Fiona's Blog

Alfonso MacGregor & Fiona Prince

For this LRNT524 assignment, we used design thinking to develop a prototype of an elearning course that will help students begin to create a sense of inclusion in their new online learning community, encourage students to engage in intellectual risk taking and become actively engaged in their online learning.

Context

Since we (Alfonso and Fiona) do not work for organizations, we created the fictitious Tremendous Travel Agency for this assignment.

Using the d.school design thinking template (Hasso Plattner Institute of Design, 2013), we interviewed each other concerning our own challenges with booking flights, cars, hotels, tours, and so on. We shared ideas about types of travellers who might need and want our services and our course.

Using Keller’s four stage ARCS model (Attention, Relevance, Confidence, and Satisfaction) we structured a 4-6 week course to include the following stages:

1. Interactive online learning tutorial:

   Video demos with transcripts and self-test quizzes on how to navigate the online learning platform and use the course applications/tools. This stage captures the learner’s attention, generates curiosity, heightens perceptions and encourages inquiry (Thomas, 2010).

2. Share Your Ideal Travel Experience

   Learners build digital scrapbooks of their ideal travel experience. This activity ensures the content is relevant to the learner (Thomas, 2010). It aligns with empathic design which “focuses on everyday life experiences, and on individual desires, moods, and emotions in human activities, turning such experiences and emotions into inspiration,” (Mattlemaki, Vaajakallio, & Koskinen, 2014, p. 67).

3. Engage with Community

   Learners comment on each other’s scrapbooks, ask questions, and update their scrapbooks based on feedback. This intellectual risk taking through feedback prepares learners for the next step and instills confidence in the learning process.

4. Challenges and Obstacles

   Learners create scrapbook pages with the challenges that prevent them from achieving their ideal travel experience. This activity keeps the learning relevant and reinforces what it is the learner is trying to accomplish. “Adults desire to be competent in matters that are valuable to them and necessary for their personal or professional growth and development,” (Thomas, 2010, p. 211).

5. Peer Coaching

   Learners review their peers’ scrapbooks, then suggest options to each other for facing challenges and overcoming obstacles. This peer coaching keeps the learners’ attention and boosts their confidence as they discover relevant solutions to their travel fears.

6. Planning to Travel

   With guidance from the instructors, learners plan their ideal travel, including how they will book their travel and accommodations, what they will pack, who will look after their home while they are gone, and other travel essentials. This final activity “provides meaningful opportunities for learners to use their newly acquired knowledge/skill,” (Thomas, 2010, p. 213) which leads to satisfaction.

By the end of the course, each learner will have developed a scrapbook of their ideal travel, the challenges they face, and solutions to those challenges.

We (Alfonso and Fiona) will reveal pages of our own scrapbooks throughout the course to create connections with the learners and demonstrate empathy (Mattlemaki, Vaajakallio, & Koskinen, 2014)  for the process they will go through to become confident travellers.

We would love to read your comments, questions and suggestions! Travel with us and be our critical friends.  🙂

References:

Hasso Plattner Institute of Design. (2013). An introduction to Design Thinking. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4302-6182-7_1

Mattelmaki, T., Vaajakallio, K., & Koskinen, I. (2014). What Happened to Empathic Design? DesignIssues, 30(1), 67–77. https://doi.org/10.1162/DESI

Thomas, P. Y. (2010). Learning and instructional systems design. In Towards developing a web-based blended learning environment at the University of Botswana. (Doctoral dissertation).

Travel Agency image attribution: Source:  https://blog.itravelsoftware.com/2012/10/travel-agency-system-5-things-it-must-have/

Scrapbook image attribution:   https://i.pinimg.com/originals/7e/66/20/7e6620b70509f667f3c3ae09e7454cd8.jpg

A  post for my LRNT524 Innovation, Design and Learning Environments class

The readings for this week focused on instructional system design (ISD) models. My key take-away is the following statement from Thomas (2010): “The effectiveness of a model is heavily dependent on the context in which it is applied; instructional design methods are situational and not universal” (p. 187).

