Collaborative Design Model: Moallem, 2003
This is an interactive design model that focuses on interactivity to promote learning. According to Moallem (2003) there are two types of interactivity: cognitive or individual interaction (interaction with content) and social or interpersonal interaction (interactions between students and between students and teachers). This model emphasizes the vital role of human interaction in learning. Moallen (2003) states: “Emotions, feelings, motivation, and attitudes are integral parts of an intellectual and social development” (p. 86). The Collaborative Design Model supports problem based learning as a form of instructional procedure. Problem based learning transfers control of the learning process from the teacher to the students. Problem based learning structures and supports a carefully planned series of collaborative learning activities. “In such an environment learners are exposed to multiple perspectives that serve to form cognitive scaffolds as the students exchange information with each other, the people around them, and experts in the field” (Moallem, 2003, p. 86). Moallem’s model relies on McGrath and Hollingshead’s (1993) task classification theory: generate, choose, negotiate, execute. McGrath and Holligshead’s (1993) model predicts the effects of task and computer mediated communication on group performance. Learners generate plans, discussions, ideas; choose preferred answers or responses; negotiate conflicts and resolve indecisions; and execute the required intellectual or psychomotor tasks that are needed to accomplish the objectives. Based on this framework, Moallem’s (2003) Collaborative Design Model uses generative and intellective tasks for problem-solving: “Problem-based learning was used as the general instructional design model to develop both a culminating project (a real-world problem-solving task) and a series of authentic but generative and intellective problem-solving tasks or collaborative activities to organize the course content, as well as to structure students’ social interactions” (Moallem, 2003, p. 89). According to Moallem, this model establishes individual accountability; encourages commitment to the group and its goals; facilitates smooth interaction among group members at both an interpersonal and group levels; and also provides stability of groups so that group members can work with each other for longer periods of time in order to reduce the time and effort for establishing group norms, group task performance, and interaction patterns. “A successful, interactive and collaborative online course requires well-developed collaborative tasks or problems, or activities that stimulate peer interaction and encourage peer collaboration (Moallem, 2003, p. 99).
R2D2 Model, Bonk and Zhang, 2006
Read, Reflect, Display and Do
Based on Kolb’s (1984) effective learning phases of experiential learning: getting involved in concrete experiences; reflective listening and observations; creating an idea with an abstract coneptualization; and making decisions through active experimentations.
Different from other design models with same or similar names because this model focuses on the type of tasks, resources, and activites that one embeds in online course to address different human learning strengths and preferences or skills areas.
Integrates 4 types of learning activities: Reading/listening; Reflecting/writing; Displaying; Doing.
Similar to VARK but puts more emphasis on Reflective activities.
Reading/Listening: (learning activities) Reading materials and information searches, Online discussions, group discussions, presentations, Guest expert chats, Online tutorials, webinars, audio files, video files, meetings in chatrooms, online brainstorming online testing, webquests, scavenger hunts: (Technologies) Announcements, Q&A, FAQs, Breeze, Elluminate Live, IM, Chat, Bulletin Boards, Listservs, podcasts, Webcasts, captivate
Reflection: (learning activities) Posted interviews, online role plays, debates, mock trials, collaborative group papers, annotate articles, reflective writing, group reflections, individual reflections, blogging, providing feedback from group, individuals, instructors, conferences with live feeds, observe expert performances, online modeling, archived examples; (technologies) Blogs, bulletin board, streaming audio, video; threaded discussion forums, , elluminate, breeze, LMS, word documents, with comments, eportfolios, webpages, etc.
