Pedagogy in Open Learning:

Lesson 11: Pedagogy and design of ICT based learning

This lesson is meant to give a general overview of a selection of different theories concerning learning and teaching as a basis for designing computer based learning environment. The main models for development of IT-based material is discussed. There exist solutions based on the Gagnes-theory, Congnitive apprenticeship and user-centred design. It is expected that one will supplement the rather scarce text by retrieving the web-addresses referred to.

1. Introductions

The development of pedagogic software does not happen in a pedagogic void. None of us are unaffected by own experiences and training. We have, either consciously or unconsciously, different preferences as to what we think is good teaching, and what we think is bad. Neither are we blueprints of a pedagogic handbook, with tidy little booths that place us in one pedagogic direction or another. Not many pedagogues start their work with a teaching scheme by looking up in a handbook to find the theory they wish to use as a starting-point.

Many of us work as pedagogical fairy-tale heroes. During our lives, we pick up pedagogic thoughts and ideas for different teaching schemes. After a while, our bag will be full of all that we have found worth dragging along. Faced with a pedagogic problem, we look in our "bag", and come up with a fraction of a theory, some well used and tired principles of teaching, and some tricky problems.

Development work is probably usually based on principles we believe in, schemes we know and like, an innate intuition we have as to what will work, and earlier experiences. We can sometimes see a pattern fitting a described theory. Other times, what we are doing is very sprawling, and cannot be placed in any particular pedagogical booth. This way, many people will be very orthodox in their pedagogical practice. This does not mean that we are without theories, but rather that we have a set of silent theories, that we apply in a pragmatic way.

What are the issues that must be addressed in designing learning environments

We propose that instructional design and development must be based upon some theory of learning and/or cognition; effective design is possible only if the developer has developed reflexive awareness of the theoretical basis underlying the design. In other words, we will argue that effective instructional design emerges from the deliberate application of some particular theory of learning.

2. What is learning

Concepts such as learning and knowledge are used daily without any further complications. However, if we are to go closer in on these concepts, we will find that it is not easy to agree on clear definitions. When one works with the development of teaching programmes, this is something one should be aware, and preferably have an opinion, of. The choices one makes for a programme product will be influenced by how one views these basic conditions. The understanding of concepts like learning and knowledge, is not only of theoretical interest. One's views in this debate will often be related to one's views on people, and more basic thoughts concerning the role of learning, in a broader perspective.

In this presentation, we wish to only give a small framework shortly describing the different directions within learning psychology. But it is still useful to have the sketch as a starting-point, to easier understand different pedagogic learning environments where IT is an integrated part. Today, design, integrating of information technology, evaluating and research concerning these questions, are all coloured by the fact that one basically has different knowledge.

2.1 Behaviourism and Information Processing theories

Behaviourism has its starting-point in empiric ideals that only that which we can observe and measure, is true science. When we expose an individual to influence, it is only possible to observe and measure what behaviour this influence causes; for example, the relation between stimuli and response. It is not possible to observe or measure what happens in the individuals mind between stimuli and response, and thought is therefore a scientifically problematic area according to the behaviourists. According to behaviourists thinking, most of the human behaviour is learned through stimuli-response. The behaviourists theory of learning describes learning as:

Learning is a relatively permanent change of behaviour, that arise based on experience.. (Hilgard and Atkinson 1967, here quoted after Imsen 1991)

The behaviourism has gradually absorbed new elements. In behavioristic theory, you can today find the acknowledgement, and interest, of mental processes in the learning. One representative of such new thoughts, is for example Gagné. (http://www.oltc.edu.au/cp/04d.html)

More expanding material can be found on http://129.7.160.115/inst5931/Behaviorism.html

Information Processing Theories are more concerned with the inner mental processes when learning, than the outer factors of influence. Especially important is it how the individual interprets and organises stimuli. The driving force is not so much reward, as claimed by the behaviourists, than the urge to find meaning, coherence and wholeness in everything. Therefore, a definition of learning from a cognitive theory could be:

Learning is any change in the human personality life that is not directly or indirectly related to certain hereditary factors.. (Harbo and Myre 1963, here quoted after Imsen 1991)

Information Processing learning theory concentrate on those processes that go on in the individuals thoughts and conceptions when it learns. While the behaviourists are concerned with the stimuli and associations, the cognitive psychology examines what happens from the moment we sense, and to the point where response comes. The interesting questions becomes what happens when we learn, how the brain organises the knowledge, how we solve problems, etc.

