Rev2020 Remote Engineering conference
Download as PPTX, PDF0 likes191 views
The document discusses the evolution of teaching methodologies towards active and student-centered learning, emphasizing the integration of technology to enhance educational outcomes. It outlines various research projects and frameworks designed to assess and improve learning experiences in both physical and digital environments. The emphasis is on shifting teaching roles, creating engaging learning activities, and employing iterative assessment processes for continuous improvement in educational practices.
Rev2020 Remote Engineering conference
- 1. @isaja Active and Student- Centered Learning With Technologies Prof. Dr. Isa Jahnke @REV2020 in Athens, GA February 28th, 2020
- 3. @isaja Teaching • Traditional teaching (lectures, seminars) since 2001 • First blended/hybrid learning course: 2002 • First fully online learning course: 2015 (M.Sc online since 2003) Professor • TU Dortmund, Germany (2008-2011) – pre-tenure • Umea University, Sweden (2011-2015) – post-tenure • University of Columbia MO (USA) (2015-active) – post-tenure Research • Educational researcher: Focus on Learning Technologies • Interdisciplinary Ph.D. in Informatics and Social Science • STEM / Engineering Education researcher
- 4. @isaja Higher education • InPUD, technology-embraced informal-in-formal learning (Germany, NRW grant: 2001-2004; 2005-2009) (Jahnke, 2012) • DaVINCI, creativity in higher education (BMBF grant, 2008-2011) (Jahnke, Haertel, & Wildt, 2017) • PeTEX, Remote labs in engineering education (EU grant, 2008-2011) (Jahnke et al., 2011; Terkowsky et at., 2012) • AR / GoogleGlass project, dentistry education, Eva Marell-Olsson (Marell-Olsson, Meitoft, & Jahnke 2019) • LeXMizzou, AR-enhanced located-based games for learning (app) (Mizzou IIFund 2016-2017) (Ringbauer et al., 2016) Middle schools • 1:1 Tablet classrooms in DK, SWE, FIN, and MO (Swedish Research Council grant, 2014-2016) (Jahnke et al., 2017) User eXperience / Usability (my ielab.Missouri.edu) • NSF Cybersecurity, sociotechnical systems, Honestbroker/KBCommons (2018-2020) • Alert-System Implementation in an Elderly Care Facility, C.of Engineering (2019-2020) • Mobile-Microlearning with School of Journalism (2017-2019) • Socio-technical-pedagogical heuristics for technology-enhanced learning (2018-2019) Learning technologies – research projects (selection)
- 5. @isaja Now what? We can design for learning…
- 6. @isaja … they change how we communicate, express, share, receive information, collaborate, connect, network, learn … Web-enabled technologies or Information Communication Technologies (ICTs) change conditions and ways of human interaction… We are living in CrossActionSpaces …
- 7. @isaja Classroom / Course Classroom / Course Digital-enhanced classroom: Physical and online spaces are merging We go to college/university because of getting access to learning processes Twitter, FB, GroupApps, … Interactive/Live Broadcasting, … Websites, Blogs, … and more Traditional classroom: Separation We went to college/univ. because of getting access to information CrossActionSpaces Published in: Jahnke (2015)
- 8. @isaja Physical, online spaces, and web-enabled technologies are merging into new spaces where human action happens: co-expanded co-located communication and interaction spaces Jahnke, 2015 Routledge CrossActionSpaces
- 9. @isaja What kind of learning in CrossActionSpaces? Artist: Ralf Jahnke-Wachholz … with active, student centered learning strategies… Shift from teacher thinking onto student thinking … … where the answer is not known.