Displaying: (learning activities) e-portfolios, reflections, video library of concepts, cases or experts, graphic representations, timelines, interactive visuals with online chats, peer evaluations, peer critics, draw tools in asynchronous chats, flash visuals and animations, virtual tours, project gallery, blogging; (technologies) Concept mapping, Visual Understanding Environment VUE, Timeliner or other online timeline tools, blogs, IM with whiteboards, virtual tours
Doing: (learning activities) online demonstrations, interactive, project-based learning with dynamic online databases, case simulations and manipulations, case-based learning, online simulations and lab resources, oral histories, PBL, online survey, online radio stations, digital movies, online galleries for current, past and future students
Implications for Design, Hung and Chen, 2001: Based on Principles of situated cognition and Vygotskian thought:
4 dimensions: Situatedness, Commonality, Interdependency, Infrastructure (fostered by rules, ratings or points system to motivate participation, accountability mechanisms, credibility of a contributors review and facilitating structures,,information architecture facilitating the interdependencies)
1. Situatedness: Learning is embedded in rich cultural and social contexts-acquiring both implicit and explicit knowledge (web-based with common networked platform, anywhere, anytime access)
2. Learning is reflective and metacognitive, internalizing from social to the individual (environment should be portable , focus on tasks and projects, enabling learning through doing and reflection-in-action, focus on depth over breadth, thus enabling learners to analyze communicative “speech acts”)
3. Commonality: Learning is an identity formation or act of membership (environment should create a situation where there is continual interest and interaction through the tools embedded in the environment)
4. Learning is a social act/construction mediated between social beings through language, signs, genres and tools (environments should capitalize the social communicative and collaborative dimensions allowing mediated discourse and should have scaffolding structures which contain the genres and common expressions used by the community)
5. Interdependency: Learning is socially distributed between persons and tools (environments should create interdependencies between individuals where novices need more capable peers capitalizing on the zpd and should capitalize on the diverse experiences in the community)
6. Learning is demand driven-dependent on engagement in practice (environment should be made personalized to the learner with tasks and projects as embedded in the meaningful activity context , environment should be able to track the learner’s history, profile, and progress and tailor personalized strategies and content)
7. Infrastructure: Learning is facilitated by an activity-driven by appropriate mechanisms and accountability structures (environments should have structures and mechanisms set up to facilitate the activity (project) processes where learners’ are engaged in and environment should have the potential to radically alter traditional rules and process that were constrained by locality and time)
Thomas Reeves Model of Effective Dimensions of Interactive learning on the WWW (1998)
Parts of Model include: Cultural Habits of the Mind, Aptitiude and individual differences and origin of motivation (these 3 have arrows showing that they impact the next sequence) Opportunity to construct learning, Task ownership, Sense of Audience, collaborative support, teacher support, metacognitive support (These 6 have arrows showing they produce the following) Knowledge and skills, Robust mental models, and higher order outcomes. P. 4 Model
“Given an appropriate instructional design, two or more learners working together via the WWW might accomplish more than an isolated learner because the interactions among the learners may have more influence on their learning than the interactions between the learners and the web-based content. The proliferation of web-based tools for groupwork make this one of the potentially most powerful factors in this model of interactive learning on the web” quote on collaboration p.6
Roblyer & Wiencke,2003, Design and Use of a Rubric to Assess and Encourage Interactive Qualities in Distance Courses
“Distance learning theory and research holds that interaction is an essential characteristic of successful distance learning courses.” P. 77
Wagner(1994) stipulates 3 prerequisites for learner engagement:
1. Operatinal definition of interaction based on relevant theory and research; 2. Course designs that go beyond replicating face-to-face methods and infuse interaction in ways that take advantage of the mediation possible between learner and technology; 3. Empirical assessments of interaction and measurement of effects on achievement
Quote: “However, The needed articulation from theory and research to course design guidelines and impact research has not taken place. Course designers and instructors continue to report design guidelines primarily as “best practices” based on personal experiences. One reason for the lack of transfer from theory to practice in this area is the complex nature of interaction in distance courses and the difficulty of designing assessment and evaluation tools that build on a solid theoretical framework, yet provide sufficiently practical guidelines to make the concept of interaction measurable and useful to distance instructors and researchers alike.”
3 concepts that permeate interaction
1. Moore’s 1989 identification of types of interaction: learner-content, learner-learner, learner-instructor
2. interaction as message transmission (Shannon & Weaver, 1949; Wagner, 1994; Yacci, 2000)
3. interaction as social and psychological connections (Zhang & Fulford, 1994; Wolcott, 1996; Gilbert & Moore, 1998) “These authors share the view that a distance learning environment in which there is friendly and open exchange among students and instructor is likely to be more productive from a learning standpoint than an environment in which exchanges are formal and circumscribed.” P.80
Learning theories Factors influencing interaction: Wagner (1994) feedback, elaboration, learner control, self-regulation, motivation
Instructional theories Factors- (Gagne, Briggs, and Wagner, 1992) 9 different events of instruction could provide conditions “external to the learner to support internal processes of learning” (p. 188) instructional activities to accomplish each event would differ according to desired learning outcomes…more learner autonomy and collaborative relationships…
“First, it is apparent that Interaction is achieved through a complex interplay of social, instructional, and technological variables. Second, though influenced by all these factors, the aspect of interaction acknowledge to be most meaningful to instructors and designers is student engagement in the learning process. Third, Student engagement can be increased when learning structured around collaborative experiences.
Social interaction and instructional interaction are part of the course design.
Strategies to increase social rapport include: introductions at the beginning of the course, icebreakers, group-building strategies, brief bio exchanges, sharing photos, small group discussion intermittent chats, emails, and bb postings of informal observations and information.
Activities designed to encourage, support, require interaction.
Small groups, collaborative learning designs “not only require students to interact, but also make frequent, meaningful interaction more manageable.
Instructor engagement includes consistent, timely, and useful feedback to students.
WisCom Model, Gunawardena et al, 2006.
Community Centered: common goal is wise community, reflective dialogue
Mentoring acts as mechanism for people supporting people.
Mentoring aids: matching inexperienced with experienced: instructors assistants peers, experts, Proteges paired with mentors with common interest..