Cameras in the Classroom

The technological advances of recent years (I could even say months) are changing the way we teach and learn. Just this week, I was surprised by a learner in a Presentation Skills course that I developed for a local organization. I had designed an activity to provide a non-threatening approach to presenting and to introduce the power of storytelling.

Twelve learners were divided into three tables of four. At each table, one learner rolled six Rory Story Cubes which were then used by each learner at the table to write a story to present to the class. One learner didn’t like the cubes that were rolled, so she took a picture of them on her iPhone for her fellow learners, then picked up the cubes and rolled them again. Another learner liked the idea, took a picture of the second roll of the cubes and rolled them again. Soon the learners were choosing between sets of cubes from pictures instead of being limited by the physical cubes on the table.

I welcomed their adaptation of the exercise. As a result, when they presented they shared a picture of their set of cubes with their classmates before they told their story. One learner who was terrified of presenting voluteered to present instead of waiting to be asked because she was having fun with the activity.

I am improvisational by nature and welcomed the learners adaptation of the exercise. If I had been stuck in a prescriptive model that did not allow for learner input, I believe the ‘terrified learner’ would have remained terrified and the other learners would not have been nearly as engaged. In the end, they owned the activity and their technology–their own smartphones–became an integral part of the learning environment.

Notes from Bates & Thomas:

Bates (2014) claimed that “the [ADDIE] model is too inflexible for the digital age” because learning environments and learner needs are changing more rapidly than in the past.

Thomas (2010) made a similar claim for the 11 pedagogical and 11 ISD models summarized in the author’s dissertation on web-based blended learning. In short, although useful for classroom learning, traditional ISD and pedagogical models lack flexibility for keeping up with technological advancements and learners needs in online learning environments.

Thomas (2010) offers grounded design as a valid approach for blended and online learning environments because “grounded design can be applied to any learning theory platform as well as cross-platform, because it does not promote any single theoretical stance or practical methodology over another”; it is founded on “psychological, pedagogical, technological, cultural, and pragmatic considerations” (Thomas, 2010, p. 234)

Land and Hannafin in Thomas (2010) describe the five foundations of grounded design as:

•  Psychological foundations reflect views about how individuals acquire, organize and deploy skills and knowledge
• Pedagogical foundations include the instructional practices that the designers use to support learning
• Technological foundations addresses the potential of technology to transform teaching and learning, the capabilities of specific technology tools, and the limitations of interactive multimedia technology
• Cultural foundations reflect the prevailing values of a community and its culture
• Pragmatic foundations dictate the extent to which various alternatives can be implemented in order to address the needs of learners in a given learning system (Thomas, 2010, pp. 235-238).

Reflections on the Past

The more I read about pedagogical models and instructional design, the more thankful I am for my choice to take a BFA instead of B.ED as my first degree. From 1979-1983 I was part of an experiential program at UVIC–a conservatory style theatre program. My focus was acting. Everyday, with twelve other students, I did 2 hours of movement, 1.5 hours of voice work, 2 hours of acting, and 1.5 hours of stage craft, theatre history, lighting, or other theatre-related course. I chose Hebrew, Latin and Canadian Literature as my electives; it is the theatre classes I remember the most.

In movement classes, the behaviourist approach was predominant as we learned gymnastics, dance, acrobatics, fencing, stage-fighting, and other physical skills required for acting. I imagine the instructional design model was fairly simple: 1) show learners how to do the moves 2) learners practice the moves 3) evaluate how the learners execute the moves.

In voice and acting classes, the predominant approach was constructivist as very little work was individual. Most assignments required a partner or a team to bring pre-existing stories and scripts to life or to create new stories and scripts then bring them to life. Again, I imagine the instructional design was fairly simple: 1) provide students with a script 2) learners interpret and present the script 3) critique the learners’ interpretation and performance 4) learners revise using feedback 5) evaluate final performances.

Because of the every-changing content, my classes were always challenging, often exciting, and sometimes frustrating. It took me two semesters before I was able to do a slow-motion forward somersault without using any momentum; I was unable to learn trapeze work as I prefer my feet to be on solid ground. I did get B for my efforts :-).

The principles I learned in those classes have served me well in my academic and professional life. Regardless of what we are learning and what models are being used to teach us, interest in the topic and engaged instructors/facilitators are key to our success.