How can these cognitive processes be best explained? One presumption is based on the fact that there are large analogies between the programming of computers and human processing of symbols. Theories of cognition can be built up around this metaphor. That is why Herbert Simon, among others, say:

Human beings use symbolic processes to solve problems, reason, speak and write, learn and invent. Over the past thirty years, cognitive psychology has built and tested empirical models of these processes as they are used to perform simple tasks. The models take the form of computer programs that simulate human behaviour. .....Using these programs as models, we have designed an entire secondary school mathematics curriculum (algebra and geometry) that is now being used in Chinese schools.

Visit Herbert Simon on this address ( http://www.psy.cmu.edu/psy/faculty/hsimon.html )

Common for both behaviourism and cognitive theories about symbol processing, is that they both try to describe a general way learning is done. Each in its own way discusses the "mechanics" of learning.

2.2 Constructivistic Theory and Situated learning

There are theoretic schools that choose other angels of approach towards the problem area. On one hand we have the constructivistic psychological direction that has other explanations on how learning is done. On the other hand we have what can be called situated learning (Situated Learning http://www.oltc.edu.au/cp/04k.html). Situated learning underlines the importance that learning usually happens related to an activity, a context, and in a particular culture. Many feel that this is a contrast to the "classroom learning" knowledge that is often presented in an abstract form, outside a contextual connection. The social interaction is a critical component to the particular learning of the situation.

The constructivism claims that all stimuli is interpreted through our past knowledge's and ideas. Learning is an inner process, that affects the entire personality of the human. Learning does not necessarily result in any outward reactions, and cannot be directly observed. Learning is also an active, constructive process, where the learner himself plays the vital role. The human does not learn like a passive object exposed to an active outer source of stimulation, but instead makes its own active selections, interpretations and adaptation of stimuli to its own system. The constructivism concentrates on the mental processes, but does more than just to say that these are interpreting and organising. The constructivists think that we, when learning, construct our subjective knowledge. This happens in an interaction between the influence of the individual, and what the individual does with the influence.

The constructivism thinks it most important that man has a spontaneous tendency to want to interpret and organise the world that surrounds it. Reward is not the most important for people, but finding meaning and coherence in everything.

I believe it to be a fact that those things we need to learn the most in our struggle to find meaning in our existence, are the same things we wish to learn most. (Jon Holt 1974)

The same author continues:

There is a particular reason why we want to know the things we want to know . The reason is that there is a hole, a void in our understanding of things, in our mental model of the world.

Closely connected to this, is the phenomenology, which bases its observations on how the learner conceives his surroundings. The same phenomenon, the same problem, the same event, can be conceived differently by different individuals. The mind model found in the individual, decides what one sees. Two people at the beach looking towards the horizon will "see" different things based on whether one thinks the earth is flat or round. Both will through his observations find confirmations to their beliefs. According to the phenomenology, learning is a change in the way an individual conceives, understands or experiences the surroundings. The phenomonologistic starting-point is closely related to a direction which has had a great influence during the last 10 years. One ask whether cognition is to a larger degree dependent upon context. This means that learning cannot be taken away from the particular situation it is occurring in. It is therefore difficult for us to come up with a general method valid in all situations. Because of this, many failed attempts to prove transfer of learning from one field to another can be explained. Salomon, 1989, puts it this way:

effective problem solving, sound decision making, insightful invention - do such aspects of good thinking depend more on deep expertise in a speciality than on reflective awareness and general strategies.

When one moves from a cognitive science point of view, to situation learning, it will mean a change in perspectives which can be summed up like this:

Information Processing-----------------Situated Learning

general 				context dependent
knowledge 				practice    		
goal 					expectations  
problems 				dilemmas
looking at
explicit theories 			implicit theories

The vital factor here has changed from the describing of structures of knowledge, and to focus on practice. Learning is no longer a question of defining general cognitive structures, but to develop a context dependent practice. This means that it is difficult to formulate pre-determined objectives and to define which methods that shall be used to accomplish the objective.