Knowledge innovation purposeful creation sharing and preservation of meaningful
socially constructed ideas. Cyclic Process, but unfolds in 4 phases: Create, record, Access, Enable—through interaction, archives, retrival, making connections between concepts
This is a 5 step design:
1.Learning challenge
2.Initial exploration
3.Resources
4.Reflection
5.Preservation
Monday, November 17, 2008
Thursday, November 13, 2008
Phases of The Process
Aprille's thinking:
Analyze-Establish Learners' and instructors' needs, as well as course requirements.
Design- create an initial strategy for course development
Develop- development of prototype for course
Implement-Implement the prototype as a pre-launch review
Incorporate changes based on pre-launch review
Execute-Execute necessary revisions and then Launch the course
Evaluate-Conduct Summative Evaluation and revise the next iteration of the course.
In Designing and Developing Prototype Provide:
1. Authentic Context
2. Authentic Activities
3. Access to expert performances and modeling of processes
4. Allow for Multiple Roles & Perspectives
5. Allow for Collaborative construction of knowledge
6. Allow for reflection to enable abstractions to be formed
7. Allow for articulation to enable tacit knowledge to be made explicit
8. Allow for coaching and scaffolding at critical time
9. Allow Authentic Assessment of learning within the tasks
Analyze-Establish Learners' and instructors' needs, as well as course requirements.
Design- create an initial strategy for course development
Develop- development of prototype for course
Implement-Implement the prototype as a pre-launch review
Incorporate changes based on pre-launch review
Execute-Execute necessary revisions and then Launch the course
Evaluate-Conduct Summative Evaluation and revise the next iteration of the course.
In Designing and Developing Prototype Provide:
1. Authentic Context
2. Authentic Activities
3. Access to expert performances and modeling of processes
4. Allow for Multiple Roles & Perspectives
5. Allow for Collaborative construction of knowledge
6. Allow for reflection to enable abstractions to be formed
7. Allow for articulation to enable tacit knowledge to be made explicit
8. Allow for coaching and scaffolding at critical time
9. Allow Authentic Assessment of learning within the tasks
Thursday, October 30, 2008
Steps Towards Design Process
In getting started, I will establish a procedure for meeting with the client. In that initial meeting we will need to discuss project/course goals. I must establish a list of questions that should be used in the initial client meeting. Course objectives, time line constraints, and available resources should be covered in the questions. Also, questions should cover project contributors, such as subject matter experts. Also, questions should include an assessment of organizational/course needs and learner needs. Perhaps developing a template or two that could be used for a variety of contexts would be helpful. The look and feel of the learning environment should be established in meeting with the client. In developing the course within the framework of CSCL, multimedia needs and technical issues must be considered. Will there be Compliance issues such as SCORM/AICC? What form of assessment and evaluation will be included?
Monday, October 27, 2008
Knowledge Building and Discourse
Knowledge Building and Discourse
Based on the work of Scardamalia and Bereiter (2006), “Sustained knowledge advancement is seen as essential for social progress of all kinds and for the solution of societal problems. From this standpoint the fundamental task of education is to enculturate youth into this knowledge-creating civilization and to help them find a place in it” (p. 97). Knowledge Building allows for discourse, negotiation and sharing of ideas: “Idea improvement is an explicit principle, something that guides the efforts of students and teachers rather than something that remains implicit in inquiry and learning activities” (Scardamalia, 2002, p. 77). Knowledge Building also provides opportunities for the construction and development of knowledge artifacts. Artifacts are shaped throughout the learning process and include artifacts produced by use of cognitive tools such as plans, graphs, concept maps, and models (Quintana et al, 2006). Knowledge building is centered in pedagogical practice (authentic activity, project-based learning, situated cognition, etc). Knowledge Building requires keeping a persistent record of discourse and providing common spaces for group members to share (Scardamalia & Bereiter, 2006). For example, communities of practice and/or communities of learners require common space for members and establish that group size should be small. Scaffolding and supports should be designed for a variety of perspectives (small groups' preferences as well as individual learning preferences). Activities should reinforce the transforming personal perspective to group perspective:
In effective collaborative knowledge building, the group must engage in thinking together about a problem or task and produce a knowledge artifact such as a verbal problem clarification, a textual solution proposal, or a more developed theoretical inscription that integrates their different perspectives on the topic and represents a shared group result that they have negotiated (Stahl, 2006, p. 3).
Such activities support interactions and enable the co-creation of knowledge and the development of knowledge artifacts.
Based on the work of Scardamalia and Bereiter (2006), “Sustained knowledge advancement is seen as essential for social progress of all kinds and for the solution of societal problems. From this standpoint the fundamental task of education is to enculturate youth into this knowledge-creating civilization and to help them find a place in it” (p. 97). Knowledge Building allows for discourse, negotiation and sharing of ideas: “Idea improvement is an explicit principle, something that guides the efforts of students and teachers rather than something that remains implicit in inquiry and learning activities” (Scardamalia, 2002, p. 77). Knowledge Building also provides opportunities for the construction and development of knowledge artifacts. Artifacts are shaped throughout the learning process and include artifacts produced by use of cognitive tools such as plans, graphs, concept maps, and models (Quintana et al, 2006). Knowledge building is centered in pedagogical practice (authentic activity, project-based learning, situated cognition, etc). Knowledge Building requires keeping a persistent record of discourse and providing common spaces for group members to share (Scardamalia & Bereiter, 2006). For example, communities of practice and/or communities of learners require common space for members and establish that group size should be small. Scaffolding and supports should be designed for a variety of perspectives (small groups' preferences as well as individual learning preferences). Activities should reinforce the transforming personal perspective to group perspective:
In effective collaborative knowledge building, the group must engage in thinking together about a problem or task and produce a knowledge artifact such as a verbal problem clarification, a textual solution proposal, or a more developed theoretical inscription that integrates their different perspectives on the topic and represents a shared group result that they have negotiated (Stahl, 2006, p. 3).
