1 Review “Conducted a review of C&IT in learning and teaching and shown an understanding of the educational processes” u Review a type of learning technology.
Published byModified over 7 years ago
Presentation on theme: "1 Review “Conducted a review of C&IT in learning and teaching and shown an understanding of the educational processes” u Review a type of learning technology."— Presentation transcript:
1 Review “Conducted a review of C&IT in learning and teaching and shown an understanding of the educational processes” u Review a type of learning technology in relation to the context. This will generate one or more specific solutions. u Assess possible solutions against the requirements (especially students, learning activities, and planned learning outcomes) u Select a solution (the start of design) u Write a “statement of purpose”
2 Review a learning technology area Using workshop materials, online and library resources In the light of the needs analysis E.g. Web discussion boards for tutorials CMC for students on placements Computer based assessment for large first years CAA for improved feedback Web based resources to support laboratory work Web based virtual fieldtrips Web based induction for staff Online resource library catalogue
3 What technologies to consider? u Tools yWorldware, discipline-specific, authoring tools yPresentation software, interactive whiteboard u Resources yMultimedia, resource collections, course webs, portals yTutorials ySimulations, models u Computer Mediated Communication yEmail, chat, text conferencing, video, audio
4 What technologies? Laurillard 2002 u Narrative print, lecture, video … u Interactive Hypermedia, web resources, interactive TV … u Adaptive simulations, tutorials, games … u Communicative CMC, conferencing… u Productive microworlds, modelling (authoring, worldware, programming)
5 SWOT for one or more technologies Learning technology: e.g. web board GoodBad Now Strengths and how to use them Weaknesses and how to support them Future Opportunities and how to exploit them Threats and how to avoid them
6 Selection “Selected C&IT appropriate to the learning situation” “There is no simple prescriptive rule connecting the analysis of learning activities to the required medium” Laurillard 2002 p.197 Matching a mix of methods and technologies to the learning gap and the other requirements is creative and requires discipline teaching expertise.
7 Selecting u What technologies are there? (short list reviewed) u What matches the analysis? Especially TLAs u What is available? u What is the best mix of media? u What are the costs and constraints?
8 Needs analysis 1.Review the current course, if any 2.Analyze the stakeholders especially students 3.Analyze the subject domain 4.Analyze the learning outcomes 5.Analyze the teaching/learning activities 6.Analyze the constraints and resources 7.Analyze the evaluation methods needed
9 Matching technology to TLAs Laurillard 93, Conole & Oliver 98 TLA Media S Describes concept S Reflects… Lecture …*****…. Hypertext-**….
10 Matching technology to TLAs Laurillard 2002 Table 10.4 Learning activities needed Design featuresMedia type (N,I,A,C,P) AttendingDescribes the narrative related to the goal Narrative Investigating, analysing Offer student the means to select their own task goal Interactive … 13 ……
11 Development costs u Development:delivery time data for multimedia courseware yminimum 100:1 development:delivery hours for experienced developers, assuming about 90 screens or instructional points per hour of delivery y200-300:1 if graphics, more if sound/video u Marshall et al. 1994 u Conole and Oliver 1998 Table 1 u Laurillard 2002 Tables 10.7, 10.8
12 What determines the cost of developing courseware? Marshall et al. 1994 u course difficulty: number of learning objectives, difficulty, existence of content u least cost if knowledge learning objectives, more if skill, most if attitudes u interactivity: complexity of interface, branching, feedback, question style; addition/complexity of graphics, animation, audio, video, simulations u development environment: production tools, ID used, team size, subject & MM experience, u subject matter expert: availability, their multimedia experience
13 Preparatory work comparison chart (Conole and Oliver) Media type Example work Hours from scratch Hours if existing Resource s needed Bulletin board Set up forums and write activities 2-50software … 29 …………
14 Study hours to cost PrintVideo…total Course aim 1 25 hrs035 2 3 ….. 5 ….. 520 Student time 60 hrs5100 hrs Academic time 250 days50400 days Support time 150 days230600 days Total time400 days2801000 days
15 Constraints u Timetable u Location dependent u Groups needed u Equipment u Rooms e.g. Conole and Oliver 1998 tables 4,5
16 A statement of purpose System titleThe learning technology intervention MeaningOn the course … learning activities … will be supported by the learning technology … Responsibilities u … u Evaluated by … Exclusions u…u…u…u…
17 What CPD will I need? “Identified their own professional development goals, directions or priorities” What new abilities will I need? u Technical skills? u Project management? u Educational expertise? u Subject expertise?
18 (Later, in the design stage…) “Planned for their initial and/or continuing professional development” How will I gain that development? u Tutor support u Training u Colleagues u Study …
19 Issues -1 – variety of uses Do we use a method for u A new course from scratch u Improving an existing course u Supporting students or staff?
20 Issues -2 – life cycle Life cycle issue: u Do we try to keep analysis separate from design u Plan to evaluate design and review analysis u Look ahead to design during analysis u Integrate analysis and design
21 Issues -3 – pick and mix u Do we present an aggregate of published ideas on analysis and encourage pick and mix of what seems relevant Or u Provide a simplified, core account, highlighting the issues?
22 Issues - 4 - scholarship u Do we provide a practical, prescriptive guide Or u Provide a scholarly account based on the literature?
23 Issues – 5 Pedagogy Should pedagogy theory (conceptual design, educational principles) figure more explicitly in analysis before “selection”?