Designing Meaningful Learning with Technologies in CrossActionSpaces

@isaja
Designing Meaningful Learning
with Technologies in
CrossActionSpaces
(Digital Didactical Designs)
Prof. Dr. Isa Jahnke
#NKUL18, Trondheim, Norway

@isaja
University of Missouri
Established 1839

@isaja
sislt.missouri.edu
Educational Technology –
fully online (1999 first online course)
Information Experience Lab, IELab:
User Experience Studies (UX)
ielab.missouri.edu
• Mobile microlearning apps
• Tool for strategic improvement
planning at schools
• Data visualization tools
• And more
Our Study Program:
Educational Technology for School Teachers

@isaja
Designing for meaningful learning
with technologyDavid Jonassen et al.
Digital Didactical
Designs

@isaja
My focus today
Schools
1:1 tablet classrooms
• in Denmark (2011-2014),
• in Sweden (Swedish Research Council grant, 2014-2016)
• in Finland (2014-2015)
• in Columbia, MO and Kansas City, MO (2016-2017)
Some of my other work related to higher and teacher education
• InPUD, 2001-2009, Computer Science student community
• Teacher Perception of Student Creativity, DaVinci, 2008-2011
• PeTEX, Remote Labs in Engineering Education, 2008-2011
• GoogleGlass project, Eva Marell-Olsson, 2015
• LeXMizzou, Learning Expeditions, games for learning, mobile apps
(IIFund 2016-2017)
Interdisciplinary: Social Sciences,
Teacher Education, Computer Science
Intercultural: Germany, Scandinavia, USA

@isaja
Who is using a device with Internet access?
Perfect!

@isaja
… change how we communicate, express, share,
receive information, collaborate, connect, network, …
Web-enabled Information Communication Technologies (ICTs)
change conditions and ways of human interaction…

@isaja
Human interaction  crossaction
I look at interaction as a form of communication
(N. Luhmann)
Cross-action
(example of conferences: participants using Twitter)
• humans connect to each others’ resources
• no clear difference between offline and online
• at different places at same time (Instagram, Twitter, …)
Photo: Ralf Jahnke-Wachholz
L. Floridi, OnLIFE
I. Jahnke, 2015

@isaja
Classroom
/ Course
Classroom /
Course
Digital classroom:
Formal and Informal Spaces
are merging
We go to school/higher education
because of
getting access to learning processes
Twitter, FB,
GroupApps, …
Interactive/Live
Broadcasting, …
Websites,
Blogs, …
and
more
Traditional classroom:
Separation
We went to school
because of
getting access to information
CrossActionSpaces

@isaja
=CrossActionSpaces
Physical classroom and web-enabled technologies
are merging into new spaces: co-expanded co-located
communication spaces
Jahnke, 2015 (book)
Routledge
How does this perspective help?

@isaja
What is ‘learning’ in
CrossActionSpaces?
Reflections = people interact,
make choices and decisions, and
can explain why they are doing
what they are doing, with ethical
considerations, and why this is
useful for their learning progress
• reflective doing of multiple crossactions
• reflective performance of crossactions
• reflective communication
“Critical thinking”
Alan November, Monday keynote

@isaja
What kind of learning is useful or
wishful in CrossActionSpaces?
When all information is out there, then what ?
Design for Meaningful learning with
technologies!
“From cheating to thinking”
Alan November, Monday keynote

@isaja
Design for Learning
Design is the act of giving a form to something.
Teaching is the ’design act’ of creating conditions for
learning.
More specific: it is the act of modelling
sociotechnical-pedagogical processes to
enhancing student learning
Bonderup-Dohn & Hansen, 2014
Jahnke, Norqvist, & Olsson, 2014
P1: “What does a teacher do nowadays?”
P2: “I do design learning…
I design student projects”

@isaja
Information
Delivery
Delivery of
Structured
Knowledge
Teacher
Student
Interaction
Facilitation
of Under-
standing
Supporting
Conceptual
Change and
Intellectual
Development
(behavior
change)
I II III IV V
From surface to deep learning
David Kember, 1997
•Topic oriented
•Problem solving
Deep, meaningful learning
•Teacher-centered
•Content-oriented
surface levels
David Kember, 1997
Johannes Wildt, 2012

