Downloaded 18 times
Uploaded byAndrew Brasher
Supporting integration through incidental learning
The document presents the Maseltov project aimed at assisting the social integration of immigrants through mobile technologies and incidental learning frameworks. It discusses the diverse target groups of immigrants and the challenges faced, while proposing frameworks for integrating structured and incidental learning. The conclusion emphasizes the need for clarity on context support by technology and the role of educators in this innovative learning approach.
More Related Content
Similar to Supporting integration through incidental learning
Supporting integration through incidental learning
- 1. Supporting integration through incidental learning Open University Maseltov team Andrew Brasher, Agnes Kukulska-Hulme, Ann Jones, Jan Jones, Eileen Scanlon, Mark Gaved
- 2. Contents • Background • Theincidental learning framework • Issues and conclusions
- 3. Maseltov project “Mobile Assistance for Social Inclusion and Empowerment of Immigrants with Persuasive Learning Technologies and Social Network Services” www.maseltov.eu Universitat Oberta de Catalunya, Spain Joanneum Research, Austria Open University, UK CURE - Centre for Usability Coventry University, UK Research & Engineering, Austria Czech Technical University, Czech Republic University of Applied Sciences, FH Telecom Italia SpA, Italy Joanneum, Austria Fluidtime Data Service GmbH, Austria Athens Information Technology, Fundacian Desarrollo Sostenido, Spain Greece Verein Danaida, Austria busuu.com -, Spain Migrants Resource Centre, UK
- 4. Target groups • immigrantswith specific problems & similar background: – first year of stay in Europe – low level education, degree of illiteracy – never learned foreign languages – cultural background in contrast to host country – young immigrants (age < 25) – females or wives joining husband in host country • native inhabitants – “integration is a two way process of mutual accommodation by all immigrants and residents of EU countries” (cf. European Parliament, 2005)
- 5. Immigration to EU-27 (a) (c) (b)
- 6.
- 7. Some starting points •Purposes of the framework “Incidental learning occurs as the – shared integrated vision forbyproduct of some adaptive other activity. It learning services that take account of individual and occurs informally learner's characteristics and contexts. is unplanned”. • Why incidental learning? – ‘incidental’ highlights opportunistic elements of learning, when compared with the learning opportunities that occur in structured programmes (Kerka, 2000) (Silva, 2007) • Combining structured and incidental learning – What structured learning will be offered? – When might other learning opportunities occur?
- 8. Technology/services Context Mobile text lens awareness + recommendatio n Social network Serious games Volunteer radar Language lesson service Partners for Incidental learning framework: Serious Games Institute, IET, Busuu.com Center for Machine Perception, Coventry Uni. Czech Technical Uni. Open Uni.
- 9. Existing learning frameworks •Analytical frameworks • Design frameworks Design framework Analytical framework
- 10. Learning design tools •Examples in the Learning design toolbox http://cloudworks.ac.uk/cloudscape/view/1882
- 11. Frameworks being reviewed •Ecology of Resources design framework (Luckin, 2010) • Theory of Learning for the Mobile Age (Sharples et al., 2007) • Four dimensional framework (de Freitas et al., 2010) • Language learning defined by time and place (Kukulska-Hulme, 2012) • A Pedagogical Framework for Mobile Learning (Park, 2011) • Etc.
- 12. Ecology of Resources Luckin,R. et al. (2010) MAP (More Able Partner); fading
- 13. Time and placein mobile language learning Time Place Specific time or anytime? Specific location or anywhere? Routine or spontaneous? Private or public place? Instant access or leisurely? Relaxing, energising? How much available time? Stationary or moving? Dependent on sufficient time? Walking, running? Interruptible? Driver or passenger? next generation designs Activity Challenging or easy? Suitable for multitasking? Receptive or productive? Involves speaking aloud? Writing or gestures? Individual or social? (Kukulska-Hulme, 2012)
- 14. Four dimensional framework for games and simulation based education Table 1 Checklist for evaluating the use of educational games and simulations Context Learner specification Pedagogic considerations Mode of representation (tools for use) What is the context for learning? Who is the learner? Which pedagogic models and approaches are Which software tools or content would best (e.g., school, university, home, a What is their background and learning being used? support the learning activities? combination of several) Does history? Which pedagogic models and approaches might What level of fidelity needs to be used to the context affect learning? What are the learning styles/preferences? be the most effective? support learning activities and (e.g., level of resources, accessibility, Who is the learner group? What are the curricula objectives? outcomes? technical support) How can How can the learner or learner group be (list them) What are the learning outcomes? What level of immersion is needed to links be made between context best supported? What are the learning activities? support learning outcomes? and practice? In what ways are the groups working How can the learning activities and outcomes be What level of realism is needed to achieve together (e.g., singly, partially in achieved through existing games or learning objectives? groups) and what collaborative simulations? How can links be made between the world approaches could support this? How can the learning activities and outcomes be of the game/simulation and achieved through specially developed reflection upon learning? software (e.g., embedding into lesson plans)? How can briefing/debriefing be used to reinforce learning outcomes? (de Freitas & Oliver, 2006,)
