Some reflections

In this blog 'some reflections' I look back on a design process for a lesson in primary education. This had to be done based on the TPACK framework. The reflection is divided into 4 themes: process of designing a course as and educational designer; working with TPACK;the limitations/challenges of flexibility and implications for instructors.

Process of designing a course as an educational designer
I had no experience in developing a course for primary education. I found this quite a challenge, to understand the starting level of the group we selected and to decide what is suitable or not. Fortunately, my group members did have some experience and were able to support me with that part.

I experienced that I am very much used to having formats to work towards to, or to develop formats before inserting the information. We managed to get a lesson preparation form from the pre-service teacher education at Stenden University for Applied Science. I found this really helpful in designing the lesson. Looking back I should probably have looked for some design models in the literature as well. Using this form lead to a very detailed lesson plan. That in itself is not a problem, but it may hinder the amount of flexibility the teachers’ experience when they start to work with the lesson. If they feel they cannot adjust or tweak the lesson to their requirements, it may hinder the commitment of the teachers and the implementation. As a result, involving teachers in the design phase is important.

Also the role of the context is very important. We took an existing primary school as a base for our context analysis. We were now able to tweak the context to match our design. However, in the real world, this is much more difficult or not feasible at all.

Overall, I have enjoyed the experience of designing a lesson for a primary school and it was really nice to work in a team, as we really could help each other along and were critical in our feedback on the different parts we delivered.



Working with TPACK

It has emerged (as expected) that you cannot look at the separate components and then, by putting it together, reach TPACK. We had as a starting point the pedagogical approach ‘collaborative learning’. As the assignment was to use TPACK and thus integrate technology in the lesson, we almost immediately started searching for a digital product to support collaborative learning. After some brainstorming we came to using a web quest.

The step we took led immediately to PTK, as we had to combine the pedagogical approach with a technology. The last element to look at was content. As we decided to use a web quest to support the pedagogical approach, we were relatively free in deciding on the content, so we searched for a nice topic within available web quests.

It is important to realise that TPACK is a framework, as opposed as a design model. The added value of the framework is that it makes teachers’ aware of the relation between the knowledge components technology, pedagogy and content. It helps teachers to understand the complexity of these concepts and by creating awareness of the different (and complex) relations that can support development of new courses.

I feel however, that we could have used the suggested literature more. We had a very practical approach, maybe guided by the format for the lesson plan. As stated we fairly quickly came to the combination of collaborative learning and using a web quest, whereas we could have looked at the activity types of Mishra & Koehler (2009) as explained in my blog on ‘TPACK and its relation to flexibility, pedagogy and technology’. Also the pathways JISC (explained in the same blog) has set out could have given us some other ideas.
 


The opportunities/challenges of flexibility

As I described in an earlier reflection, the level of flexibility influences the pedagogical approach. More flexibility requires a different mix of pedagogical approaches than a very rigid programme, in which the learner has little to no choice. Similarly, adding technology to face-to-face classrooms settings will require a different pedagogical approach. In our case the starting point was the pedagogical approach collaborative learning. As a result, we did not really consider flexibility when developing the lesson.

As described in one of my earlier posts, flexibility is integrated in the TPACK model, but not specifically mentioned. Having a lot of PK, CK and TK will support more flexibility. However, as it is not specifically mentioned, it is easy to forget. As the context for the lesson was a primary school, where generally speaking only face-to-face classroom activities take place, flexibility needs to sought within that context. We did try to integrate some flexibility in the lesson, but in the end it has become a fairly prescribed lesson. The teacher has to make some decisions, but the outline of the lesson plan is fairly fixed. On the other, because the work form is a web quest, there is sufficient flexibility for the learner, as they can for example choose to do the assignments in the order given in the web quest, or to first scan the whole web quest before starting with the assignments.

In the blog on working with TPACK, it was already identified you need to have thorough knowledge of all three knowledge components, because otherwise the risk is that one will jump to quick fixes rather than looking at it creatively, as happened in our design. We went very quickly from collaborative learning to using a web quest to support the pedagogical approach with a technology. We for example also jumped to the conclusion that the technology should be digital, when in fact, that was not a specific requirement.



