This paper reports on a case study that examined the process of designing and evaluating a learning object to help students understand the therapeutic principles of drug administration. The challenges and issues associated with creating learning objects using interactive multimedia software will be described. The study had two broad objectives: (1) to analyze and document the process of designing a learning object and (2) to evaluate the outcome of applying these practices. To achieve its purpose, this illustrative case study examined the following areas, 1) theories of learning and cognition that influence the design of learning objects; and 2) instruments that can be used to assess the quality of the learning object and to provide designers with information for improving the learning object. The results from the evaluation revealed that the learning object was rated highly in the areas of content quality, learning goal alignment and motivation. Interaction/ usability and feedback/ adaptation were areas identified as needing improvement. The comments and ratings obtained in the student surveys provided the basis for the learning impact study and indicated that this learning object provides added value for the study of pharmacokinetics.
{"title":"A Study of the Design and Evaluation of a Learning Object and Implications for Content Development","authors":"F. Krauss, M. Ally","doi":"10.28945/407","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.28945/407","url":null,"abstract":"This paper reports on a case study that examined the process of designing and evaluating a learning object to help students understand the therapeutic principles of drug administration. The challenges and issues associated with creating learning objects using interactive multimedia software will be described. The study had two broad objectives: (1) to analyze and document the process of designing a learning object and (2) to evaluate the outcome of applying these practices. To achieve its purpose, this illustrative case study examined the following areas, 1) theories of learning and cognition that influence the design of learning objects; and 2) instruments that can be used to assess the quality of the learning object and to provide designers with information for improving the learning object. The results from the evaluation revealed that the learning object was rated highly in the areas of content quality, learning goal alignment and motivation. Interaction/ usability and feedback/ adaptation were areas identified as needing improvement. The comments and ratings obtained in the student surveys provided the basis for the learning impact study and indicated that this learning object provides added value for the study of pharmacokinetics.","PeriodicalId":104467,"journal":{"name":"Interdisciplinary Journal of e-Learning and Learning Objects","volume":"68 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"114734635","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Introduction Authoring tools that allow creation of learning objects are emerging at a slow pace. There are authoring tools available to the public for free download. Reload, for example, is an authoring tool that facilitates "creation, sharing and reuse of learning objects using a range of pedagogical approaches through the use of lesson plans" (See http://www.reload.ac.uk/). Another example is GLO maker, a free authoring tool for creating generative learning objects. (See http://www.glomaker.org/). Although these authoring tools are free to download, they are not Open Source (OS). Conversely, there are several OS authoring tools that are freely available to anyone who would like to adapt, expand, modify, and/or enhance the software. Several examples of these OS authoring tools are as follows: * Xical-Xical is an Open Source player for media presentations, e-learning lectures, tutorials and webinars. It is designed and programmed in Flash and ActionScript and runs on Macromedias OS-agnostic. (See http://xical.org/) * eXe-The eXe project is an Open Source authoring application for creating Web educational content. (See http://exelearning.org/wiki) * Multimedia Learning Object Authoring Tool--The Multimedia Learning Object Authoring Tool is an Open Source tool that "enables content experts to easily combine video, audio, images and texts into one synchronized learning object." (See http://www.learningtools.arts.ubc.ca/mloat.htm) * Xerte-Xerte is an Open Source server-based suite of tools that is "aimed at developers of interactive content who will create sophisticated content with some scripting." (See http://www.nottingham.ac.uk/~cczjrt/Editor/) Most of these OS authoring tools have an extensive learning curve with little attention to simplicity and design flexibility. Therefore, these LO authoring tools may not be suitable for everyone wishing to create learning objects. While the task of developing OS Learning Objects authoring tools is slowly picking up among the communities of practice, two elements must be taken into consideration during the development process--(1) simplicity of design and (2) a free style pedagogical design