- 15. Kolb Learning Cycle Kolb learning cycle image by Davies & Lowe
- 16. Incident Outcomes Social Tools Task Time Place Incident Time Incident
- 17. Incident Outcomes Social Tools Task Time Place More Able Partner Incident Time Place ≠ Location (Gillies, S. 2011) (Luckin, 2010) Incident
- 18. Learner’s journey Incident Outcomes Structured learning Social Tools Learner profile Task Time Trigger Place (Bull & Kay (2007)) Incident Trigger Reflect/plan Time Reflect/plan Incident
- 19. Conclusions & issues •Too generic? – this is the first version Some issues • Level of abstraction • Need to clarify what aspects of context will be supported by the technology – Role of the teacher? • Privacy
- 20. Thanks •To the Nounproject http://thenounproject.com/ for these icons: •To Oula Akiki (busuu.com) and Ian Dunwell (Serious Games Institute) for valuable ideas and comments •And to you for listening
- 21. References Bull, S., &Kay, J. (2007). Student Models that Invite the Learner In : The SMILI :-) Open Learner Modelling Framework. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education, 17(2), 89-120. Gillies, S. (2011). Technical Introduction to Places. Retrieved March 30, 2012, from http://pleiades.stoa.org/docs/technical- intro-places Kerka, S. (2000). Incidental learning: trends and issues, Alert No. 18. Educational resources information center. Retrieved from http://www.eric.ed.gov/ERICWebPortal/contentdelivery/servlet/ERICServlet?accno=ED446234 Kukulska-Hulme, A. (2012). Language learning defined by time and place: A framework for next generation designs. In J. E. D ´ıaz-Vera (Ed.), Left to My Own Devices: Learner Autonomy and Mobile Assisted Language Learning. (pp. 1-13). Luckin, R. (2010). Re-Designing Learning Contexts: Technology-Rich, Learner-Centred Ecologies (Foundations and Futures of Education) (p. 208). Routledge. Retrieved from http://www.amazon.co.uk/Re-Designing-Learning-Contexts-Technology-Rich- Learner-Centred/dp/041555442X Muyinda, P., Lubega, J., & Lynch, K. (2011). A framework for instantiating pedagogic mLearning objects applications. In A. Cerone & P. Pihlajasaari (Eds.), Theoretical Aspects of Computing – ICTAC 2011 (pp. 194-217). Springer Berlin / Heidelberg. Retrieved from http://www.springerlink.com/index/692325145Q23QT4J.pdf Park, Y. (2011). A Pedagogical Framework for Mobile Learning: Categorizing Educational Applications of Mobile Technologies into Four Types. International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 12(2), 78-102. Elsevier. doi:10.3394/0380-1330(2006)32 Sharples, M., Taylor, J., & Vavoula, G. (2007). A Theory of Learning for the Mobile Age ( pre-print ). In R. Andrews & C. Haythornthwaite (Eds.), The Sage Handbook of Elearning Research (pp. 221-247). London: Sage. Silva, P. M. (2007). Epistemology of Incidental Learning. Retrieved from http://scholar.lib.vt.edu/theses/available/etd-10162007-224008/unrestricted/silva.pdf de Freitas, S., & Oliver, M. (2006). How can exploratory learning with games and simulations within the curriculum be most effectively evaluated? Computers & Education, 46(3), 249-264. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2005.11.007
Editor's Notes
- #2 Abstract The Maseltov project (“Mobile Assistance for Social Inclusion and Empowerment of Immigrants with Persuasive Learning Technologies and Social Network Services”, http:// www.maseltov.eu / ) project recognises major risks for social exclusion of immigrants and identifies the potential of mobile services for promoting integration and cultural diversity in Europe. The project intends to exploit the potential of mobile services for promoting integration and cultural diversity in Europe, and is focusing on support for immigrants with particular needs e.g. those who have not learned foreign languages, and who have a cultural background that contrasts with that of their host country. We will present the first iteration of an incidental learning framework developed within the Maseltov project. This framework is intended to facilitate the coordination of existing technologies, content, pedagogies, processes and practices into learning services that can be used effectively by immigrants, their networks and mentors so as to increase immigrants’ ability to function in an unfamiliar society. When fully developed, the framework is intended to support the design of learning experiences which show (i) how incremental, opportunistic, social and game-based learning can be applied to immigrants problems, (ii) which content areas can be offered and combined (from among language, culture, information access, mobility, health care, etc.), and (iii) which technologies are best suited for each type of content and interaction.
