The document summarizes current research on media education conducted by the Centre for Media Pedagogy (CMP) at the University of Lapland in Finland. The CMP coordinates research and development projects in media education and educational technology. It has developed several pedagogical models for integrating technology into teaching and learning, which are empirically tested through long-term experiments. Lessons learned include the importance of teacher training, technical support, motivation, and evaluating learning outcomes. Future plans include international surveys on meaningful mobile learning and commercializing the developed pedagogical models.

1. Current Research on Media Education:
From School Children to Senior
Citizens
Heli Ruokamo
Professor, Faculty of Education (FoE)
Director, Centre for Media Pedagogy (CMP)
University of Lapland (UoL), FINLAND
Rethinking Media Education
22 Oct 2015, Milano Catholic University, Italy

2. Background

3. Background
Centre for Media Pedagogy (CMP)
 Established at the beginning of 2001, in order to support teaching,
research and development in the areas of media education and
the educational use of ICTs
 Part of the FoE at the beginning of 2003, officially established
2005
 Coordinates and participates:
- teaching,
- research and
- development projects
- of the media education and
- the educational use of the information and
communication technologies (ICTs)
 Approx. 10 staff members

4. Background
Areas of multidisciplinary research:
 New pedagogical models and pedagogically appropriate use of ICT in
teaching and learning
 Online and mobile learning, simulations and virtual reality, digital videos,
playful learning environments, use of ICT in all areas of life by people of
different ages living in rural areas
 Design, implementation and evaluation of the processes
 Covers 3 themes of ME curriculum:
1. Media in teaching and learning
2. Median in society
3. Media and psychosocial wellbeing

5. Pedagogical Models by CMP

6.  The socio-constructivist and socio-cultural perspectives (e.g.
Vygotsky, 1978; Säljö, 1999; 2004; 2005; Wells & Claxton, 2002)
– Learning is not related only to academic achievements, but also to
all actions that take into account the person as a whole – body,
mind and spirit – and the role of cultural tools and artifacts
– Learning is seen as a tool-dependent and metaphorical concept
(Säljö 2005; 2006), and is defined through the concept of
knowledge co-creation (Kangas et al. 2006), which
• refers to knowledge co-construction with an assumption that
learning no longer repeats what is already known, but
creates something new (Säljö 2006)
Learning Theorethical Framework

7. Pedagogical Models
 Development of pedagogical models (cf. Joyce & Weil, 1980) is still
crucial
- teachers are not yet fully aware of how to use technology in
pedagogically appropriate ways
- they need functional examples
 An effective pedagogical model will make teachers aware of the different
means available to them
- it will ensure that students benefit from a more meaningful learning
experience

8. Teaching Model
Can be defined as:
 ”a plan or pattern that can be used to shape
curriculums (long-term courses of studies),
 to design instructional materials, and
 to guide instruction in the classroom and other
settings”
(Joyce & Weil 1980, 1)

9. Pedagogical Models
 of purposive studying and meaningful learning
 that teachers, tutors and curriculum designers and
students can apply in:
- designing, teaching, tutoring, evaluating and
- learning processes (Tissari, Vahtivuori-Hänninen,
Vaattovaara, Ruokamo & Tella 2005)

10. Pedagogical Models in Practice
 The value of the pedagogical models comes to the fore
above all in practice
 Three different ways of using the pedagogical models:
1. planning of instruction on the basis of the model
2. combination of models
3. varied use of the models depending on the situation
 They can be combined and should in fact be adapted to
fit in with the teachers’ own pedagogical thinking

11. Pedagogical Models Developed by CMP

12. Research Projects by CMP
 VIP (2013-2014) TEKES, (SAVI; AoF, TEKES, NSF)
 MediPro (2012-2014); ERDF, TEKES, municipalities and companies)
 Adiona (2012-2014; TraFi)
 Doctoral Programme for Multidisciplinary Research on Learning Environments
(2002-05, 2006-09, 2010-2013; Academy of Finland and Ministry of Education)
 AC in Net (2012-2013; ESF)
 TravEd (2010-2012; ERDF, TEKES, municipalities and companies)
 MediPeda (2007-08-10; ERDF, TEKES, municipalities and companies)
 InnoPlay (2007-08-10; Tekes, municipalities and companies)
 GloVed (2008-2009; Centennial Foundation of the Finnish Technology
Industries)
 MobIT (2007-09; Ministry of Education)
 Benedict (2006-07; Ministry for foreign affairs of Finland)
 PlayIT (2006; TEKES)
 Web-Seal (2006; Academy of Finland)
 LEVIKE (2004-07; ESF)
 Let´s Play (2003-06; ESF, State Provincial Office of Lapland and Lappset Group
Ltd.)
 JIBS Lapland (2003-04; EU)
 MOMENTS (2002-05; Academy of Finland, TEKES and companies)
 HelLa (2001-03; Ministry of Education)