environment. Simplicity means that the authoring tool is simple and straightforward. It is uncomplicated and the learning curve is nominal. Simplicity of the authoring tool may encourage the LO designer to include appropriate user interface elements in the design process of learning objects. A free style pedagogical design environment does not impose a set of pedagogical approaches to be followed by the LO designer; rather it allows the flexibility for creativity of design using learning theories and principles suitable for a chosen audience. The primary purpose of this paper is to present the birth of an Open Source Learning Objects authoring tool (the LO Creator) that emphasizes simplicity and flexibility for a free style pedagogical design environment for creating learning objects. Consistent with its purpose, this p
{"title":"Design of an Open Source Learning Objects Authoring Tool-The LO Creator","authors":"A. Koohang, K. Floyd, Cody Stewart","doi":"10.28945/1386","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.28945/1386","url":null,"abstract":"Introduction Authoring tools that allow creation of learning objects are emerging at a slow pace. There are authoring tools available to the public for free download. Reload, for example, is an authoring tool that facilitates \"creation, sharing and reuse of learning objects using a range of pedagogical approaches through the use of lesson plans\" (See http://www.reload.ac.uk/). Another example is GLO maker, a free authoring tool for creating generative learning objects. (See http://www.glomaker.org/). Although these authoring tools are free to download, they are not Open Source (OS). Conversely, there are several OS authoring tools that are freely available to anyone who would like to adapt, expand, modify, and/or enhance the software. Several examples of these OS authoring tools are as follows: * Xical-Xical is an Open Source player for media presentations, e-learning lectures, tutorials and webinars. It is designed and programmed in Flash and ActionScript and runs on Macromedias OS-agnostic. (See http://xical.org/) * eXe-The eXe project is an Open Source authoring application for creating Web educational content. (See http://exelearning.org/wiki) * Multimedia Learning Object Authoring Tool--The Multimedia Learning Object Authoring Tool is an Open Source tool that \"enables content experts to easily combine video, audio, images and texts into one synchronized learning object.\" (See http://www.learningtools.arts.ubc.ca/mloat.htm) * Xerte-Xerte is an Open Source server-based suite of tools that is \"aimed at developers of interactive content who will create sophisticated content with some scripting.\" (See http://www.nottingham.ac.uk/~cczjrt/Editor/) Most of these OS authoring tools have an extensive learning curve with little attention to simplicity and design flexibility. Therefore, these LO authoring tools may not be suitable for everyone wishing to create learning objects. While the task of developing OS Learning Objects authoring tools is slowly picking up among the communities of practice, two elements must be taken into consideration during the development process--(1) simplicity of design and (2) a free style pedagogical design environment. Simplicity means that the authoring tool is simple and straightforward. It is uncomplicated and the learning curve is nominal. Simplicity of the authoring tool may encourage the LO designer to include appropriate user interface elements in the design process of learning objects. A free style pedagogical design environment does not impose a set of pedagogical approaches to be followed by the LO designer; rather it allows the flexibility for creativity of design using learning theories and principles suitable for a chosen audience. The primary purpose of this paper is to present the birth of an Open Source Learning Objects authoring tool (the LO Creator) that emphasizes simplicity and flexibility for a free style pedagogical design environment for creating learning objects. Consistent with its purpose, this p","PeriodicalId":104467,"journal":{"name":"Interdisciplinary Journal of e-Learning and Learning Objects","volume":"33 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"115117034","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
The observation "the nice thing about standards is that there are so many to choose from" (Tanenbaum, 1981, p. 221) has been circulating in e-learning standards circles for some time. This statement certainly reflects the varied and complex nature of standards organizations and standards development processes. This paper provides an overview of standards and specifications bodies and processes relevant to e-learning and particularly to learning objects and related infrastructures. It focuses specifically on three key organizations and on the e-learning specifications and the standards they develop: the IMS Global Consortium, the IEEE LTSC (Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, Inc. Learning Technology Standards Committee), and the ISO/IEC (International Standards Organization/International Electrotechnical Commission).