@isaja
Meaningful learning with technology
(not from technology!)
Chapter 1 in Jonassen et al. (2003) “Solving Problems…” or
Howland et al. (2012) “Meaningful learning with technology”
Read pp.6-12

@isaja
Learning
activities
1. Authentic
2. Active
3. Constructive
4. Collaborative
5. Intentional

@isaja
Learning
activities
1. Authentic
2. Active
3. Constructive
4. Collaborative
5. Intentional
Teaching goals Visible & clear to your students?
Where can students read them?

@isaja
Learning
activities
1. Authentic
2. Active
3. Constructive
4. Collaborative
5. Intentional
Teaching goals
Visible & clear to your students?
Assessment as Iterative Process
Process-based/formative assessment?
When do you give feedback during the process?
Self-reflection/peers/teacher feedback?

@isaja
Learning
activities
1. Authentic
2. Active
3. Constructive
4. Collaborative
5. Intentional
Teaching goals
When do you give feedback within the process?
Self-assessment/peers/teacher feedback?
Roles/ Social
Relations
Students are active agents;
Teachers are not only experts but
learning-companions
(coach & empowerment, Prensky)

@isaja
Learning
activities
1. Authentic
2. Active
3. Constructive
4. Collaborative
5. Intentional
Teaching goals
When do you give feedback within the process?
Self-reflection/peers/teacher feedback?
Roles/ Social
Relations
Multiple roles for both students
and teachers
Web-enabled technologies
Not substitute for textbooks
Use technologies to produce something
(learning WITH not FROM)

@isaja
Learning
activities
Teaching goals
Roles/ Social
Relations
Web-enabled
technologies
When designing for meaningful learning
with technologies,
how do you know, your design is on the
’right’ (usable/useful) way?

@isaja
Roles/
Social
Relations
Learning
activities
Teaching goals
Outer circle=5
Inner circle=1
Technologies
Iterative Assessment
1
2
3
4
5

@isaja
Roles/
Social
Relations
Learning
activities
Teaching goals
Outer circle=5
Inner circle=1
Technologies
Assessment
1
2
3
4
5
From traditional classrooms (inner circle=1)
to
meaningful learner-centered practices (outer circle=5)
Digital Didactical Design (DDD)
for meaningful learning

@isaja
Use checklist 1
during your planning phase!
Access the checklist:
https://www.isa-jahnke.com/teaching

@isaja
Self-Reflect/evaluate your plan and
evaluate your actual practice!
Access to the self-assessment tool :
https://www.isa-jahnke.com/teaching