- 10. @isaja Active Learning increases positive student learning outcomes and student performance Why active learning? What is active Learning? Freeman et al., 2014 Chi, 2009: Active-Constructive-Interactive Hodges, L.C. (2018). Contemporary issues in group learning in undergraduate science classrooms: A perspective from student engagement. CBE-Life Sciences Education, 17(2), es3. https://www.lifescied.org/doi/full/10.1187/cbe.17-11-0239 Activity-based model of instruction Students don’t learn because the instructor does some activity but students learn through their own activity
- 11. @isaja Passive Active, student centeredActive, teacher centered Lecture Lecture with iClicker Students produce artifacts Higher order thinking skills, e.g., analyzing, creating What course design does support active student centered learning? Active and student centered learning Examples Lower order thinking skills, e.g., recall, understanding Skills learned
- 12. @isaja Active learning strategy (one of many): Meaningful learning Howland, Jonassen, & Marra, 2012 New book: “Meaningful Online Learning” 2018
- 13. @isaja Active Learning with technology (not: learning from technology) Jonassen, 1996 Learning from technologies Learning about technologies Learning with technologies Drill and practice, tutorials, memorizing (passive learning) Computer literacy Active learning, higher order learning skills • Learner has no input into the process, • students are controlled by the technology • Learning about how to use the technology, • to understand how the computer works • Intellectual partnership, • computer enhances learner thinking /learning Computer program is programmed to teach the student, to direct activities toward the acquisition of prespecified knowledge or skills Memorizing parts of facts about technologies is relatively meaningless; better would be to understanding results from using not memorizing Technology use to extend cognitive functioning during learning and engage learners in cognitive operations while constructing knowledge that they would not otherwise been capable of. Video-recorded lecture Students use technology as mindtools
- 14. @isaja A course (re)-design framework for active student-centered learning: Digital Didactical Design - DDD Published in: e.g., Jahnke (2015), Jahnke et al. (2017)
- 15. @isaja Teaching goals Visible & clear to your students? Where can students read them?
- 16. @isaja Learning activities • Authentic • Active • Constructive • Collaborative • Intentional Teaching goals
- 17. @isaja Learning activities Teaching goals Assessment as iterative process Process-based/formative assessment? When do you give feedback during the process? Self-reflection/peers/teacher feedback?
- 18. @isaja Learning activities Teaching goals Roles / social relations (human interaction) Students are active agents, co-designer; Instructors are not only experts but learning-companions (coach & empowerment, Prensky) Assessment as iterative process
- 19. @isaja Learning activities Teaching goals Assessment as iterative process Web-enabled technologies Not substitute for textbooks Use technologies to produce something (learning WITH not FROM) Roles / social relations (human interaction)
- 20. @isaja Web-enabled technologies When designing for active and student- centered learning with technologies, how do you know, your design is on the ’right’ (usable) way? Assessment as iterative process Learning activities Teaching goals Roles / social relations (human interaction)
- 21. @isaja Outer circle=5 Inner circle=1 1 2 3 4 5 From traditional classrooms (inner circle=1) to active, student-centered practices (outer circle=5) Web-enabled technologies Assessment as iterative process Learning activities Teaching goals Roles / social relations (human interaction)
- 22. @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).
- 23. @isaja Evaluate your plan and evaluate your practice! Access to the self-assessment tool : https://www.isa-jahnke.com/teaching by • self-assessment • peers • Students
- 24. @isaja Use checklist 1 during your planning phase! Access the checklist: https://www.isa-jahnke.com/teaching
- 25. @isaja
- 26. @isaja Examples of pedagogies for active and student centered learning
- 27. @isaja PeTEX, remote lab (e.g., Terkowsky et al., 2013 CSCL@Work)
- 28. @isaja • What kind of active learning pedagogy does PeTex apply? • How to redesign PeTEX into active and student centered learning? PeTEX Published in: e.g., Jahnke, Terkowsky et al. (2010)
- 29. @isaja LeXMizzou – location-based AR gamified learning https://lexmizzou.wordpress.com/ Ethics Game The learner navigates through campus, protect campus visitors while also navigating difficult ethical situations, questioning the very nature of right and wrong. Will you make the right choice?
