learning design: the international standard for call?

Learning Design: The International Standard for

CALL?

Don HinkelmanUniversity of Melbourne, School of

Languages

札幌学院大学人文学英語英米文学科 , 2006.06.04

Don Hinkelman, JALTCALL 2006.6.4

2

Outline

1. Problem: Why are standards needed?2. Issues: What kind of standard is best? Depending on Theoretical Stance Depending on Methodological Approach Depending on Technological Trends Depends on Development Ideology

3. Study: Does Learning Design fit CALL? Case Study of an Open-source LMS


3

Part 1: Problem

1. Process: Software does not move from one site to another. Need to re-program. How do we interchange software and activities (process)?

2. Content: Content does not move easily from site to site. How do we interchange content?

Not: “what is a single pattern for all CALL software?

But: “how do we ensure interoperability(portability)?


4

Common StandardsCurrently Used by CALL

Teachers .html .xml .jpg .ppt .doc .xls .php

Yet all are single file standards. To exchange a full learning scenario involves a complexity of multiple files, multiple activities, multiple people & venues


5

Interoperability Standards

for Macro-level FilesNeeds to include: Whole courses in an LMS Units of Learning (UOL)

fixed sequences of activities flexible sequences of activities

Single activities [a.k.a. learning objects]


6

Interoperability Standards

for Macro-level FilesSome Teacher Authoring Requirements: Granularity: ability to break down whole course into parts

Composition: ability to combine parts into a course

Editable, Arrangable: reorder, reedit, sequence

Sequencing Multiple Paths Multiple Groups & Roles


7

IMS-Learning Design

An international standardSCORMIEEEIMS

Only standard devoted to collaborative learning

Inclusive of solitary, and fixed sequence learning scenarios, blended learning


8

IMS-Learning Design

Technical Specifications XML “wrapper” standard nomenclature for describing activities and process

can be pre-specified, or post-harvested

intended for all learning scenarios, commercial or proprietary, blended or non-blended


9

Part 2: Issues

1. Problem: Why are standards needed?2. Issues: What kind of standard is best? Depends on Theoretical Stance Depends on Methodological Approach Depends on Technological Trends Depends on Development Ideology

3. Study: Does Learning Design fit CALL? Case Study of an Open-source LMS


10

a. Theoretical Stance

What is your core stance on learning?

Learning is solitary Learning is collaborative

Let us look at some theories of second language learning


11

Theories of Second Language

Learning Second Language Instruction (SLI)

Second Language Acquisition (SLA)

Second Language Socialisation (SLS)


12

Theory of SLI 　　　　　　ごしどう

Second Language Instruction (SLI) 　第二言語指導

Based on linguisticsA second language is learned best by learning the grammatical rules and vocabulary of the language.

It is instructed in school classrooms or on self-study materials.

Researchers analyze the language by dividing it into smaller bits (reductionism).

Teaching is by putting these small pieces in a logical order. Sentences, words and phrases are focused on.


13

Model of SLIGrammar Progression

Vocabulary Progression

PresentTense

PastTense

PresentPerfectTense

And so on

BasicWords

IntermediateWords

AdvancedWords

And so on


14

Theory of SLA しゅうとく

Second Language Acquisition (SLA) 　　第二言語習得

Theory from psychologyA second language is learned best by following the natural pattern of developing a language in the brain

It is “acquired”, not instructed, in both the real world and through classroom study or self-study.

Researchers analyze the stages that learners pick up a language (interlanguage).

Researchers look at mental processes. Teaching is by paying attention to the natural order of acquisition. Students should focus on good learning strategies, not the structure & meaning of a language. Communicative discourse is more important than sentence structure.


15

Model of SLA

Information processing metaphor

Inputs Processing Output

Books

Teaching

Media

StudentEssays

Speeches

Test Answers


16

Theory of SLS

　　しゃかいか

Second Language Socialisation (SLS) 　第二言語の社会化

Influenced by sociology/anthropology/ecologyA second language is learned best by joining a community that uses that language for specific purposes.

It happens through purposeful projects and tasks inside that community.

Researchers analyze the language acts and how veterans teach apprentices to do those jobs.

Teaching is by designing and facilitating a community that is full of real-life projects for students to do.

