mobile-learning2012 at IADIS ML2012

Understanding, reflecting, designing learning spaces of tomorrow

IADIS International ConferenceMobile Learning 2012Berlin, Germany11-13 March 2012

Isa Jahnke, Peter Bergström, Krister Lindwall, Eva Mårell-Olsson, Andreas Olsson,

Fredrik Paulsson, Peter Vinnervik

Interactive Media and Learning (IML)Department of Applied Educational Science

Umeå UniversitySweden

[email protected]

[email protected]@edusci.umu.se

2

Some teachers don’t know how to handle

ICT in their classrooms => reaction: usage

is not allowed in classrooms/courses

Some teachers are very enthusiastic to getiPads, they expect ”creative classrooms”

Many people understand virtual worlds as not real

=> Wrong! Facebook, SecondLife etc. are

examples for a social-constructed Technology-

mediated reality. Social media matters for people who

communicate via the Internet.

[email protected]


3

“Homo Interneticus”

Social construction of realityBerger & Luckmann, 1966

Homo InterneticusAleks Krotoski, 2011

in a social-constructed world BUT

we live in a socio-technical

constructed society We do not live any longer Homo Didacticus

[email protected]


4

a) What are the understandings of teachers towards “iPad-Didactics”? What do they expect? What are their teaching practices supported by iPads? What problems will occur?

b) What are the understandings of pupils/students towards “iPad-Didactics”?

c) What is the classroom of tomorrow (equipment, didactics, virtual…)?

Guiding research questions

iPad-DidacticsiDidactics

[email protected]@[email protected]

5

How to design (develop & evaluate)

sociotechnical-didactical learningsuccessfully?

Design-based research perspective(action research)

Wasson (2007): Design and Use of Technology Enhanced Learning Environments

What does “successful” mean?

What elements can be designed?

What are appropriate methods?

Jahnke et al. 2010, GMW Zurich; REV Stockholm

[email protected]


6

Theoretical background(social sciences)• Mediatization (e.g., Hjarvard 2008; Krotz 2007)

• Media-constructed social awareness (Medialitätsbewusstsein)• Objective facticity (Berger & Luckmann 1966)

• Complexity theory (e.g., Dugdale 2000)

New media affects society (“media is integrated into the operations of social institutions”,) but on the other hand society designs new forms of communication.

Media is formed by society but also became an active agent which influences human interactions.

People live in a media-constructed world where we have a difference between “reality” and “reality given by different media”. To know this and to handle this in the classroom is one aspect of media competency.

Complex problem: technical, social and didactical developments are required simultaneously

[email protected]

CSCL & CSCWwhat we already know

• Socio-technical approach (e.g., Suchman 1987, Orlikowski 1996, Coakes 2002; G. Fischer 2005).

• CSCW: knowledge management(e.g., 1986 first conference; Gross & Prinz, 2003)

• CSCL: collaborative learning = co-construction of (new) knowledge (e.g., CSCL conference started 20 years ago; Koschmann, Stahl, Suthers, Dillenbourg 2003)

• Socio-technical Communities(e.g., Communities of practice, Wenger & et al. 2002; Online communities, Preece, 2000)

[email protected]

Different understandings of “mobile learning”

• Focus on mobile learning in terms of devices and technologies• Focus on the mobility and flexibility of learners (anywhere, anytime,…)• Focus on mobility of learning• Focus on learners’ experience with mobile devices • Mix

Traxler (2007)Sharples et al. (2005)Sharples (2006) Pachler (2007)

[email protected]


9

Kolb’s learning cycle (1984)•concrete experience (ideas)•reflective observation (reflecting)•abstract conceptualization (generalizing)•active experimentation (applying)

To what extent does the “design of mobile learning” motivate and enable students to….. •Access theories, ideas or concepts? •Ask questions to (a) the teacher, (b) their peers?•Offer their own ideas to (a) the teacher or (b) their peers?•Use their understanding to achieve the task goal by adapting their actions? •Repeat the practice using feedback that enables them to improve performance?•Share their practice outputs with peers for comparison and comment? •Reflect on the experience of the goal-action-feedback cycle?•Debate their ideas with other learners? •Reflect on their experience by presenting their own ideas, report designs (productions) to peers and to teachers?

Laurillard, 2007, pp.163-164

What is “learning”? To what extent can it be supported?

[email protected]


10

Teaching objectivesBloom’s taxonomy 1956; Anderson & Krathwohl, 2001

• Remembering• Understanding• Applying• Analyzing• Evaluating• Creating

What level(s) do a teacher address; to what extent? What is her/his design to achieve this level?

Inter-dependencies

Use of Technology(Social Media)

Teaching and LearningCultures (different faculties, disciplines, subjects)

Didactical approaches(e.g., learning to be creative)

Inter-actionsTrans-formations

Designing the Interdependencies

[email protected]


12

Research activities

1) University course with iPads (spring 2012)• “Applied IT in schools” (Krister Lindwall, Peter Vinnervik)

• Ca. 15 student teachers (teacher education program),

• blended learning

2) University course with iPads • 55 student teachers (teacher education)

• preschool study program (Kenneth Ekström, Eva Mårell-Olsson)

3) Odder municipality (Denmark)• 200 teachers, 2,000 pupils – iPads for all – started in Dec 2011

4) ”CSCL@Work” – learning at work• Sean Goggins (USA), Isa Jahnke (SWE), Volker Wulf (GER)

[email protected]


13

Group A“iDidactics teachers”

+They are happy to get an iPad; have ideas for designing their classrooms; have ideas of the outcomes; they redesign their

teaching practices.