“标准的好处是有这么多的选择”(Tanenbaum, 1981, p. 221)在电子学习标准界流传了一段时间。这种说法当然反映了标准组织和标准开发过程的多样性和复杂性。本文概述了与电子学习，特别是与学习对象和相关基础设施相关的标准、规范、主体和过程。它特别关注三个关键组织以及它们开发的电子学习规范和标准:IMS全球联盟、IEEE LTSC(电气和电子工程师协会)。学习技术标准委员会)和ISO/IEC(国际标准组织/国际电工委员会)。
{"title":"Interoperability and Learning Objects: An Overview of E-Learning Standardization","authors":"N. Friesen","doi":"10.28945/408","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.28945/408","url":null,"abstract":"The observation \"the nice thing about standards is that there are so many to choose from\" (Tanenbaum, 1981, p. 221) has been circulating in e-learning standards circles for some time. This statement certainly reflects the varied and complex nature of standards organizations and standards development processes. This paper provides an overview of standards and specifications bodies and processes relevant to e-learning and particularly to learning objects and related infrastructures. It focuses specifically on three key organizations and on the e-learning specifications and the standards they develop: the IMS Global Consortium, the IEEE LTSC (Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, Inc. Learning Technology Standards Committee), and the ISO/IEC (International Standards Organization/International Electrotechnical Commission).","PeriodicalId":104467,"journal":{"name":"Interdisciplinary Journal of e-Learning and Learning Objects","volume":"118 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"123232054","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
In this article, we describe the development of a classification system providing a framework for analysis of, and communication about, a subgroup of learning objects. The objects we consider are highly visual, animated, interactive, and mathematics-related, and we call them VaniMaps. Secondly, we discuss the use of the system. In the first phase, the development was based on literature studies and discussions on examples of VaniMaps. In the second phase, the classification system was tested by students and their responses were analyzed to identify possible improvements. Now, the system is developed further based on experience gained while using it for different purposes. We see several possible uses of the classification system, or selected parts of it: (a) to facilitate communication between the orderer and the developer, (b) to initiate discussions on VaniMaps in teacher education, (c) to analyze and choose between VaniMaps for teaching and learning activities, and (d) to establish a database for VaniMaps labeled using classification statements. We will discuss all these uses and especially emphasize the use in teacher education, illustrated with a case study.
{"title":"A Taxonomy as a Vehicle for Learning","authors":"C. Brodahl, B. Smestad","doi":"10.28945/67","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.28945/67","url":null,"abstract":"In this article, we describe the development of a classification system providing a framework for analysis of, and communication about, a subgroup of learning objects. The objects we consider are highly visual, animated, interactive, and mathematics-related, and we call them VaniMaps. Secondly, we discuss the use of the system. In the first phase, the development was based on literature studies and discussions on examples of VaniMaps. In the second phase, the classification system was tested by students and their responses were analyzed to identify possible improvements. Now, the system is developed further based on experience gained while using it for different purposes. We see several possible uses of the classification system, or selected parts of it: (a) to facilitate communication between the orderer and the developer, (b) to initiate discussions on VaniMaps in teacher education, (c) to analyze and choose between VaniMaps for teaching and learning activities, and (d) to establish a database for VaniMaps labeled using classification statements. We will discuss all these uses and especially emphasize the use in teacher education, illustrated with a case study.","PeriodicalId":104467,"journal":{"name":"Interdisciplinary Journal of e-Learning and Learning Objects","volume":"483 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"123558657","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Introduction In 1994 the term "learning objects" made its first appearance in the title of Wayne Hodgins' CedMA working group: "Learning Architectures, APIs and Learning Objects" (Polsani, 2003). This reference is ostensibly made toward object-oriented programming, a paradigm of software engineering where software programs are built using modules that are interoperable, reusable, and easier to maintain than their monolithic counterparts. In a similar fashion, an academic course can be broken up into computer-mediated instructional units that possess these same qualities--portability, adaptability, reusability, and