PPAARR


17

Model of SLSEcological/Environmental metaphor

Kramsch (2002), Van Lier (2001, 2005)

T=Teacher

NS=Novice

VS=Veteran Student

OV=Outside Veteran

SS=Sister School

OB/OG=Alumni

NSNS

NS

NS

NS NS

Learning Community

NSNS

NS

NSNS

NS NSNS

NS

TVS

TVS

VS

VS

OB

NS NS

OV

SS

OV

SSSS

SSSS

SS


18

Learning is solitary

Standards which fit this model of reality

SCORM 1.3 IMS-SS


19

Learning is collaborative

Standards which fit this model of reality

None


20

Learning is collaborative &

solitaryStandards which fit this model of reality

IMS-LDEvolved from EML (Educational Modeling Language) of Open University NL

Incorporates solitary and collaborative learning in sequences of activities

Incorporates face-to-face and online learning (blended scenarios)


21

b. Methodological Approach


22

Key Concepts

Technology: electronic, architectural, paper forms, portfolios, media, web interfaces and other non-human actors in the learning process

“materialist semiotic view”Design: continuous planning, redesign, improvisations, and refinements of pedagogy“translation/transformation view”

Blended: hybrid forms of human/technology/curriculum/methods/spaces

“actor-network view”


23

Core Conceptual ChangeCALL as a package

Client-based Proprietary code Licensed content Single-user learning

CALL as an environment Web-based Swappable scripts Shared content Collaborative learning


24

Trends of Blended Learning

Theoretical Changes instruction >> acquisition >> socialisation

Methodological Changes drill training >> project-based learning

Technical Changes laboratories >> wireless rooms CD software >> web software


25

c. Technological Trends

web based software (not standalone) modules and scripts (not packages) teacher-based design (not professional specialists)

drag-and-drop interfaces (Flash, Red5) reconfigurable sequences (de/reconstruction)

rewriting/reformatting of authored content reuse of learner content granularization of roles and permissions


26

d. Development Ideology

Choices for teachers and developers


27

Part 3: Study

1. Problem: Why are standards needed?2. Issues: What kind of standard is best?

Depending on Theoretical Stance Depending on Methodological Approach Depending on Technological Trends Depends on Development Ideology

3. Study: Does Learning Design fit CALL?

Case Study of an Open-source LMS


29

Learning Design Study Group

moodle.orgRenamed to Technology and Pedagogy Study Group


30

Key Text

Learning Design


31

Key Text

"Learning Design: A Handbook on Modelling and Delivering Networked Education and Training"

Edited by Rob Koper and Colin Tattersall


32

What is Learning Design?

Learning Design (LD) is an international standard for modeling flexible sequences of educational activities. It applies not only to online network-based teaching but also classroom-based or blended learning as well.


33

Why use LD for CALL?

IMS-LD is perhaps the only standard now proposed that allows for collaborative, socio-constructivist-oriented learning in a variety of formats.

Yet, it is a “Proposed” standard in that little software actually uses it.


34

Studying Learning Design

A working group at moodle.org community held a collaborative study course to analyze LD and its potential for integration with Moodle during the spring and summer of 2005. That group produced a paper which was published in August 2005.

Journal: Journal of Interactive Media in Education

Title: Practical and Pedagogical Issues for Teacher Adoption of IMS Learning Design Standards in Moodle LMS

Authors: A. Berggren, D. Burgos, J. M. Fontana, D. Hinkelman, V. Hung, A. Hursh, G. Tielemans

Available at: http://jime.open.ac.uk/2005/02/


35

Research Team Anders Breggren

IKT-Pedagogen E-learning Consultancy, Sweden Daniel Burgos

UNFOLD Project, Open University, Netherlands Josep Fontana

Faculty of Translation, Universitat Pompeu Fabr, Spain

Don Hinkelman (Facilitator, Editor) Horwood Language Centre, University of Melbourne, Australia

Vu Hung Ministry of Education and Training, Vietnam

Tony Husch Dept. of Educ. Psych., University of Illinois, USA

Ger Tielemans Stedelijk Lyceum, Twente University, Netherlands


36

Case Study Conclusions LD does not have flexible authoring engines

LD is not an environment (not LMS) LD exchanges learning sequences from LMS to LMS

LD can take snapshots of a learning process at various points in time. Can record the cumulative process.

LD is not necessary for teachers to understand. Simply, it is a requirement for any LMS--open source or proprietary.


37

Core Issue

Does IMS-Learning Design handle “bricolage” design?


38

Conclusion: Does LD fit CALL?

No: if your conditions are as follows Theory of learning: solitary, SLI, SLA Method of learning: content dissemination Technological base: broadcast/delivery mode

Development ideology: proprietary, private licensing

Better Standards:IMS-Simple Sequencing, SCORM 1.2, 1.3


39

Conclusion: Does LD fit CALL?