@isaja 2
DDD component Description of Coding scheme
Character of
Teaching goals/ILO and
intended/expected learning
outcomes: clear and visible?
TA/ILO
1= Not clear, not visible, no communication about teaching aims or learning intentions; focus on content
2=
3= Oral communication
4=
5= Teaching aims are clear and visible for students; intended learning outcomes in forms of development of skills; a source
is available where the students can go and read aims and objectives; at best, co-aims of students are included, students know
the criteria for learning progress (available right form the start).
Character of
Learning activities: towards
producing in engaged,
authentic, deep, open
settings?
LA
1= Students hear what teachers read from the textbook (surface learning only; e.g. remembering/ repetition of facts);
theoretical problems without connecting it to a real world problem
2=
3= In-between (…) – signs are: students are not so engaged, too much time for doing other things (e.g. playing cards
instead)
4=
5= Learning activities have a range from surface to deep learning: students produce something, engaged classrooms,
collaboration with peers; the activities are connected to the students world and include a real-world problem (e.g. everyday
experience); a real audience, students critically reflect on existing content (e.g. evaluating/creating/making), relate
knowledge to new knowledge; “organize and structure content into coherent whole” (Marten & Säljö, 1979), students are
engaged in producing, using the Internet or other sources beyond the physical school walls (signs of crossactions)
Character of assessment:
process-based?
ASM
1 = Feedback only at the end (summative feedback); character of the feedback is rather summative, not formative
2=
3= Feedback during the class (not only technical help) by coincidence; teacher only gives feedback when they ask for
support; passive support
4=
5= Criteria for a learning progress are visible for students from the beginning of the learning process; Feedback/feed-
forward at the end but mainly process-based assessment for learner’s development; a plan exists for how the teacher creates
pro-assessment (formative evaluation); a range of forms such as self-assessment; peer-reflective learning and feedback by
the teacher, e.g. students document learning (electronically; a map or text, etc.), the teacher asks them to go back and reflect.
Character of
Social relations: multiple
roles (not only consumers?)?
RO
1= Teacher is in the traditional role of the expert only; students are only seen as consumers (of solving closed questions and
tasks where only one correct answer is possible)
2=
3= Teacher is in 1-2 roles but spends majority of time as expert; teacher does not support student engagement to be active
4=
5= TEACHER plays different roles, e.g., expert, process mentor, learning-companion, coach, she fosters students to be in
different roles such as consumers, producers, collaborators, critical reflectors, etc.; teacher engages students; teacher
activates the students to change their roles; STUDENTS are in several roles, e.g. teachers for their peers, finding own
learning aims, creating own learning tasks, etc., teacher supports student reflection of roles and development of new roles.
Character of
Web-enabled technology/
tablets for crossactions?
TAB
1= Low extent, drill and practice; students work primarily alone when using technology, not related to the real world (e.g.,
technology is substitute for pen and paper)
2=
3= Medium extent (e.g., new technology is substitute for existing media; for example, tablet substitutes a laptop)
4=
5= High extent, multimodal, beyond writing texts, camera app, digital paintings, apps for collaborative creation; students
construct, share, create, publish their knowledge (to a real audience); students use online resources, actively select topics
beyond the limitations of even the best school library, signs of crossaction (using online world to solve a learning activity).

@isaja
Social Relations,
Multiple Roles:
From 1 to many &
From consumer to
producer
Learning
activities:
(From shallow to
deep learning)
Teaching goals:
From unclear to
clear and visible
Outer circle=5
Inner circle=1
From teacher-led classrooms (inner circle)
to
meaningful learner-centered practice (outer circle)
Mobile Technology
Integration:
From substitution to
multimodal
Process-based
Assessment:
From summative to formative

@isaja
Learning
activities
Process-based
Assessment
Web-based techn.
integration
Social Relations,
Roles
Teaching
goals
ID 11 Physics class

@isaja
ID 12 creating a digital pres
(geography)
Learning
activities
Process-based
Assessment
Web-based techn.
integration
Social Relations,
Roles
Teaching
goals

@isaja
Process-based
assessment
Fostering Social
Relations and
Multiply
Roles
Teaching aims
clear and visible
Learning
activities
(mainly
deep learning)
ID 12 creating a digital pres
(geography)
Web-based techn.
integration

@isaja
Process-based
assessment
Fostering Social
Relations and
Multiply
Roles
Teaching aims
clear and visible
Learning
activities
(mainly
deep learning)
ID 21 chronological order
Web-based techn.
integration

@isaja
ID 19 creating a timeline
Learning
activities
Process-based
Assessment
Social Relations,
Roles
Teaching
goals
Web-based techn.
integration

@isaja
Interpretation of different design levels
• Meaningful learning with technologies
Alignment of all elements towards learner-centric
meaningful learning with technologies
• Almost there!
Alignment but not as strong as in pattern the green model
• Benefit but some elements can be improved
design is on a good way toward meaningful learning but some
of the elements are not aligned to each other and need
improvement
• Potential
the potential is there, the plan is good but the actual practice
shows that design needs improvement
• Needs Re-Design
Designs in practice limited learning experiences, considering of
re-alignment!

