Thursday, December 4, 2008
The online learning environment - A new model using social constructivism and the concept of "Ba" as a theoretical framework By Kim Bryceson
This article postulates that in our current time, the question for learning is not whether the Internet will be used in course delivery, or if it is a useful tool, but rather how can a teacher best make use of it to enhance learning. The article documents a study that has analysed five years of reflections on the scaffolding mecahnisms used to promote and encourage learning in five internet-based courses at the University of Queensland between 2001 and 2005.
I wanted to share with everyone briefly this article in the Springer book, as it gives an overview of 4 theoretical approaches associated with learning: behaviourism, Cognitive Theory, Constructivism and Social Constructivism.
The diagrams included here show the Social Constructivist Theory, put forward by Vygotsky (1978) that learning is not purely an internal process, nor passive, but that culture and context are important in forming understanding and hence initiating deeper learning. Thus, learning is seen as the development of higher-level psychological processes occuring first on an interpersonal level through social intecation and then being internalised.
This links to the research on Swedish schools (see previous entry), where much of the concern was whether these international instruments fit into the Swedish context. Fig 2 shows an interesting theory introduced by Nonaka and Konno (1998)based on the japanese concept of "Ba", roughly meaning "place" in English, as a means of describing where and how knowledge is created. They proposed that Ba should be considered a framework in which knowledge is activated as a source for the creation of new knowledge. There are four types of Ba (see fig 2). Interesting...Do read it to find out more!
Assessing the Quality of learning Environments in Swedish schools: development and analysis of a theory-based instrument By Mara Westling Allodi
The author notes that the practice of using validated and theory-based instruments is still not well-established in Swedish schools. With this in mind, the first aim of the reserach was to illustrate, from the students' perspectives, the development of a theory-based instrument for assessing goals, values and attitudes as perceived in educational settings. The second aim was to analyse the results of a questionnaire to tset how the data fitted the hypothesised model and other alternative models.
The need to create a new questionnaire suited to the learning environment in Sweden was to address the general resistance in Swedish schools to undertaking quantitative measurements of group processes and interactions, and also the mindset that these cannot be measured with international instruments applicable everywhere.
The article examines in some detail Schwatz's general theory of values which is used together with Moos's general model and 3 dimensions.Schwatz's model describes universal values which depend on human needs for group intercation and social needs for coordination. Cross-cultural comparisons have shown that, despite cultural differences across countries and populations, the essential structure and the internal relations among the values are quite stable (Schwatz and Sagiv 1995). Looking at the two figures, you can see that Schwatrz's model shows values as a multi-faceted construct with two bi-polar value dimensions. The combination of these dimensions are used to identify universal value types (see table 1). the value types are structured in a continuum in the bipolar model (see Fig 1). This model suggest what value types are supposed to be essential in a theory of human values.
SPSS was used to calculate the overall means and reliability coefficients for the scales.
The Goals, Attitudes and Values in School (GAVIS) questionnaire was thus developed on the basis of these theoretical frameworks concerning learning environments, universal human values and studies of students' experience of learning environments. It can be used by teachers and special educators to assess the quality of their classroom learning environments, as perceived by their students, and to identify strengths and weaknesses in their classroom climate. The profiles obtained for each classroom with the mean scores from each scale could help the teacher plan interventions specific to the individual class profiles.
The rich discussion that we had during the lessons helped to clarify doubts and give more insight to our learning. The activities were also skilfully weaved together, and built up to various end-products which showcase our development and understanding in this area.
The final research paper that we completed as a group on the final day was exciting as it meant all of us had to pull together and do our parts efficiently and helped us to consolidate our learning. All the readings, the discussions, the Wiki, the presentations somehow added to what we put into this paper. It was certainly a well-coordinated challenge!
To be continued...
