Learning activity patterns and pedagogical affordances
Download as PPT, PDF2 likes747 views
The document discusses the analysis of learning afforances in social software through pedagogical activity patterns, emphasizing the evolution from e-learning 1.0 to 2.0. It presents a soft ontology approach for selecting interoperable tools in personal learning environments and includes preliminary study results using the iCampfolio tool. The study involved 21 master's students evaluating their learning activity patterns and tool affordances.
Learning activity patterns and pedagogical affordances
- 1. Using Pedagogical Activity Patterns for Analysing the Learning Affordances of Social Software Mart Laanpere, Tallinn University, Estonia Kai Pata, University of Tartu, Estonia
- 2. Roadmap Web 2.0 (r)evolution in e-learning Activity theory revisited Activity patterns and e-tool affordances Soft ontology approach iCampFolio tool Preliminary results of an emprical study
- 3. Web 2.0 and e-learning E-learning 1.0 = using a LMS/VLE Web 2.0: from read-only to read-write Web E-learning 2.0: Personal Learning Environments Constructivist approach to learning environments Problem: how to select tools for PLEs and make them interoperable?
- 4. Activity theory revisited Engeström: Activity model Knotworking Action-Act-Operation Pattern languages: from architecture to computing Unified Activity Management framework by IBM Learning activity patterns: people, tools, objects, (roles, rules, events) Beyond IMS Learning Design
- 5. Affordances of e-tools Affordance: originally used by J.J. Gibson in environmental psychology, referring to salient functionalities of environment that lead to direct perception and action by an agent (hobbit door) Affordances in Human Computer Interaction design E-learning 2.0: inter-tool learning affordances, impact of community and academic culture Mapping activity patterns with learning affordances
- 6. Soft ontology approach Ontology: philosophy of being, existance “Hard” ontology in Web 2.0: taxonomies (OWL) Soft Ontology (SO) approach (Aviles, Kaipainen et al): each agent is able to rank, add and negotiate properties based on personal preferences Combining SO and MDS (Multi-Dimensional Scaling) Implementing soft ontology in e-inclusion and community building
- 8. Preliminary results of a study The study is part of FW6 IST project iCamp 21 MA students were asked to depict and analyse their learning activity patterns in Learning Technologies course Result was a heterogeneous set of mindmaps, heavily tool-oriented Then we asked them to evaluate with iCampFolio learning affordances of the Web 2.0 tools they used Work in progress: www.htk.tlu.ee/icamp , icamp.eu