Implications for instructors

Professional development is an essential element in implications for instructors. As explained, the more knowledge a teacher has on the three different knowledge components, the more flexibility can be achieved. Professional development can support this. Teachers need to have an understanding of the TPACK framework so this would be a good starting point. Once they see the complexity of the interrelations of the three knowledge components and their relation to the context, it may help them to design lessons taking all three components into consideration and to reach TPACK. It will help them to think about the three components in relation to the context. As a result, the professional development of teachers should be focused on the three knowledge components. By gaining more knowledge on the three separate components, it will become easier to look at the interrelations and to create ‘new’ liaisons.

The context can be challenging or limiting for instructors. As a result support and the implementation process are very important aspects. If teachers feel not supported by the school or the context is very limiting, it may hinder them from trying to be innovative. I feel that the TPACK framework really can help teachers in being more innovative, when support for development of innovative lessons and support during implementation is given.

TPACK and its relation to flexibility, pedagogy and technology

In the previous blogs, the focus has been more on the perspective of a learner, so when talking about for example flexibility, the emphasis was on how to make learning more flexible for the learner. Although it has become clear that flexibility, pedagogy and technology have an influence on the teaching practice, not a lot of attention was paid to the teacher with regard to the consequences of developing materials. The TPACK model is aimed at providing such support for the teacher. All elements come back in this model. As explained in the blog ‘TPACK – T what?’ the TPACK model is aimed at teacher knowledge. In this blog, the three concepts and the connection with TPACK will be described.

Flexibility is an integral part of content knowledge, pedagogical knowledge and technological knowledge, but is also determined by the context. The greater the knowledge of the teachers on these concepts and their relationships, the more flexibility the teacher will have in finding a good balance between the three different concepts and actually reach TPACK.

With regard to technology, the focus by teachers has mainly been on presentation software, learner-friendly websites and management tools to enhance current practice. This relates to a ‘technocentric’ approach (Papert, 1987; in Harris, Mishra & Koehler, 2009) which means that the starting point is the opportunities and constraints of certain technologies and as a second step, how it can be integrated in the current content-based learning environment.

In the TPACK model, the role of technology is aimed to support inquiry and collaboration which leads to reformed practice. Although a lot of courses now work with a CMS such as Blackboard, it generally has been implemented as an ‘add-on’ rather than to reform practice. It functions more as a notice board for messages and assignments than as an active collaborative learning environment. This is a clear example of the fact that introducing a new tool does not automatically lead to reformed practice, even if it does change learning practices somewhat. This is also closely related to the fact that learning how to use a tool is different from learning how to use the tool in instruction (Harris, Mishra & Koehler, 2009).

With this last example, it becomes once again apparent that it is difficult to see the three concepts in isolation, as teaching practices has a lot do with pedagogy. There are some sources now available to assist teachers in selecting appropriate technologies with chosen pedagogic approaches. JISC (2009) has a nice example of choosing pathways, which can assist teachers in assessing the amount of technological knowledge they have and how they can use that to enhance e-learning. E-learning is defined by JISC as: ‘enhanced learning through the use of digital technology’ (p.6).

Also Harris, Mishra & Koehler (2009) have developed support by dividing learning activity types into knowledge-building activity types, convergent knowledge expression activity types and divergent knowledge expression activity types, linked to technologies that can support these type of activities. This support does not prescribe certain technologies to be used with certain pedagogies, but gives teachers more insight in how different technologies could be used. This may help them in choosing technologies that they may not have considered otherwise.

Offering support to teachers may also support the implementation process. Staff engagement is very important if the goal is to achieve reformed practice, which TPACK essentially advocates. Teachers need to be convinced of the effectiveness of introducing technology into the course and should confident to use it for instruction. This includes sufficient technological support (Collis & Moonen, 2001).

All in all, TPACK takes a broader perspective on the three concepts of flexibility, pedagogy and technology and focuses both more on the teacher’s perspective and the interrelationships of the different concepts. I believe that TPACK is a very good model to help understand teachers the complexity of these concepts and by creating awareness of the different (and complex) relations can help them in developing new courses, in which they can integrate these concepts.