Such activities support interactions and enable the co-creation of knowledge and the development of knowledge artifacts.
Project based Learning
Project-based Learning
Studies indicate that most students are bored in school (Csikszentmihalyi, Rathunde, & Whalen, 1993). When students are not engaged, boredom usually interrupts focus; therefore, students are less likely to learn (Blumenfeld et al, 1991). Learning sciences research suggests that project-based learning, a form of situated learning, offers a potential solution to the problem of boredom in school. Students are more engaged and less likely to be bored (Krajcik & Blumenfeld, 2006). Students learn by doing and applying ideas through real-world activities. The 5 key features of project-based learning include:
1. Instruction Starts with a driving question, a problem to be solved;
2. Students explore the driving question by participating in authentic, situated- inquiry. As students explore the question, they develop an understanding of the discipline and also how to apply their understanding;
3. Students, teachers, and community members engage in collaborative activities to find answers to the question;
4. During the inquiry process, students are scaffolded with learning technologies that allow them to perform activities normally beyond their individual ability; 5.Students create a set of products to address the needs of the question. These products are shared artifacts that represent the learning of the class (Blumenfeld et al, 1991; Krajcik, et al., 1994; Krajcik, Czerniak, & Berger, 2002).
The theoretical background of project-based learning includes active construction, situated learning, social interactions and cognitive tools.
Learning sciences research indicates deep understanding occurs when learners actively construct meaning based on their experiences and interactions. Situated learning requires that learning take place in real-world, authentic context. For example, in science, when students design their own investigations to answer a question that is important to them or to their community, they discover value in science and also develop a deeper understanding of how science can be applied to solve real-world problems. Social interaction plays a key role in learning; therefore, the best learning results when students, teachers and subject matter experts from a community work together in a situated activity to construct shared solutions to problems as well as to expand understandings of underlying principles. Deeper comprehension is developed through sharing, applying and debating ideas with others. This process of back and forth interaction creates a community of learners. The use of cognitive tools amplifies and expands what students are able to learn (Krajcik & Blumenfeld, 2006) . Learning technologies can support students in accessing and collecting a range of information; provide tools for visualizing complex, abstract ideas; allow for distance collaboration; assist in planning, building and testing models; and allow for the development of multimedia knowledge artifacts that can be shared globally.
Project-based learning reinforces an awareness that there may be more than one way to interpret data and more than one way to solve a problem. Driving questions guide instruction and are meaningful and important to learners. The driving question should be a tool for organizing and directing the activities of the project, as well as provide an authentic context in which students can establish and explore learning goals. Continuity and coherence are instilled in the project with the development of quality driving questions. Features of driving questions include the following attributes:
1. Feasible. Students can design and perform an investigation to answer the question;
2. Worthwhile. Question contains rich science content that aligns with national and state standards and relates to real-world science;
3. Contextualized. Question is real-world and important;
4. Relevant. Question is meaningful, interesting and exciting to learners; and
5. Ethical. Question does no harm to individuals, organizations or the environment (Krajcik et al, 2002).
Studies indicate that most students are bored in school (Csikszentmihalyi, Rathunde, & Whalen, 1993). When students are not engaged, boredom usually interrupts focus; therefore, students are less likely to learn (Blumenfeld et al, 1991). Learning sciences research suggests that project-based learning, a form of situated learning, offers a potential solution to the problem of boredom in school. Students are more engaged and less likely to be bored (Krajcik & Blumenfeld, 2006). Students learn by doing and applying ideas through real-world activities. The 5 key features of project-based learning include:
1. Instruction Starts with a driving question, a problem to be solved;
2. Students explore the driving question by participating in authentic, situated- inquiry. As students explore the question, they develop an understanding of the discipline and also how to apply their understanding;
3. Students, teachers, and community members engage in collaborative activities to find answers to the question;
4. During the inquiry process, students are scaffolded with learning technologies that allow them to perform activities normally beyond their individual ability; 5.Students create a set of products to address the needs of the question. These products are shared artifacts that represent the learning of the class (Blumenfeld et al, 1991; Krajcik, et al., 1994; Krajcik, Czerniak, & Berger, 2002).
The theoretical background of project-based learning includes active construction, situated learning, social interactions and cognitive tools.
