Group Admins
Description
In blended and online education, educators have an almost infinite number of decisions to make when designing a course. Furthermore, given the inherently complex and dynamic nature of learning processes, educators find they have to continuously fine-tune these learning designs while riding the waves of learning. Over the last twenty years, a range of pedagogical approaches and learning designs have been suggested (Beetham, 2012). Nonetheless, few such learning approaches have been robustly analysed to ascertain whether they indeed lead to consistent learning designs that enrich and improve learning performance (Kirschner et al., 2006).
In a review of 118 learning designs in 22 countries, Rienties et al. (2012) found that teachers used fairly similar learning designs when the context and pedagogy is known, although the delivery of these was found to be inconsistent. In this follow-up study, we will build on these initial findings by focusing on a newly developed, more fine-grained learning design tool based on the work of Conole (2013) and used at the Open University.
At ALT-C we will identify key trends in how 60 module chairs designed their modules, with reference to the tool’s four student experience dimensions and seven categories of student activity. By linking these 60 learning designs to the actual behaviours of 60,000 students in Moodle using Learning Analytics, we will investigate whether these learning designs predicted actual learning patterns and learning performance. Follow-up semi-structured interviews with 10-20 teachers using Critical Event Recall (De Laat et al., 2007) we will analyse which learning designs worked well and why, and what educators aim to do to further develop their learning designs. This will enable researchers to better understand which learning design variables are important for learning analytics, as well as helping educators to identify which (combination of) design elements to focus on.
References
BEETHAM, H. 2012. Institutional Approaches to Curriculum Design.
CONOLE, G. 2013. Designing for Learning in an Open World, New York, Springer.
DE LAAT, M., LALLY, V., LIPPONEN, L. & SIMONS, R.-J. 2007. Online teaching in networked learning communities: a multi-method approach to studying the role of the teacher. Instructional Science, 35, 257-286.
KIRSCHNER, P. A., SWELLER, J. & CLARK, R. E. 2006. Why Minimal Guidance During Instruction Does Not Work: An Analysis of the Failure of Constructivist, Discovery, Problem-Based, Experiential, and Inquiry-Based Teaching. Educational Psychologist, 41, 75-86.
De Laat, M., Lally, V., Lipponen, L., & Simons, R.-J. (2007). Online teaching in networked learning communities: a multi-method approach to studying the role of the teacher. Instructional Science, 35(3), 257-286. doi: 10.1007/s11251-006-9007-0
Eysink, T. H. S., de Jong, T., Berthold, K., Kolloffel, B., Opfermann, M., & Wouters, P. (2009). Learner Performance in Multimedia Learning Arrangements: An Analysis Across Instructional Approaches. American Educational Research Journal, 0002831209340235. doi: 10.3102/0002831209340235
Kirschner, P. A., Sweller, J., & Clark, R. E. (2006). Why Minimal Guidance During Instruction Does Not Work: An Analysis of the Failure of Constructivist, Discovery, Problem-Based, Experiential, and Inquiry-Based Teaching. Educational Psychologist, 41(2), 75-86. doi: 10.1207/s15326985ep4102_1
Rienties, B., Kaper, W., Struyven, K., Tempelaar, D. T., Van Gastel, L., Vrancken, S., . . . Virgailaite-Meckauskaite, E. (2012). A review of the role of Information Communication Technology and course design in transitional education practices. Interactive Learning Environments, 20(6), 563-581. doi: 10.1080/10494820.2010.542757.
Authors
| Name | Annie Bryan |
| Affiliation | The Open University |
| Country | United Kingdom |