Collis, B., & Moonen, J. (2001). Flexible learning in a digital world: experiences and expectations. New York: Routledge.

>Harris, J., Mishra, P., & Koehler, M. (2009). Teachers' technological pedagogical content knowledge and learning activity types: Curriculum-based technology integration reframed. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 41(4), 393-416.

JISC (2009). Effective Practice in a Digital Age. A guide to technology-enhanced learning and teaching. Bristol: Higher Education Funding Council for England.

TPACK - T what?

The TPACK model (see fig. 1) is a model that has been developed to assist teachers in developing course materials, and is based on the following concepts: content knowledge (CK), pedagogical knowledge (PC) and technological knowledge (TC). The main thing to remember is that it is aimed at teacher knowledge. Furthermore, the three concepts cannot be viewed in isolation, the interaction between them is equally important. The aim of the TPACK model is to view technology as an integral part of teaching and learning, rather than an add-on. In the paragraphs below I will give a brief explanation of the different concepts.

CK refers to the knowledge the teacher has on the subject. A teacher needs to have full command on the subject, to be able to make appropriate choices on pedagogy and technology to develop a successful course. PK is related to the knowledge of student learning and thinking. This involves all aspects of learning, including assessment and the like. TK refers to knowledge on technology, which has to be seen a developmental as especially digital technology changes so fast nowadays.

As stated, the different concepts are closely related: PCK involves linking the choices on teaching to the content, or in other words, make the content accessible for students. TCK refers to the influence of technology on content and vice versa. For example; the development of technology has led to different insights in subject areas and thus leads to new opportunities. On the other, the content may constraint the use of certain technologies. Thus this relation offers both opportunities and constraints. TPK is mainly aimed at understanding how the use of technology influences the way of teaching and learning. This is in view of technology integration rather than technology as a add-on.

TPACK then is the interrelation between all these concepts. It will be different for every specific context and cannot just be transferred from one context to another. Every context demands its own combination of TPACK. And of course, one cannot exclude the context the course is developed in. This involves things such as the organizational constraints, entry requirements, prior knowledge and the like.

Fig. 1 – The TPACK model

Reference

Koehler, M. J., & Mishra, P. (2009). What is technological pedagogical content knowledge? Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education, 9(1), 60-70

Flexibility, pedagogy and technology – a reflection

After having studied the three concepts separately, it already has become apparent that these subjects are closely connected. To recap: flexibility deals with the number of options being offered to the learner; pedagogy deals with the way things are being done; and technology refers to the amount of technology being used in the course.

From this brief description it immediately becomes clear that the level of flexibility influences the pedagogical approach. More flexibility requires a different mix of pedagogical approaches than a very rigid programme, in which the learner has little to no choice. Similarly, adding technology to face-to-face classrooms settings will require a different pedagogical approach.

Technology may assist flexibility in different ways: by means of a content management system (CMS) for example. This is valid both for on-campus courses as well as distance learning. In a CMS, students can collaborate, using a discussion board, they can post (part) assignments for feedback from instructor or peers. Furthermore, podcasts can be delivered through the CMS, allowing students to watch the information at a time that suits them. In this example, by using a CMS, the pedagogical approach already becomes a blend of pedagogical approaches (i.e. face-to-face classroom teaching and use of CMS).

No matter what your starting point in developing new course materials is, whether it is to add more flexibility to the learner, or pursuing a different mix of pedagogical approaches or to add more technology, the three are interrelated and all three aspects will not only have to be taken into consideration but should match each other as well.

Example of pedagogical approach in practice

Further to the description of different pedagogical approaches, I have tried to find an example of a pedagogical approach which is supported by technology. Although it was very hard to find, below an example of a pedagogical approach, which is supported by technology is given. I have searched the site for evidence of this approach as well as the statement that it is a flexible and creative environment.

"The Cornell School of Hotel Administration offers a combination of inspired classroom teaching and innovative practical experiences. As the only Ivy League business-management program to focus on hospitality, we actively prepare students to be leaders in a dynamic global industry.
The Hotel School is an independent academic college within Cornell University, giving it the ability to adjust its curriculum and services to keep pace with changes in the hospitality industry. Our students reap the benefits of this flexible, intellectually-rich, and creative environment".