ease of maintenance. Because a single hour of online instruction can take up to 300 hours to develop (Kapp, 2003), reusability is the core return on investment (ROI) message offered by learning object promoters, from the earliest days to the present (Churchill, 2005, 2007; Downes, 2003; du Plessis, 2005; Garcia-Barriocanal, Sicilia, & Lytras, 2007; Hodgins, 2000; Liber, 2005; Liu, Huang, & Chao, 2005; Polsani, 2003; Wiley, 2000). Yet, after 12 years of successive evolution, learning objects are still primarily a collection of stand-alone modules that rarely interconnect outside of strictly controlled regimes, such as those imposed by corporate and military training guidelines. The lack of reusability does not stem from a dearth of technical and procedural standardization. Groups like IMS Global Learning Consortium, Inc. (IMS Global), IEEE Learning Technology Standards Committee (LTSC), Cisco Systems (Cisco 1999), and, by extension, Griffiths, Stubbs, and Watkins (2007) have published documents that describe in detail process analysis, metadata, sequencing, learning management system portability, test and assessment, and/or interconnection. What is missing from these control structures is the conceptual and aesthetic engineering necessary to promote visual, auditory, and kinesthetic consistency as well as interoperability at the lowest level, from learning module to learning module. Impediments to Reusability Definition Several factors coalesce into a collective impediment to reusability. First, the definition of a learning object is devoid of a uniform structure, making the reuse of these nebulous entities difficult. Borrowing from Churchill (2007), here are some example definitions: * Any digital or non-digital entity for technology-supported learning (IEEE, 2001). * Atomic or aggregate learning resources (IMS Global, 2003) * Any digital resource used to support learning (Wiley, 2000). * Any digital resource used to mediate learning (Wiley & Edwards, 2002). * A LO can be based on an electronic text, a simulation, a Web site, a .gif graphic image, a QuickTime movie, a Java applet or any other resource that can be used in learning. (McGreal, 2004). * A collection of 7 [+ or -] 2 components containing content, practice and assessment parts (Cisco Systems, 2001). * Combined knowledge object and a strategic object representing a mental mode
{"title":"Learning Pod: A New Paradigm for Reusability of Learning Objects","authors":"N. Mogharreban, D. Guggenheim","doi":"10.28945/381","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.28945/381","url":null,"abstract":"Introduction In 1994 the term \"learning objects\" made its first appearance in the title of Wayne Hodgins' CedMA working group: \"Learning Architectures, APIs and Learning Objects\" (Polsani, 2003). This reference is ostensibly made toward object-oriented programming, a paradigm of software engineering where software programs are built using modules that are interoperable, reusable, and easier to maintain than their monolithic counterparts. In a similar fashion, an academic course can be broken up into computer-mediated instructional units that possess these same qualities--portability, adaptability, reusability, and ease of maintenance. Because a single hour of online instruction can take up to 300 hours to develop (Kapp, 2003), reusability is the core return on investment (ROI) message offered by learning object promoters, from the earliest days to the present (Churchill, 2005, 2007; Downes, 2003; du Plessis, 2005; Garcia-Barriocanal, Sicilia, & Lytras, 2007; Hodgins, 2000; Liber, 2005; Liu, Huang, & Chao, 2005; Polsani, 2003; Wiley, 2000). Yet, after 12 years of successive evolution, learning objects are still primarily a collection of stand-alone modules that rarely interconnect outside of strictly controlled regimes, such as those imposed by corporate and military training guidelines. The lack of reusability does not stem from a dearth of technical and procedural standardization. Groups like IMS Global Learning Consortium, Inc. (IMS Global), IEEE Learning Technology Standards Committee (LTSC), Cisco Systems (Cisco 1999), and, by extension, Griffiths, Stubbs, and Watkins (2007) have published documents that describe in detail process analysis, metadata, sequencing, learning management system portability, test and assessment, and/or interconnection. What is missing from these control structures is the conceptual and aesthetic engineering necessary to promote visual, auditory, and kinesthetic consistency as well as interoperability at the lowest level, from learning module to learning module. Impediments to Reusability Definition Several factors coalesce into a collective impediment to reusability. First, the definition of a learning object is devoid of a uniform structure, making the reuse of these nebulous entities difficult. Borrowing from Churchill (2007), here are some example