I have found this diagram interesting from the start when Dr Quek first spoke about it in Session 3. I am a visual learner and this diagram encapsulated much of what we have been learning in this module. After having done some more reading of some of the articles, I am reminded of this diagram, as much of the research centres on the relationship between the learning environment, the people and the personalities, as well as certain terms, like alpha press and beta press were used in one of the articles I have read. This link has helped me to internalise better the key ideas or fundamentals in the field of learning environments.That many of the readings deal with the learning environment for different subjects, and also research conducted in different countries, means that these different learning environments have been explored to see how effective / ideal they are in producing student outcomes. Much of the research also rests on the premise that "the one way to find out about, say, the suitability of the learning environment is to ask students, as well as teachers and trained observers" (Walberg, 1976, p 159). This diagram captures the history behind the development of the field of learning environments, as well as what much of the research today is based on.
I have included a link to an article that gives a brief overview on these aspects of the learning environment, and also defines these terms: "classroom climate", "educational climate" and "social climate".
http://go2lily.com/Documents/School%20classroom%20climate.pdf
Wednesday, December 3, 2008
This is a photo of our group discussing how to present our information on Theo Wubbles. The group Wiki that we are still working on to refine has helped us to learn several things.The fact that it was not easy to find any information on Theo Wubbles except through reading of carefully selected articles made it difficult for some members to find anything concrete to say about "his theory", which we assumed he had, but quickly realised he did not really have. His best contribution (and a significant one as it reflects the current thinking on learning environments) is the Quesionaire for Teacher Interaction (QTI), which is an instrument widely used by other researchers to measure teacher-student interaction. There was also the misunderstanding that we had a lot of time to complete our Wiki, and so were not fully prepared for the presentation. In conversation with other groups, we discovered we were not alone, as others also were not fully prepared, and had a just-in-time moment! Nonetheless, the experience made us more determined to work better together as a team. (Here is the URL to our group's work on Wubbles. Please visit us and give us your comments!)
http://twfans.wetpaint.com/
The presentations by all the groups were useful for us to gain quick overviews on the various researchers / gurus in the field. In discussion with Dr Quek, we learnt that all instruments need to fulfil Moo's three social climate dimensions: Relationship, Systems Maintenance and Change, and Personal Growth. According to Moos, these three dimensions underpin all socially created environments, no matter how diverse. Each dimension has its own scales which are classified. For more details on Moos' scheme, please see link below.
Link: http://www.mindgarden.com
The article "Constructive solutions: Improving teaching and learning in e-learning environments" by Sue Trinidad was simple to read, and helped us to focus on what kind of research is important in this area and how to be more critical of the data collected, the recommendations, and to reflect on the follow-up necessary in each of the gaps identified. A weakness in the paper was that not all the gaps identified in the research done were addressed. It also helped to remind us that research necessitates the kind of conclusions that are needed to address all the gaps identified based on the data collected.
A question I have is as to how much of the qualitative data should be taken into account, eg, if only one or two students interviewed reported problems with understanding the task. Because it is data from only one or two students, how far do you take his view as representative of the rest?
The second activity we had was on the use of an actual instrument. As a group, we looked at how to tabulate our scores for our resposes to the modified WIHIC instrument we used in class. It was a good exercise as we actually became much more familiar with the 6 scales used. Using the SPSS, the scores were computed and we got a first-hand look at how the SPSS system calculates the various types of information needed based on the research question. I was amazed at how efficient the software was (and that it even existed!)
The class discussion also gave us an insight to the terminology used for the various instruments.
Eg, the use of the terms "pre-test" and "post-test" are considered quite archaic (laugh here - cos we are still using these terms in school without knowing it is a give-away as to the "era" we come from!!) and that we should instead be using terms like "preferred" and "actual" to refer to our ideal state in the classroom lesson environment and the actual / one's own / real experience respectively.
This adds on to the earlier learning we gained on the use of the LE instruments; that they can be adapted for use in different contexts, but that the meanings of the statements should not change. this ensures tha validity and reliability of these instruments, which have already been tested and proven.
The group also worked very well together today!