References:

Bates, T. (2014, September 9). Is the ADDIE model appropriate for teaching in a digital age? [Blog post]

Thomas, P. Y. (2010). Learning and instructional systems design. In Towards developing a web-based blended learning environment at the University of Botswana. (Doctoral dissertation).

Image source: http://www.whatismylearningstyle.com/learning-style-test-1.html

I was very glad to see the Kirschner article–Stop Propagating the Learning Styles Myth–in our readings because it supports what I have been teaching in my Train the Trainer workshops for close to ten years.

In 2006, I was asked to develop a two-day Train-the-Trainer program for a client. I had just completed a certification in Keirsey Temperament Theory and knew that I wanted to include some type of psychometric tool in the workshops.

I found a great little program called Brain.exe (which is no longer available), a 20-question survey that provided the participants with their learning style and tips on which methods would be most beneficial for their learning. My intent was to build participants awareness of learning styles so that they would understand 1) that people have different ways of learning, and 2) that they would most likely design their training according to their own learning preferences which could exclude other types of learners.

The two-day workshop I designed went well; however, the learning styles theory didn’t sit well with me. Like Kirschner, I was looking for empirical evidence to support learning styles theory, but I couldn’t find it. I did find a wonderful quote by George E. P. Box  that I added to all my workshops that include psychometric tools.

All models are wrong; some models are useful.

The learning styles theory is useful, even if it’s only to get learners to think of the ways they prefer to learn and to understand that some types of learning may be a stretch for them.  Kirschner wrote, “it [learning styles theory] should really be relegated to the realm of beliefs” (p. 167). Beliefs are powerful motivators that instructors can use to create positive learning environments. 

In 2008, the video Learning Styles Don’t Exist by Professor Daniel Willingham came to my attention, and I added it to my workshop. Willingham ends his video with the following statement:

Good teaching is good teaching and teachers don’t need to adjust their teaching to individual students learning styles.

If we–instructional designers, facilitators, and instructors–focus on the learners needs, respect their existing knowledge and abilities, and help them to be active participants in their own learning, we will succeed in providing them with a positive learning experience.

Additional Info:

Two key sources I used to build the train-the-trainer workshop were Training the Trainer by Mary-Jo Dolasinski  and The Ten Minute Trainer by Sharon Bowman . Both authors made reference to training and learning styles; Bowman’s perspective was heavily influenced by Kolb’s theories of the Experiential Learning Cycle and Learning Styles.

Dolasinski’s approach was performance-based with the facilitator doing most of the talking; Bowman’s approach was activities-based with the facilitator presenting short theory-bursts followed by content related activities that addressed all the learning styles. I enjoy the activities-based approach the most.

What methods of instruction do you enjoy the most?

In LRNT523 I am researching the use of video/computer games in education (for assignment 2), specifically for learning language,  with the goal of discovering what elements motivate students to continue playing, thereby reinforcing the learning.  In my research I have come across two resources that may be relevant for others in this course.

1. 1. Tiny Tap: Games by Teachers 

      

      Tiny Tap is an application that enables teachers to create their own educational games, set-up classes , track students progress  and create reports.

      The Tiny Tap website offers thousands of educational games created by teachers and publishers. Because there are no ads or in-app purchases, learners may focus on the content and game-play without distractions. The games may be played on iOS, Android, or desktops.

      The Tiny Tap Youtube Channel contains video samples of interactive games and quizzes for all ages, and videos that provide insights into how and why games motivate learners and assist with memory retention.

      The Tiny Tap interface is geared towards the K-12 age group, but may be adapted for learning complex subjects as seen in this tutorial for how to create an interactive algebra lesson (3:47 minutes).

1. Understanding Video Games: The Essential Introduction by Simon Egenfeldt-Nielsen, Jonas Heide Smith, Susana Pajares Tosca. This book “provides a comprehensive introduction to the field of game studies, and highlights changes in the gaming industry, advances in video game scholarship, and recent trends in game design and development—including mobile, casual, educational, and indie gaming” (p. 2).