- 30. @isaja • Communication channel in lectures (e.g., polleverywhere.com) • Places off campus (e.g., construction of bridges: go to existing bridges) • Students create artifacts (team-based) (e.g., Berlin wall app) Three types of course designs using mobile devices Active still teaching centered Active and student centered Published in: Jahnke & Liebscher (2020)
- 32. @isaja Log in to Canvas 8 weeks 6 Modules Learning with web-based technologies M.Sc. students (teachers, …)
- 33. @isaja Each Module has: Overview of readings, literature and assignments in this module (1-2 weeks)
- 34. @isaja Activity-based model of instruction Plan Ahead After course completion, students are able to do … Weekly modules Assessment Syllabus - elements
- 35. @isaja Modules Mod-1 Intro- duction Mod-2 Your first ideas Mod-3 Team work (2 weeks) Mod-4 Design for learning Mod-5 Project (2 weeks) Mod-5 Reflec- tion Mod-1a) Introduce yourself by creating a video, 1-2mins. (4 points) Mod-1b) Discussion of terminologies such as Learning and Web-based Technologies (4 points) Week 1 Week 1: Listen to the Intro Slides in Voicethread
- 36. @isaja Modules Mod-2 Your first ideas Mod-3 Team work (2 weeks) Mod-4 Design for learning Mod-5 LwI project (2 weeks) Mod-6 Reflec- tion Mod-2a: Discussion of challenges and pitfalls (4 points) Mod-2b: Start to design for meaningful collaborative learning with technologies (20 points) Week 2
- 37. @isaja Modules Mod-3a: Discussion of roles and Group Dynamics (4 points) Mod-3b: Team Project: Collaborative Meaningful Learning Project (20 points) Week 3-4 Mod-2 Your first ideas Mod-3 Team work (2 weeks) Mod-4 Design for learning Mod-5 LwI project (2 weeks) Mod-6 Reflec- tion
- 38. @isaja Modules Mod-4: How to Design for Learning (4 points) Week 5 Mod-2 Your first ideas Mod-3 Team work (2 weeks) Mod-4 Design for learning Mod-5 LwI project (2 weeks) Mod-6 Reflec- tion
- 39. @isaja Mod-5: Individual Project: Learning With Web-based Technologies (30 points) Apply what you have learned In your context and report! Week 6-7 Mod-2 Your first ideas Mod-3 Team work (2 weeks) Mod-4 Design for learning Mod-5 LwI project (2 weeks) Mod-6 Reflec- tion Modules
- 40. @isaja Mod-6: Final Week Reflection Statement (5 points) Week 8 Mod-2 Your first ideas Mod-3 Team work (2 weeks) Mod-4 Design for learning Mod-5 LwI project (2 weeks) Mod-6 Reflec- tion Modules
- 41. @isaja Assessment: each week (process-based) Feedback to student work (grading) –resubmit 1x 1. Click on the assignment link (here: Mod-2b), then a new window opens: 2. read my comments (“test”) 3. add your comments
- 42. @isaja Course design pedagogy active and student centered learning technology ”with”, not “from”, technology the social humanizing the hybrid/online space
- 43. @isaja Traditional teaching is conceptualized as a routine activity; Future: Teaching is turning into a co-design project Traditional teaching views the instructors as subject matter expert Future: Teachers are learners at the teaching-workplace Implications (Goggins, Jahnke, & Wulf, 2013)
- 44. @isaja Higher/engineering education… … teacher teams across disciplines (e.g., our study with Eva Mårell’s GoogleGlass/AR with three different study programs) … designs for active and student centered learning processes … learning with technologies (not ‘from’ techn.) … don’t forget to humanizing the online/hybrid spaces! „knowledge is not the destination but an ongoing activity” (Jonsson et al., 2013)
- 45. @isaja The first principle of true teaching is that Nothing can be taught (Oscar Wilde) ….and this means: Happy applying! (don’t forget to collect data to study the learner experience and learning outcomes)
- 46. @isaja Prof. Dr. Isa Jahnke & Director of the Information Experience Lab Email jahnkei@missouri.edu Website http://www.isa-jahnke.com