@isaja
Cluster A) new teaching/learning practice toward
meaningful learning with technologies
Cluster B) on the way but stuck, needs some improvement
Cluster C) conflicting, trapped in traditional designs
In short:

@isaja
Students apply math into a new context
2nd grade
Transformation of existing “math stories”:
students got the task to create a new story
(comic app)

@isaja
Peer-Reflective
Learning
7th grade
Students write something
from their childhood and using
peer-reviews for
improving their writing skills
Facebook style
Fakebook
https://www.classtools.net/FB/home-page

@isaja
• 9th grade
• collaborative production of experiments
• Student groups create videos to review and improve the experiments,
and share it via YouTube channel with university students
• in Physics and Chemistry
Science, STEM

@isaja
Digital Humanities and Arts
8th grade
Students take photos of provocative paintings in a museum;
analyze and discuss what the audience would say
writing a collaborative report in small groups

@isaja
Language learning
• 6th grade
• Student read a book
• Groups create book trailers to showcase their interpretation of the book
(improving reading/interpretation skills)
• An booktrailer/movie evening with the community at the school
Example
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7RajJlbg5K0

@isaja
Students improve grammar skills by producing a
audio-recorded presentation (screencasting tool)
4th grade
Student groups explain
what a “verb” , “adjective” and “noun” is
• Students created storyboard incl. sound
and visualization
• App Explains Everything
• Small teams “outdoors”

@isaja
Students reflect on math strategies by producing
a voice recorded short presentation (screencast app)
3rd graders use Educreation for
applying different math strategies in small groups

@isaja
Students develop/improve reading and writing skills
by producing digital book reviews
• Preschool class: Students read a traditional book and write a book
review; they use Bookcreator to make a review (recording the own voice,
paintings and writings)

@isaja
What my students (teachers) developed for their students (examples)
ISLT9440 Spring 2018 class:
1. Student groups create digital posters to educate others about importance of trash recycling.
2. Students debate renewable and nonrenewable energy forms, Pros and Cons, plus own
statement, what they would do later in their own house (Debate Graph).
3. Students create collaboratively an interactive video to showcase a circuit workout routine.
4. Students develop an Animoto case to show the importance of digital citizenship.
5. Dental students produce a digital presentation with Google Slide to educate patients about
correct tooth-brushing.
6. First grade students use the online platform Toontastic, to activate their prior knowledge of
what elements help make a good story, and apply the knowledge to create their own stories.
7. Student teams create a digital Public Service Announcement (PSA) using EdPuzzle to explain
to others the importance of always wearing a seatbelt.
8. Student groups in seventh grade of social studies classes create an Adobe Spark video of
American Indian living in a specific region.
9. Students work collaboratively to develop an Arduino (engineering) lesson (AKA sketch
activity) for other students.
10. And more 

@isaja
DDD is useful for analyzing tablet classroom practices (research):
• Classroom observations reveal meaningful, semi-integrated and
shallow learning.
• A third of the classrooms achieve meaningful learning with mobile
devices.
DDD can help teachers/schools! (practice)
• Education/teachers can use the DDD scheme to evaluate
teaching/learning with tablets.
• DDD developed a new framework that may guide education in the
digital age.
Implications

@isaja
CrossActionSpaces
"require teachers to undertake more complex
reasoning than before in their planning and
practice" (Webb & Coxx, 2007)
Traditional teaching is conceptualized as a routine activity;
…it is turning into a design project
Teachers are learners at the workplace
(Goggins, Jahnke, & Wulf, 2013)
Implications

@isaja
trad. Lesson Design vs. Process Design
Element for organizing learning is
a) meeting place
b) regular meetings
Element for organizing learning is the
process that supports learners to achieve
learning goals (competencies)
What activities?
What resources?
What roles?
When, where?
Anders Norberg
• 2011, A time‐based blended learning model
• 2017, From blended learning to learning onlife:
ICTs, time and access in higher education

@isaja
Designing learning as a design project
Design the process!
**Do not** organize learning
around textbooks or meetings
points, but: design the process.
 Where the answer
is not known! (G.Fischer)
Students are pro-sumers and
co-designers.
Traditional course design:
Textbook driven
Content driven
Location/place-based driven
the answer is known
Students are consumers

@isaja
From traditional course-based learning
to meaningful learning expeditions
Learning expeditions stand for rather open-ended, problem-based
learning paths and processes which include aims-oriented learning to
master X, or explore and understand the implications of N, in which
the learning methods and instruments are very open,
that take place in CrossActionSpaces with reflecting peers where
process-based assessment (criteria and guided reflection) supports
the learning progress.
Jahnke, Norqvist, Olsson, 2014
Norberg & Jahnke, 2013
No straight-ahead process but loops, back and forth: detours!