   Topics by chapter:
   1. Studying Video Games
   2. The Game Industry
   3. What is a Game?
   4. History
   5. Video Game Aesthetics
   6. Video Games in Culture
   7. Narrative
   8. Serious Games: When Entertainment Is Not Enough
   9. Video Games and Risks.

   Chapter 8 is of particular interest as the authors examine video games from the perspective of learning theories: behaviourism, cognitivism, and constructivism. Currently, most electronic “edutainment” games, where entertainment is used to serve education, are designed around behaviourist principles of “drill-and-practice” with rewards for choosing the correct answers. The authors see the need for games that are comparable to the cognitivist and constructivist experiences provided by commercial entertainment titles that require problem-solving, and in multi-player games, collaboration and social skills (p. 382).

References:

Egenfeldt-Nielsen, S., Smith, J. H., & Tosca, S. P. (2016). Understanding Video Games: The Essential Introduction (3rd ed.) New York, NY: Routledge

 

 

 

 

Co-written by Jason Keddie, Alfonso MacGregor, Fiona Prince, Klaus Rimke, and Gavin Sturgeon.

Activity 7 of the course LRNT523, Foundations of Learning and Technologies, at Royal Roads University asked students to read articles by Richard E. Clark, and Robert B. Kozma. We were then tasked as a group to find four documents that challenge the analysis presented by either Clark or Kozma and subsequently critique and question the claims made by those authors.

According to the Oxford Dictionary (n.d.), ‘Influence’ is defined as “the capacity to have an effect on the character, development, or behavior of someone or something”. Clark (1994) confidently proclaimed that media will never influence learning since “they are not directly responsible for motivating learning” yet his argument seems to miss the nuance of the meaning of ‘influence’ as the following articles reveal.

Article 1 – Using Media to Motivate and Promote Language Production in the English as a Foreign Language Classroom

Bergeron (2015) asserts that media causes motivation while Clark (1994) contends that media does not cause motivation. Bergeron (2015) begins the overview section of the paper by stating that “the purpose of this paper is to provide a brief overview of how media can be effectively used to motivate” (p. 18). There is a consistent narrative throughout the paper that media are driving improvements in motivation and learning. For example, Bergeron (2015) states that “observation of students’ engagement during the unit of work suggests that the use of media tools…did effectively motivate students” (p. 23). This contrasts with Clark’s (1994) position that “media do not influence learning or motivation” (p. 1). Appropriate use of instructional methods, not media, according to Clark (1994), cause motivation and learning.

Bergeron (2015) also separates media into technical and non-technical categories, defining technical as mostly audio and video while defining non-technical as mostly writings, drawings, or images. According to Bergeron (2015), teachers should familiarize themselves with technical media because it is more effective with today’s learners. Bergeron (2015) does not adequately support the assertion that technical media is superior to non-technical media, and this concept would also contrast with Clark’s (1994) position since Clark believes that media do not influence motivation, which would mean that one form of media cannot influence motivation more than another form of media if neither form of media influences motivation.

Bergeron (2015) focused on the idea that media drives learning and motivation, but to a lesser extent comments on the instructional methods employed with the media. Bergeron (2015) details observing increased motivation and learning with the use of media, but according to Clark these increases in motivation and learning are due to changes in instructional method and not media.

Reading Bergeron’s paper while keeping Clarks assertions in mind, it is easy to see all the instructional methods employed that may be the actual cause of the purported increases in motivation and learning.

Article 2 – Is This the Future of Adult Learning?

In this article, Bennett (2016) outlines three concepts that would improve literacy and earning power of adult learners as discussed at the MIT Media Lab by researchers, adult learning experts, and entrepreneurs. These concepts were: Read Out Loud (literacy improvement), Express Me (mobile learning during commutes), and Citizen Tutoring (provide mentoring opportunities from senior tutors). Each of these concepts incorporates the use of technology media to deliver intuitive and accessible information to adult learners while circumventing barriers of language and time.