definitions: * Any digital or non-digital entity for technology-supported learning (IEEE, 2001). * Atomic or aggregate learning resources (IMS Global, 2003) * Any digital resource used to support learning (Wiley, 2000). * Any digital resource used to mediate learning (Wiley & Edwards, 2002). * A LO can be based on an electronic text, a simulation, a Web site, a .gif graphic image, a QuickTime movie, a Java applet or any other resource that can be used in learning. (McGreal, 2004). * A collection of 7 [+ or -] 2 components containing content, practice and assessment parts (Cisco Systems, 2001). * Combined knowledge object and a strategic object representing a mental mode","PeriodicalId":104467,"journal":{"name":"Interdisciplinary Journal of e-Learning and Learning Objects","volume":"25 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"123939874","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
The scarcity of readily usable instruments to resea rch learning in Computer Supported Collaborative Learning (CSCL) environments has posed a great challenge to devise appropriate analytical tools to investigate how individuals change their u nderstanding or create a new personal construction of knowledge as a result of social intera ction and negotiation within the group. Given this scenario, the Activity System Model (Engestrom, 1987), based on a socio-cultural perspective, was adopted as a framework for analysing the quality of a CSCL community in this research project. Data were analysed to examine how interactivity had contributed to the fostering of higher order thinking skills in the CSCL community. Findings of this study confirmed that there was a positive correlation between the quality of collaborative pr ocess engaged by groups and the quality of cognitive skills fostered. High levels of social in teraction and collaboration contributed to the establishment of a community of learning, nurturing a space for fostering higher order thinking through co-creation of knowledge processes. Lessons learnt and limitations of the investigation in this study in light of the methodological issues re lating to coding reliability and difficulties in translating Chinese text involved in the CSCL for c omputerized coding process were discussed as well.
{"title":"Computer Supported Collaborative Learning and Higher Order Thinking Skills: A Case Study of Textile Studies","authors":"Ada W. W. Ma","doi":"10.28945/69","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.28945/69","url":null,"abstract":"The scarcity of readily usable instruments to resea rch learning in Computer Supported Collaborative Learning (CSCL) environments has posed a great challenge to devise appropriate analytical tools to investigate how individuals change their u nderstanding or create a new personal construction of knowledge as a result of social intera ction and negotiation within the group. Given this scenario, the Activity System Model (Engestrom, 1987), based on a socio-cultural perspective, was adopted as a framework for analysing the quality of a CSCL community in this research project. Data were analysed to examine how interactivity had contributed to the fostering of higher order thinking skills in the CSCL community. Findings of this study confirmed that there was a positive correlation between the quality of collaborative pr ocess engaged by groups and the quality of cognitive skills fostered. High levels of social in teraction and collaboration contributed to the establishment of a community of learning, nurturing a space for fostering higher order thinking through co-creation of knowledge processes. Lessons learnt and limitations of the investigation in this study in light of the methodological issues re lating to coding reliability and difficulties in translating Chinese text involved in the CSCL for c omputerized coding process were discussed as well.","PeriodicalId":104467,"journal":{"name":"Interdisciplinary Journal of e-Learning and Learning Objects","volume":"5 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"129457282","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
This paper describes a model for studying collaborative knowledge building (CKB) as a group activity. We integrate the model described by Stahl (2000a) with an analysis based on the principles of cultural historical activity theory (CHAT), using the analysis of a self reflective case study to guide the description. The concept of the CKB activity system is developed, and the role of contradictions in CHAT is described. The case is then analyzed to show how the model explains collaboration in practice. The final model includes two additional cycles representing the role of reflective practice in CKB. The new model of CKB processes combined with the concept of the activity as the unit of analysis and the tools of CHAT provides an efficacious way of investigating collaborative knowledge building.