I feel that they do practice what they preach. They offer monthly webcasts on trends and developments in the industry such as investment and pricing strategies to position hotels and casinos for economic recovery (for details, see: http://www.hotelschool.cornell.edu/about/pubs/news/newsdetails.html?id=593). This offers students the flexibility to watch it where they want.

Furthermore, they host Dean's lecture series, in which key speakers from the industry share their views on for example critical industry-related issues and how they perceive the current status of the industry (for details, see: http://www.hotelschool.cornell.edu/academics/lectureseries.html)


Reference: http://www.hotelschool.cornell.edu/academics/

Pedagogical approaches

Pedagogical approaches – a brief overview

There are many different pedagogical approaches. When selecting a particular approach as a teacher, you would soon discover that often it is a mix of pedagogical approaches that are used. I have selected a few approaches that I find pleasant to learn with and will explain them briefly. Furthermore, I will give suggestions on how a content management system (CMS; such as Blackboard) could support these approaches.

Problem-based learning (PBL)

PBL is an approach that is learner-centred, and should cover a wide range of disciplines and subjects. The role of the teacher is that of a tutor or facilitator. Important characteristics of PBL are ill-structured and authentic problems, self-directed learning, integration of theory and practice, application of knowledge and skills, collaboration, and reflection on concepts and principles learned. It is also essential that what is learned, is applied back to the problem with re-analysis and resolution. Part of the learning process within PBL is peer and self assessment. Reflection thus happens both on content and on professional and personal competences. This can be supported by a CMS by means of discussion boards, where students can discuss about the concepts used in the PBL environment, or pod- or webcasts can support the content that is discussed in the face-to-face PBL environment.

Dual education

In dual education, working and learning is combined. Learning takes place both at work and during the study days at the college. The programme is often related to the processes an employee experiences on a regular basis and provides the student with the theory behind the application at work. The division of amount of time spent at work and at school differs per country and sometimes even per school. Dual education is mainly used in vocational training, both at secondary level as in higher education. Typical fields include those where there is immediate contact between the employee and the customer, such as in health care and the service industry. This can be supported by a CMS, to allow students access to study materials when on the job, or by means of a discussion board, where they can discuss problems they experienced while at work.

Collaborative learning

Collaborative learning is an umbrella term for a variety of approaches in education that involve joint intellectual effort by students or students and teachers. Students work together on a task to achieve a common goal and are accountable to each other. The task can be fixed and pre-set or can be more flexible and open. The aim is for students to learn from each other’s questions and answers. Reeves (1994) refers to this as cooperative learning. This can be very well supported by a CMS, where the teams can make use of for example discussion boards, or post (parts of) their assignments or resources found for feedback from peers and other teams. Use can also be made of online web-conferencing whereby the discussions are recorded, so that students can access these at a later date.

Workplace learning

With the increasing shift towards ‘knowledge workers’ the divisional line between working and learning is fading (Boud, Garrick, & Greenfield, 1999). Workplace learning is an important tool to provide skills to gain innovative capacity. For companies to remain competitive in today’s day and age, innovative capacity is essential (NCVER, n.d.). Workplace learning happens both formally and informally. The major part is however informally. The formal part often exists of the induction programme into the company and on or off-site training courses. The informal part is the learning on the job. This can be assisted by the following factors: asking peers for help, observing the work of peers, mentor relationships and corridor conversations. There are a few challenges related to this informal learning. Peers may not be willing to share their knowledge, or may give disinformation. The main opportunities for incorporating e-learning are in formal workplace training. Research has shown that e-learning can assist in incorporating workplace learning in the corporate strategy (NCVER, n.d.). Specific to using CMS in workplace learning, this can be used to provide new employees with company information, manuals and the like, so that they can find important information themselves, rather than being dependent on others.