By providing an atmosphere of accessibility and inclusivity, the media in Bennett’s article had a profound influential effect on the development of the learner and is in stark contrast to Clark’s argument. For example, Read Out Loud “allows the user to scan any book and view the text in English and any other language side-by-side” (Bennett, 2016) which enabled the parent to read along with their kids; thus, “parents are able to engage in this important part of their children’s education and play the role of teacher, while engaging in learning themselves” (Bennett, 2016). Not only does the children’s literacy improve with this media tool; the adults’ does, too.Improved literacy gives the adult learners additional options to select information integral to employment opportunities and provides “autonomy over improving general skills as well as increasing earning potential” (Bennett, 2016). When a technology provides the motivation to directly impact a person’s ability and desire to learn, develop, and improve their self-worth, that in itself is influence; perhaps Clark will revisit this concept.

Article 3 – The Effects of High/low Interactive Electronic Storybooks on Elementary School Students’ Reading Motivation, Story Comprehension and Chromatics Concepts

In order to explore if the media through which content is delivered to learners influences the outcome, Kao et al. (2016) divided a group of 40 fourth-grade students in two groups, and provided them with the exact same reading material.  All students received an e-book; what marked the difference was that one set of books were of low interactivity while the other set was of high interactivity.  High interactivity consisted of having three advanced features that responded to the reader: “guidance”, “prompt”, and “feedback”.

The conclusions of the authors point toward the positive effects that interactivity has as a complement to reading material. This finding is supported by other researchers, such as Ciampa, Grant, and Lewin (as cited in Kao et al., 2016) who stated that motivation and engagement in readers are increased with illustrations, animations, and narrations when those features are congruent with the storyline and content of the e-book.

Article 4 – 7 Tech Innovations That are Drastically Changing the Way People Learn

When Clark (1994) wrote that media will never influence learning, did he foresee the invention of the following media and technology, and their use in education? Miller (2017) claims that these seven tech innovations are drastically changing the way people learn because they support experiential learning–learning by doing. In keeping with our team’s focus on ‘influence’, we agree that these innovations do influence learning when thoughtfully included in the instructional design.

• 3D Printing
  3D-printers are now affordable and easy to use right of the box. One application is to introduce learners to the basics of engineering through hands-on, problem-solving activities.

• Gamification
  Clear in game rules, objectives and competition in video games such as Minecraft (Educational Edition) increase learner engagement in subjects from history to reading comprehension.

• Virtual reality
  Interactive virtual reality platforms in classes, such as Biology (imagine dissection without the mess), Engineering, and Architecture allow students to learn through simulations and renderings; Google expeditions has made virtual travel a reality bringing the wonders of the world to a much greater audience.

• MOOCS
  Massive open online courses have increased accessibility to learning, allowing anyone with an internet connection to attend classes, even graduate studies. MOOCS are being used in both online and blended delivery models.

• Skype
  Even though it is a technology originating in 2003, Skype has become a popular media for connecting learners with teachers and tutors , especially for language learning services.

• Big Data and custom learning
  Algorithms and data tracking are used to guide the development of blended learning programs and give students the ability to customize their learning experience. This has been proven to reduce the dropout rate and increase comprehension. (Now that’s influence!)

• IPads and Chromebooks A popular piece of tech that has and is immersed in the schools allowing teachers to facilitate rather than manage the learning of the students.

Clark may see these technical innovations as tools that could be replaced by other tools and methods; however, we must consider whether other tools and methods would provide the same level of engagement, motivation, and timeliness for learners.

References

Bennett, T. (2016, July 10). Is this the future of adult learning? [Blog post]. EdSurge News. Retrieved October 05, 2017.

Bergeron, S. (2015). Using media to motivate and promote language production in the English as a foreign language classroom.

Clark, R. E. (1994). Media will never influence learning. Educational Technology Research and Development, 42(2), 21-29.

Influence | Definition of influence in English by Oxford dictionaries. (n.d.). Retrieved October 05, 2017.

Kao, G., Tsai, C., Liu, C., & Yang, C. (2016). The effects of high/low interactive electronic storybooks on elementary school students’ reading motivation, story comprehension and chromatics concepts. Computers & Education, 100, 56-70.

Kozma, R. B. (1994). Will media influence learning: Reframing the debate. Educational Technology Research and Development, 42(2), 7-19.

Miller, L. (2017). 7 tech innovations that are drastically changing the way people learn[Blog post].