Learning sciences research indicates deep understanding occurs when learners actively construct meaning based on their experiences and interactions. Situated learning requires that learning take place in real-world, authentic context. For example, in science, when students design their own investigations to answer a question that is important to them or to their community, they discover value in science and also develop a deeper understanding of how science can be applied to solve real-world problems. Social interaction plays a key role in learning; therefore, the best learning results when students, teachers and subject matter experts from a community work together in a situated activity to construct shared solutions to problems as well as to expand understandings of underlying principles. Deeper comprehension is developed through sharing, applying and debating ideas with others. This process of back and forth interaction creates a community of learners. The use of cognitive tools amplifies and expands what students are able to learn (Krajcik & Blumenfeld, 2006) . Learning technologies can support students in accessing and collecting a range of information; provide tools for visualizing complex, abstract ideas; allow for distance collaboration; assist in planning, building and testing models; and allow for the development of multimedia knowledge artifacts that can be shared globally.
Project-based learning reinforces an awareness that there may be more than one way to interpret data and more than one way to solve a problem. Driving questions guide instruction and are meaningful and important to learners. The driving question should be a tool for organizing and directing the activities of the project, as well as provide an authentic context in which students can establish and explore learning goals. Continuity and coherence are instilled in the project with the development of quality driving questions. Features of driving questions include the following attributes:
1. Feasible. Students can design and perform an investigation to answer the question;
2. Worthwhile. Question contains rich science content that aligns with national and state standards and relates to real-world science;
3. Contextualized. Question is real-world and important;
4. Relevant. Question is meaningful, interesting and exciting to learners; and
5. Ethical. Question does no harm to individuals, organizations or the environment (Krajcik et al, 2002).
notes related to collaboration
Should provide opportunities for reflection.
1. Build instruction based upon students' prior knowledge and community knowledge advancement. 2. Provide scaffolding that is tailored to the learners needs in achieving the goals of the moment. 3. Scaffolding is added gradually, modified, and removed based on the needs of the learner. 4. Allow opportunities for students to Externalize and Articulate their unformed and still developing understanding of concepts. Discourse becomes a means for collaborative problem solving. As understanding becomes more developed, articulation and externalization act as reinforces for learning in an interative knowledge building process where knowledge develops as ideas improvement.
5. Provide opportunities for reflection on cognitive activities or metacognition. Give students time to reflect on the process of learning and on the knowledge they are acquiring. Understanding is emergent 6. Build instruction from the concrete to the abstract.
Learning groups should be unstructured and students should be the facilitators. The learning environment of the group should be informal and roles of the participants should be emergent. Tasks are undefined for individual group members. Assessment should be in the form of group assessment as shared meaning and knowledge artifacts are produced.
1. Build instruction based upon students' prior knowledge and community knowledge advancement. 2. Provide scaffolding that is tailored to the learners needs in achieving the goals of the moment. 3. Scaffolding is added gradually, modified, and removed based on the needs of the learner. 4. Allow opportunities for students to Externalize and Articulate their unformed and still developing understanding of concepts. Discourse becomes a means for collaborative problem solving. As understanding becomes more developed, articulation and externalization act as reinforces for learning in an interative knowledge building process where knowledge develops as ideas improvement.
5. Provide opportunities for reflection on cognitive activities or metacognition. Give students time to reflect on the process of learning and on the knowledge they are acquiring. Understanding is emergent 6. Build instruction from the concrete to the abstract.
Learning groups should be unstructured and students should be the facilitators. The learning environment of the group should be informal and roles of the participants should be emergent. Tasks are undefined for individual group members. Assessment should be in the form of group assessment as shared meaning and knowledge artifacts are produced.
Proposal for CSCL Research Project
Computer-supported collaborative learning (CSCL) has been defined by Koschmann (1996) as “a field of study centrally concerned with meaning and the practices of meaning-making in the context of joint activity, and the ways in which these practices are mediated though designed artifacts” (p. 2). CSCL is designed to analyze how the combination of computers/technology and collaborative activities enhance learning. The purpose of this paper is to describe a study that would investigate the use of collaborative activities in a project-based learning environment to move group participants from novice to experts within the learning community through the use of appropriate scaffolding and to enhance female self-efficacy related to science.
According to a 2004 study, “While women make up nearly half of the U.S. workforce, they make up only 26 percent of the science and engineering workforce” (U.S. Department of Education, 2007, p. 3). Gender differences in perceptions about academic abilities in relation to math and science are specifically evidenced in middle school aged children:
In general, researchers have found that girls and women have less confidence in their math abilities than males do and that from early adolescence girls show less interest in math or science careers. This gender difference is interesting, and somewhat puzzling, given that males and females generally enroll in similar courses and display similar abilities (at least as measured by course grades). In other words, girls, particularly as they move out of elementary school and into middle and high school and beyond, often underestimate their abilities in mathematics and science (Institute of Education Sciences-U.S. Department of Education, 2007, p. 6).