@isaja
Technology Integration Matrix (UF, Florida)
Interactive Online Site! https://fcit.usf.edu/matrix/
Role of technology
“Technologies need to engage learners in
articulating/communication and representing
their understanding, not that of teachers.”
(p. 4).

@isaja
In the school of the future -
teacher teams
… work together across disciplines/subjects
(our study with Eva Mårell’s GoogleGlas with three different study programs)
… design for learning processes: learning by topic / not by subject
… enable meaningful learning with crossactionspaces
… don’t forget to ”humanizing the online space!”
”knowledge is not the destination
but an ongoing activity”
(Jonsson et al., 2003)

@isaja
The first principle of true teaching is that
Nothing can be taught
(Oscar Wilde)

@isaja
Tusen Takk!
Email me
jahnkei@missouri.edu
Website
http://www.isajahnke.net

@isaja
Three layers
affect (hinder or
support)
designs for
meaningful
learning
ICT ICT
ICT
ICT
Student
Teacher
Content
Teaching
goals
Pro.-Assessment/
Feedback
Learning
activities
Academic staff
development
Curriculum developmentInstitutional strategies
1 Didactical
Interactions
2 Digital
Didactical Design
3 Didactical
Conditions

@isaja
What teachers plan…
…does not always match with the actual practice
1. Remembering
2. Understanding
3. Applying
4. Analyzing
5. Evaluating
6. Creating
Bloom’s Taxonomy
Anderson & Krathwohl (2001)
Didactical Design IPM
- what it actually was
Didactical Design IPM
- what teacher wanted,
but not designed for
New 7. Collaborative
creativity

@isaja
Backward design
• Set learning goals, ”After course completion, students
are able to do ….”
• Create assignments/tasks
• Set criteria for ‘how to’ assess in iterative ways!
• Crucial: design for social relations/interactions
Wiggins & McTighe,
Understanding by Design

@isaja
Scale (5) (4-3-2) (1)
A. Teaching / learning goals visible… …not
B. Student activities meaningful… …surface
C. Process-based assessment formative… …summative
D. Technology integrated… …no/low extent
E. Relationships/Roles
(Humanizing Spaces) multiple roles… ...expert only
More than 100 tablet classrooms
DK, SWE, FIN, NO, USA (2012-2017)
Jahnke, Bergström, Mårell-Olsson, Häll & Kumar (2017).
In: Computers & Education (journal).
Design of Teaching and Learning Practice
Denmark: iPads for 7 public middle schools, 2,000 students, 180 teachers, all got iPads

@isaja
Empirical data
• Schools
– classroom observations, interviews with teachers,
– grades: preschool to K-11
– meetings with leaders and task force, qualitative data
• 3 online questionnaires: Sept 2012, March 2013, March 2014
– 18 items
– Limesurvey online
• Students’ perspectives on learning situations, Dec 2013
– photo-based group interviews (numbers of analyzed photos= 283)
• Teachers’ perspectives on learning, Aug 2014
– group interviews (one group per school)
S.Hyysalo, 2013 "not rely on
snap-shot studies, encompass
multiple times/loci where
technology is shaped"

@isaja
Some other things to think about
Empirical studies in Denmark
Teachers are jugglers of the elements;
complexity of teaching/learning design
increases through technical breakdowns
which affect teachers’ pedagogical plans
Isa Jahnke, Niels V. Svendsen, Simon K. Johannsen, & Pär-Ola Zander (2014). The Dream
About the Magic Silver Bullet – the Complexity of Designing for Tablet-Mediated Learning.
In: ACM GROUP 2014 conference proceedings.

Designing Meaningful Learning with Technologies in CrossActionSpaces

More Related Content

What's hot (20)

Similar to Designing Meaningful Learning with Technologies in CrossActionSpaces (20)

More from Isa Jahnke (17)

Recently uploaded (20)

Designing Meaningful Learning with Technologies in CrossActionSpaces

Editor's Notes