Monday, December 1, 2008
Article: New learning environments and constructivism: The students' perspective By David Gijbels, Gerard Van De Watering, Filip Dochy & Piet Van De
This research article aimed to investigate if students in a new learning environment (NLE) perceive it to be more constructivist when compared to the perceptions of students of a conventional lecture-based learning environment (LE). The researchers were also interested to know which factor showed the greatest difference between the two groups. The NLE used in the research was consistent with the characteristics of Problem-based learning (PBL) (see below). The questionnaire used was based on Tenenbaum's(see below) consisting of seven key factors of constructivist LEs.The results show that students in the NLE perceive it to be more constructivist when compared to the perceptions of students in a conventional LE (marked by large-group lectures and teacher-provided learning objectives and assignments). The difference was statistically significant for four of the seven factors. The greatest difference in perception between the two groups was the factor “conceptual conflicts and dilemmas”.
NLEs claim to develop an educational setting to reach educational goals (to communicate, think and reason effectively, make judgments, solve problems and work collaboratively), where instruction is defined as enhancing learning (Lea et al., 2003) as cited in this paper.
The article helps one to understand the link between the theory of constructivism and NLEs. NLEs are constructivist by nature. NLEs, such as problem-based learning, case-based learning and project-based education are seen as being able to improve educational outcomes for students in higher education (Simons et al., 2000; Lea et al., 2003.
The article also gives some background to the difficulty of defining the term constructivism and looks briefly at how the discussion of this term and its characteristics have developed over the years. What exactly is a constructivist environment?
Constructivism can be seen as an umbrella term that groups learning perspectives with the same basic assumption about learning - that knowledge is actively constructed by the learner (Harris and Alexander, 1998; Tynjala, 1999; Birenbaum, 2003). This definition suggests then that all learning is constructivist, since students are thinking and constructing knowledge all the time, even in a drill and test situation. It is useful to understand that there are different perspectives of constructivism known as cognitive constructivism (individual knowledge construction) or social constructivism (building knowledge collaboratively with others).
This idea was discussed spontaneously in class in session 3 as we looked at what kind of students (Express, NA or NT) are able to understand that knowledge is necessarily evolving and should be linked to the outside world to make it more relevant to them and their own learning and understanding. I certainly believe that all students are able to understand this concept through various means, eg, direct link to the curriculum, through teachable moments and through students own experiences, whatever stream they come from. Students have to understand / be taught to see the links between the knowledge and skills they acquire in the classroom and the outside world, and that they are key players in constructing their own (and others')knowledge.
Let us look briefly at the key factors and the development of the questionnaire used for this study.
The key factors of constructivist LEs have been developed over time. Based on Taylor & Fraser's (1991) original CLES, Taylor et al. (1997) developed the new CLES to test if secondary students found the maths or science learning environment to be consistent with the key dimensions of constructivism. Qualitative and quantitative approaches were used to collect data. A final 30-item questionnaire divided into 5 scales of 6 items on a 5-point Likert scale was developed for secondary education.
The scale used in this study is by Tenenbaum et al. (2001) for university teaching. 30-item 5-point Likert scale questions with 7 key factors of constructivist LE:
1. arguments, discussions, debates
2. conceptual conflicts and dilemmas
3. sharing ideas with others
4. materials and measures targeted toward solutions
5. reflections and concept investigation
6. meeting students needs
7. making meaning, real-life examples
The paper concludes that students perceptions of the LE are a powerful factor in the way students cope with the LE, so educational interventions need to succeed in modifying students' perceptions of their LEs. It also appears that students' perceptions are triggered by a greater variety in learning environments, thus the researchers do not recommend a problem-based curricula, but future research should look into an optimal mix of LEs and consider students'’ perceptions of the blend of various approaches, eg., PBL, practical work, problem- and case-based learning groups, online learning, etc.
Friday, November 28, 2008
Today, we were reminded of the importance of remembering the various researchers in the field of educational psychology such as John Elliot for action research, Piaget, Vygotsky, Skinner and Pavlov.We also looked at how to modify instruments to assess the learning environment and some of the considerations to bear in mind when doing so. One key consideration is not to make too drastic a change but to retain the original meaning and structure of the question as far as possible to ensure its validity. If many changes are made to the instrument, as in the case of the CLES used in the research by Yip Meng Fai and Quek Choon Lang's Conference paper "Validation of An Instrument to monitor My Students' Face-to-face Philosophy", then the instrument needs to be tested to ensure its validity. The importance and relevance of the scales used to address the research question needs to be considered carefully.