Yes: if your conditions are as follows Theory of learning: solitary & collaborative, SLS

Method of learning: project-based learning multiple learning paths collaborative, group

learning Technological base: networked, blended learning

Development ideology: open source, public licensing


40

FutureLD-compliant project-based language learning module to an open-source learning management system


41


42


43


44


45

Refined Problem

How and when do teachers use technology? …use the internet?

Why do they choose some technology and not others? What factors?

How do they blend face-to-face technologies and online technologies?


46

What is a purpose?

Not practice for later “real-life” Learning happens through doing something with real purpose, that secondarily uses a second language (not native language).

Some examples: holding a conference (in a foreign language) producing a magazine (in a foreign language) hosting a visitor (in a foreign language) going on a study tour (in a foreign language) doing a fashion show (in a foreign language) planting trees with a sister school (in a foreign…)


47

What is a community?

A group with a purpose Veterans/Permanent members (veterans)

TeachersOlder studentsAlumni (OB, OG)Non-school community members

Apprentices/Transitory members (apprentices)

Beginning students


48

Part II: Trend of Blended

Learning Theoretical Changes

instruction >> acquisition >> socialisation

Methodological Changes drill training >> project-based learning

Technical Changes laboratories >> wireless rooms CD software >> web software


49

What is a project?

A project is: a job that needs to be done.a classroom task that is related to a larger group effort

Some examples at SGU:Korean exchange programs (hosting, visiting, organising)

Email exchange programs Teaching practice, counseling practiceBunkyodai Shogakko/Melbourne Primary School exchangeHomestay introduction letters (before going abroad)Interviewing foreigners/international students in Sapporo

Powerpoint presentation forumsMini-Drama Happyokai


50

History of Approaches and Foci

in Second Language Pedagogy Pre-1970s 1970s-1990s Post-1990s

Philosophical Perspective Reductionism Constructivism Connectionism

Dominant Theory Structural Cognitive Sociocultural

Dominant Metaphor Instruction Acquisition Socialisation

Research Unit of Analysis Sentence Discourse Actions, Effects

Role of Learner Imitator Processor Apprentice

Pedagogical Goals Accuracy & Fluency Skill & Strategy Participation & Use

Pedagogical Technique Error-correction Consciousness-raising Project-creation

Pedagogic Assessment Proficiency Competency Fulfillment

Pedagogic Success Native Production Global Proficiency Local Accomplishment

Design World Drill Task Environment/Community

Design Models Fixed, Rule-based Linear, Input-Output Ecological, Semiotic


51

Part II: Trend of Blended

Learning Theoretical Changes

instruction >> acquisition >> socialisation Methodological Changes

drill training >> project-based learning

Technical Changes Software: client software >> web software

Hardware: laboratories >> wireless rooms


52

Web Software: Towards Community Connectionism

Three Types of Web Software Static

Example: HTML text/image page Communicative process: computer to students

Dynamic/Interactive Example: Buttons, Paths, Quiz Communicative process: between computer/student

Networked (Shared Database) Example: Community portal Communicative process: student to student


53

Community Portals

Open SourceAllows cross-university collaborationAllows customisationAllows creative module buildingCan integrate *all* language learning software

Low costNot “Moodle”, but…

Cross-platform, open-source, language-learning community-building, class-administrative space


54


55


56


57


58

Kanda University of International StudiesBlended Learning Classrooms


59


60


61

Wireless Campus

What is our situation?Two CALL rooms til nowExpansion from 2 >> 35 CALL rooms


62

SGU Wireless Campus Former CALL Rooms (before 2005.4.1)

Current CALL Rooms (after 2005.4.1)

第１ CALL室 A-202

第２ CALL室　 A-201

A-301 A-302 A-303 A-304 A-305

A-306 A-307 A-308 A-309 A-310

A-311 A-312 A-313 A-314 A-315

A-316 A-317 A-318 A-201 A-202

B-201 B-202 C-201 C-202 C-203

C-204 C-205 C-206 C-301 C-302

C-303 C-304 C-305 C-306 C-307


63

On November 16th, Kofi Annan announced the $100 laptop for all children campaign. Hundreds of millions of wireless laptops will be built for children all across the world. National governments will provide these learning tools for $100 per child or less.