Because of the emphasis on increasing female self-efficacy in science, female scientists will be recruited as participants in the collaborative work. According to the study conducted by the Institute of Education Science, one strategy for addressing female self-efficacy related to science is the use of female role models:
Teachers should expose girls to female role models who have achieved in math
or science in order to promote positive beliefs regarding women’s abilities in
math and science. Even in elementary school, girls are aware of the stereotype
that men are better in math and science than women are. Exposing girls to
female role models (e.g., through biographies, guest speakers, or tutoring by
older female students) can invalidate these stereotypes (Institute of Education Sciences-U.S. Department of Education, 2007, p. 5).
This study will address girls’ self-efficacy related to science and also extend our understanding of the learning process of participants through the use of scaffolding in a CSCL environment for adolescent boys and girls.
Studies indicate most students are bored in school (Csikszentmihalyi, Rathunde, & Whalen, 1993). Valuing course objectives and being engaged in course activities, as well as believing one has the ability to be successful in the course, are critical factors in learner motivation. “Beliefs of personal efficacy constitute the key factor of human agency. If people believe they have no power to produce results, they will not attempt to make things happen” (Bandura, 1977, p. 3). When students are not engaged and are bored in class, they are less likely to increase their knowledge (Blumenfeld et al, 1991). An inquiry learning culture produces engaged and active learning, as well as more enhanced production of explanations in both males and females (Prinsen et al, 2007). Learning sciences research suggests that the inquiry learning culture of project-based learning may offer a potential solution to the problem of boredom in school.
The theoretical background of project-based learning includes active construction, situated learning, social interactions and cognitive tools. Project based learning increases student engagement; therefore, students are less likely to be bored. Students learn by doing and applying ideas through real-world activities. The five key features of project-based learning include the following:
1. Instruction begins with a driving question and a problem to be solved.
2. Students explore the driving question by participating in authentic, situated- inquiry. As students explore the question, they develop an understanding of the discipline and also how to apply their understanding.
3. Students, teachers, and community members engage in collaborative activities to find answers to the question.
4. During the inquiry process, students are scaffolded with learning technologies that allow them to perform activities normally beyond their individual ability.
5. Students create a set of products to address the needs of the question. These products are shared artifacts that represent the learning of the class (Blumenfeld et al, 1991; Krajcik, et al., 1994; Krajcik, Czerniak, & Berger, 2002).
Learning sciences research shows that deep understanding occurs when learners actively construct meaning based on their experiences and interactions in the world. Situated learning requires that learning take place in real-world, authentic context. For example, in science, when students design their own investigation to answer a question that is important to them or to their community, they see the value of science and also see how science can be applied to solve real-world problems. Social interaction also plays a key role in learning. The best learning results when students, teachers and subject matter experts from the community work together in a situated activity to construct shared solutions to problems and new understandings of underlying principles. Deeper understanding is developed through sharing, applying and debating ideas with others and this process of back and forth interaction creates a community of learners (Vygotsky, 1978; Lave, 1991; Lave & Wenger, 1991; Scardamalia & Bereiter, 1996). Also, the use of cognitive tools can amplify and expand what students are able to learn. Learning technologies can support students in accessing and collecting a range of information; provide tools for visualizing complex, abstract ideas; allow for distance collaboration; assist in planning, building and testing models; and allow for the development of multimedia knowledge artifacts that can be shared globally. Using the principles of group interaction to form collaborative communities to construct knowledge (Vygotsky, 1978; Lave, 1991; Lave & Wenger, 1991; Scardamalia & Bereiter, 1996), the learning activities will occur in an authentic group context, be project based, and include activities with an authentic focus (Kearsley & Shneiderman, 1999). According to Vygotsky (1978) classroom social interactions should be arranged in such a way that weaker students will be “scaffolded” by stronger students. Vygotsky situates learning in the zone of proximal development which he posits is the “distance between the actual developmental level as determined by independent problem solving and the level of potential development as determined through problem solving under adult guidance or in collaboration with more capable peers” (p. 86).
Project-based learning creates a setting for the discovery that there may be more than one technique for interpreting data and more than one approach for solving a problem. “Individuals generate personal beliefs from their own perspectives, but they do so on the basis of sociocultural knowledge, shared language, and external representations. Further, these beliefs become knowledge through social interaction, communication, discussion, clarification, and negotiation. Knowledge is a socially mediated product” (Stahl, 2006, p. 205). Driving questions guide instruction and should be meaningful and important to learners. The driving questions are tools for organizing and directing the activities of the project. The driving questions provide an authentic context in which students will be able to establish and explore learning goals, as well as provide continuity and coherence to the project. Specific features of driving questions include:
1. The question is feasible; therefore, students can design and perform investigations to answer the question. 2. The question is worthwhile; therefore, appropriate responses should contain rich science content that aligns with national and state standards and relates to real-world science. 3. The question is contextualized in that the question is an important, real-world question. 4. The question is meaningful, interesting and exciting to learners. 5. The question is ethical in that in addressing the question, students will do no harm to individuals, organizations or the environment (Krajcik et al, 2002).