If we are to formulate some kind of "memory word" on learning and the forming of learning environments as a consequence of this perceptive, it would have to be that one should examine and understand the situation and the questions to be enlightened before the integration of the information technology. It is difficult to pick from a general methodical "librarian". Those who work against automation of pedagogical software will face great problems when method and contents will not easily be separated.

However, this is not agreed upon. For example, see what Herbert Simon says in his latest contribution on the Internet: http://sands.psy.cmu.edu/personal/ja/misapplied.html.

3. Learning Theory and Design Models

All those designing instructional materials will have a toolbox consisting of, among other things, some principles of teaching. How active and how conscious one uses these principles varies, but it can always be found evidence of different principles in teaching.

The choice of principles can happen as a consequence of conscious evaluations, or as a consequence of unconscious attitudes, thoughts and relations with whoever is in charge of forming the teaching system. It is however interesting to claim that the choice of principles never is random, no matter if the choice was made consciously or unconsciously.

The repertoire of the teachers, developers or designer will naturally limit the choices. No one can be expected to use principles they do not know, consciously or unconsciously. In the development situation, no matter if it is a lesson, a teaching scheme or a computer based training system, the developer will choose certain techniques.

We know that in a lot of situations, the developers of the training systems take advantage of principles of teaching they know from their own education. There is often a main reason why some principles still remain dominant, despite knowledge of these principles' weaknesses. Others choose principles based on tradition, or what they believe is expected in the organisation. Others again choose based on practical considerations such as time, and access to equipment, resources etc. Common for all these choices, are that they are made without any clear assessment whether there is a connection between the principles chosen, and the teaching objectives or not.

A more conscious relationship to the principles of teaching means that one evaluates these compered to the objectives of the teaching system, and choose based on a professional assessment as to what will be most useful in each separate case.

The discussion about constructivism, situated learning, behaviourism and theories of cognition can easily be seen as a particular debate concerning the many changing fashions within pedagogic. A more permanent repertoire of teaching strategies has been requested from several points, a toolbox to choose from without touching in on grand philosophical and psychological considerations. But these questions are much more deeply rooted than just till the discussion concerning the shaping of pedagogic software. It concerns the entire learning environment. It seems that the same questions return in the development of all kinds of computer systems that are related to human-machine communication. This means that there are different views as to how we should generally make pedagogic programmes or software.

3.1 The principles of learning inspired by behaviourism and information processing theories

Gagné is a theoretician who describes himself somewhere in the twilight zone between behaviourism and cognitive science. Gagné describes learning as a process involving both outer stimuli and inner conditions (Gagné 1985). If teaching, or a teaching programme, is to be effective, this should be taken into consideration. R. Gagné has, based on this, listed nine elements that should be a part of a teaching unit. Every one of these elements can very well appear several times, but should appear at least once:

According to Gagné, the instructor or the teaching system must:

1. Capture the attention, so that the student is ready to receive stimuli.

2. Create expectation as to what is going to happen, by giving information about the purpose of the learning.

3 . Create connection to earlier structures existing in the LTM (long term memory).

4. Make sure of selective perception through a clear and understandable presentation of the material

5. Make sure of semantic coding through guidance and examples of the material.

6. Create activity from the students by demanding response. This can for example happen through exercises.

7. Give the student feedback on his response.

8. Evaluate the student's actions in relation to the learning objectives after several repetitions.

9. Enhance learning and transfer to new situations.

Gagné's principles are often tied to traditional CBT-systems, principles are basically tied to linearity. If we ignore this, even developers of open learning systems will find elements in Gagné's principles that are useful.

Thomas Shuell works like Gagné, to some extent outside the traditional pedagogic booths. But while Gagné has his starting-point in behaviouristic theories, Shuell is closer tied to the cognitive tradition. Shuell suggests a couple of functions or points he feels should be preserved in a training situation to obtain the best learning possible (Shuell 1992). He claims that these functions connects learning theory and the practical learning situation in a purposeful way. The points which Shuell describe can be realised in widely different ways, and he claims that the initiative to realise these points can come both from the instructor side and from the student side. He also thinks that with a more open learning situation, more of the responsibility of initiating the learning functions will be on the student side. Without claiming to be complete, Shuell describes twelve different learning functions:

* Expectation:

By gaining an overview over the purpose, objective and content of that which is to be learned, expectations to the whole process of learning are made. Having a more open learning situation, the expectations will often rather be tied to the process of learning than a difficulty defined learning objective.