One Laptop Per Child (NGO) http://laptop.media.mit.edu/


64


65

Research Design

Research Paradigm Data Collection Data Analysis Site Selection Positionality Validity


66

Research Paradigms

post-positivist, qualitative viewconstructivist, ecological learning

perspectivemultiple paradigms

both intersubjectivity and interobjectivity

critical and pragmatic stance


67

Research Paradigms


68

Research Design

Data CollectionAction ResearchAutoethnography

Data AnalysisActor Network Theory


69

Site Selection Criteria

EFL in university settingLocation irrelevent, or less immaterial to framework being studied

Sites chosen for convenience and active use of blended learning

Locations: Three universities in JapanGeneral English, Shakai Joho, at SGUKanda University of International StudiesKyoto Sangyo University


70

Research Design I

Units of Analysis:

Themes of Interobjectivity

Roles/actions of all actors

Boundaries/responsibilities, negotiation spaces

Size of actors

Micro (self, teacher, task, course, classroom) and,

Macro (curriculum, faculty, campus, environment)

Units of Analysis:

Themes of Intersubjectivity

Community of practice

Decisions and justifications of stakeholders

Group aims and interests

Conflicts, challenges, emergencies


71

Research Design IISite Comparison—Cycles, Methodology, Participants, Data Collection, Data Analysis

Site Cycles Methodology Participants Data Collection Methods

Data Analysis Methods

Home/office

1970-2010

40 yearscontinual

Autoethnography

Researcher diary, blog critical incidentsinnovationskey issues

SGU

Cycle 1

2005-2006

2semestersonsite

Nested Case Study-three classes-single LMS mod

Research teamStudentsSoftware engineers

teacher diariesobservationinterviewmaterials/interface

Role, task, time, venue analysis.Movements and boundaries

SGU

Cycle 2

2006-2007

2semestersonsite

Nested Case Study-three classes-single LMS mod

Research teamStudentsSoftware engineers

teacher diariesobservationinterviewmaterials/interface

Same

KU

Cycle 1

2005-2006

1week+onsite

Dept. Case Study-Engl. curriculum, -multiple teachers

Research teamAdministratorsTeachers, students

observationinterviewmaterials/interface

Role, task, time, venue analysis.Movements and boundaries

KU

Cycle 2

2006-2007

1week+onsite

Dept. Case Study-Engl. curriculum, -multiple teachers

Research teamAdministratorsTeachers, students

observationinterviewmaterials/interface

Same


72

Research Design III:Positionality

Site ParticipantsPositionality

Level

Positionality

Description

Home/office Researcher 1 Insider alone

SGU-1 classroom

Research team

Students

Software team

2 Insider team

SGU-2 classroom

Research team

Students

Software team

2 Insider team

KU-1 campus

Research team

Administrators

Teachers, students

5

Outsider working with insiders

KU-2 campus

Research team

Administrators

Teachers, students

5

Outsider working with insiders


73

Research Design IV:Validity

Type of Validity Site Questions of Validity Importance

Outcome Validity KU Does the research identify a problem and does the agreed upon action move to resolve it?

5%

SGU Can a low level English class benefit from blended learning? Low cost/student satisfaction/learning?

Process Validity KU-SGU

Does the cycle lead to further problem identification? Does triangulation work well?

15%

Catalytic Validity KU-SGU

Is the research recognized across the department, and to other departments, causing further change?

30%

Democratic Validity KU-SGU

Are silenced actors given voice in the process?

Are teachers and students empowered?

Are technophobic teachers/students represented?

20%

Dialogic Validity KU-SGU

Is the research accepted for publication, in-house, nationally, internationally?

Does the research create a dialogue amongst researchers, practitioners? How? What degree?

30%


75

Conclusions (preliminary)

Teaching Theory is moving to… X SLI/SLA Second Language Instruction/Acquisition

O SLS - Second Language Socialisation primary focus, blended with SLI & SLA

Teaching Methods are moving to… X from drill & practice learning O to project & community-based learning focu, blended with drill, skill, and cognitive learning

Teaching Technology is moving to… X from language laboratories, CD software O to wireless hardware, web-based software, community servers blended with face-to-face technogies


76

Conclusions (preliminary)

Second Language Pedagogy is moving to…

X Face-to-face learning (lectures, pair conversation)

X Online learning (e-learning, laboratories) O Blended learning (simultaneous online/face-to-face)

Blended Learning対面学習とオンライン学習の統合

Action removes the doubt that theory cannot solve.

Sun Tzu

learning design: the international standard for call?

Documents