Historically, in the United States, females are less interested in pursuing science than males: “by eighth grade, boys are twice as interested in STEM (science, technology, engineering, math) careers as girls are” (LiveScience, 2007, http://www.livescience.com/health/070827_girls_math.html). Therefore, this study will include scaffolding to address girls’ self-efficacy related to science. Also, the study will extend our understanding of the importance of scaffolding in the learning process of participants in a CSCL environment. This project, grounded in computer-supported collaborative learning, focuses on meaning making through the combined use of computers and collaboration:
Small group processes of collaborative knowledge building can construct meanings of symbolic and physical artifacts like words, gestures, tools, or media. The meanings of these meaningful artifacts are group accomplishments resulting from social interaction and are not attributable to individual participants. The artifacts retain intersubjective meaning, which can be learned or renegotiated later. The meaningful artifacts are interpreted by individuals from within the current situation or activity (Stahl, 2006, p.346).
Because research indicates that females prefer interactive and collaborative uses of technology, CSCL is an appropriate environment for this study: “Girls appear to be particularly interested in interactive technology that encourages communication, collaborative learning, the solving of complex social dilemmas, intensive writing and flexible problem solving (AAUW Educational Foundation Research 2000)” (Prinsen et al, 2007, p. 394). This study will include opportunities for students, teachers and female members of the local science community to collaborate with one another to investigate group-developed driving questions. The community of learners will address questions through dialogue and written discourse, collect data, discuss findings, and form group conclusions. They will create a presentation or other artifact to illustrate their understanding. Also, because the rules for these collaborative activities are explicitly expressed, girls will be more confident in participating in the project (Prinsen et al, 2007).
Scaffolding students is critical to the success of any project-based learning scenario. Krajcik and Blumenfeld (2006) are precise in their strategies for scaffolding:
Our scaffolding strategies include making the rationale behind explanations explicit, modeling how to construct explanations, providing students with opportunities to engage in explanation construction, and writing scaffoding comments on students’ investigation sheets (p. 324).
This study will incorporate the above cited techniques for scaffolding within the project-based learning environment.
According to a 2004 study, “While women make up nearly half of the U.S. workforce, they make up only 26 percent of the science and engineering workforce” (U.S. Department of Education, 2007, p. 3). Gender differences in perceptions about academic abilities in relation to math and science are specifically evidenced in middle school aged children:
In general, researchers have found that girls and women have less confidence in their math abilities than males do and that from early adolescence girls show less interest in math or science careers. This gender difference is interesting, and somewhat puzzling, given that males and females generally enroll in similar courses and display similar abilities (at least as measured by course grades). In other words, girls, particularly as they move out of elementary school and into middle and high school and beyond, often underestimate their abilities in mathematics and science (Institute of Education Sciences-U.S. Department of Education, 2007, p. 6).
Because of the emphasis on increasing female self-efficacy in science, female scientists will be recruited as participants in the collaborative work. According to the study conducted by the Institute of Education Science, one strategy for addressing female self-efficacy related to science is the use of female role models:
Teachers should expose girls to female role models who have achieved in math
or science in order to promote positive beliefs regarding women’s abilities in
math and science. Even in elementary school, girls are aware of the stereotype
that men are better in math and science than women are. Exposing girls to
female role models (e.g., through biographies, guest speakers, or tutoring by
older female students) can invalidate these stereotypes (Institute of Education Sciences-U.S. Department of Education, 2007, p. 5).
This study will address girls’ self-efficacy related to science and also extend our understanding of the learning process of participants through the use of scaffolding in a CSCL environment for adolescent boys and girls.
Studies indicate most students are bored in school (Csikszentmihalyi, Rathunde, & Whalen, 1993). Valuing course objectives and being engaged in course activities, as well as believing one has the ability to be successful in the course, are critical factors in learner motivation. “Beliefs of personal efficacy constitute the key factor of human agency. If people believe they have no power to produce results, they will not attempt to make things happen” (Bandura, 1977, p. 3). When students are not engaged and are bored in class, they are less likely to increase their knowledge (Blumenfeld et al, 1991). An inquiry learning culture produces engaged and active learning, as well as more enhanced production of explanations in both males and females (Prinsen et al, 2007). Learning sciences research suggests that the inquiry learning culture of project-based learning may offer a potential solution to the problem of boredom in school.
The theoretical background of project-based learning includes active construction, situated learning, social interactions and cognitive tools. Project based learning increases student engagement; therefore, students are less likely to be bored. Students learn by doing and applying ideas through real-world activities. The five key features of project-based learning include the following:
1. Instruction begins with a driving question and a problem to be solved.
2. Students explore the driving question by participating in authentic, situated- inquiry. As students explore the question, they develop an understanding of the discipline and also how to apply their understanding.
3. Students, teachers, and community members engage in collaborative activities to find answers to the question.
4. During the inquiry process, students are scaffolded with learning technologies that allow them to perform activities normally beyond their individual ability.