Tuesday, November 25, 2008
I have added the url for COMPASS and the Partnerships framework by Joyce L Epstein as it has to do with creating a community-centred environment. I have attended a seminar by Epstein and she is really good. This framework is the one advocated by MOE as well.As for the Misskoh, well, I like the website so much I want others to see it if they come to my blog. Thanks, Chong Min!
In designing classroom environments, Bransford suggests that:
1. To be learner-centred, learning environments (including teaching practices) must consider carefully the knowledge, skills, attitudes and beliefs that learners bring to the classroom. Schools and classrooms must be learner-centered.
2. To provide a knowledge-centered classroom environment, we must focus on what is taught (subject matter), why it is taught (understanding), and competence.
3. In the assessment-centered classroom environment, formative assessments help both teachers and students monitor progress. Formative assessments allow the teacher understanding of the students' level of competence, and design instruction accordingly.
4. A community-centered approach means there are norms for the classroom and school, as well as connections to the outside world, that support core learning values. Learning is thus influenced by the context in which it takes place.
Some reflections on the group sharing today:
- the concern on self-assessment by students is an interesting one. I believe self-assessment adds value to the idea of a positive classroom environment. Students who feel they have a part to play in assessing their own and their peers' learning will be more attuned to what learning outcomes are important and be better learners as a result. Or course, preparing students to be competent and fair assessors is a pre-requisite, as mentioned in class today.
- a point made by one of the groups on striking a balance between a learner-centred and a knowledge-centred environment is certainly valid and needs to be a teacher's focus in the classroom.
- the community-centred environment encompasses all the other three and is necessary in our local context, given our multi-racial, multi-religious setting. Eg, National Education is an important initiative that helps to embrace all these into one.
Four instruments which have been used in Asia are discussed: the Questionnaire on teacher Interaction (QTI), Science Laboratory Environment Inventory (SLEI), Constructivist Learning Environment Survey (CLES) and What Is Happening In This Class? (WIHIC). Some “historically important questionnaires” are also discussed.
The Learning Environment Inventory (LEI) and Classroom Environment Scale (CES) were developed in the USA in the 1960s. The My Class Inventory (MCI) is a simplified form of the LEI for children aged 8-12.
Fraser notes that the Individualised Classroom Environment Questionnaire (ICEQ) was the first instrument to focus on dimensions which distinguish individualized classrooms from conventional ones (Fraser, 1990).
Determinants of Classroom LE
Classroom learning dimensions have been used as criterion variables in research to find how the classroom environment varies with factors such as teacher personality, subject matter, the nature of the school-level environment and the type of school (Fraser, 1994). Many examples of Asian studies are cited as having explored a great variety of areas and variables, eg, Hirata and Sako (1998) found differences between classroom environment perceptions of at-risk students and normal students in Japan. Differences in the perceived LEs of gifted and non-gifted students in Singapore, and Lee and Fraser (2001a, 2001b, 2002) used three instruments – the SLEI, CLES and QTI – to investigate the differences between streams (science-oriented and humanities-oriented) in student perceived LE.
The paper ends with a note that Asian researches have yet to contribute towards developing any instruments. The Asian researches have also only centred on learning environment’ perceptions and student outcomes.
Monday, November 24, 2008
Talk about learning environments, motivation is a necessary part of this learning environment. From a broader perspective, all places are our learning environments, if we allow them to be. I have added these pictures as the Korean drama scene has given me the motivation and impetus to learn about this fascinating country and its culture, including its language. I am learning a little everyday. The people have much to be proud of and are fiercely outspoken in the defence of their rights. I have discovered that there is much to admire about their country and culture.
I am keen on learning the Korean language, and I believe an ideal way to pick up any language is to go on some immersion programme. I have always believed this is the best and fastest way to learn any lagnuage. With the readings on learning environments, I understand better why any immersion programme is good as the learning environment would fulfil all dimensions required.