- #4 (Background)
- #5 (Background)
- #6 (Background) Percentage of (im)migrants with respect to country population (2010). Number of EU citizens from non-EU countries (2010). (c) Percentage share of continents on European immigrants (2010). 20 million 3rd country nationals in EU, i.e 4% of population by 2014 the eu workforce will start declining (10-25% by 2050). Labour market shift towards higher qualifications. Employment gap increases with educational level (!!!!) EU Actions – European agenda for integration (2011): promotes integration as a shared responsibility, 2 way between migrants and new home). Barcelona workshop - When the NGOs were asked what should be the general themes that Maseltov should focus on, RL (Migrants Resource Centre) said there are two: Language People understanding their rights. The people from the other NGOs agreed. (Background)
- #7 (Incidental learning framework)
- #8 (Incidental learning framework) The framework is intended to help users of the framework produce adaptive services that take account of individual learner 's characteristics and contexts. “ Incidental learning is unintentional or unplanned learning that results from other activities. It occurs often in the workplace, during the use of computers, and in the process of completing tasks. Incidental learning occurs in many ways, including the following: through observation, repetition, social interaction, and problem solving; from implicit meanings in the classroom or workplace policies or expectations; by watching or talking to colleagues or experts about tasks; and from being forced to accept or adapt to situations. Incidental learning is situated, contextual, and social. It is thus characterized by those features that are considered most effective in formal learning situations. Incidental learning can result in improved competence, changed attitudes, and growth in interpersonal skills, self-confidence, and self-awareness. Not all unplanned learning is effective, however. Because incidental learning is often not recognized or labeled as learning by learners or others, it is difficult to measure and harness for use. Adult learners often do not distinguish between formally and incidentally acquired learning or prefer incidental learning opportunities to formal ones. Several researchers have examined the issue of how educators can help learners make incidental learning outcomes explicit” (Kerka, 200). (How) can we prompt (incidental) learning? (How) Can we motivate people to learn (incidentally)?
- #9 (Incidental learning framework)
- #16 This incidental learning framework builds on Kolb’s theory of experiental learning (Kolb, D. A., Boyatzis, R. E., & Mainemelis, C. M. (2000). Kolb’s learning cycle consists of four steps--concrete experience, reflective observation, abstract conceptualization, and active experimentation
- #17 Introduction The Incidental Learning Framework shown is intended to support the design of technology to support incidental learning. The spatial and social context of learning in formal settings can often be assumed e.g. a particular class in a particular classroom. Learning activities in formal education have been characterised as a specific interaction of learner(s) with zero or more other(s) using specific tools and resources, orientated towards specific outcomes (Beetham, 2007). but we can not make those assumptions for learning in incidental, mobile and informal settings. The framework is intended to depict interactions from the point of view of a learner. It can show the learners journey from one incident to another, over time. Each incident comprises the place the incident occurs the task the learner is attempting to carry out the tools the leaner can or does use to complete the task the social support that the learner can or does make use of the outcomes that the learner wants to achieve, and those that the learner does achieve.
- #18 The role of tools and people In any incident, the learner may receive support from a ‘More Able Partner’ (MAP) to reach their learning outcomes (Luckin, R. (2010)). This MAP may be a person, a tool, or a combination of one or more of either of these. The MAP should support the learner during any incidental learning activities that occur, and also prompt both reflection after an incident and planning of subsequent learning practice.
- #19 The learning journey This diagram shows a learning journey through 3 incidents, which occur at different times and places. In between each incident there should be opportunities for the learner to reflect on their previous learning, and adjust their learning plans if necessary. The Maseltov system should support this reflection and planning. Context Aspects of context included in this framework include place, time, the learner profile, social aspects and the tools and resources available. Tool and service design The design of the way the tools and services should support the learner will need a more fine grained approach to the type of possible incidents, and opportunities for reflection and planning. Design at this level should be informed by practices suggested by e.g. de Freitas, S., & Oliver, M. (2006)., Luckin, R. (2010), Kukulska-Hulme, A. (2012), Muyinda, P., Lubega, J., & Lynch, K. (2011) etc. The servicemay include triggers to motivate learners to undertake structured learning related to the incidents thy have recently paarticipated in. E.g. practice vocaculary related to shopping.
- #20 Conclusions and issues This first version of the incidental learning framework has been drawn from existing frameworks. Although we have included frameworks for language leaning and educational games, there is a danger that it is too close to the needs of the learners that these frameworks were designed for, and not close enough t o the needs of Maseltov’s target population. Level of abstraction Most frameworks (including this one) can be presented at a level of abstraction that is shareable, but this level of abstraction hides details that are required to use a framework to design, analyse and evaluate. How close are we to the right level of abstraction? Context and role of the teacher Most of the frameworks analysed so far (including EoR, Language Learning and ) implicitly assume detailed knowledge of learners. It is not clear if and how Maseltov can and will deal with gaps in knowledge about learners (see also privacy). Privacy Finding from MRC focus groups with North African and Latin American immigrants: n one of the participants wanted their location tracked all the time . Participants thought having a profile was a good idea. They only wanted to put information up that they chose to and not be required to add anything in particular. Some people would be happy to put information about their education but they were concerned that some people wouldn’t want to put information about where they studied, for example, for fear of being traceable. Generally they would be happy to add their learning goals and to add comments about their learning. They would want the option, like on Facebook, to decide who they share their information with and not automatically share it with everyone who is signed up to the app.