5. Students create a set of products to address the needs of the question. These products are shared artifacts that represent the learning of the class (Blumenfeld et al, 1991; Krajcik, et al., 1994; Krajcik, Czerniak, & Berger, 2002).
Learning sciences research shows that deep understanding occurs when learners actively construct meaning based on their experiences and interactions in the world. Situated learning requires that learning take place in real-world, authentic context. For example, in science, when students design their own investigation to answer a question that is important to them or to their community, they see the value of science and also see how science can be applied to solve real-world problems. Social interaction also plays a key role in learning. The best learning results when students, teachers and subject matter experts from the community work together in a situated activity to construct shared solutions to problems and new understandings of underlying principles. Deeper understanding is developed through sharing, applying and debating ideas with others and this process of back and forth interaction creates a community of learners (Vygotsky, 1978; Lave, 1991; Lave & Wenger, 1991; Scardamalia & Bereiter, 1996). Also, the use of cognitive tools can amplify and expand what students are able to learn. Learning technologies can support students in accessing and collecting a range of information; provide tools for visualizing complex, abstract ideas; allow for distance collaboration; assist in planning, building and testing models; and allow for the development of multimedia knowledge artifacts that can be shared globally. Using the principles of group interaction to form collaborative communities to construct knowledge (Vygotsky, 1978; Lave, 1991; Lave & Wenger, 1991; Scardamalia & Bereiter, 1996), the learning activities will occur in an authentic group context, be project based, and include activities with an authentic focus (Kearsley & Shneiderman, 1999). According to Vygotsky (1978) classroom social interactions should be arranged in such a way that weaker students will be “scaffolded” by stronger students. Vygotsky situates learning in the zone of proximal development which he posits is the “distance between the actual developmental level as determined by independent problem solving and the level of potential development as determined through problem solving under adult guidance or in collaboration with more capable peers” (p. 86).
Project-based learning creates a setting for the discovery that there may be more than one technique for interpreting data and more than one approach for solving a problem. “Individuals generate personal beliefs from their own perspectives, but they do so on the basis of sociocultural knowledge, shared language, and external representations. Further, these beliefs become knowledge through social interaction, communication, discussion, clarification, and negotiation. Knowledge is a socially mediated product” (Stahl, 2006, p. 205). Driving questions guide instruction and should be meaningful and important to learners. The driving questions are tools for organizing and directing the activities of the project. The driving questions provide an authentic context in which students will be able to establish and explore learning goals, as well as provide continuity and coherence to the project. Specific features of driving questions include:
1. The question is feasible; therefore, students can design and perform investigations to answer the question. 2. The question is worthwhile; therefore, appropriate responses should contain rich science content that aligns with national and state standards and relates to real-world science. 3. The question is contextualized in that the question is an important, real-world question. 4. The question is meaningful, interesting and exciting to learners. 5. The question is ethical in that in addressing the question, students will do no harm to individuals, organizations or the environment (Krajcik et al, 2002).
Historically, in the United States, females are less interested in pursuing science than males: “by eighth grade, boys are twice as interested in STEM (science, technology, engineering, math) careers as girls are” (LiveScience, 2007, http://www.livescience.com/health/070827_girls_math.html). Therefore, this study will include scaffolding to address girls’ self-efficacy related to science. Also, the study will extend our understanding of the importance of scaffolding in the learning process of participants in a CSCL environment. This project, grounded in computer-supported collaborative learning, focuses on meaning making through the combined use of computers and collaboration:
Small group processes of collaborative knowledge building can construct meanings of symbolic and physical artifacts like words, gestures, tools, or media. The meanings of these meaningful artifacts are group accomplishments resulting from social interaction and are not attributable to individual participants. The artifacts retain intersubjective meaning, which can be learned or renegotiated later. The meaningful artifacts are interpreted by individuals from within the current situation or activity (Stahl, 2006, p.346).
Because research indicates that females prefer interactive and collaborative uses of technology, CSCL is an appropriate environment for this study: “Girls appear to be particularly interested in interactive technology that encourages communication, collaborative learning, the solving of complex social dilemmas, intensive writing and flexible problem solving (AAUW Educational Foundation Research 2000)” (Prinsen et al, 2007, p. 394). This study will include opportunities for students, teachers and female members of the local science community to collaborate with one another to investigate group-developed driving questions. The community of learners will address questions through dialogue and written discourse, collect data, discuss findings, and form group conclusions. They will create a presentation or other artifact to illustrate their understanding. Also, because the rules for these collaborative activities are explicitly expressed, girls will be more confident in participating in the project (Prinsen et al, 2007).
Scaffolding students is critical to the success of any project-based learning scenario. Krajcik and Blumenfeld (2006) are precise in their strategies for scaffolding:
Our scaffolding strategies include making the rationale behind explanations explicit, modeling how to construct explanations, providing students with opportunities to engage in explanation construction, and writing scaffoding comments on students’ investigation sheets (p. 324).
This study will incorporate the above cited techniques for scaffolding within the project-based learning environment.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
