Embed Size (px)
DESCRIPTION
Between Pedagogy and Technology: The Pedagogical Affordances of Online Learning Environments. Sarah Schrire , Miri Shonfeld, Zipi Zelkovich Kibbutzim College of Education, Mofet Institute The 12th Annual MEITAL National Conference, Levinsky College, July 2 nd , 2014. - PowerPoint PPT Presentation
Citation preview
Between Pedagogy and Technology: The Pedagogical Affordances of Online Learning Environments
Sarah Schrire, Miri Shonfeld, Zipi ZelkovichKibbutzim College of Education, Mofet Institute
The 12th Annual MEITAL National Conference, Levinsky College,July 2nd, 2014
Theory of AffordancesTools Thinking Change
“tools are more than just something to make a task easier. They change your way of thinking, of approaching a task (and indeed the nature of the task itself), and can reap unimagined wider social changes.”
Joinson, A. N. (2003). Understanding the psychology of Internet behavior: Virtual worlds, real lives, Hampshire: Palgrave Macmillan, pp. 2-3.
Inverting the Question
How can ICTs be used to achieve
pedagogical objectives?
(How) do ICTs afford a springboard for
conceptualizing new pedagogies?
?
Affordances: Overview
Gibson (1970’s)
• Ecological theory of perception• Properties of environment in relation to animal behavior
Norman (1980’s)
• Properties of objects: The Psychology of Everyday Things• Design / perception of computer interfaces
Wertsch (1990’s)
• Mediating properties of tools
Chemero, Hutchby (2000’s)
• Explication and redefinition• Relational theory
Affordances
“Perceiving affordances is placing features, seeing that the situation allows a certain activity” (p. 187).
Chemero, A. (2003). An Outline of a Theory of Affordances. Ecological Psychology 15 (2), 181-195.
ICTs at the Kibbutzim College:over the years till today
SiteWise for content presentation, Mofet forums and internal mail system for interactivity
HighLearn LMS, Interwise for synchronous lessons
Moodle LMS, WordPress CMS, Elluminate for synchronous and recorded lessons
2000-04
2004-09
2009-14
The Reported Study1
• RQ 1 What…?
• RQ 2 In what ways…?
• RQ 3 What…?
Conducted at the Kibbutzim College of Education with the support of the Mofet Institute
Methodology and Analysis
• Qualitative o Objectives of the studyo Nature of the questions
• Mixed-methods techniqueo Automatically generated reports where availableo Questionnaires and content analysis (Narralizer)o Semi-structured interviews and content analysiso Analysis-in-context of sample sites
Shkedi, A. (2004). Narralizer Qualitative Analysis Software. Available: http://www.narralizer.com
• What characterizes the pedagogical applications of:o each of the asynchronous online environments (SiteWise,
HighLearn, Moodle) adopted by faculty?o each of the synchronous online environments (Interwise,
Elluminate, Second Life) adopted by faculty?
• Designed to define the real affordances of each tool (Norman, 1999, 2004)
• Based on the characterizations of each tool by a small expert group
• (Is the concept of real affordances a contradiction in terms?)
RQ 1
• What characterizes the pedagogical applications of:o each of the asynchronous online environments (SiteWise,
HighLearn, Moodle) adopted by faculty?o each of the synchronous online environments (Interwise,
Elluminate, Second Life) adopted by faculty?
• Zoom-in on Moodle (expert group):o Learning managemento Presentation of content (resources, links, etc.)o Asynchronous and synchronous interactiono Collaborative learningo Assignments and tests
RQ 1
RQ 2
• In what ways do instructors integrate each of the online environments in their pedagogical practice?
• Questionnaire data
• Automatically generated reports of course sites developed on Moodle (2010-2013)
• In-depth semi-structured interviews with 14 instructors
In what ways do instructors integrate each of the online environments in their pedagogical practice?
Asynchronous Activity Types Reported
Scanned documents
Instruction Pages
Worksheets
Internet Links
Presentations
Individual assignments
Collaborative assignments
Discussions
Media
Tests
Other
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90
Synchronous Activity Types Reported
Lecture
Student-Pupil Lesson
Student-Student Independent Discussion
Counseling hour
Other
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90
Moodle: Zoom-in
Moodle: Zoom-in
Moodle: Zoom-in
Percentage of Activity Distribution in Moodle: 2010-2013
Moodle: Zoom-in
No. of courses with distinctive activity types: 2010-2013
Martin Dougiamas, MoodleMoot, July 2011
Content Analysis of Interviews:Categories
• History• Characterization
o Time savingo Organization o Encouragement of independent learning
• Personal implementation o Efficiency in teaching and learningo Tool as trigger for pedagogical changeo Progression in awareness of possibilities and sophistication of use
Responses to example questions(How) does the availability of the environment affect your teaching practice?