Inquiry learning

Inquiry learning assumes a natural curiosity of the learner. Inquiry learning is defined as ‘an approach to learning that involves a process of exploring the natural or material world and that leads to asking questions, making discoveries and rigorously testing these discoveries in the search for new understanding” (National Science Foundation, in De Jong, 2006). Inquiry learning promotes self-directed learning of students, as they can take initiatives as to what road to take. It can also be used in collaborative learning. With the development of technology, inquiry learning has become more effective, as students are free to experiment within a simulation. They do however experience problems with deciding on the right variables, setting hypotheses etc. Nowadays, cognitive tools are added to provide support to students in the simulation. A CMS could be used in this respect to offer for example background information, assignments to support the inquiry process or planning tools (De Jong, 2006).

Conclusion

From this brief explanation of different pedagogical approaches, it becomes almost immediately clear that often a mix of pedagogical approaches is used. Especially collaborative learning can be used in combination with a number of other pedagogical approaches. Also, adding e-learning or using a CMS leads to blended pedagogical approaches. When selecting a specific pedagogical approach for a course, one should take into consideration which blend is best to use.

Boud, D., Garrick, J., & Greenfield, K. (1999). Understanding learning at work. New York: Routledge.

De Jong, T. (2006). Computer simulations: technological advances in inquiry learning. Science, 312, 532-533.

NCVER. (n.d.). What makes for good workplace learning? Retrieved 4 October, 2009, from http://www.ncver.edu.au/research/core/cp0207.pdf

Reeves, T. (1994). Evaluating what really matters in computer-based education. Retrieved 23 September, 2009, from http://www.educationau.edu.au/jahia/Jahia/home/cache/offonce/pid/179;jsessionid=48

Interesting article

As part of an assignment I was asked to find an article on a specific pedagogical approach. As the university I work for promotes itself as a problem based learning (PBL) university, I found an article on this theme.

Nowadays, it is more important to be able to find and use information rather than possessing it. This requires higher order skills such as critical thinking, doing research and using and transforming information. PBL is seen as a constructivist approach, which can help student acquire these higher order skills. Savery (2006) has created an overview of the development of PBL, its requirements to make it successful and sets it off against inquiry-based and case-or project based learning. He also identified the following challenges: the idea of PBL and the high stake standard tests which are used in the US and focus on drill and practice do not match and might have a negative influence on implementation. Furthermore, in the fast changing world we now live in, the skill to find and assess information becomes more and more important. For the full article, please refer to: http://docs.lib.purdue.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1002&context=ijpbl

Reference: Savery, J.R. (2006). Overview of problem based learning. The Interdisciplinary Journal of Problem-based Learning. 1 (1)

Summary of different kinds of flexible learning

So, I have already established I might not be so flexible in my learning when it comes to using new applications of technology. However, flexible learning extends much further than use of technology and the often associated distance learning. Below I have written a brief summary of 5 different aspects of flexible learning, with their advantages and disadvantages.

Flexibility related to entry requirements is mainly focused on conditions for participation. This relates closely to the recent developments in competence-based learning and the recognition of prior learning (RPL; or in Dutch EVC-erkennen verworven competenties). An example of fixed requirements could be a selection test on relevant issues for the course or having to present certain diplomas. A more flexible approach is based on using RPL, whereby different kinds of prior knowledge would lead to participation in the course. The advantage of having fixed requirements is that the entry level of all students can be presumed to be more or less at the same level. A disadvantage is that it may cancel out potential students who do have the relevant RPL, but not the diploma for example. The advantage of a more flexible approach using RPL is the more individual outlook on prospective students, however, it may be more difficult to integrate those different types of students in the course; a more individual route may be necessary. This is logistically not always feasible in the current set up of higher education in The Netherlands. Furthermore, instructors may not have the time or resources to deal with the increased individuality and required variations of the course (Collis & Moonen, 2001).

An item that is connected to flexibility related to content is topics of the course. In a system with little or no flexibility, the course leader determines the content, the order in which it is offered and the approach towards the content (theoretical vs. practical) (Collis & Moonen, 2001). By adding more flexibility; i.e. the learner can make choices on one or more of these elements, the learner is empowered to influence the way and content of the course of learning. This can be seen as an advantage. It also fits with a social constructivism approach to learning, in which the focus is on the fact that students have different approaches to learning, that students are to take responsibility for own learning and gives students control over when and how they want to learn (Dorrian & Wache, 2009). However, this shift towards self-directed learning may lead to student anxiety and resentment (Dorrian & Wache, 2009), as students may not always feel confident enough to decide on their own course of learning. Furthermore, students need to have a certain level of prior knowledge, to be able to determine what is relevant for them. Another advantage is that students’ are no longer required to follow (and pay for!) the entire course, but can follow only those modules that are relevant to them, thus making the course less expensive.