{"title":"An Integrated Model of Collaborative Knowledge Building","authors":"Gurparkash Singh, L. Hawkins, G. Whymark","doi":"10.28945/388","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.28945/388","url":null,"abstract":"This paper describes a model for studying collaborative knowledge building (CKB) as a group activity. We integrate the model described by Stahl (2000a) with an analysis based on the principles of cultural historical activity theory (CHAT), using the analysis of a self reflective case study to guide the description. The concept of the CKB activity system is developed, and the role of contradictions in CHAT is described. The case is then analyzed to show how the model explains collaboration in practice. The final model includes two additional cycles representing the role of reflective practice in CKB. The new model of CKB processes combined with the concept of the activity as the unit of analysis and the tools of CHAT provides an efficacious way of investigating collaborative knowledge building.","PeriodicalId":104467,"journal":{"name":"Interdisciplinary Journal of e-Learning and Learning Objects","volume":"10 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"128442511","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
This study compares three groups of teachers that (1) work in one-to-one laptop classrooms, (2) received a laptop from the state for pedagogical use, and (3) teach without technology. The influence of openness to change and attitudes towards ICT implementation on online communication and information search by 97 Israeli middle school teachers was explored. The results indicate that teachers' openness to changes in professional life and their attitudes towards ICT predict 22.3% of the variance in online communication and 35% of the variance in online information search, both for personal and pedagogical purposes. Teacher openness to change, online communication, and information search were significantly higher among teachers who volunteered to participate in the one-to-one program compared to those who did not volunteer. These results are consistent with the important role of individual differences in explaining the rate of adopting innovations in general and implementing technology by teachers in particular. Compared to other participants, teachers in the one-to-one program showed higher level of awareness to the time invested in preparing digital learning materials. This emphasizes the importance of speeding the development of digital content that is adapted to local context by providers of learning materials. Compared to other participants, teachers who have a laptop reported a higher level of openness to professional changes, to online communication, and information search for both personal and professional purposes. These findings emphasize the importance of providing teachers with personal devices for pedagogical use and online communication.
{"title":"Teachers' Openness to Change and Attitudes towards ICT: Comparison of Laptop per Teacher and Laptop per Student Programs.","authors":"I. Blau, Y. Peled","doi":"10.28945/1728","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.28945/1728","url":null,"abstract":"This study compares three groups of teachers that (1) work in one-to-one laptop classrooms, (2) received a laptop from the state for pedagogical use, and (3) teach without technology. The influence of openness to change and attitudes towards ICT implementation on online communication and information search by 97 Israeli middle school teachers was explored. The results indicate that teachers' openness to changes in professional life and their attitudes towards ICT predict 22.3% of the variance in online communication and 35% of the variance in online information search, both for personal and pedagogical purposes. Teacher openness to change, online communication, and information search were significantly higher among teachers who volunteered to participate in the one-to-one program compared to those who did not volunteer. These results are consistent with the important role of individual differences in explaining the rate of adopting innovations in general and implementing technology by teachers in particular. Compared to other participants, teachers in the one-to-one program showed higher level of awareness to the time invested in preparing digital learning materials. This emphasizes the importance of speeding the development of digital content that is adapted to local context by providers of learning materials. Compared to other participants, teachers who have a laptop reported a higher level of openness to professional changes, to online communication, and information search for both personal and professional purposes. These findings emphasize the importance of providing teachers with personal devices for pedagogical use and online communication.","PeriodicalId":104467,"journal":{"name":"Interdisciplinary Journal of e-Learning and Learning Objects","volume":"14 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"132448797","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Video as a tool for teaching and learning in higher education is a multimedia application with considerable promise. Including video within the online support material for a module can help students to gain an understanding of the material and prepare for assessment. We have experimented with using short videos that summarise the lectures given, as an aid for students to use when revising. An interpretive method has been adopted to investigate the use students make of these videos, during the teaching term and when revising for assessment. In this paper a summary of ways that video can be used for supporting teaching and learning is given, the ways in which we used video are presented followed by discussion of some issues relating to producing summary length videos. Preliminary research indicates that students find these summary lectures very useful for reviewing lecture material as well as for their revision.