* Motivation:.

It is important to make the student get involved in the learning process. Shuell separates between creating expectations and the motivation created in the learning situation.

* The obtaining of existing knowledge:

Obtaining new knowledge requires one to improve on and take advantage of existing knowledge. It is necessary to focus on the knowledge that is to be a basis for the learning process.

* Focusing:.

In the learning situation, the attention has to be directed at the most important elements. Such focusing becomes more important with increased complexity of the learning environment.

* Encoding:

The information has to be coded in such a way that it can be stored. The learning situation has to make sure that such coding not only happens, but that it is purposeful to the learning process one is involved in.

* Comparing

In the process of learning, new knowledge has to be compared to the existing. The learning situation must make sure such comparing is possible.

* Hypothesises Generation:

Active learning means that one forms hypothesises based on the understanding one has obtained through he learning. These hypothesises will reflect the students cognitive model after the learning, and they play an important role in formulating new knowledge and to try out the new knowledge on the surroundings.

* Repetition:

To learn, repetitions will be necessary. These repetitions might aim to memorise single elements of knowledge, or they might aim to present the same thing from different angels by using different techniques in different situations.

* Feedback:

In the learning situation, the student is going to try out hypothesises to formulate the understanding. Through the experiences made in this testing, the student will discover if he is on the right track, or if the understanding he has, needs to be corrected. Without some kind of feedback, reaction or experience, the learning situation will become uninteresting for most students.

* Evaluation:

The learning process should all the time encourage an evaluation of feedback, hypothesises, need for repetitions, etc. Such evaluation will be the basis when deciding how the process should continue. Is there need for more repetitions? Is it necessary to go back and form new hypothesises? Etc.

* Supervision:

The learning process should include some element of assessment of the learning. The different sides in the process should have some understanding as to where one stands in relation to the main- and part objectives.

• Combination, integration, synthesis:

The knowledge gained through the learning process has to be inserted into a pattern. In constructivistic terms, one would say that the student construct his own knowledge. This means in particular that new knowledge must be reshaped and integrated, so that it, together with earlier knowledge, can form a new and different knowledge.

Shuell`s learning functions theory does not only summarise the current cognitive research on learning and education. It can also used as a framework for evaluating the effectiveness of different computer based learning environment.

3.2 Design model based on behaviourism og Information Processing Theories

The concept Instructional System Design (ISD for short), is used to describe models that are mainly based on principles from behavioristic or cognitive theories. One of the more characteristic traits, is that they separate the content of the teaching and the methods. The content is often described in detailed learning objectives and specified teaching components. One seeks through a natural science methodology to develop new tools for the analysis of exercises, analysis of objectives, measuring, and evaluation methods. This is clear from the following programme formulation:

ISD is more engineering than art. Its important benefits come from well documented procedures, a differentiated staff team development approach, separation of instructional content and strategy, and the continuing evolution of a prescriptive, analytical, research-based model. (O'Neal,1988)

A detailed description of such a method can be found at http://www.whidbey.com/frodo/isd.htm.

There are a lot of design models that follow such a plan:

Mirrel, O'Neal, A.F., Fairweather, P.G., and Huh Y.H. 1988; Gibbons, A.S., 1988, Merrill, M.D