Two aspects connected to flexibility related to instructional approach and resources are learning resources: modality, origin (instructor, learners, library, WWW) and social organisation of learning (face to face; group; individual). An enormous development in resources has taken place the last decade. The growth of Internet, availability of e-books, online I-pod presentations and the like have led to a much more dynamic world with regard to resources. The advantage is clear, students can now access information anywhere at any time. One of the drawbacks is however the validity of sources found by the students. To increase flexibility in learning resources a mix of ‘traditional’ learning materials such as books in the library and the new sources of information is desired. The supplemental resources, which are not prescribed can be used to enrich the prescribed information (Collis & Moonen, 2001).

Depending on learning style, students will have different perceptions on the social organization of learning. With an increased flexibility, students are able to choose the form that best matches their learning style, i.e. face to face communication, online learning environment, working individually or in a group. The advantage is that students then have a choice in learning the way they prefer. A disadvantage is that students are not encouraged to incorporate other learning styles as well. When students are forced to work in different types of social organizations, they can actually learn from other learning styles, and learn to adopt their own learning style based on the composition of the particular group they are working in.

An aspect related to flexibility related to delivery and logistics is types of help, communication available and technology required. In a flexible environment, the student has a choice between a low-end platform (i.e. tv, telephone and stand-alone computer) up until a high-end platform, which uses fast network connections. In a less flexible environment, the course leader would decide on the main platform to be used (Collis & Moonen, 2001). With regard to communication, a more flexible approach is apart from having face-to-face communication as is the case with classroom settings, to include online communication as well. The advantage for the learner is clear; it allows more flexibility in when and how to ask questions, as questions often arise when students are reading the materials, rather than only in the classrooms environment. A disadvantage may be that learners then start to expect immediate answers from the instructor. The instructors however should also be able to manage their own time to deal with questions from students, in balance with other responsibilities and tasks (Collis & Moonen, 2001). In providing different types of communication, clear instructions should be given to students and staff. With regard to technology, realistic expectations of new systems should be created. Support should also be given to students who are less comfortable with using new systems (Dorrian & Wache, 2009). An important aspect of using (new) technology is implementation. The likelihood that a student is going to use it, can be described by the 4-E model (Collis, Peters & Pals, 2000; in Collis & Moonen, 2001). This model describes four factors: environment, educational effectiveness, ease of use and engagement. Environment relates to the context of the education; educational effectiveness can be actual or perceived, and engagement relates to the student’s personal response to using technology and change (Collis & Moonen, 2001).

These are only some of the aspects related to flexible learning. Concluding it can be said that increased flexibility in learning is desired, but does come with some constraints as well. It requires careful planning and implementation.

References

Collis, B., & Moonen, J. (2001). Flexible learning in a digital world: experiences and expectations. New York: Routledge.

Dorrian, J., & Wache, D. (2009). Introduction of an online approach to flexible learning for on-campus and distance education students: lessons learned and ways forward. Nurse Education Today, 29, 157-167.

Flexible learner??

Well, here I am, trying to write a blog. That is actually quite hard to do! How do you make it interesting for your readers to read?? And what is it that I want to write about...it would be nice if I had a brilliant idea....

In light of the assignment that I am writing this blog for, I realise that I might not be so flexible in trying out new ways of learning. That is to say, I am a little apprehensive on how to use this blogsite and have learned that I am one for learning by doing rather than reading the instructions first. I then get stuck and still don't read the instructions but try to figure it out myself. This is not a complete suprise, after all I did choose the subjects that work with assignments rather than a written examination at the end.



Today has taught me another skill: I have installed and already used Skype, something else I was apprehensive of. So all in all, quite a good day to step over boundaries I didn't realise I had!