Responses to example questions
• It enables me to continue the lesson…• To sum up the lesson or open a digital
presentation during the lesson itself…• To call up texts• It provides opportunities for the
student who is reluctant about speaking – to write
• One need not be dependent on catching a student in the corridor since one can raise issues on Moodle.
(How) does the availability of the environment affect your teaching practice?
Responses to example questions
• It enables me to continue the lesson…• To sum up the lesson or open a digital
presentation during the lesson itself…• To call up texts• It provides opportunities for the
student who is reluctant about speaking – to write
• One need not be dependent on catching a student in the corridor since one can raise issues on Moodle.
(How) does the availability of the environment affect your teaching practice?
Moodle is my bookcase containing • the syllabus• materials that can be readily
available to the learners
Moodle Zoom-In: Responses to example questions
• It enables me to continue the lesson…• To sum up the lesson or open a digital
presentation during the lesson itself…• To call up texts• It provides opportunities for the
student who is reluctant about speaking – to write
• One need not be dependent on catching a student in the corridor since one can raise issues in Moodle.
Moodle is my bookcase containing • the syllabus• materials that can be readily
available to the learners
(How) does the availability of the environment affect your teaching practice?
• I had to create a new course and I had the Moodle [interface] in front of my eyes. The Moodle topical division helped me to conceptualize the topics.
• Over the years [using online environments], I’ve learned that I have to write precisely what I want to say. In the online environment, there is no place for correction.
• I think at the computer.
Moodle Zoom-In: Responses from sample interviews
The new environment enables :• the visualization of information• organization of activities• focus• availability of materials• access to online books
What changed when you adopted a new online LMS?
• I changed from dependence on the content to becoming an independent content developer.
• In the past the content was dictated to me and my role was only to activate the forums and chat.
RQ 3
• What characterizes the pedagogical approach of instructors who use similar tools within a given online environment?
• Two patterns relating to instructors who have maximized their application of the tools:o The “constantly searching”o The “pedagogically already there”
• This observation can be connected to the concept of perceived affordances (Norman, 1999, 2004).
Emerging answers• We cannot draw conclusions about changes in
pedagogical practices but only about reported pedagogical practices
• We have learned some things about the ways in which the digital environments are / are not triggering new pedagogical conceptualizations
• What is most exciting is identifying the profile of the person who “perceives affordances” in the online environments adopted, who “sees that the situation allows a certain activity” (Chemero, 2003).
Return to the theory of affordancesOur findings can be explained by the position of Hutchby (2001) in “Technology, Texts and Affordances”• Sees talk of the social impacts of ICTs as “populist
discourse”• Raises the issue to a philosophical level:
essentialism versus constructivism / interpretivism • Interplay between “essential properties” of
technologies and interpretations of those using them
Hutchby, I. (2001). Technologies, Texts and Affordances. Sociology 35 (2), 441-456.
Return to the theory of affordancesOur findings can be explained by the position of Hutchby (2001) in “Technology, Texts and Affordances”• Possibilities for use of a technological object are
not infinite; they are socially mediated• Affordances are functional and relational aspects
which frame, while not determining, the possibilities of agentic action in relation to an object
Hutchby, I. (2001). Technologies, Texts and Affordances. Sociology 35 (2), 441-456.
From “Technology, Texts and Affordances” (p. 444)
Hutchby, I. (2001). Technologies, Texts and Affordances. Sociology 35 (2), 441-456.
Implications / Questions
• Pedagogy: What should our vision be in higher education?o Can technology make a difference to pedagogy?o Should we force it to do so?
• Practice: How should faculty development programs in ICT integration be structured?
• Theory: How does such a study contribute to our understanding of the relationship between texts and technologies?
Implications / Questions
• Pedagogy: What should our vision be in higher education?o Can technology make a difference to pedagogy?o Should we force it to do so?
• Practice: How should faculty development programs in ICT integration be structured?
• Theory: How does such a study contribute to our understanding of the relationship between texts and technologies?