1. Pre-project planning: identifying issues and proposed solutions as stated by stakeholders, recommending which issues that can be solved by instruction, providing a general scooping of how the issues can be solved, reviewing costs with the client, and clarifying expectations of all parties concerned.
2. User analysis: gathering data about the background of participants and instructors, and the context surrounding the delivery of the instruction, crafting strategies to ensure that participants and instructors will be able to understand and use the instructional materials.
3. Job analysis: gathering data about the work performed by the target population, identifying the knowledge, skills and attitudes required to perform the job or jobs.
4. Content analysis: reviewing documentation (including existing training programs, policies, procedures, legislation, and case histories), recommending high-level strategies for treating this content to teach it effectively and efficiently.
5. Instructional planning: drafting objectives and tests for understanding, selecting teaching points, establishing the flow of teaching points, selecting appropriate methods and media.
6. Material preparation: packaging the instructional material, checking for quality.
7. Validation: reviewing the material with users, conducting pilot instructional sessions.
8. Presentation: exposing users to the materials in whatever mode of instruction: classroom, self-study, multimedia, or otherwise.
9. Evaluation: reviewing whether the instruction succeeded. (Did users like it? Did they learn the information, skills or attitudes? Did they use what they learned on-the-job? And, most important, did the learning make a difference to their knowledge, skills and attitudes as well as their on-the-job performance?).

Below, a model softening the earlier rigid linear plans for production. The analysis phase, production phase and implementation phase can rarely happen in sequences where one module is completed before the next one is produced. Even though many developers still follow a linear model, practice has forced a more flexible and realistic model for the development of teaching aids.

In earlier developing projects, each unit was surrounded by a rigid taxonomy. The system was then formed after a "top down" hierarchy developing plan. According to this plan, the goal is to progress openly. All of the modules are available throughout the entire development programme. But even here, the learning principles are based on Gagné's principles.

..the process of specifying learning objectives can be updated by extending Gagnés (1985) conditions of learning to include analysis of knowledge structures and in the cognitive strategies area. Such extensions change the emphasis of instruction from teaching of discrete facts, concepts, principles and skills, to increased a broadened range of instructional strategies to support the increasingly diverse types of learning objectives.

(Tennyson,1995)

Design models for instructional software have followed a development that allows increased flexibility. This is an acknowledgement of the fact that we have inadequate knowledge of how this material shall be formed. The same tendency in development can also be found in what we call system design. The linear model called the "Waterfall method", which describes development of software that separated itself from specification to implementation, has now been changed to a spiral model.

The figure above shows the waterfall method that, until recently, (and maybe still), applied to general system design. Many developers have experienced that when one is finished, the completed system does not completely fit the original expectations. In many cases, the goal changed during the development, which meant that one could come up with a product no longer needed. Often, the map does not fit the terrain.

3.3 Principles of learning inspired by constructivistic and situated learning

Instructional design theory comes with a belief in instructional delivery. The goal is to design an instructional system that transmits content and skills in a clear, well structured, and efficient manner. The approach derives from the behaviourists, programmed instruction tradition and Thorndike, Skinner and Gagne, but has assimilated aspects of the cognitive research in recent years. The critic of «instructional science», and in particular the attempts to automate the development of teaching aids, has been quite clearly formulated. Constructivist assumptions about learning imply a new approach to instruction. According to this view, learning can best be facilitated through the design and use of constructivist tools and learning environments rather than instructional interventions that control the sequence and content of instruction. This belief further assumes that the role of the designer therefore shifts from creating perspective learning situations to the development of environments that engage and require the learner to construct knowledge that is most meaningful to them.

See for example. http://ouray.cudenver.edu/~slsanfor/istech.txt

The constructivist view of education, stemming from the work of Piaget, Dewey, and Vygotsky, argues that the goal of education is to help students construct their own understanding.

But what does the alternative give in practice? The new perspective tells us that it will not be easy to use theories of research from cognitive information processing in the shaping of pedagogic programmes. The methodology concerning knowledge representations and studies of expert/novice as a starting-point for the dividing of the material is hard to use. It is even worse that we are unable to predict which and how tutoring aids are used.

According to Jonasson,1996, constructivist environments engage learners in knowledge construction through collaborative activities that embed learning in a meaningful context:

1. Context refers to preserving the real world factors surrounding the learning environment or the environment in which the task to be learned might naturally be accomplished. These factors may include the physical, organisational, cultural, social, political, and power issues related to the learning and application of the new knowledge.

1. Collaboration occurs throughout the learning process. The role is to develop, test and evaluate different beliefs within learning contexts. Through the process of articulation covert processes and strategies, learners are able to build new and modifies existing knowledge structures.

1. Construction of knowledge is the result of an active process of articulation and reflection within a context. The knowledge that is created is a product of the mind and results from the individuals experiences and interpretations. Those experiences can be encountered in learning environments as well as the real world. Such environment s are constructivist only if they allow individuals or groups of individuals to determine their own meaning for what they experience.