13.  Integrated model of network-based education
 MOMENTS Metamodel (MM)
 Network-oriented study with simulations (NOSS) model
 Innovation Education in Virtual Reality (InnoEd VR) model
 TML (Teaching and Meaningful Learning) model
 TPL (Tutoring, playing and learning) model
 CCLP (Co-Creative Learning Processes) model
 RC (Reciprocal Creativity) model
 PLP (Playful learning process) model
 CPL (Creative and Playful Learning) model
 GloVEd model
 FTL (Facilitating, Training and Learning) model
 The Model for Enhanced Teaching and Meaningful e-Learning (ETMeL)
 The Model for Meaningful Work-based Mobile Learning (MWBML)
 Introduction, Simulation, Scenario, Debriefing (ISSD) Model
Pedagogical Models by CMP

14. Design-Based Research (DBR)
 Involves developing, testing, investigating, and refining learning environment
designs and theoretical constructs as well as illustrating and predicting how
learning occurs (Barab & Squire, 2004; Design-based research collective
2003).
 Process proceeds through iterative cycles of design and implementation
 Leads to “contextually-sensitive design principles and theories” (Wang &
Hannafin 2005, 7).
 It aims to improve simultaneously, both theory and local practices.
implementation
design
analysis

15. Figure 1. Integrated model of network-based education. Teaching-
Studying and Learning processes (cf. Ruokamo et al. 2002; Vahtivuori et al.
2002; 2003).

16. Figure 2. MOMENTS Metamodel (MM). Descriptors of the Teaching-
Studying-Learning process (Ruokamo & Tella 2005).

17. Figure 3. Teaching and Meaningful Learning (TML) model
(Hakkarainen 2007; 2009; Hakkarainen, Saarelainen & Ruokamo 2009)

18. Figure 4. The model for ETMeL (Ruokamo, Hakkarainen & Eriksson
2012)

19. • reflection
and
evaluation
learning
process
• what, how
and why
questions
• sports and
games
• play
• physicality
• reflection,
improvemen
t
• fact-based/
fiction-based
content
creation
• exploration
and
validation of
ideas
• knowledge
base
• orientation
to the
process
• various
methods
The role of
the teacher:
Co-ordinator
Tutor
Co-creator
Supporter
Guide
Facilitator
Promoter
Instructor
Knowledge co-creation: small group and classroom levels
The nature of
learning
Playful
Active
Co-Creative
Participative
Emotional
Narrative
Transformativ
e
Heuristic
Orientation Co-Creation Game Play Elaboration
Figure 5. Creative and Playful Learning Model (CPL) (cf. Kangas
2009; 2010a, c; Randolph, Kangas, Ruokamo & Hyvönen 2013)

20. Figure 6. Global Virtual Education (GloVEd) model (Keskitalo, Pyykkö
& Ruokamo 2011)

21. 1. INTRODUCTION
Presentation of a course topic as well as
other important concepts.
Explanation of how course is organised
(pedagogical models and methods).
2. SIMULATOR BRIEFING
Introduction of a scenario, case, problem etc.
Introduction of goals, roles, rules,
procedures, and decisions.
Setting the individual goals.
Participants familiarise themselves with
the environment, the case and their roles.
4. DEBRIEFING
Comprehensive evaluation, reflection
and critical analysis of the FTL
process, the knowledge and the
learning environment.
Providing individual guidance and
feedback.
3. SCENARIOS
Participating in simulations.
Practising of skills and knowledge.
Training
Experiential
Experimental
EMOTIONAL
Socio-constructive
Collaborative
Active
Responsible
Reflective
CRITICAL
Competence-based
Contextual
GOAL-ORIENTED
Self-directed
INDIVIDUAL
Competencies
set for the
healthcare
personnel
Facilitating
Choosing the resources and scenario
based on students` characteristics,
characteristics of meaning learning
and competencies.
Facilitate and guide students`
meaningful learning.
Learning
VR and simulation-based learning environment (context)
Figure 7. Redesigned pedagogical model for VR and simulation-based
learning environment (Keskitalo, Ruokamo & Väisänen 2010).

22. Figure 8. Refined pedagogical model for MWBML in tourism education
(Vuojärvi, Eriksson & Ruokamo 2012)
TEACHING AND TUTORING WORK-BASED MOBILE LEARNING
TEACHER OR TECHNICAL
SUPPORT STAFF
Technical training and support
TEACHER
Design and organization of
apprenticeship period, quality
control
Support and guidance for
students
TOURISM COMPANIES
Tutoring learning
Challenging students
Providing learning environment
PROCESS CHARACTERISTICS
1) Active and self-directed
2) Constructive
3) Individual and goal-oriented
4) Collaborative and
conversational
5) Contextual, situated and
multiple-perspective oriented
6) Experiential and authentic
7) Reflective and critical
8) Creative
9) Emotionally involving
EXPECTED OUTCOMES
1) Domain-specific
knowledge and skills
2) Transferable, generic
knowledge and skills

23. Figure 9. Introduction, Simulation, Scenario, Debriefing (ISSD) Model
(cf. Poikela, Ruokamo & Keskitalo 2014; Poikela, Ruokamo Teräs )

