Inquiry Based Learning and Second Life
3 likes1,530 views
This document discusses using Second Life to support inquiry based learning. It defines inquiry based learning as an approach where student inquiry drives the learning experience. It presents a framework for inquiry based learning that involves students investigating open-ended questions, applying research skills, and building new knowledge. The document describes how activities in Second Life can support different aspects of the inquiry process, such as exploring existing information, pursuing original lines of inquiry, and producing knowledge. However, it notes that Second Life has limitations for locating disciplinary information and may be challenging for novices.
Inquiry Based Learning and Second Life
- 1. Inquiry Based Learning and Second Life Sheila Webber Information School University of Sheffield December 2010
- 2. Introduction • This draws on a presentation given last month by Professor Philippa Levy and me. I have acknowledged her on slides she authored • Phil was Academic Director of the Centre for Inquiry Based Learning in the Arts and Social Sciences (a Centre for Teaching & Learning) and I was a CILASS Academic Fellow (small % buyout of my time) • CILASS funded the purchase & year 1 rent (2007/8) on our SL island
- 3. Structure • Identify how we view IBL • Present a framework of IBL for learners derived from longitudinal research study • Also have created version of this in 3D in SL • Identify how activities with first year students fit this framework • Discussion about what aspects of IBL can be supported/ pursued in SL
- 4. What is IBL? • A cluster of related pedagogies in which student inquiry or research drives the experience of learning and building knowledge ‘inquiry n: the action of seeking, especially (now always) for truth, knowledge or information concerning something; search, research, investigation, examination’ (COD) Philippa Levy
- 5. Designed around students engaging in a process of inquiry: they … • investigate questions & problems that often are open-ended • apply the principles and practices of scholarship or research in their academic or professional area • explore a knowledge-base actively, critically and creatively • participate in building new meaning and knowledge
- 6. http://www.shef.ac.uk/ibl for the ‘Sheffield Companion’ and other follow-up resources 6
- 7. students communicate students/tutors and share establish question, results of problem, theme their inquiry students reflect, discuss, students draw on their critique, analyse, existing knowledge and, conceptualise, with support, decide on synthesise, create, the direction and methods receive feedback of their inquiry students explore evidence, interrogate texts, conduct experiments etc, interacting with information via a range of sources Philippa Levy
- 8. 8 Modes of IBL Levy & Petrulis (2012) Philippa Levy
- 9. Planning IBL Students Learning outcomes Inquiry theme Inquiry process Tasks Assessments Information Spaces Technologies Tutoring Peer-to-peer Dissemination From: The Sheffield Companion to IBL
- 10. Transition and inquiry “Approaches to supporting transition are linked to improving preparedness for HE, easing integration into the university environment - both academically and socially - and encouraging the development of the independent learner.” (Whittaker, 2008: 3) “Curriculum design should have a greater focus on the interactive dimensions of learning and the social experience of students, for example working in small groups and more enquiry-based and project work. It should also provide a more challenging learning experience to encourage greater engagement and the development of independent learning and high-level critical skills.” (Whittaker, 2008: 8).