3.4 Design Models inspirer of constructivistic and situated learning

The term situated learning is built upon the idea that general teaching theories do not get the entire picture. A designer of a teaching sequence cannot predict which aspects of the teaching scheme that will have an effect on the learning. This has consequences as to how the teaching is planned. In many cases, methods had to be modified; see for example M.J. Streibel (1990):

After years of trying to follow Gagnes theory of instructional design, I repeatedly found myself, as an instructional designer, making ad hoc decisions throughout the design and development process. At first, I attributed this discrepancy to my own inexperience as an instructional designer. Later, when I become more experienced, I attributed it to the incompleteness of instructional design theories. Lately, however, I begun to believe that the discrepancy between instructional design theories and instructional design practice will never be resolved because instructional design practice will always be a form of situated activity (i.e., depend on the specific, concrete, and unique circumstances of the project I am working on)

This adress can give more detailed information: http://www.oltc.edu.au/cp/04k.html

This quote questions the established method to design instructional materials There are alternatives to instructional design theories. Often, constructivistic learning theories have been connected to exploratory environments and tool based projects, characterised as open unstructured learning environments. A strategy is to give the students control over everything. There is not necessarily a connection between the theoretical perspective and unstructured learning environments. A good example of this is shown in a design model called Cognitive Apprenticeship (Brown & Collins,1989).

1. Cognitive Apprenticeship

Before the invention of schooling, everything was taught by apprenticeship, where learning is situated in the context of work. It is the most natural way to learn. The basic method of apprenticeship involves modelling, coaching, and fading; first showing apprentices what to do, next observing and helping them as they try to do it themselves, and then fading the help as they take on more responsibility. Cognitive apprenticeship attempts to apply this approach to teach thinking and problem solving. But, unlike the kinds of skills taught with traditional apprenticeship, thinking is not visible. So cognitive apprenticeship stresses the importance of techniques to make thinking visible, such as articulation and reflection on cognitive processes.

Exploring
Explorations means that one lets the student try out different hypothesises, methods and strategies. This allows the student to control the problem solving, and develops the ability to plan the exploration so that one can come up with a result safely and efficiently. The computer technology gives the student rich possibilities to explore hypothesises and solutions quickly. Through exploration, one tries to help the student:

• Learns to set realistic goals.
• Learns to form and test out hypothesises.

2. Pedagogic tools

This is something we are familiar with, after the first wave of IT- based learning environments. For example, Papert (1993), writes about Instructionism vs. Constructionism. The importance of tools is also mentioned here. From the early research of Paperts, we know LOGO as a tool to create one's own "mathematics". There is a difference between active learning and interactive learning that is often overlooked. It is the difference between being in a highly responsive environment vs. being in a fairly non-responsive environment, such as working with a drawing program, a modelling system. Examples on such activating but non-interactive tools can be find at this address: http://www.powersim.no/ (Find the download area)

The costs and benefits of active learning vs. passive learning are probably well known, but the costs and benefits of interactive learning vs. active learning are less well known. The costs of high interactivity are lack of thoughtfulness by the student and a lack of problem finding and construction by students.

On Mikas own planet they learn to bow whenever someone asks a good question, but never for an answer. «You should newer bow for an answer», says Mika. An answer is always the part of the road that lies behind you. Only a question can point ahead.

Josten Gaarder. Hallo - Er det noen her ? Gyldendal 1996

The benefits of high inter-activity is that students receive immediate feedback on the success of their actions. Less interactive environment may foster thoughtfulness, while more interactive environment foster automaticty ?

3 Participatory design

Participatory design and the concept User-Centred Design express a philosophy that is based on the users having an active role in the development of the software. This principle concerns both pedagogic and general software. Participatory design started first in Scandinavia, and builds on the final user to also be the designer.

Participator influence is relevant for the discussion about situated learning.

Task analysis, as it has traditionally been conducted in Human-Computer-Interaction (HCI) is based on the idea that a description, containing all necessary information to build the computer application, can be made of the sequences of steps that it takes in interaction with the computer to conduct a task. We are not capable with this method of catching the tacit knowledge that is required in the actual work process.