{"title":"Using Video to Record Summary Lectures to Aid Students' Revision","authors":"Janice Whatley, Amrey Ahmad","doi":"10.28945/393","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.28945/393","url":null,"abstract":"Video as a tool for teaching and learning in higher education is a multimedia application with considerable promise. Including video within the online support material for a module can help students to gain an understanding of the material and prepare for assessment. We have experimented with using short videos that summarise the lectures given, as an aid for students to use when revising. An interpretive method has been adopted to investigate the use students make of these videos, during the teaching term and when revising for assessment. In this paper a summary of ways that video can be used for supporting teaching and learning is given, the ways in which we used video are presented followed by discussion of some issues relating to producing summary length videos. Preliminary research indicates that students find these summary lectures very useful for reviewing lecture material as well as for their revision.","PeriodicalId":104467,"journal":{"name":"Interdisciplinary Journal of e-Learning and Learning Objects","volume":"6 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"128874768","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Computer-supported collaborative learning (CSCL) is believed to be a powerful pedagogical process to equip students with critical reflection to be more sensitive to cultural diversity, stereotypes, and multiple perspectives. The elements of collaborative learning are drawn from research findings and result in a new model to be implemented for learners using Blackboard as avenue for on-line self-reflection and on-going peer critical debate. Participants are students enrolled in a Bachelor of Education program in the field of Home Economics and assigned to group projects. Students are required to undertake a critical analysis of fashion advertisements with reflective ejournals and a reflective paper to question taken-for-granted assumptions. This paper begins with a literature review on critical reflection which demonstrates the problematic nature of defining and researching reflective concepts and techniques, as well as the very wide range of meanings assigned to terms associated with reflection. Next is an outline of the pedagogical design that creates CSCL opportunities and experiences to promote critical reflection in learners. It then highlights students’ reflections on how the created peer support system promotes their critical reflective capabilities. Finally, good practices of fostering collaborative reflection are shared that may be adapted in different contexts apart from the teacher education sector.
{"title":"Computer supported collaborative learning and critical reflection: A case study of fashion consumerism","authors":"Ada W. W. Ma","doi":"10.28945/1170","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.28945/1170","url":null,"abstract":"Computer-supported collaborative learning (CSCL) is believed to be a powerful pedagogical process to equip students with critical reflection to be more sensitive to cultural diversity, stereotypes, and multiple perspectives. The elements of collaborative learning are drawn from research findings and result in a new model to be implemented for learners using Blackboard as avenue for on-line self-reflection and on-going peer critical debate. Participants are students enrolled in a Bachelor of Education program in the field of Home Economics and assigned to group projects. Students are required to undertake a critical analysis of fashion advertisements with reflective ejournals and a reflective paper to question taken-for-granted assumptions. This paper begins with a literature review on critical reflection which demonstrates the problematic nature of defining and researching reflective concepts and techniques, as well as the very wide range of meanings assigned to terms associated with reflection. Next is an outline of the pedagogical design that creates CSCL opportunities and experiences to promote critical reflection in learners. It then highlights students’ reflections on how the created peer support system promotes their critical reflective capabilities. Finally, good practices of fostering collaborative reflection are shared that may be adapted in different contexts apart from the teacher education sector.","PeriodicalId":104467,"journal":{"name":"Interdisciplinary Journal of e-Learning and Learning Objects","volume":"12 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"116614325","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：