- 11. Selected IBL elements: Level 1 BSc Information Management Learning about interviewing, data Semester 1 analysis & research ethics Problem: Is the “Google Data collection and Webber gen” really info illiterate? analysis: interview on (2010) (Group work/Presentation) critical incident E-portfolio on IL W W e Bibliography on IM topic Report on IM e e Semester 2 e k k 1 Steps in Identify research question, Poster Support / Cox et al research carry out mini research session & supervision/ (2008) 1 process project, group work report guests 2 exercise E-portfolio NB does not cover all elements in teaching, learning & assessment! Sheila Webber, 2010
- 12. Use of key technologies • WebCT: repository for knowledge base, interim store for knowledge creation, crude research tool (discussion board), crude tool for research project management • Second Life: site for pursuing new questions, stimulus to question their own conceptions, object of research, starting to be repository for knowledge base • Web: site(s) of existing knowledge; tools for collecting data (e.g. surveymonkey)
- 13. • Facebook: (likely) informal tool for project management, host for survey instruments, object of research • Mobile phones & IM “Initially we simply handed out phone numbers and communicated via text messaging, with some use of instant messaging conversations…” (student blog 2008, talking about working on their assessed mini-research project)
- 14. Assignment Short lecture and briefing handout about Practice interviews interviewing in triads (interviewer, interviewee, observer) Lecture, exercises, readings on information behaviour, Handouts data collection, ethics Discussions WebCT Presentations module Practice interviews in triads in SL Student‟s Revised Assignment interview schedule FAQs etc Individual feedback Research /communication: email, interviews F2F, SL . in SL Email, IM etc used to communicate with interviewees Sheila Webber, 2010
- 16. „Identifying‟: Students explore a knowledge-base (KB) actively in response to questions, problems, scenarios or lines of inquiry framed by teachers (“what is the existing answer/response to this question?”) Muinjij native American island – Exploring: extent of KB in SL depends on discipline (& chance) – Information Literacy for SL needed Mansourian‟s (as for other modes) information visibility model – Presenting findings (whether found in SL or not) FSU Holocaust Sheila Webber, 2010
- 17. „Pursuing‟: Students explore a knowledge-base actively by pursuing their own questions, problems, scenarios or lines of inquiry (“what is the existing answer/response to my question?”) – Locating existing disciplinary information within SL is problematic – May be particularly challenging (even harder for novice to identify a feasible question) – Can still be environment for parts of the process Sheila Webber, 2010
- 18. „Producing‟: Students explore open questions, problems, scenarios or lines of inquiry, framed by teachers or others such as an external „client‟, in interaction with a knowledge-base (“how can I answer this open question?”) – Providing problems and questions for inquiry – Potential for joining research community (but mostly research students) – Environment for data collection – Tools to manipulate data (crude) – Analysing data through representation in SL? – Dissemination Sheila Webber, 2010
- 19. Structuring inquiry Students observing “model” structure, to reflect on/ discuss in relation to their own inquiry – 3D model of research steps in Second Life Students carrying out their own inquiry, but guided by a structure (i.e. they interact with and populate the structure) Sheila Webber, 2010
- 20. „Authoring‟: Students explore their own open questions, problems, scenarios or lines of inquiry, in interaction with a knowledge-base (“how can I answer my open question?”) – Again, discipline/specialism-specific in terms of whether could support students in identifying valid research questions/ problems – If students forming their own questions with significant use of SL, implies existing SL competence/ knowledge – Could be particularly useful at certain stages e.g. • Question formulation (engaging with SL research community) • Data collection (just as use Web 2.0 channels like Facebook) • Testing emerging results with international audience • Dissemination Sheila Webber, 2010
- 21. Concluding points • Framework as means of – thinking when and why SL can be valuable in IBL e.g. as part of blended learning – identifying areas for development – clarifying course design & approach to T, L & A • Thinking of students as researchers from level 1 – most research communities in SL focused around postgrad researchers (not unique to SL!) – however constructivist/ PBL/ IBL tendencies of SL educators world seem fertile ground for developing community Sheila Webber, 2010
- 22. Sheila Webber s.webber@shef.ac.uk Twitter & SL: Sheila Yoshikawa http://information-literacy.blogspot.com/ http://www.slideshare.net/sheilawebber/ Flickr: http://www.flickr.com/photos/23396182@N00/ Netvibes: http://www.netvibes.com/sheilawebber
- 23. References etc. • Centre for Inquiry Based Learning in the Arts and Social Sciences. (2008) Inquiry-based Learning: a conceptual framework. Sheffield: CILASS. http://www.shef.ac.uk/cilass/resources • Cox, A. et al. (2008) “Inquiry-based learning in the first-year Information Management curriculum.” Italics, 7 (1), 3-21 • Healey, M. & Jenkins, A. (2009). Developing Undergraduate research and Enquiry. York: Higher Education Academy. • Khan, P. and O´Rourke, K. (2005). “Understanding Enquiry-based Learning”, In: Barrett, T., Mac Labhrainn, I., Fallon, H. (eds), Handbook of Enquiry and Problem Based Learning. Galway: CELT. • Levy, P. & Petrulis, R. (2012). How do first-year students experience inquiry and research, and what are the implications for the practice of inquiry-based learning? Studies in Higher Education, 37(1). • Webber, S. (2010) “Investigating modes of student inquiry in Second Life as part of a blended approach.” International Journal of Virtual and Personal Learning Environments, 1 (3), 55-70. • Whittaker, R. (2008) Quality Enhancement Themes: The First Year Experience: Transition to and during the first year. Glasgow: QAA Scotland Sheila Webber, 2010