first principle of true teaching is that Nothing can be taught (Oscar Wilde)
  55. 55. @isaja
  56. 56. @isaja Prof. Dr. Isa Jahnke, Associate Professor and Director of Research for the Information Experience Lab Email Website