Bannon (1991) underlines the necessity of building a bridge between theory and practice. They talk of "ecological gaps" or "work-context-gaps" between the design theory and the place of work, in other words, the existing social-cultural relations. This is directly relevant for the discussion about design of IT-based tutoring aids. And this raises the question if we should designe with or for the students.

Study the learning environment on this school: http://peabody.vanderbilt.edu/ltc/general/

Many schools have in the same way used the possibility of Web. This means that the students have presented the project they are working on, by using the net like a school newspaper.

Study how IT is being used in the teaching on this address: http://buckman.pps.k12.or.us/

User-centeredness requires that the system merely accommodate user interest and preferences, but engages the learner through his or her perspectives, it does not merely permit, but encourages, inquiry and manipulation.

4. Problem Based Learning

The next concept that fits into the constructivistic direction, is the problem based learning. Problem based learning is viewed as both a didactic concept, and a didactic model where one focuses on the practical and theoretical sides of planning, execution, assessment and critical analysis of teaching and learning. Vital cue words in the characteristic of problem based learning are:

Student controlled learning

Often casus oriented

Focus on divergence; development of new knowledge

Dynamic objectives: the objectives develop as the student obtain new knowledge

Collective knowledge development through collaborative learning; the students and the teacher are consumer and producers on a common knowledge marked.

Problem based learning (PBL) is vitally different from lectures and fixed curriculum books. The basic philosophy behind self controlled learning, is to work in groups and problem solving. PBL sets demands to the students abilities to work on their own, work in groups, and to train themselves in critically assessing the gathered knowledge. The teacher's role is more to help with the students' learning process than to pass on a large amount of facts that often can be found in, for example, literature. With support in the discussion with the student friends in the basis group, the student will find his own way to the goal. The students are divided into basis groups on about 6-8 students. They themselves control their learning to reach the set goal.

Searching the Internet with Alta Vista, will yield many examples of "problem based learning". The many entries indicate the large interest there is for this methodology.

4. Learning Environment in Distance Education

Distance education is defined by Moore (1990) as consisting of all arrangements for providing instruction through print or electronic communication, media to person, engaged in planned learning in a place of time different from that of the instructor or instructors. Much of the distance education literature has placed emphasis on the practical and mechanical logistics of instructional delivery, most often merely transmitting images of the instructor to remote cities and less often supported by limited, two-way, interactive correspondence between the instructor and remotely located students. Research in this area has just begun to consider the interaction of personal and situational variables involving the learner, learner behaviours and the environment (Gibson, 1990)

From earlier lessons, one should know all those possibilities there are in distributed teaching:

Preferably together, but also on their own, do these make the pedagogic platform for distributed teaching. We will now comment on some of the pedagogic possibilities listed in the figure above.

• Help-Wizard-Agents

In the discussion around the master-apprentice model is it implied that the "master" is a computer program which can supervise and instructional session, based on a predefined system of rules. The architecture is similar to what we call agents or assistants connected to network based applications. An agent can be adaptable. The metaphor here, is the agent as your "personal secretary" or "assistant", that will help you handling different assignments. We have earlier discussed the "Cognitive apprenticeship" -"master - apprentice" -model as a starting-point for the development of pedagogic software (Collins 1988, Gabrys 1993, Brown 1989, Sandberg 1992). Such tutoring as we have mentioned, means that the software instructor shows what needs to be done, and explains the student why the exercise is being done the way it is (modelling). Then, the student gets to try to do the exercise himself, while the instructor guides (coaching). After a while, the "master" will withdraw, and let the apprentice work on his own (fading).

The difference between a "personal secretary" and the "master", is evident when the secretary agent takes the role of the apprentice in the opening phase. This means that it is the user who takes the initiative. The agent "learns" from the earlier activity of the user. The agent shall be capable of "understanding" work patterns. A secretary agent "learns" by constantly looking over the user of the application's shoulder. If an agent for example discovers that on continuously stores incoming letters in a particular list, the agent will suggest doing this automatically. When the agent can predict an action, the agent will have to decide how this shall be used. The agent can be guided through two levels: the tell me it level, and the do it level. It is dependent on experience whether agents succeed in their guiding or not. The training period gives the user the possibility to "trust" the agent. In this period it is important to understand what it is the agent does. This kind of information can be obtained through the agent's built-in option to explain what is going on. in some cases, this is done with a simple feedback from the agent icon (see for example in Koziorok & Maes,1993). The picture shows the agent's condition; thinking, working, notifying... Others supplement the explanation with text messages. Or, it could be possible to see what is going on from the entire line of conclusions the agent builds.