Group B“iPad-how? teachers”

+/- They want to use iPads in their

classrooms, but have no ideas how to do it, have some technical problems;

they would like to improve their teaching practice but without any

more additional effort.

Group C“Tech-NO! teachers”

-

They don’t want to use new technologies, iPads. They don’t see

the benefit.

Didactical Designs

(supported by iPads)

Ideas of learner’s learning

outcomes

1.)

2.)

Math;pupils =16

years

Bio-logy;5

years

Language;

11 years

RQ 1: a) Groups at the beginning? B) Changing over time?

RQ 2: To what extent are iPads useful for student’s learning based on special didactical designs by the teachers? What skills are students able to develop over time? (aimed skills, additional skills)

Subject X;n

years

iDidactics-Barometer

[email protected]


14

• Scenario 1: GIS in School

• Scenario 2: Sloyd Project - Podcasting in Teacher Education

Two examples in detail

[email protected]


15

Pilot project 2004 (Pär Segerbrant, Leif Marklund, Fredrik Åslund)

Didactical approaches

•Co-construct knowledge together with other pupils

•Increase the pupils' involvement in the learning situation

•Create a strong connection between the learning situation and the pupils immediate environment

•An interdisciplinary approach

GIS in School

[email protected]


16

GIS in School

PDA

GP

S R

ecei

ver

[email protected]


17

GIS in School

[email protected]


18

GIS in School

Problems from the Pilot project 2004

•Expensive maps •Manual registration of the map coordinates (gps devices had no internet connection)•The pupils could not document their findings with multimedia•No technology for synchronous sharing of the findings among the pupils

[email protected]


19

GIS in School

Possibilities in 2012

•Inexpensive apps (GPS motion X)

•The devices (ie. iPhone, iPad) often has constant Internet connection

•The devices can be used to document the findings via multimedia

•Pupils can share findings synchronouslyamong themselves and the rest of theworld.

[email protected]


20

Inter-dependencies

Use of Technology(Social Media)

Teaching and LearningCultures (different faculties, disciplines, subjects)

Didactical approaches (e.g., learning to be creative)

Designing the Interdependencies

[email protected]


21

Sloyd Project - Podcasting in T.E.

• Pilot project 2006• Funded by the Faculty of Teacher Education• In collaboration with Dept. of Creative Studies• Teacher programme in Sloyd (metal and woodwork)• Distance ; 3 on-campus meetings (per semester) • Project objectives

o Offer a more flexible study environmento Increase time for individual tutoring during on-campus

meetingso Promote the use of ICT in teacher education programmeso Support teacher trainerso Develop training material for Teacher Education

Peter Vinnervik & Krister Lindwall

[email protected]


22

• Provided 20 students with Ipod Videos• Prepared instructional videos

o Welding, wood carving etc.• Subscribe to videos via RSS• Use Ipod at home in personal workshop

o anywhere, anytime learning


[email protected]


23

• Nowo Shift in technologyo Collaborative opportunitieso Improved anytime,

anywhere learning, 24/7o Improved usability


• Theno One-way

communcationo Partial anytime,

anywhere learningo Media player

[email protected]


24

What we learnt so far

Challenge 1 -- informal learning influences formal education

We can learn from the informal characteristics of knowledge construction: •The problem is often the trigger for learning•Take advantage of the curiosity that makes people use Internet for information retrieval.

Place the problem at the centre. The tool which the learner uses to solve this problem may vary

Thesis 1: Mobile learning bridges informal learning approaches to formal education and new flexible teaching methods -- where the problem and not only the textbook is in the center of teaching.

[email protected]


25

Challenge 2 -- Shift from “textbook knowledge” to “learning to be creative”

a)How to teach/support learning “when the answer to a problem is not known”? (Gerhard Fischer, 2011)

a)New understanding of learning -- learning what-- learning how, -- learning to be (e.g., learning to be a teacher, a researcher etc.), -- learning to be creative


Collins &Halverson 2009

Thesis 2: Mobile learning supports a shift from “textbook learning” to “learning to be creative”

[email protected]


26


Challenge 3 – omnipresent online presence

a)Change of daily-life discussion culture e.g., students “google” teacher’s talk

b)Smartphones, iPad, Androids, = Small Multitouch-devices : It’s different to the Laptop age! The devices are small, you can communicate in seconds, nobody can see it when the user doesn’t want to; it doesn’t take time to reboot/start

Thesis 3: Mobile devices bring innovations from daily life into schools and universities, and are able to “crack” traditional teaching routines

[email protected]


27

Mobile devices…

enabling learning

across established boundaries

in unexpected online places

[email protected]


28

We need the sociotechnical-

didactical designs for FORMAL

education to foster a new

understanding of “learning to be creative”

Thanks a lot!

•Professor Dr. Isa Jahnke•Professor in ICT, media and learning•Umeå University•Dep of Applied Educational Science

•[email protected]

•http://isa-jahnke.de •http://www.facebook.com/isajahnke

[email protected]


29