24. Lessons Learned

25. Lessons Learned
 Developed pedagogical models need to be empirically tested and future
developed during long term (at least 10 weeks) teaching experiments
 Enough time should be quaranteed to be able to adopt the pedagogical model,
new methods and tools to be used
 Teachers’ and students’ motivation and engagement are critical factors
 Teachers’ and students’ pedagogical and technical knowledge and skills -- in
addition to domain specific knowledge and skills – should be taken into account
 Both pedagogical and technological solutions should be made from teachers’
and students’ perspective so that they see them appropriate for them and for
spesific learning purposes

26. Lessons Learned
 They should also see the importance to learn some generic knowledge and skills
that could be transferred for future learning and practises
 Reflection and evaluation of the processes should be paid more attention to
 Technical problems are always critical
 Grouping of meaningful learning characteristics into wider themes should be done
via statistical and content analyses
 In addition to students’ processes and outcomes learning results should also be
measured – What and how well they actually learn?
 At the moment meaningful mobile learning questionnaire is under construction to
be used in international high school contexts

27. Future Plans
 Meaningful mobile learning survey -> International data collection
for university students
 Model of the models to be published
 Commercializing of the models  Trademarks
 Educational export business

28. Contact Information

29. Thank You for Your
Attention!
Centre for Media Pedagogy (CMP)
http://www.ulapland.fi/CMP
http://www.facebook.com/#!/CefMP
Faculty of Education (FoE)
University of Lapland (UoL)
http://www.facebook.com/#!/medu.ulapland
P.O.Box 122, FI-96101 Rovaniemi, FINLAND
Tel. + 358 16 341 341
Email: Firstname.Lastname@ulapland.fi

30. Hakkarainen, P., Saarelainen, T. & Ruokamo, H. 2009. Assessing Teaching
and Students’ Meaningful Learning Processes in an E-Learning Course. In C.
Spratt & P. Lajbcygier (Eds.) E-Learning Technologies and Evidence-Based
Assessment Approaches. IGI Global, 20–36.
Keskitalo, T., Pyykkö, E., & Ruokamo, H. 2011. Exploring the Meaningful
Learning of Students in Second Life. Educational Technology and Society,
14(1), 16–26. Retrieved from http://www.ifets.info/journals/14_1/3.pdf
Keskitalo, T., Ruokamo, H. & Väisänen, O. 2010. How does the facilitating,
training and learning model support characteristics of meaningful learning in a
simulation-based learning environment from facilitators` and students`
perspectives? In Proceedings of World Conference on Educational
Multimedia, Hypermedia and Telecommunications 2010 (pp. 1736–1746).
Chesapeake, VA: AACE. http://www.editlib.org/noaccess/34874/
References

31. Poikela, P., & Ruokamo, H. & Teräs, M. 2015. Comparison of meaningful
learning characteristics in simulated nursing practice after traditional versus
computer-based simulation method: A qualitative videography study. Nurse
Education Today, 35(2015), 373–382.
Randolph, J., Kangas, M., Ruokamo, H., & Hyvönen, P. 2013. Creative and
playful learning on technology-enriched playgrounds: an international
investigation. Interactive Learning Environments. Available online:
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2013.860902
Ruokamo, H. & Tella, S. 2005. Multidisciplinary Network-Based Mobile
Education (NBME) and Teaching–Studying–Learning (TSL) Processes: The
MOMENTS Integrated Metamodel. Proceedings of ED-MEDIA 2005: World
Conference on Educational Multimedia, Hypermedia & Telecommunications.
June 26–July 2, 2005. Montréal, Canada. CD-ROM. Electronic Version of
Papers Presented at ED-MEDIA 2005 Conference, 324–329.
References

32. Ruokamo, H., Hakkarainen, P. & Eriksson, M. 2012. Designing a Model for
Enhanced Teaching and Meaningful E-Learning. In A. D. Olofsson & J. O.
Lindberg (Eds.) Informed Design of Educational Technologies in Higher
Education: Enhanced Learning and Teaching (pp. 375–392). IGI Global.
Tissari, V., Vahtivuori-Hänninen, S., Vaattovaara, V., Ruokamo, H. & Tella,
S. 2005. Applying Pedagogical Models in Network-Based Education:
Research Findings from the Finnish HelLa Project Case Studies.
Proceedings of ED-MEDIA 2005: World Conference on Educational
Multimedia, Hypermedia & Telecommunications. June 26–July 2, 2005.
Montréal, Canada. CD-ROM. Electronic Version of Papers Presented at ED-
MEDIA 2005 Conference, 656–662.
Vuojärvi, H., Eriksson, M. & Ruokamo, H. 2012. Designing Pedagogical
Models for Tourism Education: Focus on Work-Based Mobile Learning.
International Journal of Mobile and Blended Learning, 4(3), 53–67. Available
online: http://www.igi-global.com/article/designing-pedagogical-models-
tourism-education/69815
References