• Hypermedia

In earlier lessons, the different parts of hypermedia have been discussed. There is also a description of the pedagogic use of hypermedia. We will just state that remote on-line hypermedia document may facilitate the construction of knowledge. Provide access to a variety information sources allow for self-directed exploration of information. Knowledge construction is fostered through the intentional searching process and linking of the information to the learner's own schema. Merely locating information is a database in not necessarily productive of learning.

Critical to the knowledge construction process is a meaningful purpose to learn or intentionally of the learner in performing the search to facilitate and strengthen connection between elements of information.

• Interactive Screens

The interactive learning environment which are commonly known from computer-assisted instruction, are starting to become available trough the network. Particularly interesting are systems which can involve several users and operate over a network, where competing groups can, for instance, control of a simulation applications.

Examples of interactive educational business simulation is no available over Internet The game administrator can monitor a simulation and produces comparative plots etc., to be used in a debriefing session. The basic modules of a management simulator will often represent several structural identical industrial corporations, competing for the same group of potential customers.

The figure show four group of player emulate the boards of directors of virtual enterprises, that compete with each other. During the game, each group of players can be confronted with interrelated decision making requirements, and it can be difficult to understand how they interact and how the whole system will react. To improve the performance, the group must identify and collect relevant information. The team members must derive alternative courses of action and evaluate their expected consequences.

To participate in the same tray http://www.powersim.no/

• Frequent-Ask-List, News Conference and Bulleting Board.

The power of computer conferencing as a constructivistic learning environment lies in its capability as asynchronous collaboration as well as the opportunities for coaching, modelling and scaffolding to assist learners in accomplishing various educational tasks. The learner is an actively engaged

In comparison with traditional classroom, where the teacher contribute up to 60-80% of the verbal exchange, on-line computer conferancing shows instructor contributions only 10-15 % of the message volume (Winkelmans,1988). Allowing learners to generate questions, summarise content, clarify points and predict upcoming events are activities that can facilitate

The Learning Environment

When designing a learning environment, whether computer based or not, there are a multitude of design decisions that must be made. Many of these design decisions are made unconsciously without any articulated view of the issues being addressed. It would be better if these design decisions were consciously considered, rather than unconsciously made. Implications for the instructional design process traditional behavioural theory and cognitive science contrast dramatically to the constructivist theories in terms of the underlying epistemological assumptions. As should be clear from the discussion thus far, these epistemological differences have significant consequences for our goal and strategies in the instructional design process.

D Brown, J.S., Collins, A. & Duguid, P. (1989). Situated cognition and the culture

of learning. Educational Researcher, 18(1), 32-42.

D Brown, A.L., Metz, K.E. & Campione, J.C. (199?). Social interaction and

individual understanding in a community of learners: The influence of Piaget and

Vygotsky. In A. Tryphon & J. Voneche (Eds.) Piaget - Vygotsky The Social

Genesis of Thought (145-169). London: Psychology Press.

D Laurillard, D. (1993). Rethinking University Thinking. A framework for the

effective use of educational technology. London: Routledge

D Turkle, S. (1995): Life on the screen - Identity in the Internet. New York:Simon & Schuster

R.D. Tennyson, (1993); Instructional System Development. I Automating Instructional Design: Computer-Based Development and Delivery Tools, Springer_Verlag .

Michael J.Stribel (1989) Instructional Plans and Situated Learning, Journal of Visual Literacy, 9(2)

Gagne, R.M., Briggs,L.J., & Wager,W.W. (1988). Principles of Instructional Design, New York: Holt, Reinhart & Winston.

Collins, A., Brown,J.S., Newman,S.E. (1989). Cognitive Apprenticship. In: L.B.Resnick (Ed) Knowing, Learning and Instruction. Lawerence Erlaum Associates.